Are you trying to make decisions about the same question? If the top score in a game is currently 87 out of 100, and the last player takes their turn. The announcer says the player scored “Ninety…” they won. It doesn’t matter if the complete information is “Ninety-five”, “Ninety-nine” or even “Ninety… just flat ninety” … the final player is the winner. You dont need the second digit. Knowing the score is in the range of 90-99 isn’t COMPLETE information, but it is ENOUGH information… To answer “did this player win” … if you wanted to know if they beat the world record score of 97, then you’d need the second digit. You only need fully complete information if you need a fully complete answer.
Another option is that you already have complete information. “I tossed a coin 10 times and 8 times it landed on heads” – what happened the other 2 times? You already know. Just because no one said it doesnt mean you don’t have it. Not everything needs to be said explicitly for it to be true. “There’s 2 types of people in the world: those that can derive missing data.”
The third option is just that it truly doesn’t matter, usually because of the rule of the first point. How long it takes to get to the destination, whether 3 hours or 4 hours, or 3.5 hours… doesnt matter if the destination closes in 2 hours. “More than 2” is complete enough. Some things are ok with vague answers because the question was vague. Someone may have said “how long does it take to get there” but that truly doesnt matter, because the secret real question was “Can we arrive before the store closes”
Case 1: information known is incomplete, but sufficient.
Case 2: information known is complete, and sufficient.
Case 3: see case 1.
Yes, those cases are easy to handle, even on the spectrum.
Hard cases are where information is insufficient, and consequences of the decision are serious.
Neurotypicals (& ADDers) facing genuinely insufficient information often prefer a decision regardless - instead of admitting they cannot yet make a sound one. They prioritise impatience over correctness; short-term over long-term.
That bias is a factor in much social, environmental, and economic harm.
Add haver here, I almost always know I don’t have the information and understand that I am probably being impatient or “incorrect” however with many things I. Life the consequences for being slightly incorrect don’t outway the effort of thinking things through for longer.
This happens a lot in group settings. "What game should we play? And everyone spends 10-15 minute waffling about this or that. Just decide one I have other shit to do and have a job. This is the only limited time I have. Or picking a movie to watch, or what restaurant to eat at, or what day we wanna meet up for an rpg or whatever.
Rather than getting all the information and making a decision my friends will often times just take long enough to decide not do anything at all or social gatherings get procrastinated for weeks.
I’d rather do something for certain than wait around for people to find a perfect solution to things that do not have perfect solutions.
How often do you spend a substantial amount of time deliberating something to only get it wrong anyway?
Now if we’re talking something like the steps to repair a car or do important tasks then yes I can totally get waiting and figuring everything out.
But that’s just my opinion and how my brain works.
All that said it ally value the autistic girlfriend I have because she fills in those gaps for situations. That really require further thought that I simple am not equipped for lol
I’m aware. Those cases all extend though. Because a lot of times the decision isn’t intended to be a concrete answer.
I just had to conduct an interview. I got to talk to the person for a whole hour. And now I need to determine if we should hire this person.
I definitely have insufficient information. No interview process has ever finished with an abundance of complete information (well, if the candidate is bad enough or just screaming slurs the whole time, that’s pretty complete). And yet I have to make a serious decision that has real consequences for my company AND for the candidate.
I don’t get the option to gather more information. I get it. This case is not fun to deal with.
But regardless of what the company says, the question isn’t “do I think this person will without a doubt be our top employee” or “WILL this person succeed” … the question is “Given the information at hand, do I think there is a higher likelihood of the person succeeding or struggling?” I can make a decision based on “given the information at hand” … and when I do, I always qualify it as such.
If I say yes, and they hire the person, and they don’t fit at the company, I can still just point to “they answered all the interview questions properly” and it’s not my fault things went poorly. I may also say no to amazing candidates who just didn’t represent themselves well in the interview. Even if I cannot make a sound decision, I have to make one though.
And maybe I’m just unlucky in life, but I feel like I face a lot of situations where I need to make decisions with incomplete information just because more information isn’t available, or time is truly a factor in the decision. Some of life is always going to require some guesswork. And we can just try our best to make educated guesses. There is no such thing as “complete” information.
But I fully agree with you that there are situations where some people are just impatient, and corners are cut. But a lot of neurotypicals often don’t like those people too. That’s not just “neurotypicals do this” … that’s “lazy/impatient people do this” and I guess I’m lucky in the sense that I rarely have to deal with this, but then again, I work in a field where basically everyone is on the spectrum.
I fully agree with you that there are situations where some people are just impatient, and corners are cut
👍
a lot of neurotypicals often don’t like those people too
Unfortunately, that is not my experience.
the question isn’t “do I think this person will without a doubt be our top employee” or “WILL this person succeed” … the question is “Given the information at hand, do I think there is a higher likelihood of the person succeeding or struggling?” […] If I say yes, and they hire the person, and they don’t fit at the company, I can still just point to “they answered all the interview questions properly” and it’s not my fault things went poorly.
This is an instance of your case 1, which is not really what this thread is about.
There are 3 things possibly at play here.
Are you trying to make decisions about the same question? If the top score in a game is currently 87 out of 100, and the last player takes their turn. The announcer says the player scored “Ninety…” they won. It doesn’t matter if the complete information is “Ninety-five”, “Ninety-nine” or even “Ninety… just flat ninety” … the final player is the winner. You dont need the second digit. Knowing the score is in the range of 90-99 isn’t COMPLETE information, but it is ENOUGH information… To answer “did this player win” … if you wanted to know if they beat the world record score of 97, then you’d need the second digit. You only need fully complete information if you need a fully complete answer.
Another option is that you already have complete information. “I tossed a coin 10 times and 8 times it landed on heads” – what happened the other 2 times? You already know. Just because no one said it doesnt mean you don’t have it. Not everything needs to be said explicitly for it to be true. “There’s 2 types of people in the world: those that can derive missing data.”
The third option is just that it truly doesn’t matter, usually because of the rule of the first point. How long it takes to get to the destination, whether 3 hours or 4 hours, or 3.5 hours… doesnt matter if the destination closes in 2 hours. “More than 2” is complete enough. Some things are ok with vague answers because the question was vague. Someone may have said “how long does it take to get there” but that truly doesnt matter, because the secret real question was “Can we arrive before the store closes”
Your list of cases can be paraphrased thus:
Yes, those cases are easy to handle, even on the spectrum.
Hard cases are where information is insufficient, and consequences of the decision are serious.
Neurotypicals (& ADDers) facing genuinely insufficient information often prefer a decision regardless - instead of admitting they cannot yet make a sound one. They prioritise impatience over correctness; short-term over long-term.
That bias is a factor in much social, environmental, and economic harm.
Add haver here, I almost always know I don’t have the information and understand that I am probably being impatient or “incorrect” however with many things I. Life the consequences for being slightly incorrect don’t outway the effort of thinking things through for longer.
This happens a lot in group settings. "What game should we play? And everyone spends 10-15 minute waffling about this or that. Just decide one I have other shit to do and have a job. This is the only limited time I have. Or picking a movie to watch, or what restaurant to eat at, or what day we wanna meet up for an rpg or whatever.
Rather than getting all the information and making a decision my friends will often times just take long enough to decide not do anything at all or social gatherings get procrastinated for weeks.
I’d rather do something for certain than wait around for people to find a perfect solution to things that do not have perfect solutions.
How often do you spend a substantial amount of time deliberating something to only get it wrong anyway?
Now if we’re talking something like the steps to repair a car or do important tasks then yes I can totally get waiting and figuring everything out.
But that’s just my opinion and how my brain works.
All that said it ally value the autistic girlfriend I have because she fills in those gaps for situations. That really require further thought that I simple am not equipped for lol
I’m aware. Those cases all extend though. Because a lot of times the decision isn’t intended to be a concrete answer.
I just had to conduct an interview. I got to talk to the person for a whole hour. And now I need to determine if we should hire this person.
I definitely have insufficient information. No interview process has ever finished with an abundance of complete information (well, if the candidate is bad enough or just screaming slurs the whole time, that’s pretty complete). And yet I have to make a serious decision that has real consequences for my company AND for the candidate.
I don’t get the option to gather more information. I get it. This case is not fun to deal with.
But regardless of what the company says, the question isn’t “do I think this person will without a doubt be our top employee” or “WILL this person succeed” … the question is “Given the information at hand, do I think there is a higher likelihood of the person succeeding or struggling?” I can make a decision based on “given the information at hand” … and when I do, I always qualify it as such.
If I say yes, and they hire the person, and they don’t fit at the company, I can still just point to “they answered all the interview questions properly” and it’s not my fault things went poorly. I may also say no to amazing candidates who just didn’t represent themselves well in the interview. Even if I cannot make a sound decision, I have to make one though.
And maybe I’m just unlucky in life, but I feel like I face a lot of situations where I need to make decisions with incomplete information just because more information isn’t available, or time is truly a factor in the decision. Some of life is always going to require some guesswork. And we can just try our best to make educated guesses. There is no such thing as “complete” information.
But I fully agree with you that there are situations where some people are just impatient, and corners are cut. But a lot of neurotypicals often don’t like those people too. That’s not just “neurotypicals do this” … that’s “lazy/impatient people do this” and I guess I’m lucky in the sense that I rarely have to deal with this, but then again, I work in a field where basically everyone is on the spectrum.
👍
Unfortunately, that is not my experience.
This is an instance of your case 1, which is not really what this thread is about.
Your experience is incomplete and a poor basis for making judgements about large groups of people.
Touché! But my experience of my experience is complete. (Like, perhaps, my misfortune in this respect…)