This post is spot on. It's encouraging to see one's experience reflected back from someone else. I agree with the author that the psychology of this is critical and that it doesn't get discussed much.<p>One point I'd like to add is that history gives a very misleading picture. History is divided into people who worked through hard problems and triumphed (these are called "geniuses") and people who either gave up or died trying (these are called "failures"). Those seem like opposites, but it's only hindsight that makes them so. Psychologically, when you're in the middle of it, which is when it really matters, there's no way to know. All you know for sure is that you've been walking down a dark tunnel for a really long time.<p>An interesting question, more interesting than it appears, is: why would someone do that? That is, at some point, having walked down the tunnel for quite some time, the rational thing would appear to be to turn back. Why would someone not turn back?
I have to agree with this. I'm also in math grad school after numerous startups. The hardest part about transitioning from math undergrad to graduate school is that you know assign problems in undergrad have a solution, you just have to go out and find it. Research problems just might not have a solution in reach of existing technology.<p>However, I find the difficulty and uncertainty of research mathematics much worse than anything I encountered even in research-heavy startups. Depends on what you're working on, I guess.
"There’s a simple reason why tackling a hard problem can lead to depressive symptoms: you’re necessarily wrong 99% of the time."<p>This immediately rang out to me...any time I'm having problems outside of working (relationship/depression), it kills my ability to be resilient and work through a problem until it's solved..I think working through emotional pain is an excellent skill on its own.
Hackers frequently have an idea, build 90% of an MVP and then never launch. Why would they get so close and never cross the finish line?<p>It seems obvious: if you don't launch, you can't fail.<p>A subtle fear of rejection is understandably common in a population that experienced it frequently in their formative years.
I think the key is in not seeing "being wrong" as a "failure"<p>"I've failed" != "I'm a failure"<p>No one gets everything right all of the time. Accepting that and seeing hard problems as a challenge to overcome rather than a potential failure waiting to happen is, in my opinion, the way forward.
One idea: positively reinforce the behavior of taking a solid swing at your problem regardless of whether you successfully solve it.<p>In other words, cheer yourself on for <i>ruling out</i> apparently promising solutions as well as successfully solving problems.
Good post--I'm in the midst of doing a PhD on the side while working, and I've noticed that "I'm afraid it won't work" behavior in myself during both my research and working on hard problems in my day job. Glad to know I'm not alone!
Too many comments here are a re-phrase of "learn from your failure" quote. I hate to sound too negative here, but people learn from their success a whole lot than they learn from their failure. It sounds like something we just tell ourselves after we've failed to make ourselves feel better.<p>Though I agree that keep trying (and obviously failing many times along the way) is often necessary to get to where you want to go.
Makes me think about how, in college, I used to put down a math problem as soon as I thought I knew how to do it. I would put off doing it, and I never understood why. This was totally the reason! It seems obvious since, as you said, when I went about actually fleshing out the answer, I would usually discover something that was wrong. Great observation.
Strongly agreed, and great insight on the everyday struggle of a research heavy life or career!<p>It can be a heavy burden at times, but being prepared mentally helps a lot.<p>As my dad always taught me growing up, "attitude is everything."<p>Plus, tackling a large stack of problems, and iterating until successful feels so rewarding. Both during and after the fact.<p><i>Failure is key to success.</i>
To expose yourself to positive black swans you have to take on this psychic toll. This is why it's human nature to prefer to bias for small regular wins and the occasional catastrophe.<p><a href="http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_04_29_a_blowingup.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_04_29_a_blowingup.htm</a>
Great read! This really ties up together with the idea of "keep shipping" - while working on a startup recently - I found myself spending a lot of time thinking about what if this or what if that. The kind of logic that paralyzes you. This is specifically a problem for perfectionists and very intelligent people - you're either afraid it wont be perfect or spend so much time thinking of the most efficient or beautiful solution that in the mean time someone else - may have already solved it. That experience really taught me to keep shipping - stuff wont work - even if it isn't one of those massively hard problems - sometimes things just dont work. The trick is to keep shipping and that 1% will go up to much more!
In the scientific community, things are never a failure. Instead, it's something we like to call 'negative data'.<p>You learn to embrace the negative data. At the very least, you've just ticked off one thing that assuredly does not resolve the issue.
I like this paraphrased quote: "An expert is a person that has made every possible mistake within his or her field." -Niels Bohr<p>That way, each mistake I make (and realize/correct) is me leveling up
"I'm afraid that it won't work." I know this may sound silly, but I honestly just realized how wrong that statement is. I have actually used it to dismiss a potential solution...
There are actually two difficulties here:<p>1. The problem in hand <i>may not have a good solution</i>. This is especially true of research type problems. You have to pick the right one, otherwise it can be a frustrating experience. This is where a broad knowledge of the subject and previous research help.<p>2. Some potential solutions may be very difficult to implement or explore, so one tends to explore the simpler options first. When these are not enough, you tend to loose faith.
iteration = trial-and-error = try-and-fail<p>For me, the hard part is that an experiment can be a lot of work... all that effort, for <i>NOTHING</i>. :(<p>Though Tesla has more geek cred these days, Edison also did some stuff. He said:
(<a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison</a>)<p><pre><code> I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.</code></pre>
Anybody else think of that scene from Home Alone when Mcauley Culkin says "Hey, I'm not afraid any more! I said I'm not afraid any more! Do you hear me? I'm not afraid any more!
[Old Man Marley approaches Kevin and stares at him - Kevin runs back inside, screaming like a maniac]
I can't agree with this more...this especially rings true here in the valley. Its a tightrope walk to synthesize feedback from failures efficiently and effectively while not breaking pace and letting your emotions have you pause on the undesired outcome. Persistence is magical.
I suppose that's why it's better to like knowing the ground truth, than having ideas. You delight in finding the actual answer, than what you think might be the answer.