None of us are perfect. Well, maybe you are, but I sure as hell am not. Each day, I make some error of judgment, have some flaw in my reasoning or simply misinterpret words or actions. Furthermore, apart from just making mistakes, I often realize that even my thought process or approach to a problem is wrong. Why? Well, there are probably a lot of reasons. But the most important reason is a simple concept nearly everyone from you and me to presidents and world leaders falls prey to on a regular basis. It's called path dependence.
New York Times columnist David Brooks recently discussed several scientific concepts suggested by leading thinkers and academics that "would improve everyone's cognitive tool-kit." One of the concepts was path dependence, which refers to the notion that once-effective strategies are no longer transferable to new albeit similar situations. Brooks invites the reader to think of our modern "qwerty" keyboard as an example it was designed to slow typists on old typewriters, which would frequently jam if typed on too fast. On our modern computers, this is clearly unnecessary, yet the old design remains.
At its best, path dependence is similar to cognitive problem-solving processes. In math class, we figure out a way to solve a certain type of problem and employ the same strategies when encountering similar problems in the future. When looking at a piece of literature, we initially identify strategies of understanding that we subsequently use to synthesize or analyze the information more quickly the next time.
We learn early on how to act in certain social situations, slowly learning the right protocol to employ the next time a similar encounter occurs. When we fail to understand the role this kind of path dependency plays in our everyday thinking and problem-solving processes, errors begin to occur.
Although path dependence is an important component of learning and academia, we must not fall prey to established, tired ways of thinking. Repeating similar strategies might work on textbook problems, but sooner or later we will need to abandon previously established modes of investigation to create new ones. These new thought paradigms will allow us to solve the many complex problems old and new facing us today.
Similarly, in our personal and social lives we must realize that strategies we have used to solve problems in the past are not necessarily the best solution to new problems. We live in a diverse, complex world that requires us to step outside of learned behavior and form new modes of thinking that are more accepting, tolerant and understanding. As adults, thought processes that served us well in dealing with social situations as high schoolers may no longer applywe need to adapt.
Perhaps most pressing and relevant to our lives and futures is the danger of path dependence in the realms of politics and policy. For example, though "trickle down" economics had some successes during the Reagan years, that same philosophy may not be relevant in today's world. Similarly, though tying public school funding to property taxes may have been a good solution at its inception, anyone familiar with the disparity between high and low income areas in education quality might question its current efficacy.
What was previously done might be easy, popular and quick, but it will not necessarily yield good results. It is our responsibility to be cognizant of the past and create new strategies for the future.
