How smart do we fail ?

There is IQ.

There is EQ.

There is SQ.

And now there is TryQ πŸ˜‰

For now it has three plateaus:

Low TryQ:

Try -> fail -> blame.

Medium TryQ:

Try -> fail -> try -> fail -> try -> fail -> try -> fail -> try -> succeed or quit.

High TryQ:

Try -> fail -> try -> fail open-eyed -> try better -> fail open-eyed -> try sedulously * -> fail open-eyed -> try sedulously -> succeed or quit mindfully.

————————

Succeeding does not come from absence of failure. It comes from lots of failures.

Success is not about right and wrong. It is about

  • how good the impact is when we are right and
  • how bad the impact is when we are wrong.

(This principle is seen by a few ‘smart’ people as an excuse to privatise gains and socialise losses. To do this is often profitable for while, but it is nevertheless a rather disingenuous application of the principle)

Sustainable success requires continuous learning. And learning requires playful or purposeful or mindful failing. Nobody just β€œtold” us to walk. We learned walking.

Fast learning requires high frequency open-eyed failure combined with a sedulous attempt to succeed.

What, then, is the difference between a teaching environment and a learning environment.

A teaching environment tells what is right and wrong – and being wrong is a sin.

A learning environment facilitates trying and failing – and not trying is the sin.