Deepstash brings you key ideas from the most inspiring articles like this one:
Read more efficiently
Save what inspires you
Save all ideas
This is a productivity technique that involves delaying dealing with something when there is a good chance that it will resolve without your immediate input.
When Napoleon was a general in Italy, he directed Bourrienne to only open letters that came by extraordinary couriers, and to leave all the other letters unopened for three weeks. He observed that a large part of the correspondence had disposed of itself and no longer required an answer.
The Napoleon technique's main benefit is that it allows you to conserve resources such as time and energy. By putting off replying to someone, this technique can help teach a person to be more thoughtful when asking for your help
The technique is useful in routine tasks (minor, non-urgent matters that you can afford to postpone with little risk). For example, delaying emails for one day is enough to allow most minor issues to resolve themselves.
When you decide to implement the Napoleon technique consider both the positive and negative outcomes and the possibility of these outcomes.
When using the Napoleon technique, set clear deadlines for yourself to reduce the likelihood of postponing things unnecessarily.
SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:
The Sagan standard is related to astronomer Carl Sagan, who stated that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” (a dictum abbreviated as ECREE).
This means t...
Based on the Sagan standard, if someone claims that they came across a unicorn during they commute, they would be expected to brig stronger evidence in order to verify that claim than if they claimed that they came across a horse.
This happens because there is significant evidence for the existence of horses, but no relevant evidence to support the existence of unicorns, which makes the latter claim extraordinary.
It is a rhetorical technique that involves overwhelming your opponent with numerous vague arguments, with no regard for accuracy, validity, or relevance of those arguments.
A classic example is when a proponent of some pseudoscience bombards an expert with many weak arguments and start a new argument each time the expert successfully refute one of them.
But Gish gallops also appear in less formal contexts. E.g., someone who wants to support an unfounded stance on social media might post a huge list of irrelevant sources that they didn't actually read.
When responding to specific arguments within a Gish gallop, you can use certain techniques to respond effectively to the flawed arguments.
The empathy gap is a cognitive bias that causes people to struggle to understand mental states that are different from their own.
When someone is happy or angry, they ...
The empathy gap causes us to misjudge our own emotions and behaviors. Examples include overestimating our ability to stay composed in a stressful event, overestimating the likelihood that we can control our desire for an addictive substance, such as coffee, or underestimating how much our feelings for someone affected our judgment in the past.
The empathy gap can cause people to be unprepared for situations and act differently to what they would ideally prefer.