Judgments supported by Multiple perspectives of [different ranges of observation - Derivative content from [We cannot know the totality of what others know.
If Mr. A says that he prefers Option X based on his Observation range information
- Mr. B doesn’t think option X is a good idea based on his observations.
- In this case, Mr. B will not adopt Mr. A’s proposal X
- If Mr. A really believes that incorporating option X will benefit B, it is better to share with B the information that will provide the basis for believing so.
- Share the decision-making process, not the results of the decision. - [Good decisions are supported by many facts.
- Since A does not do so, B decides that A is just saying that without any particular basis.
- This could be a symmetrical relationship.
- Both parties believe the other’s judgment is not well-founded.
- B also asked A, “Why do you think that’s a good idea?” It is more productive to ask
- Don’t wait for A to give it to you first, just go get it.
- Well, there are a myriad of people, so I thought it would be reasonable to give preference to those who seem to be able to converse productively, rather than those who are strongly advocating for it.
relevance - Decisions supported by multiple perspectives
I don’t think we’re airing each other out. - read the situation
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/異なる観測範囲の複数の視点に支えられた判断 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.