Of course we all have problems. In fact, right now more of us have more problems than we did a couple of months ago—and some of us have far more of them.
Since we all have problems, we think we know what problems are. We can easily perceive a particular set of circumstances as a problem, by which I mean we recognize it as a condition or situation that exists objectively.
But we also assume we perceive reality itself objectively (as it is), when a preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise. So our perceptions and assumptions aren’t entirely trustworthy.
Let’s back up a step, then, and see if we can get a handle on what a problem is.
There are two general categories of problems:
A. undesirable situations to be resolved
B. inquiries to be investigated
The first category is the one we usually think of when we consider the concept of problems. The second category describes how scientists, philosophers, and artists—among others—tend to define problems. This important distinction of what we’re talking about when we talk about problems is one we frequently fail to make. It’s important because problems in the undesirable situations category are generally well-defined, while problems in the inquiries category are generally ill-defined.
Well-defined problems lend themselves to convergent thinking, the focus of which is to identify the one right answer or solution. Ill-defined problems, on the other hand, benefit more from divergent thinking, which involves attempting to identify as many different solutions as possible and/or lateral thinking, which combines convergent and divergent thinking.
Problems and Their Perception
Now let’s back up even more and consider the matter of how we identify problems. At the beginning of this article, I suggested we perceive and treat problems as if they have an objective existence in the world, which is also how we treat obstacles. But something only becomes an obstacle to me if it’s in my way. A boulder in the middle of the road is an obstacle if I have a compelling desire to get somewhere on the other side of it. If it keeps me from going somewhere I didn’t really want to go, then it’s a good excuse, like a get-out-of-jail-free card. If I’m looking at a picture of it or merely out for a drive (like in the olden days), it’s just a boulder in the middle of the road. I can turn around and head in another direction.
Problems are like obstacles in that they don’t exist independently from the people who perceive them.
Problems are also like stories, and as I have written about before, there’s no such thing as a true story.
Since problems don’t have an objective, independent existence, that means we are doing something other than simply recognizing them. There’s some interaction between us and the set of circumstances we determine to be a problem, whether it’s a Category A problem or a Category B problem. And just as every story has a point of view, so does every problem.
Rather than perceiving or recognizing problems, we are formulating, defining, and posing them. The technical term for this is problem finding. It’s an active process rather than a passive one.
Need Problems Be Found?
Problem-finding has been researched and written about since at least the 1960s by a wide variety of people, including Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi, who also wrote about flow and creativity. In a 2018 article in the journal Creativity, Ahmed M. Abdulla and Bonnie Cramond state that:
The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution.
And J. W. Getzels, who co-authored work on problem-finding with Csikszentmihalyi, wrote:
Need problems be found? Is not the world already teeming with problems and dilemmas at home and in business, in economics and in education, in art and in science? The world is of course teeming with dilemmas. But the dilemmas do not present themselves automatically as problems capable of resolution or even sensible contemplation.
They must be posed and formulated in fruitful and often radical ways if they are to be moved toward solution. The way the problem is posed is the way the dilemma will be resolved.
That’s not a realization we come to if we operate under the assumption that problems have their own objective existence out there in the world. Yet it’s true. And that makes creative problem finding a far more important skill to develop than creative problem solving.
I’ll have more on that in the next newsletter. In the meantime, you might find it useful to consider the sets of circumstances you have identified as problems (personal, societal, or global) from the perspective of Category A and Category B.
A. Undesirable situations to be resolved, which are well-defined and benefit from applying convergent thinking. These problems are characterized by a scarcity of the solution space, which means the nature of the problem doesn’t allow for multiple solutions.
B. Inquiries to be investigated, which are ill-defined and benefit from applying divergent and/or lateral thinking. These problems are characterized by the lack of a clear path to solution, which means desired outcomes and objectives (and the resources to be used) must first be determined.
Remember that Category B problems are best approached not by rushing to find a solution, but by taking a big picture perspective, clearly identifying the desired outcome and objective you’re aiming for, and then considering all the available information, resources, and possibilities. After taking action, pay attention to what happens, so you can correct your course if necessary.