ALBERT EINSTEIN used to say that if he had one hour to solve a problem he would spend 50 minutes studying the problem and ten minutes figuring out a solution. It feels like most people, however, would prefer to switch those times around, spending less time studying the problem and more time acting out a solution. We want solutions but are often not prepared to take the time to understand the issues.
Former Chinese leader Mao Zedong was faced with the problem of feeding China’s large population. He was advised that sparrows were responsible for eating large amounts of grain. Mao’s solution was simple and direct: eradicate the sparrow. However, sparrows don’t only eat grain. They also eat insects. The population of locusts ballooned and decimated the grain farms in a way sparrows could never. This was one of the contributing factors to three years of famine which some estimates say cost more than 20 million lives.
Mao is not unique. Human beings are generally attracted to simplistic solutions, like dynamite fishing. Many fishermen today, still use a technique reportedly created by European soldiers during World War 1. They would throw explosives into seas, rivers and lakes, blasting and stunning the fish so they could easily scoop them out of the water. The problem is, this method kills more fish than can be caught. It also destroys baby fish, coral reefs, insects, larvae and plankton, all necessary for fish stocks to be replenished. Blast fishing is an attractive quick and easy solution. In the long term, however, not a good one.
Finding a good solution often takes work and patience. It is a kind of work that is different from the work produced from simply wanting the problem to go away, and a kind of patience that restrains the impulse to blast through the problem.
Wanting a real solution inspires deep thought and the willingness to experiment and to try sometimes counter-intuitive options.
We are often like the woman who was speeding down the road when she suddenly noticed a cow standing in the road. She made the problem disappear by putting her hands over her eyes. The solution that we prefer may be reflexive and feel natural. You can then jump quickly to action. In skipping hurriedly to action, you miss the most integral work necessary for effective solutions: the work of thought and study. A person like this may flatter themself with adjectives like results oriented, solution focused, practical, decisive and action oriented. They might as easily be called reckless.
We don’t want to look too intensely into the issues. We are contented with quick superficial analysis. We reject the long collaborative process of consultation and investigation by experts, preferring to glance through the windscreen of our own shallow knowledge and experience, accepting the quick solution suggested by our conditioning.
Of course, there are times when the situation requires a quick drastic solution. In a crisis, there may be no time to study too long or too hard. After five days alone in a deserted canyon in Utah, with his arm pinned under an 800-pound rock, Aaron Ralston chose the simple, direct solution. He used his dull multi-use tool to cut off his arm and free himself. It was his arm or his life. Most times in life, solutions don’t have to be that drastic. Better options often become available with some thought and patience.
Years ago, doctors were quick to remove the tonsils of children who suffered frequent ear and throat infections. Some children would suffer negative complications due to the surgery. This was until antibiotics became available and preferred as a treatment. However, the overuse of antibiotics has now become a problem. Not only do antibiotics kill good bacteria in your body, bad-guy bacteria have been evolving to resist the antibiotics.
Surgery and drugs are solutions that often lead to complications which might be avoided by making positive lifestyle changes instead, like better nutrition, exercise and rest. There are studies that show that children who have infected tonsils removed, while gaining more relief in the short term, are no better off months later than children who wait out the infection.
So it goes with many so-called solutions. They make problems disappear in the short term, only to reappear sometime after. In the midst of their child’s misery, a parent may pressure the doctor to make the suffering disappear. They may also take the time to think and study and patiently address the issue at the root by improving the child’s nutrition and habits. One does not rule out the other but if you can avoid or reduce the need for drugs or cutting, why not? Whether it be cutting tonsils, an arm or a mass of people.
But simplistic solutions are seductive. We continue to cut off larger and larger numbers of people from society, dumping them in prison. It might be a short cut to an incident-free Kadooment. What do we do when the Kadooment is done? We continue to imprison people without enough thought of preparing them for release. We continue to argue for amputating whole lives via the death penalty, to rid society of antisocial elements, with little appreciation for the social conditions that grow that behaviour. To argue for solutions to societal issues without the study of history, sociology, psychology, the arts and culture is like calling for surgery without a proper diagnosis.
Some will argue that cutting off access to beaches is worth the foreign investment. Maybe it is like the two women who went before King Solomon claiming the same baby. One of them was happy with cutting the baby in half. Those who favour the cutting may not have the same emotional attachment to the baby being cut. It may mean nothing to them. But they may be dynamiting the water of future generations by making problems appear to disappear, but solving little in the long term.
Adrian Green is a creative communications specialist.
Email: Adriangreen14@gmail.com