Lateral Thinking

by Edward de Bono

  PO is to lateral thinking what NO is to logical thinking. NO is a rejection tool. PO is an insight restructuring tool. The concept of the laxative is the basis of lateral thinking just as the concept of the negative is the basis of logical thinking. Both concepts have to be crystallized into language devices. It is essential to have language devices because of the passive nature of the mechanism of mind. The language devices are themselves patterns which interact with other patterns on the self-organizing memory surface of mind to bring about certain effects. Such language devices are extremely useful in one’s own thinking and for communication they are essential.

  Although both NO and PO function as language tools the operations they carry out are totally different. NO is a judgement device. PO is an anti-judgement device. NO works within the framework of reason. PO works outside that framework. PO may be used to produce arrangements of information that are unreasonable but they are not really unreasonable because lateral thinking functions in a different way from vertical thinking. Lateral thinking is not irrational but arational. Lateral thinking deals with the patterning of information not with the judgement of those patterns. Lateral thinking is prereason. PO is never a judgement device. PO is a construction device. PO is a patterning device. The patterning process may also involve depatterning and repatteming.

  Although PO is a language tool it is at the same time an anti-language device. Words themselves are just as much cliché patterns as the way they are put together. PO provides a temporary escape from the discrete and ordered stability of language which reflects the established patterns of a self-organizing memory system. That is why the full function of PO is unlikely to have ‘evolved in the development of language. Instead PO arises from consideration of the patterning behaviour of the mind.

  The function of PO is the arrangement of information to create new patterns and to restructure old ones.

  These two functions are but different aspects of the same process but for convenience they may be separated.

  Creating new patterns.

  Challenging old patterns.

  These two functions can be expressed in another way:

  Provocative and permissive: putting information together in new ways and allowing unjustified arrangements of information.

  Liberating: disrupting old patterns in order to allow the imprisoned information to come together in a new way.

  The first function of PO: creating new arrangements of information.

  Experience arranges things in patterns. Things in the environment may happen to be arranged in a particular pattern or else attention may pick things out in a certain pattern. In one case the pattern is derived from the environment and in the other case it is derived from the memory surface of mind since this directs attention. The first function of PO is to create arrangements of information that do not arise from either of these two sources. Just as NO is used to weaken arrangements that are based on experience so PO is used to generate connections that have nothing to do with experience.

  Once information has ‘settled’ into fixed patterns on the memory surface* then new arrangements can only occur if they are directly derived from these patterns. Only such trial arrangements of information are allowed as would be consistent with these background patterns. Anything else is dismissed at once. Yet if (somehow) different arrangements of information could be brought about and held for a short while then the information might snap together to form a new pattern that was either consistent with the background pattern or capable of altering it This process is shown diagrammatically overleaf. The purpose of PO is then either to bring about arrangements that would otherwise not occur or to protect from dismissal arrangements that would otherwise be dismissed as impossible. These functions may be listed as follows:

  To arrange information in a way which would never have come about in the normal course of events.

  To hold an arrangement of information without judging it.

  To protect from dismissal an arrangement of information which has already been judged as impossible.

  An arrangement of information is usually judged as soon as it comes about. The judgement results in one of two verdicts: ‘This is permissible’, or ‘This is not permissible’. The arrangement is either affirmed or denied. There is no middle course. The function of PO is to introduce a middle course as suggested in the diagram. PO is never a judgement. It does not quarrel with the verdict but with the very application of the judgement. PO is an anti-judgement device.

  PO allows one to hold an arrangement for a little longer without having to affirm or deny it. PO delays judgement.

  The usefulness of delaying judgement is one of the most basic principles of lateral thinking. It is also one of the fundamental points of difference from vertical thinking. With vertical thinking an arrangement of information must be right at every step, which means that one must use judgement at the earliest possible opportunity. With lateral thinking an arrangement of information may be wrong in itself but can lead to a perfectly valid new idea. This possibility arises directly from consideration of the mind as a self-maximizing memory surface.

  By delaying judgement and holding onto an idea a number of things may happen. If the idea is pursued far enough it may be found to make sense. If one holds onto the idea then freshly arrived information can interact with the idea to give a valid idea. The unjudged idea may direct the search for information that can prove useful in its own right. Finally if the idea is held long enough then the context into which it did not fit may itself be changed.

  Exactly the same considerations apply to the use of PO for protection of arrangements of information that have already been judged and dismissed. Such dismissed arrangements may have been dismissed long ago and it may be a matter of resurrecting them under the protection of PO. On the other hand the arrangements may have been proposed and dismissed only recently.

  It is important to realize that the use of PO for creating new arrangements of information is quite different from the use of the usual devices for arranging information.

  PO does not have an addition function as provided by ‘and’.

  PO does not have an identity function as provided by ‘is’.

  PO does not have an alternative function as provided by ‘or’.

  The function of PO is to bring about a provocative arrangement of information without saying anything at all about it. The arrangement itself is not important but what happens next is. The purpose of the arrangement is to lead forward to new ideas.

  In practice there are certain specific occasions on which it is convenient to use PO.

  Juxtaposition

  The simplest use of PO is to hold two unrelated things together in order to allow them or their associations to interact. No connection or relationship at all is implied between the two things. Nor is there any reason for putting them together (except what might happen). Without the PO device one would not easily be able to put things together hi this way without finding, suggesting, or forcing some reason.

  One might say, ‘computers PO omelettes’. From this juxtaposition might come such ideas as: Cooking by computer or by some pre-set automatic device. Another idea would be a central store of recipes and one would use a telephone to dial in your ingrethents and requirements in order to be given a matched recipe. Both omelettes and computers are concerned with the changing of raw material into a more usable form. In an omelette things are mixed up but come out in a definite form so with a certain type of computer an apparently random mixing of information would still result in some definite output (as for instance in the brain).

  Introduction of a random word

  Instead of linking two unconnected words together as in juxtaposition PO can be used to ‘introduce’ a random unconnected word into a discussion in order to stimulate new ideas. You could say, ‘Gentlemen, you know all about lateral thinking and the use of a random input to help disturb cliché patterns of thought and to stimulate new ideas. I am now going to introduce such a ra
ndom word. This word has no connection at all with what we have been discussing. There is no reason behind my choice of the word. The only reason for its use is the hope that it will provoke some new ideas. Do not feel that there really is a hidden reason. Do not spend your time searching for this reason. The word is ‘raisin’. Instead of saying all that one would simply say: ‘Po raisin’.

  If the problem under discussion was, ‘How to use study time’ then this random word could set off such ideas as: raisin – used to make cakes enjoyable – small pockets of sweetness – intersperse short periods of more interesting subjects among longer periods of less interesting subjects – create small nodes of interest in less interesting subjects:

  raisins – dried grapes – concentrated sweetness – concentrate and summarize material so that it can be taken in over a shorter time.

  raisins – exposed in the sun to dry – perhaps one can study in a pleasant surrounding as easily as in an unpleasant one – do lighting, colour etc. affect boredom? Perhaps material can be subjected to ‘glare’ of analysis by someone else in order to reduce it to its essentials.

  raisins – dried for preservation – notes and summaries easier to remember but need reconstituting with fluid (i.e. examples).

  Disconnected jumps

  In vertical thinking one moves in sequential steps but in lateral thinking one can make disconnected jumps and then try and fill in the gaps. If you do this in the middle of a vertical thinking discussion then everyone else will be very confused as they try to find the logic behind this jump. In order to indicate that the jump is a lateral disconnected one you could preface your comment with PO. For instance in the discussion about study time you might say, ‘Po time spent studying is time spent not doing other things.’.

  The jump may be only a small one within the same field or it may be a large one to an unconnected field. PO saves one the trouble of having to link the new remark to what has gone before. As usual PO implies, ‘Don’t look for the reason behind this. Let us just go forward and see what the effect of it is.’

  Doubt (semi-certainty)

  Whenever a discussion gets blocked by the impossibility of proving a certain point PO can be used to open things up again. PO does not prove the point or deny it but it allows the point to be used in any way which will enable the discussion to keep going. One can then see what happens. It may be that nothing very useful comes of it and one realizes that the original point was not so vital after all. It may be that one can reach a solution and from this one can find another way back to the starting point without having to go through the doubtful point. It may be that one can only reach a solution through the doubtful point and so one comes to realize how vital this point is and therefore increases the effort to prove it. This particular use of PO is not very different from the ordinary use of ‘if or ‘suppose’.

  Being wrong

  In lateral thinking one does not mind being wrong on the way to a solution because it may be necessary to go through a wrong area in order to get to a position from which the correct path is visible. PO is an escort that allows one to move through the wrong area. PO does not make things right but it switches attention from why something is wrong to how it may be useful. In effect PO implies, ‘I know this is wrong but I am going to put things this way in order to see where it leads me.’.

  In considering the problem of keeping the windscreen of a car free from dirt and water someone suggested that cars ought to be driven backwards since the back window was always much easier to see out of than the front window. In itself this is obviously nonsense since if one was going backwards that window would get just as dirty as the ordinary windscreen. Nevertheless the suggestion, ‘Why not drive backwards’ can lead on to such other ideas as indirect vision systems or some way of protecting the windscreen from head on exposure to mud and water.

  In this example PO would be used in the following way. Someone would suggest driving backwards and this would be met with the response, ‘That’s nonsense, because…’ The reply to this would be, ‘Po why not drive backwards’? The purpose of PO would be to delay judgement — to hold the idea in mind for a few moments in order to see what could arise from it instead of dismissing it at once.

  Holding function

  In addition to protecting an idea which is obviously wrong PO can be used to protect an idea from judgement. In this case the idea has not already been judged but is about to be subjected to critical analysis. PO is used to delay this. This function of PO is rather similar to its use for the introduction of a random stimulus. An ordinary remark or idea in the course of a discussion is turned by the use of PO into a catalyst Used in such circumstances PO indicates: ‘Let’s not bother to analyse whether this is right or wrong — let us just see what ideas it will lead to.’

  PO could be used by the person offering the idea or it could be used by anyone else. Thus if an evaluation of the idea was started someone could simply interject, ‘Po…’ This would mean, “Let’s hold off evaluation for the moment.’

  Construction

  In school geometry a problem is often made easier to solve by adding some additional lines to the original figure. This process is similar to that involved in the story of the lawyer whose task it was to divide up eleven horses among three sons so that one of them got half of the horses, another got a quarter, and the third son got one sixth. What he did was to lend his own horse to the sons and then divided the twelve horses up, giving the first son six, the second three and the third two. He then took his own horse back again.

  Here PO is used to add something to the problem or to change it in some other way. Changing the problem in this way can lead to new lines of development, new ways of looking at it. The purpose of changing the problem is not to rephrase it or put it in a better way but to alter it and see what happens next. For instance in considering the efficiency of the police in dealing with crime one might say, ‘Po why not employ one-armed policemen?’ Changing the problem in this way by adding the factor of ‘one-armed policemen’ would focus attention on the possible advantages of being one-armed and especially on the need to use brain and organization rather than muscle power.

  Summary

  There are many other ways in which PO can be used but the occasions listed above are enough to illustrate the first function of PO. This first function is quite simply to allow one to say anything one likes. PO allows one to arrange information in any way whatsoever. There need be no justification at all for such arrangement except PO.

  Po two and two make five.

  Po water flows uphill if it is coloured green.

  Po lateral thinking is a waste of time.

  Po men have souls and women have not.

  Po it takes a lifetime to unlearn what has been learned in education.

  The first function of PO is to shift attention from the meaning of a statement and the reason for making it to the effect of the statement With PO one looks forwards instead of backwards. Because any arrangement of information can lead on to other arrangements a statement can be very useful as a stimulus no matter how nonsensical it is in itself. And by being nonsensical one can arrange information in a way that is different from the established patterns — and so increase the chance of a permanent restructuring. With vertical thinking one is not allowed to do any of this. With vertical thinking one looks backwards at the reason far a statement at the justification, at the meaning.

  The statement, ‘Po water flows uphill if it is coloured green’ is ridiculous but it could lead on to such ideas as: Why should the green colour make a difference? Why should adding colour make a difference? Is there anything one could add to water to make it flow uphill? In fact there is. If one adds a very small amount of a special plastic then the water acts as a solid/liquid to such an extent that if you start pouring water out of a jug and then hold the jug upright the water will continue to siphon out, climbing up the side of the jug, flowing over the rim and down the outer side.

  PO as a device allows one
to use information in this way which is completely different from the ordinary use of information. One could use information in this way without PO but one would still be using the lateral concept which is incorporated in PO. The convenience of PO as an actual language device is that it clearly indicates that information is being used in this special way. Without such an indication there would be confusion as the listener would not know what was going on. A PO type statement inserted into an ordinary vertical thinking discussion without the use of PO would lead the listeners to suppose that the speaker was mad, lying, mistaken, stupid, ignorant or facetious. Apart from the inconvenience of being the recipient of such judgements there is the danger of being taken seriously. For instance, ‘Po the house is on fire’ is rather different from. ‘The house is on fire’. Furthermore if one does not use PO then the information is not used as a stimulus in the lateral manner.

  The second function of PO: challenging old arrangements of information

  The basic function of mind is to create patterns. The memory surface of mind organizes information into patterns. Or rather it allows information to organize itself into patterns.* The effect is just the same as if the mind picked things out of the environment and put them together to give patterns. Once formed these patterns become ever more firmly established because they direct attention. The effectiveness of mind depends entirely on the creation, the recognition and the use of patterns. The patterns have to be permanent to be of any use. Yet the patterns are not necessarily the only way of putting together the information contained in them — or even the best. The patterns are determined by the time of arrival of the information or by preceding patterns that have been accepted entire.