Vertical thinking vs. Lateral thinking

Vertical thinking is the traditional type of thinking. Lateral thinking is complementary to vertical thinking. In vertical thinking, one moves forward in sequential steps each of which must be relevant. Lateral thinking allows one to be wrong or irrelevant at times, in order to achieve a correct solution in the end. Lateral thinking is for changing concepts and perceptions.
History
The purpose of thinking is to collect information and use it in the best possible manner. The mind works to create fixed patterns from the surroundings, after which they can be used, and they become firmly established. Thus, the mind provides a special environment for information to organize itself effectively. However, this pattern making system has several limitations associated with it. While patterns can be easily combined or added, it is extremely difficult to rearrange or restructure them in order to make them up to date and effective, thanks to our traditional thinking methods, termed as "vertical thinking".
Vertical thinking is encouraged in schools, where one is taught to meet problems head-on. With this technique one can refine patterns and establish their validity. But one will never be able to make the best use of information, unless one knows how to create patterns and diminish the dominance of old patterns. This is where lateral thinking comes into picture.
The term "lateral thinking" on the other hand, was invented by Edward de Bono in 1967. The concept was first elaborated in a book called "The Use of Lateral Thinking" or "New Think"-both the titles referring to the same book- by Edward de Bono. Later, several other books were also written by Edward de Bono on this concept.
Introduction
Lateral thinking is not a substitute for vertical thinking. They are both complementary to one another. With vertical thinking, one might reach a conclusion with a valid series of steps. Because of the validity and relevance of the steps, one can be quite certain about the conclusion. In any case, it cannot be denied, that the starting point was just a perceptual choice, which could have been different. Lateral thinking is needed to handle the perceptual choice. Lateral thinking does not rely on the relevance of the steps used to obtain a solution. One can be absolutely certain about the solution, no matter how relevantly it has been obtained.
Lateral thinking makes vertical thinking more effectual. Vertical thinking enhances the ideas generated by lateral thinking. When you dig a hole, vertical thinking will be used to dig the same hole deeper, whereas lateral thinking will be used to dig a hole in a different place.
Comparison
Rightness vs. Richness
Vertical thinking is selective. It emphasizes on selecting the right approach. Lateral thinking, on the other hand, is generative. It emphasizes more on richness than it does on rightness. It attempts to look for as many approaches as possible. Vertical thinking selects the most appropriate pathway by excluding all the inappropriate and irrelevant pathways. Lateral thinking, on the other hand, seeks to open-up pathways. In vertical thinking, one aspires to use the most promising approach, as a result of which one keeps on looking for different approaches till one finds such a promising approach. In lateral thinking, however, one continues generating as many approaches as one can, even after one has already found the most promising approach.
Direction
Vertical thinking emphasizes on the use of a definite approach to solve a problem, as a result of which one moves forward only is there is a clearly defined direction. In lateral thinking, however, the stress is laid on movement or change. Therefore, one need not be moving towards a direction, one may be moving away from it. Generation of a new direction is of greater prominence. The movement or change in lateral thinking is a way of bringing about re-patterning.
Analytic vs Provocation
Vertical thinking is analytical. It tends to analyze and judge ideas. Lateral thinking is provocative. It stresses on the fact that an idea that seems irrelevant for the moment, may result in the provocation of several relevant ideas in future. Hence, no idea should be analyzed from the very beginning. Analysis cannot be sidelined. In order to use the provocative nature of lateral thinking effectively, one must be able to use the selective nature of vertical thinking too. Analysis, however, should be kept til the end.
Sequence
Sequence is of utter importance in vertical thinking. One moves forward one step at a time, with each step arising from the previous step, and each step being firmly connected. In lateral thinking, however, one need be sequential. One may jump to a new point and fill in the gap later on. Hence, unlike vertical thinking, the soundness of the solution does not depend on the soundness of the path by which it has been reached. Nonetheless, the solution still makes sense in its own way, without having to depend on the pathway by which it was received. This is just like trial-and-error, a trial is considered successful even if there was no good reason for trying it. It could also be possible that after reaching the solution one is able to device a sound pathway from the starting point.
Correctness
Vertical thinking stresses on the importance of being correct at each step. This is absolutely fundamental to nature of vertical thinking. Logical thinking and mathematics are entirely based on this concept of vertical thinking. Lateral thinking, on the other hand, is like building a bridge. The parts do not have to be self-supporting at every stage but when the last part is fitted into place the bridge suddenly becomes self supporting. This means that one need not be right at each step, provided the conclusion is correct.
Relevance
Vertical thinking emphasizes on selection by exclusion; exclusion of whatever is irrelevant. Lateral thinking, however, is the realization of the fact that restructuring does not come from within, but from outside influence. So one welcomes outside influence in lateral thinking, for provocative action. The more the irrelevance of these incoming patterns, the more are the chances of pattern restructuring.
Finiteness vs. Probability
With vertical thinking, one always expects to seek an answer. In lateral thinking, however, there may be no answer at all. Its main aim is to bring about the restructuring of a pattern. It does not emphasize on the necessity to obtain an answer. As a result, vertical thinking promises at least a minimum solution; whereas lateral thinking increases the chances of a maximum solution, but makes no promises.
Categories, classification and labels
Vertical thinking depends on identifying something as the member of some class or excluding from that class. Therefore, categories, classifications and labels work only if they are consistent. For example a frog is most likely to be classified as an animal; though it can also be classified as a reptile. This is where lateral thinking comes into picture. Lateral thinking aspires to look at things in a different way. Hence, labels may change.
Negativity
In vertical thinking, one may use the negative to block off certain pathways. In lateral thinking, however, there is no negative. One may require to be wrong at times, in order to be right in the end. This is possible in lateral thinking.
Likeliness
Vertical thinking is not perverse. It follows the most likely approach. Lateral thinking, on the other hand, follows the least likely approach, as a result of the willingness to explore such pathways. Lateral thinking does not require to follow a pathway that seems useful; it is just the thirst to explore new pathways that causes one to choose the least likely approach.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu