Temple Grandin teaches animal science after a storied career in the meat industry. As a woman with autism, she has also become an advocate for people with neurological differences, speaking about her experience with autism and arguing for common sense ways of addressing the needs of people with the condition.
One of the themes of Grandin’s speeches on autism is the concept of “bottom-up thinking.” By this, Grandin means a way of considering an issue that takes into account the details on the ground particular to the individual circumstance.
Grandin explained, “You take a bunch of data about something you don’t know about, and you (find patterns to) sort them into categories.” Grandin, who did not speak until after age 4, is a pictorial thinker and this form of sorting came naturally to her.
She provided the example of learning to categorize animals as a young girl. She said:
When I was a kid, I would sort cats, dogs and horses into three categories: small, medium and large. Okay, now that way of categorizing got ruined when a dachshund came into the neighborhood the same size as cats. I remember sitting on the lawn of the next-door neighbor’s house studying Rosie the dachshund and trying figure out why she was a dog.
Grandin had to consider other characteristics, such as barking, to properly group dogs with dogs and refine her system of understanding this aspect of the world around her. She explained, “These are things I was figuring out at 6 years old. This is the very beginning of bottom-up thinking.”
The alternative to bottom-up thinking is top-down thinking in which a general concept is applied to specific circumstances as a means of understanding. Beginning first with a general principle and then seeking to see how the individual details fit into that concept can inhibit efficiency.
Another way of thinking about top-down thinking is through the analogy of a business. If the managers at the top make all the decisions without detailed information from workers on the ground, this would be top-down thinking. On the other hand, if workers on the front-lines gathered detailed information about conditions and processes and this information factored into the decisions, this would be bottom-up thinking. There are scenarios in which quick action is required, so bottom-up thinking with the methodical accumulation of information would not be a good fit.
In some respects, bottom-up thinking may come more easily to people with autism. One writer explains, “Wherein the typical-minded person is taking in the concept before the details, based on collective memories, the autistic mind, due to a bombardment of sensory clues, is taking in the details before the concept.”
In another sense, bottom-up thinking is another name for the principle of subsidiarity. This term refers to the organizational idea that “nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization.” By putting the decision in the hands of those most immediately effected by it, there is increased relevant information for the decision and increased interest in the outcome.
Whatever you call it, bottom-up thinking or subsidiarity, Grandin’s impassioned call for rational decision-making is one worth heeding.
4 comments
Comments are closed.