Second-Order Thinking: Ask “And then what?”
Sometimes we make a decision that looks for a while positive and good. After some time, however, the decision returns more negative consequences. With the help of Second-Order Thinking, we can think before we decide about possible consequences.
The following quote by the American science-fiction author Frederik Pohl captures the Mental Model of Second-Order Thinking best:
“A good science fiction story should be able to predict not the automobile but the traffic jam.”- Frederik Pohl
Second-Order Thinking Explained
The Model of Second-Order Thinking involves considering not just the immediate or direct consequences of a decision or action (first-order consequences) but also the potential consequences that may result from those initial outcomes (second-order consequences).
It helps us to avoid possible negative outcomes of our actions/decisions, which we don’t see when we only look at the First-order consequences.
It’s called SECOND-Order Thinking, but it doesn’t stop there. It includes also third-order thinking, fourth-order thinking, (nth-order) and so …
In other words, Frédéric Bastiat, who was a French economist, talks in his essay “That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen” about the difference between people (in this case economists, but applies to any domain) who can think one step ahead and those who not.
Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference — the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen, and also of those which it is necessary to foresee. Now this difference is enormous, for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the ultimate consequences are fatal, and the converse. Hence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, — at the risk of a small present evil.- Frédéric Bastiat [1]
In a simplified form, fast food is from a pleasure perspective probably good and the second-order and so forth consequences are not good. The other way around, salad/broccoli now for many a little pain but the nth-order consequences are positive.
How to use the Mental Model of Second-Order Thinking (my experience)?
Second-order thinking requires much more work than first-order thinking. It is asking ourselves many questions about a certain decision.
- Take the time to sit back and think. Starting with the first-order consequences.
- Ask “And then what?” for each first-order consequence. That’s how we figure out the nth-order consequences. Keep repeating the question.
- Considering the aspect of time. Second-order consequences (nth-order…) probably show much later after the first-order consequences
In this process, we could discover an unacceptable consequence. Even when we think that it has a low likelihood to appear, the consequence would be so negative, that we can not take a certain action.
Some limitations, what to keep in mind
I notice in doing this kind of thinking, that I see causalities where there are none and naturally try to predict. Reality is complex and foggy. We can’t “predict/anticipate” with certainty. This we have to keep in mind. Just because we can think about the consequences that they happen doesn’t mean that they happen.
Some situations we can judge as more likely to happen than others.
For example, constantly smoking has a “high” probability of fatal nth-order consequences. On the other side, when thinking about a job change, we can think about what nth-order consequences will appear, but the probability is not so high that they appear.
Important to notice here generally: When we talk about past examples, it’s easy to see those consequences in retrospect.
Second-Order Thinking applied
Frequently taking Painkiller
(Disclaimer: This is no health advice! Only for illustration purposes)
Decision/Action: Frequently taking painkillers for temporary pain relief (e.g. for headaches)
First Order Consequence -> Pain (Headache) relief, feel better
Second Order Consequences -> Possibly developing a medication tolerance (needing a higher dose for the same pain relief)
Dependency
Masking underlying issues
Better sleepThird Order Consequences -> Health risk through long-term use (can cause damage to organs) + neglecting underlying issues
Frédéric Bastiat: Broken Window
In this example, a shoemaker’s child was careless and broke his window. People around him say it’s a good thing because it brings money to the glass repairmen. Frédéric Bastiat argues, that this is only what we see. It does not include what we are not seeing.
Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier’s trade — that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs — I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.
It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.- Frédéric Bastiat [1]
In this case, from the perspective of other people, the first-order consequence was positive, money was spent on the glass repairmen. But no one saw the second-order consequences, that the shoemaker has this money not for other spending.
The next time we are faced with a (big) decision, we can sit down and think through some possible consequences, not just focus on those we immediately see. This costs energy, time, and willpower. I would say, it’s worth the cost.
Thank you for taking the time to read this article.
As always. I wish you a great day!
For more, consider following me here on Medium and my YouTube channel “Invisible Compass”: https://www.youtube.com/@invisiblecompass
Sources:
[1] That Which is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen — Frédéric Bastiat
