Well, what did you want?

Friends, this is not the format of my blog, not a story about computer arithmetic, but a fiction story that I wrote more than 4 years ago and published earlier in my old, already closed blog. The story is largely related to the topic of choosing a profession, life path and there is a little bit of mathematics in it, I decided that it suits Habr's visitors better than the rest of my works in this direction and the thoughts presented are worthy of your attention. Most of you will recognize the acute problems of society in the story and think about something. Or maybe they just have fun, which is also good.



I want to make a reservation right away: I do not enter into a discussion about the content of my stories, I do not answer questions on this topic, so my comments under this post will not be. I can only say that I belong to the category of those who are indirectly criticized in the story: my diplomas are 100% filled with “excellent” grades, without a single exception, and I think in a philistine superficial way. But I have the right to dream about such an Institute from the story? :) Moreover, it already exists ...



The text contains a reference to one of the real-life social projects (Social Forestry), which faced a collapse this year, but I ask you not to pay attention to it, you just cannot throw out the words from the song, did not cut it.



And the story does NOT reflect my personal opinion either about the academy of sciences, or about competitions in programming, or about anything in general. This is precisely fictional fiction.

Part 1

Ivan entered one of the provincial universities, because, on the one hand, he did not want to leave his hometown, and on the other hand, he understood that he would not get into a prestigious capital university. The young man was not gifted with any abilities, but had an extraordinary craving for science. Interested in how our world works, Ivan in childhood was constantly looking for popular literature on physics, chemistry and other natural sciences. He was driven by a craving for knowledge, but was hampered by, as it seemed to him, low intelligence, the inability to grasp information quickly and on the fly. He spent many times more time to understand even simple things that Ivan's peers learned quickly enough. A little later, the young man found out why this is happening. But that was later ... and now Ivan entered an ordinary university in his city.



The study was interesting for him, but very difficult, with difficulty rolling from three to three, Ivan did not notice how two years had passed. He knew that the university annually hosts a competition for third-year students and older, according to the results of which young men and women are selected to the research Institute, which in the future promises a prestigious high-paying job in real science. However, there was one extreme problem that Ivan could not come to terms with. In order to get to the competition itself, it was necessary to pass the qualifying stage. The essence of this stage is extremely simple: it is required that for the last four sessions there were only "fives" on the record. You need to be an excellent student to be allowed to get at least to the first stages of the competition.



Ivan knew about this research institute very well. Passing him, he always dreamily raised his head to look at the majestic Building of Science, imagining how the best minds of the region are working on the most complex research that ensures the progress of mankind. There were similar buildings in other regions of Russia. Ivan also knew how such an Institute differs from the classical office of the Russian Academy of Sciences. There was no bureaucracy, there were no unscrupulous scientists who produced dozens of "scientific" articles for the sake of raising the citation index. All applied developments were completely real and really had a useful meaning, as the inhabitants of the whole country were convinced of it over and over again, and fundamental research was an order of magnitude ahead of similar ones in other countries. The building was very comfortablescientists could work both in separate offices and in general workshops. Almost any tools were available to them on demand, they could work according to a free schedule, they were even paid for the work that they did on their own initiative, in excess of working time. They had 5 days off and 2 working days a week, which, however, was a very conditional schedule due to the free regime and the fact that some scientists even spent the night in the building in specially designed rooms, because they could not tear themselves away from their developments.They had 5 days off and 2 working days a week, which, however, was a very conditional schedule due to the free regime and the fact that some scientists even spent the night in the building in specially designed rooms, because they could not tear themselves away from their developments.They had 5 days off and 2 working days a week, which, however, was a very conditional schedule due to the free regime and the fact that some scientists even spent the night in the building in specially designed rooms, because they could not tear themselves away from their developments.



Of course, Ivan wanted to get into the Institute, this was his dream ever since he learned to understand the reason for the extinct look of his parents, each of whom, in addition to their main job, worked somewhere on the side to provide the family with a more or less comfortable existence. Once he asked his parents why they did not get into this Institute. They replied that when they studied together at the university, where they met, they did not understand that they needed to study excellently right away, and by the third year they could not boast of all the A's. When asked why they then did not try to rectify the situation in order to get to the qualifying competition already in the fifth year, the parents somehow indistinctly answered, they say, somehow it was not up to that, adulthood began, part-time work after school, all things…



Then it was even more interesting. Ivan met people who passed the competition and were able to get into the Institute for a trial period. But it was surprising that they managed to fail this trial period. To Ivan's question about how it was possible to fail the test at such a heavenly job, he heard an answer that he did not understand then, but realized very well later. He was told that people are prejudiced there. That is, they can take to a more prestigious position the one who failed the test instead of the one who passed it and whose intelligence is several dozen points higher according to special tests. Moreover, the selection criterion was completely unclear: the managers subsequently did not even look at the grades, the color of the graduates' diplomas, awards and merits during their studies at the university, and other such characteristics, moreover, the Losers somehow got there,expelled from the university due to academic failure. There was a feeling that they were hiring out of pull, that this whole phony system with competitions and selections was a screen for averting the eyes, after which, through a bribe or by family ties, some "leftist" people were taken, but honest and decent closed.



This did not fit into Ivan's head. How can it be that the Institute is famous for its developments, but at the same time immoral and incompetent people work in it? How is it that these people, even in spite of a two-day working week, sit in the building and work all the time? On the other hand, the Institute published extremely few scientific articles, monographs and other journalism, rarely announced itself in the news, which led to strange thoughts. This seemed contradictory. The fact that the Institute itself did not look at the formal indicators of future employees was also alarming, but they did look at the students' grades for selection for the competition. These reflections forced Ivan to take a desperate step. The young man understood that he would never even receive a grade of "good", and one could not even dream of "excellent", and a daring plan arose in his head ...

Part 2

On the day of the preliminary selection, Ivan approached the assembly hall of the university, in which a small group of excellent students had already gathered, wishing to take a place at the Institute. The inspector at the entrance to the hall asked everyone to show him the grade book, and only after that he let him inside. Ivan approached the inspector and politely asked to call the leader of this whole circus performance. He said so - "circus performance". The man looked at Ivan with an appraising glance - and a spark of cheerful mood flashed in his eyes. It seemed that the request of an outwardly ordinary young man was something he even liked. He immediately called another man from the hall, whispered something to him and pointed in the direction of Ivan, who trembled a little internally from his insolence, which he himself did not expect. To relax somehowthe young man moved away from the door a little and moved to the center of the corridor.



The man, who was called by the inspector, went out of the doors of the hall - and Ivan immediately calmed down when he saw him. The person walking towards him, with all his appearance, produced a feeling of incredible reliability and strength of character. This was a person who wanted to obey immediately, but at the same time he did not completely restrain the will, but on the contrary, gave a feeling of freedom and even some kind of clarity of thinking. Approaching Ivan, he held out his hand and introduced himself:



- Sergei Andreevich.



“Ivan,” the young man said shortly, firmly shaking Sergei Andreyevich's hand.



- What do you want, Ivan? - the man got down to business.



- I want to express one critical thought regarding your contests, and you, please, correct me if I am wrong. But if I am right, I ask you to give me the opportunity to pass the tests, despite the fact that I have never received higher than three marks.



- I am listening to you, Ivan, - Sergei Andreevich readily agreed, - state your idea. Just let's step aside so as not to disturb anyone here.



They moved away from the center of the corridor to a corner, and Ivan expressed his thought, himself surprised at how smoothly and easily he manages to speak in the presence of Sergei Andreyevich:



- I talked with different people, including those who passed tests to work at the Institute. They said that you are very dishonest in the selection of employees. On the one hand, here in these competitions the selection is carried out according to formal parameters, such as grades at the university, the level of intelligence, which in fact does not show anything except a person's ability to pass the test for the level of intelligence. Then you have some, I beg your pardon, idiotic psychological tests that allow you to divide the entire infinite variety of human nature into four primitive types, then each of these types for some reason is divided into eight more classes that have no relation to reality. And the result - all the same, not the people whose indicators are higher than the others will get into the Institute, but some others. I was told that you have nepotism and bribery there, but I don't believe in it.I got a different impression. Instead of evaluating people according to these formal indicators, you somehow imperceptibly determine the presence in a person of some factor incomprehensible to me. If this factor exists, the person suits you, and if not, then neither the level of his intellect, nor the ability to click systems of differential equations and other such useless talents for science, does not matter. Therefore, on the basis of what has been said, I ask you to give me the opportunity to go to the assembly hall without showing the record. If I'm right, of course. If I'm wrong, I see no reason to continue dreaming about working at the Institute.then neither the level of his intelligence, nor the ability to click systems of differential equations in his mind and other such useless talents for science, does not matter. Therefore, on the basis of what has been said, I ask you to give me the opportunity to enter the assembly hall without showing the record book. If I'm right, of course. If I'm wrong, I see no reason to continue dreaming about working at the Institute.then neither the level of his intelligence, nor the ability to click systems of differential equations in his mind and other such useless talents for science, does not matter. Therefore, on the basis of what has been said, I ask you to give me the opportunity to enter the assembly hall without showing the record book. If I'm right, of course. If I'm wrong, I see no reason to continue dreaming about working at the Institute.



Sergei Andreevich looked at Ivan for a while, and he looked at him. The man's eyes were very deep, wise, it was impossible to hide anything from them, because they pierced the young man through and through. At the same time, there was a certain restraint in this strength, thanks to which there was a feeling that Sergei Andreevich could explain a lot to Ivan, but he still would not understand now. Instead of the teacher's instructions and some explanations that the young man expected, he heard, to his surprise, a simple answer:



- You can go to the testing room. Nice to meet you, Ivan.



Sergey Andreevich shook Ivan's hand, turned around and walked towards the door of the hall, nodded in the affirmative to the man who was checking the book, and then went inside. For some time Ivan could not come to his senses from communicating with this strange person, but then came to his senses and hurriedly approached the person who was checking. He gestured to the door with an inviting gesture and said cheerfully:



- Well, come in.

Part 3

Ivan went to the assembly hall, chose an empty seat away from other students, and sat down, still not believing his success. It was incredible for him. After all, it was just that he, either out of internal indignation, or out of helplessness and resentment, told the program manager what he thought about all this booth with grades - and he was right ... at least he passed the preliminary selection. On the other hand, a strange feeling that he was undeservedly in the hall crept up to Ivan and for a long time did not leave him, that he did not demonstrate in any way his readiness to work in a scientific Institute ... Meanwhile, Sergei Andreevich went on the stage of the hall and began calmly, but make a speech distinctly and clearly.



At first, Ivan listened to this speech attentively, but quickly realized that all this was the same set of words distracting from the essence, which had no direct relation to reality. These were words of greeting, some formal things about the Institute and the banal bullshit that “you are the elite of our city, but even among you, only a few will be able to get to work for us, because this work is extremely difficult, requires a high mind, creativity, inexhaustible desire for discovery and ... perseverance. " At the last word, he looked expressively at Ivan, who was sitting aside, and smiled. Ivan froze in surprise and couldn't even breathe for a couple of seconds.



The man, who had previously checked the books, walked through the rows of the hall, handing out to everyone some papers with dough and pens. Sergei Andreevich, who was still on stage, said that candidates have half an hour to answer the test questions.



Ivan opened the assignment sheet. It was almost a classic intelligence test. Standard questions that the young man never liked. They demanded to think quickly in typical situations, which he never knew how to do and was lost when they demanded some kind of haste in answers. According to his mentality, Ivan thought for a long time about each question, worked out different answers in detail and from all sides, which required many times more time than the other students spent, giving the very first answer that would fit their logic. The young man decided that he had nothing to lose, and therefore you just need to move step by step through the list and be attentive to all issues. After all, this is how he was going to work in science - thoroughly and thoroughly delving into the problem. Therefore, there is no point in cheating the employer,trying to provide poor quality answers for the sake of speed. You need to answer as if you had already worked at the Institute. You don't have to pretend and play someone else in your place.



Half an hour flew by unnoticed, Ivan managed to answer only a third of the questions from the list, handed over the sheet signed by his name and left the hall. From conversations with the rest of the students, he understood that the majority easily answered all the questions even before the expiration of the allotted time. Many boasted that they did it in 15-20 minutes and were surprised that the test was so simple. Sharing their impressions and being in some euphoria from success, the students excitedly informed each other about how they answered one or another question and were glad that their answers were often the same. Ivan was surprised that none of the answers to those questions that he managed to answer coincided with those that he managed to overhear in the conversation between the students.



For example, in one of the tasks it was necessary to extend the sequence of numbers: 1, 2, 4, 7, ... All students considered this task quite simple, because it is obvious that you need to add one to the first number to get the second, two - to the second , three - to the third, therefore, further you need to add a four to get 11. However, Ivan thought not only so. If you think a little more, you will notice that the next number is the sum of the two previous ones plus one. That is, 1 + 2 + 1 = 4, then 2 + 4 + 1 = 7, so then we get 4 + 7 + 1 = 12. In other words, we get a sequence of Fibonacci numbers without one. Then Ivan found several confirmations that 13 could have been put instead of 12 (for example, if we take the degrees of cube roots of seven, rounded to the nearest integer),but it was possible to put 14 (if the same degrees are rounded up). In short, the young man was not satisfied with the fact that many simple formulas for him fit into this sequence, so he simply wrote the number 0 in the answer. That is, after the number 7, he wrote 0, - “and the author of the test will have to be very convincing to prove to me erroneousness of this assumption, "thought Ivan, giving the same exact answer to all problems with a similar question.giving the same exact answer to all problems with a similar formulation of the question.giving the same exact answer to all problems with a similar formulation of the question.



This was followed by a task in which 4 squares and a circle were drawn. The question was: "What figures are superfluous?" All students answered that only the circle is superfluous. Ivan pondered this question and decided that the squares may be superfluous, and the circle just remains. Or maybe all the figures are superfluous here, because it is not clear what the circles and squares have in general to work at the Institute, as in the test for small children. Or maybe there are no unnecessary figures here, because since they are drawn, it means that the author of the test needed them to formulate this question. This means that the figures are drawn exactly as they are, and exactly as the author needed, therefore they are not superfluous, moreover, they have a certain role - to mislead the students with the seeming simplicity of the question. After thinking a little more, Ivan replied that there are no extra pieces here.



Thus, to all the questions that he got to, Ivan answered differently from the rest of the students, however, despite this, he was not upset, but only felt more special than all these "excellent students" thinking, as it turned out , very primitive within the framework of the usual program given by him. They simply chose the answer that was obvious to them, without thinking about the fact that with different views on the question, the answer can be completely different. For example, one task contained the following wording: “Can you solve this problem?”, And then the text of the task was written. Everyone solved the problem and wrote the answer to it, and Ivan wrote the word "I can" as an answer. Who can say that this is the wrong answer to the only question in this assignment? And so in everything else: Ivan always tried to look as broadly as possible at each problem. So who is right after all?



The next day, lists of results were posted, in which all test participants were sorted in descending order of the number of points scored for the test. Ivan was also on this list ... in last place. For a long time he looked at the familiar surnames, at the number of points that these people received, and tried to compare the picture in his head with these lists. So, it turns out that if we compare his answers with the answers of the leader of the first round, then Ivan could not get as many points as he received, because all the answers he gave did not coincide with the answers of the leader, who scored the full, maximum possible score. Thus, Ivan had to get zero! But he got even more than if all his answers, which he managed to give, were the same as those of the leader ... what's the matter?



If we do not take into account the possibility of a mistake by the checking commission, there could be two answers. First: Ivan was “dragged in” by falsifying the result, just as he was “dragged” to the first round without a record. Second: Ivan's answers were more correct than the leader's, so they were given even more points than the “correct” answers, but the questions Ivan managed to answer were too few to get ahead of the leader. In fact, there was a third option, which the young man did not even know about ... he learned about this option much later.

Part 4

Then it was all the same. Sergey Andreevich conducted several more very different tests, and everywhere Ivan tried to show his inclination to deep comprehension of questions and carefully formulated the answer. Of course, he constantly failed to cope with all the tasks, managing to pass only a third, and sometimes even a quarter of the test. The others were already beginning to laugh at him, when he was constantly in last place on the lists. But the group of candidates decreased from test to test, and Ivan's surname moved from one list to another, without changing its position relative to the other candidates ...



***



... Many years have passed since Ivan joined the Institute. Checking tests of new candidates this year, he was surprised to find a rather strange job of one of the students. In the tasks for the continuation of the sequence of numbers, Ivan instead of the expected answers - some integers - saw everywhere the square root of two. In a difficult problem, which ended with the question "can you determine which of the guys is called?", The answer was "of course!" Many other questions were also answered correctly, but unusual answers, in which, in addition to strong logic, there was an attempt to think independently and creatively. Ivan smiled, remembering himself, and put the work aside for a more detailed study. Unlike him in those distant years, this student managed to answer all the questions.After skimming over the papers of the other applicants and making sure that there were only standard correct or typical erroneous answers, Ivan randomly gave each person a number from 0 to 100 - the number of points for the test - and gave an unknown student with non-standard answers such a score that he was on the last place among those candidates who "passed" to the second round.



An unusual student's name is Vasily. Having passed all stages of testing, he found himself in a small group of interns of the Institute, selected for probation. All students were invited to the building of the Institute for an excursion, during which everyone will get acquainted, first of all, with the department in which the practice will take place. Each student took an individual excursion with one of the representatives of the corresponding department. Naturally, Vasily was assigned to Ivan, and after a short acquaintance he immediately offered to go to his office to discuss the test results. They went into a spacious office, Ivan invited Vasily to the table, and he went to the sideboard to pour tea. Putting two cups and a kettle on the table, Ivan sat down opposite the student and began a dialogue:



- Vasily, you should know some things that were hidden from you during our testing. All these things are strictly necessary for the correct selection of candidates, and I must tell them to you in order for you to make a truly free choice regarding your future work.



- Ivan Alexandrovich, I am somewhat surprised at your insight. - said Vasily. - I'm really interested in why I ended up in the final group, while by indirect indications only the lazy will not guess that I should not have gone through even the very first stage.



- Nevertheless, Vasily, - Ivan answered, - as you can see, none of your peers had thought to ask such a question. No one was embarrassed that your Yuri - a third-year star and a successful student everywhere - suddenly began to show very mediocre test results, and in the end he completely failed one, which was the finale of his triumph. And you somehow managed, while remaining in the last position, to get to practice at the Institute. At least someone other than you asked a simple question: why did this happen?



- It confused me, but I decided that I would get the answers here. - said the young man and continued the thought. - I suspect that you are testing not the level of training of students, but their psychology. How they react to certain situations. That is, it is not what they do that matters to you, but HOW they do it.



- Yes and no, - answered Ivan Alexandrovich, - this year, for example, when I checked all the tests, I put the points in random order, and I gave you so much so that you would be at the bottom of the list every time ...



- It can't be! - the student was surprised, interrupting Ivan Alexandrovich.



- Maybe Vasily, maybe. - continued Ivan. - The fact is that we are essentially indifferent to the standard correct answers that are expected from the subjects in such tests. Patterned thinking is one of the enemies of science. If a person was offered a sequence of numbers 1, 2, 3, and he confidently says that the next number is 4, then from an ordinary point of view he is right, for most applied processes it will be so, so it will be in the ordinary life of an ordinary person, desire and readiness to which the subject demonstrates his answer. But this cannot be in science, whose task is to break through the boundaries of modern concepts and expand the methodology of cognition. After thinking for a second and writing the answer 4, moving on to the next question, the candidate actually fails the intelligence test, although he is confident that he passes it successfully,snapping tasks like nuts. Having given a superficial and ordinary answer, this person seems to say that he wants to live and work on superficial and ordinary tasks in the gray everyday life of the standard social system. A scientist explores the issue from all sides that will be available to him, up to the point that he will try to find the reasons for the appearance of this or that issue in his life. For example, a smarter person in the place of our would-be candidate will certainly ask himself: “Why is this question so ridiculous in its simplicity that it ended up being interviewed at such a large scientific Institute? And why are all the questions like this? " In your case, for example, when you wrote the answer in the form of a square root of two in all similar problems, I immediately understood what you meant. You meant that the next number in the sequence can be anything at all,depending on the imagination of the author of the question, his knowledge and intentions, while nowhere is it said that the number must be whole. So you showed that the task was actually set incorrectly, and if the purpose of the question was to test the non-standard thinking, then you passed this test. And if I wrote the number 4, I would have failed. That's how you reasoned?



- Almost so, - Vasily agreed, - but in addition I wanted to show that I don't care about the task itself, the reaction of the inspector to such a turn of events is important to me. After all, it is clear, as you have already correctly noted, that problems for children of elementary grades are NOT just given when testing future scientists, which means there is a catch in the problem, that is, no specific number at all is suitable as an answer, but the answer is needed specify exactly the number. How can this be done? You just need to write an unexpected number. I could write the number i, that is, the imaginary unit, or the number pi, but I was afraid that these letters could be interpreted by the inspector differently than I imagine.



- It is clear, Vasily, - Ivan nodded with satisfaction, - by the way, several decades ago I in your place argued similarly, only as an answer I wrote zero, thus expressing the beginning of an endless number ray. That is, any of these rays, at the discretion of the inspector.



- Originally, - Vasily agreed, - somehow it didn't occur to me to write zero ...



- It doesn't matter, - Ivan Aleksandrovich waved his hand, - the main thing is that they understood you correctly.



They sat for a while in silence, drinking tea from their cups. Then Ivan continued his thought:



- Well, now I will explain to you what generally happens with such testing. Just imagine, a person is sure that he solved the problems correctly, but receives very few points, does not go to the next stage - and ...



- There are two options, Ivan Alexandrovich, - the young man picked up, - either he lowers his hands, as all my peers did, or he goes to understand and defend his position, as soon as he considers it correct.



- Quite right, - Ivan agreed, - we have been observing the person for some time. If he obeyed the primitive and familiar system of selection - and the rules of our competition, by the way, we did not announce from the first stage - then he is hardly able to go beyond the limits of ordinary consciousness, that is, there will be little sense from him in our science, although he may well get into the Russian Academy of Sciences or some standard private company, especially if he continues to show excellent results at all kinds of different competitions and olympiads. There they love such guys, and they, in turn, know that they are loved and try to get out of their skin in order to be above the rest in any of these superficial rating systems that do not reflect absolutely any characteristics that are essential for science.



- Do you want to say that all such contests for young people, as a result of which they are invited to different jobs, are initially a fake assessment system? - asked Vasily. - What is it for and why do you use it too?



Ivan was silent for a while, being in thought, and then answered:



- This is the right question, my young friend, now I will tell you what lies at the heart of the logic of choosing the path of life of most people. This will be the answer to the first part of the question. Later I will answer the second part.

Part 5

Ivan Alexandrovich spoke for a long time and accompanied the presentation with many different examples. In a brief retelling, his thought can be expressed as follows.



Imagine a person who is trying to integrate into the system of relations between people that has developed before him. He accepts the existing unspoken rules and tries to fit into the general structure of society in the form in which he understands it. Those primitive tests, which are given in any state scientific or private offices, show only a person's ability to solve just such tests. All Olympiads and contests are based on problems that already have solutions (at least reference solutions of the jury) or on problems set in line with template logic. If a person answered the test questions in a formulaic way, got a job, and then sits on it and complains about the routine and routine that accompanies him from Monday to Friday, then a natural question arises:“Well, what did you want? With your standard answers, you showed the employer your readiness to quickly solve standard monotonous tasks, you showed that you spent several years at the university, preparing yourself for such a typical job in such a typical office, playing the role of a typical performer of typical tasks, who obeys the typical system of relations without questioning it, and which accepts any, even the most humiliating for common sense, typical rules of a typical game “work-home-work”. In a sense, you can understand such a person, because he has adopted unspoken rules according to which it is customary to answer at an interview as the employer expects, that is, the answers should be simple logical in the opinion of the employer. But then another equally interesting question arises:“Well, what did you want? You gave the answers in accordance with the surface logic inherent in everyday consciousness, the same as that of your employer; you have shown that you are ready to solve problems in the first way that comes to your mind. With this gesture, you confirmed your understanding of the fact that your employer is not able to go beyond superficial logic and will not be able to give you any unusual and interesting tasks. So why do you expect to be given tasks that require creativity after that? Where will they come from in an ordinary office, whose employees are limited only by the superficial logic of thinking? " The applicant understands that he is, as it were, in a trap, because if he acts outside the box and does not please the authorities by giving correct, but unusual answers, then the examiner will not understand him, he will think,that the candidate is incapable of basic reasoning. Therefore, the applicant may be left without work at all with his bright creative mind. And here an interesting question also arises: “Well, what did you want? You knew beforehand that the bosses needed a typical performer of typical tasks, and knew that you would have to forget about creativity and self-development, so what are you whining about the impossibility of realizing your creative potential? You yourself signed an implicit agreement with the employer, taking a typical test and giving typical answers to it, so in accordance with this agreement, you will solve typical problems with a superficial logic of decision. You YOURSELF subscribed to the routine - you got it! " Thus, a person, choosing his path in life, is faced with a phenomenon that is simple in essence, but at the same time very difficult for correct understanding,which is called "what I fought for, I ran into it" or "what you sow, so you reap." If a person devoted a significant part of his time to training to solve standard problems, the answers to which in fact already exist, he increased his formal indicators like IQ, the number of awards in competitions, the percentage of "fives" in the diploma, the citation index, the number of publications, etc. etc., then there is nothing surprising in the fact that further reward for a certain work of such a person will be expressed in the same formal values, which often have no inner content. Having risen on the career ladder and having accepted the rules for moving along this path, he will receive exactly this promotion as a reward for his work. The fact remains in the defaultsthat the predictable in the sense of probabilistic predetermination of movement along the standard ladder does not contain any creative self-realization, and therefore it is somehow silly to try to escape from the product of YOUR own efforts - from everyday life, routine and other forms of dead monotony.



- So you want to say, - Vasily inquired in surprise, - that the existing system of evaluating people on special tests or competitions is just a way to "evaluate the product" as in the market? Indeed, in many jobs, creativity is not needed, but precise execution is needed. Moreover, as I understand it, - Vasily continued his question, - such a system was not formed on purpose, but as if spontaneously, that is, people who think in a standard and superficial way, not understanding what the essence of creative development and the meaning of life is, replaced it with different formal statuses and ratings of each other. Their work consists of a set of some simple and typical tasks for every day, and different tests are designed only to show the candidate's ability to perform just such tasks. Moreover, deviations from this "norm" are not encouraged by other participants in this strange game,that is, in case of deviations, they will immediately put you one step below the "normal" people, without understanding what you wanted to say.



- This is a correct, but very superficial interpretation, Vasily, - said Ivan Alexandrovich, - everything is much more complicated. Firstly, deviations are different, and if you look at most people with deviations who consider themselves original, you will see that in essence they are no better than normal people, and even worse in terms of behavior. They act “not like everyone else” not because they have a stronger, deeper and more grounded position in life, but simply because it seems to them a good idea to be “not like everyone else”. And so, this group of people, behaving in the same and predictable way “not like everyone else”, does more harm than good, and therefore such template tasks and interview tests just play the role of a very good defense against such a group of “originals” ", Consisting, in essence, of people who can do nothing. Secondly,it's not just a matter of whether a person fits the test objectives or not. And the fact that a person IN GENERAL accepts such rules of the game, and then wants to escape from them somehow, and he runs away all according to the same rules. Let's look at an example to clarify the idea behind the "implicit rules of the game." Take this primitive entertainment of unsuccessful drivers who like to "break" from a traffic light, competing with a car in the next lane. Now try to tell me: who and when decided that the driver who passed the intersection faster is better than the one who “lost”?Take this primitive entertainment of unsuccessful drivers who like to "break" from a traffic light, competing with a car in the next lane. Now try to tell me: who and when decided that the driver who passed the intersection faster is better than the one who “lost”?Take this primitive entertainment of unsuccessful drivers who like to "break" from traffic lights, competing with a car in the next lane. Now try to tell me: who and when decided that the driver who passed the intersection faster is better than the one who “lost”?



- Hmm, - Vasily began, - as if for more than one thousand years there have been competitions like “who is first”.



- This is true, - Ivan Alexandrovich confirmed, - but you did not answer the hidden part of my question: why is it so important for two irresponsible drivers to feel better and why the best is the one who is the first?



- Well, this is a kind of hidden form of self-affirmation, - the young man began, - like whoever has a cooler car is more successful in life, or simply he is successful because he drives better.



- Again, in the wrong direction, - Ivan said smiling, waving his hands in front of him, - why should they assert themselves so much and why exactly this form is considered by both participants to be a suitable way for this? Why do both know what to do, even though they did not even agree with each other? Why is the former the winner? And now one more question: why is a more powerful car cooler?



- These are the rules? The young man suggested timidly.



- That's it! - Ivan was delighted. “They both obeyed the unspoken rules that exist in the culture itself, Vasily. You understand? A certain logic of social behavior is “sewn up” into our culture, which is not completely understood by the participants in the game. If a person just thought for himself, went beyond the bounds of superficial logic and tried to ask questions that are not standard for this logic, then he would discover a lot of interesting things. For example, he would understand that both drivers described in the example are two typical woodpeckers, which, firstly, increase the overall danger in the current road situation, and secondly, why should they rape their cars in vain, forcing them to work at their maximum power; thirdly, a sharp acceleration greatly increases fuel consumption (even if for a short time), and then after a couple of hundred meters you still have to hit the brakes,washing the brake pads and discs a little more - all this together leads to more frequent repairs or maintenance. Let it drop by drop, but still it is a blow to the environment. And there are tens of millions of such woodpeckers, and every day many of them add this very drop. Fourthly, and this is most important, the logic itself ...



- The very logic of these people, - said Vasily, suddenly realizing the depth of Ivan Alexandrovich's thought, - is that they spend their whole lives in such a state of woodpeckers. If you look at their lives more closely, you will notice that such imprudence on the roads for the sake of a child's catch-up game is just the tip of the iceberg of their logic of social behavior. Usually such people do much more reckless actions in life, which are permissible for them for the same reasons for which they compete at traffic lights, and this competition itself is not even a problem, it is just an indicator by which you can immediately say a lot about a person. Most likely, they smoke or drink, are prone to thoughtless decisions in favor of their own comfort, they can afford to litter on the street, believing that one of their thrown pieces of paper does not change anything.Well, and most importantly, they obey the unspoken rules of relationships based on formal statuses, and therefore, instead of developing their creative potential, they simply chase after mythical success and coolness, or, at worst, they just follow primitive forms of pleasure. Formally, accepting the rules of the game of racing at traffic lights, they admit that in life they are typical losers who definitely need to prove something to someone in order to show their weight, that their personal comfort is more important than public safety, in the fact that they think superficially and that they are so dumb that they think that winning such a race really means something. A normal person will not prove something to someone in this way, because he knows his own worth and in general knows what he wants and how to achieve it.A loser does not know this, so he simply acts according to superficial primitive rules, is not able to go beyond them, he needs some external events like such victories in "races" to constitute his personality ...



- Well, well, Vasily, that's enough, - Ivan hastened to interrupt the young man, - and now, before you forget this most important thought, imagine now as vividly as possible the next moment, the full meaning of which you will understand with age. All these participants in Olympiads, various competitions and competitions are exactly the same woodpeckers if they took part in such events in order to be as fast as possible, higher, stronger, etc. If they believe that, according to the results of such competitions, a person should to receive a certain status or recognition in society, they are doubly woodpeckers. There is only one useful property of such events - the development of some positive qualities and the exchange of experience in better problem solving. In this case, neither the final scores, nor any privileges in terms of the number of these points matter. A normal person will only care aboutwhat tasks of the competition he solved correctly and best and what should he do with this result. EVERYTHING! That is, to compete in such events with each other and expect that after that, depending on your position in the ranking, something will shine on you - this is no different from the logic of woodpeckers tearing from traffic lights. The only difference is in the implementation details of this primitive program. Thus, both those and other woodpeckers are guided by the logic of social behavior, in which it is customary to agree with the proposed rules, and then expect a high quality of life. And that's why I ask my favorite question: “Well, what did you want? You have deliberately abandoned independent thinking, self-development and creativity in favor of solving tasks that have been lowered to you from above and following the rules that have been lowered to you from above, and now you are surprised,that there is no place for development and creativity in your work. " In other words, these people agreed to a typical routine life of formal statuses imposed on them, and therefore, in addition, they receive a typical template situation: unloved work for 40 or more hours a week, a beggarly salary disproportionate to work, scandals and tantrums in family relationships, in general, a dull and gray life - the one they chose for themselves by signing its rules. They chose it all themselves, just as stupidly and grayly following the dull and gray logic of social behavior. They solve their everyday problems as primitively as tests for hiring - the first way they come across - and as a result they get the same superficial existence, which is difficult even to call life.Well, as a consolation, any participant in such a relationship with society from time to time receives some kind of new status or victory in the race at the traffic lights. It's great! Look: a person's life was not successful, but he was the first to ride a hundred meters on his cart, having the opportunity to shift his status as a loser to the one he was ahead of. However, soon the illusion of superiority disappears and you need to look for the next victim for self-affirmation ...



Ivan fell silent and closed his eyes, leaning back in his chair, and Vasily gazed thoughtfully at his cup of unfinished tea. For some time there was silence, which was broken by Vasily:



- Is your Institute a kind of alternative reality of social relations? Those people who did not accept the superficial logic of social behavior organized a kind of community, united in such an Institute and engaged in science ... but if this is so, then what should other people, whose work cannot be associated with science in the usual sense of the word, do?



- Oh, great question, - Ivan rejoiced, sitting down straight again, - it shows that you have already begun to slowly understand the essence of our Community. The fact is, Vasily, that similar Communities like our Institute exist in all areas of human activity. It would be more correct to say that our Institute is part of the Community. Hotbeds of free and independent thinking arise in all corners of the world, you just don't notice it. There is even a confrontation between people from these two different cultures, and it is provoked by losers from a typical system of relations, who do not understand the logic of truly free people. But we will not talk about all this now. This is the subject of Social Forestry, one of the sciences that originated in our Institute many decades ago ... in fact,now you are communicating with one of the students of the founder of this direction, and you have to study with us for a long time before you get to this discipline and can understand it correctly.

Part 6

Vasily was silent for a long time and looked thoughtfully at his cup, comprehending the described principle that guides people in choosing their life path. Ivan Alexandrovich sipped his tea, he also paused for a while in thought, and continued:



- Now I will answer your second question about why we organize such competitions, the essence of which we have just analyzed. The point is that two cultures cannot exist completely in isolation. If we, people who think independently and freely, will forcefully impose some rules of our own on the rest of the world or sharply oppose ourselves to people with an ordinary consciousness, then nothing good will come of it. In a sense, “we” will not even differ from “them” if we follow “their” logic of opposition. If we think more deeply, then we must choose the scheme of our relationship with the rest of the world so that they understand us at least approximately, and we can cooperate with them at least somewhat constructively. Such interaction should not be allowed to lead to conflict, say, on an emotional basis,as is the case when “smart people” sharply and openly challenge the norms of behavior habitual to ordinary people. Therefore, it is better not to question a significant part of the rules by which most people live, because otherwise they will not understand you - and you will be left with nothing at all, you will not be able to influence this world even minimally. That is why we left the standard picture of the selection of candidates, but left only the external part of it, because such a form is understandable and familiar to people with an everyday consciousness, and will not raise unnecessary questions. The inner essence of the contests, which is not visible to anyone but us, remains at our discretion. From a formal point of view, it is impossible to find fault here, because an ordinary person will never see through the logic of such manipulations, it will seem to him with his superficial thinking,that everything is going along the way he is accustomed to: here are the tasks, but the results of the solution, who is higher in the list, is a fine fellow, although, I repeat, we have not announced this rule anywhere. Do not misunderstand me: if you tell ordinary people that we value their morality, their decency, creativity and other such qualities, then they will all begin to resent, they say, "who and how decides that he is better and more honest than me?" Their level of understanding is not developed enough EVEN to realize the simple fact that with these and similar questions they reliably remove themselves from the list of applicants for a job at the Institute. Do you see the paradox? - if we tell people that we choose candidates for morality, they will demand some kind of numerical and understandable assessments of this morality and, funny, they will start competing, walking over each other's heads,so that this estimate is as high as possible, that is, they will increase it at any cost. Often this price will run counter to morality itself. It is simply impossible to knock out the formal-evaluative nonsense from their consciousness. Therefore, in order to avoid unnecessary indignation, we leave the form of selection outwardly familiar to people, endowing it with its own meaning.



- That is, this is what I was talking about, - the young man realized, - you changed the essence of the tests without changing the way they were conducted?



- Yes, - Ivan Alexandrovich answered, - the tests are the same, but we do it differently, we look at HOW a person reacts to circumstances in the current situation. For example, we had a case when they gave 0 points to someone who passed the test 100 points. If a person tacitly agreed with this circumstance, would not defend his innocence, although he knew that he was right, it would mean that he does not suit us. But this man came and began to prove to us that he was right. He showed a certain will, explained his position, during which it turned out that he still had the makings of originality in thinking, and in combination with perseverance and a tendency to seek justice, this makes him a good candidate. We took note of him, apologized for the fact that supposedly just “looked in the wrong place” and followed him further with the utmost attention.However, he responded in the same standard way on other tests. Unfortunately, everything went to this, then he failed the so-called probationary period. It's a pity, he had great abilities! But his consciousness was already so crammed with routine and routine that he did not think of any other paths of development other than movement along the classical scientific hierarchy. As a result, he did not do anything useful for the world, but he became the most important person in the RAS, an academician with a capital letter, everyone respects him now, they consider him an authority. He will become their next president, don't go to the fortuneteller. Now he is finishing his five hundredth scientific article and by the beginning of the election period he will publish the twentieth monograph. One of them, by the way, some time ago propped up our closet for a short time, until I found an opportunity to replace the leg. - Ivan nodded towards the bookcase that stood in the office.



Vasily smiled modestly, he still liked this kind of humor. However, he now understood that it was a test: to support the joke about the future president of the Russian Academy of Sciences for him now was tantamount to ending a career at the Institute that had not yet begun. Meanwhile, Ivan continued the thought:



- So, we closely monitor how a person approaches a problem. We do not need outstanding talents unable to compete for the outcome of their research. Therefore, those who do not try to defend their innocence, having received an underestimate, simply pass us by. We do not need those who choose as the correct one the solution that first comes to mind according to ordinary logic, therefore we do not pay any attention to the so-called correct answers. These people also walk past us, they will find their purpose where absolutely accurate, fast and high-quality answers to standard tasks are needed. They themselves chose this path, not realizing that the correct release of their energy can ONLY be through creativity, and they themselves are responsible for this decision. We don't need people who don't understand this. We don't need thosewho begins to fall into pride and boast of their abilities, having received the maximum score for the test, not even realizing that points are often assigned randomly, by hand. Those who want to "leave" at the expense of lowering others are also not needed. At the next stage, all such comrades are guaranteed to drop out, and no longer by accident. As a result, Vasily, only those who could pass these moral tests of ours make it to the final.



- In what sense are they moral? - asked the young man.



- In the fullest, - Ivan replied, - these people are trying to understand the situation, not trying to look better than others or "leave" at their expense. That is, they simply and honestly do their job, are not afraid to express their personal opinion, but they do it with a full understanding of their position and a willingness to justify it. They do not disdain before authority, do not begin to rise above those who have failed. They are generally not inclined to compete for the sake of formal assessments or statuses. These are sincere people without bad habits, putting a common cause above a personal one, but ready to resist the pressure of colleagues alone if they find themselves in some kind of madness and do something wrong. They want to work and try to do their job as correctly as possible, as they understand it. In general, everything that you could put into the concept of "morality"then we are looking in people. Moreover, this concept is quite broad, so people with a wide variety of qualities and personal data can fall into the category of moral people. Real science is revealed only to such people, which was also very convincingly shown in the framework of the Social Forestry.



- Don't you think that this form of moral experiment is wrong in relation to people? - Vasily asked. - You are within the framework of a certain culture, but you define your own hidden rules of the game, climbing with them into a strange monastery, and then you say that the person is to blame for not recognizing these rules. That is, it’s like taking emetics into food in a public dining room, and then informing visitors through the toilet door where they will be for a long time, that they are to blame, that they succumb to the typical logic, according to which there should be quality food in the dining room. ...



- No, Vasily, you do not yet fully understand the whole meaning of our method of selecting employees, so your analogy with catering does not reflect the essence at all. - Ivan Alexandrovich began to explain. - You see, in the worst case for a candidate, he simply does not get into our Institute, that's all, that is, no one poisons him with emetics. We check in a person for the presence of a certain property, let's call it "property A", thanks to which he can work in science and get really important results or just do really important work, and not parasitize on society, as most scientists from academic science do hiding behind the alleged importance of their research. The same property A is guaranteed to allow the candidate to pass our tests correctly.The absence of property A is guaranteed not to allow the candidate to get along in our team and take the level of work ability that we need, so the candidate will not pass our perfect testing system. Further, you say that we do not communicate the rules ... you are right, but only partially. For thousands of years, the rules for the existence of our Community have been described in works of art, such as, for example, fiction, especially classical literature. Should we somehow additionally inform the candidates that it is impossible to lie, sneak, humiliate others or assert ourselves through formal statuses and evaluations? And why should we communicate these rules, if they have already been said and written everywhere,wherever possible? Why should we communicate things for granted? Why do different useful life rules like “what I fought for…” need to be further explained to someone if they are imprinted in our culture by the blood of billions of people? If a person, as a result of his own choice, consciously refused to cognize the World and improve himself together with Him, having closed the way to our Community, then he cannot have property A for sure. And now tell me, Vasily, why do we have to explain the rules, which any sane person must understand independently and from childhood?having closed the way to our Community for himself, he cannot have property A for sure. And now tell me, Vasily, why do we have to explain the rules that any sane person must understand independently and from childhood?having closed the way to our Community for himself, he cannot have property A for sure. And now tell me, Vasily, why do we have to explain the rules that any sane person must understand independently and from childhood?



Vasily was silent, because he did not expect such logic, it was quite unusual and deep against the background of everything that he was used to in his life. Indeed, this is the personal choice of each person: to follow the path of development or degradation, and why be surprised if nothing shines on the path of degradation? Indeed, what is the point of describing the rules of development, growth and improvement if they are described in a million ways in books and films, in music and dance, imprinted in works of art and generally surround us everywhere, you just need to look carefully? Indeed, how else can you test independent thinking, if not in a similar way: create a situation in which a person makes an independent decision? If you inform the person in advance that he is being tested for independent thinking and say,that he now needs to make a difficult decision on his own, then this decision will ALREADY NOT be independent, since he had to be reminded of its necessity additionally, otherwise he would not have understood it himself ... in fact, candidates who demonstrate a straightforward logic of thinking in their answers on the first test, already absolutely do not show independence, because they do not even admit the thought of the presence of other, deeper answers. But if you tell them that this is possible, they, of course, could easily find them, but then the solution to the problem will no longer be independent ... Vasily admired this logic, but only years later did he really understand it.candidates who demonstrate a straightforward logic of thinking in their answers to the first test no longer show independence for sure, because they do not even admit the thought of having other, deeper answers. But if you tell them that this is possible, they, of course, could easily find them, but then the solution to the problem will no longer be independent ... Vasily admired this logic, but only years later did he really understand it.candidates who demonstrate a straightforward logic of thinking in their answers to the first test no longer show independence, because they do not even admit the thought of the presence of other, deeper answers. But if you tell them that this is possible, they, of course, could easily find them, but then the solution to the problem will no longer be independent ... Vasily admired this logic, but only years later did he really understand it.



- And why is it impossible to invite an ordinary, but gifted enough person to work at the Institute, so that under the influence of the team he acquired property A? - Vasily asked suddenly.



- Again, you do not see the essence, - Ivan said condescendingly, - the fact is that this very property A cannot be acquired entirely under the influence of external circumstances. A person must come to its appearance by himself, by his own efforts, as a result of an act of independent thinking. A person must develop his own internal support, on which this property will be held. If the support is purely external, as in your example, then it will just as quickly be destroyed when external circumstances and conditions change. Well, for example, when there are enough such people in the Institute, their internal culture will begin to dominate in it, the one in which they grew up, then everything that is characteristic of academic science will appear: from bureaucracy to parasitism - and we will become another scientific institution Academy of Sciences ... in our plans, as you know,such degradation is not included in any way.

7

- I understand, Ivan Alexandrovich, this is indeed a very well thought-out system of tests, as I feel now, but it takes a lot of time to comprehend it, - the young man said after a pause, - now I am interested to know one detail concerning mine, if I may say so , style of thinking. I got to the first round of selection of candidates without a record, just took it and walked into the hall past the person who was checking the record, he didn't even try to stop me, but only smiled. In reality, I did not receive grades higher than four, but not because I was stupid, but because I spent a lot of time mastering the material, I did not have time to learn everything for the exam, and therefore, when I came across a question that I knew poorly, I just pulled the ticket that, according to our rules, already lowers the mark by a point, or left the exam,and then, in any case, they do not give a higher than a four on retake, because it is believed that only ignoramuses retake. Why am I thinking so hard? You can't say that I'm a slob, because sometimes I study books and notes from morning to evening, while my classmates manage to learn the material three days before the exam, and many always get "excellent" without any options. Maybe I am "not given" and I do not suit you?



- You see, Vasily, - Ivan Aleksandrovich said with a sigh, - I did not receive grades higher than three, but got tested as a result of a rather daring trick, informing the then head of tests that this was a circus, not science. Later, I realized something myself, but they explained something to me ... in general, these assessments do not mean anything, they are just protection from the fool. If someone thinks that science, and indeed the quality of life in general, depends on the grades in the record book given by an ordinary teacher of some provincial university, then we do not need such a person. Accordingly, whoever accepted the rules of the game imposed by society, and did not come to us because of the assessments, has already failed the main test for the presence of common sense. Fool-proof has worked - and such a person will not get to us. Further, I thought diligently on each question in each test,trying to understand where the propensity for scientific research and creativity is tested here. Unlike you, by the way, I managed to answer only a third of the questions in the first round. Moreover, I didn’t answer any of them “correctly” neither in the first test, nor in the subsequent ones. This, too, was a foolproof defense that anyone who tries to imagine that stupid tests can take scientists away from those who are incapable of science does not pass; those who boasted of their results took off especially quickly there. All those who tried to answer on the basis of superficial logic and chased speed, wanting to demonstrate their abilities as if they were demonstrating a product on the market, also dropped out. Some hidden observers were closely watching me and how I react to the lists of results,how my behavior changes from one stage of testing to another, how I communicate with those who have always remained above me in this fake rating. They also followed the rest: who and how behaved, showed their emotions, whether they tried to boast of their results or somehow compare themselves with others. Then it turned out that in our group there was one of the employees of the Institute, who strenuously portrayed the role of a student from our first year and, under this case, obtained the necessary information, like an intelligence officer.who strenuously portrayed the role of a student from our first year and, under this case, obtained the necessary information, like an intelligence officer.who strenuously portrayed the role of a student from our first year and, under this case, obtained the necessary information, like an intelligence officer.



- Was that one in our group too? - Vasily asked in surprise.



- Was, and is, only you will never know who it is until he "graduates" from the university.



- Aren't you afraid that someone will divulge this information that you are giving me now? The young man asked suspiciously.



- Firstly, we are not afraid; secondly, no one will divulge. This is known only to those whom we consider moral enough to understand how such an attempt to interfere with the completely fair selection of future employees will end. These people will not allow themselves to violate the secret of the Institute. But even if it happens by some miracle, it won't change anything. People who come to us, having played on the rules already known to them, will not stay for a long time, because their deceitful nature will not withstand the level of work that is maintained here. They will be blown away from here like the wind. Any parasite here will simply die out. The philistine logic of behavior will not take root here, for example, it will not be possible to sit at lunch and discuss colleagues behind their backs, the boss, their everyday problems or some uninteresting stories from the next drunk - all this here has no value,therefore, a person accustomed to this form of behavior will quickly get lost here. And then we will have the first person in the history of the Institute who resigned of his own free will or because of non-observance of our internal regulations.



- What, this has not happened yet? - Vasily continued to be surprised.



- Yes, oddly enough, our selection method works flawlessly and does not fail. If a person takes the path of creative development through knowledge and improvement of the world, he will not leave this path. Not everyone can take this path, but only a highly moral person. The rest do not pass the probationary period.



Yes, ”Vasily said slowly,“ it’s amazing how cleverly you can use completely standard tests from different areas to pull out of a person his entire essence out, and this person will remain confident to the last that he has very successfully exposed himself in the best light, without even suspecting that it had been pierced for a long time. He does not even know which doors have closed in front of him and that his future, even the most successful, will now be very far from real happiness ... and all because he, in general, was not ready for this happiness, then is, having achieved it, he will not know what to do with it. Therefore, he needs to go a different path, fully consistent with his own choice, his logic of thinking and behavior ... If a person demonstrates in life the logic of a predictable philistine, he gets the life of a predictable philistine,if he demonstrates superficial logic in solving life problems, he gets a gray surface life, if a person thinks deeply, then his life will be filled with deep meaning ... and you somehow discover these properties through a system of simple tests ... amazing ...



Ivan nodded approvingly while the young man voiced his guess:



- Almost so, Vasily, only much more complicated. All the examples of people described by you will not get into the Community. If, for example, a person who thinks deeply imagines that he is the one who deserves to work at the Institute more than others, then in terms of the quality of his thinking he is no different from an average person with superficial logic. A person who thinks really freely and independently will not be puzzled by such stupidity in principle. Such a person ... how can I tell you ... just comes to us and finds his place, he does not even need to be told any rules - he knows them perfectly. There are even people who independently guess about the existence of our Community and, as it were, “figure out” us, and then come, for example, to this Institute, and quickly find a way to declare themselves. And all this by ourselves, without prompts.



Vasily suddenly realized something and stared at Ivan Alexandrovich, choosing the right words.



- Wait, - the young man suddenly dawned, - you told me all this because you have already accepted me into the Institute even without a probationary period?



- That's right, Vasily. And in general, there is no probationary period in the usual sense for you - it's just another protection from a fool. Now you can leave your university, here you will be taught to the required level, after which you can move on your own. However, you can still refuse. If so, I know you still won't be able to betray our secret of employee selection.



- I can not. - Vasily confirmed slowly. - really, I can't. And what will happen to the rest, to my classmates? After all, if there is no probationary period, and they think that there is, then the way is already closed for them?



- From this set in which you find yourself, no one will go further. - said Ivan. - I say this not because we will put sticks in their wheels, but from our own experience. These guys will not be able to take the bar for our productivity level and they generally do not know how to work, we will just let them know, calling this demonstration with the words "trial period". We invited them simply to portray the appearance of "fair" - in the opinion of outsiders - selection of employees, so as not to raise questions and suspicion. In general, if we raise the statistics, then all the employees ended up in the Institute, violating at least one of the rules of the game imposed by society - they were accepted immediately, without any probationary periods. Of those who demonstrated the standard logic of social behavior, no one went further - that is, they were invited in the same way as your classmates,and simply offered to hold out in our work rhythm for several days, following our interaction logic. They immediately scattered themselves, because our logic did not fit into their logic at all, because they expected that here they take into account some formal points, merit, the level of a particular skill, etc., but we do not have this and cannot be in principle. People with such superficial logic will not be able to work in the direction we need, and we just create such conditions so that they discover this fact as soon as possible. But they are excellent performers in other social institutions. This is their choice. And we must respect this choice. In general, always remember that without them there would be no us either. We move the world forward, and they provide us with reliable support, so remember, Vasily, having got here,you must forget about any attempts to compare people according to some imaginary height: this one is lower, and this one is higher. All people have every right to realize their genetically determined potential, and each of them is free to choose a strategy for his life path. I think you understood well that on my part the joke about the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences was a provocation, and it is very good that you did not react to it. You cannot humiliate people using your advantage in style and quality of thinking. The same goes for talking about woodpeckers on the road and in life: I deliberately chose such a form so that you could understand it, but later you will have to abandon such forms of identifying less responsible representatives of our society. It is important to remember that our Community came from an ordinary society and so far can exist only with it.We are one of the possible options for further social evolution, along which the whole society may soon follow us. "Soon" is a few hundred years from now, of course. Without the efforts of all mankind, we would not have become what we have become, and our sacred duty is to gradually teach other people that, for some reason, they learned to understand and do themselves faster than them. In other words, Vasily, we treat all people with respect and full reverence; thanks to their successes and mistakes, strengths and weaknesses, as well as their lives in general, we are able to do what we do. Accordingly, our task is to help them reach our level, but in no way interfere with their own choice of their life path, even if from the outside it seems absolutely hopeless to you. Our branch of social evolution will reach a dead endunless we learn to find a common language with ordinary people with all their many flaws. If you are smarter - find a way to help another so that he WANTED this help and understand you, and if you cannot, if you can only assert yourself, boast and humiliate, then what can you take from you ... then you are no different from them.

Part 8

Ivan looked at the young man for a while, and then continued:



- If I answered all your questions, I suggest you go home, think as much as you need - and make a free independent decision.



“You forgot to answer my main question,” objected Vasily, “why do people like me and you think so long and slowly and we cannot quickly solve problems like many other people?



- Well done, Vasily, but I was just wondering if I would be able to knock you out of your mind and chat ... failed! - Ivan said cheerfully. - The answer is simple: you try to think deeper, and the rest think superficially. What is obvious to them raises a number of questions in you, you begin to delve into these issues and find out something that other people do not care about. It seems to you that they understand the material as well as you, but in reality they do not. You mistakenly thought all this time that other people, having read a chapter from a textbook, understand the essence of what has been written as deeply as you do when you sit over one chapter for several days in a row.



- And what, it turns out that they just learned the material without thinking? How is this possible? The young man asked indignantly. - It turns out that on the exam they simply repeat the formulas they have learned, copy the thoughts of another person without understanding how everything works in practice?



- Quite right, my young friend, - Ivan answered cheerfully again, - if you didn’t understand these formulas, didn’t try to deduce each of them in ten ways, to make certain connections with other fields of science, to check something from physical data in practice you would do ten times more than your peers. But you are hampered by the craving for knowledge, and they do not have this craving. They sometimes mistakenly consider your craving as perfectionism, not realizing that in fact you are working on yourself correctly, but they are superficial, because this superficiality is enough to solve typical everyday tasks, and they do not even know any other tasks, which is why they think that you are trying to do the job too well when it is "unnecessary", spending energy on it. They have no burden of responsibility, no tools with which they could dig so deephow can you. They themselves have established for themselves such rules of the game, and they themselves will reap the fruits of their choice. The hardest thing you have to understand now is an ode to an important thought. This will be the last thought that I will give you today, and with it you will go home.



Ivan was silent for some time, collecting his thoughts, and then calmly and with concentration expressed what, to fully comprehend which Vasily took years of hard work on himself. Ultimately, however, he understood what Ivan Alexandrovich had said. And he said this.



- Life is such a Game, the rules of which you were not told in advance, but you still play. Over time, you begin to understand some rules, and a little later you realize that many of them can be changed at your discretion. Moreover, every action and even every thought creates certain vibrations in the structure of the universe, which also, according to certain, albeit very complex, rules are returned to a person back in the form of some life circumstances. Now, if you have chosen a certain set of rules that seem convenient to you, your whole life will be subject to them, because you yourself will achieve their fulfillment. If you decide, for example, that formal indicators of intelligence or academic performance in a university mean something to you, then it will be so in your life - you will always find yourself in situations,in which the quality of your life depends on these formal parameters, and your life will consist of these and other formal indicators that will not necessarily correspond to reality. You will try to calculate the formula for happiness, measuring it in numerical ratios of quantitative indicators that are a consequence of your logic of behavior, but you will only get some numbers that do not even closely reflect reality. If you decide that such indicators do not matter, then you remove yourself from the restriction in the form of the need to maintain in your life some numerical data reflecting your level, and you begin a different life, according to different rules that you you create yourself. You do not need to spend time and effort to maintain the desired numerical characteristics,therefore your work is not limited to a small set of such sensors. You set different tasks and find yourself in qualitatively different life situations that allow you to solve these tasks. In other words, if you have chosen the path of a “successful person”, with some effort you will be this most successful person, and you will get what you worked for: numerical characteristics in your bank account, in your car passport, in documents for an apartment, in the cost of a shirt or shoes. But when you realize that this is not exactly what you wanted in the final of the Game, it will be too late. If you have chosen the path of practice-oriented creativity and created other rules, you will receive a reward according to these rules of your own, at least it will be an opportunity for creative development and self-realization. If you chose the path of lies and sycophancy, you set the rulesin which this strategy works, it will accompany you all your life - and everywhere you will face lies and sycophancy, thinking that this is the world, and you are a victim of circumstances, and therefore you have to lie more and more in order to survive ... according to your own rules ... If you have chosen the path of a performer of routine work, succumbing to the opinion of others about your exceptional intelligence and conversations about the prestige of work in a particular office, you will get exactly this - all your life you will solve simple problems for you, showing off your abilities, while getting tired of routine and howling from the impossibility of realizing your creative nature, because you wanted this - recognition from less gifted colleagues - you got it. If you have chosen the path of development of morality, then your whole life will pass according to the rules of morality, as you yourself define them,at the same time, this path can turn out to be both simple and extremely difficult, when you want to howl and go to some simpler rules. Thus, your life is your rule. Your rules are your responsibility. Your responsibility is your ability to realize your potential in this Game. In other words, how you have defined the strategy for your life path is exactly what it will be. But remember: any action can have an effect that you did not know about. You need to understand well what you are doing so that there are no such effects. Every time you come across something that does not fit even closely into the plot of your life, you are faced with such an effect of flaws in your rules. There is only one rule that cannot be broken. It consists of two parts: the first is that you must play this Game,and the second - She always passes exactly the way you define the rest of Her rules. Whatever you do, you play anyway. After all, you must admit that even if you do not control a ship at sea, it will still exist and somehow sail. Even your voluntary exit from the Game is also a part of the Game. Abandoning the Game is simply different rules of the Game. Attempts not to believe in this Game and consider its description to be the delirium of a madman is also one of the variants of your Game rules. And only you decide how you play your game in It. What your decision will be - this is how the Game will be for you. What you want and do is what you get in the end.it will still exist and somehow float. Even your voluntary exit from the Game is also part of the Game. Abandoning the Game is simply different rules of the Game. Attempts not to believe in this Game and consider its description to be the delirium of a madman is also one of the variants of your Game rules. And only you decide how you play your game in Her. What will be your decision - this will be the Game for you. What you want and do is what you get in the end.it will still exist and somehow float. Even your voluntary exit from the Game is also part of the Game. Abandoning the Game is simply different rules of the Game. Attempts not to believe in this Game and consider its description to be the delirium of a madman is also one of the variants of your Game rules. And only you decide how you play your game in It. What your decision will be - this is how the Game will be for you. What you want and do is what you get in the end.



07/29/2016 - 08/07/2016.

Karavaev Artyom Mikhailovich .