[abnry]

I think there are two types of engineers:

- Those who approach technical conversations where all facts stated must be always true (usually details-oriented people).

- Those who approach technical conversations where facts stated should converge to the truth (usually highly intuitive people).

These two types tend to frustrate each other. Although, I would contend that everyone needs to have the capacity to operate in either mode.

For example, you _must_ be technically correct when programming. You cannot omit a closing parenthesis. However, if you are working on trying to solve the overall problem, usually something that could have multiple implementations, you need to brainstorm, which is best done when you are free to state things imprecisely.

[nuancebydefault]

I recognize that. My colleague would say, I'm fixing that in the docker. Then i ask (somewhat frustrated) 'the dockerfile, the docker image or the docker container?' Then he answers (somewhat frustrated) 'that's a detail I don't want to go into now.' And I understand it like, 'damn I didn't even think about that, i just fend him off'. My other colleague, who has great empathy, says: "you are very blue, he's very red".

[fragmede]

I'm not sure what blue vs red is, in this context, but I can't tell if the frustration is because your colleague thinks you're asking because you don't understand docker, or because you question their understanding of docker.

[nuancebydefault]

I know he knows docker well enough, but somehow he finds something a detail, where i find that difference important. That said, i do get what you're saying, indeed this might be the issue.

[PH95VuimJjqBqy]

I'm going to echo what the other poster just said.

If I know something is a solvable problem, I don't worry about it, it's just a detail. For example, if I have to integrate with a 3rd party API, the details don't matter until I get there. I have full confidence I'll be able to do that even if it's a super old school strings over tcp before XML was a thing. Because I'm fully confident in being able to solve that, I don't care about it, it's just a detail, like having to reverse your vehicle out of your driveway.

It may even be that he's not completely sure of the details yet but he's confident he knows the approach to take and he'll do the discovery while he's working the problem.

[nuancebydefault]

Thanks for the feedback!

[ivix]

If it's a detail to them, they might be looking at a bigger picture than you are.

[ravishi]

That's interesting. Applying that model to my interactions with my wife I think I could add that the same person could be details oriented in some situations/subjects/contexts while at the same time being intuitive in others. Which only adds to the frustration people feel while seeking for a common ground.

[hnhg]

This is an interesting perspective. I think these might actually be modes of thought, since I’ve experienced these attitudes from the same people just at different times. I’ll keep this comment in mind.

[donutshop]

Running up against this with teammates that equate being highly detailed to being highly intelligent.

I enjoy being wrong and asking questions if it leads us to a better place.