Munger: thoughts on how to be the ultimate intellectual companion
/By Duncan Anderson. To see all blogs click here.
Summary:
“As iron sharpens iron, people sharpen people.”
“The purpose of a friend is to make you better than you would otherwise be.” Socrates.
“A rising tide lifts all boats.”
I name the ultimate intellectual companion a ‘Munger’ (after Charlie Munger and his relationship with Warren Buffett). I think that you and your life will be immeasurably better with 2-5x lifelong ‘Mungers’. For me, a ‘Munger’ is far more important than a ‘Romantic Partner’. I’ve nothing against romantic partnerships… indeed one of your ‘Mungers’ could also be your romantic partner.
What is an ideal ‘Munger’?
They have minimum sufficient knowledge in all major areas (eg philosophy, economics, politics, science, finance, sociology, etc etc)
Spend 5+ hours of your week consuming nutritious content (can be in the form of reading, podcasting, audiobook, documentary, etc)
Spend 5+ hours of your week writing (this includes writing on work hours for eg new problem solving)
You speak with them for 1-20 hours a week
When you speak you upgrade each other (ie 1+1=3) AND you mutually get energy from the conversations (ie both feel energised at the end and look forward to the next conversation)
On average you are both upgrading each other more over time than you were, ie 1 hour with each other does more upgrading each year ad infinitum!
A ‘Munger’ = the ultimate intellectual companion
A ‘Munger’ = makes you wiser and happier than you otherwise would have been without them in your life
For reference what do I do?
10-20 hours of nutritious content consumption a week (at ~4x speed, so 40-80 hours of 1x speed :) )
10-20 hours of writing a week (most of this is for Edrolo / OwlTail, eg strategy, problem solving, recipe creation, etc)
Done well this is rewarding, energising and life changing :)
What having a ‘Munger’ does in graphical form:
Wisdom
Life Enjoyment
Where this can be implemented:
In short, everywhere!
Problem solving
Product design
Recipe building
Process building
Culture
The list is endless
Jingle: at birth most people are taught to look for a romantic partner, I think you should be taught to try to be a ‘Munger’ and to look for ‘Mungers’ :)!
+++++++++++++
Details
Friends have many purposes, but IMO if you are not meaningfully upgrading at least one other person and yourself you are missing out on one of the best joys of life and a key way to help make the world better.
Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger are two of the wisest people I know.
For the uninitiated they met when they were ~30 and are now ~90 years old.
They are business partners at Berkshire Hathaway (a ~USD $500bn market cap company) and here is a graduation speech from Munger in 2007.
IMO Buffett and Munger are two of the wisest people on earth because of the systematic upgrades they have done to each other through their 60 year friendship. They live in different states (Omaha vs California), I think they see each other in person only a few times a year. But they talk all the time, systematically upgrading each other!
IMO if they hadn’t met each other they would still be smart, financially successful and wise, but not at one point Buffett being the richest person on earth (currently 3rd I believe) and IMO both in the top 10 wisest people on earth. So the 60 years of up upgrading each other has had a massive impact on where they currently are.
Also, from my vantage point, they have enjoyed the sh1t out of life!
“Acquiring wisdom is a moral duty.” Munger.
I believe the growth rate of each other massive increased after meeting each other.
Buffett and Munger are the best example of ‘intellectual companions’ I’m aware of.
As Buffett is the more famous of the two, I’m going to name the ‘ultimate intellectual companion’ a ‘Charlie Munger’... or ‘Munger’ for short.
Most people are looking for a romantic partner, I’ve got nothing against a romantic partner. But I think not having one or more ‘Mungers’ in your life will make it meaningfully worse than it would otherwise be. For me, much worse than not having a romantic partner.
I don’t want to live with a ‘Munger’. I don’t want to spend every spare moment with a ‘Munger’. However I want to spend 1-20 hours a week every week for the rest of my life with a ‘Munger’.
After 30 years of upgrading (Mungering) each other you’ll be so far away from ‘average’ that someone new won’t be able to be a ‘Munger’ as they can’t properly hold a conversation with you to upgrade you (see the details below on conversations).
To become Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger you both need to be ‘Mungers’ to each other for 60 years. It doesn’t work if only one side is a ‘Munger’.
Warren Buffett is also very good friends with Bill Gates, I’d say that Gates is another ‘Munger’ for Buffett. Buffett has a buffet of ‘Mungers’. Life can and IMO should have multiple ‘Mungers’… no need to be monogamous with ‘Mungers’!
If you don’t Munger others, and have others Munger you, your life could well be buggered. Don’t have a mongrel of a life, have a Munger of a life!
Most people are looking for one lifelong majority romantic partner (ie they spend a majority of their spare time with 1x person).
I’m after 2-5 minority (ie 1-20 hours a week) life long ultimate intellectual companions (‘Mungers’).
So what is a ‘Charlie Munger’?
Someone who systematically adds wisdom to themselves (Lens 1 - time needed to be a ‘Munger’)
Someone who systematically adds wisdom to others (Lens 2 - how to do ‘inter-thinking’ well)
Lens 1 - optimal time needed to be a ‘Munger’ (adding wisdom to yourself)
Nutritious content consumption for 5+ hours each week - ingredient gathering
Reads broadly, aka has minimum sufficient knowledge in all major areas (eg philosophy, economics, politics, science, finance, sociology, etc etc)
Reads to open their mind, not close their mind (see ‘Strong beliefs held loosely… and multiple beliefs held harmoniously’)
While reading builds mental models with the knowledge they are acquiring. Eg layering together distention schools of thought. Eg Treasure Taxonomy. Eg Explaining with equations is enlightening.
Writing for 5+ hours each week - creating new ingredients yourself
Writing is thinking. When you write you join ideas (ingredients from others) together into new ingredients and you also figure out where pieces from a puzzle you are trying to solve are missing (ie where you need to invent new ingredients).
Inter-thinking 5%+ each week - working with others to create new ingredients and upgrade each other
Quality collaboration = “1+1=3+” = inter-thinking = discourse = positive sum
Your minds meld in a way that creates an emergent layer that allows a possibility set not possible individually.
Discussion = zero zum = “1+1=2”
Debate = negative sum = “1+1<2” = most of today's political interactions :(.
Comment
The average person works for 8 hours a day and watches 4 hours of TV / Netflix / Youtube / etc. So that is 12 hours a day. You can do this. Not only can it be done. It is fun.
Lens 2 - how to do ‘inter-thinking’ well (adding wisdom to others)
I love this model from Ray Dalio about conversations.
The analogy that I attach to this is one of ‘tennis’. Conversations = tennis
Inter-thinking = 1. Starting new rallies + 2. Returning the ball well + 3. Finishing the rally well
1. Start new rallies = (reading + writing) * thinking in models = bringing new ideas / ingredients to the table
This is the top level, ie the ‘letters’ in the model above.
Some people don’t bring any new rallies to the table. To be a ‘Munger’ you need to start conversations (rallies) that otherwise wouldn’t have happened.
If you only return the ball (ie respond to a conversation started by another) you aren’t upgrading nearly as much as you could.
2. Returning ball = 2.1 Stress testing the idea + 2.2 Adding to the idea (eg by thinking in models or joining on new ingredients) * 2.3 The way you return the ball
Returning ball taxonomy:
L0: cannot return the ball (idea / ingredient) you hit to them. They don’t have enough knowledge to access the idea / conversation.
L1: can return ball but only mildly level up the conversation and can only do it in a few areas (eg if you are a Humanities teacher will only be able to conversations about Humanities)
L2: can improve the rally by ‘2.1 Stress testing the idea’. Can do this for almost any idea. This is different to starting new rallies, but it means one can productively add value in basically any rally.
L3: L2 + ‘2.2 Adding to the idea (eg by thinking in models or joining onto new ingredients)’
Comment:
The best people can talk about anything, can level up the idea inside the box (ie with the ingredients others have provided) AND add new ingredients that weren’t already part of the rally (conversation).
IMO the best way to be able to do this is to read and write in equal measures.
2.3 The way you return the ball
Your tone matters hugely, AKA “3. The energy you bring to the conversation”
But also understanding the difference between ‘Facts vs Ideas’. For Ideas there is never a right / wrong (eg what is the best immigration policy, what is the best way to live one's life). If you are pushing back on what someone is saying, it is not an attack on them as a person, but an attempt to upgrade the idea.
3. Finishing the rally well = 3.1 Synthesis well + 3.2 Don’t segway into endless other ‘ideas’ and never complete something.
Some people can hit a ball back but cannot synthesize to save themselves.
Synthesis taxonomy:
L0: cannot synthesize. People like this can be useful in a conversation as they have ingredients that their experience has given them that one needs for a problem. Their role is to add necessary ingredients to solve a certain problem set.
L1: can synthesize but only with the ingredients that surfaced as part of the rally / conversation
L2: L1 + can add in external ingredients as well.
Comment:
IMO the best way to get good at synthesizing is through writing (eg a big part of blogging for me is building synthesis skill).
IMO the best way to get good at adding new ingredients is through reading.
Comment: a Munger is top shelf in all of “Inter-thinking = 1. Starting new rallies + 2. Returning the ball well + 3. Finishing the rally well”
“The more you know about anything, the more interesting it is.”
If you know nothing about something (eg politics, eg sport) it doesn’t make sense and as such is boring.
But the more you know about something the more interest potential it has.
Eg 15 year old Duncan couldn’t think of anything worse than politics. 35 year old Duncan can’t get enough of US politics and the Hong Kong situation.
Eg writing a maths question 5 years ago was a boring repetitive task. Now making a maths question is problem solving of the highest order, it is ART! All maths questions used to look the same to me, now I’ve ‘cultivated my eye / maths question problem solving ability’ to the point where some maths questions make me shed a tear from the beauty and some maths questions make me vomit a little in my mouth from the ugliness. 5 years ago Duncan couldn’t tell the difference between a beautiful and ugly maths question, I thought they were exactly the same! What a dumb dumb 5 years ago Duncan was!
“What you can learn is a function of what you know. Ie the more you know the more you can learn.” IMO there is no limit to how good a ‘Munger’ you can be, there is no limit to the amount of upgrading you can do to others AND the reward you can get from upgrading others. The bigger the upgrade you have provided the better you should feel.
So basically, done well you get better and better at giving other upgrades. Ie being a ‘Munger’ only ever becomes more fun.
A good ‘Munger’ is like a top shelf whiskey, it gets better with age!
If you only take away one thing:
“Every year of your life should be the best year of your life.”
IMO one key way for this to be possible is to be a top shelf Munger, ie someone who gets better at providing upgrades to others with age.
IMO be a ‘Munger’ for others, and have 2-5 people be ‘Mungers’ for you!