Do you mostly focus on the general image, or the details?

[warpus]

Due to work I first try to look at the big picture, and to break it down into smaller parts.

Then I zoom into individual parts and examine the details in a recursive-like fashion, depending on what I'm after.

This is mostly how I function at work. Outside of work, I'm not so sure. My mind is sort of conditioned to look at the world like that, but I haven't exactly thought about it.

 

[classical_hero]

I just get to work and hope for the best. Who needs planning anyway?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Is it a detail or big picture thing if I question how much the details vs big picture divide is all that important, or something that is used for covers for more significant divides?

Also, just in general, it's the kind of thing that disappears later in the learning curve, I find.

 

[Borachio]

If you're going all meta that's a big picture thing, isn't it?

I don't find it disappears at all, later in the learning curve. Quite the contrary.

You do still need them both, I think.

 

[Kyriakos]

^I agree. The only thing that 'disappears' seems to be what you left from your own horizon. Furthermore, consciously examining your analytical and synthetic abilities and ends is not by itself useless; it is pretty much a self-examination of your current way of thinking (which itself is axiomatically only examinable by you to a degree; consciousness is not including a large part of the mental existence of a person which remains at all times in the unconscious).

PS: of course maybe analysis and synthesis are tied in other manners, rendering them 'one' ('the road upwards and the road downwards...is one road' as an Ephesian used to argue ), but that is way too hypothetical and we currently have clear distinctions between analysis and synthesis, regardless of what intermingling may exist between them in other unconscious mental parts of our existence.