What Sherlock Holmes can teach us about productivity and our brains

Summary

Undo Podcast Summary: "What Sherlock Holmes Can Teach Us About Productivity and Our Brains"

Title: Undo – How history's outliers got stuff done
Episode: What Sherlock Holmes Can Teach Us About Productivity and Our Brains
Release Date: April 20, 2025
Host: Mark Steadman
Guest: Matthew Bellringer, Neurodiversity and Innovation Specialist

---

1. Introduction to the Episode

In this episode of Undo, host Mark Steadman explores the intersection of productivity and neurodiversity through the lens of one of literature’s most iconic characters: Sherlock Holmes. The discussion delves into how Holmes’ unique cognitive traits can offer valuable insights into optimizing personal productivity systems.

---

2. Sherlock Holmes as a Model of Neurodiversity

Mark introduces Sherlock Holmes as "the world's first and only consulting detective," whose exceptional mental prowess has captivated audiences for over 130 years. The episode questions, "What can Baker Street's most famous resident teach us about how we do our most important work?" and sets the stage for examining Holmes’ methods as a bridge to understanding neurodivergent productivity.

Mark Steadman [00:34]: "He’s the world’s first and only consulting detective and his mind has fascinated us for over 130 years."

---

3. Distinguishing Neurodiversity from Neurodivergence

Matthew Bellringer clarifies the distinction between neurodiversity and neurodivergence. He explains that while everyone is neurodiverse, some individuals are neurodivergent, meaning their neurological differences significantly diverge from cultural and social norms.

Matthew Bellringer [02:55]: "Everyone is neurodiverse in the sense that we all differ... some people lie quite significantly outside of the cultural social expectations... we tend to call those groups neurodivergent."

---

4. Traits of Holmes: ADHD and Autism

The conversation shifts to assessing Sherlock Holmes’ character traits, suggesting he exhibits signs of both ADHD and autism. Mark emphasizes understanding behaviors and needs without necessarily seeking a formal diagnosis.

Mark Steadman [04:49]: "Holmes... exhibits traits of both autism and ADHD. And I'm going to stick with the word traits here, because whether or not you're looking for a formal diagnosis of your own, understanding how you behave and what you need can be really helpful."

---

5. Productivity Systems and Individual Needs

Mark and Matthew discuss the pitfalls of adopting one-size-fits-all productivity systems. Using Holmes as an example, they highlight the importance of personalized systems that cater to individual strengths and weaknesses.

Matthew Bellringer [05:59]: "Having a magpie mind having a high novelty seeking need is a very common experience of ADHD."

Mark Steadman [06:34]: "A system that works well enough for now, even if it's not absolutely perfect, because chances are it won't be."

---

6. Experimentation with Productivity Methods

The duo advocates for experimenting with different productivity methods rather than committing wholly to a single system. They stress the importance of tiny experiments and assessing what works based on personal hypotheses.

Mark Steadman [09:50]: "The key is to start with tiny experiments, begin with a hypothesis, a reckon if you will, and test it out over a period of time."

Matthew Bellringer [10:19]: "Being really, really careful with your experiments, also being clear upfront as possible about what it is you're trying to find out."

---

7. The Importance of Support Structures

Drawing parallels to Holmes’ reliance on Watson, Mark emphasizes the necessity of having a support system to bolster productivity efforts. He suggests that while systems are crucial, human support can provide flexibility and resilience.

Mark Steadman [14:30]: "Whatever you're undertaking in life... make sure you've got someone to lean on."

---

8. Addressing Misconceptions and Societal Views

The episode addresses common misconceptions about neurodivergence, particularly in the context of recent controversial statements linking autism to environmental toxins. Mark debunks these myths, advocating for improved understanding and acceptance.

Mark Steadman [12:01]: "Autism isn't the result of some sort of magic gas... we've improved our diagnostic criteria, not because there's fluoride in the water."

---

9. Conclusion and Final Thoughts

In wrapping up, Mark reflects on the value of viewing productivity through the traits lens, inspired by Sherlock Holmes. He encourages listeners to recognize their unique cognitive profiles and adapt their productivity systems accordingly, fostering both efficiency and personal well-being.

Mark Steadman [16:34]: "Support for the show... if you can support me via Patreon, that'd be amazing."

---

Notable Quotes

• Matthew Bellringer [01:27]: "Holmes is almost unfunctional without Watson. He can't talk to people properly without offending them. He can't do half of the stuff he needs to do."

• Mark Steadman [04:49]: "Understanding how you behave and what you need can be really helpful."

• Sarah Pascoe [11:21]: "One of the main symptoms of ADHD is the ability to diagnose it in friends and family."

• RFK Jr. [12:01]: "These are kids who will never pay taxes, they'll never hold a job...". (Followed by Mark's refutation)

---

Final Notes

The episode eloquently intertwines the fictional brilliance of Sherlock Holmes with real-world applications of neurodiversity in productivity. By emphasizing personalized systems, support networks, and the validation of individual experiences, Undo empowers listeners to craft productivity methodologies that resonate with their unique cognitive landscapes.

For more insights and full interviews, listeners are encouraged to join the Undo community on Patreon.

Transcript

[Mark Stedman]

Oh, hey, if you're seeing this episode again, but you've already listened to it, my apologies.

[Mike]

I made a technical error today that caused a bunch of episodes to show up twice. So sorry for the inconvenience. If you've heard this episode, feel free to move on.

[Mark Stedman]

But if you haven't, I hope you like it.

[Matthew Bellringer]

Sherlock Holmes.

[Mike]

Your Holmes. The meddler Holmes. The busybody Holmes. The Scotland Yard jack in office holmes.

[Mark Stedman]

Good afternoon, Dr. House. You've caused me considerable mental distress.

[Matthew Bellringer]

Certainly hope so.

[Mark Stedman]

The name Sherlock Holmes in The address.

[Matthew Bellringer]

Is 221B Baker Street.

[Mark Stedman]

He's the world's first and only consulting detective and his mind has fascinated us for over 130 years. His methods are mysterious and complex, but God damn it, he gets results. So what can Baker Street's most famous resident teach us about how we do our most important work? I'm Mark Stedman, and this is Undo. Packing the briar pipe of productivity, Taking a long P and coughing our guts up all over the lino.

[Matthew Bellringer]

I'm Matthew Bellringer. I'm a neurodiversity and innovation specialist.

[Mark Stedman]

Matthew helps neurodivergent people work in ways that support them and their unique strengths. For Matthew, Sherlock is a great model for understanding both the gifts of a neurodivergent brain and the challenges that come with it.

[Matthew Bellringer]

Holmes is almost unfunctional without Watson. He can't talk to people properly without offending them. He can't. Like, he can't do half of the stuff he needs to do. He can't turn up in the right place very often. He's like, he needs Watson and they understand that in their relationship. What I really like about the way that Holmes approaches the world is he understands where he's strong and where he's weak, and he brings in other people to do that and he's very willing. What I really enjoy is how clear that boundary is and how it's absolutely a no.

[Mark Stedman]

One of the first things Watson discovers about Holmes is the bizarre gaps in his knowledge. My favorite being that the great detective is completely unaware that the earth moves around the sun and not the other way around. And better still, that knowledge holds absolutely no interest to him because it's not relevant to his work. Now, two things are important to say at this junction. Firstly, Sherlock Holmes is not, no matter how many monuments, societies and walking tours that happen in his name, is not and never was a real person. So let's not dwell too much on whether or not a character who only existed in words that were Typeset well over a century ago might or might not have certain neurological traits. But if we assume that he did, what do we really mean by neurodivergence and what's the difference between neurodivergence and neurodiversity?

[Matthew Bellringer]

Everyone is neurodiverse in the sense that we all differ in terms of our lived experience as a result of differences in neurology. So all of us think and feel and experience the world somewhat differently. However, within that overall variation, some people lie quite significantly outside of the cultural social expectations about how brains are supposed to work or how brains do work. And we tend to call those groups neurodivergent, sometimes neuro atypical as well, I've seen as well. And that might be associated with a specific diagnosis like adhd, autism, dyspraxia, dyslexia, Tourette's, but it also might not. I mean, it can also just mean fundamentally working from a very different experience. But that's the really important idea. The distinction is, so everyone is neurodiverse at a population level, but no individual can be neurodiverse. That doesn't make sense, really. But some people are neurodivergent and have that really quite considerable difference in experience and thinking and feeling on an ongoing basis compared to the way that most people mostly think and feel.

[Mark Stedman]

So the next time your uncle tells you over the dinner table that we're all a bit autistic, aren't we, you can kindly remind him that, no, we're not. But we exist on a spectrum and some people experience the world in some specific ways more than others. So we're not in the business of diagnosing other people, and we'll get onto that in a bit. But we can say that Holmes, as written by Conan Doyle, exhibits traits of both autism and adhd. And I'm going to stick with the word traits here, because whether or not you're looking for a formal diagnosis of your own, understanding how you behave and what you need can be really helpful.

[Matthew Bellringer]

Your experience is valid. Your experience of the word is valid. Whether or not you have a diagnosis to back that up, that's the important thing. Whether or not you feel comfortable using the label and other people feel comfortable with you using the label is a slightly different matter. But the most important thing is to know that whatever anyone else says, your experience, the way you experience the world, is true.

[Mark Stedman]

If you find yourself flitting between interests, trying something for a few days or weeks, putting them down, and then looking for the next thing, you might have an experience that tallies with someone that has adhd. One of Holmes special interests for a time was cigarette ash. He wrote the equivalent of a long read blog post listing different types of tobacco ash and how to identify them. A piece of writing he'll mention about as often as a vegan tells you they're vegan. This sort of magpie mind is often drawn to the world of productivity as there's always a new system to try and we can tell ourselves that we're improving our efficiency or getting more organized. And that might be true, but we're also fueling our insatiable need for novelty. Back to Matthew One of the things.

[Matthew Bellringer]

Having a magpie mind having a high novelty seeking need is a very common experience of adhd. It's not a universal experience of adhd, and it's not just people with ADHD who have high novelty seeking and that kind of magpie mind shiny thing. So it's useful to be able to kind of understand and I think talking about these as experiences like understanding I experience the world this way, is actually a more helpful way very often of working with this stuff than saying I have adhd. And therefore the thing we need to.

[Mark Stedman]

Watch out for if we have that kind of novelty seeking mind, is that we don't let playing with a new system get in the way of doing the actual work. It's a refrain that goes back to our discussion on the Bullet Journal method, and if you'll permit me, I'd like to express it like this. A 1, 2, 3, 4 the system you use for organizing your work and your time should be like the rhythm section in a tight band. It literally keeps time and it underpins everything, everything else the band does. Without it, the piece turns to chaos. Rhythm is essential in most music, especially the kind people actually enjoy, rather than the stuff polo necks pretend to like in order to impress other polo necks. But it isn't the star. Occasionally, especially if you see a band live, you want to hear the drummer properly, let it rip all over the kit. But not every piece should sound like the movie Whiplash. Your work, the stuff you're actually on this earth to do, is the melody, and your life is the chords underneath. If you keep changing the tempo or the time signature, you disrupt the other musicians in the band. So sometimes what we have to do is find a system that works well enough for now, even if it's not absolutely perfect, because chances are it won't be. And throwing all your stuff into the newest app or the next trending method is going to leave you knackered. Also, not all systems are created equal.

[Matthew Bellringer]

You know, if I've got the greatest notation system in the world, if I have to copy and paste a ton of stuff every day into that, I'm never going to use that after the honeymoon period because that's going to be that, that's going to become tiresome very quickly. It's very low value work. So it's how does it integrate? How you know, how little maintenance does it need? Because when we start out, when things are fun and novel, the maintenance is fun, but as soon as it gets boring, the maintenance is a chore.

[Mark Stedman]

As someone who keeps trying to move his entire life into notion, I can wholeheartedly agree. I love the idea of the Everything app that can act as my second brain and store all the stuff I need to know and think about. But you'll prime my to do app from my cold dead hands. One of the reasons you might find yourself jumping between different systems is that no one system quite covers all your needs or reflects the way your brain works. So for that we want to create our own individual productivity method. And that's where we start getting all scientific. When Sherlock Holmes approached a new case, he went in curious. He studied the scene of the crime in as much detail as he could. He asked questions of everyone who was there and used his method of deductive reasoning to get to a conclusion. When we read a book like Getting Things Done or Building a Second Brain, we can be tempted to think, right, this is the way forward. Let's get everything into this system. And then something crops up that doesn't fit that system and gradually things start to fall apart. These self help books are great at showing us just how marvelous and miraculous it can be to organize our lives into these narratives. Neat little boxes. But if you've ever tried to take a cat to the vet, you'll know just how dangerous it is to try and force a physics defying object into a finite space. So the key is to start with tiny experiments, begin with a hypothesis, a reckon if you will, and test it out over a period of time.

[Matthew Bellringer]

A lot of services have free trial because they understand you put a ton of effort in, you set it all up how you like it, you're committed, you, then you're going to pay the subscription fee. So being really, really careful with your experiments, also being clear upfront as possible about what it is you're trying to find out.

[Mark Stedman]

That's the key here. If you're going to try out a new system, what are you hoping to get out of it. Is it meant for you to save time? Is it meant to help you stop forgetting stuff? Is it to help you stick to commitments you've made? If you find after a bit of time that the system is you're trying isn't meeting those needs, or it has its own set of needs which get in the way, then you can either discard it entirely or see if there's a little bit you can cherry pick from it and move on. So earlier we talked about diagnosis and whether it's something you want to seek out. And while I'm really glad a lot of people are sharing their experiences online and encouraging others to learn more about themselves, there's a teeny little red flag we need to watch out for.

[Sarah Pascoe]

And it turns out that one of the main symptoms of ADHD is the ability to diagnose it in friends and family. So ADHD is working as a pyramid scheme where, yeah, everyone who, everyone, everyone who finds out they've got it, they tell seven to eight people that they've got it.

[Mark Stedman]

Thank you, Sarah Pascoe. Now, we've talked mostly about ADHD here, but before we crack on, I just wanted to acknowledge that autism has also been in the news in America these past few days. I started work on this episode before RFK Jr. The US health secretary, took to the podium to tell us that autism is a disease caused by an environmental toxin.

[RFK Jr.]

These are kids who will never pay taxes, they'll never hold a job, they'll never play baseball, they'll never write a poem, they'll never go out on a date. Many of them will never use a toilet unassisted.

[Mark Stedman]

I promise I'm not going to dwell on this or make a whole big thing of it. I just wanted to put it out there as it was in the zeitgeist. Autism isn't the result of some sort of magic gas that's in the air or in vaccines that stop us getting common communicable diseases. We know more people are diagnosed with autism because we've improved our diagnostic criteria, not because there's fluoride in the water or whatever other crackpot theory the Secretary of Health has overheard from someone misremembering a study they found on a Reddit thread. Oh my God, there is so much more I could say, but we're a few minutes from the last time I did a joke. So let's get back on track. As Matthew suggested right at the top of this episode, Holmes was not necessarily the most functional of people and the intricate workings of those meat Sacks didn't come easy to him. Now, I've talked before about the importance of, of other people in our productivity methods because while it's all well and good protecting your time, we don't exist in a vacuum.

[Matthew Bellringer]

For example, I work to time bounding, but I have a system that is flexible up until all the time is used and it arranges things so that I've got specific things that I need to do. I don't have a very strong sense of, well, like, yeah, maybe I want to do that one in the afternoon and that one is in the morning, but each one of those takes an hour. So it kind of doesn't matter when people book in as long as I get those done within bounds. So having a system with a bit of flex in it is really, really helpful because that then allows other people to flex a bit. And this is one of the risks of really complicated systems is they can be quite brittle if they encounter something unexpected for you as well. And I've seen people fall out of entire systems because they had one. You know, they're like, if you, if it feels like it's all going to break, if you miss one day and you're going to be irrecoverable, that's going to happen at some point. At some point the day is going to get beyond your control. That's just life. So if the system can't deal with that kind of with your own needs and flexibility as well, and it all falls to pieces, then that system is over complicated and too brittle.

[Mark Stedman]

Holmes had his mind palace, Watson his notebook. Each of us has a way of keeping track and keeping time. And the key is to find the best possible option or the least bad combination of options that works for us and to remember that life is going to rattle the bars of your system. When Holmes wasn't occupied with a case, he took recreational drugs because he just needed that altered state. His mind was a terrifying hall of mirrors as much as it was a palace. But thankfully he had Watson as his support structure. Whatever you're undertaking in life, whatever your big work is or the work you'd rather be doing than paying the bills, make sure you've got someone to lean on. Systems are flexible up to a point, but people will always provide more support. Undo is written and produced by me, Mark Stedman. My special guest this week is Mike Matthew Bellringer, and you can check out their [e-mail] a link is in the show notes. Also, I spoke with Matthew for about an hour, so you can Hear the full interview if you sign up to become a member of if you sign up to become a member of our [e-mail] undo podcast, you can stop off here and go about your day, or stay after this brief break to hear me talk about my relationship with the Sherlock Holmes and his many incarnations.

[Mike]

That's my impression of the acast ad noise, and I'm glad to let you know that that is the last you'll be hearing of it, at least from this podcast. From now on, the only commercial messages you'll hear will come from my voice, and there won't be like five minutes of them per episode. If you know anyone who was listening to the show and who bailed because the ads got too annoying, please do let them know that we've righted the ship.

[Mark Stedman]

As you can gather, writing a TED.

[Mike]

Talk every week takes its toll.

[Mark Stedman]

And while I'm never going to guilt.

[Mike]

You about listening for free, some level of remuneration for the effort is always appreciated.

[Mark Stedman]

So if you'd like to show your.

[Mike]

Support for the show, you can do [e-mail] undo podcast. I don't have a team. I don't hand work off to an editor. Everything you hear is made by me in my home studio. So if you can support me via Patreon, that'd be amazing.

[Mark Stedman]

So, as is, you know, possibly becoming apparent here, neurodivergence is something that I'm increasingly interested in, have been interested in for the last few years, both for myself and for others and those around me. I think it's interesting to look at this through the world of traits, though. I think one of the things I really appreciate about the conversation with Matthew is how we talked about traits. And so you don't necessarily have to go and seek a diagnosis in order for you to say, well, my experience of the world tallies in certain ways with this set of experiences that these people seem to have. And that may be all that's useful to you. If you then find that there's medication or there's other support that you want to access, then yeah, a diagnosis can help if you want the. You know, there's this talk of how labels can be problematic, but sometimes labels can be useful because it can give you a context, not an excuse for your behavior. Because we all, you know, we all as people want to take responsibility for our behavior, but as a way at least of contextualizing it and understanding it. I seem to really react in this way because perhaps this particular need is not Met. That's one of the things that I found really helpful. You know, I don't work in an office anymore. Well, I work in a co working space. And even then, I know when I'm getting frustrated. I know when that loud person is being way too loud. I know that's me. That's me having the problem. And previously when I. When I had a day job and I worked in an office, I would get so wound up and so frustrated because to me, the outside world was the problem. It wasn't the way that I was processing. It doesn't mean it's my fault, but it was my processing of the outside stimulus. You know, I'm trying to work on a particular problem. I can't have music because it's too distracting. But these conversations over here, these several meetings that are happening in this open plan office that's lovely and cool. It's just too difficult and jarring a thing to be able to actually get any real work done. And there were a couple of times where I kind of like blew up a little bit. And that's because I didn't have the language to say I need to go elsewhere or I need to be somewhere else or I need to figure this out, because other people seem to be fine and that's great. They're doing their thing. But I'm having a really bad time of it here. And instead of me thinking like, I need to change, it's just saying, well, I have certain needs. In order for me to. To get my work done, I need to meet those needs. And it's on me to do that, or it's on me to have a conversation with my boss or whoever's around to say, in order for me to work at my best, this is the sort of thing I need and to hope that people are going to be understanding. And I think, you know, in the year of our Lord 2025, we are a lot better at that. RFK junior discourse aside. So one of the things that I'm kind of interested in doing is so I have a little company that I'm in the process of spinning up at the moment. And one of the things that we're looking to do is run some community projects. And one of those that I'm really keen to. To run is a little group, a little support group of people who are either seeking diagnosis for a neurodivergence condition, whether it's ADHD or possibly dyspraxia, dyslexia maybe, certainly autism, those kinds of things, where there is an experience of the world, that maybe for a while they've been thinking, am I the only one who feels like this, or is it weird that I feel like this? So that if they're in that limbo of diagnosis, which I think I had a lovely conversation about this with a friend a couple of days ago, actually, that sort of diagnosis, limbo. And I think also whether you're not necessarily seeking diagnosis, but you feel like your experience is tally with other people having a space to have those conversations to, you know, to actually ask the questions like, is it weird that? Or just to vent, you know, the frustration of this is what life is like at the moment. And, you know, I've put my paperwork in and it could be years before I hear anything or get any kind of formal support. So it's one of the things that I'm keen to do and I'd love to know if that's anything you've encountered. Hellondo FM is the. Is the email address. Do feel free to drop me a note on that one. Completely coincidentally, to my conversation with Matthew. I've been reading Sherlock Holmes books at the moment, so it was so lovely when they sort of said that, that Sherlock was, was someone that, that they not necessarily emulate, but sort of hold in some esteem as a character because of the way their brain works. And it's. It just so happened that recently I, I've. I've gone on a real Sherlock kick because I'm like. I think I probably really enjoy the stories that, honestly, if I'm, you know, if I'm completely honest, the Hound of the Baskerville is the only story of, of, of Holmes as I really knew. And, and, and having watched the TV show As well, the 2010 sort of modern, the bomber with the bomber snatch, you know, that was kind of my own, my only real relationship with, with Holmes. And so I've started on the, on the definitive collection and I'm having a great old time and it's. It's interesting to me how the character is very different. So the 2010 Sherlock, which I think is such a great adaptation, he's played as a sociopath and really I. It's a very different character from the Holmes that we know in the original books. The Holmes in the original books, actually often quite kind. And he's not the. Yes, he's like, fascinated by puzzles and wants to solve all the puzzles and stuff, but he's also empathetic and he's like, he's, he's kind to people, which is kind of at odds with what we think about the, the trope of the autistic detective. Right. And I think that kind of trope is, you know, that's been the thing for the last 15 years of sort of, you know, Scandi drama and kind of noir things, you know, Girl with a Dragon Tattoo. It doesn't actually have any detectives. Well, it does, but they're not vocal. But you know, all those, the Killing and all those kinds of dramas, the bridge like that, they're all that same kind of idea. And so it's, you know, it's interesting that actually the sort of original consulting detective, as you read him in the books, yes, he's got his character flaws and his faults, but actually he's a good deal more empathetic and like I said, kind of decent and moral and kind to the people. It's not sometimes a little condescending in a sort of 19th century way, but a lot more. He has a lot more of those traits than, you know, the high functioning sociopath that we get in the adaptations from 2010. But I'm having fun with it. I'm also having fun with sort of tiny experiments at the moment and trying a few things out myself and trying to, and I think I may have mentioned this last week, just not getting too attached to things, just checking a few things out, seeing what happens if I lift this lid, if I press this button, pull this lever. And it's quite fun to sort of knock around like that rather than really hope for a specific outcome. So listen, I tend to wang on too much in these, in these segments, so I'm going to leave it there. I am going to thank you so much for listening and to suggest if you, since you've made it this far and if you haven't already, do sign up for, for our patreon patreon.com undo podcast. You get ad free episodes of the podcast, but you also get extra stuff like the full interview with Matthew Bellringer and some other bits and pieces that go on. You know, I post questions and little thoughts. We've got a little community space there where you can come and hang out and have a chat. If you want to suggest the episode titles and, and things that we should discuss, then you can do all of that over on patreon.com undo podcast. You can support the show for as little as $3 a month and that just helps, helps me recoup some of my time. I enjoy doing this immensely and it's, it's also a way that you and I can hang out a bit more, should that interest you. Right. I will let you go on about your week. Have a marvelous week, and I will chat to you again next Monday.