Overthinking and how to nobble it

[andygates]

An interesting study has been going the rounds (Ars has the clearest writeup) and its got me thinking.  Not about M&Ms -- well, mmm, now you mention it -- not about M&Ms but about thinking and doing, and why I'm so very good at adhockery and starting projects and so very bad at follow-through and finishing things.

I'm very, very good at task visualisation.  I know exactly how the finished bathroom will look: I've gone over all the details of every job but I just can't find the gumption to make it physical.  I know exactly what that training session will be like but, meh, maybe I'll just surf for a bit (million-tab baby, baby: if I could I'd twinscreen each eye separately).  And yeah, I know exactly what healthy food I'll do tonight but meh, I've already thunk that, let's have dirty pizza instead.  I've turned into Grampa from the Lost Boys: read the TV guide, don't need the TV.

Let's assume for a moment that this article provides a working hypothesis: if I think about things less, I'll do more.  I may even fall into fewer gumption traps (the most obvious ones are Lane Rage and For Want Of A Bolt) as my planned-stuff is less rigid, so less derailed by unplanned stuff.

How in the seven hells does that actually turn into a thing to do?  All I can think to do is make a bunch of to-do lists and spin the bottle, but that's a project and I'll get bored of it after I've worked out the list parameters and upgraded the bottle for some custom dice or maybe made an app for it.  

You lot are different think-meats in different heads; barring the solipsistic horror of the entire Universe being my imaginings, you must think in different ways.  Do you hypervisualise and then get bored?  If you don't... what do you do?  Are you always surprised when things work out as expected, because "as expected" is a null set?  How do you do anything without the mental map beforehand? 

Comments

[tyrshundr.livejournal.com]

If you are proposing a situation in which you build a perfect boat without testing then I might drown; however, if you cannot test then your dilemma is more likely to be drown whilst not doing anything or attempt something, and even a sinking boat is better than no boat.

Your question related to how people avoid over-analysis and for me the best solution found to date is starting to actually apply a solution to a problem to see what happens; for an situation where I have time but need to succeed with the first solution then wrap I would put the iterations into testing instead of deployment.

[andygates.livejournal.com]

I see the iterations, at least on a larger scale. For example, I got a boat to have an activity while my knee healed. But I see the limitations of that boat, and want another boat that doesn't have them.

Since I know little about boat designs, I'm using someone else's plans, tried and tested in cute photos of beardy mountain men rolling them among icebergs. So the iterative stages don't apply: this is purely a "build".

Hmm. I'm blogging instead of sketching out those separator offsets...