Overthinking and how to nobble it
Dec. 19th, 2010 10:19 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
andygatesAn 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?
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?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-01-04 05:57 pm (UTC)It's relevancy is that it's the same black box. (or wetware box, in this case). Analysing of black box is done by in-out signal comparison.
To put it another way (i.e. another ray trace passing through): Have you worked out who your audience is yet? (for each case mentioned). (re:prioritise-or) c.f. maslow pyramid (ie it's not death avoidance/adrenal addiction (safe); it's not food (sated); it's adaquate shelter (protected) ....)
Oh here's another little bit random, little bit connected, little bit other article to check out: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all
My curiousity; Why do all these experts assume they work in an isolated closed system? that is to say isolated to their interests/data stream