About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Monday, April 05, 2010

Thinking About: Thinking

It should not come as any surprise to my regular readers that I think about things a lot. Indeed it has been said more than once that I think far too much. Not surprisingly I have always been rather mystified by this comment. How, I thought, is it even possible to think too much? Part of the implied criticism is that I think about things other people – arguably normal people – do not think about at all (or only fleetingly). Most people I come into regular contact with consider that I’m a little odd when I talk about the things that interest me or articulate some of the thought processes that regularly pass through my mind. Of course, over the years, I’ve learnt to moderate my outbursts or wild speculations not wanting to alienate or ‘creep out’ those around me. But sometimes I just can’t help myself. I actually enjoy thinking about things very much. Though from time to time, especially when I’m snuggling into my bed, after a long day I do wish that my mind would “shut the fuck up” so that I can get some much needed sleep.

Whilst rejecting the idea that I think too much about things, I can understand another aspect of what people mean. I have a very annoying tendency to over analyse things – to the extent that it can stop me doing anything at all. This is especially pronounced when I’m thinking about relationships or potential relationships. If I’m uncertain about things I try to look at them from as many angles as I can before making a decision. Unfortunately I find that I’m often working with inadequate information and feel that I don’t have enough grounds to jump one way or the other – so I hesitate…. And then hesitate some more until the person I’m either in a relationship with (on those rare occasions) or hoping to be in a relationship with gives up in exasperation and moves on to someone who can actually make an apparently simple decision. I think that it’s largely based on fear. The more I’m emotionally invested in a decision the more difficult I find choosing a course of action which, because of inadequate information (or bad thinking), may be the wrong one. In these circumstances rather than potentially making the wrong decision I default to making no decision which, rather ironically, is normally the wrong decision. If, however, my emotion commitment is low or absent (or my confidence levels are high enough) I can make apparently important decisions instantly even in the absence of sufficient information. Go figure.

Generally speaking I don’t believe that people think about things enough. They fail to look ahead and consider the consequences of their actions, they go on gut-instinct or emotional response which, more often than not, gets them into a whole heap of trouble they try to instinct their way out of or just attempt to deal with. I’ve seen this happen so often that it’s just not funny any more. Although I’m not beyond a bit of instinctive behaviour from time to time and I probably have similar emotional responses to other people, the thinking part of my mind has a tendency to jump in at that point, wave its metaphorical arms in front of me, and caution me to think before I do anything rash. I have probably avoided a good many mistakes in that way though I’ve probably missed out on a fair share of opportunities too. On balance though I consider that thinking about things – even too much – is better than not thinking about things. People’s lives and the world in general would, I think, be better if we all gave things a bit more thought rather than doing the first thing that comes into our heads and living with the consequences afterwards. I shall, then, be continuing to think about things for the rest of my life and some of them I shall continue to share with you here.

6 comments:

wstachour said...

Very interesting. I suspect I fall somewhere in the middle, thinking (like you) a great deal about things which have little hold on most other people, but rather lunging on instinct about other subjects.

I wonder if the key to this aspect of your personality lies in your perception of the consequences of making the 'wrong' decision. It sounds as though this tendency to overanalyze while the present circumstance slips away is both a big aspect of your personality and the source of some difficulty (my own difficulties, while certainly as bad and worse, are very different in nature). But is it just a habit or is there some kernel of fear that lurks there? Does one dread looking the fool (if the decision is wrong)? Is it a question of having to live with the consequences ever after?

Of course I have no idea, but it's fascinating to contemplate! (He says, overanalyzing...)

Thomas Fummo said...

Usually thinking about things brings me nothing but pain and dissappointment.
But sometimes... just every now and again... it gives me some of my best ideas.
So I won't stop now :-)

CyberKitten said...

wunelle said: I wonder if the key to this aspect of your personality lies in your perception of the consequences of making the 'wrong' decision.

Highly likely I think....

wunelle said: It sounds as though this tendency to overanalyze while the present circumstance slips away is both a big aspect of your personality and the source of some difficulty...

Oh, it was much worse in the past - particularly my teenage years. I'm a lot better at emotional risk taking these days but I have been experiencing some serious flash-backs recently which is probably what brought it to the forefront of my 'thinking about' post... and yes, there's a woman involved (rather inevitably....)

wunelle said: But is it just a habit or is there some kernel of fear that lurks there? Does one dread looking the fool (if the decision is wrong)? Is it a question of having to live with the consequences ever after?

It's probably something stemming from my early childhood and my mother... (isn't everything?) It'd probably cost me thousands of pounds and years in therapy to dig that particular sucker out into the light of day. Too late now - I'll just live with it [grin]

TF said: Usually thinking about things brings me nothing but pain and dissappointment.

Been there... felt that.... I've tried to stop thinking about things - too much anyway - that can't (apparently) be resolved inside my head. It's certainly reduced the amount of anguish in my life!

TF said: But sometimes... just every now and again... it gives me some of my best ideas.
So I won't stop now :-)

Oh, never stop. Never let the bastards (or the world) grind you down.

VV said...

I personally believe we human beings don't think nearly enough. Critical thinking is sorely lacking in our general population. I'd much rather think too much than too little. I've often said to my history students, that people seemed to think more a long time ago, before all the electronic gadgets and information overload. They had to reason things through. Now we just go in for the instant information and quick fix without really understanding the problem. Here are some examples of lack of thinking on the part of students lately: "Compare two of the following topics:" The questions from a student, "what do you mean by compare, what do you mean by topic?" (Seriously.) Another student who was continually using passive voice in papers and her professor repeatedly gave her examples and instructions on what passive voice was and not to use it. Her complaint, "well nobody in community college or high school ever taught me about passive voice." Professor: "But you know what it is now, correct?" Student: "Yes." Professor: "Then don't use it." Student: "But if I wasn't taught until now what it was, why can't I keep using it?" Really?! A paper assignment is to write on one of a provided list of victims of the Nazis during WWII. (They have a list of 12 approved victim groups to choose from.) Submissions: papers on victims of the Turks during WWI; the Greek revolution, the famine of the Ukrainians prior to WWII. Really? Are instructions that hard to follow? Another rule - NOBODY is allowed to write on the Jewish victims - period. It's been done. I seriously had a 10 minute discussion/disagreement with one student who insisted he was going to just write on the Jews anyway. OMG!!! Where do these people come from?

CyberKitten said...

v v said: I personally believe we human beings don't think nearly enough. Critical thinking is sorely lacking in our general population. I'd much rather think too much than too little.

Totally agree!

v v said: Another student who was continually using passive voice in papers and her professor repeatedly gave her examples and instructions on what passive voice was and not to use it.

Ah... Passive voice [grin] The first time I ever came across that was when MS Word told me I was writting in it! I have no idea what it was. It's actually the way I've been taught to write - in University - and find myself naturally writing that way all of the time (except here of corse.... probably....)

v v said: Another rule - NOBODY is allowed to write on the Jewish victims - period.

Really? How odd..... Sensitivity issues?

v v said: I seriously had a 10 minute discussion/disagreement with one student who insisted he was going to just write on the Jews anyway. OMG!!! Where do these people come from?

The joys of teaching! I'm *so* glad I didn't choose that particular career path....... Most of the psych tests I've taken say that I'd be very suited to teach..... Dodged that bullet I think... [shudder]

VV said...

The whole point for not writing on the Jews was that we were using Irvin Staub's book, _Roots of Evil_ as a springboard to writing the papers.

Staub has come up a thesis in which he claims there are certain factors present in every genocide and that if you look at various genocides you will see these key characteristics. You can actually watch events unfolding and predict when a genocide will happen.

His book analyzes these factors in the Jewish Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, the Cambodian genocide, and the mass disappearances of Argentina. I think a later edition of the book also covers the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides.

So the point of the paper is to look at other victim groups and see whether Staub's thesis is correct, are these factors present in other killings? Were these people merely victims of war, mass killings, genocides, or a holocaust?

Because the book already does this for the Jewish victims, the students can't write on this group. It's already been done. So for this student to argue with me that he was going to do that anyway was ridiculous. What was he going to do, copy that chapter from the book for his paper? What would he prove by doing that? Ugh.

I really do enjoy teaching but you do get people who refuse to think or do even the most basic work for class.