On the Excess of Thinking

A lot has been said about excessive reading. But what about excessive thinking? And what does excessive thinking mean at all? How can thinking be excessive? Isn’t thinking always good? Isn’t more thinking always better than less thinking? Does that mean that the popular “less is more” phrase is true when it comes to thinking?

Personally, I distrust all people who read a lot (five books a year is already too much for me), but they are not the only kind I distrust. I also distrust all those who think a lot and especially those who talk a lot. People who do not know how to keep silent – there’s no greater horror for me.

My thinking is mostly repetitive. That’s right. Mostly it’s about mantra, reminding myself of thoughts that are dear to me. I have to do this in order to keep my sanity levels in check, otherwise I can easily get lost. When you’re surrounded by people who are the opposite of your kind, there is no other way but pure repetition.

Original thoughts are rare with me – and they aren’t original anyways. They are merely thoughts that are suited for my way of thinking: they are original only in the sense that I’ve been waiting for them for a long time.

Silence and pain: I esteem these much higher. Courage is required for this sort of shit. After all, I already know the answers – the necessary answers. I think that everyone knows the answers. Those who think a lot, question a lot, talk a lot, discuss a lot, post a lot: cowards with no balls to put the obvious and simple answers to practice. Cowards they are, that’s right, but stupid they are not. On the contrary, they are rather intelligent, perhaps even too intelligent for their own good: their logical capacities cannot wait to be put to some sort of use, so they cheat on the other drives, they break or devalue the agreement previously reached – a strict discipline necessary for any sort of holistic growth – they constantly look for the opportunities to dominate difficult logical problems, to see problems, to create problems, problems that might not even exist, and most of all, to impose their own limited, narrow and inverted perspective on everything around them and, finally, to hide the fact that their host is a coward.

This is how I feel about most people. This is how I feel about most forums. And this is a trap I sometimes fall into myself too.

By in large, most people most recognize in others what is most common in themselves. And what is not common within themselves is so unrecognizable, they don’t even believe it really exists. So they cleverly imagine hidden scenarios that would excuse why it appears to exist in their false bravado. They then declare that others must be hiding their true self due to the same fear and cleverness as they find within themselves.

So what is most common to you is to recognize that what you most recognize in others is most common to you?

That is not only true, but the very instigation for empathy, distaste, beauty, ugliness, love, and hate.

What one hates in others, is what one hates in himself - stands to reason. Yet these days, blinds himself to it within himself, having been inspired to accept himself as good regardless of anything (Dorian Grey Syndrome = evil is only elsewhere. Never let the blame fall on me).

Most people’s reason is a tyranny over them. So many choose to deny reason, that it inflict less confusion and pain upon them. Hence the various strains of religion and “philosophy”.

Guilt is merely the first form of knowledge; and pride, not even the first.

Increasing the quantity of thinking might be good for a few types of people. People who leap before they look and the looking is integral to things like health, staying out of prison, and so on. I don’t think less thinking is necessarily better, for most people, changes in quality would be the area to focus on first. But there are a couple of types of too much thinking and they are both fairly endemic: the muttering, sentence fragment, not quite participating in life, neurotic inner sound track type. And then over valuation of thinking as a tool for change. Here, defining thinking as language-based mental construction. Experience, doing new things, in new ways, getting outside the habitual boxes one has non-linguistically are much more likely to lead to changes and give good meat for future effective mental chewing. People seem to think it is not a miracle when one manages to argue or be argued into a new way of understanding things. But it is rare. If you want words, learn a new language. If you want to understand or challenge your understanding get out and experience something you have not that relates. Try some other states of mind, ones you have not. Meet someone outside the circles you are most comfortable in. Challenge yourself experientially. Juggling words can solidify learning and clarify it, but when we are talking about fundamentally changing or improving the way one sees the world, other people, and understands these things, going around in the revolving door of the mind gets you, well, not very far.