Philosophy Now Forum

How does one find the right balance between resolve and thinking?

I'm a person of... perhaps... excessive thinking... compared to my resolve. Lots of ambition and many things I wanna do but I do not plunge into the task of doing those things. Perhaps it is time, that I'm short of it, because I do a lot of philosophy, at the same time I've found myself wasting moments as well, and perhaps excessively consuming without producing, which makes me somewhat lazy, but I constantly think... think, think, think... so it's not that I'm careless of things I want to do, it's more that I seem to just think about it all the time, and often it pays out as well by developing the idea, but without the plunge I'm not producing and I'm not getting enough experience to make working judgement (that is, judgement that leads to resolve).

So, where is this balance? How do we seek it out and attain it?

If all you do is thinking, then it's counterproductive, as it's only theoretically things you can never test.

I rather have a real life problem, and see if I can solve it with thinking. On most philosophy fora they never reach any result as their thinking can never be tested, why it's a mere endulgence and not a serious undertaking.

Lots of ambition and many things I wanna do but I do not plunge into the task of doing those things.

How about this? Pick one of those things, a little easy one, and stop asking us and go do it.

Doing one thing will be rewarding, and you'll want to have that experience again. This will be a bit easier to get the next project going. A bit bigger project will yield a bit bigger reward, leading to a bit more motivation, leading to a bigger project yet, etc.

Start with small things, carefully feed the psychological feedback loop, and grow your way to larger projects.

But in life in general, where is the balance? I've been thinking that perhaps the balance lay in three functions: pre-thought, care thought and after-thought. That your first thoughts are those that open the way and gives you basic preparations, then you commit to resolve but meanwhile you carry with you "care thought" to avoid pitfalls that occur on the way, for then when you are finished you will take on the function of after-thought to reflect upon what you did and be better prepared for the next pre-thoughts you'll carry in similar- or related situations.

You should try the laconic way.

Maybe anothe way of looking at the problem is trying to reduce your own writings into the shortest phrases possible.

HexHammer wrote:Maybe anothe way of looking at the problem is trying to reduce your own writings into the shortest phrases possible.

I see no particular gain in this thread for doing that. And short doesn't mean good always, I prefer context and giving a problem a personalized look. Without context and a personal touch the problem itself is unappealing.

The Voice of Time wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Maybe anothe way of looking at the problem is trying to reduce your own writings into the shortest phrases possible.

I see no particular gain in this thread for doing that. And short doesn't mean good always, I prefer context and giving a problem a personalized look. Without context and a personal touch the problem itself is unappealing.

Let me give this anology to your answer.

Once I told a CEO of a newspaper to change his ancient outdated OS to a newer easier to learn OS as it was programmed over 3 times and had contradicting commands. He refused as he postulated the OS and database was 1 thing and therefore couldn't change the OS, then I had to demand that he CEO talked to the IT chief, which the IT chief confirmed my postulation, that it was 2 seperate things.

So, this means that you can easily reduce a little without giving too much away.

What I'm saying is that I don't see the point, I've said exactly (with other words) what you said above to other people before and I know what you mean but it's not for this thread, and you are polluting this thread with an off-topic conversation. If you care so much you could write me a PM, so if you want to continue with this conversation you can write to me in PM from now on and let us stop using this thread.

No, my anology is very relevant to this topic, because no one can give you a definitive answer to OP, nor even an answer that comes close to your desired goal. Therefore you must try other ways.

You refuse because you havn't tryed, it's like refuding that stringplay and philosophy has nothing in common, yet Bhudda found inspiration from the stringplayer's words.