Some of you may have seen my tweets on beef-only thinking (eg: https://twitter.com/vgr/status/1076991447235063808) on twitter, ie people who only seem to be able to do good thinking in the context of conflict, where they're trying to prove someone wrong.
I'm interested in mechanisms of no-beef thinking. Which we can maybe call soy thinking, reclaiming the soyboy slur.
Quality thinking in a non fight-flight context.
@vgr The method I use is something that I think Feynman did: keeping a small list of interesting ideas and paying attention anytime stuff on it pops up.
His ex complained of him doing math problems near immediately upon waking. I found I do that kind of thing when I overload my thinking with biological concepts the night before.
Einstein may have stumbled upon that too regarding his life-long obsession with compasses.
As a way to direct thinking: It ends up being driven by curiosity, not ego.
I think it helps to have time to follow curiosity. If there are questions that I want to know the answers to, and I have time and energy to pursue them, that can take up a lot of my attention. Sometimes that eventually leads to conflicts, if there are obstacles or societal incentives to dissuade people from finding the info.
It's hard to follow curiosity in a context where time and attention are claimed and commanded - like most elementary and high schools in North America.
Mastodon instance for attendees of Refactor Camp, and members of various online/offline groups that have grown out of it. Related local groups with varying levels of activity exist in the Bay Area, New York, Chicago, and Austin.
Kinda/sorta sponsored by the Ribbonfarm Blogamatic Universe.
If you already know a few people in this neck of the woods, try and pick a handle they'll recognize when you sign up. Please note that the registration confirmation email may end up in your spam folder, so check there. It should come from administrator Zach Faddis.