Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

statweb.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 84 posts

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#11

Post by conjectures »

fipar wrote: post #9
wazoox wrote: post #8

This made my day: To be honest, the academic discussion doesn't shed much light on the practical problem. Here's an illustration: Some years ago I was trying to decide whether or not to move to Harvard from Stanford.I had bored my friends silly with endless discussion. Finally, one of them said, "You're one of our leading decision theorists. Maybe you should make a list of the costs and benefits and try to roughly ca…

Thanks for this find! The same story, minus the "Sandy", is attributed to the pseudonym Triffat in Antifragile. In light of this text, I think Taleb mischaracterized Diaconis. At least I never would have imagined that the quote was a story "Triffat" was telling about himself!

the idea of Taleb mischaracterizing something doesn't strain my credulity too much ;)

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#12

Post by pingec »

nathanasmith wrote: post #2

My problem with thinking too much is when I'm faced with a decision, I find I often have a preferred course of action already in mind and whether that course happens to be objectively better than the alternative is completely immaterial to my ability to think long and abstractly enough about it to reason myself into believing that it is. I have had to train myself to turn off this abstract thinking as necessary. The…

How do you turn it off, how do you train for that? I cannot really do that that's why I ask for a second and third opinion and then talk it out.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#13

Post by kekebo »

mapcars wrote: post #4

Like we learn how to use our hands one should learn how to use our brains when needed, and when not needed how to put it down, that's all.

Just that learning to halt subvocal speech even for a couple of seconds seems to be a much harder task than learning keeping an untrained hand still. There seems to be active resistance, a compulsion to internally vocalize, even (/especially) when detrimental. Unlearning it seems possible but no easy task, requiring a large amount of hours and determination in my experience.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#14

Post by throwayEngineer »

This is a very Academia driven problem.

They have been so detached from problem solving that they forget how to problem solve.

Modeling a human randomness with math didn't give you perfect data and conclusions?

What was the original problem? To solve something unsolvable with our current understanding of biology?

Industry asks better questions and finds solutions. Academia waddles around in theoreticals, and makes minimal meaningful progress.

Edit, to clarify. Academia picks a unreal problem, and can't find a logic driven solution. Industry picks real problems, and doesn't make money unless they solve it. We should be learning to solve problems from Industry, not our underachieving professors.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#15

Post by kaybe »

kekebo wrote: post #13
mapcars wrote: post #4

Like we learn how to use our hands one should learn how to use our brains when needed, and when not needed how to put it down, that's all.

Just that learning to halt subvocal speech even for a couple of seconds seems to be a much harder task than learning keeping an untrained hand still. There seems to be active resistance, a compulsion to internally vocalize, even (/especially) when detrimental. Unlearning it seems possible but no easy task, requiring a large amount of hours and determination in my experience.

Is there a good way to notice you're doing subvocal speech?

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#16

Post by apocalypstyx »

throwayEngineer wrote: post #14

This is a very Academia driven problem. They have been so detached from problem solving that they forget how to problem solve. Modeling a human randomness with math didn't give you perfect data and conclusions? What was the original problem? To solve something unsolvable with our current understanding of biology? Industry asks better questions and finds solutions. Academia waddles around in theoreticals, and makes mi…

And yet much profit has been derived from the privatization of publicly-funded academia.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#17

Post by thisoneworks »

Thinking should be a time boxed activity, with time proportional to the priority of the thing at hand. As a classic overthinker I've realized my overthinking is a weird amalgamation of perfectionism and procrastination. That took me a long time to accept, since I've always rationalized my overthinking as ultimately a good thing. If you assume that action (instead of thinking) is the primary unit in the world, then you can see that thinking is just a tool which informs action.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#18

Post by Loughla »

kaybe wrote: post #15
kekebo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just that learning to halt subvocal speech even for a couple of seconds seems to be a much harder task than learning keeping an untrained hand still. There seems to be active resistance, a compulsion to internally vocalize, even (/especially) when detrimental. Unlearning it seems possible but no easy task, requiring a large amount of hours and determination in my experience.

Is there a good way to notice you're doing subvocal speech?

Meditation and mindfulness has helped me.

I noticed that my 'internal dialogue' was what started anxiety spirals and depression.

Meditation and mindfulness practice seem to help. I think that just like any muscle, the brain can be exercised in a certain direction. But holy shit is it infuriating to start meditating. Do you realize how much time you spend in your own head? Like all of it.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#19

Post by stunt »

js8 wrote: post #5

I have realized some time ago that when some decision is difficult to make, it is likely that both outcomes are equally good (or bad), or at least, equally indeterminable. If one of them was much better, then the decision would be obvious! So indeed, if you can't decide, spin a penny. You save time and the outcome will be similar.

When I hit a similar situation. I'd share it with someone else to verify that both outcomes are equally indeterminable. If that is the case, I often go with my gut feeling.

Re: The Problem of Thinking Too Much (2003) [pdf]

#20

Post by throwayEngineer »

apocalypstyx wrote: post #16
throwayEngineer wrote: post #14

This is a very Academia driven problem. They have been so detached from problem solving that they forget how to problem solve. Modeling a human randomness with math didn't give you perfect data and conclusions? What was the original problem? To solve something unsolvable with our current understanding of biology? Industry asks better questions and finds solutions. Academia waddles around in theoreticals, and makes mi…

And yet much profit has been derived from the privatization of publicly-funded academia.

This is the exception, not the rule.
Post reply on HN