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

How to think in writing

henrikkarlsson.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 131 posts

Re: How to think in writing

#81

Post by mewpmewp2 »

troupe wrote: post #18
nxicvyvy wrote: post #5

The PG quote is a hot take. Yes, writing can be a productive focusing mechanism, it can also provide you with good reflections. But so can meditation, so can a good walk. It's a tool, not a requirement. It also has it's own downsides in that it forces you to think a certain constrained way, and while that is also one of its strength, it does limit your ability to think creatively. Similar to how using ChatGPt to draf…

Can you give any examples of someone whose idea formation was not improved went they undertook the task of writing their thoughts down?

I have had ideas that come to me, during walks, and other certain moments, briefly and they keep developing over time. It has happened that after I actually write them down, my mind stops caring about them and they stop happening.

Alternatively I have had ideas in mind that get stronger and stronger and at some point I just have to work them and so I work on them without writing them down and I actually bring them to fruition while writing down might have oddly killed that motivation or obsession.

It is mainly various side projects. The act of writing somehow diminishes that motivation or reward feeling as opposed to immediately starting to build the side project.

Re: How to think in writing

#82

Post by cplat »

chrisjj wrote: post #73

> And someone who never writes has no fully formed ideas about anything nontrivial. So ... music is trivial? Dance is trivial? Sculpture is trivial? I have to say I think P Graham needs to get out more.

As someone who has done a lot of those things (beyond programming), I can assuredly say that "writing about something" is neither a proof of understanding nor a proficiency in a subject. (Case in point, our educational system)

Re: How to think in writing

#83

Post by chrisjj »

pauln99 wrote: post #76
chrisjj wrote: post #73

> And someone who never writes has no fully formed ideas about anything nontrivial. So ... music is trivial? Dance is trivial? Sculpture is trivial? I have to say I think P Graham needs to get out more.

I think he also said somewhere that people mainly disagree with distorted versions of your ideas...

Feel free to identify any distortion here.

Re: How to think in writing

#85

Post by jilles »

“Writing organizes and clarifies our thoughts. Writing is how we think our way into a subject and make it our own. Writing enables us to find out what we know—and what we don’t know—about whatever we’re trying to learn.”

― William Knowlton Zinsser, Writing to Learn

One of the books that got me into writing for myself.

Re: How to think in writing

#86

Post by thfuran »

jstanley wrote: post #60
BeetleB wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that the comment came across as arrogant. However you misunderstood the point. It's not that I'm very smart, but that a superior intelligence was not the factor in me finding glasses in his reasoning. It can't be, because as I pointed out, my intelligence is not superior to his. Of course I do get your point that I should consider whether both he and I are simply not that intelligent and that's the reason I fin…

In some sense, isn't making flawed arguments an intelligence flaw by definition?

That depends on the flaw and whether you'd consider lacking omniscience to be a sign of low intelligence.

Re: How to think in writing

#88

Post by whatever1 »

BeetleB wrote: post #33

I'm torn about this article. On the one hand, he's right: Writing helps refine your thoughts. On the other hand, if your goal is to probe the validity of your thoughts, this is painfully inefficient. You'll get much further if you do one or two simple passes on your writing, and then pass what you've written around and ask for feedback. I think I learned this in one of Haidt's books, and it has jived with my experien…

Socrates is kicking from his grave.

Re: How to think in writing

#89

Post by chrisjj »

cplat wrote: post #82
chrisjj wrote: post #73

> And someone who never writes has no fully formed ideas about anything nontrivial. So ... music is trivial? Dance is trivial? Sculpture is trivial? I have to say I think P Graham needs to get out more.

As someone who has done a lot of those things (beyond programming), I can assuredly say that "writing about something" is neither a proof of understanding nor a proficiency in a subject. (Case in point, our educational system)

Quite so.

If indeed all the author's ideas are incomplete until written, his mistake is ascribing this to the power of his writing rather than the limits of his ideation.

Re: How to think in writing

#90

Post by unshavedyak »

toxik wrote: post #55

Writing fleshes out thought because writing is like talking to yourself with automatic history recording. I suggest trying to skip the middle step (writing) and just talk to yourself via voice recording or something else. It works and it takes a lot less formatting effort. Similarly, conversation works beautifully too.

I do this a lot, but I lose my place and cut myself off so frequently that it’s easy to get lost. I can see the value of going more slowly, documenting the process and completing sentences.

Perhaps a LLM could wrap it all up for me lol.

Post reply on HN