"Thought is the enemy of flow"

luka

Well-known member
Everything you say is garbled third hand quotations. There's no understanding. It's a syllabus mangled through skim reading and faulty memory.
 

thirdform

Well-known member
Everything you say is garbled third hand quotations. There's no understanding. It's a syllabus mangled through skim reading and faulty memory.

everything you say is basically calling everyone an idiot and thick.

And arguments that make no sense.
 

thirdform

Well-known member
They make perfect sense. They're very simple and straightforward.

No they don't.

Just because social being determines social consciousness does not mean that all thought is post-hoc. People still engage in thought whilst traversing the world.

Your sylogism game is weak, fam.
 

luka

Well-known member
Because you can't read words enter your consciousness without being understood, then you cough them up in half digested form. You don't know what you're saying.
 

version

Warehouse Operative
The best way to access a flow state for me is either

1) posting on dissensus
2) playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare for 8 hours

I was in one the other day without really doing anything. Just gliding round the kitchen, shutting cupboards with my feet, flicking and catching utensils, washing up and cooking at the same time.
 

blissblogger

Well-known member
I've read the book "Flow". I don't recall it being about productivity so much as happiness (though productivity might be a byproduct of that).

I recall him writing that people make a mistake in devoting their leisure time to passive activities like watching TV, because we're actually happiest when we're doing something challenging, though not too challenging to enjoy and not too easy to be completely inane.

i think that's why puzzle books are so popular, especially with middle aged and elderly folk - probably their equivalent of games actually

solitaire also

playing chess must be where thought and flow are the same thing - wouldn't know, supremely mediocre chess player -

chinese checkers though, that is more my level - that is thoughtflowtastic - it's problem solving but short term - and nothing real at stake
 

blissblogger

Well-known member
"play" is the key word with flow - playing music, playing games, playing the fool

child-games especially (chase, hide and seek, etc) are pure flow
 

version

Warehouse Operative
It's perhaps clearest in stuff where someone's in more or less constant motion: skating, surfing, cycling. That sort of thing. Anything where a loss of momentum's immediately obvious.
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
Somwtimes I will intentionally get a little too high because I know that on the come down I can enter the flow state
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
I've never known what people mean by 'thinking.' Thoughts, yes, I can see what people mean by thoughts, but thinking as an active, directed process I'm sceptical about. I'm not convinced it exists. In what I do, which has tight time constraints, typically an idea pops into my head immediately, but if I started 'thinking' I would get stuck.

If customers ask I usually tell them I try to move quickly enough that no options present themselves, as soon as you're presented with a choice of paths you're stuck. Go at the correct speed and that dilemma doesn't arise.
Do you do this for your own poems or is this just for poems you do at work?
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
Today I had to do a little on the spot drawing and i have to do a simliar thing but it doesnt usually produce anything Im particuarly excited about
 

luka

Well-known member
it's best when it's life. when you sense the heat-map of the city and move from move from one local flare-up of excitement to another,
never any down time, always someone to talk to or gawp at.
 

suspended

Well-known member
This sounds to me more like an inner voice than 'thinking'. Jibber jabber exists, thinking is probably a myth, that's my position.
Strong and IMO correct take

I think there is a certain hermeneutics of suspicion where you see verbal production and with its verbal consciousness as pure propaganda (in many different mediums and contexts) for the thinker/speaker—here, one's actual motivations and actions are only loosely coupled to the verbal, insofar as the verbal must plausibly justify/explain/narrativize the actor

What do you make of this? Is it too far? Is it too paranoid?
 
Top