So the question I am forced to ask myself is this - Should I go the ´abstract thinking´ way or should I go the ´objective thinking´ way?
Each path offers me alternatives and different approaches to the same ¨problem¨ or situation. What made me think of this? Well...lets just say the discussion was enlightening until it turned into a debate. And no one likes debates because as with all conflicts, there can be only one outcome - someone loses.
So what is abstract thinking? According to http://www.answers.com it is ¨Thinking characterized by the ability to use concepts and to make and understand generalizations, such as of the properties or pattern shared by a variety of specific items or events.¨ In philosophical terminology abstraction is the thought process wherein ideas are distanced from objects.
Objective thinking is ¨The expression "objective thinking" (or alternatively, neo-objectivism) designates a mode of reasoning which is based on and modelled by the notions of objective reality (reality is exterior to our minds) and reason (knowledge must be based on objective evidence - on methods which seek outward, not inward).¨ - http://www.objectivethought.com/objectivethinking.html
Now I am by no far stretch of then imagination a philosopher - heck, for a long time I though Socrates was a kiddie word for scrotum! But thankfully, I´ve played enough video games and been stung by enough wasps to tell what is good for me and what isn't.
So lets get to the point. I am forced to understand which thinking school do I come from? Abstract or Objective. After the debate it was quite clear that I was from the latter. And I can see why. I am questioning my own thinking at 3 AM! I cant generalize. I cant relate to anything that does not fit in the real world. I cannot reason with someone who thinks in an abstract direction. I question what I think needs to be questioned and I cant go forward unless I know what's ahead. Severely limiting - but not without its perks.
Now - this brings an interesting thought to my mind. A person who thinks abstract sees grey! Objective does not. It only sees black and white. There is no ¨ummm...OK¨. Its either right or wrong, left or right, good or bad. Black or White (what an amazing game). If you're a Matrix fan, then this fits, because choice is only an illusion. The grey here probably represents choice. ¨You can choose to make it real.¨ But what if its not supposed to be real? See how confusing this is? That question in itself represents a grey zone! And therefore I'm typing at 3 AM.
So an abstract thinker thinks of endless possibilities - practical or impractical. But so does the other guy - except that the objective dude prefers to stick with the practical or real world outcome. I think its called selection by elimination. So who wins this debate. Well...according to me, the objective thinker. Here's why :
- You can believe in aliens
- You don't follow your heart - you follow reason (Go Bender B Rodriguez! Go!)
Arrogant as this may sound, it seems to me as the most suitable approach to thinking. Why would I want to think that if I flipped a coin it would land perpendicular and not parallel? That's abstract. Why would I want to think that my heart tells me it will, it will? That's subjective. I will however think that it is not possible for a coin to land perpendicular because physics will never allow it in the real world. If the coin is spinning parallel to the surface its supposed to land on, then once it hits that surface the potential and kinetic energy gained will force it to fall flat on its face! Heads or tails - that's objective thinking. (I am no physicist either).
So it all really boils down to this - objective is the way i´m going. Because the way I see it, abstract = random and baseless while objective = true or false.
In short : "I could be wrong - but as long as I use reason, and unless you prove otherwise, or I find that I am wrong, I must start from the premise that I am right". And that's the statement that turned a great discussion into a debate.
I suggest you do NOT use this as a pick-up line.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
ROTFL, whatever happened to the simple logic of "Cogito ergo sum"? Wasn't that enough, that you even had to subcategorize it into schools of thinking and then try and tear your hair out into deciding which one you belonged to? :D And more importantly, what substance were you abusing at 3 in the morning to make you think like this? :D In any case, I happen to be an abstract thinker myself, but I was wondering (some would say I talk this way exactly because I am an abstract thinker), is it not possible for someone to think both abstractly as well as objectively, depending on the situation that they are facing? I mean, talking about objective thinking, the very logic that everyone has to fit into either an abstract or an objective school of thinking, is thinking pretty objectively. Along the same lines as looking at the world through black-and-white instead of the multiple shades of gray, a line of thought that's as unfounded as the left brain vs. right brain wars. An abstract thinker just happens to be more flexible when it comes to reasoning. I am not talking the "may or may not be" stand, thats a load of pure BS and it just shows how undecided or unknowledgeable that person is. Instead, I am talking about the hallmark of true intelligence, where one is really open to certain ideas, seeing things in various shades of gray, rather than taking a cloistered mindset approach, seeing things only in black and white. Its not entirely impractical, but sometimes its the only way you get the results to agree with the predictions. Its not really "random and baseless", but more of a situation where the abstract thinker can think of all possibilities, and is thus safely covered under any possibility. In the end, we actually owe a lot of the people who were actually abstract thinkers than practical people. The objective people were the ones who laughed at the possibility of a hundred ton object flying through the air, into space or floating on the oceans. Yet, the abstract thinkers dared to imagine and more importantly, work towards trying to figure out the impossible. No, I think the abstract thinkers deserve a little bit more credit. :D Plus, when has reason always been right? History is chock-full of reasoning gone drastically wrong.
Dude, keep thinking like that and the robot armies will find it really easy to squash you like the chocolate flavored bug that you are :-)
The bottom line really is that like you said, its quite hard to pinpoint whose a what and whats a who. But my friend, when you're posting at 3 am, you're either one of 'them' or you've just been given crushed bones painted blue and shaped like a small pill.
Post a Comment