- "You think too much. Convert your thoughts to actions. Write a "DO" behind your computer and u will be much happier"
- "Yea..you think too much...at times Way too much, but then that's just "YOU". Minus your thoughts, their wouldn't be a "YOU". Your Too much thinking is what defines you."
Strangely or not so strangely, these are contradictory opinions. But i hold both equally true. The first is the opinion of a person who believes in action, who believes in implementing, achieving.The second comes from a person who understands my kind of people. Maybe because she belongs to that category herself. Understands why and how some brains are born to analyze, dissect and get into the intricacies of things!
U see, that's just the category i belong to. I believe my biggest strength is my mind and more often than not, it is your biggest strength that works as your biggest weakness. I do not know if i owe this to my Zodiac or my genes of well just the "category" of the human race i belong to, but what i do know is that it comes naturally to me. In fact, it oft is subconscious. I am very perceptive and the second stage to my perception is analysis. However, it is when people take this analysis to being 'judgemental' that things go hay wire. Each person is allowed the sanity of his thoughts. Each person is permitted the freedom of his perception. But it is indeed the sound of these thoughts n perceptions that become opinions and opinions are just always contradicted.
So what I have realized, or rather my theory of "its all in the mind" states that it should all be in the mind. Elaborating on what I already mentioned. Perceptions imply thoughts. Thoughts imply voicing out of thoughts. Voicing out of thoughts of person is equivalent to 'opinions' for the other person. 'Opinion' imply a 'Contradictory opinion'. And then Hell brakes loose. because they may be an example at a micro level but at the macro level when you apply this very theory to nations, communities, jihads, wars, curfews, states, labour unions and the likes, I will be proved nothing but true.
Now taking this introspection to a deeper and more individual level. Lets consider the alternate model. This model tries to avoid 'hell from breaking loose' and the following are the sequence of events in this case: perceive, think, don't voice out, no opinions, no contradictions, no hell. Now what will happen in this scenario is: perceive, think, because cant voice out, more thinking, jam in the brain. Basically, if i perceive and build my thoughts but do not voice them out, I will think more and beyond the point of sane thinking,I shall face the very tragic and maddening 'brain jam' because if i don't share my thoughts, i restrict myself, and theres a clog in my brain. Hence it becomes necessary to change my thoughts to opinions by voicing them out so i can get more perspectives on them that will evolve them instead of restricting them.
However, it is the micro that leads to macro.
And so my theory has no profound conclusion as yet. It has many loose ends. Almost zero factual errors. But it is indeed subject to subjectivity. What also stands against my theory is the the confusion within me which stems from nothing but my self contradictory, questioning, overtly analytical nature.
And as this theory was forming a clog in my brain, I thought i might voice it out and share it, maybe outsider perspective on it mgiht sought out that clog.
1) My language has deteriorated horribly, drastically. Am aghast, shocked (and all other words of all other languages that imply the same meaning) at myself. I NEED to read a good book!
2) Economics hons has deeply affected my brain as can be seen by my choice of words and style of writing.
3) I do think a lot.