What's interesting to me is the extent to which one *simulates* actual talking when sitting quietly formulating thoughts. It's often less about *what* you want to say and more about how you want to say it to this audience. When Bob and I are talking, it feels like I have little simulations running inside me like Could I say it this way? Could I say it that way? Will that work with Bob? Etc. [†]
And if I'm right that I'm *simulating* talking as I prepare to talk, then the only distinguishable difference is which motor functions are engaged when simulating vs actually talking. (Note I'm not suggesting all internal dynamics are equivalent to talking. Only that the difference between thinking "I have a cat" and saying "I have a cat" is vanishingly small, or at least not as large/distinct most people think it is.) [†] This is one of the reasons people who never pause to let others think and simply fill all the silence with jabber irritate me. Give me a little time to run some simulations, here! On 6/7/20 2:55 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > It often seemed like George W. Bush would start talking before he decided > where he really wanted to go. Sometimes he would recover and sometimes he > would not. I know when I’m put on the spot, like on a video conference, it > seems to me like there’s a wave moving forward and the goal is just to put > the banal or non-controversial stuff in the front of the wave and save time > to prioritize or guard or qualify the rest in real time. The coding is a > separate process from the real time editing. -- ☣ uǝlƃ .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
