On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 8:20 AM, mike brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>Well, of course an action can't be performed by thought (Uri Geller proved that point), but it > usually has its genesis in that thought, and the thought process continues making > observations and judgements during and after the particular action. I don't think that's really true. I think people may retroactively make up some story about this or that thought leading to some action, but generally the action arises. And judgements are totally separate, really if you believe the judgment, it is a separate action. I certainly empathise with the 'everyday lifeness' (I think that's a new > phrase) sentiment of your point, but I find the opposite to be true. When I > equivocate or second guess myself in a situation where an immediate response > would be preferrable, I usually end up making a mess, or regreting, a > situation that might have been better dealt with spontaneously and > intuitively. This is not to suggest, however, that some decisions shouldn't > be made thru careful consideration of the facts, it's just that we often do > this quite needlessly. Whoa! I'm sure I never wrote about equivocate, second guessing, or avoiding the spontaneous action (personally, I find "intuitive" to be a word tightly linked to thoughts - a flash of intuitive insight is something I stake my professional life on, and it is always a thought, never an action. Careful consideration of the facts? Eh, sometimes I guess. Certainly not in the example I used of catching an ice cream scoop as it falls to the floor. I suppose when you are trying to decide on what house to buy with your spouse, some planning activity is useful, but I try not to get carried away with it or too attached. --Chris
