Do We Need More Time to Think or is it Sound Bites All the Way?
I'd like to look at some rather scary statistics. Current research indicates that our attention
spans are shortening. In the year 2000, the average attention span was 12
seconds, in 2012 that average had shrunk to 8 seconds. The attention span of a
goldfish is 9 seconds. Of course, we all
know statistics can be manipulated, even so, I believe there is a trend.
Let's
look, first of all, to the barriers that inhibit our thinking. We are
constantly busy and distracted. The trouble may be that we multitask even when
we don't know we're multitasking. We talk socially or about business on the
telephone, probably with the radio or tv banging away in the background.
We work on
the computer and have to remember to be mindful of the dinner vegetables
bubbling away on the stove. Our senses are constantly bombarded with sensations
and our brains have to block the overflow. It takes energy for our brains to
resist all this superfluous stimuli, and this negativity can simply drain us.
We need to
resist this overload and free ourselves to allow for some brain space. We can
meditate, either alone or with help from a teacher or likeminded friends, or we
can help ourselves by practising some repetitive motion, like swimming or
running.
Or as my
daughter-in-law points out, "Stare out the window to give your brain the
space so your thoughts can float into your head." I don't think my daughter-in-law, with her
busy lifestyle, ever had the time to read the great Empiricist philosopher,
John Locke, but her words echo his own conclusions about thinking as he plays with words such as the French reverie, for when words float into our minds or
our understanding. “…our language has
scarce a name for it,” he
says.
The thing is that thinking is not just a single action. It
is, rather, a procedure, a process, encompassing a number of states of
consciousness. In other words, there are degrees and variations.
In his great work, An
Essay Concerning Human Understanding, John Locke’s short chapter “Of the Modes of Thinking” examines aspects of thinking and
considers how they are related to the human soul.
Locke
explains how, from our perception, which he rightly regards as an aspect of
thinking, we receive distinct ideas. I
love Locke's writing, although he can sometimes be a little bit long-winded, so
I have tried to shorten the following statement without losing meaning: “Thus,
the perception which actually accompanies… any impression on the body made by
an external object… furnishes the mind with a distinct idea which we call
sensation.” What
Locke is actually describing is the “entrance of an idea into the understanding by the
senses.”
The
same idea, recurring, is remembrance. Locke differentiates between recollection
and contemplation by this distinction: “…if
it be sought after by the mind… and brought again in view, it is recollection;
if it is held there long under attentive consideration, it is contemplation.”
Most
of us, I am sure, remember and recollect, but how often do we contemplate, and
by doing so, allow ourselves to examine our lives, our minds and our world in
full colour.
Dreaming,
Locke says, “… is the having of ideas
in the mind, not suggested by any external objects…and whether that which we
call ecstasy be not dreaming with the eyes open, I leave to be examined.”
Further,
Locke says, an idea gains our
attention when the mind chooses to fix on and consider it. This concept leads
to intention or study.
Locke mentions other aspects of thinking, such as
reasoning, judging, volition (in the sense of the act of exercising the will)
and knowledge, which he claims are “…some
of the most considerable operations of the mind and modes of thinking.”
In the 17th century, as in
the time of the ancients, great men and women were fully aware of the practical
and spiritual validity of allowing ourselves time to think, with all the vigour
of our being. Maybe this is something we are beginning to lose sight of. We are
skipping several stages of the thinking process.
Expediency
In the world today, many people
seem primed just to pass exams and gain qualifications. Not always, but in some
cases, it seems by fair means or foul. I
believe that being unwilling to apply oneself to thinking carefully and
reflectively can actually result in a severe lack of confidence, of
self-knowledge and even lead to acts of dishonesty. For example:
Not too long ago, a young
woman I know was explaining how she had smuggled some data into the examination
room to help her with her paper. She was not embarrassed or ashamed, just
relieved she wasn't caught. I responded that this was not just cheating the
system, but that, most of all, she was cheating herself by depriving herself of
the opportunity to learn and grow. She was not convinced and evidently thought
I was a dinosaur. Maybe she was right.
I have found my online
articles stolen and on sites that sell them to undergraduates for their
coursework, and have been involved in long, arduous disputes to get the
webmaster or host to take them down.
These rogue sites make far more money out of my work than I do.
The man who ran a private
tuition agency I once worked for in London, had his degree printed in big bold
letters on his invoices. One day he confessed to me that it was fake. He'd
purchased his "degree" online and it came with an impressive looking
certificate from a North American university. He urged me to do the same, after
all, it was only a couple of thousand pounds. You just had to say you'd read a
few books. But, quite apart from the deceit, I wouldn't want to deprive myself
of the sheer joy of learning a few new thinking strategies and a whole chunk of
exciting new knowledge.
Is it entirely the fault of
these cheats that they are cheating? I
ask that because I believe they are, in part, influenced by our "success
at any cost" society. If everybody
does it, then the one who plays fair is going to feel at a disadvantage. So, are we creating a world where people are
not encouraged to think deeply and analytically for themselves and take pride in
their own development? People who don't have the time for self-development and
the willingness to achieve an honest qualification, and who, instead, need
other people to do their thinking for them?
A great deal of popular
material today has to be in soundbites, rather than in depth. In a way, that meets the criteria of its
authors, to get people to read and assimilate short, accessible chunks of data.
Many people complain about texts and tweets in the same way, but I am not
including these in my criticism. I don't think that would be fair, as they are
a specific method of communication and used in an entirely different context.
Anyway, it's fun working out all the acronyms!
I am frequently LMAO. If you don't know, work it out!
But - in the end, thinking
into soundbites doesn't go.
A third problem to the
clarity of our thinking is that we tend to think in binary opposites. This is a
black and white view of the world and it's is not a helpful way to pursue a
solution or fix an argument. For example:
We might say that all
accidents are preventable, when clearly we know they are not. But that doesn't mean that the only other
option is fatalism. If a person doesn't believe
in God, does that mean they believe in the devil, or in evil? If a person doesn't support gay marriage,
does that make them homophobic? If a person says they love women's humour, does that mean they dislike male-focussed humour?
Life isn't black and white,
and there are many other way to find solutions to its dilemmas besides using
language in binary opposites, which is confrontational and not conducive to
careful thought.
The question being asked
is, "We need time to think."
It's not always easy when there are so many other calls on our time, or
people demanding our attention. When you get home from a busy day, I guess a
meal out and some time socialising around the pub is probably more attractive
than practising your thinking skills. I
know for me this can sometimes be the case and I'm no goody-two-shoes. I love a
large glass of wine and a few good jokes in agreeable company and if I was
still working full time, I wouldn't be rushing home to mull over Hume's
dialogues or the thoughts of Chairman Mao.
However, there are a few
other strategies besides meditation and repetitive sport to aid thinking, such
as writing. Even you are not a writer, writing is a great thing to do because
of the thinking that happens while you are writing. The author, Joan Didion,
said, "I don't know what I think until I write it down." Reading a
book can have a similar beneficial effect and can be time well spent.
You can structure your time
so you can use it well. While performing mindless activities, throw away the
headphones and let your mind wander where it will. Some years ago, as the head
ironing operative in the family, I wrote stories in my head while pressing
piles of white shirts. Going on a long
journey doesn't faze me as it presents me with good opportunities both to think
or to daydream.
We also need to develop our
listening skills, in this way we help others to develop their own thinking.
This is not patronising, as it works both ways. If you listen to me, I start to
hone my thinking and I become aware of what I am saying, and this gives me
confidence that my thoughts have some value and are worth sharing.
But there is another kind
of thinking that we ignore at our peril, and that's the thinking that informs
our everyday life. If we don't dream our dreams, pin them down in recollection
and remembrance, then contemplate or reflect on what is in our minds and
hearts, how will we ever be sure we are living our lives in the best possible
way for the best possible outcome, both socially, practically and spiritually?
Perhaps I'll give the last
word to the mostly very rational Rene Descartes. I think, therefore I am. Yes
indeed. There is no other way to become our most mindful and fully-realised
selves.
Comments