Silence

I've hesitated to write for so long. Today I looked up from the pages and saw three months had passed. Time carries on with or without our choosing. The quality of the articles here aren't what I want them to be. My understanding of material isn't what I want it to be. This is a part of life.

As I wait, my mind atrophies.
Every time I stifle the creative urge, I lessen the chances it will spring up once more in future incarnations of myself... in less Nietzschean terminology... what you do, you will continue to do more of.

While not inherently true, this encapsulates the general idea of habituation. When we are prompted to take action, we can reinforce the behavior through actualization, or weaken that further likelihood it will be a prompt in a similarly relevant scenario in future.

So, here I am, sitting at a table, needing to read for my MS program, writing a blog post about my failure to write due to perfectionistic tendencies (a commonly cited excuse for writers.) This bears a question... should I be?

Does stream-of-consciousness writing disrespect the reader? Should I be carefully picking selecting
EVERY
SINGLE
WORD? I don't know. I pay for the site, so I'll write what could be potentially beneficial for myself and my readers (who may or may not exist at this point in time.)

I hope to look back on this article and smile a reminiscent smile that says "I'm glad I finally decided to write. I'm glad I didn't let the shroud of depression and obligation to "perfect" limit the creative expression which may make me a better thinker, human, and, for those business minded individuals, a better worker at whatever creative thinking job I do. My philosophy still is that writing or speaking in an explanatory manner is one of the best ways to assess your own general knowledge on a subject. If you can generate new sentences and somewhat new material, then you might know your stuff. I'll admit, I did use two qualifiers in the previous conditional statement. This is a bit of a cop-out. I am avoiding making the bold claim that someone who can explain something new, is an expert. I don't believe it goes quite that far, but I think the Feynman method does have validity.
What is the Feynman method you say?

Feynman Method

I'll let GPT handle this one... actually, I'll do it myself.

Here's why;

The Feynman Method is a way to see if you really know a subject by how well you can explain it to someone who doesn't know it. The exact story is a bit fuzzy, but the idea is that IF you cannot explain a subject to someone who doesn't know it, then it is unlikely you actually know it well. So, I guess this paragraph was my test of how well I know the Feynman Method.

Enough said for this article. It feels unfinished, and it is in many ways, but I need to get back to work.

This is my way of reinforcing writing, and hopefully it will get better. I'll end on a cool quote so you don't feel cheated.

Eventually you learn there's no point resisting the flow of time, you just have to dive into the moment you have