I am constantly writing extensively on any and all manner of subjects. I am referring to not only what one can observe of me on the internet, but in general. It seems people today overwhelmingly prefer visual and auditory learning, whereas I prefer writing.

When I write something, I commit it to memory, as if I were “coding” ideas per line into memory. So long as I have done so, I have yet to encounter a concept I was unable to grasp, first by writing it out, then describing it in my own words per se, as my own creation.

This also works deductively, in a literary manner akin to reverse-engineering ideas and subjects I have yet to fully understand. For example, when there is a subject about which I know very little, I will simply begin writing about it.

I will write in a capacity similar to how an instructor would explain an idea to a classroom of laypersons. I will write exhaustively on the subject, until I can no longer do so, at which point I will use the transcript to identify weak points in my understanding.

This has been demonstrated to be a sound method for me personally insofar as identifying and minimizing my own bullshit regarding that which I do and do not know. If I find myself unable to conceptualize an idea on my own terms, then how could I teach it to another?

It should be theoretically impossible, without relying either on my own bullshit (which is not knowledge) or the a priori knowledge of the receiver, which in turn compensates for gaps and weak points in my own understanding for complete conceptualization.

As verbose and complicated as my explanation of this process might appear to some readers, and thus perhaps pretentious, one should understand the words I often choose are the words on which I, myself, have come to rely in order to understand the subject matter.

Though, the implication is not that I learn something according to the first words I associate with an idea, nor the first words I write of it. What is in fact the case is any idea, regardless of significance, undergoes many written revisions.

These written revisions are the result of constant rumination throughout the day in more or less the form of repetitive monologue. I never write about something and just forget about it. Some days I will even become overwhelmed by too many thoughts.

Though, seldom am I completely overwhelmed, as this usually manifests as anxiety of varying degrees, typically occurring immediately upon awakening each day. I suspect this is because my brain has reenergized, but I cannot say for certain.

This takes anywhere from several minutes to several hours to subside, and usually determines whether I am going to have a productive day or a very frustrating, non-productive day, with any observer being none the wiser.

On my worst days, I will avoid people entirely, and if forced to interact with anyone, will likely seem similar to an individual with low blood-sugar in that I will be extremely irritable. I am typically aware of this, but I tend not to care, as the anxiety itself be the concern.

And so, why have I troubled myself with explaining all of this?

First, believe me when I say it is scarcely any trouble at all. When I write posts, threads, or articles of any length (to say nothing of my writings kept private), it is a therapeutic exercise, for I more keenly structure my thoughts.

As someone who frequents the gym and frequently writes, it is with no exaggeration that I claim the feeling I get while working out and the feeling I get from writing are almost identical, save heart rate, the environment, and the music.

In fact, much of my writing begins in the gym as broken, scattered thoughts on a subject that I quickly record into my notes on my phone. I actually have to be cognizant that I do not become lost in thought and hog any of the stations.

Writing is therefore the opposite of “trouble” for me. Unfortunately, this does not seem to be the case for most people, and this is the reason I decided to write this thread—to highlight the difference in writing being perceived as therapeutic and as laborious.

When writing is perceived as a laborious task, as I suspect is the case for the vast majority, people tend to project a great deal of negative emotion into my writing, and needless to say, it can be frustrating. Furthermore, I am a habitual writer.

This should come as no surprise given I personally find writing to be therapeutic; however, this is not the lens through which most people are constantly reading my threads. When this is continuous, it begins to distort how people to see me as a person.

It is why no small number of folks see Twitter threads only three tweets long and refer to them as a “rant”, whereas here I am perplexed at this reference to such a small, effortless act, if for no other reason than I could figuratively type it in my sleep.

Ultimately, I am not concerned with what people believe about me, but therapeutic or otherwise, the words I write have a point—a point often obscured or entirely missed as a result of fatigue that many feel from wrongly projecting feelings of laboriousness into these threads.

I hope that by writing this, those to whom this applies are inclined not to do such a thing anymore, for it begins to be an inconvenience with respect to a therapeutic activity, one for which wrongful projection is a wrongful imposition, despite being the result of ignorance.

, ,

Related posts


I have always thought it ironic how in spite of me being a highly...


"Your destruction is the will of the gods, and I am their instrument."


There is nothing wrong with being nice, but there is something wrong with the expectation of it.

Latest posts


I have always thought it ironic how in spite of me being a highly...


"Your destruction is the will of the gods, and I am their instrument."


There is nothing wrong with being nice, but there is something wrong with the expectation of it.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.