> Writing is thinking. Thinking and deciding. There have been many times when I start out writing something substantial - could be an email, a blog post, a software design document, anything - when my own views substantially changed during the writing process. Writing forces you to serialize your thoughts - and you can't always trust the gestalt.

I don't disagree, but I think it's often not appreciated how much there's other work to writing too.

The biggest one is that you have to communicate non-interactively to an unknown audience. Having to (literally) put it in someone else's assumed terms does help giving different perspectives into the matter, but doesn't necessarily help one's own thinking that much. Instead you have to do some of the reader's thinking for them.

You also have to spend time on textual matters like grammar and style and a lot of "unspoken rules", which aren't really about linearizing your thinking about the contents.

Not all writing is thinking and not all thinking is writing.

▲

fwlr 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Strange! I would quite specifically highlight “having to do the reader’s thinking for them”, as well as more generally developing the skill to “communicate non-interactively with an unknown audience”, as extremely valuable upgrades to my thinking.

	▲	card_zero 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's a kind of shared fiction of an imaginary person's thinking, really. The author writes "now, I know what you must be thinking", and hopes the reader will agree "OK, close enough".

▲

iterateoften 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> You also have to spend time on textual matters like grammar and style and a lot of "unspoken rules", which aren't really about linearizing your thinking about the contents.

Hard disagree. Constraint is the driver of creativity. Also rewording sentences to sound better or make sense can make you reconceptualize the whole concept you are expressing

▲

jampekka 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure, but doing an interpretative dance or an abstract painting can make you reconceptualize the whole concept too. But we're not really pushing those tools as much as writing.

Take for example a non-native writer of the language. I'm sure having to check up words from a dictionary may help to reconceptualize things, but I'm sure also that it's not often very efficient. And I think similar is going on for natives too for many types of writing.

	▲	alpinisme 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It’s not clear that doing an abstract painting can make you reconceptualize in the way that reframing in other words does. The point about putting in other words is that you may stumble on a clearer, more tractable, more extensible framing. The kind of reframing an abstract painting does is very different, more like changing your attitude or way of looking. But I don’t think it ever leads to a place where you will suddenly find yourself with a sharper understanding that helps you communicate with others more effectively.

▲

Dumblydorr 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

All writing is thinking when done by a human, you’re literally distilling your thoughts into words. You can’t write without thought.

And not all thinking is writing is a clear truism, there’s no point to even stating that.

Writing helps us think about the world, it’s a pivotal intellectual technology.

▲

altmanaltman 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have been thinking over this comment for a while now. I think yes, you are correct that thought is involved in writing but I don't think it is possible to claim "all writing is thinking when done by a human". Like what type of thinking are you claiming here?

Because one can copy a text and write it down and that involves thinking in the sense that anything we do involves thinking fundamentally. But that thinking is different from thinking logically about a concept and writing it down which I think is where you are getting at.

The definition of writing and thinking is too broad in that sentence even though it does apply in several obvious cateogires within that at different levels.

And also "writing helps us think about the world" is too broad again. Why? Why does me writing "apt apt apt apt apt apt apt" help me think about the world? I just wrote it because i felt like writing it. Why wouldn't you consider that writing?

	▲	lelanthran 37 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> Why does me writing "apt apt apt apt apt apt apt" help me think about the world? Poor example. You wrote it to make a point, after all.
	▲	max__dev an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You wrote "apt apt apt apt apt apt" to prove a very specific point no? Absolutely requires reasoning and understanding the problem to go there. And good luck getting an LLM to do that.

▲

jampekka 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is an example of the problem. I did choose to write it in the way that although I knew it can be interpreted trivially, if the reader assumes I'm an imbecile. It was a "punchy" recap of the relatively long explanation for a HN comment and hopefully decently argued point.

▲

jkahrs595 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Not all writing is thinking

Would love an example where you’re able to write without transferring your thoughts. Besides the obvious: fjcjfjrnjfjfifjfnrnakosifnrbwkofgjrj

▲

tomjen3 a minute ago | parent | next [-]

When you transfer other people's thoughts. On this board, we are engaged in pursuits where the truth matters. A lot of writing is about showing that you belong to the right in-groups. That is better done by repeating their talking points than sitting down and coming up with an earnest way to show that you agree.

▲

jampekka 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I did think about this while writing, and I made the compromise to accept that someone will nitpick about it to hopefully drive the point better for those willing to read it charitably.

QED?

	▲	jakelazaroff 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What is the charitable interpretation? I am not being coy or sarcastic here; it is genuinely (forgive the claude-ism) unclear to me what your arguments are.

▲

27183 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The number of times the friction of writing has saved me from prematurely communicating a poorly understood idea must be in the hundreds or maybe thousands. For me when something is difficult to write about, it's a very good signal that I don't understand it well enough. So I think all the things you label as aspects of writing that aren't necessarily "thinking" are nonetheless good for thinking because they provide some necessary friction.

▲

hi_im_greg_h 4 hours ago | parent [-]

This to me is the key reason people are so obsessed with using an LLM for everything.

They’re completely opposed to experiencing any type of friction.

	▲	27183 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Hence The Great Smoothening of Minds we're all experiencing in this decrepit era. I blame the financial incentive, and welcome its disappearance. There are too many people doing computers just for the big paycheck, it would be more fun without them. Maybe the AI bubble popping will get rid of them.