René Descartes (1596-1650) was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher. He was born and raised in France, but traveled extensively around Europe and spent most of his working life in the Dutch Republic.[/caption]

This idea of thinking about thinking came into my head about seven o’clock in the evening Friday the 13th – unlucky for some? but maybe not so. I’m trying to figure out how much effort I spend on visualizing, thinking, assessing, and what proportion of this results in productive thinking leading to action. I have no idea what will appear during the writing of this article because I am working blind so to speak. I have no expectation of it.

On Thursday the 12th, I wrote an article consisting of nearly 3000 words and that was because of a particularly stimulating conversation with a volunteer guide round the city art gallery in Bath. I have no expectation of that either. An article forms in my mind during and after the events themselves and is stimulated by the people I met during the day. It comes of its own accord i.e. I do not have to ‘try’ to make a new project.

I could of course go to Gemini or co-pilot and ask it to write me a thousand word article on the topic, but then I would be reduced to a passive spectator I would not have used what I am pleased to call my mind in a stimulating way. I’m not sure if AI produces anything new or whether it’s summarizes what has already been written and scraped other sites to find out. I suspect I would get something rather bland.

I’m going to do an exercise right now so I will ask ‘Gemini’ to “write 400 words on the topic of I think, therefore I am’. This was the result:

Descartes’ assertion “I think, therefore I am” serves as a foundational statement in his quest for certainty. During a period of intense doubt, Descartes sought to strip away all beliefs that could be subject to even the slightest doubt. He doubted the reliability of his senses, the existence of the physical world, and even the existence of a benevolent God. However, he realized that the very act of doubting required a thinking entity. Thus, the fact that he was thinking was undeniable proof of his own existence. This realization became the bedrock of his philosophy.

The statement underscores the importance of the mind and consciousness in establishing existence. Descartes posited that while the physical world could be an illusion, the mind’s ability to think was irrefutable. This led to his dualistic view of reality, where the mind and body are distinct entities. The mind, being the seat of consciousness and thought, is fundamentally different from the physical body, which operates in the realm of matter.

Descartes’ philosophy had profound implications for the development of modern science and philosophy. By emphasizing reason and doubt, he laid the groundwork for the scientific method, which relies on skepticism and empirical evidence. His ideas also influenced the Enlightenment, a period characterized by an emphasis on reason, individualism, and skepticism of traditional authority.

Critics of Descartes’ philosophy argue that his dualism creates a problematic separation between mind and body. This “mind-body problem” has been a central issue in philosophy ever since. Additionally, some philosophers contend that Descartes’ reliance on introspection and rationalism overlooks the importance of sensory experience and the external world in shaping our understanding of reality.

Despite these criticisms, “I think, therefore I am” remains a powerful and enduring statement. It highlights the intrinsic connection between thought and existence and underscores the role of the mind in defining our reality. Descartes’ insight continues to inspire philosophical inquiry and debate, making it a cornerstone of Western thought.

OK there you have it. We see what the great philosopher and scientist thought at the time. However, a cursory reading shows that there may be some misleading statements, for example ‘the mind, being the seat of consciousness and thought, is fundamentally different from the physical body, which operates in the realm of matter’.

Since that era we have learnt a lot about energy fields and how the body itself has its own intelligence. We have advanced further on the nature of the mind and whether the mind equals the brain.   However, the creators of AI would say that they have answered the question as presented. I consider any input a mere starting point to catalyze and then interpose my own experience and education which I have gained in my life. So, here we go.

First of all I must admit that my thoughts are more about worst case scenarios then about best case scenarios. I think of all the things that could go wrong, all the mistakes I might make, all the social blunders, and generally making a mess of things and not delivering. I wonder if I treat myself badly when I start to think about something even when it is so-called random thoughts. In a way it is self abuse and I’m not quite sure why I do it . I also worry about the condition of the world and wonder what I can do to make it better.

I want to add however that in recent years the positive / negative ratio of thinking has moved in favor of the positive and when I get such moments I enjoy myself immensely. I have thinking processes about what I would do if I won some money and how I would spend it on good works,  changing the community, making people’s lives better and this does give me joy when I think about it though a little bit mixed with frustration that I cannot achieve the aims and dreams that thinking and envisioning can produce.

If I wanted to consider something that is of importance, do I need to get myself in the right state of mind, which could include less beta and more theta as we could say in brain wave jargon.  Do I start thinking about a topic after two hours of watching TV and if so do I need a time of reflection and reorientation before starting my thinking work?

If I was running a race I would change into suitable apparel, make sure that I had enough energy in my body, appear at the starting point and read the room in other words see what other people are doing. Perhaps I should modify this in the case of discussion

If I want to discuss something important and it can be good or bad, and I want to discuss it with someone else, then maybe I should set the scene by saying that I feel we need to discuss x, y and z. The other party or parties can  therefore prepared their minds and so you will get hopefully more out of the thinking processes which will lead to a decision.

All this sounds common sense really but I don’t think we do it because of the pressures of life, the lists of things we have to do, the effort of making a living and simultaneously juggling a number of balls.

If I want to cook a meal, I clear the preparation table and make sure the utensils are clean. I assembled together all the ingredients, seek guidance from a cookbook if necessary, make sure I have enough time to finish, and off I go. This seems a really good model because I can think of cases where I’ve mentioned something important en passant catching other people unawares when for all I know there was something else on their minds.

I am not going to get the most out of the conversation, the act of thinking will not be clear, and frustration and maybe dead ends will be the result.

I’m drawn to think about a conductor of a symphony in a hall of music. The audience know that this is going to happen, they take their seats, they hopefully turn off their phones, they show respect for the performance by ending their casual conversations and focusing expectantly on what is to come.

If the subject is of any moment, it would do no harm to look at the history, for example the purchase of a motor vehicle. Let’s say you have seen a new vehicle. You would hopefully reflect on the decisions that you have made in the past, the results of those decisions and whether there is anything to learn.  In a way we are objectifying the past by taking emotion out of it which for all we know could be the major handicap to clear thinking.

It may be that disagreements between two or more people hinted the creative process and some forgiveness needs to happen, in other words the decks need to be cleared.  I know in my work with controversial health matters that fear and anger and ignorance paralyzes people and they are unable to think.