Metacognition (n): Thinking about  how you think.

First answer: maybe. Why? The weak argument of: I seem to be smart enough, I practice metacognition, ergo. Unless I conduct a metacognition study, I’ll have to be satisfied with a sample size of n=1.

Second answer: maybe not. Why? Because, can higher level thought processes really change the deeper ones that control how we think? My opinion is, once you get going down a certain way, it’s really hard to get off that train of thought. My (yes, limited,  thanks for noticing adult me) experiences show that only other experiences can actually change how your brain works and make it smarter. It’s very hard to imagine any new way of thinking until you absorb an idea or emotion externally. (Well then how do people come up with new ideas? Slowly and with lots of synthesis from old ideas).

Or, maybe, I still don’t understand enough about how I think for metacognition to be useful for me yet. Come to think of it, thinking about math or computer science or English were all just another skill that I got better at by repeated, structured practice. An actual philosophy/psychology course is in order, then? I’ll think about it.

Anyways sorry for the rambly post, I kept thinking of new things half-coherently in the middle of writing. It feels good to write down these (mostly stupid) ideas sometimes, even if no one else reads them.