Writing, speaking, thinking

Author: danielcorin

src/content/logs/2025/12/01.mdx

@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+---
+date: '2025-12-01T21:35:45Z'
+title: '2025-12-01'
+draft: false
+tags: []
+---
+
+Lately, I've been thinking about the difference and similarities between speaking, writing and thinking.
+Paul Graham wrote an article about [how writing is thinking](https://paulgraham.com/writes.html) and that if you think you're thinking without writing, you only _think_ you're thinking.
+
+I haven't known what to do with this idea for a while but think I've found something interesting recently.
+
+In using LLM agents to build software, sometimes I use voice to text functionality to get thoughts out of my head as fast as possible.
+From a pure speed perspective, this is usually the fastest way to get the agent something to start working on.
+In practice, however, the transcription of what I've said isn't always as exacting or precise as what I had in mind.
+
+I _think_ the appreciation of this freestyle nature is to appreciate what it is to think through writing.
+
+When you speak to communicate, you're generally trying to communicate some information.
+But speaking has certain constraints.
+While you're speaking, you need to figure out what you're going to say next while you're saying the thing you're already saying.
+
+This is quite different from writing.
+Oddly enough, I never realized how different this was until I watched a bunch of people demonstrate how they use coding agents.
+
+They would talk about their process, explain what they were going to do, and then would start typing to the agent, at which point, their verbal speed and cadence would change entirely.
+
+They would dictate or type things like the following:
+
+> Create a React, Typescript application, using the Tailwind CSS framework ...
+
+Usually monotone.
+Usually slower than natural speaking speed.
+Usually completely different from how the presenter was previously addressing the audience.
+
+In a presentation forum, this is highly unnatural to listen to.
+
+It's the conversion of the writing process into something consumable to a speaking presentation format, but it's awkward.
+
+Having noticed how strange this transition feels, when I do presentation coding with agents now, I tend to prefer a voice to text approach.
+This approach allows me to fluidly explain myself to the audience and the agent at the same time, whenever I want to, by recording myself when I am talking about what I am going to build and using that transcription as my prompt.
+
+That's a fun party trick, but back to writing and thinking.
+
+Writing slows you down to a speed where you can care more about where you are going.
+The constraints of speaking require tradeoffs you don't have to make when writing.
+
+If you can't think of quite the right word to describe what you're thinking, you can fall back to a more simple description or a synonym.
+This works in conversation, but is a more lossy version of your actual thought and what you were trying to say.
+
+Words and speech are already lossy, but when we take time to write something down, we have the best chance of using the best words we know how to communicate what we mean.
+
+When we consider what this means in the context of writing to think, we might suggest speaking is insufficient to think because it requires mental energy to be committed to other things as well.
+If you're presenting, you may be considering your cadence, your body language, your tone, your volume.
+You may be watching the audience and picking up on cues from them to get a sense of how they are receiving what you are saying.
+If you're conversing, you're listening to your conversation partner and picking up similar cues.
+In the end, what I think this means is that your mental bandwidth cannot be maximally focused on thinking when you are speaking.
+
+There are too many other things going on.
+Maybe the closest thing to writing when speaking is to record yourself by yourself with no conversation partner and nothing to distract you.
+But even still, it's not quite like writing.
+You're looking around, absorbing other stimuli, and subconsciously incorporating it in what you say.
+
+If you close your eyes and dictate, you might come close to thinking like writing, but you still can't avoid the constraint of being forced to pick the next word to string it together with the last.
+Unless of course, you are going to pause and deliberately and carefully pick each. and. every. word. as. you. say. it. aloud.
+But is that really even speaking?
+
+There is a sort of freestyle component to speaking.
+In our minds, we might think we generally know where we're going (what point we're going to make) but we don't always know how we're going to get there.
+
+I've played with this idea a lot lately.
+
+The next time you're in a casual conversation, observe the topic and listen to the participants.
+Get a sense of what is being talked about and stay engaged.
+
+See if you notice multiple threads of conversation.
+See if it seems like the people speaking are understanding each other.
+See if you can follow the conversation evolving from one topic to another.
+
+Conversations are rarely planned.
+They emerge, evolve, and eventually fade away.
+
+Even after an engaging and enjoyable conversation, there is a moment of palpable exhale where you realize it's time to turn the page.
+
+So what are we doing when we converse?
+Are we thinking?
+
+If we need more of our mental bandwidth to focus fully, then maybe we're thinking to a certain degree but at a diminished capacity.
+
+If we're debating, we'll hear the argument of our opponent and then be expected to respond, advocating for our perspective over theirs.
+We're thinking on our feet, but maybe not as deeply or clearly as we're capable of doing.
+
+We're kind of thinking, but really we're reacting.
+We've practiced debating and when we hear an argument we only have so much time to respond.
+There are lots of techniques you could use to buy time.
+
+Take a deep breath. Pause. Vamp. Talk about something unrelated.
+
+All to buy time.
+Time to think.
+
+Because when speaking, time is the tightest constraint limiting the clear communication of your ideas.
+
+When speaking, it's more difficult to manage a conversation.
+Harder to retrace to previous topics.
+To prune earlier branches.
+With a partner it's nearly impossible and would likely make the conversation feel quite unnatural.
+
+There is a natural give and take of a conversation.
+If someone is talking about their day, it would be unbecoming to interrupt or abruptly change the topic to something else.
+
+When speaking, you live in the flow of time.
+You need to speak words in an order that make sense.
+You can't return to a sentence from 5 minutes ago, edit that, then reorganize it to better state your point.
+When speaking you kind of can, but it takes practice and you have to expend energy bringing your partner or audience with you.
+
+> I know I said that you can think when you speak but I don't think I said that quite right. What I mean was, you can do an _approximation_ of thinking while speaking but to truly think with clarity you must write.
+
+If you say that, people can follow what you're talking about, but you have to lay a trail of breadcrumbs.
+When writing, the thoughts are more pure and uninterrupted.
+
+If you have the thought that leads to speaking the quote -- maybe something like
+
+> My point is that writing is thinking and speaking isn't quite thinking so I need to ensure I communicate clearly that speaking isn't quite clear thinking
+
+You can change your prose to reflect that.
+You don't need to bring anyone along with you.
+You don't have to justify your hard pivot.
+You can think and respond to your thought alone without the decorum or ceremony required when speaking.
+
+To respond to this thought while speaking compared to writing requires different orders of magnitude of mental bandwidth.
+So much more, I could almost imagine myself letting the misunderstanding go while speaking because it would just be so much work to return and correct the record with linear conversation.
+
+When writing, the nonlinear edits are possible and easy.
+The ideas exist concretely in words, to be sculpted into ideas.

src/content/logs/2025/12/02.mdx

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+---
+date: '2025-12-02T09:39:17Z'
+title: '2025-12-02'
+draft: false
+tags: []
+---
+
+I always turn off Cursor Tab when I am writing to think.
+Otherwise, I end up subconsciously influenced to write what Cursor Tab thinks I am writing, not what I actually mean to write.

src/content/posts/2025/on-writing-speaking-and-thinking/index.mdx

@@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
+---
+title: On Writing, Speaking and Thinking
+location: Brooklyn
+createdAt: 2025-12-02T21:35:45Z
+updatedAt: 2025-12-02T21:35:45Z
+publishedAt: 2025-12-02T21:35:45Z
+draft: false
+---
+
+Have you ever observed someone try and demonstrate how they use a coding agent?
+The presenter will usually introduce the concept of an agent, discuss the idea of a software harness wrapping a language model, and then will show an example of how it works.
+
+When they make the transition from explaining to demonstrating, a visceral change occurs.
+They begin dictating what they are typing into the agent chat window.
+
+> Create a React, Typescript application, using the Tailwind CSS framework ...
+
+Usually monotone.
+Usually with a slower cadence than their natural speaking speed.
+Usually completely different from how they were previously addressing the audience.
+
+The communication style is completely different.
+
+Frequently witnessing this shift in these presentations was what first gave me more insight into the differences between writing and speaking, and why I think I better understand this idea now, after being introduced to it by [Paul Graham](https://paulgraham.com/writes.html).
+
+## The tension of writing while speaking
+
+The reason I believe it is awkward to type a prompt to an agent while presenting is because you're stretching your mental bandwidth trying to perform two different activities at once.
+On one side, you're presenting or performing.
+You're trying to deliver certain material to an audience that they can follow and understand.
+You're thinking about your tone, pacing, and ensuring you've mentioned all your talking points.
+
+On the other, you're attempting to craft a specific thought.
+Because you're putting words to an idea, you now need to pick the words.
+Your mind shifts to considering which words you should choose.
+
+It seems this mental shift also causes most people to downshift in speed.
+From what I have observed, it seems
+
+1. most people type more slowly than they speak
+2. putting words on a "page" invokes an inner critic in a way that is less common while speaking
+
+But the disconnect is actually deeper than this.
+
+As a presenter, you already know what you're going to say, and the change in speed is due to typing more slowly than you speak.
+If you've preemptively come up with your prompt, writing it or pasting it into the agent is not really representative of the process you followed to create that prompt.
+
+Witnessing either feels unnatural and confusing to an audience member.
+You are showing the final product of your thinking process, not the process itself.
+
+A better version of this demo would be building an under-prescribed idea in real time and working through the ambiguities and clarifications required to get a functional result.
+
+Effectively using an agent to help you accomplish tasks requires you to participate in the thinking process.
+
+## Thinking is refining unstructured ideas
+
+Writing lets you spend time refining and organizing unstructured thoughts.
+We can think of unstructured thoughts as stream of consciousness.
+The type of things you say as a response in conversation or doing morning pages, where you just write and don't edit or delete anything.
+
+The words and ideas that come from these processes often contain the raw material you might use to refine your thoughts, but they are scattered and fuzzy, lacking coherence and consistency.
+If want to clearly communicate an idea, you need to refine these.
+
+And how do you do that?
+You put them into words then edit and structure them.
+
+The writing process brings clarity to thought.
+Writing is thinking.
+
+## Why speaking isn't really thinking
+
+Think of a time you were having a debate and felt like someone said something you didn't quite have a good response to.
+You felt unprepared and maybe gave an unconvincing response or maybe tried to change the subject to deflect from that fact.
+
+Later, you probably thought of a response that would have been better, you just hadn't thought of it in the moment.
+
+Speaking is linear.
+
+If you want to go revisit something you've already said, you must pivot a conversation back to an earlier point.
+To reopen, revise, or revisit a matter that seemed settled.
+To bring your conversation partner or audience along to ensure they are following you through the change in topic.
+
+Non-linearity in speaking is an illusion.
+You are always appending words to the transcript of time.
+
+When speaking, you're confined to the best you can do in the moment, given the constraints.
+If you can't think of the perfect word, you might substitute a passable replacement.
+You might use several words to describe your idea.
+You likely won't pause in silence while you think of the right word.
+
+Speaking uses mental bandwidth you might have allocated to thinking.
+When you start saying words, you only have so much time before you need to say other words.
+That is just how speaking works.
+You're freestyling your abstract thoughts.
+It's hard to say things exactly as you want given these constraints.
+
+If you need to communicate yourself clearly through speech, you probably will prepare and practice beforehand.
+You'll structure and organize your thoughts.
+You will consider your argument, counterarguments, and your audience.
+When you speak your ideas, you will have already done most of your thinking and can focus on delivery.
+
+In conversation, you never quite know what your conversation partner will say.
+You spend mental bandwidth listening and processing what the other person is saying.
+When it's your turn to speak, you will have just finished hearing the thoughts of your partner and then you need to verbalize your own thoughts to respond.
+
+How can you listen, think, and figure out what you're going to say all at once?
+
+At best, your mental bandwidth is split.
+In practice, you are reacting.
+With practice and the preparation of experience, you respond coherently and clearly.
+But it's hard to imagine doing your best thinking under such tight mental constraints.
+
+## Writing is nonlinear
+
+Your best idea is unlikely to be your first idea.
+Your clearest thought is unlikely to be your first.
+
+It's challenging and effortful to think things through.
+It's often complicated, requires research, presents tradeoffs.
+Most things are complicated if you take the time to look at them closely.
+
+Writing is a better fit than speaking for thinking because writing allows for nonlinear interaction with ideas.
+With thoughts laid out in words, you can fluidly jump between paragraphs, reorder how concepts are introduced, swoop in and change a single word or phrase for clarity.
+
+You can sit with your work, take breaks when you're tired, and return when you are inspired.
+You can evolve and define your ideas.
+You think.
+
+## Writing changes your ideas
+
+Writing is thinking because when you write about something, your ideas change with the writing.
+You are a slightly different person at the end of writing a work than you were before.
+
+Writing needs to be focused, in part, to ensure you can actually stop writing.
+To provide a reasonable spot to conclude work.
+
+The writing that feels most worthwhile leaves me with as many new questions as answers.
+
+Yet this always means a writer is cursed to spend forever chasing their tail, writing to think, writing to think.
+
+## Writing and agents
+
+When working with agents, the most common difficulty I hear when someone feels they are not having success is that the agent is failing to do what they want it to do.
+Typically, this challenge results from not having done the necessary thinking about what is to be done.
+
+Knowing what you want is the only way to collaborate successfully with a coding agent.
+These tools are trained to be instruction following.
+In a void of instructions, they often make median, flavorless decisions.
+In a void of context, they attempt to fill in the gaps as best they can.
+
+Context engineering (a topic worthy of its own post) is a downstream application of knowing what you want.
+
+You can only begin to know what you want by thinking about what it is you need to accomplish.
+
+You write to do this thinking.
+As you write more, you think more and refine your approach.
+
+So if you are struggling getting a coding agent to do what you want, think about what it is that you want to accomplish.
+Write it down.
+
+Once you're finished, you will have done your thinking and you will have written your prompt as well.