Do we think differently? Linear vs. Non-linear thinking

Do we think differently?  Linear vs. Non-linear thinking

Wondering why communication is so hard? Or how two, intelligent, educated people can come to such different conclusions on any given topic? I suggest it’s because we don’t all use the same processes to think. Dive in and comment below – there’s a great debate and we want your opinion!

I was tasked at work to blog on the difference between Linear and Non-Linear thinking, and how it relates to business. Not being an expert in the subject (but not feeling limited in expressing my opinion either) I dove in. Please feel free to comment – I love hearing your opinion.

Logic and Creativity

Some of us pride ourselves on being logical. We think through ideas with the efficiency of a well-oiled machine. We enjoy structured thought and evidence-based conclusions. I’m sure you know the type – we plan out every step of a process, follow the Gantt chart to the “t”, and ensure results within schedules and deadlines.

Others of us pride ourselves on being creative. We rejoice in the big ideas, in the new discoveries, and in the satisfaction of creation. We are always coming up with new ways to solve problems, love the questions “what if?” and don’t mind jumping ahead in a conversation to tell you what we just thought of.

I suggest that these two characteristics of humans (logic and creativity) are often correlated with two different, but not disconnected types of thought processes: Linear and non-Linear thinking. Rather than argue that one is more important than the other, I suggest that they are both integral to success in business and, on the grander scale, life.

The Linearity of Logic

“Linear Thinking” is defined as:

a process of thought following known cycles or step-by-step progression where a response to a step must be elicited before another step is taken.

If a = b, and b = c, then a = c. The application of linear thinking can be found in the well known Socratic Method:

a form of inquiry and debate between individuals with opposing viewpoints based on asking and answering questions to stimulate rational thinking and to illuminate ideas

Jan Helfeld (pronounced Iain), a rather infamous libertarian reporter, provides an amusing (or infuriating – depending on who’s side you’re on) application of the Socratic method to our political representatives. It’s all very logical, and for those who don’t build their policies or opinions on logic, it’s a game that raises tempers with captivating efficiency. After watching, I tend to wonder if any of our policy makers think through their political conclusions logically. Logic seems lost from our world, like an ancient language that’s spoken only by tribes of some distant jungle.

More important to this blog’s argument however, is that Jan’s use of the Socratic method is also extremely linear. As much as the person in the hot seat wants to jump around and evade, Jan forces them to answer one question before they move on to the next. The videos remind me of walking a puppy – when they want to walk every direction but the one you’re traveling. You rein them in every time before moving forward.

Though you may doubt it after watching Jan Helfeld’s videos, much of our world is indeed structured upon the concept of logic (very basic logic at least). We learn math, deductive reasoning, and tend to apply these logical processes to our everyday life. Our drive to do so comes from our inherent need, as cognitive humans, to categorize our experiences in our minds and make projections about what the outcome of an action will be. We compare our expectations with our experience, weigh the similarity, and adjust our thought processes as needed.

Linear thinkers are very much the same. They start at step one and usually do a good and efficient job of completing the task before moving on to step two. They are driven, focused, and don’t easily get off topic. Does this sound like you? Perhaps. Or maybe it sounds like the person in the office you have a tough time working with?

The Dangers of Logic

There’s a danger in relying too heavily on logic. The danger is in the determination of the starting point. Once a starting point is chosen, there are a limited number of logical conclusions to a problem. For example, imagine a store owner who believes that he must raise his revenues to increase his profits. He tries multiple methods including advertising, increasing inventory, and product bundling to make every possible sale to his customers. But he forgot that he could also reduce his costs to increase profits, and in doing so missed what could have been much less expensive, less demanding options.

This example is simplistic, but it underscores the point that for any logical process, there must be a decided-upon truth as a starting point. And the beauty of logic, is that it allows us to reach an answer from a given starting point. It’s easy, however, to rely upon starting points simply because they’re what we’ve used all our lives – starting points that either may be false, or that limit us from finding a much better answer.

Non-Linear Thinking

Non-linear thinking, a relatively new term, is vague enough (perhaps naturally so) that a simple google search will yield more beatings-around-the-bushes than formal definitions for the phrase. I think of it as follows:

Human thought characterized by expansion in multiple directions, rather than in one direction, and based on the concept that there are multiple starting points from which one can apply logic to a problem.

Non-linear thinking is less constrictive – letting the creative side of you run rampant because of its inherent lack of structure. It’s kind of like letting a puppy run wild on a walk up a mountain – anything of interest will be thoroughly investigated (and perhaps peed on) before jumping to the next, possibly non-related subject! It’s very much like brainstorming – allowing thought to flow, unhindered, in attempts to arrive upon something special in the process.

Non-linear thought increases possible outcomes by not being so certain about the starting point for any logic process. Non-linear thinkers tend to jump forward, and from side to side through the steps of a project, in an effort to see the big picture and tackle those areas where they have the most interest. Where non-linear thinking falters is in finally carrying out the required action, because as a thought process it often encourages a user to agonize incessantly over where to start (that agreed upon truth, from which logic can be applied and action can be taken).

A new form of digital presentation created by the folks at is a great example of non-linear and linear thinking in action. Why? Because rather than a linear slide show, it’s ultimately a picture, into which you can zoom in and out, infinitely. It allows you to present a product, concept, or argument in a logically by moving from location to location what is essentially group of images, but at any point you can zoom out and suddenly, “See the big picture” takes on a whole new meaning – Check it out!

In Conclusion

Again, as in my introduction, I stress the importance of both processes. And what I mean by this is maybe it’s important to have both types of thinkers on a team. Use non-linear thought to reexamine starting points and increase the possibility of finding the best option, and use linear thinkers and their efficient logic-based reasoning, once a starting point has been established, to get the job done in a timely manner. Whatever mixture of these two processes you prefer, take responsibility for your choices and learn from your mistakes, and I’ll bet on your success.

~Cecil “Chuck” McCumber

PS – What is linear thinking? What is non-linear thinking? Want to take a shot at your own definition (like I did)? I’d love your feedback! Comment below!

PPS. I just moved to Nashville to pursue songwriting professionally, and my band’s self-titled debut album, “The Pretty Unknown” was just released!

What kind of music is it?

It’s like if Taylor Swift was the surrogate mother for Michael Bublé and Sarah McLachlan’s love child. Then they raised the child listening The Beach Boys and The Beatles. That’s a technical critique.

So if you’ve found the above article at all entertaining, please considering listening to some of our songs. If you enjoy, we’d be eternally obliged if you supported our music – share with your friends or, better yet, buy an album. Take a listen!

468 ad


  1. Thanks for this Chuck, please email me as I would like to send you some of my work that I think you may be interested in.
    All the best

  2. Dear comrades!

    The mystery of how non-linear and linear thinking differ biologically, has finally been solved by me. It is a very simple science.

    If you want a pictorial description read:

    If you want a full length description read:

    To get complete idea of the first principles you should read the full presentation of the theoretical framework, it is not as hard as it seems:

    You ask, how to improve the individual / humanity’s nonlinear thinking?

    Answer — nonlinearize ecology — disregard those who linearly say, “white is the best color” — rather, replace 4 white walls substrate with a logical substrate like nature, i can give examples but a nonlinear Utopia is for humanity to devise:

    Thanks for reading!
    Anand Madhu Kumar

    PS: I’m an Aspergian, i.e., mostly nonlinear thinking type person

  3. I am a non-linear thinker though some times feel like I have ADHD as my mind jumps from one subject to another, and I am easily distracted. I wonder if there has been any research on the relevance between what type of thinker you are and the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease?

  4. Pretty cool Chuck. Thanks.

  5. This is an excellent article, a logical explanation of non linear thinking! I can relate to the description of non-linear thinking and it has even made me consider my own career more deeply. I’m sure this knowledge could save a hell of a lot of money in productivity…

  6. Thank you, very much, for your understandable and enjoyable article, it has been of great help to me.

    Regarding Jan Helfeld’s use of the Socratic method, you had written “You reign them in …” – that would actually be “rein them in”; if it softens the blow to my image, I’ll admit to having made the same mistake more than once and haven’t mentioned that for the sake of nit-picking. :)

    Kind regards, Chuck.

  7. Many thanks Marc! I’m never upset by a correction to my grammar – I’m very appreciative of those who use language correctly and while I try to keep myself in line, I’m still fallible!

    Secondly – thanks for reading! I never thought so many would read this blog and it’s really taken off.

    Finally, I’m in the process of figuring out where to take this blog site. An aesthetic update is obviously necessary, but I’m finally excited to start writing more about other areas of life for which I’m no expert, but about which I’ve thought a lot!

    All that to say, check in again soon.



  8. Great article. I’m non linear and love it. Often get bored within the first several minutes of a linear thinking speaker. Thank you for such a well written article.

  9. Thank you for reading, Charlie! Your compliments are much appreciated, especially from one Chuck to another :)


  10. This is an AMAZING article w/ a spot on description of non-linear thinking. While working on a writing project, I realized it was picaresque, non-linear & episodic after attempting to figure out the beautifully chaotic approach to my attempts at streamlining. Sharing this post now & thanks for the concise explanation.

    I also found this blurb on Forrest Gump that I love:
    “The film’s director, Robert Zemeckis, has described the film as ‘essentially a picaresque novel for the screen’. The term ‘picaresque’ refers to a type of novel common in the 18th century. Usually these were lengthy prose works of many hundred pages, following the rambling adventures of some heroic (or unheroic) character. These works were always episodic; they didn’t build towards a grand conclusion, they simply tacked one self-contained scene after another. The novels ended not because the story was over; had the author wished, the story could have sprawled onwards forever.”

  11. I am both.. linear and non-linear. I will often use my creative, non-linear side to get to the starting point and then use logic and reasoning to construct my argument or even something like starting a new business. So I keep the image of the outcome sharp in my mind but I follow or walk towards it logically. See, it is logic that tells me I must first imagine, create the outcome and believe in the outcome.. I will take the logical steps to realize what I have imagined. One needs the other. Otherwise, I am either a machine like robot, just following authority or I am scattered ideas never staying focused long enough to create anything but a mess = ) Balance. Darwinian Evolution isnt logical. Intelligent Design is logical. Now persons to whom linear thinking is their choice, I am a fool, however it requires an abundance of non-linear thinking to accept Darwinian Evolution. Theres the rub.. we are both, all of us, using linear and non-linear thinking everyday. The problem for most is, they dont realize it, thus they dont know how to balance. Very interesting subject.

  12. To think logically, one must first consider the foundation, the point at which he or she reasons from. Critical. I submit most people arent logical. I believe it is very rare to find someone who understands foundations or anyone who actually realizes its not logic if you just start at a point not unbiasedly reasoned. We live in a world built largely on sand and from that sand we build great monuments. Not logical. OH, and by unbiased I mean grounded in truth. Its true that a theory is just that and the logical mind is willing to keep that in mind. The person who forgets theories arent truths and works his or her logic as if theory is truth is what? The majority, to say the least. It isnt logical to assume… we assume when we are being creative.. we find it hard to separate the two.

  13. I am preparing a presentation on the Opportunity Wheel and Impact Wheel and wanted s clear definition of the difference between linear and non-linear thinking. I searched that exact phrase and in the perfect manner of the web, your blog popped up! Great article. BTW, the Opportunity Wheel and the Impact Wheel are great tools to move into the non-linear mode of thinking. See
    Cheers, Carrie

  14. In addition to “linear thinking”, there is “associative thinking”.
    I’ve observed some people start with one known fact, proceed
    in a rigid logical manner, and then make a general conclusion
    which is completely false.

    They build a “house of cards” in their mind. From a single
    true statement, they create a completely incorrect reality.

    They can’t see the forest behind the tree.

    Richard S.

  15. Great article Chuck. My husband, who is more non-linear, has a quote he uses about his father, who is more linear. “I grew up believing my father was raising me the right way. I now realize there are a lot of right ways”. If you have a chance, check out Paul Sloane’s book “The Team Builders Guide to Lateral Thinking”. Incidentally I am both – most likely because although I naturally lean towards the non-linear side, I took logic in college, and it reined me in as you say. Great analogy using puppies – there is a need and a place for both!

  16. I like the way you think!
    Seems the end goal can be at the end of the line and some will progress toward it step by step. Others will place it in the center of a circle, where it’s approached from a different/creative angle to analyze the cause and effect of each angle on the point.

    I’m innately creative but I find in presentation preparation I like to build the case as a lawyer would to reach a logical conclusion. But along the way of preparing, the creative side kicks in coming up with interactive questions from various angles to illustrate/reach the point.

    Whether circular or linear, the end goal should always be the focus. But we should not be so rigid as to forget that the point/focus could change with varying circumstances/motivations.

  17. YES! Sums it all up nicely. Stumbled on this while researching techniques to improve my communication with an EXTREMELY bright team mate. My own take is that we have these 2 basic types, though just like Myers-Briggs, an individual can possess BOTH with varying degrees. Well worth the read. Also, the example used relating to politics is PRICELESS! Even prompted me to share on FB – a rarity for me!

  18. Thank you Lisa!! Very honored to make the “share on FB” status! Great comment and insight (especially regarding possessing BOTH qualities – which I think is more often the case than not), and glad my ramblings might help your work situation!

  19. Chuck, Great blog. It looks like you have a LOT of very intelligent educated people reading and applying the processes you outline. I am not one of those. I’m just a guy with no education, not a lot of IQ and a lot of strongly held convictions regarding humanity, spirituality, communication and miscommunication. I was searching for linear vs circular reasoning because of the relationship I have with my wife of 38 years. We have never had a peaceful, bucolic relationship (is that redundant?) and it occurred to me that the ways we think and approach issues, problems and relationships were seemingly diametrically opposed. I had a remembrance of a well educated friend’s advice to me that included the concept that since “I see a black swan all swans are black”. He gave a name to this but I do not remember it. It’s purpose was to show my error of thought and it’s construct. I disagree with his conclusion but am very happy to have the concept in my mental vocabulary and even more so to see it drawn out and presented in a way that even a proletariat truck driver can understand and apply it.

    Now all I need to do is find a way to present this to the wife and convince her that reading something other than the Bible and/or Christian teaching books might possibly have some material with which to construct a reasonable point of view!

  20. Ken,

    Thank you for the comment. I’m happy that my little blog might have some benefit to enlighten communication between you and your wife. I’ve definitely found that most of the arguments in my life are consequences of two people starting mostly logical thought from two different starting points, each assuming that their starting from the SAME starting point. I may have written this blog, but I still do it all the time. Sometimes these “starting points” are simply deeply held (often unformulated) desires that are never articulated to oneself or the other. I remember that from time to time – to look at what the driver is (that starting point) for my line of thought, and be honest with myself about it. This can be eye opening and difficult – my drivers are most often selfish in some way, and when my ego is often sated by believing that I’m an unselfish person, I find myself in a conundrum. I think that I’m coming to greater and greater acceptance of the possibility that the ego IS selfish, and that the ego can never really be conquered by a desire to conquer it (because it’s the ego that is doing the desiring…)

    I got a little off topic there, but thank you again for your comment – you may consider yourself a proletariat but you have a healthy command of the English language and a clear line of the thinking!



  21. Interesting article.

    I’m finishing my doctorate in psychology, and I think this field of study has an interesting interaction with my primarily non-linear style.

    Cognitive theory is traditionally linear. Beliefs lead to cognitions, cognitions lead to emotions, emotions lead to behaviors. And the cognitive processes are supposedly linear – our conscious experience is relatively linear (even the non-linear thinkers, relatively). We all seek to understand the world in linear processes (a leads to, or causes, b). This is evolutionary – it usually increases likelihood of survival (“I’m sick because of…”), it is easier and less taxing on our mental resources, plus it facilitates communication. However, increased understanding of the human brain has resulted in additional theories of cognitive science. It appears the conscious human cognitive experience is linear, but the human brain is non-linear in its functioning. Despite our conscious experience, we are not series processing machines, but parallel processors with cyclical feedback loops.

    Psychodynamic and Gestalt theory also indicate the same thing. These theories of human experience indicate our whole self is made of many parts. We all have the experience of saying “part of me wants to… but I also want…” This is such a common phenomenological experience, we have all see cartoons that depict this type of internal dialogue with the angel on one shoulder, the devil on the other. More often, however, these parts of our self involve important developmental/parental figures (“Oh gosh, I sound like my mom,” or having an internal discussion with a parent), versions of our self from the past (ie, feeling like a helpless kid after a distressing experience), and the part of our self that we actually identify as our self. All these parts of our self are constantly in communication, though we vary in our degree of awareness of this. This is clearly not a linear or series process, but non-linear and parallel with feedback loops. It is parallel because information might be processes/interpreted by various parts of the self at concurrently (at the same time), but the parts of the self also communicate (cyclical feedback loops).

    Thus, as a non-linear thinker who is interested in the non-linear (personality) based aspects of psychology, I end up having to be quite careful my writing is clear and understandable. Of course I’d think about non-linear processes in a non-linear way!

    Additionally, I think its important to distinguish non-linear thinking from symptom-language like tangential or circumstantial communication. Specifically, the article says non-linear thinkers might jump to unrelated topics. I think – but I’m not certain – this in inaccurate. Its not that the topic is unrelated, but that non-linear thinkers might jump from A to C without stating the transitive relationship (A=B, B=C thus A=C).

  22. Really appreciate your well-crafted reply and I’ll take a bit to process the aspects/theories of psychology with which I’m not well versed (I DON’T have a doctorate in the field, after all). And your point about psychodynamic and Gestalt theories is very interesting – I’ve been having many conversations recently about the human experience being a consistent push/pull of various urges, many of which are totally contradictory to each other. I doubt one ever escapes that, despite our best wishes to be of “one mind”. Anyway – thank you again for your enthusiasm and taking the time to add to this discussion. Cheers!

    ~ Chuck

  23. Well written article on linear/non. If you want to take it further, Thomas J. Elpel explores these and other types of thinking in Roadmap to Reality: Consciousness, Worldviews, and the Blossoming of Human Spirit.

    Rarely does a book change my thinking, but this one did. In various situations, we exercise different types of thinking which Elpel calls processing. In order to effectively converse in this world we must understand our processing and the processing of others, all the while seeking a higher evolution thinking.

  24. I am writing a book of human brain evolution. The main point of this book is the change from “visual thinking” into “verbal thinking”. The first is associated with nonlinear thinking, the second is linear (or planar) thinking. So our brain, at some point in time, started to use “verbal thinking” as an improvement of overall thinking mechanism. But later, in the last 10,000 years,humans favored more and more the verbal vs visual.
    In my opinion it will be extremely difficult to define today what really was the “visual and nonlinear thinking”. I consider that all mysteries we run into about our past, all belong to nonlinear thinking.i also think that “blind forcing of conformity”over such a long period of time, just removed most of our naturally inherited nonlinear thinking (it was built up over maybe 2 million years). We have today shards of it, and people can have more or less of them.

  25. thank you so much for posting this info which was easy to get to and answered my questions of linear thinking without all the “stuff” in between. I take care of mentally challenged
    adults and found in some of their reports of, linear thinking. it really helped with giving me an understanding on this matter. again, thank you

  26. Thank you, Nancy, for reading. I never thought this blog post would be anything more than me spouting off about a topic in which I had only limited knowledge. Happy that so many people have found my exploration into the matter interesting (and I can attest to how much I’ve learned from everyone’s comments – lots).

  27. Really nice explanation. Am researching this topic and the whole ‘starting point’ thing is an eye opener and a factor I hadn’t considered before. I think this may be relevant to the seemingly linear thinking dominated economics profession: one common criticism of economics is that is takes unproven axioms as its starting point and then proceeds linearly from here. This limits the usefulness of the field’s possible conclusions quite seriously.

  28. Many thanks! Economics is a fantastic example (as are politics). While I love discussing the merits and effects of policy change or economic choices, I agree with you – we, as a culture, rarely have proven starting points, or even agreed-upon endpoints! I mean, when was the last time that all the politicians sat down and said, “Ok, before we argue the actions required or policy changes we should make, to where are we ultimately trying to get?”

    I bet you’d get a thousand different definitions of what “better for our country” means. And without defining that (or agreeing on that), we’ll always have people arguing issues from their own perspective, and talking past each other, confused as to why we can’t agree. Not sure there’s a solution for this, but it’s an interesting thing to remember when people endeavor to prove points.

  29. I found your article very interesting and first saw it shared by my partner on her Facebook page. She often says that I am “too linear” and gets frustrated by how I think and respond. We did work out that one big difference is that we process things very differently and I think in terms of words and can even see the letters of the words, whereas my wife thinks in images. This makes my thought slower but my spelling is very accurate. I can do both – thinking verbally or in images but not at the same time – but have to think about doing so. I mean by that that thinking verbally comes easily to me and is automatic but to think visually is more of an effort.

    I am sharing this article too at Facebook.

  30. Much appreciated Steve! Very interesting about the visualization of the letters vs thinking verbally. Never heard that before – thanks for the comment! ~ Chuck

  31. Many people who classify themselves as “non-linear thinkers” are just common lazy uneffective needy people.

    Non-linearity isn´t imune to the need of being productive and aggrandizing. It must not be used as an excuse to lack of attention or focus – as it usually is.

  32. All 6 of my siblings are linear thinkers. I am not. I am sending them this article to help them understand how and why I think differently. I find linear thinkers boring. JMO I like interaction with people when I don’t know where we may end up. Be it in conversation or in travel. Some of the best experiences of my life have been when I flew “by the seat of my pants”. Much to the scorn of my siblings. Linear thinkers, to me anyway, are people who make lists of the spontaneous things they want to do. I think they are afraid to let go and live life as it comes at them. Keep life in a box…keep life under control…keep everything as perfect and orderly as one can. That’s how linear thinkers come across to me. That’s like living life in a stranglehold.

  33. I would like to draw a parallel with networking topologies. There is a linear bus topology which is from point a to point b, all the way to point z; then star topology (hub-based topology) with multiple packet converging in one center and token ring topology, multiple spread out points which can be construed as multiple starting points. Cheers.

  34. Non-linear thinking is the art of finding the starting point

  35. If our Paleolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic ancestors have been nonlinear thinkers, then they have had a hard time to start a type of development that we call civilization. When they turned toward linear the civilization have started.
    I think it deserves to study what a nonlinear thinking has been able to accomplish, and then we will know exactly what the nonlinear thinking is, and what advantages it provides.

  36. Thanks for writing about this blog! This article pretty much nailed it in a simplified manner. A commenter above, Dale Robbins, describes himself as having both styles of thinking, as do I. He ‘read my mail’ so to speak.

    For many years in my youth I’d get frustrated because most often people could not understand what I was trying to communicate to them, because both thinking styles were working at the same time. How does one track with that!? (I see this in hindsight.)

    Finding the balance, and purposely switching between using both styles and learning to communicate in such a way that others can track with, or make sense of, is tricky and takes self discipline and much forethought until it becomes a habit. It still takes some effort not to just slip into doing what comes naturally and letting them work simultaneously. Others think I’m ‘all over the place’ when I’m really not! LOL!

  37. Thanks for the response Sky! Happy my meandering thoughts helped spawn your own deeper reflection. ~Chuck

  38. Great article!
    I’m educated to conduct research in the health sciences; so, critical thinking is very much needed — which requires logic. Because I’m a linear thinker by nature, this helps me in conducting research; however, for a living, I manage teams of professionals and often times it is clear to me that at teams meetings it is best that I step back and let the non-linear thinkers think of possible solutions to an issue and not hinder them their creativity. I must however continue to remain focused and be ready to “rein” the team back so that we can actually accomplish some work. So, I think both styles are needed. The non-linear thinker will have the vision; however, the linear thinker is critical in bringing it to fruition.

  39. Thanks Renee – I like the vision / fruition comparison.

  40. There is no such thing as “non-linear thought”. This would mean a human awareness can be in multiple places-or be aware of many individual things, simultaneously-not possible. All regular meditators know this directly. One can only really be aware of one thing at a time or multiple things grouped under one banner/description. This is the basic nature of thought. Try it. Meditate, slow down your thoughts, then try to actually be aware of two things at once.

  41. I don’t disagree with your position: I also have noticed (and many philosophers agree) that conscious human thought can essentially only consider one “thing” at a time. However, this article is an exploration of the ways in which human conscious attention moves from one thought to another. When I wrote it (back in 2009), there didn’t seem to be an accepted definition of “non-linear thinking” and so the definition I wrote (as an admitted non-expert) was the following:

    Human thought characterized by expansion in multiple directions, rather than in one direction, and based on the concept that there are multiple starting points from which one can apply logic to a problem.

    The key distinction I was trying to make is that some people assume a starting position (for any journey of thought) and then tend to move methodically, from one thought to the next, until they reach a conclusion. Others seem to bounce around. Perhaps I should have reduced my article into the two sentences previous – haha. At the same time, I love the discussion this has sparked. Thanks for your interest, Neil!

  42. linear v scattered brain… 99.9% of the population hold thought over intuition in todays world.. because that is why “English” was created… it is a fact that it is subservient to Latin… and that is why the dialect is the forerunner of the create a sheeple complex ….if one don’t believe me …go to your court and ask them… (yes pun intended)…most people talk of problems of today but have no real concept of how they were created..

  43. I just published a book with Authorhouse under the title “Solovki’s Ersatz” that is about nonlinear vs. linear thinking, and about the artificial world we created with our main linear thinking. It is an ebook now and it will be paper book around Sept. 20, 2015.
    However my book (interdisciplinary science)is the other face of the coin of the famous book “The Master and his Emissary” by Iain Gilchrist (2009).

  44. Hello. Hope you’re well! Thanks for the good read. Down to business! Your assertions are a little too black and white for me. I’m an INTJ; a STICKLER for logic and reason (leading invariably to underdeveloped emotional intelligence), and I attack tasks with robotic-like focus (when I deem them worthy of my attention…that good ol’ INJT “arrogance”). But I’m also, like all INTJs, a very creative thinker, able to use that same logic and reasoning to innovate with an ease that some people find baffling, when a new solution is required. I’ll create a plan, attempt to account for all contingencies, and implement it step-by-step, but convention for its own sake tends to be anathema to people with my personality type, so we’re wont to concentrate on what works and use our deductive reasoning skills to come up with a creative stand in for what doesn’t work. As an INTJ, I also care far more about the big picture than the minutia, even while I’m compelled to very methodically plan for that end goal. I think looking at these two ways of processing information without accounting for the other factors in a person’s personality type is too much like looking at things in a vacuum. It’s not nearly enough data to tell the whole story. Thanks again!


  1. Non-Linear Instant Messaging (aka Insta-Mindmapping) | The Edu-Programmer - […] Had a great chat with a friend just now. We were talking about the challenges of expressing non-linear thoughts…
  2. Where Do You Start? | - […] Chuck McCumber explains this beautifully. He provides this left brain scenario: […]
  3. Landscape Research Group Brief 2 | Landscape Research Group 2014 - […] […]
  4. Thinking About Thinking (Part 1/3) — Linear and Non-Linear Thinking | insEYEte Blog - […] Metacognition occurs when a user stops and thinks about how they think. If you were to metacognate, you would reflect…
  5. Every Play Tells a Story: The Danger of Logic | The Rookie Scouting Portfolio - […] I’ve said before that the draft is hard because it forces us to use both linear and non-linear thinking…

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *