How my Mind is Mined

Understanding how my own mind works and how I use it can be a confusing concept. In order to understand it, before explaining it, as I’m attempting to do right now, I must use it in the way that I attempt to explain. Explaining it in that way as I just did, as well as this way that I am now, is perhaps an example of overlapping circuited attempted comprehension that occasionally goes through my mind. It seems to me that to understand how your own mind works can be potentially contradicting, but ultimately, potentially beneficial with the appropriate adjustments of methods of mind use. As I think has happened to me, one likely outcome to comprehending essentially your own comprehension itself, is you will realize the faults of your ways of thinking, causing you to no longer think that way. I’d guess this is likely to happen, because if you are rational, open-minded, and accepting enough to accurately understand your own methods of attemptive understanding, then you would also be rational etc. enough to correct the faults that you become aware of.

Anyway, I believe, as a result of my attemptive understanding of my own mind, that my mind has some unique aspects to its functioning. I believe these unique aspects are what led me to even attempt to understand my own minds functioning in the first place, and what led me to ever -so oddly- come up with typing this attempted explanation. I figure my mind is at least somewhat unique in its drasticness of its questioning, wondering, theorising, and ability to understand causal reasoning, using logical and practical analysis and probability, based on what variables are present and known. This differential of the functioning of my mind seems fairly convenient and beneficial to me as this method of thinking is so broadly adaptable that it should theoretically be potentially applicable to -vaguely enough- basically any scenario or circumstance.

I’m not certain of this though, as is an effect of what I believe having a forcibly open mind. Considering the possibility that I’m correct; that my mind is effective at questioning most aspects of life, then understanding the aspects, then I would theoretically question and understand my own mind, therefore making at least most of what I’m attempting to explain here correct. In this theoretical scenario, I would then also likely be correct that I have an open mind. I’ve realised having an open mind can be an entirely separate topic to be understood and explained. But basically, having an open mind is why I believe nothing should be certain, and therefore, is why I try to never be certain of what I claim.

I also believe there are other hindering, inferior aspects to my mind of course, as everyone does, which restrict and restrain me from accomplishing as much as I might prefer. But, as effective as I believe my mind works, I also believe I’m able to potentially understand those hindrances and attempt to improve the faults at least to some degree, using practical problem solving. Besides the potential to improve the negative aspects, I believe the positive aspects outweigh the negative. This is because of the relativity, practicality, adaptability, and usability (that I attempted to explain earlier) of the positive aspects. The plausibility of using those positive aspects in order to improve the negative ones, could be considered evidential of the outweighing positivity. This is all somewhat difficult to understand, and confusing, even (or especially?) to me, but at the same time seems to make at least some significant degree of sense, and be helpful in my own understanding of my own understanding (!?!), and, is why I’m appreciative of the opportunity of use, and grateful for my mind. (unless perhaps I’m just insane…)
(April 5, 2015 (Easter))