What is Mindfulosophy or Slow thought?

Mindfulosophy (or Slow Thought) is an attempt to better understand, and create more musical harmony, in our communication.

Quality is one aspect of communication. Most of us talk. Sometimes we are engaged in conversation (talking on a higher, more qualitative level than exchanging the usual everyday phrases). Sometimes we have philosophical conversations, aiming to go even deeper into a subject, bringing even more of ourselves into the conversation.

This higher kind of conversation is not just a fun, stimulating kind of exchange. I believe that is it also the way to really solve problems, understand the world and ourselves, even to arrive at that far off goal PEACE.

It is also slower and more thoughtful, not the kind of fast verbal dueling / mud-slinging that we often engage in.

But this kind of high quality conversation usually does not happen by itself. If it does, it does not last long, being dependent on many factors, for example luck.

In Mindfulosophy I have tried to make this kind of conversation more repeatable.

Mindfulosophy can be thought of as a kind of mental room.

Let’s say we live in a big house with lots of rooms. The finest, our favorite, is the Salon. We want to be able to go there as often as we can.

Now imagine that we are dependent on luck to reach it. On some days we find it, on others we don’t. Where did it go…? Not being able to find a room would be a frustrating experience on the physical level.

On the other hand, we are most every day having the experience of talk and conversation that doesn’t fly, doesn’t really get anywhere, that just repeats old half-truths and stock phrases. Boring, as Sherlock would say.

But since our orientation in mental rooms is much poorer than in physical rooms we don’t think much of it. We accept boring, bland and repetitive as normal. Ah, well.

But it need not be so. Mindfulosophy is my attempt to clarify this mental room, understand it, map it, and make it more easy to locate.

I believe we could have a lot of deep fun in it, beside it being a tool for moving forward as humans.

We are looking for that Inner Room…

Ladislaus Horatius  >>CONTACT

Flattr this!

Mindfulosophy FAQ

(I have experimented with several different names for Mindfulosophy. One of them is Slow thought. That is the termed used in this FAQ. Basically they are the same thing.)

Why slow thought? Is slower better than faster? And isn’t this really a currently trendy way of really saying nothing?

Whoa. Take it easy. That´s three questions. Which one do we start with?

Okay, well, the second one.

No, slower is not “better” than faster. But if you want to question currently popular ideas, you might question the much more popular “truth” faster = better. You tell me, is faster better than slower?

That is certainly how it is viewed in our world. In the West, at least.

But it is better?

Well, opinions differ, surely.

The question is not easy. It is perhaps not even a good question. “Good” in the sense of precise, sharp. The better questions we ask, the better, more valuable answers we can find. And in order to find “good” questions, we need to slow down.

Okay, so slower is better when it comes to finding good questions?

It can be.

I can go along with that.

Let me ask the questions for a while. What are we talking about here?

(Sigh) Slow thought. Remember…?

Yes, that´s obvious. Go a step beyond that, a bit deeper.

Deeper, how?

You could look at the words. Be analytical.

Okay, we are talking about thoughts. Plus being slow.

Yes, we are talking about two things. We have a noun and an adjective. A “thing” and a “quality”. Do you agree with that?

I guess so.

You shouldn’t. Is being slow a quality?

Er… yes.

I would say yes and no. When we speak about high or low quality we more or less mean good and bad. We are talking about values, about better or worse. As you did in your initial question (“Is slow better than fast?”)

Yes, but a quality can be neutral also. It need not be good or bad, just what is it: slow, instead of fast.

But that is not how we usually use these words. If you observe our language “slow” is often a synonym for bad, “fast” for good.

Okay, can you give me an example of that?

They are easy to find, but I can help you.

Compare how often we hear the phrase “Don´t be so slow” with “Don´t be so fast”.  Compare the praise “he is a fast thinker” with “he is a slow thinker”. The latter would hardly be praise, but reservation or criticism. 

Have you looked in a thesaurus for synonyms for “slow”?

You asked for it. Here are some: Apathetic, delaying, disinclined, drowsy, idle, inactive, indolent, inert, laggard, leisurely, lethargic, loitering, negligent, phlegmatic, ponderous, postponing, procrastinating, reluctant, slack, sleepy, slothful, sluggish, stagnant, tardy, torpid…


Wait, there´s more! Backward, dense, dim, dimwitted, dull, dumb, dunce, imbecile, moronic, obtuse, simple, stupid, thick, unresponsive…


Now let´s look at “fast”.

Speedy, active, agile, brisk, dashing, expeditious, flashing, flying, nimble, presto, pronto, quick, rapid, ready, snappy, swift, winged…

Positive words indeed.

Also, if you shop around for a new car or computer the salesman would hardly say “Let me show you this brand new product. It is real slow!”. Unless he was a joker.

Yes, but we are talking about thoughts here, not cars or computers.

Not really. You asked for examples, and I was giving you examples of how “fast” generally means “good” in our culture, and “slow” “bad”. Why did I do that?

(sigh) To point out that fast = good and slow = bad in our culture…?

Rather to point out that we don´t generally see “slow” as something neutral but that we put a lot of valuation in this word. Negative valuation, almost all the time. Except for a minority, a small group of people who are into Slow food, etc.

Yes, I know about that movement. It´s not only about food, though. There’s also Slow cities, Slow parenting, Slow architecture…

Why not Slow fast?

Haha, perhaps.

That wasn’t meant as a joke. As I said earlier slow is and is not a quality. Is it also a quantity. Now, quality and quantity are often put against each other as opposites or at least two different things. Are they?

Are you asking me?

Yes. I would like to involve you in a dialogue with more fluid roles, instead of you always asking and me always answering (“Boring” as Sherlock would say).

Okay, are quantity and quality opposites? Let´s see. Quantity is about numbers, sizes, amounts. Let me look it up in Encyclopedia Britannica, to be sure.

If you want to be so learned, fine.

Why not? I am sure you consulted a book to get your list of synonyms.

BRITANNICA: Quan·ti·ty. Latin: quantitas. How much, how large…. The aspect in which a thing is measurable in terms of greater, less, or equal or of increasing or decreasing magnitude.

Anything there about good or bad, beautiful or ugly, serious or funny…?

No, nothing about that in EB. Even though… fat people are often funnier than slim people.

Did you notice what you just did there?

No….? Insulted a minority, probably.


I went from big to funny.

In other words…

From quantity to… quality?

Bingo. From what can be measured (body mass or weight in this case) to what cannot (being funny). At least not measured in the same way. All this is relevant for our discussion about slow vs. fast.

Hm, I see this is turning into a discussion or even a dialogue. From being a mere FAQ.

Something else is happening as well here.

What? Let me see…

Something to do with speed, tempo.

We are slowing down…

Yes, at least you are. You started out with great speed and not much reflection. Now we have both the same measured tempo. Also, our tempi are more similar now. It´s like two musicians tuning their instruments to the same A (=440).

I see. But since I have slowed down and we are more in the same tempo maybe we could take this from the top?

Good idea.

Okay. So, why slow thought? And, is slower better than faster? I could rephrase the first question, or actually both my questions into: Why is slower thinking better than faster? And perhaps more importantly, HOW is slower thinking better – or different – from fast thinking?

Did you notice something there?

Well, I feel like I am standing on the ground. There is more substance and weight to my words, for some reason.

What reason could that be?

Maybe that I slowed down.

In one sense. In another sense you speeded up. Speeded up your  understanding of what you were saying, what your words meant  more exactly. The process of noticing what is going on — mental  awareness if you will — is often very slow with us.

Slow in which sense?

Let me see. There is an English word, similar to “slow” that is very much to the point here. Slov·en·ly. About that adjective EB writes: “Untidy, especially in personal appearance” and “lazily slipshod, in thought”. So my answer is, slow in the sense of slovenly. You went from being a bit careless in thought to more careful.

Let me congratulate myself for that. But let´s get back to my question.


Thanks. For what…?

That you want to get back to the question.

Er… why are congratulating me for that? Is that something to compliment?

In Slow thought it is. Keeping to the subject is an important talent. Not the least because it presupposes KNOWING and REMEMBERING what the subject is. Also being able to HOLD on to it, instead of tossing it up in the air and see where the winds blow it.

I see. Now, will you please answer my question.

As you realize now, your questions are not one-dimensional, and not that easy to answer in a straightforward manner. But they are getting better. “Why is slower thinking better than faster?” and “HOW is slower thinking better – or different – from fast thinking?” are quite good questions. Do you have time? I ask because there are no short answers.

Yes, I have time.

I you have time, I have tempo. Actually tempo means time, in Italian.
We are revolving like planets and moons around the question (Sun) of

One important thing to realize is that there are almost no  “easy” answers. If you take it slow and go the question with reflection you will see that it leads to other, new questions. “Why is slower thinking better than faster?” leads to several new questions. If you look really carefully at that seemingly innocent, rather journalistic question, you will see that it turns into something quite different, even weird.

Let´s do it!

Let´s fall in love — with wisdom. Look at the question. “Why is slower thinking better then faster?” We have already a hint that the words “slow” and “slower” are both qualities and quantities. These are not precise, clear-cut words. There´s quite a lot of ambiguity about them.

Ambiguity can be expressed with a question-mark: ? So let’s  replace the word “slower”, thus:

“Why is ? thinking better than faster?”


But the antonym to “slow”, “fast” carries the same ambiguity.
Thus: “Why is ? thinking better then ??”

I like the double question mark at the end.

And what exactly do we mean by “better”? Not clear, open to debate.
“Why is ? thinking ? then ? ?”

Getting weird…

And what about thinking? Is that a clear, precise term that we
understand, or even agree on the definition of?


Then: “Why is ? ? ? then ? ?”

Further, what do we mean by “is”? Is that crystal clear?


Then: “Why ? ? ? ? then ? ?”

I see where you are heading.

If you wanted to you could transform the whole sentence to a
bunch of questions marks.

No need for that. A seemingly clear question turns out to be a hornets nest, a gathering of wolves, a collection of snakes. I start to understand why there cannot be a quick and easy answer.

What…? What is an “answer”?

Okay, don´t go there, please! I think I get the point.

There are many points. One of them is that while we are fast, we will miss these not so obvious question marks.

Fast, in which sense?

When I rattled off the synonyms for “fast” earlier I left out some negative words. Not many, but two very important synonyms are “hasty” and “hurried”. While you are hasty and hurried you will miss the point.

One of the points.

Thank you. After having deconstructed your question we can actually
put it back together again. Perhaps even answer it. Thus:

QUESTION: Why is slower thinking better then faster?

ANSWER: Because [a classic way to start an answer] by thinking slower [wait for it] I can see and realize [getting hot…] that my question [ahem, do I actually have to remember my question?] is like cheese, full of holes.

Haha. Okay… In short, slower thinking makes me realize, CAN make me


… can make me realize that my question was no good to begin with!
Well, what a bummer!

Not at all! This is progress. It´s no fun to stand in quicksand, but
believing that you stand on terra firma and then realizing that it’s actually quicksand IS progress. Not flattering perhaps, but definitely moving forward.


Into the Woods. Into what IS, not just what we slovenly think is.

Okay. One thing I realize is that being slow really takes time. (Which shouldn’t be a surprise really.) What was a quick, snappy process of question and answer — a FAQ —  has turned into a quite time-consuming process of reflection.

And there we are. However, further reflection about time usage might show you how much more time you invest in other things, things that might not be progressive at all. So the time you “lose” here is really nothing compared to…

How can you say that? I enjoy killing time… Oops.

Thanks for you saying that. Using time to kill time is a strange, but in our world very normal thing to do. If you think about it you might see that the logic of that is like…

Time murder?

It’s like working and toiling week in, week out, getting your monthly pay, and when the paycheck finally comes, using the fresh bills as — toilet paper. You save, you waste. You water and cultivate, then you kill.

Well, that´s harsh. But I guess it is true. It´s just that I am not used
to think so slowly, to have a conversation move like a… tortoise.

You remember who won the race, against the swift hare?

Say no more.

I won´t. Until next time, think slow.


Flattr this!

1 ₪ Prepare for peace

1 ₪ The first facet of the Venusian Peace Project is about pondering, understanding and creating worthwhile peace. (Not just avoiding bad war.)


“Nothing new under the Sun”, so say people who haven’t taken the trouble to really look around.

And I am not now talking about miraculous forgotten cities, old manuscripts in mysterious libraries or as yet uncharted islands. Even within the boundaries of our ordinary lives there are areas that are strangely neglected.

“Strangely”, when you consider how important we say they are to us.Three such areas that I have come across are party life (explored here), listening to music (explored here), and last but not least peace (explored right here!).

Considering how important peace is, or how important we claim it is, its domain seems to be built on old, stale ideas and stock (non)solutions.

I actually feel like an explorer into virgin territory here, exploring and trekking the exotic island of Venusian Peace. Sounds like an Edgar Rice Burroughs novel, but this is no fiction.


Unlike most people I do see world peace as possible. The way to it leads through intellectual and emotional paths, paths that are overgrown, unclear, confused. Asking earnest, to the point questions can help us to clear the path.

Questions like

  • What IS actually peace?
  • What is it not?
  • What is its relation to war?
  • Is there a larger spectrum, can we draw a map where war and peace (and stations in between) are placed in intelligent fashion?
  • Who’s “table” is peace? Are there other groups than politicians, diplomats and historians etc. who might give better answers, find better solutions to peace?
  • How can peace become as interesting, enjoyable, fun, exiting and enthusiasm-creating as war, or rather crypto-war (fighting, contests, debates, action movies and violent computer games)? Crypto-war is the competition, so let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that peace “has a chance” if it keeps remaining lofty but boring.
  • How can music, art and other Venusian activities help to make peace more substantial and distinctly attractive?

These are just a few non-traditional questions that could help us move forward. In short:

Ask better questions and ye shall receive better answers.

Repeating and ruminating the same old tired peace questions does not lead us forward. Let us think outside the board and explore really new (or long forgotten) paths…

Flattr this!

Seven obstacles to peace

What stands in the way of peace? Here are seven obstacles. Actually there should be one more, let’s give it number zero.

0) “If you want peace, prepare for war” (Si vis pacem, para bellum, no less idiotic for being said in Latin). And if you want war, prepare for war (!?).

Seems we are always preparing for war. How on Earth is that going to give us peace? We get to eat the food we prepare, in the same way we get (often in the neck) the war we prepare for.

Now the seven obstacles.

1) We don’t know what peace is.

2) The word is empty, or negative, or filled with explosives.

3) We are blind to the seeds of war and inspiration to war all around us.

4) We don’t desire it enough.

5) We don’t really believe that peace is possible.

6) We think that we peace-lovers are a weak minority.

7) We turn to the wrong people for peace.

1) We don’t know what peace is.

Even a small child can tell you, in a simple, basic sense, what war is. Most everybody understands war.

Ask even intelligent grownups to define peace, and they will have problems. Can you define it?

If we don’t really know what peace means, how then can we work for it, find it, make it manifest?

2) The word is empty, or negative, or filled with explosives.

The word “peace” is either a nicely wrapped Christmas present that turns out to be empty, devoid of clear meaning.

Or it is mainly defined negatively, as absence. “We have peace when we don’t have war.” This could be logical if you live in a country at war, but not if you live in a country not at war.

Finally, some people talk about “balance of power” as an aspect of, or means to, peace. If every party has enough (same amount) nuclear weapons then we will have balance = peace.

Such weapon-based or war-based peace doesn’t sound particularly peaceful to us.

3) We are blind to the seeds of war and the inspiration to war all around us.

We think that only soldiers and politician are making war. At the same time we ourselves are busy doing microwar and protowar. How? Where? In our quarrels, debates (battere = hit, beat), discussions (dis= apart), war of words, “flame wars” on the Net. (All of these manifestations are a kind of ritualized “battles”.)

Mass media inspires us in this same direction, with all these competitions and contests based on elimination, reporting political debates as if they were boxing matches. Of course we see life and society as mainly a win-lose affair, however much we mouth the cliche of win-win.

4) We don’t desire it enough.

There are so many more interesting things than peace. Adventure movies, computer games, sports, Facebook, sex, hot gadgets and cool apps, Pokemon go…

Besides, it is quite logical NOT to give our energy to something that we don’t really grasp and cannot define. If peace at least had some of the excitement of sports, or politics, or even opera… But it seems to be a static, sterile phenomenon. Yes, sure, fine and high and lofty, but somehow still unable to catch our actual interest.

5) We don’t really believe that peace is possible.

Fatalism is major disease with mankind. Our scientists have not only dethroned God (and made themselves our new gods) but also informed us that we are “mere specks of dust in the Universe”. Hardly pep talk for taking our, and mankind’s, destiny into our hands.

The forces working in the opposite direction (war) seem overwhelmingly strong, our mass media constantly shows us examples of war (their logic is “good news is no news”), hordes of people around us say that voting is meaningless, “you cannot really change anything”.

Is it any wonder that one turns fatalist?

6) We think that we peace-lovers are a weak minority.

Actually we are a majority but the “hawks” and the winners of war (those who profit by it) are strong, well organized, well financed, and armed to the teeth. They project a scary image — and we let ourselves be scared.

Some like to say that man is evil, but behind war and strife stand only a small evil minority. Why don’t we send these guys and gals off to a small planet where they can act out their war games, without dragging the rest of humanity along with them?

However, for this we also need better citizens. Being a “voter” who votes every other year, maybe follows politics on TV and complains about political decisions that don’t please him is not enough. Enough to sustain status quo, and war, yes, but not enough for creating peace.

7) We turn to the wrong people for peace.

Peace work needs to be separated from politics. Peace is apolitical, utopian, win-win. Politics is win-lose, separatist, based on elimination.

Think about it. The repeatedly demonstrated talents of politicians and presidents is 1) rhetoric (including dishonesty and downright lying), 2) putting part-, party-, partisan interest (or just ego) above the common good, 3) more or less common corruption and even criminality, and 4) war (direct and indirect).

Hoping that somehow peace will flower from such a mold, such a questionable domain, is like entrusting a village of picturesque wooden houses to a pyromaniac. Wrong tool, wrong person for the job.

So who is right for it? A peace pilot, a Jedi of peace, someone who understands harmony, found in abundant measure in music.

(All this will be more fully explained in a later text. This is just a first sketch, but it is at least a step in a new, fresh direction.)

Flattr this!