# What to do when you read stuff you don't understand or have an answer to? **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [June 20, 2026, 5:40pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020 "2026-06-20T17:40:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 5:40pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/1 "2026-06-20T17:40:38Z")
I know I’ve ask this before but I wanna know how folks deal with stuff like this, like…you’re not worried about living in delusion or living a lie just because you don’t get something or feel like you have to read every single thing to be sure about it? For example, this user I came across: > > > Christina Fedor @christinasatory 3. everything vital is not only irrational but anti-rational and everything rational is anti-vital and herein lies the basis for a tragic sense of life 1. friendship is a mirror to presence and a testament to forgiveness 5. what exists for us is precisely what we need to know 1. to be on the way is a most important thing to be 2. space comes in infinitely many varieties 3. in a complex world, intelligence consists in ignoring things that are irrelevant 9. attachment creates vulnerability 1. longevity is fundamentally a thermodynamic problem 2. health is the slowest form of death we can create with our choices 3. evolution cannot occur in the absence of genetic errors 13. sublimation of primal urges into creative pursuits is a form of psychological alchemy that can be a powerful force for innovation 1. a world without sentiment would be meaningless, hence we must carefully choose what to care about 15. the route to nihilism is the instinct of reification. However lofty philosophies may be, remember their limits 1. while science illuminates collective understanding, the essence of moral truth flourishes through the free, attentive engagement of individuals 17. subjective realities obtain substance only from persistent thought 1. the unexamined assumptions of modern institutions are at the root of the most pressing problems of modern life 2. we can know more than we can tell 20. nobody takes a risk in the expectation that it will fail 1. humans are museums; filled with history they can no longer touch 2. the most beautiful harmony is composed of things at variance 23. home is where all your attempts to escape cease 1. time describes intervals between experiences on a mental continuum 2. the most significant potential of the imagination actualizes through embrace of contradiction and complexity without distorting reality Even the bio: library maximalist | founder [@consorvia](https://x.com/consorvia) | sometimes writing [@future\_remember](https://x.com/future_remember) | sharing nonlinear thoughts on knowledge, culture, + innovation Like, saying “non-linear thinking” makes it sound like they are smarter or in the know about something big that I don’t. Does none of this affect you guys? Or like number 17, that sounds like something I got from Buddhism, namely that we create distinctions and stuff like that. So if thought stopped then would subjectivity as well? I don’t understand. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 7:10pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/2 "2026-06-20T19:10:42Z")
This is an excerpt from a scientific article. > The maximum amount of total > arsenic collected from children’s hands was > 4,743 ng (4.7 pg). This is compared with > the 3.9 pg that we reported previously > (Kwon et al. 2004). > To provide a perspective of relative con- > tribution of this amount of arsenic to the > overall exposure to arsenic, in our article > (Kwon et al. 2004) we included references > for the average daily dietary ingestion of > total arsenic: > 38 pg (15 pg for children 1-4 years of age) for > Canada (Dabeka et al. 1993), 62 pg for the > United States (Gartrell et al. [1985]), 89 pg for > the United Kingdom (Food Additives and > Contaminants Committee 1984), 55 pg for New > Zealand (Dick et al. 1978), and 160-280 pg for > Japan (Tsuda et al. 1995). A range of arsenic > species that have different toxicities may be present > in food (Le et al. 2004). Estimated daily dietary > intake of inorganic arsenic was 8.3-14 pg in the > United States (Yost et al. 1998), 4.8-12.7 pg in > Canada (Yost et al. 1998), and 15-211 pg in > Taiwan (Schoof et al. 1998). > We did not monitor children’s hand-to- > mouth activity because this behavior has > already been documented in the literature > (Reed et al. 1999; Tulve et al. 2002). Our > intent was to provide direct measurements > of the amount of arsenic on children’s > hands. We recognize the importance of > these other studies, as we pointed out in our > “Conclusions” (Kwon et al. 2004): > The results?along with other information, such > as the frequency and habit of hand-to-mouth > activity, efficiency of transfer of arsenic from > hands to mouth, and repeated contact of hands > with CCA-treated wood surface after hand-to- > mouth activity?are useful for assessing children’s > exposure to arsenic I understand some of the words, but I can’t evaluate the study. I “deal with stuff like this” by looking at where it was published, who wrote it, and are the references valid? I can’t tell you how this article fits into the big question of cancer and cancer but I can tell that people who know what they are doing are figuring it out. I look at your post, don’t know anything about the author, he references nothing, he makes up phrases I’ve never seen before, it’s published on his website and no one is using him as a source. If I worried if he was on to something, then I would also be worried about every other utterance of every random prison on earth. At that point I would realize I am the one who needs to fix what it is I worry about. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 7:17pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/3 "2026-06-20T19:17:49Z")
> [@inthedarkness](#): > > 17. subjective realities obtain substance only from persistent thought BTW, I googled this one and got a decent answer. If you want to learn about cognitive theories, then go explore them. There is no other answer to what to do about things you don’t know. If you didn’t know how to drive a car, would you jump in and hit the gas, or would you learn about driving first? ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 9:10pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/4 "2026-06-20T21:10:28Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > BTW, I googled this one and got a decent answer. If you want to learn about cognitive theories, then go explore them. There is no other answer to what to do about things you don’t know. If you didn’t know how to drive a car, would you jump in and hit the gas, or would you learn about driving first? When I googled it this is what I got: [I Me Mine: on a Confusion Concerning the Subjective Character of Experience - PMC](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5362670/#Sec23) > It has been argued[31](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5362670/#Fn31) that experiences, furthermore, give _immediate_ justification for judgments such as (i). Here, I use the notion of ‘immediate justification’ as defined by Soldati ([2012](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5362670/#CR64)).[32](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5362670/#Fn32) To say that the perceptual experience provides the subject with immediate justification to judge (i) is to say that it gives her “a kind of warrant that does not depend on, for instance, any further inferentially acquired justification.” The experience as of the cat’s fur being silky can be used as evidence that the cat’s fur is silky, “without having to rely on any further evidence” to support the experience itself. The experience is a reason to judge the cat’s fur to be silky that is not itself in need of further justification. Note that this notion of immediate justification concerns the type of the epistemic warrant, not the _strength_ of this warrant, or the _psychological capacities_involved in arriving at it. Justification that is immediate in this sense does not have to be infallible; in the case of perceptual experience, it is in fact typically defeasible. And to say that the experience _warrants_ the corresponding judgment immediately is not to say that the judgment is _arrived at_ in a way that is psychologically immediate; it does not, in particular, rule out that conceptual capacities are involved in the process, as they surely are, or that we need to have other beliefs in other to acquire the relevant concepts. The immediacy I have in mind characterises the (normative) _justification_ relation between two states (the experience and the judgment), not their (factual) _psychological_ relation. And now I’m more confused than before. Is it saying that experience cannot be trusted? ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 9:15pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/5 "2026-06-20T21:15:03Z")
There was also this too: > We don’t even need to look to the past to know what it is to be “transformed from free agents to passive subjects.” Progression of technologies is inextricably linked to those power structures that set forth the rules of price, value, and social status, collectively defining the boundaries any individual’s freedom. So long as society has been of a technological nature, free agency remains elusive. Perhaps such a freedom is merely the intermediate goal on a path to something else, which might reveal itself through a latticework of ideas that are collectively telling us we are all part of something big, mysterious and impossible to explain. > > Take a look at some of the trends so far. The impact of mobility technology on spatial dynamics has rendered land a scarce commodity, increasing its value while simultaneously reducing the cost of mobility. Similarly, as labor time is compressed, leisure time becomes a luxury, with its price escalating inversely to the decreasing cost of labor. The allure of artificially illuminated screens further commodifies daylight leisure. In response to these shifts, we consciously organize ourselves into hierarchical class structures, reinforcing these power and price dynamics while elevating those who embody intellectual or economic mastery over them. This pattern reflects our persistent tendency towards self-imposed servitude in the pursuit of survival. > > One of the greatest threats to human autonomy and therefore flourishing is our own capacity to see through the fog of complexity, and to disillusion ourselves from those constructed features of our lives that bind us to conditions of unfreedom. Sometimes, the binding conditions are not even cultural. For example, our cognitive predisposition to visual stimuli is so pronounced that we rarely allocate enough expensive “free” time to develop skills for looking at the dark interior of ourselves-a practice that so many ancient traditions associate with a fundamental disruption of values-or, enlightenment. But in today’s society, where are the images of wisdom we can all aspire towards? > > Even before a new philosophy can steer technological governance towards human flourishing, we will need to carve out new contexts (perhaps even so new that they break time-space frames) within which it becomes possible to develop an innate sense of what it is to be a human again. > **[✨Refactoring “Autonomy” & “Freedom” for The Age of Language Models](https://michaelgarfield.substack.com/p/hotl-03)** > > For whose freedom are we coding? ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 9:24pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/6 "2026-06-20T21:24:23Z")
I also got this too: [Subjective Consciousness: What am I? | Springer Nature Link](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-03633-1_11) so I’m really curious to know what you found because I’m getting pulled in different directions. ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 9:45pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/7 "2026-06-20T21:45:41Z")
One more: > The indexical word “I” has traditionally been assumed to be an overt analogue to the concept of self, and the best model for understanding it. This approach, I argue, overlooks the essential role of cognitive phenomenology in the mastery of the concept of self. I suggest that a better model is to be found in a different kind of representation: phenomenal concepts or more generally phenomenally grounded concepts. I start with what I take to be the defining feature of the concept of self, namely its “super-reflexivity”: to use this concept is not just to think of oneself, but to think of oneself as the thinker of the present thought. I call this familiar observation the “Thinker Intuition”. I review some shortcomings of the indexical model of the concept of self, which is the classical account of the Thinker Intuition. I go on to propose a different account, the “phenomenal model”, according to which the concept of self is a phenomenally grounded concept, anchored in a generic kind of cognitive phenomenology: the phenomenology of intellection. [https://essex.academia.edu/MarieGuillot](https://essex.academia.edu/MarieGuillot) ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 10:23pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/8 "2026-06-20T22:23:35Z")
> An **indexical** is **a word, sign, or expression whose meaning and reference shift depending on the context in which it is used**. I’m trying to think of some word that is not indexical. Reminds me of talk about “truth” - it’s all pretty meaningless without a defined framing. Meaning that truth itself is indexical. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 10:30pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/9 "2026-06-20T22:30:43Z")
Are you looking at the sites that are from quality science, or going into Reddit? Here’s my top hit > The author reviews research showing that repetitive thought (RT) can have constructive or unconstructive consequences. The main unconstructive consequences of RT are (a) depression, (b) anxiety, and (c) difficulties in physical health. The main constructive consequences of RT are (a) recovery from upsetting and traumatic events, (b) adaptive preparation and anticipatory planning, (c) recovery from depression, and (d) uptake of health-promoting behaviors. Several potential principles accounting for these distinct consequences of RT are identified within this review: (a) the valence of thought content, (b) the intrapersonal and situational context in which RT occurs, and (c) the level of construal (abstract vs. concrete processing) adopted during RT. Of the existing models of RT, it is proposed that an elaborated version of the control theory account provides the best theoretical framework to account for its distinct consequences. > > Keywords: repetitive thought, rumination, worry, cognitive processing, control theory > > Repetitive, prolonged, and recurrent thought about one’s self, one’s concerns and one’s experiences is a mental process commonly engaged in by all people (Harvey, Watkins, Mansell, & Shafran, 2004). Such thinking bridges many topics within psychology: social cognition, emotion, motivation, self-regulation, goal attainment, stress, psychopathology, and mental health. Examples of such thinking include worry, rumination, perseverative cognition, emotional processing, cognitive processing, mental simulation, rehearsal, reflection, and problem solving (e.g., Martin & Tesser, 1996; Mor & Winquist, 2002; Papageorgiou & Wells, 2004; Wyer, 1996). Across these constructs, there is considerable similarity and overlap in theoretical conceptualizations and operational definitions. However, because these constructs have emerged in distinct research domains, they are usually not equated with one another and have rarely been considered together. Moreover, research has shown that these constructs have diverse outcomes, such that repetitive thought (RT) can have both unconstructive and constructive consequences. For example, on one hand, within the cognitive processing literature, RT about symptoms and upsetting events has been conceptualized as necessary for people to come to terms with traumatic and upsetting events (Horowitz, 1985; Pennebaker, 1997; Rachman, 1980; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). On the other hand, RT about symptoms and upsetting events has been found to predict future depression (Ingram, 1990; Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991, 2000; Pyszczynski & Greenberg, 1987) and poor recovery from traumatic and upsetting events. It’s from the national library of medicine > **[Constructive and Unconstructive Repetitive Thought](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2672052/)** > > The author reviews research showing that repetitive thought (RT) can have constructive or unconstructive consequences. The main unconstructive consequences of RT are (a) depression, (b) anxiety, and (c) difficulties in physical health. The main ... Granted, I have searched the phrase a few times and had different hits each time. You call this “being pulled in different directions”. I call it a complex topic. You aren’t going to get easy answers about consciousness. You expectations don’t meet reality, then you explain that by thinking something is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 10:41pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/10 "2026-06-20T22:41:29Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > I’m trying to think of some word that is not indexical. > > Reminds me of talk about “truth” - it’s all pretty meaningless without a defined framing. Meaning that truth itself is indexical. I got it from this lady: [https://www.ub.edu/grc\_logos/wp-content/uploads/files\_publication/user328/1413209658-Guillot%202013%20-%20The%20Limits%20of%20Selflessness.pdf](https://www.ub.edu/grc_logos/wp-content/uploads/files_publication/user328/1413209658-Guillot%202013%20-%20The%20Limits%20of%20Selflessness.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 10:43pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/11 "2026-06-20T22:43:00Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > Granted, I have searched the phrase a few times and had different hits each time. You call this “being pulled in different directions”. I call it a complex topic. You aren’t going to get easy answers about consciousness. You expectations don’t meet reality, then you explain that by thinking something is wrong. My search led me to this lady and some of her papers: [https://www.ub.edu/grc\_logos/author/marie-guillot/](https://www.ub.edu/grc_logos/author/marie-guillot/) this one too: [Self-Consciousness \> Evans on First-Person Thought (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/self-consciousness/evans-on-first-person.html) ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 11:37pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/12 "2026-06-20T23:37:24Z")
> [@inthedarkness](#): > > My search led me to Those are two very good sources. A good start. I don’t have the answers, so I can’t tell you how much time this will take. Obviously, a lot of people have spent a lot of time on the questions, and there are still people going at it, so who knows? ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2026, 11:44pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/13 "2026-06-20T23:44:22Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > Those are two very good sources. A good start. I don’t have the answers, so I can’t tell you how much time this will take. Obviously, a lot of people have spent a lot of time on the questions, and there are still people going at it, so who knows? Her page deals a lot with questions of the self and how we know stuff, things that constantly make me lose sleep at night. > What is knowledge? What can we know? And how do we know? > > These classic philosophical questions belong to epistemology, which extends far beyond the philosophical history of science to which it is too often reduced. Attentive both to the lessons of the cognitive sciences and to the normative requirements of knowledge, this volume introduces the most debated questions in contemporary epistemology in a new and accessible way. Its chapters were written by a new generation of French-speaking philosophers whose research is firmly rooted in the most vibrant international debates. > > What do we know through our senses? How much trust should we place in perception? In memory? In testimony? Does reasoning allow us to expand the scope of our knowledge? Is it possible to extend our cognitive capacities? Are art and emotions tools of knowledge in their own right? Is self-knowledge of a particular kind? What could we know about God? What is it possible to know a priori? Under what conditions are our judgments justified? Are there norms governing belief and inquiry? [https://philpapers.org/rec/GUICDS](https://philpapers.org/rec/GUICDS) ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 12:00am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/14 "2026-06-21T00:00:25Z")
Even more pages: [https://philpapers.org/rec/GUITSO-4](https://philpapers.org/rec/GUITSO-4) [https://philpapers.org/rec/MCCFIT-7](https://philpapers.org/rec/MCCFIT-7) I guess the bigger question I would ask is how does this stuff not inspire dread in anyone. Every time I read something breaking apart the self it makes life seem not worth living or bothering with. How do you guys resists this? Looking at the chapters in the first link (of this post) does it not fill you with fear or make you depressed? ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 12:11am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/15 "2026-06-21T00:11:51Z")
> [@inthedarkness](#): > > I guess the bigger question I would ask is how does this stuff not inspire dread in anyone. It does. It is known in the world of psychology and therapy. You are not alone. But, it’s not something I can help you with. I and others have tried, but you say you’ve tried everything and nothing works. [https://www.choosingtherapy.com/existential-anxiety/](https://www.choosingtherapy.com/existential-anxiety/) ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 12:17am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/16 "2026-06-21T00:17:08Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > It does. It is known in the world of psychology and therapy. You are not alone. But, it’s not something I can help you with. I and others have tried, but you say you’ve tried everything and nothing works. I’ve tried therapy but it hasn’t worked out and it doesn’t help that these things have no answers. I also have this overpowering compulsion to read everything they’ve posted to make sure it’s not a threat, it’s anxiety x100. I also don’t think they could help with questions of the self. like this lady I cited and her stuff, I don’t know how people don’t have that impulse: [https://philpeople.org/profiles/marie-guillot](https://philpeople.org/profiles/marie-guillot) ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 2:30am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/17 "2026-06-21T02:30:11Z")
> [@inthedarkness](#): > > I’ve tried therapy but it hasn’t worked out > [@inthedarkness](#): > > I also have this overpowering compulsion > [@inthedarkness](#): > > it’s anxiety x100 Random things on the internet are bothering you and you are asking people on an anonymous forum for help. Do you see the problem? ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 12:25pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/18 "2026-06-21T12:25:28Z")
> [@inthedarkness](#): > > I don’t know how people don’t have that impulse: Is it the “putative subjective dimension of experience” that troubles you, or, the “deflationary views about self-experience?” The view discussed in her work refer views from historical figures such as William James, Husserl, Merleau-Ponty and Sartre. Have you reviewed those works? ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 3:47pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/19 "2026-06-21T15:47:24Z")
I followed the suggested links to some of Write4U’s last posts. He was firing on all cylinders. Here’s a good one > You don’t need to know that you are conscious to be cognitive of reality. > Most animals are keenly aware of their environment without contemplating their own relationship to their environment other than seeking safety and comfort. ---
**Author:** ![inthedarkness](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/inthedarkness/32/23404_2.png) [@inthedarkness](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/inthedarkness)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2026, 6:03pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020/20 "2026-06-21T18:03:16Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > Random things on the internet are bothering you and you are asking people on an anonymous forum for help. Do you see the problem? I ask on forums where people are most likely to have better answers than on something like Quora or stuff like that. [Next page](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/what-to-do-when-you-read-stuff-you-dont-understand-or-have-an-answer-to/12020.md?page=2)