I wish I was a better “thinker”.

Alright, let me explain.

There are people who I believe see the world in a different, more observant manner. They ask different questions, and they see things that I often fail to notice.

Examples include popular scientific figures such as Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Vsauce’s Michael Stevens, and game critics such as Giant Bomb’s Patrick Klepek, Errant Signal’s Chris Franklin, and Super Bunnyhop’s George Weidman.

It seems as if my natural curiosity for life in general was stifled after year 7. I think that this may have been caused by me observing that intelligent people weren’t popular people, and that the only way to be socially accepted was to adhere to the behaviour (and appearance) of “normal” people.

I know that I have hurt a lot of people by selfishly protecting my so-called vanity, but I believe that I have changed this aspect of myself. However, there is no changing the past.

But I digress.

The rebuilding of my curiosity began during my tenure at Melbourne High School, where I was surrounded by a cohort of like-minded individuals. I met a whole bunch of new people with similar interests and attitudes to me, but who had read different authors, listened to different music, and watched different shows to me. It was a learning experience that no curriculum could accommodate, and I am forever thankful for it.

Bringing this back to my need to mature as a writer, I feel as if my goal is to not become someone who merely disseminates information, but someone who can make a person understand an issue, a phenomenon, or even an event.

I try to subscribe to a philosophy where my readers can read one of my pieces, and immediately be able to explain it to the person next to them – without any prior knowledge.

If I can achieve this, then I know that my words can live on as more than ink on paper, or pixels on a screen.

Perhaps there isn’t such a thing as “better” thinking, just different thinking.