When Straight Lines Don’t Fit Curved Minds

[GHA]

Linear thinking and linear learning work well in structured, rule-based environments. They follow a clear sequence — step A leads to step B, which leads to step C. This approach is often effective for neurotypicals, where predictability and uniformity help maintain focus and productivity.

For many neurodivergent individuals, however, the mind does not travel in straight lines. Ideas branch, loop back, or connect across seemingly unrelated domains. The process is not about moving from A to B — it’s about exploring how A links to Z, then circling back to C with a deeper, more nuanced understanding. This is why conventional, linear teaching and training can feel limiting. It compresses a dynamic thought process into a narrow track.

Masking — the act of imitating socially expected behaviours — is, in a way, a form of forced linearity. It’s adopting a step-by-step “social script” to fit in, even if the mind naturally operates in a more fluid or unconventional way. While it may help someone blend into structured environments, it can also drain mental energy and suppress authentic strengths.

In reality, cognitive behaviour is deeply rooted in the brain’s wiring. You can adjust, adapt, and learn coping strategies — but rewiring a naturally non-linear mind into a consistently linear one is not sustainable. The strength of the neurodivergent mind often lies in what linear systems overlook: pattern recognition across contexts, innovative leaps, and intuitive connections.

 

[Outdated]

I prefer to learn things in my own way because when others try to teach you they also teach you their own preconceptions and misconceptions.

 

[GHA]

I prefer to learn things in my own way because when others try to teach you they also teach you their own preconceptions and misconceptions.

Appreciated and accordingly edited..

 

[Ronald Zeeman]

Linear thinking and linear learning work well in structured, rule-based environments. They follow a clear sequence — step A leads to step B, which leads to step C. This approach is often effective for neurotypicals, where predictability and uniformity help maintain focus and productivity.

For many neurodivergent individuals, however, the mind does not travel in straight lines. Ideas branch, loop back, or connect across seemingly unrelated domains. The process is not about moving from A to B — it’s about exploring how A links to Z, then circling back to C with a deeper, more nuanced understanding. This is why conventional, linear teaching and training can feel limiting. It compresses a dynamic thought process into a narrow track.

Masking — the act of imitating socially expected behaviours — is, in a way, a form of forced linearity. It’s adopting a step-by-step “social script” to fit in, even if the mind naturally operates in a more fluid or unconventional way. While it may help someone blend into structured environments, it can also drain mental energy and suppress authentic strengths.

In reality, cognitive behaviour is deeply rooted in the brain’s wiring. You can adjust, adapt, and learn coping strategies — but rewiring a naturally non-linear mind into a consistently linear one is not sustainable. The strength of the neurodivergent mind often lies in what linear systems overlook: pattern recognition across contexts, innovative leaps, and intuitive connections.

Describes my mind, why it drives my wife nuts,

 

[TBRS1]

When I was being taught how to be a teacher, I was taught that there are 4 basic ways of "thinking." Everybody does all 4, but each person uses 1 of them as their native "go to" form of thinking.

The first is linear thinking, as you've described it.

The second is oceanic thinking. This is the looped thinking you've described.

The third is categorical thinking, in which the individual understands things by putting them in categories (think of something like "that animal is a mammal, subcategory of marsupial").

The fourth type is emotional thinking, where one's emotional response to something is what matters.

Linear thinking is heavily emphasised in the society that I live in because reading, logic, science, math, etc. all rely heavily on linearity.

Oceanic thinking is common amongst poets, artists, and people who engage in creative activity (including creative science).

Weirdly, though, linear thinking is vital in explaining the insights of oceanic thinking, while, at the same time, oceanic thinking is the thing that gives linear thinking something to explain.

 

[GHA]

When I was being taught how to be a teacher, I was taught that there are 4 basic ways of "thinking." Everybody does all 4, but each person uses 1 of them as their native "go to" form of thinking.

The first is linear thinking, as you've described it.

The second is oceanic thinking. This is the looped thinking you've described.

The third is categorical thinking, in which the individual understands things by putting them in categories (think of something like "that animal is a mammal, subcategory of marsupial").

The fourth type is emotional thinking, where one's emotional response to something is what matters.

Linear thinking is heavily emphasised in the society that I live in because reading, logic, science, math, etc. all rely heavily on linearity.

Oceanic thinking is common amongst poets, artists, and people who engage in creative activity (including creative science).

Weirdly, though, linear thinking is vital in explaining the insights of oceanic thinking, while, at the same time, oceanic thinking is the thing that gives linear thinking something to explain.

My working hypothesis is that many neurodivergent individuals tend toward oceanic thinking — expansive, non-linear, intuitive, deeply associative. Many neurotypicals, on the other hand, tend toward linear thinking — sequential, structured, rule-based.

When these two modes meet, the merge often happens in one of three ways:

1. Natural Dual-Processing
   Some neurodivergent individuals can fluidly switch between modes. They may ideate in an oceanic flow (patterns, metaphors, broad connections), then deliberately “translate” those insights into a linear sequence so others can follow. Think of a scientist who sees the solution in their head, then works step-by-step to prove it.
2. External Anchoring
   Collaboration often becomes the bridge. An ND individual might provide the conceptual depth and pattern recognition, while an NT partner structures it into a logical framework. This is why certain ND–NT teams work so well: one creates, the other packages.
3. Self-Trained Translation
   Over time, some ND thinkers develop personal systems for breaking down oceanic insights into smaller chunks, then ordering them linearly. This hybrid style still retains the depth of the oceanic mind but becomes accessible to a linear audience.

From my experience — both personal and observed — the real magic isn’t in proving which style is “better,” but in finding ways to translate depth into sequence and sequence into depth. That bridge is where many breakthroughs happen.

 

[TBRS1]

My working hypothesis is that many neurodivergent individuals tend toward oceanic thinking — expansive, non-linear, intuitive, deeply associative. Many neurotypicals, on the other hand, tend toward linear thinking — sequential, structured, rule-based.

When these two modes meet, the merge often happens in one of three ways:

1. Natural Dual-Processing
   Some neurodivergent individuals can fluidly switch between modes. They may ideate in an oceanic flow (patterns, metaphors, broad connections), then deliberately “translate” those insights into a linear sequence so others can follow. Think of a scientist who sees the solution in their head, then works step-by-step to prove it.
2. External Anchoring
   Collaboration often becomes the bridge. An ND individual might provide the conceptual depth and pattern recognition, while an NT partner structures it into a logical framework. This is why certain ND–NT teams work so well: one creates, the other packages.
3. Self-Trained Translation
   Over time, some ND thinkers develop personal systems for breaking down oceanic insights into smaller chunks, then ordering them linearly. This hybrid style still retains the depth of the oceanic mind but becomes accessible to a linear audience.

From my experience — both personal and observed — the real magic isn’t in proving which style is “better,” but in finding ways to translate depth into sequence and sequence into depth. That bridge is where many breakthroughs happen.

I am pretty certain that you are entirely correct about the relations between linear and oceanic thinking.

I am also fairy certain that you are correct in that many autistic people (not sure about other forms of neurodiversity) lean heavily toward oceanic thinking.

In societies like mine, linear thinking is like a "forced dominant," where, because of the practical power of linear thinking in terms of producing meaningful material value, this is the one called "normal," "correct," "most effective," etc.

In other words, it's the one you can most easily use to make bank.

However, linear thinking won't work without the input of the other three, so I also agree that none are inherently better than the others.

 

[GHA]

I am pretty certain that you are entirely correct about the relations between linear and oceanic thinking.

I am also fairy certain that you are correct in that many autistic people (not sure about other forms of neurodiversity) lean heavily toward oceanic thinking.

In societies like mine, linear thinking is like a "forced dominant," where, because of the practical power of linear thinking in terms of producing meaningful material value, this is the one called "normal," "correct," "most effective," etc.

In other words, it's the one you can most easily use to make bank.

However, linear thinking won't work without the input of the other three, so I also agree that none are inherently better than the others.

Very well said, indeed!!!

 

[lunarious]

People i've met are not many; two of them was angry leadertype Muslims, he said supposedly ASD as neurodivergent, is simply mal-nutritient, physically and mentally and a Western term.

And i agree and call it i'm Rotational but not Rooted in Martial Arts or Physical terms

Or two groups are 1) Karate and 2) Judo. Another name kicking plus punching or wrestling. So wrestlers has locked me all me life online off-line and in my dreams, i didn't tap out, and that hurt. (edit) so i'm consequentially suffering linear pride vs oceanic pride now. They are also suffering have tried to un-alive me in Their own log. The Government owe my Deity a Judgment Day.

 

[Shevek]

I make a lot of progress just by never losing sight of the forest for the trees. If a car is supposed to carry you around, why is well over 90% of its work usually done to carry itself around?
Just having broad experience helps too. I once repaired a plumbing part with silver solder for $10. Plumbers don't use it, and had been quoting $1,000 to replace the whole assembly.
It took bridge builders thousands of years to copy, upside down, the way that ships are reinforced with rigging.

 

[Vesta]

Based on everything I've seen in videos and articles about autism on YouTube (I understand that I shouldn't fully trust them, as most authors are neurotypical), it seems that high-functioning autistics have well-developed logic and a tendency toward mathematics. They enjoy things that are predictable and repetitive. However, this description captures the essence of linear thinking

 

[TBRS1]

Based on everything I've seen in videos and articles about autism on YouTube (I understand that I shouldn't fully trust them, as most authors are neurotypical), it seems that high-functioning autistics have well-developed logic and a tendency toward mathematics. They enjoy things that are predictable and repetitive. However, this description captures the essence of linear thinking

Hypothesis:

First, linear and oceanic thinking are not mutually exclusive, nor is it true that one person can't do both.

Supposing that an individual is heavily oceanic.

Suppose that the individual realizes that what they can do (as an oceanic thinker) requires the ability to turn oceanic thought into linear thought.

Isn't it likely that, such a person, might make a concerted effort to learn, develop, and practice linear thinking as a necessary adjunct to oceanic thought?

I ask this because this is what I did.

I had to learn logic and carefully develop thinking skills for the simple reason that I had to survive in a linear dominant culture.

@GHA suggested in the original post that this is a form of masking. It may be.

However, I, personally, consider it "developing a very useful skill".

Note what GHA posted later:

1. Self-Trained Translation
   Over time, some ND thinkers develop personal systems for breaking down oceanic insights into smaller chunks, then ordering them linearly. This hybrid style still retains the depth of the oceanic mind but becomes accessible to a linear audience.

This is also my hypothesis.

 

[TBRS1]

Based on everything I've seen in videos and articles about autism on YouTube (I understand that I shouldn't fully trust them, as most authors are neurotypical), it seems that high-functioning autistics have well-developed logic and a tendency toward mathematics. They enjoy things that are predictable and repetitive. However, this description captures the essence of linear thinking

Hypothesis:

First, linear and oceanic thinking are not mutually exclusive, nor is it true that one person can't do both.

Supposing that an individual is heavily oceanic.

Suppose that the individual realizes that what they can do (as an oceanic thinker) requires the ability to turn oceanic thought into linear thought.

Isn't it likely that, such a person, might make a concerted effort to learn, develop, and practice linear thinking as a necessary adjunct to oceanic thought?

I ask this because this is what I did.

I had to learn logic and carefully develop thinking skills for the simple reason that I had to survive in a linear dominant culture.

@GHA suggested in the original post that this is a form of masking. It may be.

However, I, personally, consider it "developing a very useful skill"

Note what @GHA said later as they develop their thesis:

1. Self-Trained Translation
   Over time, some ND thinkers develop personal systems for breaking down oceanic insights into smaller chunks, then ordering them linearly. This hybrid style still retains the depth of the oceanic mind but becomes accessible to a linear audience.

This is also my working hypothesis.

 

[Vesta]

Hypothesis:

First, linear and oceanic thinking are not mutually exclusive, nor is it true that one person can't do both.

Supposing that an individual is heavily oceanic.

Suppose that the individual realizes that what they can do (as an oceanic thinker) requires the ability to turn oceanic thought into linear thought.

Isn't it likely that, such a person, might make a concerted effort to learn, develop, and practice linear thinking as a necessary adjunct to oceanic thought?

I ask this because this is what I did.

I had to learn logic and carefully develop thinking skills for the simple reason that I had to survive in a linear dominant culture.

@GHA suggested in the original post that this is a form of masking. It may be.

However, I, personally, consider it "developing a very useful skill"

Note what @GHA said later as they develop their thesis:

1. Self-Trained Translation
   Over time, some ND thinkers develop personal systems for breaking down oceanic insights into smaller chunks, then ordering them linearly. This hybrid style still retains the depth of the oceanic mind but becomes accessible to a linear audience.

This is also my working hypothesis.

Most people do acquire logical thinking skills over time, and in order to succeed in mathematics and other exact sciences, it is necessary to have a highly rational and analytical mindset. It is impossible to increase the overall IQ score, which reflects the level of logical thinking

 

[vergil96]

I don't think these types of thinking are mutually exclusive. A mix is required for most skills. Think of it as... the thinking types are materials. Not many useful things are made from just one material, but if you have wood and screws, you can make a table or a chair. Some activities are more intensive in one type of thinking others in another, and takes different forms. Caramics can be used to make a plate, but also a sink, with a bit of metal to make a tap and pipes. Metal can be used in the sink, and as screws, but it can be cutlery on its own. And so forth.

As for mathematics, I was good at mathematics even as a small child and taught myself to count at an early age. Looking at some people and at chat gpt, there is indeed not only a holistic element to mathematics. But I experience it in a more holistic, intuitive manner than linear. When I count or do calculations, I visualise them as geometric figures or constructs, this way is much faster. Simple division, multiplication, addition, subtraction, I often can see elements in my mind and move them around and then simply count them at the end. I have a very detailed imagination and memory compared to most people as far as I've noticed. I can imagine music as well and then find it on an instrument and write doen the notes too. I also very often just know how many elements there are such as tiles or planks or cups there are or if not, I'm able to count them in an instant.

I think, referring to the types of thinking above, that I mostly have "multi-threaded" linear thinking. I think that what I'm referring to as intuitive or holistic thought is what others have called oceanic thought. Emotional and categorical thinking - not much on my part, not dominant. But like I have said, everyone has a bit of everything.