I have already written quite a few articles, but I have already read hundreds and thousands of times more. And this is what I notice among readers. Where there are services that show the reaction of readers in the form of comments, likes, subscriptions, reposts, for me there is a storehouse of information for analysis. To read, perceive and understand something, I need not only energy and considerable energy for the brain. I need have also appropriate thinking of a level not lower than that proposed by the author of the text. Otherwise, I won’t get much meaning from the article. It is difficult to see anything higher than one’s “bell tower”, wider than one’s picture of the world in the material offered. Even familiar fairy tales - the folk “Kolobok”, Pushkin’s “About the Fisherman and the Fish” - can be read and interpreted at several levels of understanding and deepening the meanings. And the types of thinking of the author and the reader may not coincide. It may be the simplest text, but in it I can even see for myself some kind of wisdom. Or, on the contrary, I’ll read a deep text and only some small, insignificant detail will hook me, or I’ll just even say “what kind of nonsense did the author write.” Now we’re a little bit of a child. Everyone knows the familiar kaleidoscope toy. You look into it - in the mirrors, multi-colored stones form a beautiful pattern. You turn the kaleidoscope a little - the stones roll and create a completely new picture. A small movement, and how everything sparkles with completely different colors - “wow!” Everything is seen as new and always unique. And always READY. Straightaway. It worked. The “charm” of the immediacy of a kaleidoscope and the difficulty of putting together puzzles. Now imagine modern mosaic puzzles that need to be precisely joined in both color and shape of the connection with each other. And when you put it together, sometimes you don’t even know the whole picture that should eventually turn out. But in any case, I CAN find an exactly corresponding continuation to the existing pieces. If I want... Now on the topic of the article - about thinking options. Kaleidoscopic thinking is when in the proposed material: an article, a video, or even a simple everyday conversation - the reader, viewer, interlocutor perceives everything as a ready-made picture. Already defined. And also right away - like in a kaleidoscope. The brain, like the body, always tries to save energy, because this is the most expensive thing for a person - to perceive and comprehend something. And this can happen quickly and easily by attaching your own ready-made labels to words , phrases and even meanings. For example, if I now use the word “love” in the text, then many “already know” what it is. And definitions can “give away the mountain.” Easy. Here, for example, is the aphorism of the same Francois de La Rochefoucauld: “True love is like a ghost: everyone talks about it, but few have seen it.” Everyone, again, will read, perceive and then think and interpret according to the different words of this aphorism. Which word in it will catch anyone's attention? Some people will even get “fixated” on the word ghost. And different readers will end up creating different meanings – their own. Because there is a clue to the moving “pebbles of a kaleidoscope.” THEY move, and an event HAPPENS for us: I read an article, watched a video, exchanged a few phrases with someone - all as if random and unrelated events, as in a kaleidoscope. Now about another method thinking - mosaic. I can perceive any event that happens not just as a ready-made random one, but as another puzzle piece in the picture of my continuous life. And it can and should be “combined” with already known existing ones, already somehow definitely put together. Do you feel the difference? Don’t immediately put YOUR label, “perhaps clumsy” on something new, but try to find a place for this new one in your “mosaic” life.” For example, at this moment the following questions may arise: “Why am I reading, seeing, talking about this NOW?” — I use the time factor and perceive this no longer as an accident, but as a response from the real world to my past thoughts and actions. Reality always lags behind incarnation. “How does this relate to MY LIFE and possible problems in it?” - I will use).