Here is a better image for the section.

Couldn't help but notice most of the early discussion on this thread seems to be rehashing the early discussion over in the actual discussion area. So it's worth looking here before commenting, and we should probably agree to have the discussion in one or the other of these places.

Here are some thought I've been having on an aspect of the "Hollywood rationalist" stereotype that I exhibit. As it is a stereotype, I suspect others deal with it as well. It is well understood around here that rationality != the suppression of emotion. However, for me at least, acting on my emotions to achieve near-term goals often results in decisions that are either inhibitory or stupidly impulsive. In light of this, I have attempted to heavily invest my emotions in my long-term goals and to suppress my emotions in more everyday situations. I think my acquaintances would perceive me as having a neutral, "Spockian" affect. It seems to me that this mode of behavior leads me to be generally contemplative about my actions and to procrastinate at times on activities several steps removed from my long-term goals but still necessary, or to put it another way, my suppression of "near" emotions promotes strategic thinking but impedes tactical thinking. This has both benefits and costs. People who know me often come to me for cool-headed advice and are likely to listen on the occasions that I speak up. I think I have more ability to control my moods than most people. I am passionate about my major goals and can engage in hours of thought about them, and to some extent bend my lifestyle to achieve them. However, I feel I am over-looking inefficiencies in my behavior that have become detrimental over time. I belief I've been significantly underachieving in life so far given my internal resources, and I suspect that this is part of the cause. I would like to maintain the control over my actions that emotional distance gives me while becoming more effective in everyday trivia. Does anyone have advice on this?

 Here are some thought I've been having on an aspect of the "Hollywood rationalist" stereotype that I exhibit. As it is a stereotype, I suspect others deal with it as well.
 It is well understood around here that rationality != the suppression of emotion. However, for me at least, acting on my emotions to achieve near-term goals often results in decisions that are either inhibitory or stupidly impulsive. In light of this, I have attempted to heavily invest my emtions in my long-term goals and to suppress my emotions in more everyday situations. I think my acquaintances would perceive me as having a neutral, "Spockian" affect. It seems to me that this mode of behavior leads me to be generally contemplative about my actions and to procrastinate at times on activities several steps removed from my long-term goals but still necessary, or to put it another way, my suppression of "near" emotions promotes strategic thinking but impedes tactical thinking. This has both benefits and costs. People who know me often come to me for cool-headed advice and are likely to listen on the occasions that I speak up. I think I have more ability to control my moods than most people. I am passionate about my major goals and can engage in hours of thought about them, and to some extent bend my lifestyle to achieve them. However, I feel I am over-looking inefficiencies in my behavior that have become detrimental over time. I belief I've been significantly underachieving in life so far given my internal resources, and I suspect that this is part of the cause. I would like to maintain the control over my actions that emotional distance gives me while becoming more effective in everyday trivia. Does anyone have advice on this? 

 Here are some thoughts I’ve been having on an aspect of the “Hollywood rationalist” stereotype that I exhibit. As it is a stereotype, I suspect others deal with it as well.
 It is well understood around here that rationality != the suppression of emotion. However, for me at least, acting on my emotions to achieve near-term goals often results in decisions that are either inhibitory or stupidly impulsive. In light of this, I have attempted to heavily invest my emotions in my long-term goals and to suppress my emotions in more everyday situations. I think my acquaintances would perceive me as having a neutral, “Spockian” affect. It seems to me that this mode of behavior leads me to be generally contemplative about my actions and to procrastinate at times on activities that are several steps removed from my long-term goals but still necessary, or to put it another way, my  suppression of  “near” emotions promotes strategic thinking but impedes tactical thinking. This has both benefits and costs. People who know me often come to me for cool-headed advice and are likely to listen on the occasions that I speak up. I think I have more ability to control my moods than most people. I am passionate about my major purposes and can engage in hours of thought about them, and to some extent bend my lifestyle to achieve them. However, I feel I am over-looking inefficiencies in my behavior that have become detrimental over time. I belief that I’ve been significantly underachieving in life so far given my internal resources, and I suspect this is part of the cause. Does anyone have advice on being both thoughtful and effective in everyday trivia?     

I assume this is being done because you can't figure out how to separate important topics with low votes from being overcrowded by less important topics with higher votes?

Imagine, giving up solid scientific ideas to interpretation by those who are not able to, or don't want to put an idea to the test.

Science doesn't vote, it tests, and if the new idea doesn't pass the test, then it is foot-noted and put aside.

Ah, so sad...

If it works, it works, if not it is just an idea of how things might work.