Don’t think before you speak: on the gradual formation of thoughts during speech

ABSTRACT

The common reproach: ‘think before you speak!’, epitomises an educational paradigm in which speech is only the act of transmission finalised ideas. In his inspiring short essay ‘On the Gradual Formation of Thoughts During Speech’ from 1805, the German writer Heinrich von Kleist challenged this approach when he described his habit of talking in order to think. Leaning on cognitive and philosophical theories that support Kleist’s intuitive insights, this study reads his essay as a practical guide in the learning paradigm that I call ‘speak-to-think’. While pedagogical theories have emphasised the importance of interpersonal dialogues and speech in the classroom for thinking and learning, I suggest that self-talk is a paradigmatic manifestation of speak-to-think, and a privileged learning method. Self-talk creates an internal dialogue that can promote meta-cognitive skills and critical thinking, while also challenging the normative perception of speech as a mere conduit for effective communication.

KEYWORDS:

• Self-talk
• speech
• rhetoric
• metacognition
• dialogue
• dialogism

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Minducate Center for the Science of Learning at Tel Aviv University. Field work as part of this research was supported by the Fulbright Fund. I thank the Bok center and GSAS at Harvard University, and the Communications Program at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard for their collaboration. I thank Prof. Ruth Amossy for her guidance, Prof. Martin Puchner for his thoughts on Kleist, and Dr. Benzi Slakmon for his thoughts on dialogical speech. Thank you to all the rhetoric students who helped me think while speaking.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Originally: ‘Uber die allmihliche Verfertigung der Gedanken beim Sprech’. Also often translated as: ‘On the Gradual Construction/fashioning/completion/production of thoughts’. See (Kowalik 1989) for a discussion on Kleist’s essay context and interpretations.