paragQuestion / Claim
Modern social platforms reward performance over genuine thinking, pushing real intellectual work into private, selective spaces.
Key Assumptions
- Most activity on LinkedIn and X is driven by likes, reach, and visibility rather than curiosity.(high confidence)
- Genuine thinkers prefer private or small-group environments for deep thinking.(medium confidence)
- Tools like ChatGPT enable deeper individual R&D outside public social media.(medium confidence)
- High-quality thinking communities require intentional filtering rather than open participation.(high confidence)
- A founder-led taste or bar can help maintain intellectual standards.(medium confidence)
- Regular, deliberate thinking practice is more important than raw intelligence for producing breakthroughs.(high confidence)
- A time-bound challenge (e.g., 21 days) can effectively build and lock in a thinking habit.(medium confidence)
- AI tools significantly amplify the output of disciplined, high-quality thinkers.(high confidence)
- Regular brainstorming is as important as reading for developing thinking ability.(high confidence)
- AI tools like ChatGPT make active thinking and idea iteration more valuable than passive consumption.(high confidence)
Evidence & Observations
- Observation that thoughtful people increasingly avoid public posting and focus on private conversations and personal research.(personal)
- At IIT, I created a community where members had to clear an IQ test threshold to join, which successfully filtered for serious, high-signal participants.(personal)
- I plan to run a 21-day thinking challenge with a closed group to help people build a consistent habit of deep thinking and collaborative idea-sharing.(personal)
Open Uncertainties
- Are there still meaningful sub-communities on existing social platforms that enable genuine thinking?
- Will private thinking spaces scale without becoming performative themselves?
Current Position
Kwegg is a selective, founder-led community focused on building a daily habit of deep thinking and brainstorming; this practice is as critical as reading—if not more—especially when amplified by AI, enabling shared breakthroughs and innovation.
This is work-in-progress thinking, not a final conclusion.
References(6)
- 1.^"Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule"↗paulgraham.com— Explains why deep, uninterrupted thinking time is essential for real creative and intellectual work.
- 2.^"Naval Ravikant on Reading & Decision Making"↗navalmanack.com— Argues that leverage, judgment, and clear thinking matter more than noise and social approval.
- 3.^"Farnam Street – Mental Models"↗fs.blog— Shows how deliberate thinking frameworks outperform reactive, feed-driven consumption.
- 4.^"Deep Work – Cal Newport"↗calnewport.com— Research-backed case for focused cognitive work over shallow, performative activity.
- 5.^"Collective Intelligence Study (PNAS)"↗pnas.org— Evidence that small, well-composed groups outperform larger, noisy crowds in problem-solving.
- 6.^"OpenAI Research"↗openai.com— Demonstrates how AI tools amplify the output of skilled, disciplined thinkers rather than replace thinking.