In college when I would write research papers, I liked to be able to plan out the entire paper and outline it before I began writing. I would create a rough outline and organize all my material in the proper order. I did not always write it in order because certain points were easier for me to write about than others. Usually I would start with the section that I had the most research for and was fresh on my mind. After most of the body of the paper was finished, I would write the conclusion before the introduction. It was easier for me to wrap up the whole paper and prove what I had just written about. That's the thing, I'm good at drawing conclusions. In fact, we as humans are good at drawing conclusions. Or at least we like to think we are.
The tendency to figure out a problem or solve something is a prevailing notion among ambitious people. It's not a bad thing to want to improve, but perhaps the flaw rises when we try to conclude before all the facts are presented. Maybe everything does not need to be figured out. Maybe everything does not fit in a neat box marked "case closed". Maybe it's just not that simple. It is more comfortable to know that something has been solved and the conclusion has been written, yet I'm presenting the possibility that all is meant not to be solved.
When people set out on road trips, most of the time it is not to reach the destination but to take the journey. Of course to some people, the journey would not make much sense without the destination, but you do not need a destination to have an adventure. Therefore, I believe that one does not always need to draw a conclusion in all spots of life.
