I've mentioned in a few comments now that the point I wanted to make (which I clearly did a poor job of), is that it's obviously easier to deal with only "internal interruptions", rather than both those and "external interruptions" additionally. You don't get to choose between the two, because the "internal interruptions" will exist regardless of how well you've managed to control "external interruptions".
Well I think you catalyzed a fantastic meta conversation!
I wonder if it's really as simple as your theory though...I don't disagree as a generalization, but perhaps certain classes of internal issues can be bypassed/moderated by external stimulus?
It's certainly not an uninteresting question! But personally I think the answer is "no". I think getting interrupted externally makes it strictly harder for me to manage my own internal distractions. Which doesn't mean it is universally bad though, to be clear! There are other important things, even far more important things, than individual productivity. But from the perspective of "is it easier or harder for me to get my individual contributions done if I'm left entirely alone or if I'm pinged about things frequently", I really think the answer is that it's always worse to be fielding communications.
I think there are some education maybe... take for example a gong ringing periodically in the background , this is an example of an external interruption that can be beneficial for addressing internal out of control thinking.
This is getting well outside the initial discussion (in some ways, but not all), but it's interesting.
Which parts were incorrect, and how?
> Saying you had a chuckle at their expense was condescending and added nothing.
Are you referring to your model of reality or all models of reality?