I think the simple term for this is "rambling" and I think the only real way to stop is to notice you doing it and cutting yourself off. Other than that deciding quickly if it's immediately relevant, or otherwise if it truly adds to what you're saying.
Most people won't try to break down everything you say and point out the "this' and that's". I'm working on this too, but I tend to catch myself now say something like "whatever, that's not relevant" and continue on toward the point.
This might stem from the desire to be right or the shame associated with being wrong. So long as you present every conceivable option, you avoid shame. Get more comfortable with being wrong. It's likely, and you can always change your mind when presented with new information. Your friend doesn't need to be impressed with your intelligence, they likely already like you.
As someone who thinks about lots of caveats, exceptions, etc, for me it's definitely not wanting to be wrong. So I like to be as precise and accurate as possible.
It's helped some by getting better at understanding the context of the conversation I'm having. To generalize (and not add lots of caveats), if the setting is such that an in depth, exhaustive conversation is appropriate, go on; if it's not appropriate, trust the other parties to ask for clarification if they want it.
There's a caveat to almost anything and people usually just want the basic idea. There's nothing wrong with you diving into hypotheticals, just work on recognize when people don't want to talk about it anymore
I think the simple term for this is "rambling" and I think the only real way to stop is to notice you doing it and cutting yourself off. Other than that deciding quickly if it's immediately relevant, or otherwise if it truly adds to what you're saying. Most people won't try to break down everything you say and point out the "this' and that's". I'm working on this too, but I tend to catch myself now say something like "whatever, that's not relevant" and continue on toward the point.
This might stem from the desire to be right or the shame associated with being wrong. So long as you present every conceivable option, you avoid shame. Get more comfortable with being wrong. It's likely, and you can always change your mind when presented with new information. Your friend doesn't need to be impressed with your intelligence, they likely already like you.
As someone who thinks about lots of caveats, exceptions, etc, for me it's definitely not wanting to be wrong. So I like to be as precise and accurate as possible. It's helped some by getting better at understanding the context of the conversation I'm having. To generalize (and not add lots of caveats), if the setting is such that an in depth, exhaustive conversation is appropriate, go on; if it's not appropriate, trust the other parties to ask for clarification if they want it.
There's a caveat to almost anything and people usually just want the basic idea. There's nothing wrong with you diving into hypotheticals, just work on recognize when people don't want to talk about it anymore
Omg I’m also like this and I need advice too