A completely original thought: Still possible? Was it ever possible?

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

It seems to me that almost every thought that any thinking being has ever had is at least partly a thought that some other thinking being has had before.

I may discover a species of fish that no human has ever seen before. However, the thoughts in my mind that correspond to this never-seen-before thing would include thoughts that others have previously had, such as the thought corresponding to the color white.

In other words, every thought rearranges or builds on at least one thought that someone else before has had in his/her mind.

Therefore, no idea--even an "original idea"--is completely original. Every idea is either a rearrangement of existing combinations of thoughts or builds on at least one existing thought.

Maybe there was a point in space and time where the first ever thinking being had the first ever thought. That, I suppose, would have been a completely original thought. But that is difficult to imagine.

Or am I wrong and new ideas, such as Darwinian evolutionary theory, are completely original thoughts?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Maybe yes, maybe no. It depends on the definition of "completely original". Darwinism shared similarities and features with other ideas and theories (e.g. being about life forms, or being scientific) but then again nobody had had Darwins exact ideas before him.

 

[quatona]

It seems to me that almost every thought that any thinking being has ever had is at least partly a thought that some other thinking being has had before.

I may discover a species of fish that no human has ever seen before. However, the thoughts in my mind that correspond to this never-seen-before thing would include thoughts that others have previously had, such as the thought corresponding to the color white.

In other words, every thought rearranges or builds on at least one thought that someone else before has had in his/her mind.

I don´t seem to understand how you get from "corresponds" to "rearranges" and/or "builds on".

 

[Chesterton]

Yesterday I dressed up as a pickle and sang Trini Lopez songs in front of a dry cleaner's store. I bet nobody ever thought of that before.

 

[Bushido216]

anti-matter

 

[GrowingSmaller]

anti-matter

Its a compound of the concepts of "anti" and "matter".

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

In other words, is it possible for somebody to have a thought that nobody before has at least partly had?

 

[quatona]

In other words, is it possible for somebody to have a thought that nobody before has at least partly had?

IMO the answer would be the same as it would be to the question:

Is it possible for somebody to have a child that nobody before has at least partly had?

 

[Eudaimonist]

My completely original idea is "squirgle". Sorry, I can't explain what that is in terms that you'd understand.

Or can I? Does an original thought have to have nothing to do with other thoughts? I'd think that it could instead.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

IMO the answer would be the same as it would be to the question:

Is it possible for somebody to have a child that nobody before has at least partly had?

No.

Due to genetic mutations a child may have never-seen-before traits, but every child has previously-existing genetic material.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Or can I? Does an original thought have to have nothing to do with other thoughts? I'd think that it could instead.


eudaimonia,

Mark

The question is about the possibility of completely original thought.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The question is about the possibility of completely original thought.

Yes, so? String theory was a completely original thought. It may have built on previous thoughts, but it added a completely original thought to the mix.

eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Every thought has in common with all other thoughts at least one thing: being a thought.

 

[KCfromNC]

And normally, being expressed in language using letters and words written billions of times before. Doesn't mean the particular arrangement of those letters doesn't convey a unique thought.

 

[Ukrainia]

Yes, it's possible.

Think of the first airplane as an analogy. Before the Wright brothers no one had ever created a vehicle capable of being flown. To build the plane they used materials that others had used before, but to actually create a vehicle capable of flight they had to use those materials in a way no one had ever done before them. I would say an original thought is similar - while it builds upon other ideas, it still can be original.

 

[bricklayer]

There are two types of ideas: intellectual conceptions and intellectual perceptions.

All ideas are eternally present, in the mind of God.
God is the conceiver of all ideas.

Man is a perceiver of ideas.
Man cannot conceive ideas nor can he perceive ideas that God has not conceived,

God's reasoning ontologically sequences eternally present intellectual conceptions.

Man's reasoning ontologically sequences a chronological sequence of intellectual perceptions.

"There is nothing new, under the sun."

 

[Eudaimonist]

There are two types of ideas: intellectual conceptions and intellectual perceptions.

All ideas are eternally present, in the mind of God.
God is the conceiver of all ideas.

Man is a perceiver of ideas.
Man cannot conceive ideas nor can he perceive ideas that God has not conceived,

God's reasoning ontologically sequences eternally present intellectual conceptions.

Man's reasoning ontologically sequences a chronological sequence of intellectual perceptions.

"There is nothing new, under the sun."

There are three types of ideas: this, that, and the other thing.

James T. Kirk is God.

Man is a perceiver of James T. Kirk.

James T. Kirk is a conceiver of green children.

Spock's reasoning ontologically preceeds Kirk's womanizing.

"God needs a starship."


eudaimonia,

Marl

 

[belarm]

In other words, every thought rearranges or builds on at least one thought that someone else before has had in his/her mind.

Therefore, no idea--even an "original idea"--is completely original. Every idea is either a rearrangement of existing combinations of thoughts or builds on at least one existing thought.

Maybe there was a point in space and time where the first ever thinking being had the first ever thought. That, I suppose, would have been a completely original thought. But that is difficult to imagine.

Within the parameters you've laid out, there cannot be an original thought. Furthermore, there probably never was one.

While there are certainly benchmarks on the scale of increasingly complex thoughts and perceptions, they are most accurately represented as a continuum. Our thoughts are arrangements of images, memories, and concepts we've accumulated over our life - and before it, in the case of our instinctual responses. Brains in general evolved as a way to store more information than could be represented in genetic code, and we have used that capability to pass information between generations selectively, passing on the things which appear to be of use, and refining them over time.

Of course, by that rigid definition, the question sort of looses its significance. Originality of thought is not necessarily a positive thing: flying monkeys throwing squirrels at hippos playing checkers is rather original, but not especially useful. So when we talk about 'original ideas', it's been my experience that the metric being evaluated could more accurately be called the profundity of said idea.

But those are just my rearranged pictures, instincts, and linguistic prejudices

 

[Tielec]

There are three types of ideas: this, that, and the other thing.

James T. Kirk is God.

Man is a perceiver of James T. Kirk.

James T. Kirk is a conceiver of green children.

Spock's reasoning ontologically preceeds Kirk's womanizing.

"God needs a starship."


eudaimonia,

Marl

Despite
1) Being an idea
2) Using words that have all been used before
3) Using english
4) Using quotes

The above seems like a fairly original idea