Original thought.

i was thinking about origional thought from the previous thread. I have been pondering on the subject for a couple of days. This is what i came up with... lol It might be lame but just bare with me.

Many say that origional thought cannot be. Everything is already said in done in some manner or another. So inorder to have origional thought you have to change the way we think. Human cognition has to be reprogrammed to put it simply. Then origional thought can happen once again. Like start all over with logic and everything. Just my thought...most likely someone already thought of it. so its not origional.. lol

its impossible to think of something totally irrelevant (which i think would have to be in order to be original).. or is it? discuss discuss..

I'm going to agree with this.. It just doesn't seem possible to think of something "Original" because there are Billions of people in this world That very more than likely have thought of at one point or another whether it be past or present..

I don't even really know how to comprehend and actual brand new thought now that I think about it x__x;

"You are not the doer" (Gautama Buddha)

and to express the thoujght = your using language which is unoriginial.. hey is it posible just to play with words to form original theories?.. like everything never exists<<bad example but im just testing...

Wouldn't original thought occur when you see something for the first time, like the ocean, or the grand canyon?

original to you yea perhaps, but we are talking about original thoughts period. that no other human being has thoguht of before.. i mean why do we give philosphers credit for certain thoughts if they werent original?? well then again maybe they just organised took bits and pieces of ideas and camer up with someething..

andd saying all this.. i itnhk we acknoledge that everyoen has original htoughts in that they are not identical to others exaclty exaclty the same way.. but i cant think of a way to finish that sentence.. but i mean unoriginal that its the same type/kind of ideas we have iguess..

quote:

---

I don't even really know how to comprehend and actual brand new thought now that I think about it x__x;

---

Eggsacly.

We as indivdual's often think that we are all just indivdual's. We are an unawaked mass-consiousness.

In other words there is orginal thought it just doesn't occur until the entire group of indivdual's understand and agree as a universal truth the "thought's" that we all ready have. And when this is done we as any entire species are "re-programmed" as I think the word was used, and then we as individual's have whole new forms of perceptions in which to form our "orginal ideas".

Didn't think this thread through alot but I think if makes sense.

How does the perceived, perceive?

I'm sure that there is an original thought - but it would be hard to prove.

Perhaps one: intent behind intent?

But it is a perfectly balanced system for if everything is determined such that everything has 100% certainty of occurring then how can there be any means to seperate cause from effect?

How does the perceived, perveive?

There is a group of 100 cave men in a tribe. 10 of these men know the secret of the wheel. But it is not until all 100 of them know the secret and apply in there every day life's that orginal thought can occur. Because of all 100 of them knowing the secret and they all apply it everyday then it gives all of them a new "program" or perception as I think is a better term. And as a result one of them (through this new programming) is able to have the idea of a wagon. Thus orginal thought has occured. This can be applied to philosophical ideas as well. Orginal thought does occur but only after the mass group understands a fundemental law underlying the idea.

Well argued.

The question of course would eventually break down when we ask how did they know of the wheel? Go further, further nd further still, and the human mind starts to find trouble. Are there any coincidences?

Its rather strange isn't it how we humans think.

If I could imagine the world as it probably is beyond the perception I would liken it to a perfect flow. The human mind, the human eye, any human receptor is limited. Thus we will constantly wish for and actually find originality.

In physics have you ever done the experiment where you flash a flash light at a stream of water and watch it periodically go dark and light?

This practice is what we do. Its like if you grow up with your own kids you never notice them looking different. But an aunt who hasn't seen them for a year will notice the difference.

So it is with originality; its just how big we think the event is. The perception is seeing the event as big, small, relevant, irrelavant, etc. but more importantly how we can fix this in with what else we know or our abilities, both of which may be argued to be a collection of prejudices!

Of course whether the underlying law is learned is of course what scientists wish to hope to collectively find when seeking 'the truth'. The question is whether this truth is really what is worth looking for. Fortunately, I say 'yes it is!' at least its on the right track.

i think it is possible to have an original thought, but only by applying our unoriginal human thought proccess to a current idea or thing, for example using logic to solve a new problem, the solution may be new, therefore the thought or idea is original, but it is just the application of unoriginal logic.