I believe none of our thoughts are unique

[prplchknz]

I believe that whatever you're thinking, have thought, or will think someone has,is, or will have that same thought at some point in time. So how does this make you feel? to learn that perhaps your thoughts aren't solely yours? do you feel like you need to race to get your thoughts out into the world before the other person? or do you think it's fine because more than likely you'll never meet the people you've shared 90% of your thoughts with?

 

[Octavarium]

Are you talking about creative ideas? Or just the thoughts people tend to have on a daily basis?

 

[prplchknz]

Are you talking about creative ideas? Or just the thoughts people tend to have on a daily basis?

both

 

[prplchknz]

I wonder if people can't agree that possibly their thoughts aren't completely original? I don't really care, because sometimes you have a "mind meld" which awesome, and sometimes the thought is in chinese. and I don't know chinese

 

[Ginkgo]

I think most of our thoughts are just highly specific iterations of the essence of thought itself. They are so highly specific, contextual, and outlined by general ignorance that their lack of originality eludes us.

I also think that even if my prior thought isn't true, then we ought to at least reconsider the historical notion of originality. The thinkers and artists we most idolize likely had counterparts who had similar thoughts - thoughts that were erased or overlooked by time. Only by chance do we believe some historical characters to be pioneers.

The idea that our thoughts aren't novel and ego-based seems to be very unpopular, but it's probably true.

I should also add that I don't think that anything is unique aside from the totality of existence itself, as a whole.

 

[prplchknz]

I think most of our thoughts are just highly specific iterations of the essence of thought itself. They are so highly specific, contextual, and outlined by general ignorance that their lack of originality eludes us.

I also think that even if my prior thought isn't true, then we ought to at least reconsider the historical notion of originality. The thinkers and artists we most idolize likely had counterparts who had similar thoughts - thoughts that were erased or overlooked by time. Only by chance do we believe some historical characters to be pioneers.

The idea that our thoughts aren't novel and ego-based seems to be very unpopular, but it's probably true.

I should also add that I don't think that anything is unique aside from the totality of existence itself, as a whole.

Yes

 

[JustAMind]

It's true for most of our thoughts. I believe some of our thoughts and creative ideas are completely unique. Not your everyday thoughts but more abstract ones; about art or your dreams. I doubt anyone thought of Star Wars before George Lucas, about Lord of the Rings before Tolkien or about Xenomorph before H.R Giger. You can take a ideas from different mythologies, idealogies combine them with your imagination and you will get a thought that is hard to replicate. Some combinations of already established themes may be known to a limited number of minds(each one gets it's own input of already created ideas), plus each mind can create a new thought.

 

[prplchknz]

It's true for most of our thoughts. I believe some of our thoughts and creative ideas are completely unique. Not your everyday thoughts but more abstract ones; about art or your dreams. I doubt anyone thought of Star Wars before George Lucas, about Lord of the Rings before Tolkien or about Xenomorph before H.R Giger. You can take a ideas from different mythologies, idealogies combine them with your imagination and you will get a thought that is hard to replicate. Some combinations of already established themes may be known to a limited number of minds(each one gets it's own input of already created ideas), plus each mind can create a new thought.

I disagree, I believe before they got those thoughts in print, someone else had thought them. and while the other person was like meh whatever, George Lucas and Tolkien were the ones who profitted. I'm not saying they plagerized, because they didn't know someone else had those same thoughts

 

[prplchknz]

Ok I was thinking, thoughts have to begin somewhere, but i don't think the original thinker of those thoughts are likely to be the ones who profit off those thoughts. generally 99.9% aren't original.

And before you start accusing me to be a 4, let me just say that I doubt my thoughts are original or special. I believe someone else has had my thoughts

 

[JustAMind]

I disagree, I believe before they got those thoughts in print, someone else had thought them. and while the other person was like meh whatever, George Lucas and Tolkien were the ones who profitted. I'm not saying they plagerized, because they didn't know someone else had those same thoughts

As I view it; they have used unoriginal elements to come up with original concept. Just like painters they have used known colors to create an original painting. But how similar in your opinion two things must be to be called the same idea/thought?

 

[krypton1te]

Everything we create has its origin. No thought is unique. It is borrowed. Our ideas are nothing but a collection of thoughts we have borrowed throughout history.

BUT, what's unique is how those thoughts formulate to create a completely new idea. How we see the patterns in two seemingly unrelated thoughts to produce a new thought. That connectedness... is what makes thought unique.

Rather than focusing on how "not unique" our thoughts are, focus on HOW unique they can be when the puzzle pieces fit to create your big picture.

 

[krypton1te]

Language is what allows our ideas to be communicated clearly.

Depending how well you communicate, one person may express their thoughts more clearly to you. If it is more clearly expressed, the audience may be less foreign to it... therefore there is a higher possibility of truth to it. Whereas you may express a thought that has perhaps, more truth, but your audience gets lost in your explanation, and therefore, it is less believable.