What are you thinking of right now?
No matter what it is, you can never truly say that you solely, completely, and intrinsically design the thought that you are instantaneously producing.
Every neuron firing to communicate a cohesive thought to your body, every emotionally reactive compulsion, and every moderately similar essence to an idea has been thought of by someone before you.
When delving into the expansiveness of the modern-day mind’s contribution to humanity debate, I was enveloped in an absurd belief that I needed to abstain from reading any semi-intellectual or artistic material because my ideas, thoughts, and inclinations then morph into plagiarisms of other individual’s epiphanies.
Therefore, I believed that if I became exposed to someone else’s mind and the manifested thoughts that have been thought before my own mind could compose them, I would be less vital to the expansion of our understanding of the world and would not be partaking in anthropological improvement.
After considering the topic, I realized that my stubborn ignorance of already developed ideologies was irrevocably foolish. I then solidified my belief that past thinkers have already pondered the groundwork of “original” thoughts, and it is now our job to wrestle with those thoughts and enhance them.
Late 18th-century writer, Samuel Johnson, in his fictitious philosophical piece, The History of Rasselas, said, “Whatever be the reason, it is commonly observed that the early writers are in possession of nature, and their followers of art: that the first excel in strength and invention, and the latter in elegance and refinement.”
Although it is unlikely to have an absolute original thought, I feel society still moves forward. Refreshing ideas are produced due to how we build and distort those thoughts. Like Johnson implied in his Rasselas, we have the primordial thinkers and artists such as Plato, Descartes, Kant, Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, and Milton that laid fundamental principles on interpreting this world.
Our job is not necessarily to develop new ideas that the world has never been exposed to. Instead, we must take what has been given to us and cultivate those thoughts for a fuller, richer understanding of the current sociological climate.
In her lovely collection of poems, A Philosopher Speaks of Rivers, Olga-Maria C. Cruz poses in her poem, Likeness: after Aristotle,
“Like, they say, is known by like.
(This is the ancient Greek philosophers’
Way of saying, ‘It takes one
to know one.’)
The soul knows everything
and so must be composed,
some thinkers maintain,
of all the elements.
Like, they say, is known only by like.”
Cruz is implying that all people generate like-minded thoughts. We know what makes each other tick, which means that copious amounts of similar ideas are being tossed into the wind. But I’d also like to pose the argument that minds are not alike, but more so complimentary.
We must all think the same thoughts to build on what we have pondered. In other words, humanity will naturally produce all baseline, shared thoughts to translate them into different ideological avenues to guide forward-thinking.
It is not so much the fixation on whether your original thoughts are indeed your own. Still, tweaking the commonly shared foundational thoughts further ontological clarity and broaden our finite perception of the world.
Circling back to my incredulous belief, I selfishly guarded myself against any new knowledge because I wanted thoughts that were already subconsciously tucked inside of my psyche to be my own. I wanted credit for thinking something that had already been exhausted by someone else.
I, in turn, was doing myself and society a disservice because how can I possibly contribute something valuable if I am behind on my thinking? I’ll have original thoughts, yes, but those thoughts are already over-exhausted and are now viewed as “obvious.”
I started this article because this topic has been coursing through my mind for quite some time. When beginning to write my thoughts and compose a credible standpoint, I disregarded any research and went wholly on what I had philosophized. I desired to be the individual to come up with this idea, not reiterate a point that another like-minded thinker had already developed.
As I began reading more sources, asking professional opinions, and started coming to terms with the notion that this debate existed before I illuminated it, that is when I really began to dance with the topic. I came up with deductions that I could never produce without casting off my lust for originality.
So, are your thoughts original?
Not necessarily. But there are infinitely unique ways that you may build upon them.
