Say something original

I don't really believe in originality as a concept. Even the greatest achievements are built on the concept of others. Unique interpretation, with the occasional mental leap of genius is as close as we get, I think. That's what I would call innovation, but not originality.

Now, my personal favourite question regarding this topic is what was the first thought? That could possibly be the one 'original' thought. My guess is that it probably had something to do with hunger, sex, or bodily functions.

Today I had lunch with two old friend from college (Class of '60). Ms. "A" I see frequently. Her conversation is a series of well-crafted, well-worn speeches. She tends to repeat herself. Ms. "B" reads several magazines, visits the library every week and is fond of speculating on the human condition--with footnotes.

I feel more of a kindred spirit with Ms. "B". We don't invent anything as significent as the wheel or Jungian theory or robotic lore, but this old world is full of new experiences to explore and we do our best.

Never. Used to be a goal; not now. I'm content treading well-worn paths. Other people have thought up some damned fascinating things.

I have long resigned myself to the fact that I am basically, a deductive thinker. I am great at taking ideas, digesting them, and coming up with my own conclusions. I am definitely not an original thinker, but I can do some pretty neat things with other people's ideas!

I have never said an original thing in my life. Every time I think I do - a little research proves me wrong.

I don't think humans are capable of it. Art seeks to duplicate or atleast extrapolate from nature - philosophy seeks to figure out nature... I think we discover - not invent. Perhaps our only strength is that we can abstact and extraplolate to reorganize - but this is not originality in the true sense of the word.

TF

"Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good." - Nietzche

My first reaction to the name of this thread was to respond by saying "I am unoriginal". But, it looks like several people have beat me to it! I really think that originality is a concept much the same as utopia.

Shannon

Edit: I also wanted to say that I love your quote, thethinktank. So true.

a chair of bowlies

something original

I posed this question to my Intro class. They came up with this distinction:

1) Unless you are original in every way you cannot be truly original. So a spear is simply a rock and a stick - a new sentence (like a chair of bowlies - unless it is simply a spoonerism for a bowl of cherries) is simply the arangement of an already existing language. If thought is its own language then even then a new thought is simply a slight alteration to an existing structure.

2) However, original could be the new application to old structures - thus the spear and the sentence are a new application of existing things.

Thought I would share.

TF

But every time a different person thinks the same though, the thought is reapplied depending on the person. So either everything is original or nothing is.

Everything is original in terms of its presence in time and place, and material composition.

Suppose you find something broken in the house, but you realize that by rearranging the pieces of the structure and adding some duct tape and screws that you can repair and improve the structure. Is this an Original thought? The situation and component pieces of the structure are relatively unique, as may be the solution.

Taxonomy necessitates arbitrary distinctions. So, too, I suppose, does the application of the vague term "original."

You make some interesting points.

But isn't the structural change itself original, when done intentionally? A spear is more than just a rock and a stick, just as a dandilion is more than an arrangement of mollecules.



Yes, I guess this was my point.

How often do we "create" new ideas vs repeating old ones?

Ha, I was thinking this as well (we destroyed each others originality )

So many discussions of this type seem to come down to definitions.

There's an interesting question: is originality really a question of application?

(Not the first time this issue's been brought up in the thread, I realize.)

When a new song is written, is it "original"?

When General Relativity was described, was the understanding "original"?

When man first lands on the moon, is it "original"?

I guess I need to refine my definition of original. Here's what I have to work with... I guess I'm using adj definition numbers #2 and #3 primarily.

Websters:

o·rig·i·nal ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-rj-nl)
adj.

1. Preceding all others in time; first.
2. Not derived from something else; fresh and unusual: an original play, not an adaptation.
3. Showing a marked departure from previous practice; new: a truly original approach. See
4. Productive of new things or new ideas; inventive: an original mind.
5. Being the source from which a copy, reproduction, or translation is made.

n.
1. A first form from which other forms are made or developed: Later models of the car retained many features of the original.

2. An authentic work of art: bought an original, not a print.
3. Work that has been composed firsthand: kept the original but sent a photocopy to his publisher.
4. A person who is appealingly odd or curious; a character.

Archaic. The source from which something arises; an originator.

(Removed: accidental duplicate)

By this definition, most of Shakespeare's plays are unoriginal. But I would be inclined to contend that in structure, theme, combination of disparate elements, and sheer brilliance of language he's one of the most original writers in the English language. How to reconcile?