Are We Really Thinking ?

All "information" is defined relative to a "system with a goal". It has no independent status. In the sense that the brain is such a system, and is subject to non-deterministic fluctuations like the rest of "nature", then the phrase "original thought " makes sense.

Hi Fresco !
I don´t really see the connection...
...unless you believe moments can be repeated to the detail, and I don´t, then all thoughts are infinitely original...

All "philosophical" debate is open to textual deconstruction. We can of course wander off into problems of identity theory if pushed. But the style of the question (are we really and information processing) suggests the isomorphic physical reductionism of "thought" to "brain mechanisms" in which determinism is assumed. Therefore my comment was at de-railing such determinism rather than delving into the ontological status of "separate thoughts" per se.

Most do only "think" out of compulsery behaviour, which is why some doesn't have situational intelligence.

Let's not assume determinism just yet.
We organize the information we aquire in different ways, the individual.
The mentally healthy individual is able to organize information at will, imagination.
We do not create information, we aquire it.

The animal aquires and organizes information in a compulsory manner.
The information, sought and processed, is dictated by survival.

The human element has the time to spend aquiring, processing, and organizing information for individual pleasure. We find the process to be pleasurable.

But that´s the thing you know...their originality comes from the differentiation from all other possible status at time point X given preserved dynamics...its not per se, but through the Whole.

For all that I know we are all shooting the water as "quantum fluctuations" may well regard a problem of Multiverse "fuzzy effect" between possibility's...my insight is that one needs to look past this, and check out for what makes sense...don´t throw reason out of the window so soon is my gut instinct every time paradoxes knock on the door...

Everything processes information, not brain in particular, is just a question of how much...my conclusion...information processes information ! (and that is determined, no other rule around it, emerging out of nothing)

Would anyone care to debate the ontological nature of Infinity ?
...that would make the day...

...further deep would be to address the true nature of Error...not so easy...
considering every possible system set of functions is true makes error fall into the realm of perspective given assigned functionality and context between agents...

Are you saying that a rock processes info?
I would agree that a rock is an organization of info, but can't see how it processes any.

Are you joking ?
A rock is a system which like everything else "filters" information around it...
Its gravitational pull in the surroundings is just a small example on how it works...

Filter is not process.
I'm not even sure it filters, it affects information around it sure.
In a predictable manner, according to it's organization.

OK Wayne...look further in...if it "affects" then it processes it...it transforms it !!!

ok , I see what you're saying now.
It's a static process though, predictable.

That is the point...what is it that ultimately falls out of that realm ?
Think about layers upon layers upon layers of a bottom line very simple system...its all about processes under and above other processes really...(like conveyor belts of information running upon conveyor belts of further information...systems upon systems...and meta-systems...)

Ultimately Truth is about Information (string) length...(all the length of Multiverse) = (that which is possible...all possibles ensemble !)

...no Nothing out of it...

Yes, I can agree with that.
We are just as limited as the rock, at our own level.
I do find it interesting that we have the capacity to gather and organize info to satisfy pleasure.
Leads me to wonder about motive at the next layer.
It seems reasonble to suppose that motive also continues to be more complex.

Yes...that would be further complex in the above level...but I don´t think that the under states are false given the above further complex states...they just serve different functions at different levels of explanation...they all are true...no error in the bloody "machine"...one needs to regard closely what function serves what, at what level of the "conveyors"...without inter crossing meanings at different levels...

...you see Fresco and I just "read" differently the very same problem...
I say, they all are True, there is a Truth...he says, they all are wrong there is no Truth...it does n´t really matter much...we speaking about the same thing...

Understanding Truth is about accepting we are questioning it...

I think each level supports the next.
I'm gonna go with your position that they're all true.
I am beginning to see some support for hedonism in this.

Yes...you see systems "aggregate" together a veil of protection at their level...
We, each of us is/are a system...Hedonism is about protecting our system at our own level of complexity...Further up and we get Social...further down we are individualistic in attitude...immediate or long term gain...chain complex, or go alone...

I'm thinking of pleasure as above the rest, even social.
We are willing to forego our comfort, risk our survival, put society on the back burner to enjoy our chosen pleasure.
We realize the necessity of the supporting levels and construct our pleasure system as close to the line as we can.