The Student Room Group

Are any of our thoughts original?

Can we ever truly free ourselves from external influences or are we destined to think the same things others before us thought?

How do we know we are not being sheep when the very mentality of not wanting to be a sheep can have been influenced by those telling us not to be sheep?
Reply 1
I don't care so it's not a debate that particularly interests me. I don't care about being truly original in the sense outlined above, I only just care about being original enough to publish. The fixation on originality has always baffled me. You can live authentically without requiring 100% originality, and I'm comfortable enough with that.
Original post by gjd800
I don't care so it's not a debate that particularly interests me. I don't care about being truly original in the sense outlined above, I only just care about being original enough to publish. The fixation on originality has always baffled me. You can live authentically without requiring 100% originality, and I'm comfortable enough with that.


How can we defend our ideas knowing that they are only the product of our envoirnment and not of our isolated thought? How can I say that my beliefs are true and argue in their favor against opposing points of view knowing that, had I lived a different life, I could be the person going against my ideals?

is their any merit to our thoughts if they can be so easily influenced, doesn't it frighten you how easy to manipulate humans can sometimes be and how often we fall for the ape mentality of following the herd?

Maybe you have managed to overcome this but it's something I sometimes fall for and I hate myself for it.
I'm pretty sceptical about the idea of free-will though for all practical purposes it doesn't change anything about how I behave.
Well there must be original thoughts otherwise we would never have invented anything as a race
However free will is a different concept, because we are all born as we are, every interaction with others is determined by 4 factors:-
1) the person they were born as, short / tall, calm/ feisty, kind/cruel.
2) the person you were born as,(same criteria as above (1))
3) thier history (influenced by the same four factors each interaction).
4) your history ( same criteria as above (3)).

By this criteria we are always going to act in the way we do the choice has already been made before we get to the point of choosing because we are who we are, ( very oracle from the matrix.)
Even when we do what might be thought of as unexpected we are still doing what we would always do it’s just the odd time we react differently from the norm because of external factors which again fall under the same criteria as above.
Not if you are a stem student :h:
Pew pew :shoot:
Reply 7
Original post by username121212
How can we defend our ideas knowing that they are only the product of our envoirnment and not of our isolated thought? How can I say that my beliefs are true and argue in their favor against opposing points of view knowing that, had I lived a different life, I could be the person going against my ideals?

is their any merit to our thoughts if they can be so easily influenced, doesn't it frighten you how easy to manipulate humans can sometimes be and how often we fall for the ape mentality of following the herd?

Maybe you have managed to overcome this but it's something I sometimes fall for and I hate myself for it.

I have a largely pragmatic view of truth so again, not really a concern. I don't believe in 'ultimate' truths that stand True at all times and in all circumstances. Truths work in some circumstances and not in others, so it doesn't really bother me. Re views and opposing views, some work better than others and all are contextual, and so I defend my views based on contextual applications and how well they operate at a given time or circumstance or based on general applicability. Views that I find repellant are not repellant because of some ultimate maxim, but because they just do not stand up to any sort of scrutiny and can be attacked not only on practicality, but on general applicability.

Nope, it doesn't frighten me at all. Actually, for a professional philosopher I find almost all philosophy of this sort incredibly tedious. If it's not helping you to live a nicer, happier life, what's the point? It has drew the ire of many of my peers, but at the end of the day, I'm happier with life than they are :laugh:
(edited 5 years ago)
Reply 8
Original post by Axiomasher
I'm pretty sceptical about the idea of free-will though for all practical purposes it doesn't change anything about how I behave.

Quite, and this is exactly why I don't care about the 'debate'. An ex-colleague of mine recently published on a Buddhist re-working of the free-will debate. I asked her 'what difference does it really make?' The answer is 'none'.
Maybe some are, maybe some aren't. Some are influenced, some aren't. Our character and personality probably plays a part.

Does it actually matter?
Original post by Abaddon rex
However free will is a different concept, ...

I'm suggesting that there's no obvious 'place' or 'means' for fee-will to be exercised, at any level, including the way thoughts and actions emerge as a result of, essentially, mechanistic processes. If we accept that brains are at root subject to the principle of cause and effect then every thought you have has been subject to a lineague of (albeit complex) material processes. If you believe that the mind is in some way metaphysically separated from the brain then you could argue differently I suppose but that's not my view.
The world doesn't care what you think. It only cares what you actually do. Steve Jobs aint the first to think about a personal computer but we remember him for first personal to release the product.
Original post by Axiomasher
I'm suggesting that there's no obvious 'place' or 'means' for fee-will to be exercised, at any level, including the way thoughts and actions emerge as a result of, essentially, mechanistic processes. If we accept that brains are at root subject to the principle of cause and effect then every thought you have has been subject to a lineague of (albeit complex) material processes. If you believe that the mind is in some way metaphysically separated from the brain then you could argue differently I suppose but that's not my view.

That’s the point I was making that each interaction is caused by previous cause and effect, so it could be argued there is no free will however whatever the answer is we have no way of changing it as the only things that can change our perspectives are external factors and we will always respond to each of these factors in the way we do.
I was thinking the same thing yesterday ROFL

Quick Reply

Latest