Originality an impossibility?

[Z3ratul]

I mean this on two levels:

1) The more everyday one- the one you encounter at school, in the workplace, etc. People trying to be original in the way they dress, act, speak... and I'm not referring to the 'emo's. I'm wondering if, regardless of what you did, could you ever achieve originality? Of course, that might imply that you are required to put up a facade, which, while could be the case, isn't necessary. Heck- even being yourself, while probably the most truthful way to live, isn't original in the conept, or even the execution. In the society we live in today, I do think original is impossible.

2) The first is really an example of the second. Has every idea already been thought? It seems everytime I come up with a thought that I consider 'original', I'll find that somebody has already made a quote pretaining of such, or, rather disappointingly on my behalf, sometimes whole idealogies have been based on that thought process. I guess knowing that I don't live in a case of solipism is comforting, and yet at the same time, depressing. I might be letting pride and conceit get ahead of myself, but I'm starting to consider (and maybe even accept) that it will be impossible in my life to come up with an original statement, thought, or idea.

The only possible disproof I've been able to find is our advancement of technology, but even so, I'm not sure if that counts. And, while I type this, let me apologize as I did so in a matter of five minutes and it may not be entirely thought out. In any case...

Anybody have any thoughts on the matter?

[Tokzic]

Sometimes, when I have nothing else to do but think, I consider things that life could be that we haven't considered yet. I once considered that the only thing you could be sure of existing is yourself, and everything else could be an illusion. Turns out this was an ancient Greek philosophy.

It isn't impossible, but it is definitely extremely difficult to think of something that no one else has. Even with what's left, there's high competition. You probably know someone who had a great idea for an invention that someone else made before them. I know many instances.

[esupin]

I'm sure people 60 years from now have wondered about the same question, and look where we are now. Tell someone from 1945 that there are Japanese baseball players in the MLB and they'd pee their pants.

Originality is definitely possible. A great place to find originality is in media. Every once in a while(although some would probably disagree), a movie or a book or anything else will pop up that is wholly original. Obviously, nothing is 100% original. Themes such as love and the human condition will always be around.

The trick is to not try too hard to be original. Every human being is different. Shake what your momma gave you.

[SethSquall]

Every bodys different in some way or another. I just think the difference goes further to how you present yourself or what music you listern to.

[Kilgamayan]

Originality is overrated.

[Z3ratul]

Originally Posted by esupin

Every once in a while(although some would probably disagree), a movie or a book or anything else will pop up that is wholly original.

The trick is to not try too hard to be original. Every human being is different. Shake what your momma gave you.

I disagree. Wholly original? No, I highly doubt that. Even when ignoring technicalities, I'm sure some form of the idea has been thought- perhaps just applied differently to fit the situation.

And regarding that second part... agreed.

Originally Posted by SethSquall

Every bodys different in some way or another. I just think the difference goes further to how you present yourself or what music you listern to.

Of course everybody is different. But I'm doubting anybody is original... again, ignoring technicalities. Suppose you listen to music types 'a, d, g, k, and z'. I'm sure somebody else on this planet listens to just those same kinds of music as well as yourself. You could consider, however, that nobody will be exactly the same as you (DNA for example), thus making you original. This in my eyes though, is a technicality.

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

Originality is overrated.

I agree. However, some would consider it to be one of the most important things to strive for. Subjective, I know, but just stating the fact.

EDIT: I'm not even sure if there's a point I'm trying to reach for in this discussion... it just bothers me a bit is all...

[DarkVampiress21]

There are just more and more people in the world. A long time ago, there were original people, but now there's more population so it's harder to stand out. It's also harder to not repeat the people in the past who were original at the time.

You know how they say as we keep reproducing, one day we'll all be the same?

Exactly.

[JKPolk]

The hardest part about being original, is that you're doing something that no one's done before. It's expensive, it's tricky, and it takes a HELL of a lot of work.

And DarkVamp makes me think of the good ol' days of Doppelgangers. They make for both the coolest card, and coolest theory ever.

[Z3ratul]

Something interesting I thought of- you're born from your parents, so, at least from a physical standpoint, you stand no chance for originality. Meh.

[JKPolk]

Not true Z3r. My sister was born mentally and physically retarded, but I was born quite intelligent. My parents always like to rub that in, too.
"All you do is sit around and play video games! If your sister had your brains, I bet she'd be doing something more productive!"

But anyway, as I derail my own post, there's always a random possibility. No one else in my family, at least to my knowledge, is mentally or physically retarded.

[Z3ratul]

Originally Posted by JKPolk

Not true Z3r. My sister was born mentally and physically retarded, but I was born quite intelligent.

You've only posted an unlikely probability- not something unoriginal. There's plenty of people in this world that are mentally / physically retarded (sorry if I talk objectively about the subject considering it's your sister). Your parents still have the capacity to pass on a set of genes that would create something that's handicapped... just not as likely as producing something that's more on the 'normal' side. It's just two different cases in my eyes... unless I'm missing a reasoning in your post, which is entirely possible.

[esupin]

Originally Posted by Z3ratul

I disagree. Wholly original? No, I highly doubt that. Even when ignoring technicalities, I'm sure some form of the idea has been thought- perhaps just applied differently to fit the situation.

And regarding that second part... agreed.

Hmm... recently, spoken word poetry has taken off. It's like rapping poetry. Although it's two preexisting art forms molded together, it's definitely something that's never been done before. Also, a film with a mostly Asian cast directed by an Asian made in the USA has finally been made that doesn't involve kung-fu(Better Luck Tomorrow). As far as I know, it's the only one of its kind.

[Z3ratul]

Originally Posted by esupin

Hmm... recently, spoken word poetry has taken off. It's like rapping poetry. Although it's two preexisting art forms molded together, it's definitely something that's never been done before. Also, a film with a mostly Asian cast directed by an Asian made in the USA has finally been made that doesn't involve kung-fu(Better Luck Tomorrow). As far as I know, it's the only one of its kind.

I guess those in their own respect are pretty original. xD

[flamingspinach]

it's perfectly possible to be original... o_O wtf? The state of the universe is never the same, every second of existence is original

[JKPolk]

Z3r:
I get what you're saying, and yes that makes sense to a point. Don't worry, I don't take offense, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it.

[Charlotte21]

"Originality" is a human fabrication to seperate ourselves from others. It doesn't exist, your environment determines your actions. You have a limited number of decisions in said environment and will react to a stimulus based on habit.

Six cats are thrown in the air. They cannot choose to do anything but either drop and hurt themselves, or flip around and balance their fall. Their options are limited to a very boolean system, or in other words: a resist or a comply. They can either resist or comply. The cats, having the habit of resisting injury, will fall. You can make these situations more complex and add in more variables but they melt down to the same cognitive decisions.

It is amazingly simple to take every miniscule action and span it between the two poles 'resist' and 'comply' in response to a situation (which is imposed by environment). Simply: you can either be a person to resist something or comply with something, but either way you are constrained by the choices spanning between the two poles. No decisions can be considered original or creative. You cannot decide to be original or perform any number of actions thus making yourself original.

But, since the universe is in a void, the universe itself may be original, because it has no restraints and no outer environment to determine it's actions. The universe as a whole is original, and by extension you could make the point that flamingspinach makes (I really like that idea.) but there's nothing you can do to make any difference in your "originality". You already have it, but not in the human sense where we want to set ourselves apart from others based on the difference in our actions.

Oh-- and as for new thoughts. New thoughts are just the processing and reprocessing of thoughts about the world and reactions to the environment we see in nature. It may be possible for a thought to appear that hasn't appeared before in the history of human thought, but as information builds and builds and becomes more and more accessible, it is very unprobable that there will be someone who comes up with something that hasn't been thought up before. You could put your faith in Quantum Physics, but that isn't 'original thinking', that's just die-hard empiricism.

Maybe existentialism was the last gasp for philosophy...

[Z3ratul]

Good post Charlotte... and honored to see I'm on your Top 3 ^_^

it's perfectly possible to be original... o_O wtf? The state of the universe is never the same, every second of existence is original

I consider that to be no more than coincidence... a technicality really. That goes with out saying... and if one or any number of actions goes differently, that will still be the case. The only way to really disprove that statement would be if there were multiple universes / dimensions / timelines or whatever... but I think, for the time being, that's slightly out of our reach. What I'm saying is you're right no matter what, just the first one to say it here.

"Originality" is a human fabrication to seperate ourselves from others. It doesn't exist, your environment determines your actions. You have a limited number of decisions in said environment and will react to a stimulus based on habit.

There's a definition I'll be keeping with myself for awhile. It did cross my mind, that, like many things, originality is just another thing that feeds our human ego. I do agree that everything is situational, but I would still hope that if there was a congruent universe, that, given the same situation, I might actually make a different choice. I think not... but knowing (or at least thinking) I have the choice is ensuring enough for myself. Determinism really doesn't fit my fancy.

Oh-- and as for new thoughts. New thoughts are just the processing and reprocessing of thoughts about the world and reactions to the environment we see in nature. It may be possible for a thought to appear that hasn't appeared before in the history of human thought, but as information builds and builds and becomes more and more accessible, it is very unprobable that there will be someone who comes up with something that hasn't been thought up before. You could put your faith in Quantum Physics, but that isn't 'original thinking', that's just die-hard empiricism.

Maybe existentialism was the last gasp for philosophy...

Again, great analyzation. Pretty much, I believe there's only three things I'm sure of:

1) Everything (even paradox) is possible.
2) Every possibility has a probability.
3) I believe in my own consciousness.

Anything past that, in my eyes, is assumption. Granted, I can't live day to day with that in my head, but it's still what I think. How this relates is that I think it's possible to come up with a new thought, just highly improbable.

As far as existentialism goes... I think right now I sit on agnostic existentialism. It logically makes the most sense to me, in my own way gives me hope and motivation, and from a trivial standpoint, seems like the safest route as far as belief systems go.

Everything else I didn't quote... no comment, just agreed.

[flamingspinach]

Originally Posted by Charlotte21

Oh-- and as for new thoughts. New thoughts are just the processing and reprocessing of thoughts about the world and reactions to the environment we see in nature. It may be possible for a thought to appear that hasn't appeared before in the history of human thought, but as information builds and builds and becomes more and more accessible, it is very unprobable that there will be someone who comes up with something that hasn't been thought up before. You could put your faith in Quantum Physics, but that isn't 'original thinking', that's just die-hard empiricism.

Maybe existentialism was the last gasp for philosophy...

On the contrary - every time someone thinks of a "new thought" i.e. one that hasn't been thought of before, it expands the possibility to combine that thought with other thoughts to form more "new thoughts". That's why, for example, our generation knows so much more than the last, whereas maybe 10,000 years ago people would know about as much as their parents did. The noosphere is growing exponentially. This is a vast oversimplification, but it's adequate for the purposes of this thread.

Originally Posted by Charlotte21

"Originality" is a human fabrication to seperate ourselves from others. It doesn't exist, your environment determines your actions. You have a limited number of decisions in said environment and will react to a stimulus based on habit.

Here you're basically making a statement about free will as a whole, rather than about originality, which is a small subset of it - and I agree with you completely. I invite you to examine this wikipedia article, which contains a perhaps more developed conception of this basic idea.

-fs