Nope, not me… I’m still trying.

  • ehpolitical@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Not true… every thought had to have been thought for a first time by someone, just not by us (it seems).

    • nef@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      it includes absolutely nothing that’s already familiar to you

      I truly do not believe that any thought exists without context, if you can find any examples I would be happy to be proven wrong.

      • ehpolitical@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Well, every single thought had to have been thought a first time by someone, no?

        • nef@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sure, but by your definition any thought containing any kind of language would not be “original” because it requires familiarity with the language.

          • ehpolitical@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Now you’re breaking off into something else that fascinates me… symbolism as a highly efficient method of communication. If you test yourself, you’ll find it takes less time for your brain to process symbols than spoken words… and there’s a very short amount of time in there where your brain understands what it’s looking at without the need of any other language other than symbolism.