It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Your thoughts and ideas are not your own, nor are they original

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Unless you were born and raised in a vacuum your ideas and thoughts are not your own, nor are they original.

We are all the result of our personal experiences and interactions. You are perhaps a little of whatever you were given, by whatever, at birth but mostly you are what you have interacted with since then.

Even the conspiracies that you choose to believe in, you should rethink.

Where did your thoughts of any particular conspiracy originate?

Can you trace back when or where you began believing or disbelieving in a particular anything?
edit on 29-12-2010 by In nothing we trust because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
When I found out the Mayan calender ends on my daughters birthday, Ive been on a wild goose chase ever since.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


I would agree 100%! Speaking from a musicians point of view any "original" piece of music you write is based off something you have heard before. After all to learn music you need to listen to other peoples music and it rubs off on you! So yes I agree that this logic could be applied to anything to you think or create!
edit on 29-12-2010 by phatpackage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:11 AM
link   
I think you're making a valid point.

One thing being a conspiracy researcher has taught me is to be more discerning about the assumptions I'm operating from.

I guess in the final analysis we have to ask ourselves what our goal is - what we're trying to accomplish. And to do that - listen to our inner voice.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


High fiiive!

Makes sense to me...

SF



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 

Intresting, I thought of it this way that everything is on autopilot and thoughts come into play at precise timing.
For example tomorrow when I wake up I am going to think of something that was there for me to think for.

This would mean that every thing that we think of is ploted, like destiny sort of at 10 a clock sharp you will think of this, but to me this is not the case and that thinking is based on the neural linking in our brain. I call it the link, the link provides information, less the links we have in our brains the less thoughts we have. Ability to learn builds more links, learning new things creates new links, defines a person on it's suroundings, what that person learns. Learning really is it, how can you ride a bike if you don;t know how, you got to think of how to do it.

I see it this way.
What is this = thinking. Link building.
Thinking is really based on the question mark.



edit on 29-12-2010 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:55 AM
link   
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


So, what about before the electronic era? You claim Nikola Tesla didn't come up with anything original? Pfffttt...



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by WhizPhiz
 


I don't know whether it's true or not, but I've heard that Tesla had access to ancient knowledge stored in the Vatican library, and that's the source of his genius.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:17 AM
link   
To a degree, I agree. However, if it were 100% the case, we, as a species, would have died off long ago. No-one would have invented fire, no-one would have invented the wheel, no-one would have thought of hunting- not unless that damn snake told us to, anyway..unless you believe the ancient astronaut theory, that is.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


So, what about before the electronic era? You claim Nikola Tesla didn't come up with anything original? Pfffttt...


Tesla was fed the ball so to speak. He had very detail oriented dreams (bordering on hallucinations during waking hours) that led directly to his discoveries. I use the word discoveries because that's all anything really is.

The OP's title could very well represent every single ego. Ego is the equivalent of installation software same as ideas.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:30 AM
link   
How very Taoist!

"There is no thinker, only the thought"
(I think (heh) that is how it goes.)

This is part of my subscription. Fits in well (or doesn't fit at all) with my Discordianism.

A+ OPer! (Of course that is just because I agree
)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Exactly! anything innovative is only got from something else they have seen before and taken it further!



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
This is a popular new age concept, and one that i agree with (on a deeper level, even). It is the concept of "self" and "other", whereby the self and the other are intertwined. The shared experiences of mankind makes the self part of the other.

If you are interested in that, you might also find memetics to be interesting. The word "meme" has been bastardized by internet users. Look into memetics. It is kind of like that whole "100th monkey" paradigm.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


So, what about before the electronic era? You claim Nikola Tesla didn't come up with anything original? Pfffttt...


Not if you think on a cosmic scale.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
I'm not so sure if this follows the main topic but have any of you watched a new born closely in the first month after birth? Someone told me they are in the process of their final days while being re-birthed at the same time however by the time they are a month old they have forgotten all past memory.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
That fact that I agree with your OP bothers me because for me it points to the conclusion that their is no such thing as free will, something that I struggle to accept.

Most things are invented by combining other earlier inventions and using them in a different way or for a different purpose, Nature invented electricity, people just learned to harness it.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   
That's very true. that is why it is important to be in a good environment if possible and avoid negativity so that one derives inspiration from good things and that it is reflected in their way of thinking too.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Great thread concept. I can only add:

"There is only one way in which a person acquires a new idea: by the combination or association of two or more ideas he already has into a new juxtaposition in such a manner as to discover a relationship among them of which he was not previously aware." ~Francis A. Cartier

I kinda equate this to a book or story by an author. The author might not have invented the words he used but arranged them in a particular order to tell an interesting story. The library (uhm Amazon Kindle) is full of them.

Also to note, it would sure explain déjà vu.

edit on 29-12-2010 by kinda kurious because: typos tweaks



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by davespanners
That fact that I agree with your OP bothers me because for me it points to the conclusion that their is no such thing as free will, something that I struggle to accept.

Most things are invented by combining other earlier inventions and using them in a different way or for a different purpose, Nature invented electricity, people just learned to harness it.



My take on free will is that for their to be free will, you would also have to accept that there is such a thing as "random".

In a culture run by the science of causation, this is a very difficult idea to contemplate.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
My take on free will is that for their to be free will, you would also have to accept that there is such a thing as "random".

In a culture run by the science of causation, this is a very difficult idea to contemplate.


Which is why THIS was so funny:


Originally posted by adigregorio
Fits in well (or doesn't fit at all) with my Discordianism.





new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join