| A few questions for you, because I think you make a good point about it being a mimic network (where each person puts a slight spin on it). 1. Have you heard of the belief of "Human Design"? That belief / theory / spiritual guide has a similar distribution to what you're talking about. I'm just curious if your thinking was independent to that or if you've ever heard of it. (https://www.jovianarchive.com/Human_Design/Types) 2. How do you define originality? Is it something where "you know it when you see it", or is it something else? 3. Thinking of probabilities, wouldn't it also make sense that the default for people is to be un-original? We only have so many elements and so many places, I have to imagine that people being 'incapable of [doing anything creative or original]' is less a value statement and more just a logical progression of probability. 4. I've also come to a feeling that a person doing something that they've seen before, but do not see right at that very minute, is 'non-internet brain thinking'. We didn't have visual records so prevalent until just recently in humanity's lifetime. Repetition of behavior (lately sometimes called 'holding space for X') is a useful function for social networks, giving validity to someone's creativity. Again, not trying to invalidate anything you're saying (and I noted your 'cue the outrage' comment, hence why I'm over specifying this too) Super interesting take on the article, I've been wondering similar things for a while. |