You say something or write something feeling it to be original. But if it were truly 'original' then we would not know what it is - as we need to compare it to something - to understand it.
So 'originality' is very much a contested word, our sayings and writing is defined in a narrow
cognitive parish, ie our cultural /social/economic/political environment, we are all victims of our times. ie Aristotle died in ignorance of what Descartes would say or claim etc.
A lot of academic writing is freighted with references, but Descartes really say that in that year,
what were his influences? As 'John Doe' has it (see what I mean) we find ourselves when citing a source, not pinpointing the source or originator but entering into an reverberating world of endless echoes, allusions and contingencies.
Of course we should not hoist ourselves up on the shoulders of former 'greats' and try to claim
spurious aggrandisement for our efforts, none the less pinpointing the originator, the source
is to indulge oneself in the futile attempt of find a needle in the veritable haystack.
So 'originality' is very much a contested word, our sayings and writing is defined in a narrow
cognitive parish, ie our cultural /social/economic/political environment, we are all victims of our times. ie Aristotle died in ignorance of what Descartes would say or claim etc.
A lot of academic writing is freighted with references, but Descartes really say that in that year,
what were his influences? As 'John Doe' has it (see what I mean) we find ourselves when citing a source, not pinpointing the source or originator but entering into an reverberating world of endless echoes, allusions and contingencies.
Of course we should not hoist ourselves up on the shoulders of former 'greats' and try to claim
spurious aggrandisement for our efforts, none the less pinpointing the originator, the source
is to indulge oneself in the futile attempt of find a needle in the veritable haystack.
No comments:
Post a Comment