Sometimes I feel that philosophy should be situated between or in terms of what is limited and what is unlimited. I have two statements to say that I believe are utterly true: There is nothing that arises outside of discourse. Discourse is just one thing of the universe, Or one aspect — however one would […]Unlimited
We use our legs to walk but we think with words. Our legs are ours, so is our body and the way we use it which is exclusively subjective. What about words? Are they ours or are they shared collectively throughout history?
Talking or writing gives us the feeling that words are ours. We use them through certain ways and styles. Think about poetry or storytelling: writers create worlds and words upon image creation. If this isn’t creativity what would it be?
So if we think with words and words are ours, are thoughts ours too? Is thinking a solitary activity such as walking or is it a collective sport?
Our world today seems to go for collective intelligence rather than individual solitary ones. Democracy then needs constant deliberations. This means that, unlike our legs, words and thoughts became nowadays more collective than ever before.
However, there is a thin line between thinking and debating. If the latter is collective, thinking must remain solitary. The reason is that debating can’t take place unless there is an idea to discuss. More dangerously, it is even better not to think in a world inhabited by political ideologies.
All philosophers claimed the much needed solitude for thinking, as in stepping away from the world. This is where we vision the world from a distance and can redefine it. This is when thinking can be individual and subjective. And this is where we can use shared and inherited words the way we want to.
Thinking alone is testing the ability to think far from others. It is also a risk; one might lose, get lost or become depressed. How many times do we dread thoughts at night right before sleeping?
“Legs” and “thoughts” change constantly their meanings.