Do great minds really think alike? Where did that quote come from? I mean seriously, when you think about it if great minds really did think alike then how would individual people come up with great inventions? When do great minds think alike and when don't they?

The real question is...how do you define "great"?

good point...hmmm...ok...then all what i said before and how do you define great?

I disagree with that statements. Minds wouldn't be "great" unless they had an individual type of "greatness" so they could be expressed in different ways and be used in different ways. So... yeah..........

Yeah, exactly, but if all great minds never thought alike, then how would great people work together to create great discoveries? I mean, if they never thought alike wouldn't they always have different points of views, and wouldn't get along....hmmm...complicated

genius and intelligent.

is it genius and intelligence? or is it bravery, and the courage do to what's right? you don't have to be a genius to know that.

Wouldn't some of you say Leo Tolstoy and Friedrich Nietzsche have great minds? Well, Tolstoy thought Nietzche was crazy (and stupid).
Thinking alike doesn't make minds great, ideas make minds great. The more ideas of worth, the greater the mind. What's so worthy/great about repetitive ideas?

Great minds think alike.

Bad minds think alike as well.

that's my theory. so you never know whether you're great or bad

scientists always want other scientist to prove them wrong or come up with another theory so they can test it and see if it works. so i dont think they think a like. i guess the more different thoughts the better.

Well, I think great minds can think similarly but they would work together by adding their own opinions and knoledge... just to answer your question.

i dont know how to answer; the questions confusing.

is it really?

of course they do: that's why there are debates among intellectuals about things like abortion and the death penalty. because great minds think alike, and thus naturally agree.

You just totally contradicted yourself.

You say great minds do agree and "that's why they have debates." People debate when they disagree. If they thought alike, there'd be no reason for debates.

Albert Einstein once said that 'Fellatio is the ultimate act of trust.' He wa a genius and that was pretty heavy statement if you really think about it. I wodner how many thought he was a lunatic.

bleh. i should make my sarcasm more obvious, shouldn't i?

Just add a rolly-eyed smillie next time, babe.

lol. Yeah. That'd help. And listen to Fae.

nice theory... , but can't the bad also be great?

ideas make the person great.

great= having novel ideas that benefit mankind.

alike= not novel.

thus, if they think alike, they're not great.

You contradicted yourself. If two people have novel ideas, than for you they do not think alike correct? Say two people have novel ideas and both benefit humankind (your definition of great) then they certainly ARE thinking alike by working towards the same goal, the benefit of humankind.

yes and no. for example, some musical composers in the past eras were great, and the pieces they wrote were similar. then some person like beethoven would come along, and then it would be the new "great" thing to write with mad dynamics.

my conclusion- great minds brought up in the same exact environments with the same exact care are most likely going to think the same way, but that doesn't contribute to writing music in similar styles. anyone can do that.

it doesnt matter, intelligence leans to bravery .. same thing..

What? Intelligence and bravery aren't depedent. You can be intelligent but you can be a coward all the same. Intelligence doesn't lean towards anything.

Likewise, being brave doesn't mean you're intelligent. In fact, you may have the guts to do things that some people equate to bravery while others equate to stupidity.







...

Two people may have thought of the same idea, but it's the idea that made their minds great. The act of thinking alike doesn't make great minds.

That's not true. You can be the most intelligent person in the world but aren't brave enough to show it or use your intelligence for the good of others as well as yourself. Or you might just be too scared to use an elivator. lol. Who knows? But they don't relate usually.

Of course they do. If they don't, no deicsions acan ever be made by leaders.

"The act of thinking alike doesn't make great minds." I don't think i said that at all. I was using Mr. Acid's definitions. Two people can have different ideas that make them great, but they can be thinking alike by working towards the same concern.
So your saying just the idea itself makes a mind great? So then what is the point of a great mind if it is not actually used to contribute, would we even know it is great idea in the first place? Don't you think a lot people have great ideas, but fail in the ability to actualize them?

here is the whole quote - “Great minds think alike, fools seldom differ”
I belive the emphasis is placed on the latter, which can really help to define this phrase. The first part states a limit that great minds can ONLY think alike, meaning they NEVER can think the same, this is how it is used in context. "Fools seldom differ" means ONLY fools can have the same ideas, which become redundant and of course pointless to society.

so anyway in conclusion - it is possible for great minds to think alike, but they can never think the same.

Now I am the one to be confused. I was using your example to point out that there are two things going on.
"You contradicted yourself. If two people have novel ideas, than for you they do not think alike correct? Say two people have novel ideas and both benefit humankind (your definition of great) then they certainly ARE thinking alike by working towards the same goal, the benefit of humankind. "

One, there is the act of thinking of a novel idea, and two, there is the act of thinking alike. The two can be simultaneous or successive, however, they are rather differing actions, if not seperate. I mean to say that the second act does not make great minds. That has been my point since the begining of this thread and is supported by the second part of the saying.



Again to reiterate my point, there are differences to decipher in that one part to the quote so I find it lacking.
Also, the word "differ" doesn't have to oppose only the word "same", it can be antonymous to the word "alike" as well. So, it doesn't mean "ONLY fools can have the same ideas", fools can have similar ideas as well. Saying that they seldom differ doesn't mean they don't differ, nor does it mean they only think the same... they can think similarly, and alike.
If my definitions are wrong, then proceed to ignore my last argument.

Oh yea, this discussion is rather confusing.

okay at this point i'm totally confused. lol. I thought about it and i really think it is just a saying. When we actually use the phrase we are not talking about truely great minds anyway.

Example: "I was just thinking to call you, then the phone rang and it was you calling me." Reply: "Great minds think alike." It is fun to say "Great minds think alike" because you are making a connection with the other person by saying that the two of you, in thinking the same thing at the same time, both have great minds. Thats all I think it is, a compliment both to yourself and to the person you are talking to.

Then we would be missing the point of this whole thread, which is to discuss whether or not great minds really think alike. I thought the topic creator wanted to debate the validity of the quote on levels beyond its colliquial meaning.



Again, to think of it like that would miss the point of the thread. If the topic starter really wanted to discuss on that level, then it wouldn't be a debate, I don't think... And if that is the case, this thread will need to be closed... or moved.

yeah...what u just said is wat i wanted when i opened the debate...i asked the question do great minds think alike?

I agree, but the point is not whether thinking alike makes a mind great, that would be changing the meaning completely, i think. Can't great minds think alike in terms of their purpose? I know you tried to explain this as being two different actions, but that doesn't rule out possibility. Like for example philosophers began asking pretty much the same questions "Where did we come from?" "What is the universe made of?" "How does it work?" "What is truth?" They All have different ideas that made them great, but don't you see a connection because of a similar thought process and concentration torward a similar effort? not the same of course, but similar. Well same goes for scientists or inventors. The quote it not saying "all great minds think alike", but it is possible that some great minds do and it makes sense, If of course they began seeking a similar purpose first, thats what makes it only possible, but still possible none the less.



I said fools are the only ones that CAN(meaning possibly) think exactly the same...not they can ONLY think the same. difference. Again it comes back to meaning great minds almost never ever think the same, that's the key in distinguishing their individual ideas as great.
"Great minds think alike, fools seldom differ" seems for me to be stressing not that "great minds think alike", but that great minds rarely ever think the same. This seems so, because it is outright saying fools are the ones who most of the time think similarly. So in context that must mean great minds most of the time think differently.

So the real question would be "is it true that great minds think differently?" if we are going by what the saying actually means. Kinda confusing, but not really.

Why would it change the meaning of the quote so completely? I do not doubt there are other ways to interpret the meaning of the famous saying, depending on perspective, but interpreting it a certain way doesn't neccessarily changes its meaning completely. If there is but one way to understand it, only one of us would be right or we'd both be utterly wrong. I do not believe interpretations could be wrong unless it deviates too far from the definitions of the words in the saying.

I understand where you're coming from saying that thinking alike in purpose can make minds great, and agree that there could be such a possibility. Now, I will explain why your explanation doesn't sit well with me.

Philosophers, inventors, scientists may set out to accomplish one purpose, and lets say that the purpose is to benefit mankind, but what makes their minds great isn't the act of having a similar purpose, it's the act of coming up with ideas for the purpose. They all may have the same noble ideas, the same ambition, but what makes their minds great is the fact that they came up with such ideas and ambition. That is greatness. Having a similar purpose doesn't make their minds great.

Let me further that by saying the following. Men who came up with great ideas may have great minds, but they are NOT great--as a person, as a human--unless they share their ideas with others. Martin Luther King wouldn't have been great at all if he kept his passion for freedom and equality to himself. If he had kept all that to himself, he would still have a great mind, but he would not have been great.

Thus, there is a crucial difference that sets apart thinking alike and thinking up the idea. Coming up with the same idea doesn't make a mind great. The "coming up with the idea" makes the mind great and the "same idea" becomes an incentive for cooperation... etc.



Before analyzing anything else, I apologize for the confusion. Since you emphasized the word "only" so strongly, I was led to believe that you do not think in the possibility that fools can thinking differently. There is indeed a difference, but it wasn't as clear to me as it is now.



I'll get to this later... must prepare for staff meeting at work.

Okay so Martin Luther King obviously had a purpose first before any of his ideas were considered to be the result of a great mind.
Well if having a great idea is the cause of a specific purpose, then in some cases you can say - Two people having two novel/great ideas, that result from a similar purpose, are linked because they thought alike in both purposes. I see it as only a connection (thats all i'm trying to say), not a direct cause and effect, because i agree the act of thinking alike does not actually make minds great. They are separate actions, but that's usually how we connect the "Greats", always in terms of their purpose. So when we connect them in purpose i guess we just assume that must mean they think alike and that's becasue they have great minds, i guess it's a common misconception. I think i was being too confusing before.

No, how would I, or anyone for that matter, have a purpose before having an idea? Essentially, purposes cannot exist without ideas, however, ideas can exist without any purposes. So, MLK Jr OBVIOUSLY had an idea first before having a purpose. For example, if my purpose is to make dinner, I must have thought of the idea of making dinner first before turning my idea into a purpose. I cannot have the purpose to make dinner without even thinking about it first.


Having similar purposes do not change the fact that two people have thought of two great ideas. The ideas may be alike, but it's the thinking up of such ideas make minds great, the "alikeness" is just a plus. I think I've stressed this before as well.


If I were to say MLK Jr was a great man, I mean that he did something very meaningful, beneficial for his posterity. If I were to go into depth and explain further, I'd use an example of how he, like Ghandi, protested using non-violent means. The two men are certainly great and they thought alike. I do not argue this point. But to say that MLK Jr had a great mind because he and Ghandi thought alike is rather incorrect, wouldn't you say? The purpose of the non-violent protests were similar: to get attention, support without violence against either side. As you can see, that is a great purpose, but the idea to impliment such strategy is ingenious.

People do tend to connect such things, but the purpose of this topic requires a break down of differing actions...

neither martin luther king jr. nor ghandi were great minds they were great people but they used henrey david thoreu's ideas. therefore, they were not great minds.

Then I'd disagree because


MLK Jr, Ghandi have great minds because the idea to use the strategy is great! The strategy may not be original, but who would have guessed that admist violence, two people would think to use non-violence as means of persuasion? Someone else may have created the strategy, but knowing when to use it, when it is most effective, proves a great mind was at work.

I don't think that statement means...."All great minds think that people came from monkeys", or "All great minds think that Newton was cooler than Plato"

I think its on a larger scale than that more along the lines of...all of the worlds genuius had a vision, a plan and they thought that the world would be a better place with their ideas/plans, they all set out to help. Hitler, Einstein, Shakespeare(kinda haha)

I've already debated this point, did you want to form a rebuttal against my argument? If so, read the thread.

i think, yes, great minds think alike

Read the thread, please.