The Illusion of Originality

As I write this article, I can't shake the feeling that it may come off as plagiarized. Even the phrase "there's nothing new under the sun," which I borrowed without realizing its origin in the Book of Ecclesiastes, feels like intellectual theft. My apologies to the author of that ancient text.

How can I articulate this sentiment in my own way? The problem lies in the fact that "my own words" are part of a shared linguistic framework. If everyone wrote entirely in their own unique way, communication would become nearly impossible.

“It’s all been done,” is another borrowed sentiment, this time from the Barenaked Ladies. And to echo Mark Twain, he claimed, “there’s no such thing as an original idea.”

At times, I feel as though my existence is merely a collage of others' thoughts and ideas. I am a product of recombined concepts, convinced that I have created something unique, when in reality, it’s merely a remix of pre-existing notions.

A Fleeting Original Thought

Contrary to Twain's assertion, I once had an original idea on November 3, 2018. Unfortunately, the excitement of having a unique thought overshadowed the content of that idea, which I promptly forgot.

Perhaps it was that night I imagined I had broken the speed of light barrier, only to realize later that this limitation only applies to physical entities. Ideas, being non-physical, are not subject to such constraints.

Indeed, thoughts can travel faster than light. Not in the sense of electrical signals, but as unencumbered concepts that transcend the laws of physics. I mistakenly believed I had discovered something groundbreaking.

Just two days later, I learned that researchers in China had accurately measured the speed of quantum entanglement five years earlier, far surpassing my notions of the speed of ideas.

At a staggering 3 trillion meters per second, the transfer of information between entangled particles eclipsed both my imaginative speed and even the speed of light.

The Nature of Simultaneous Invention

This brings me to the outdated notion of originality versus plagiarism. The phenomenon known as Simultaneous Invention, or Multiple Discovery Theory, illustrates that when the time is ripe for an idea, multiple individuals often arrive at the same conclusion independently.

This principle posits that significant scientific breakthroughs are frequently made by several people at once, suggesting that ideas emerge from the collective consciousness of humanity.

For instance, the development of calculus, the crossbow, magnetism, and even evolutionary theory were all simultaneously discovered by various individuals across different regions. My references primarily focus on Western discoveries, neglecting significant contributions from Asia even in the 21st century.

In various conceivable universes, it seems improbable that Albert Einstein would have emerged as he did without the influences of contemporaries like Max Planck and Maria Meric, among others. Had history unfolded differently, figures from Asia might have been credited with the foundations of modern relativity.

The Rise of Plagiarism in Academia

Now, we can address the growing concerns surrounding plagiarism in academia that have intensified with the advent of the internet. A fervent contingent of professionals is determined to eradicate plagiarism in educational institutions, imposing severe penalties for perceived infractions.

They insist that every academic endeavor must be an original work by the student. While this seems reasonable, how many of you pursuing advanced degrees have discovered that your "original" thesis ideas were already taken?

It appears that many accusations of plagiarism stem from hasty judgments based on misconceptions. I maintain an optimistic belief that those truly passionate about their fields aspire to contribute innovative discoveries rather than merely copying others' efforts.

In my preliminary exploration of this issue, I found a lack of articles defending or attempting to understand the rise of plagiarism. Most writings seemed to be fueled by personal grievances over having their work appropriated.

While I do not endorse blatant plagiarism, I argue that the conversation surrounding it is often one-sided, omitting crucial context. I empathize with those who have faced infringement, as I have also experienced the frustration of having my work misappropriated.

I have come to realize that I may have inadvertently engaged in plagiarism as well. When writing, particularly in fiction, I often draw inspiration from various sources without consciously acknowledging them.

If I were to craft a novel about spacefaring squid, I’d inadvertently borrow from the works of Stephen Baxter, and in time, I might forget the original inspiration altogether.

The Role of Experience in Academia

It disheartens me that after a decade of experience in a field, I am still expected to rely solely on the published opinions of others. It seems the academic environment operates under a dated premise that students lack the capacity to form their own judgments.

For instance, during a recent Project Management course, our textbook author, who spent two years in Germany and two years in Hong Kong, defined the top three issues in international project management. In contrast, I have spent thirteen years working in seven countries, yet my insights were dismissed because I lack a published text.

The Zero Tolerance Approach

Academics are increasingly adopting zero-tolerance policies regarding plagiarism, often assuming the worst of their students. They fail to reflect on the nature of the assignments they assign, many of which require mere repetition of established facts without encouraging original thought.

There are only so many ways to articulate certain concepts, and industry-standard jargon often must be employed to ensure understanding. Accusations of plagiarism should apply only to genuinely creative endeavors.

For example, if tasked with designing an intake form for a hospital, it should not be considered plagiarism if my form resembles countless others already in existence.

Imagine a scenario where students are criticized for their designs of a medical intake form, branded as "lazy" for their similarities to existing templates. Such reactions reflect a lack of consideration for the broader context.

When will educators reflect on their own roles in this system? When can we restore logic and common sense to an environment that has turned a blind eye to reality?

Just as civil rights have been compromised in America post-terrorism, educators have been inundated with alarmist rhetoric about plagiarism for decades. Consequently, plagiarism has become their primary concern when evaluating student work.

Seeking Clarity in the Chaos

This hysteria must cease, and I refuse to continue punishing myself for adhering to standardized options when addressing gender or sex in forms.

We are at a critical juncture, and there seems to be no way to express my thoughts without creating an entirely new language.

Many points are so self-evident that they should not even require mention, such as the absurdity of accusing someone of plagiarism for reproducing a standardized form.

Like an uninvited guest at an unexpected gathering, there are essential conversations that need to take place beforehand.

It appears that both academia and a significant portion of American society have lost their way regarding communication and understanding.

I cannot restore clarity and sanity alone; I need your support. I am uncertain how much longer I can endure this state of affairs.

I feel isolated, yet I am convinced that my thoughts are coherent. I urge you to acknowledge or signal your understanding, as these issues have become so prevalent that I sometimes question my own sanity.