Has the use of the phrase "Think outside the box" become an example of thinking inside the box?
967760
Yes, it has.  Every fresh turn of phrase, every innovative way of thinking faces the possibility that it will become the status quo.  Blame intellectual laziness, blame fear of being thought an eccentric, but whatever the cause, [cliche' alarm!!] it's always easier to operate within your comfort zone than outside it.\n\nGood question...deeper than it looks at the surface.
294990
Imagining the world with no hypothetical situations is a hypothetical situation itself.  It's an impossible paradox.
763339
I think that thoughts are quantum super positions of space time geometries and the electric circuit model of the brain is way off.\n\nRead Shadows of the Mind by Roger Penrose for more.
967750
" I thought that you thought that I thought that you thought."  I think that is about it because after that you would be only referring to the same thought that you thought you have thought before.  Unless another person is added or another thought different than the first 2 thoughts, then it could be endless, hypothetically.
1117890
A punch line is the last line of a joke. I don't know of any company that used "Think different" as a punch line. However, Apple Computer used it as a tag line or marketing slogan.
535549
Positing something different from the thinking that prevailed at the time.\n\nDo your own thinking for your homework.
122289
mental ability to develop innovation.\n\n*yes, i am creative\n*It can not be copied, but developed and boosted in childhood with a positive enviroment.\n*If you copy, then you are not being innoative, therefore not creative.\n*Thinking outside the box is not being ordinary, not an average joe
1104960
Thinking is an internal mental process that uses information as input, integrates that information into previous learned material and the result may be knowledge or may be nothing.Problem solving, planning, information integration, and analysis are four kinds of thinking.
260375
an attempt: "more than words"
970369
"I think therefore I am." Descarte was trying to start from what was indesputable, & procede to the less certain aspects of knowledge.\n\nThe ability to think was to Descarte proof that we actually existed. Descarte was deeply confused. Thinking is one of many things we DO, as well as breath, act, sense, emote, remember, imagine, or meditate. If we stop thinking, what happens? Nothing except our mind grows quiet & somewhat more peaceful for a while. We still are, thinking or not at all. If we stop breathing, we die. Wikijo would have said " I breath, therefore I am." It would have made more sense.\n\nI hope this helps.\n\n;-)
910847
Out think,out maneuver...
176393
I would say that linear thinking is like black and white.\nThere is "If_________ Then________ thinking.  Basically thinking 'within the box'.
429629
Do you need footnotes to write this argument?  Is it a paper assignment or debate? Your own mind is a great place to begin thinking outside of the box. Madison Ave. applauds this in advertising.Science applauds this in new discoveries. Point is, we all have a contribution.  make yours.
532112
This is often misused today.\n\nAn example of the original meaning was as in this example.  If a scientist were designing an experiment to determine whether A was bigger than B, and in his preparations for this, made an assumption (inherent in his experiment design), that A is actually bigger than B, then he is 'begging the question'.  (I.e. he is assuming an answer to a question and therefore confusing the result).\n\nOften nowadays, however, it is used to mean 'raise the question'.  As in 'The President's denial of the allegation begs the question of how we can ascertain the facts'. (I..e becasuue he denies it we need to think of another way to verify the truth.)  This is raising or prompting a question - not begging it.
332223
The last several decades in our nation have witnessed growing concerns that our educational system is not adequately preparing all of our citizens to develop the skills and knowledge they need to live and work successfully in today's complex society (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). Calls for change have centered on the need for schools to provide opportunities for students to engage in activities that promote in-depth understanding, critical thinking, creative problem solving, and the ability to use knowledge in real-life settings (Darling-Hammond, 1993).\n\nIn response to these concerns school improvement efforts have proliferated, aimed at all aspects of the educational system - school structures, organization, governance, and leadership; family and community involvement; as well as curriculum content, instructional methods, individual and system-wide assessments. While all of these initiatives are important, many have been undertaken leaving some basic assumptions about teaching and learning intact, assumptions that have not been sufficiently informed by current understandings of how students learn.\n\nMany commonly accepted educational practices have been influenced by ideas of teaching from the past, based on traditional behaviorist views that teaching is primarily an act of "telling" - supplying students with facts and information in much the same way that an empty glass is filled. While these practices have been successful at producing proficiency in the lower-order skills measured on many tests, they have generally met with little success in developing the kind of knowledge and abilities that\n\nstudents need in real-life situations (National Assessment of Education Progress, 1981).\n\nIn contrast to this transmission-of-knowledge model of teaching, newer understandings of how people learn present a conception of teaching that focuses on developing "thinking" students who understand and can use what they learn. This conception is termed "constructivist" because it sees learning as a dynamic internal process in which learners actively "construct" knowledge by connecting new information to what they already know, rather than as a process in which learners are passive recipients of information transferred to them from external sources. This newer conception's emphasis is on developing students' capacities for analysis and problem-solving, rather than on having them "cover the curriculum" in the most efficient manner possible. Rooted in the assumption that all human beings have a deep drive to make sense of the world (Carini, 1987), constructivism sees learning as motivated by interest and shaped by individuals' cultural and linguistic backgrounds as well as their different learning styles and strengths (Carini, 1986; Gardner, 1983). From the perspective of the constructivist view, learning is supported by multiple experiences and social interactions, rather than by solitary drill and rote memorization (Dewey, 1916, 1956; Piaget, 1973,1980; Piaget & Inhelder, 1969; Vygotsky, 1978). It is a nonlinear process that requires extended periods of time to visit and revisit ideas until they are organized into coherent, stable, and generalizable understandings (Bruner, 1966; O'Brien, 1987).\n\nBecause constructivist principles are based on knowledge of learning, they provide a good starting place for school improvement efforts aimed at supporting students to become better thinkers, creators, and problem-solvers. Without such a focus, reform efforts run the risk of merely "reforming again, again, and again" (Cuban, 1990), focusing on the surface structures of schooling but leaving the central problems untouched.\n\nThis article describes constructivist teaching, highlighting some of its essential\n\nelements. It also discusses some of the challenges that constructivist teaching poses for teacher development. It demonstrates how a c
690862
It means you are supposed to think about what influences your thinking process. Is your way of thinking shaped by your upbringing? Your peers? Your education? Your culture? By becoming more self-aware and understanding what shapes our thought process, we can begin to weed out prejudices and limitations in our thinking. Then we can become better able to understand new ideas and perspectives.
810311
"Let us reason together", sayeth the Lord.\n\nChristians are not saying you shouldn't use your mind. They're just telling you "don't be brainwashed." It would seem to me that your idea of "using your mind" means accepting as fact something that not only hasn't been proven, but in actuality has been DISproven, and is held to with religious fervor by so-called "scientists". I assume you are speaking of the fallacy of evolution, which has been disproven by every major field of science.