Can we use “original” to describe an idea that is “less” original?

Question

Suppose someone comes up with a great original idea.

Some time later, someone else comes up with exactly the same idea without knowing that idea been conceived already and even without being influenced in any way by the other person's thought.

In other words, both of them make the discovery totally independently and not at the same time. For example, Leibniz and Newton invented Calculus this way; Cook and Levin established NP-Complete theory this way.

The idea from the very first inventor is no doubt considered original. But what about the same idea independently conceived by others later in time? I have no problem calling the latter original, although it seems less original than the very original one. Would there be a word or phrase that can readily convey the state of being "less" original?

Answer 1

I would use independent to discover multiple discoveries which do not derive from each other.

Both Newton and Leibniz independently developed the fundamental principles of calculus.

The same word can be used to describe multiple inventions, linguistic innovations, etc.

Answer 2

There are several senses available. Original has to do with origins, and can refer to either

1. the personal origin of something (an idea, in this case), i.e, whether it was copied or not

   • originating with him
   • original to him
   • and triplets of composition virtues like "originality, clarity, and order"

2. or, one can employ a THOUGHT is ALIVE metaphor theme to treat an idea as having a single, unique origin (like a living being), and therefore referring to its assumed temporal origin

   • Radioactivity was originally discovered by Becquerel.

(Note that there was in fact radioactivity before Becquerel discovered it, so this is not the origin of radioactivity, but rather the -- undisputed, in this case -- origin of our current state of knowledge about radioactivity.)

With regard to Newton/Leibnitz, each invented one calculus: Newton differential and Leibnitz integral. Each was aware of the inverse variety but put them to different uses for their own purposes. Both share the credit, and if there is any temporal difference it's measured in less than a decade, so at this distance I'd say they both are original, since there's no question of copying.

Answer 3

"When the time is ripe for certain things, they appear at different places in the manner of violets coming to light in early spring."

— Farkas Bolyai, to his son Janos, urging him to claim the invention of non-Euclidean geometry without delay.

In my answer to Synonym for 'arrive independently' at same solution, I cited the concept of multiple discovery -- "the hypothesis that most scientific discoveries and inventions are made independently and more or less simultaneously by multiple scientists and inventors."

The Wikipedia article goes on to say:

Robert K. Merton defined such "multiples" as instances in which similar discoveries are made by scientists working independently of each other. "Sometimes the discoveries are simultaneous or almost so; sometimes a scientist will make a new discovery which, unknown to him, somebody else has made years before."

When an new discovery can take place years after the same discovery made by someone else, and still be considered part of the same "multiple," it makes about as much sense to restrict "original" to a single independent discovery in a multiple as it does to anoint a single "original" violet in Bolyai's quote. They are all original.

Answer 4

“Re-original”? (Dictionaries are not prescriptive.)

“The patent for the chemist’s re-original discovery was pending, but likely.”

People might get that. The flexibility and utility of English is profound.