> Thus you get situations like this one, where an apparently brilliant neuroscientist reaches a conclusion that a philosopher in Ancient Greece did 2,300 years

> Thus you get situations like this one, where an apparently brilliant neuroscientist reaches a conclusion that a philosopher in Ancient Greece did 2,300 years ago. Or, this scientist did the research, learned about what philosophers did 2300 years ago and then adapted/repackaged the message/knowledge in a way that fits his audience. Also, in your statement you are essentially saying the scientist was not original because he reached the same conclusion as someone else before him. Then you conclude that being unoriginal is a waste of resources. So of course this relates to originality.