What interested me from the reading was the how Aristotle introduced the idea that the new ideas we have as humans begin with what we are somewhat familiar with. New thinking is based off previous ideas. Humans are prone to falling to a pattern of leisurely creating inductions. This makes me wonder, how do we come up with our abstract and innovative ideas if all our ideas are based on something we already know. He also says that humans make inductions based on the universal and then moving to the particular. This is because human thinking is largely based on perception. Generally we see the big picture and are not likely to take time to understand the particulars that make up the large perceptive view we habitually see the world through. By our nature humans think of the universal or the whole parts of the world. But when the whole is broken down new ideas come about but they are derived from the same whole. Is it possible to think in a different way then our nature? Are human beings capable of initially starting with particulars and then creating a universal ideas? If this is not possible then everything that we have come to know is from the same first thought. Aristotle seems to believe that this is true. The universal is simply broken down into different types of inductions. Aristotle also adds the idea that universal is broken up into contradictions. Overall, I was intrigued that human perception has a large effect on the process of creating new ideas.