Brains operate on electricity, as do computers. — Harry Hindu

The brain is not an electric machine, for the most part it is an hormonal machine with a bit of electricity to speed it the signals.

Thought is being and being is thought. In our modern ossified world we tend to believe thinking is just abstract machinations and 'logic' and such things. It is much broader than that.

In common language: there’s always some mental activity happening. — Olivier5

Would you categorize some mental activity as not thinking, as opposed to thinking? Would dreaming qualify as thinking?

In theory it can be done, but current ones can’t so by my definition they are not “thinking”. What I mean by aware is: I can hear myself thinking. I have some knowledge of what I think while I think it. — Olivier5

You can "hear" yourself think? How were you able to accomplish that?

To say that you have knowledge, is knowledge dependent upon thinking? Isn't saying anything dependent upon some sort of thinking before saying it? Can you think about thinking? isn't this just an information processing loop that we can program a computer to do as long as the information being processed in the loop is about itself to some degree? Again, what would the information need to be about for it to qualify as thinking? Do the thoughts necessarily need to be about the self - reflective - to qualify as thinking? Are ants self-aware? Are ants capable of thinking?

The brain is not an electric machine, for the most part it is an hormonal machine with a bit of electricity to speed it the signals. — Olivier5

Do you have any citations to support this assertion? Even if you did, are you saying that thinking is dependent upon hormones? We can write a program that emulates how our emotions impact our thinking.

Hey Harry, you ask a lot of questions. Can you prioritize a bit? To take a simple one:

Would dreaming qualify as thinking? — Harry Hindu

The meaning of words is only a matter of convenience and convention. You can define thinking as inclusive or exclusive of dreaming, depending on what you want to say. I am just pointing at the common English use of the term, which in my humble opinion does not cover all dreaming but one can think in a dream of course.

As much as possible, it is useful to stick to regular language when doing philosophy. Popper said something like that in his introduction to the Open Society And Its Enemies: don't use more complicated language than you need to.

That's just my answer to one question.

Do you have any citations to support this assertion? Even if you did, are you saying that thinking is dependent upon hormones? We can write a program that emulates how our emotions impact our thinking. — Harry Hindu

Let me take another one. A visit to the Wikipedia entry on "Brain" would answer the first question. Yes, the brain is a very elaborate system of hormonal information management. Such systems are universal in life, they go way beyond emotions. For instance your body temperature is regulated by a thermostat-like hormonal information management system referred to as "homeothermy", and emotions can factor in your temperature but homeothermy is not in essence an "emotional system". The same applies to pretty much everything that happens in your body: it's about using chemicals as support for information exchange and management.

The brain is just a bunch of specialized cells, doing better and faster what any cell can do i.e. manage information through chemistry, and bringing it to the next level: symbolic thought, emotions, artistic creativity, etc.

I think a "thought" should have to be propositional

When words are just visual scribbles and sounds, what does it actually mean to assert that thinking is "propositional", other than that thinking should consist of particular visuals and sounds in the mind being manipulated for some purpose?

I find it difficult to believe that pre-language babies or animals don't think. How does one learn a language without the ability to think prior to learning it?

I think a "thought" should have to be propositional — GodlessGirl

So emotions wouldnt be under the umbrella of thoughts? They dont necessarily assert any opinion or view they can just be reactive and instinctive. Nor would imagery or any other "wordless" concept as they are depictions not assertions. Nor any idea that you dont have an opinion, assertion or judgement on. I think to assume that thoughts are only propositional limits them to linguistic in quality -a thought made of words or a "narrative/monologue etc" or to even having a sensibility/rationality to them that could be attributed to proposition. Nonsensical or discordant/ disjointed or psychotic thought is still thought of a kind but I cant see the proposition these ppl would be making. Sometimes thought has no particular agenda -so how could it propose?

Because "propositional" refers to a statement or assertion that indicates ones opinion or judgements. I think thought goes far beyond that. This disregards subconscious thought or unconscious thought (dreams) as how could they be an opinion or judgement if they are uncontrollable and spontaneous?

IMO
Consciousness defines thinking.
To understand thinking you have to understand consciousness.
Until you do, you cannot define thinking.
Except as a function of consciousness