Why “though”? We usually reserve that word for when we’re about to introduce a counterexample or some other means of contradicting a claim.
But thoughts are also particular things, so clearly one can direct their thoughts to particular thoughts. And even to the act of thinking in particular about thoughts, because that is a thing one can think about.
Because you described attention as “directing your thoughts towards something”.
But thought is one of the things you can direct attention at.
So I would put thought in the class of “things that I can direct my attention at”, with no necessary tie to attention.
Also, “thinking about a thought” looks quite different to me from “directing my attention at a thought”. It looks to me like “directing my attention at a thought about a thought”.
In what way does your second paragraph contradict your first? They seem independent of each other to me. The two together mean that a thought is something that we can attend to, and I believe that’s true in part because I have experienced it.
I agree that a thought is a thing we can attend to and I don’t know how that could possibly conflict with describing attention as the act of directing thoughts to a particular thing, including to a particular thought. I am, right now, attending to the thought “I don’t understand why this person sees these statements as conflicting with each other” in part because I want to remain curious about why you think these statements conflict with each other, and so I am attending to these thoughts in order to be on the lookout for judgmental thoughts that tend to interfere with being curious.
Why “though”? We usually reserve that word for when we’re about to introduce a counterexample or some other means of contradicting a claim.
But thoughts are also particular things, so clearly one can direct their thoughts to particular thoughts. And even to the act of thinking in particular about thoughts, because that is a thing one can think about.
Because you described attention as “directing your thoughts towards something”.
But thought is one of the things you can direct attention at.
So I would put thought in the class of “things that I can direct my attention at”, with no necessary tie to attention.
Also, “thinking about a thought” looks quite different to me from “directing my attention at a thought”. It looks to me like “directing my attention at a thought about a thought”.
In what way does your second paragraph contradict your first? They seem independent of each other to me. The two together mean that a thought is something that we can attend to, and I believe that’s true in part because I have experienced it.
I agree that a thought is a thing we can attend to and I don’t know how that could possibly conflict with describing attention as the act of directing thoughts to a particular thing, including to a particular thought. I am, right now, attending to the thought “I don’t understand why this person sees these statements as conflicting with each other” in part because I want to remain curious about why you think these statements conflict with each other, and so I am attending to these thoughts in order to be on the lookout for judgmental thoughts that tend to interfere with being curious.