What is thought? It's inception, its ongoing process, and its orientation toward some goal, as far as it is intuited?
It's inception is related in a large extent , to the very earliest pre-human experience of sub species. The reason that the negative view of the social contract, (Hobbes), can be viewed as superior to Rousseau's is related to a precise extent to this pre-human origins of experience.
And how does thought develop in this scheme?
The protective feature in sub-species behavior, progressing into the very earliest human forms :Neanderthal, Homosapian forms of development becomes evident very early on as herding together is used as protection against intruders.
But even before intrusive actions become a way to preserve the livelihood of groups and tribes, the staking out of territory, the homesteading of groups become evident per individual members of the group.
Signs and early symbols of setting off territory can be observed in animals , such as dogs urinating at certain places such as the bases of trees.
Territoriality, as a mode of defensive behavior, is at the bottom of developing tools and signs which serve to recognize where boundaries - form later on from their literal beginnings to their figurative aspects, via increasingly complex, interwinding symbolism.
Consciousness, or awareness of signs is a form of behavior, through which, these signs develop, and without such, a communal recognition of them becomes impossible.
Thought, is the stage of consciousness, where learning takes off from a level of becoming conscious from an automatic system to a level of symbolic signification, where, semi automatic, and completely voluntary manifestations of thought can occur.
Thought can contain both kinds of determinants, vis , one where totally automatic and archaic systems can predicate earlier, more defensive 'triggers', and two, where, more ubdetermined and more figurative systems are able to override the earlier ones.
Cultural shifts and changes occur, at a point arrived, where richer symbolism, containing less formal designations overcome the more archaic, and so called ideal elements.
That the two systems have been unable to form a successful union , forming compatible elements , has a long history in the literature, and proving one over the other, or their workable synthesis has almost reached the level of disconnect with their origin in the sensible world. If connections are broken between pure thought and it's subsisting terrain, then the dog begins to chase its own tail, and thought will be unable to find its own rationale.
But usually, this chase begins with a 'higher ground', with basic elevated assumptions which predicated Darwin's discoveries of a continuum between species, and this is the reason for raising thought and consciousness on a higher regard. Descartes, as seemingly far removed from the critical moment when such a separation became manifest, is fairly recent in cosmic time.
The implications for thought, in reference to boundaries, is increasingly manifest toward further lessening between the gaps of terretirial demarcation, and more toward an intrinsic, overlapping inclusion of separated elements.
Is there a time where this progression, which, some call entropy will reach it's critical point? Or, is it an unstoppable process, comparable to a physical manifestation of a black hole phenomenon, where, the ultimate collapse will lead to an infinite regress?
In case of black holes, it has been noted that there is no such event, because the so called Schwartzchild horizon is evidence for it. Had not 'thought' not developed this assymetry between the pre-existent cosmic events, and the original territoriality causes of thought, this link would never had been discovered.
Finally, are these cosmic evidences primordially causative toward by larger boundaries toward vastly smaller ones, on scales mentioned above, does this signify, or, imply as much, far more complex developmental nexus for the development of thought?