So, thought objects are like our way of perceiving the object in our mind based upon the way we hold true to it from reality?
I am wondering what exactly you mean with 'hold rue to it from reality'. It is not a way of saying things I am familiar with.
I am going to try to describe what takes place in a short way. I think the opening post might be more comprehensive though.
When one observes something an image of what is observed is caught on our retina. Of this image there are things we understand. That part is 'grasped' (to grasp=fassen) by our brain and it is this which forms a thought-object. A thought object is not the object itself, not is it the entire observed image, it is what is understood of what one has observed. After that the mind can 'percieve' it.
So, this can explain why if I learn a new word, I all of a sudden feel like I'm hearing it a hundred times. It was there before in the environment, but never perceived unless thought object was provided. (Or am I completely lost here?).
It is one of the factors which explains that, yes. I think one needs to have grasped something once before one can understand it, and therefore 'percieve' (percieving is an activity of the mind; the recognising of something it has previously understood; it is derived from the Latin perceptio) it.
Also, I was reading the theory of forms. Would light be considered atemporal because it is a reference to the equation in time itself, sort of. lol.
Well, this seems a little off topic and the theory of forms (Aristotle) has very little to do with light being temporal;
but like all things carries something atemporal along with it.
I think three more topics are needed to discuss this properly.
And does it necessarily have to be words that relate to the thought objects? Why not qualia? What is the thought object of learning the word qualia?
I do not understand what exactly you mean with 'it'. I do know that qualia
are what things seem to us and are part of an empirical world view. Thought-objects are the mental 'pictures' our brain has 'grasped' from something observed. It does not have the pretence of belonging to the object itself, baut qualia do; in the same way as a thought-object of the word 'qualia' is not a qualium itself.
Does this help you along?