It’s ironic that there are so many synonyms for the word “unoriginal.” Copycat. Cookie-cutter. Cliche.

Originality and individualism influence American life, especially industry, in profound ways.

People pay to get special ring tones for their phones. Our cars are customizable in just about every way. Fast-food establishments advertise letting us have it “our way.”

But as prized an attribute as it is, individualism really doesn’t account for much.

The independent, original mindset is one of the things that brought the economy down. It’s that kind of inward thinking that led people to believe they deserved excessive credit-card purchases.

People who should have rented from another person bought houses instead, seemingly gaining independence. Consumers bought SUVs for their own safety, regardless of what a crash would do to a smaller vehicle.

People demand that their personal products cater to the individual. But nobody demands originality from popular entertainment.

Sequels and remakes fill this summer’s blockbuster schedule. One of the most popular movie franchises of all-time, “Star Wars,” was conceived from Joseph Campbell’s studies on the common elements of different mythologies.

Movies are made for mass audiences to enjoy, yes. But if there are certain themes in entertainment that make them enjoyable to millions of people, that demonstrates broad similarities exploited only by the movie industry.

In the capitalist economic system, private wealth is stressed over the collective good. But does that mean people have to pursue private wealth to define themselves as people?

There is nothing anybody can buy that will make him or her original. It’s impossible. Because another person made every product, ownership of any product is inherently unoriginal.

Parents always tell their kids they can do anything they want. That’s cruel and false. It raises the expectation of greatness in average children. Inevitably, there are few failures and mostly average children.

If there were as many great people as our parents told us there would be, the world would be perfect.

That doesn’t mean children shouldn’t aspire to be brilliant people.

It means they shouldn’t assume their own inherent brilliance.

For someone to be exceptional, there has to be someone who is not exceptional. Through capitalism, the more exceptional person should stand out.

Telling every child that he or she is special is detrimental, because that creates a mindset of entitlement. Instead, society should operate on the assumption that the film industry thrives on: that people are inherently more similar than they are different.

It would benefit society if everyone were taught that every human has an inherent worth equal to everyone else.

If people didn’t believe they were inherently worth more than their neighbor, there’d be no reason to value personal beliefs over someone else’s right to theirs. There would be less incentive for reckless home buying, because nobody would be entitled to own a home (or several).

Then, perhaps, conscience would intervene during key financial decisions, rather than the federal government.

Chris’s ring tone is O.D.B. Be just like him by e-mailing cogino@asu.edu.