The beginning and the end of a thought are often the same as those of any other deed.
The separation of thought in a different area than that of real processes has rather an emotional reason.
One thought comes to existence and then to an end of its functionality just as, for instance, one bird starts to fly and then comes to the ground.
But the watcher of the bird could change his object of observation without involving any void spaces between an action and the next one. He also has started to observe it from the comfortable position of a member of a fully accepted practice of observing natural events.
Meanwhile, the real performer of a thought has no background which from he could consolidate the initiative of advancing a thought. If there is something previously accepted, he risks failing in having his own thought. His passing from a thought to other things implies a gap that was generally denominated as the difference between an ideal world and a real one.
Because of its departure from the heterogeneous circumstances, only a thought has the power to reveal what are the beginning and the end. Only by thinking we have the chance to understand them in their singularity.
Currently, there is little esteemed a pure beginning and a strong delimited end. For the purpose of prolonging the life disregarding the unfavorable circumstance of living, we are bent to view things from a previously grounded position and to look for other things immediately when the observed things disappear.
Accordingly, thought should be excluded from the normal course of life and is easily placed in a different world.