Difference between revisions of "Creativity" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(87 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
+
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]{{Copyedited}}
 
[[Category:Psychology]]
 
[[Category:Psychology]]
 
[[Category:Education]]
 
[[Category:Education]]
{{Contracted}}
+
{{Ebcompleted}}{{2Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}
 +
[[Image:Leonardo_da_Vinci_helicopter_and_lifting_wing.jpg|thumb|right|225px|[[Leonardo Da Vinci]] is well known for his creative works]]
 +
'''Creativity''' is a process involving the generation of new ideas or concepts, or new associations between existing ideas or concepts, and their substantiation into a product that has novelty and originality. From a scientific point of view, the products of creative thought (sometimes referred to as divergent thought) are usually considered to have both "originality" and "appropriateness." An alternative, more everyday conception of creativity is that it is simply the act of making something new.
  
'''Creativity''' (or '''creativeness''') is a mental process involving the generation of new ideas or concepts, or new associations between existing ideas or concepts. From a scientific point of view, the products of creative thought (sometimes referred to as [[convergent and divergent production|divergent thought]]) are usually considered to have both ''originality'' and ''appropriateness''. An alternative, more everyday conception of creativity is that it is simply the act of making something new. Although intuitively a simple phenomenon, it is in fact quite complex. It has been studied from the perspectives of [[behavioural psychology]], [[social psychology]], [[psychometrics]], [[cognitive science]], [[artificial intelligence]], [[philosophy]], [[history]], [[economics]], [[design research]], [[business]], and [[management]], among others. The studies have covered everyday creativity, exceptional creativity and even [[Artificial Creativity|artificial creativity]]. Unlike many phenomena in science, there is no single, authoritative perspective or definition of creativity. Unlike many phenomena in psychology, there is no standardized measurement technique.
+
Although intuitively a simple phenomenon, creativity is in fact quite complex. It has been studied from numerous perspectives, including [[psychology]], [[social psychology]], [[psychometrics]], [[artificial intelligence]], [[philosophy]], [[history]], [[economics]], and [[business]]. Unlike many phenomena in science, there is no single, authoritative perspective, or definition of creativity; nor is there a standardized measurement technique. Creativity has been attributed variously to [[divinity|divine]] intervention or [[afterlife#Positive Spiritual Influences|spiritual inspiration]], [[cognition|cognitive]] processes, the social environment, [[personality|personality traits]], and chance ("accident" or "serendipity"). It has been associated with [[genius]], [[mental illness]] and [[humor]]. Some say it is a trait we are born with; others say it can be taught with the application of simple techniques. Although popularly associated with [[art]] and [[literature]], it is also an essential part of innovation and invention, important in professions such as business, economics, [[architecture]], [[industrial design]], [[science]], and [[engineering]]. Despite, or perhaps because of, the ambiguity and multi-dimensional nature of creativity, entire [[industry|industries]] have been spawned from the pursuit of creative ideas and the development of creativity techniques.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
This mysterious phenomenon, though undeniably important and constantly visible, seems to lie tantalizingly beyond the grasp of scientific investigation. Yet in [[religion|religious]] or spiritual terms it is the very essence of human nature. Creativity, understood as the ability to utilize everything at hand in nature to transform our living environment and beautify our lives, is what distinguishes human beings from all other creatures. This is one way that human beings are said to be in the [[image of God]]: they are second creators, acting in a manner analogous to [[God]], the original Creator.  
  
Creativity has been attributed variously to [[divine intervention]], [[cognitive]] processes, the [[social]] environment, [[personality|personality traits]], and [[Randomness|chance]] ("accident," "[[serendipity]]"). It has been associated with [[genius]], [[mental illness]] and [[humour]]. Some say it is a [[trait (biological)|trait]] we are born with; others say it can be taught with the application of simple [[creativity techniques|techniques]]. Although popularly associated with [[art]] and [[literature]], it is also an essential part of [[innovation]] and [[invention]] and is important in professions such as [[business]], [[economics]], [[architecture]], [[industrial design]], [[science]] and [[engineering]].  
+
Moreover, all people, regardless of their intellectual level, are co-creators of perhaps the most important thing—their own self. While God provides each person with a certain endowment and circumstance, it is up to each individual to make what he will of his life by how he or she choses to live it.  
  
Despite, or perhaps because of, the ambiguity and multi-dimensional nature of creativity, entire [[creative industries|industries]] have been spawned from the pursuit of creative ideas and the development of [[creativity techniques]]. This mysterious phenomenon, though undeniably important and constantly visible, seems to lie tantalizingly beyond the grasp of scientific investigation.
+
==Definitions of Creativity==
 +
<blockquote>''"Creativity, it has been said, consists largely of re-arranging what we know in order to find out what we do not know."'' '''George Keller'''</blockquote>
  
<blockquote>''"Creativity, it has been said, consists largely of re-arranging what we know in order to find out what we do not know."'' '''George Keller'''</blockquote>
+
<blockquote>''"The problem of creativity is beset with mysticism, confused definitions, value judgments, psychoanalytic admonitions, and the crushing weight of philosophical speculation dating from ancient times."'' '''Albert Rothenberg'''</blockquote>
[[Image:Leonardo_da_Vinci_helicopter_and_lifting_wing.jpg|frame|right|[[Leonardo Da Vinci]] is well known for his creative works]]
 
  
==Definitions of creativity==
+
More than 60 different definitions of '''creativity''' can be found in the psychological literature.<ref>C.W. Taylor, "Various approaches to and definitions of creativity." in ''The Nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives,'' ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1988, ISBN 0521338921).</ref> The etymological root of the word in English and most other [[Europe|European]] [[language]]s comes from the [[Latin]] ''creatus,'' literally "to have grown."
  
<blockquote>''"The problem of creativity is beset with mysticism, confused definitions, value judgments, psychoanalytic admonitions, and the crushing weight of philosophical speculation dating from ancient times."''  '''Albert Rothenberg'''</blockquote>
+
Perhaps the most widespread conception of creativity in the scholarly literature is that creativity is manifested in the production of a creative work (for example, a new work of art or a scientific hypothesis) that is both "novel" and "useful." Colloquial definitions of creativity are typically descriptive of activity that results in producing or bringing about something partly or wholly new; in investing an existing object with new properties or characteristics; in [[imagination|imagining]] new possibilities that were not conceived of before; and in seeing or performing something in a manner different from what was thought possible or normal previously.  
  
More than 60 different definitions of ''creativity'' can be found in the psychological literature,<ref>(Taylor, 1988)</ref> and it is beyond the scope of this article to list them all.  The [[etymology|etymological]] root of the word in [[English language|English]] and most other [[Europe|European]] [[language]]s comes from the [[Latin]] ''creatus'', literally "to have grown."
+
A useful distinction has been made by Rhodes<ref>M. Rhodes, "An analysis of creativity." ''Phi Delta Kappan'' 42 (1961): 305-311.</ref> between the creative person, the creative product, the creative process, and the creative "press" or environment. Each of these factors are usually present in creative activity. This has been elaborated by Johnson,<ref>D.M. Johnson, ''Systematic introduction to the psychology of thinking'' (Harper & Row, 1972, ISBN 0060433310).</ref> who suggested that creative activity may exhibit several dimensions including sensitivity to problems on the part of the creative agent, originality, ingenuity, unusualness, usefulness, and appropriateness in relation to the creative product, and intellectual leadership on the part of the creative agent.  
  
Perhaps the most widespread conception of creativity in the scholarly literature is that creativity is manifested in the production of a creative work (for example, a new work of art or a scientific hypothesis) that is both ''novel'' and ''useful''. Colloquial definitions of creativity are typically descriptive of activity that results in producing or bringing about something partly or wholly new; in investing an existing object with new properties or characteristics; in [[imagination|imagining]] new possibilities that were not conceived of before; and in seeing or performing something in a manner different from  what was thought possible or normal previously.  
+
Boden noted that it is important to distinguish between ideas which are psychologically creative (which are novel to the individual mind which had the idea), and those which are historically creative (which are novel with respect to the whole of human history).<ref>M.A. Boden, ''The Creative Mind: Myths And Mechanisms'' (Routledge, 2004, ISBN 0465014518).</ref> Drawing on ideas from [[artificial intelligence]], she defines psychologically creative ideas as those which cannot be produced by the same set of generative rules as other, familiar ideas.
  
A useful distinction has been made by Rhodes<ref>(Rhodes, 1961)</ref> between the creative person, the creative product, the creative process, and the creative 'press' or environment. Each of these factors are usually present in creative activity. This has been elaborated by Johnson,<ref>(Johnson, 1972)</ref> who suggested that creative activity may exhibit several dimensions including sensitivity to problems on the part of the creative agent, originality, ingenuity, unusualness, usefulness, and appropriateness in relation to the creative product, and intellectual leadership on the part of the creative agent.  
+
Often implied in the notion of creativity is a concomitant presence of inspiration, cognitive leaps, or [[Intuition|intuitive]] insight as a part of creative thought and action.<ref name="Koestler75">A. Koestler, ''The Act of Creation'' (Macmillan, 1975, ISBN 0330244477).</ref> Pop psychology sometimes associates creativity with [[cerebral hemisphere|right or forehead brain activity]] or even specifically with lateral thinking.
  
[[Margaret Boden|Boden]]<ref>(Boden, 2004)</ref> noted that it is important to distinguish between ideas which are psychologically creative (which are novel to the individual mind which had the idea), and those which are historically creative (which are novel with respect to the whole of human history). Drawing on ideas from [[artificial intelligence]], she defines psychologically creative ideas as those which cannot be produced by the same set of generative rules as other, familiar ideas.
+
Some students of creativity have emphasized an element of chance in the creative process. [[Linus Pauling]], asked at a public lecture how one creates scientific theories, replied that one must endeavor to come up with many ideas, then discard the useless ones.
 
 
Often implied in the notion of creativity is a concomitant presence of inspiration, cognitive leaps, or [[Intuition (knowledge)|intuitive]] [[insight]] as a part of creative thought and action.<ref name="Koestler64">(Koestler, 1964)</ref> [[Pop psychology]] sometimes associates creativity with [[cerebral hemisphere|right or forehead brain activity]] or even specifically with [[lateral thinking]].
 
 
 
Some students of creativity have emphasized an element of [[Randomness|chance]] in the creative process. [[Linus Pauling]], asked at a public lecture how one creates [[theory|scientific theories]], replied that one must endeavor to come up with ''many'' ideas then discard the useless ones.
 
 
 
==Origin of Creativity==
 
According to many religions, God as the original Creator of the world initiated the first act of creativity.
 
 
 
''God it is Who created the heavens and the earth,
 
and that which is between them, in six days.''
 
Islam. Qur'an 32.4-9
 
 
 
''In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth... And God said, "Let there be light"...And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he had done in creation.''
 
Judaism and Christianity. Bible, Genesis 1.1-2.3
 
 
 
''But, joining minute particles even of those six, which possess measureless power, with particles of himself, he (The Divine One) created all beings.''
 
Hinduism. Laws of Manu 1.5-16
 
 
 
Unification Thought explains the purpose for which God created humankind and the universe as the desire to actualize joy through love. God created the universe as His object of joy and to give joy to humankind. God is a great artist and the universe is God’s work of art. God, as the artist, receives joy through creating people to resemble his characteristics (Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Genesis 1.1-2.3), and the universe resembles his characteristics symbolically. Likewise humans participate in the act of creativity from a desire to give joy to God and others, as well as find joy for themselves. The British art critic Herbert Read (1892-1968) said, "All artists have ... the desire to please; and art is ... defined as an attempt to create pleasing forms."
 
 
 
Furthermore, Unification Thought explains that artistic activity not only involves creativity but also appreciation. While engaging in creation, one also engages in appreciation, and also while engaging in appreciation, the appreciator adds value to the work of art being appreciated. Both appreciation and creation are based on the dual desires to realize value and to seek value. The act of creation is based on the desire to realize value while appreciation is performed based on the desire to seek value. To go further, both desires come from dual purposes:
 
• The desire to realize value comes from the purpose for the whole
 
• The desire to seek value comes from the purpose for the individual.
 
 
 
These dual purposes are derived ultimately from God’s purpose of creation – to give and receive joy. Likewise humans desire to give joy to God and others, as well as find joy for themselves. The artist’s act of creativity has the purpose of manifesting value for God and humankind, whereas the appreciator finds value in the work of art. From this perspective, an artist’s work is elevated rather than the frequent manifestations of self-centered art very prevalent in today’s world.
 
  
 
==History of the term and the concept==
 
==History of the term and the concept==
 +
The way in which different societies have formulated the concept of creativity has changed throughout history, as has the term "creativity" itself.
  
The way in which different societies have formulated the concept of creativity has changed throughout history, as has the term ''creativity'' itself.  
+
The ancient [[Greek]]s, who believed that the muses were the source of all inspiration, actually had no terms corresponding to "to create" or "creator." The expression "''poiein''" ("to make") sufficed. They believed that the inspiration for originality came from the gods and even invented heavenly creatures - the [[Muse|Muses]] - as supervisors of human creativity.  
  
The ancient Greeks, who believed that the [[muse]]s were the source of all inspiration, actually had no terms corresponding to "to create" or "creator.The expression "''poiein''" ("to make") sufficed. The sole exception was [[poetry]]: the poet was seen as making new things — bringing to life a new world — while the [[art|artist]] merely ''imitated''. In Rome, this Greek view was modified, and [[Horace]] wrote that not only poets but painters were entitled to the privilege of daring whatever they wished. Unlike [[Greek language|Greek]], [[Latin]] had a term for "creating" ("''creatio''") and for "creator," and had two expressions for "to make" — "''facere''" and "''creare''".<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80">(Tatarkiewicz, 1980)</ref>
+
According to Plato, [[Socrates]] taught that inspired [[thought]]s originate with the gods; ideas spring forth not when a person is rational, but when someone is "beside himself," when "bereft of his senses." Since the gods took away [[reason]] before bestowing the gift of [[inspiration]], "thinking" might actually prevent the reception of divinely inspired revelations. The word "inspiration" is based on a Greek word meaning "the God within." The poet was seen as making new things—bringing to life a new world—while the [[art]]ist merely ''imitated.''  
  
In the [[visual arts]], freedom was limited by the [[Body proportions|proportions]] that [[Polyclitus]] had established for the human frame, and which he called "the canon" (meaning, "measure"). [[Plato]] argued in ''[[Timaeus]]'' that, to execute a good work, one must contemplate an eternal model. Later the [[Roman Republic|Roman]], [[Cicero]], would write that art embraces those things "of which we have knowledge" ("''quae sciuntur''").
+
In the [[visual arts]], freedom was limited by the proportions that [[Polyclitus]] had established for the human frame, and which he called "the canon" (meaning, "measure"). [[Plato]] argued in ''Timaeus'' that, to execute a good work, one must contemplate an eternal model. Later the Roman, [[Cicero]], would write that art embraces those things "of which we have knowledge" ''(quae sciuntur).''
  
In [[Rome]], these Greek concepts were partly shaken. [[Horace]] wrote that not only poets but painters as well were entitled to the privilege of daring whatever they wished to ("''quod libet audendi''").  In the declining period of antiquity, [[Philostratus]] wrote that "one can discover a similarity between [[poetry]] and [[art]] and find that they have [[imagination]] in common." [[Callistratos]] averred that "Not only is the art of the [[poet]]s and [[prose|prosaist]]s inspired, but likewise the hands of [[sculptor]]s are gifted with the blessing of divine [[inspiration]]." This was something new: [[classical Greece|classical Greeks]] had not applied the [[concept]]s of [[imagination]] and [[inspiration]] to the [[visual arts]] but had restricted them to [[poetry]]. [[Latin]] was richer than [[Greek language|Greek]]: it had a term for "creating" ("''creatio''") and for "''creator''," and had ''two'' expressions — "''facere''" and "''creare''" — where Greek had but one, "''poiein''.Still, the two Latin terms meant much the same thing.
+
In [[Ancient Rome|Rome]], these Greek concepts were partly shaken. [[Horace]] wrote that not only poets but painters as well were entitled to the privilege of daring whatever they wished to ''(quod libet audendi).'' In the declining period of antiquity, [[Philostratus]] wrote that "one can discover a similarity between [[poetry]] and [[art]] and find that they have [[imagination]] in common." [[Callistratos]] averred that "Not only is the art of the [[poet]]s and prosaists inspired, but likewise the hands of [[sculptor]]s are gifted with the blessing of divine inspiration." This was something new: classical Greeks had not applied the [[concept]]s of imagination and inspiration to the visual arts but had restricted them to poetry. [[Latin]] was richer than [[Greek language|Greek]]: it had a term for "creating" ''(creatio)'' and for ''creator,'' and had ''two'' expressions—''facere'' and ''creare''—where Greek had but one, ''poiein.''<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80">Władysław Tatarkiewicz, ''A History of Six Ideas: An Essay in Aesthetics,'' Translated from the Polish by Christopher Kasparek, (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980, ISBN 9024722330).</ref> Still, the two Latin terms meant much the same thing.
  
Although neither the Greeks nor the Romans had any words that directly corresponded to the word creativity, their art, architecture, music, inventions, and discoveries provide numerous examples of what we would today describe as creative works. At the time, the concept of [[genius]] probably came closest to describing the creative talents bringing forth these works.<ref name="Albert99">(Albert & Runco, 1999)</ref>
+
Although neither the Greeks nor the Romans had any words that directly corresponded to the word creativity, their art, architecture, music, inventions, and discoveries provide numerous examples of what we would today describe as creative works. At the time, the concept of [[genius]] probably came closest to describing the creative talents bringing forth these works.<ref name="Albert99">R.S. Albert and M.A. Runce, "A History of Research on Creativity" in ''Handbook of Creativity'', ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 0521576040).</ref>
  
A fundamental change came in the [[Christianity|Christian]] period: "''creatio''" came to designate God's act of "creation from nothing". "''Creatio''" thus took on a different meaning than "''facere''" ("to make"), and ceased to apply to human functions.  
+
A fundamental change came in the [[Christianity|Christian]] period: ''creatio'' came to designate God's act of "creation from nothing." ''Creatio'' thus took on a different meaning than ''facere'' ("to make"), and ceased to apply to human functions.  
  
The influential Christian writer [[Augustine of Hippo|St. Augustine]] felt that Christianity "played a leading role in the discovery of our power to create" (Albert & Runco, 1999). However, alongside this new, [[religion|religious]] interpretation of the expression, there persisted the ancient view that art is not a domain of creativity.<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80"/> This is also seen in the work of [[Pseudo-Dionysius]]. Later [[medieval]] men such as [[Hraban the Moor]], and [[Robert Grosseteste]] in the [[13th century]], thought much the same way. The [[Middle Ages]] here went even further than [[classical antiquity|antiquity]]; they made no exception of poetry: it too had its rules, was an [[art]], and was therefore [[craft]] and not creativity.
+
The influential Christian writer [[Augustine of Hippo|Saint Augustine]] felt that Christianity "played a leading role in the discovery of our power to create" (Albert & Runco, 1999). However, alongside this new, [[religion|religious]] interpretation of the expression, there persisted the ancient view that art is not a domain of creativity.<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80"/> This is also seen in the work of Pseudo-Dionysius. Later [[medieval]] men such as [[Hraban the Moor]], and Robert Grosseteste in the thirteenth century, thought much the same way. The [[Middle Ages]] here went even further than antiquity; they made no exception of poetry: it too had its rules, was an art, and was therefore craft, and not creativity.
  
Another shift occurred in more modern times. [[Renaissance]] men had a sense of their own independence, freedom and creativity, and sought to give voice to this sense of independence and creativity. [[Baltasar Gracián]] ([[1601]]-[[1658]]) wrote: "Art is the completion of nature, as it were ''a second Creator''...". By the [[18th century]] and the [[Age of Enlightenment]], the concept of creativity was appearing more often in art theory, and was linked with the concept of [[imagination]].<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80"/>
+
Another shift occurred in more modern times. [[Renaissance]] men had a sense of their own independence, freedom, and creativity, and sought to give it voice. [[Baltasar Gracián]] (1601-1658) wrote: "Art is the completion of nature, as it were 'a second Creator'"; … [[Raphael]], that he shapes a painting according to his idea; [[Leonardo da Vinci]], that he employs "shapes that do not exist in nature"; [[Michelangelo]], that the artist realizes his vision rather than imitating nature. Still more emphatic were those who wrote about poetry: [[G.P. Capriano]] held (1555) that the poet's invention springs "from nothing." [[Francesco Patrizi]] (1586) saw poetry as "fiction," "shaping," and "transformation."
  
The Western view of creativity can be contrasted with the Eastern view. For the [[Hinduism|Hindus]], [[Confucianism|Confucius]], [[Taoism|Taoists]] and [[Buddhism|Buddhists]], creation was at most a kind of discovery or mimicry, and the idea of creation from "nothing" had no place in these philosophies and religions.<ref name="Albert99"/>
+
Finally, the word "creation" appeared in the writings of the seventeenth-century Polish poet and theoretician of poetry, Maciej Kazimierz Sarbiewski (1595-1640), known as "the last Latin poet." In his treatise, ''De perfecta poesi'', he not only wrote that a poet "invents," "after a fashion builds," but also that the poet "creates anew" ''(de novo creat)''. Sarbiewski even added: "in the manner of God" ''(instar Dei)''.
  
In the [[19th century]], not only was art regarded as creativity, but ''it alone'' was so regarded.  When later, at the turn of the [[20th century]], there began to be discussion of creativity in the sciences (e.g., [[Jan Łukasiewicz]], [[1878]]-[[1956]]) and in nature (e.g., [[Henri Bergson]]), this was generally taken as the transference to the sciences of concepts proper to art.<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80"/>
+
By the eighteenth century and the [[Age of Enlightenment]], the concept of creativity was appearing more often in art theory, and was linked with the concept of [[imagination]].<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80"/> There was still resistance to the idea of human creativity which had a triple source. The expression, "creation," was then reserved for creation ''ex nihilo'' (Latin: "from nothing"), which was inaccessible to man. Second, creation is a mysterious act, and Enlightenment [[psychology]] did not admit of mysteries. Third, artists of the age were attached to their rules, and creativity seemed irreconcilable with rules. The latter objection was the weakest, as it was already beginning to be realized (for example, by Houdar de la Motte, 1715) that rules ultimately are a human invention.
  
The formal starting point of the scientific study of creativity is sometimes considered to be [[J. P. Guilford]]'s address to the [[American Psychological Association]] in 1950, which helped to popularize the topic<ref name="Sternberg99">(Sternberg, 1999)</ref>. Since then (and indeed, before then), researchers from a variety of fields have studied the nature of creativity from a scientific point of view. Others have taken a more pragmatic approach, teaching practical [[creativity techniques]]. Three of the best-known are [[Alex Osborn]]'s [[brainstorming]] techniques (1950s to present), [[Genrikh Altshuller]]'s Theory of Inventive Problem Solving ([[TRIZ]]), (1950s to present); and [[Edward de Bono]]'s [[lateral thinking]], (1960s to present).
+
The Western view of creativity can be contrasted with the Eastern view. For the [[Hinduism|Hindus]], [[Confucianism|Confucius]], [[Daoism|Daoists]] and [[Buddhism|Buddhists]], creation was at most a kind of discovery or mimicry, and the idea of creation from "nothing" had no place in these philosophies and religions.<ref name="Albert99"/>
  
==History article==
+
In the nineteenth century, not only was art regarded as creativity, but "it alone" was so regarded. When later, at the turn of the twentieth century, there began to be discussion of creativity in the sciences (e.g., [[Jan Łukasiewicz]], 1878-1956) and in nature (such as [[Henri Bergson]]), this was generally taken as the transference to the sciences of concepts proper to art.<ref name="Tatarkiewicz80"/>
  
The way in which different societies have perceived the concept of creativity has changed throughout history, as has the term ''creativity'' itself. [[Władysław Tatarkiewicz|Tatarkiewicz]]'s ''History of Six Ideas'' presents a historical survey of the concept.  
+
The formal starting point of the scientific study of creativity is sometimes considered to be [[J. P. Guilford]]'s address to the American Psychological Association in 1950, which helped to popularize the topic.<ref name="Sternberg99">R.J. Sternberg and T.I. Lubart, "The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms." ''Handbook of Creativity,'' ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 0521576040).</ref> Since then (and indeed, before then), researchers from a variety of fields have studied the nature of creativity from a scientific point of view. Others have taken a more pragmatic approach, teaching practical creativity techniques. Three of the best-known are Alex Osborn's brainstorming techniques, Genrikh Altshuller's Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ); and Edward de Bono's lateral thinking.
  
The [[ancient Greeks]] had no terms corresponding to "to create" or "creator."  The expression "''poiein''" ("to make") sufficed.  And even that was not extended to [[art]] in general, but only to ''poiesis'' ([[poetry]]) and to the ''poietes'' ([[poet]], or "maker") who ''made'' it.  [[Plato]] asks in ''[[The Republic]]'', "Will we say, of a painter, that he makes something?" and answers, "Certainly not, he merely [[mimesis|imitates]]."  To the ancient Greeks, the concept of a creator and of creativity implied freedom of action, whereas the Greeks' concept of art involved subjection to laws and rules.  Art (in [[Greek language|Greek]], "''techne''") was "the making of things, according to rules."  It contained no creativity, and it would have been — in the Greeks' view — a bad state of affairs if it ''had''.
+
==Creativity in psychology and cognitive science==
 +
An early, psychodynamic approach to understanding creativity was proposed by [[Sigmund Freud]], who suggested that creativity arises as a result of frustrated desires for fame, fortune, and [[love]], with the [[energy]] that was previously tied up in frustration and [[emotion]]al tension in the neurosis being [[sublimation|sublimated]] into creative activity. Freud later retracted this view.
  
This understanding of art had a distinct premise:  [[Nature]] is [[perfection|perfect]] and is subject to laws, therefore man ought to discover its laws and submit to them, and not seek freedom, which will deflect him from that ''optimum'' which he can attain.  The artist was a [[discovery (observation)|discoverer]], not an [[inventor]].
+
[[Graham Wallas]], in his work ''Art of Thought,'' published in 1926,<ref>G. Wallas, ''Art of Thought'' (Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1926).</ref> presented one of the first models of the creative process.
 +
Wallas considered creativity to be a legacy of the [[evolution]]ary process, which allowed humans to quickly adapt to rapidly changing environments.<ref name="Simonton99">D.K. Simonton, ''Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity'' (Oxford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0195128796).</ref>
  
The sole exception to this Greek view — a ''great'' exception — was [[poetry]].  The poet made new things — brought to life a new world — while the [[art|artist]] merely ''imitated''.  And the poet, unlike the artist, was ''not'' bound by laws.  There were no terms corresponding to "creativity" or "creator," but in reality the poet was understood to be one who creates.  And only he was so understood.  In [[music]], there was no freedom:  melodies were prescribed, particularly for ceremonies and entertainments, and were known tellingly as "''nomoi''" ("laws").  In the [[visual arts]], freedom was limited by the [[Body proportions|proportions]] that [[Polyclitus]] had established for the human frame, and which he called "the canon" (meaning, "measure").  [[Plato]] argued in ''[[Timaeus]]'' that, to execute a good work, one must contemplate an eternal model.  Later the [[Roman Republic|Roman]], [[Cicero]], would write that art embraces those things "of which we have knowledge" ("''quae sciuntur''").
+
In the Wallas stage model, creative insights and illuminations may be explained by a process consisting of 5 stages:
 +
#'''preparation''' (preparatory work on a problem that focuses the individual's mind on the problem and explores the problem's dimensions),
 +
#'''incubation''' (where the problem is internalized into the subconscious mind and nothing appears externally to be happening),  
 +
#'''intimation''' (the creative person gets a "feeling" that a solution is on its way),
 +
#'''illumination''' or insight (where the creative idea bursts forth from its subconscious processing into conscious awareness); and  
 +
#'''verification''' (where the idea is consciously verified, elaborated, and then applied).  
  
Poets saw things differently. Book I of the ''[[Odyssey]]'' asks, "Why forbid the singer to please us with singing ''as he himself will?''[[Aristotle]] had doubts as to whether poetry was imitation of reality, and as to whether it required adherence to truth:  it was, rather, the realm of that "which is neither true nor false."
+
Wallas' model has subsequently been treated as four stages, with "intimation" seen as a sub-stage. There has been some empirical research looking at whether, as the concept of "incubation" in Wallas' model implies, a period of interruption or rest from a problem may aid creative [[problem-solving]]. Ward<ref>T. Ward, "Creativity." In ''Encyclopaedia of Cognition,'' ed. L. Nagel, (New York: Macmillan, 2003).</ref> lists various hypotheses that have been advanced to explain why incubation may aid creative problem-solving, and notes how some empirical evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that incubation aids creative problem-solving in that it enables "forgetting" of misleading clues. Absence of incubation may lead the problem solver to become fixated on inappropriate strategies of solving the problem.<ref>S.M. Smith and S.E. Blakenship, "Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving." ''American Journal of Psychology'' 104 (1991): 61&ndash;87.</ref> This work disputed the earlier hypothesis that creative solutions to problems arise mysteriously from the [[unconscious]] mind while the [[consciousness|conscious]] mind is occupied on other tasks.<ref>J.R. Anderson, ''Cognitive psychology and its implications'' (Worth Publishers, 2005, ISBN 0716701103).</ref>
  
In [[Rome]], these Greek concepts were partly shaken. [[Horace]] wrote that not only poets but painters as well were entitled to the privilege of daring whatever they wished to ("''quod libet audendi''"). In the declining period of antiquity, [[Philostratus]] wrote that "one can discover a similarity between [[poetry]] and [[art]] and find that they have [[imagination]] in common."  [[Callistratos]] averred that "Not only is the art of the [[poet]]s and [[prose|prosaist]]s inspired, but likewise the hands of [[sculptor]]s are gifted with the blessing of divine [[inspiration]]."  This was something new:  [[classical Greece|classical Greeks]] had not applied the [[concept]]s of [[imagination]] and [[inspiration]] to the [[visual arts]] but had restricted them to [[poetry]]. [[Latin]] was richer than [[Greek language|Greek]]:  it had a term for "creating" ("''creatio''") and for "''creator''," and had ''two'' expressions — "''facere''" and "''creare''" — where Greek had but one, "''poiein''."  Still, the two Latin terms meant much the same thing.
+
[[J. P. Guilford|Guilford]]<ref name="Guildford67">J.P. Guilford, ''The Nature of Human Intelligence'' (McGraw-Hill, 1967).</ref> performed important work in the field of creativity, drawing a distinction between convergent and divergent production (commonly renamed convergent and divergent thinking). Convergent thinking involves aiming for a single, correct solution to a problem, whereas divergent thinking involves creative generation of multiple answers to a set problem. Divergent thinking is sometimes used as a synonym for creativity in psychology literature. Other researchers have occasionally used the terms "flexible" thinking or "fluid intelligence," which are similar to (but not synonymous with) creativity.
  
Although both the Greeks and Romans had no words that directly corresponded to the word creativity, their art, architecture, music, inventions and discoveries provided numerous examples of what we would today describe as creative talents. At the time, the concept of [[genius]] probably came closest to describing individuals with these talents (Albert & Runco, 1999). The Romans came to see genius as an illustrious male's creative power that could be passed on to his children.  
+
In ''The Act of Creation,'' [[Arthur Koestler]]<ref name="Koestler75"/> listed three types of creative individuals: the "Artist," the "Sage," and the "Jester." Believers in this trinity hold all three elements necessary in [[business]] and can identify them all in "truly creative" companies as well. Koestler introduced the concept of "bisociation"&mdash;that creativity arises as a result of the intersection of two quite different frames of reference.
  
A fundamental change, however, came in the [[Christianity|Christian]] period:  "''creatio''" came to designate [[God]]'s act of "creation from nothing" ("''creatio ex nihilo''"). "''Creatio''" thus took on a different meaning than "''facere''" ("to make"), and ceased to apply to human functions. As the [[6th century|6th-century]] Roman official and literary figure [[Cassiodorus]] wrote, "things made and created differ, for we can make, who cannot create."
+
In 1992, Finke<ref>R. Finke, T.B. Ward, and S.M. Smith, ''Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications'' (MIT Press, 1996, ISBN 0262560968).</ref> proposed the "Geneplore" model, in which creativity takes place in two phases: a generative phase, where an individual constructs mental representations called preinventive structures, and an exploratory phase where those structures are used to come up with creative ideas. Weisberg<ref>R.W. Weisberg, ''Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius'' (Freeman, 1993, ISBN 0716723670).</ref> argued, by contrast, that creativity only involves ordinary cognitive processes yielding extraordinary results.
  
The influential Christian writer [[Augustine of Hippo|St. Augustine]] felt that Christianity "played a leading role in the discovery of our power to create" (Albert & Runco, 1999). However, alongside this new, [[religion|religious]] interpretation of the expression, there persisted the ancient view that art is not a domain of creativity. This is also seen in the work of [[Pseudo-Dionysius]]. Later [[medieval]] men such as [[Hraban the Moor]], and [[Robert Grosseteste]] in the [[13th century]], thought much the same way.  The [[Middle Ages]] here went even further than [[classical antiquity|antiquity]]; they made no exception of poetry:  it too had its rules, was an [[art]], and was therefore [[craft]] and not creativity.
+
===Creativity and intelligence===
 
+
There has been debate in the psychological literature about whether [[intelligence]] and creativity are part of the same process (the conjoint hypothesis) or represent distinct mental processes (the disjoint hypothesis). Evidence from attempts to look at correlations between intelligence and creativity from the 1950s onwards regularly suggested that correlations between these concepts were low enough to justify treating them as distinct concepts.  
This Christian view can be contrasted with the Eastern view of creativity. For the [[Hinduism|Hindus]], [[Confucianism|Confucius]], [[Taoism|Taoists]] and [[Buddism|Buddhists]], creation was at most a kind of discoverey or mimicry, and the idea of creation from "nothing" had no place in these philosophies and religions (Albert & Runco, 1999).
 
 
 
The Western view changed in modern times.  [[Renaissance]] men had a sense of their own independence, freedom and creativity, and sought to give voice to this sense of independence and creativity.  The philosopher [[Marsilio Ficino]] wrote that the artist "thinks up" ("''excogitatio''") his works; the theoretician of architecture and painting, [[Leon Battista Alberti]], that he "preordains" ("''preordinazione''"); [[Raphael]], that he shapes a painting according to his idea; [[Leonardo da Vinci]], that he employs "shapes that do not exist in nature"; [[Michelangelo]], that the artist realizes his vision rather than imitating nature; [[Giorgio Vasari]], that "nature is conquered by art"; the Venetian art theoretician, [[Paolo Pino]], that painting is "inventing what is not"; [[Paolo Veronese]], that painters avail themselves of the same liberties as do poets and madmen; [[Federigo Zuccaro]] ([[1542]]-[[1609]]), that the artist shapes "a new world, new paradises"; [[Cesare Cesariano]] ([[1483]]-[[1541]]), that architects are "demi-gods."  Among [[musician]]s, the [[Holland|Dutch]] composer and musicologist [[Jan Tinctoris]] ([[1446]]-[[1511]]) demanded novelty in what a composer did, and defined a composer as "one who produces ''new'' songs."
 
 
 
Still more emphatic were those who wrote about [[poetry]]:  [[G.P. Capriano]] held ([[1555]]) that the poet's invention springs "from nothing."  [[Francesco Patrizi]] ([[1586]]) saw poetry as "fiction," "shaping," "transformation."
 
 
 
Finally, at long last, someone ventured to use the word, "creation."  He was the [[17th century|17th-century]] [[Poland|Polish]] poet and theoretician of poetry, [[Maciej Kazimierz Sarbiewski]] ([[1595]]-[[1640]]), known as "the last Latin poet."  In his treatise, ''De perfecta poesi'', he not only wrote that a poet "invents," "after a fashion builds," but also that the poet "''creates anew''" ("''de novo creat''").  Sarbiewski even added:  "in the manner of God" ("''instar Dei''").
 
 
 
Sarbiewski, however, regarded creativity as the exclusive privilege of poetry; creativity was not open to visual artists.  "Other arts merely imitate and copy but do not create, because they assume the existence of the material from which they create or of the subject."  As late as the end of the [[17th century]], [[André Félibien]] ([[1619]]-[[1675]]) would write that the painter is "so to speak [a] creator."  The [[Spain|Spanish]] [[Jesuit]] [[Baltasar Gracián]] ([[1601]]-[[1658]]) wrote similarly as Sarbiewski:  "Art is the completion of nature, as it were ''a second Creator''..."
 
 
 
In the [[18th century]], the [[Age of Enlightenment]] brought about a fundamental shift, with growing resistance to divine authority and a higher level of individual freedom to explore and inquire about the world (Albert & Runco, 1999). The concept of creativity was also appearing more often in art theory.  It was linked with the concept of [[imagination]], which was becoming a popular term. [[Joseph Addison]] wrote that the imagination "has something in it like creation."  [[Voltaire]] declared ([[1740]]) that "the true poet is creative."  With both these authors, however, this was rather only a ''comparison'' of poet with creator.
 
 
 
Other writers took a different view.  [[Denis Diderot]] felt that imagination is merely "the memory of forms and contents," and "creates nothing" but only combines, magnifies or diminishes.  It was precisely in [[18th century|18th-century]] [[France]], indeed, that the idea of man's creativity met with resistance.  [[Charles Batteux]] wrote that "The human mind ''cannot create'', strictly speaking; all its products bear the stigmata of their model; even monsters invented by an imagination unhampered by laws can only be composed of parts taken from nature."  [[Luc de Clapiers, marquis de Vauvenargues]] ([[1715]]-[[1747]]), and [[Étienne Bonnot de Condillac]] ([[1715]]-[[1780]]) spoke to a similar effect.
 
 
 
Their resistance to the idea of human creativity had a triple source.  The expression, "creation," was then reserved for creation ''ex nihilo'' ([[Latin]]:  "from nothing"), which was inaccessible to man.  Second, creation is a mysterious act, and [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] psychology did not admit of mysteries.  Third, artists of the age were attached to their rules, and creativity seemed irreconcilable with rules.  The latter objection was the weakest, as it was already beginning to be realized (e.g., by [[Houdar de la Motte]], [[1715]]) that rules ultimately are a ''human invention''.
 
 
 
In the [[19th century]], art took its compensation for the resistance of preceding centuries against recognizing it as creativity.  Now not only was art regarded as creativity, but ''it alone'' was so regarded.  When later, at the turn of the [[20th century]], there began to be discussion as well of creativity in the [[science]]s (e.g., [[Jan Łukasiewicz]], [[1878]]-[[1956]]) and in [[nature]] (e.g., [[Henri Bergson]]), this was generally taken as the transference to the sciences of concepts proper to [[art]].
 
 
 
The formal starting point of the scientific study of creativity is sometimes considered to be [[J. P. Guilford]]'s address to the [[American Psychological Association]] in 1950, which helped to popularize the topic. Since then (and indeed, before then), researchers from a varierty of fields have studied the nature of creativity from a scientific point of view. Others have taken a more pragmatic approach, teaching practical [[creativity techniques]]. Three of the most well known are [[Alex Osborn]]'s [[brainstorming]] techniques (1950s to present), [[Genrikh Altshuller]]'s Theory of Inventive Problem Solving ([[TRIZ]]), (1950s to present); and [[Edward de Bono]]'s [[lateral thinking]], (1960s to present).
 
 
 
[[Image:Archimedes' screw.jpg|frame|right|[[Archimedes]]' inventions are an early example of creative insight]]
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
==Creativity in psychology & cognitive science==
 
The study of the mental representations and processes underlying creative thought belongs to the domains of [[psychology]] and [[cognitive science]].
 
 
 
A [[psychodynamic]] approach to understanding creativity was proposed by [[Sigmund Freud]], who suggested that creativity arises as a result of frustrated desires for fame, fortune, and love, with the energy that was previously tied up in frustration and emotional tension in the neurosis being sublimated into creative activity. Freud later retracted this view.
 
 
 
[[Graham Wallas]], in his work ''Art of Thought'', published in 1926, presented one of the first models of the creative process. In the Wallas stage model, creative insights and illuminations may be explained by a process consisting of 5 stages:
 
 
 
:(i) ''preparation'' (preparatory work on a problem that focuses the individual's mind on the problem and explores the problem's dimensions),
 
 
 
:(ii) ''incubation'' (where the problem is internalized into the subconscious mind and nothing appears externally to be happening),
 
 
 
:(iii) ''intimation'' (the creative person gets a 'feeling' that a solution is on its way),
 
 
 
:(iv) ''illumination'' or insight (where the creative idea bursts forth from its subconscious processing into conscious awareness); and
 
 
 
:(v) ''verification'' (where the idea is consciously verified, elaborated, and then applied). 
 
 
 
In numerous publications, Wallas' model is just treated as four stages, with "intimation" seen as a sub-stage. There has been some empirical research looking at whether, as the concept of "incubation" in Wallas' model implies, a period of interruption or rest from a problem may aid creative problem-solving. Ward<ref>(Ward, 2003)</ref> lists various hypotheses that have been advanced to explain why incubation may aid creative problem-solving, and notes how some empirical evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that incubation aids creative problem-solving in that it enables "forgetting" of misleading clues. Absence of incubation may lead the problem solver to become [[fixation|fixated]] on inappropriate strategies of solving the problem.<ref>(Smith, 1981)</ref> This work disputes the earlier hypothesis that creative solutions to problems arise mysteriously from the unconscious mind while the conscious mind is occupied on other tasks.<ref>(Anderson, 2000)</ref>
 
 
 
Wallas considered creativity to be a legacy of the [[evolution|evolutionary]] process, which allowed humans to quickly adapt to rapidly changing environments. Simonton<ref name="Simonton99">(Simonton, 1999)</ref> provides an updated perspective on this view in his book, ''Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity''.
 
 
 
[[J. P. Guilford|Guilford]]<ref name="Guildford67">(Guilford, 1967)</ref> performed important work in the field of creativity, drawing a distinction between [[convergent and divergent production]] (commonly renamed convergent and divergent thinking). Convergent thinking involves aiming for a single, correct solution to a problem, whereas divergent thinking involves creative generation of multiple answers to a set problem. Divergent thinking is sometimes used as a synonym for creativity in psychology literature. Other researchers have occasionally used the terms ''flexible'' thinking or [[Fluid and crystallized intelligence|fluid intelligence]], which are roughly similar to (but not synonymous with) creativity.
 
  
In ''The Act of Creation'', [[Arthur Koestler]]<ref name="Koestler64"/> lists three types of creative individuals - the ''Artist'', the ''Sage'' and the ''Jester''. Believers in this trinity hold all three elements necessary in [[business]] and can identify them all in "truly creative" [[Company (law)|companies]] as well. Koestler introduced the concept of ''bisociation'' - that creativity arises as a result of the intersection of two quite different frames of reference.
+
It has been proposed that creativity is the outcome of the same cognitive processes as intelligence, and is only judged as creativity in terms of its consequences. In other words, the process is only judged creative when the outcome of cognitive processes happen to produce something novel, a view which Perkins has termed the "nothing special" hypothesis.<ref name="OHara99">L.A. O'Hara and R.J. Sternberg, "Creativity and Intelligence." in ''Handbook of Creativity,'' ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1998).</ref> However, a very popular model is what has come to be known as "the threshold hypothesis," stating that intelligence and creativity are more likely to be correlated in general samples, but that this correlation is not found in people with IQs over 120. An alternative perspective, Renculli's three-rings hypothesis, sees [[intellectual giftedness|giftedness]] as based on both intelligence and creativity.  
  
In 1992 Finke et al. proposed the 'Geneplore' model, in which creativity takes place in two phases: a generative phase, where an individual constructs mental representations called preinventive structures, and an exploratory phase where those structures are used to come up with creative ideas. Weisberg<ref>(Weisberg, 1993)</ref> argued, by contrast, that creativity only involves ordinary cognitive processes yielding extraordinary results.
+
[[Image:Gray728.png|thumb|right|250px|The [[frontal lobe]] (shown in blue) is thought to play an important role in creativity]]
  
===Creativity and intelligence===
 
There has been debate in the psychological literature about whether [[intelligence]] and creativity are part of the same process (the conjoint hypothesis) or represent distinct mental processes (the disjoint hypothesis). Evidence from attempts to look at correlations between intelligence and creativity from the 1950s onwards, by authors such as Barron, Guilford or Wallach and Kogan, regularly suggested that correlations between these concepts were low enough to justify treating them as distinct concepts. Some researchers believe that creativity is the outcome of the same cognitive processes as intelligence, and is only judged as creativity in terms of its consequences, i.e. when the outcome of cognitive processes happen to produce something novel, a view which Perkins has termed the "nothing special" hypothesis.<ref name="OHara99">(O'Hara & Sternberg, 1999)</ref> However, a very popular model is what has come to be known as "the threshold hypothesis", stating that intelligence and creativity are more likely to be correlated in general samples, but that this correlation is not found in people with IQs over 120.  An alternative perspective, Renculli's three-rings hypothesis, sees giftedness as based on both intelligence and creativity. More on both the threshold hypothesis and Renculli's work can be found in O'Hara and Sternberg.<ref name="OHara99"/>
 
 
[[Image:Gray728.png|thumb|right|The [[frontal lobe]] (shown in blue) is thought to play an important role in creativity]]
 
 
===Neurology of creativity===
 
===Neurology of creativity===
The [[neurology]] of creativity has been discussed by Fred Balzac in an article on [http://www.neuropsychiatryreviews.com/may06/einstein.html "Exploring the Brain's Role in Creativity"]. <ref name="NeuroPsychiatry">(''NeuroPsychiatry Reviews'', May 2006)</ref>
+
[[neurology|Neurological]] research has found that creative innovation requires "coactivation and communication between regions of the brain that ordinarily are not strongly connected."<ref name="NeuroPsychiatry">Fred Balzac, [http://rkerle1.squarespace.com/creativity-matters-blog/2010/7/5/exploring-the-brains-role-in-creativity-neuropsychiatry-revi.html Exploring the Brain's Role in Creativity] ''NeuroPsychiatry Reviews'' 7(5) (2006): 1, 19-20. Retrieved July 16, 2020.</ref> Highly creative people who excel at creative innovation tend to differ from others in three ways: they have a high level of specialized knowledge, they are capable of divergent thinking mediated by the [[frontal lobe]], and they are able to modulate [[neurotransmitters]] such as [[norepinephrine]] in their frontal lobe. Thus, the frontal lobe appears to be the part of the [[Cerebral cortex|cortex]] that is most important for creativity.<ref name="NeuroPsychiatry"/>
 
 
The study found that creative innovation requires "coactivation and communication between regions of the brain that ordinarily are not strongly connected". Highly creative people who excel at creative innovation tend to differ from others in three ways: they have a high level of specialized knowledge, they are capable of [[convergent and divergent production|divergent thinking]] mediated by the [[frontal lobe]], and they are able to modulate [[neurotransmitters]] such as [[norepinephrine]] in their frontal lobe. Thus, the frontal lobe appears to be the part of the [[Cerebral cortex|cortex]] that is most important for creativity. The study also explored the links between creativity and [[sleep]], [[Mood disorder|mood]] and [[Addiction|addiction disorders]], and [[Depression (mood)|depression]].<ref name="NeuroPsychiatry"/>
 
  
 
===Creativity and madness===
 
===Creativity and madness===
 
+
Creativity has been found to correlate with [[intelligence]] and [[psychoticism]],<ref>J.P. Rushton, "Creativity, intelligence, and psychoticism." ''Personality and Individual Differences'' 11 (1990): 1291-1298. </ref> particularly in schizotypal individuals.<ref>Melanie Moran, [https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2005/09/06/odd-behavior-and-creativity-may-go-hand-in-hand-59261/ Odd behavior and creativity may go hand in hand] Vanderbilt University, September 6, 2005. Retrieved July 16, 2020.</ref> To explain these results, it has been hypothesized that such individuals are better at accessing both hemispheres, allowing them to make novel associations at a faster rate. In agreement with this hypothesis, [[ambidexterity]] is also associated with schizotypal and [[schozophrenia|schizophrenic]] individuals.
A study by the psychologist [[J. Philippe Rushton]] found that creativity correlated with [[intelligence (trait)|intelligence]] and [[psychoticism]].<ref>(Rushton, 1990)</ref> Additionally, a different study found that creativity is greater in [[schizotypal]] individuals than either normal or fully [[schizophrenia|schizophrenic]] individuals.  While divergent thinking was associated with bilateral activation of the [[prefrontal cortex]], schizotypal individuals were found to have much greater activation of their ''right'' prefrontal cortex.<ref>http://exploration.vanderbilt.edu/news/news_schizotypes.htm ([http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2005.06.016 Actual paper])</ref> This study hypothesizes that these individuals are better at accessing both hemispheres, allowing them to make novel associations at a faster rate. In agreement with this hypothesis, [[ambidexterity]] is also associated with [[schizotypal]] and [[schizophrenia|schizophrenic]] individuals. Creativity has also been associated with [[Creativity and bipolar disorder|bipolar disorder]].
 
  
 
==Creativity in various contexts==
 
==Creativity in various contexts==
 
Creativity has been studied from a variety of perspectives and is important in numerous contexts. Most of these approaches are unidisciplinary, and it is therefore difficult to form a coherent overall view.<ref name="Sternberg99"/> The following sections examine some of the areas in which creativity is seen as being important.
 
Creativity has been studied from a variety of perspectives and is important in numerous contexts. Most of these approaches are unidisciplinary, and it is therefore difficult to form a coherent overall view.<ref name="Sternberg99"/> The following sections examine some of the areas in which creativity is seen as being important.
  
[[Image:HenryMoore RecliningFigure 1951.jpg|thumb|300px|left|[[Henry Moore]]'s ''Reclining Figure'']]
+
[[Image:HenryMoore RecliningFigure 1951.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Henry Moore]]'s ''Reclining Figure'']]
===Creativity in art & literature===
+
===Creativity in art and literature===
Most people associate creativity with the fields of [[art]] and [[literature]]. In these fields, ''originality'' is considered to be a sufficient condition for creativity, unlike other fields where both ''originality'' and ''appropriateness'' are necessary.<ref name="Amabile98">(Amabile, 1998)</ref>
+
Most people associate creativity with the fields of [[art]] and [[literature]]. In these fields, "originality" is considered to be a sufficient condition for creativity, unlike other fields where both "originality" and "appropriateness" are necessary.<ref name="Amabile98"> T.M. Amabile, "How to kill creativity." ''Harvard Business Review'' 76(5) (1998). </ref>
  
Within the different modes of artistic expression, one can postulate a continuum extending from "[[interpretation]]" to "innovation". Established [[art movements|artistic movement]]s and [[genre]]s pull practitioners to the "interpretation" end of the scale, whereas original thinkers strive towards the "innovation" pole. Note that we conventionally expect some "creative" people (dancers, actors, orchestral members, etc.) to perform (interpret) while allowing others (writers, painters, composers, etc.) more freedom to express the new and the different.
+
Within the different modes of artistic expression, one can postulate a continuum extending from "interpretation" to "innovation." Established artistic movements and genres pull practitioners to the "interpretation" end of the scale, whereas original thinkers strive towards the "innovation" pole. Note that we conventionally expect some "creative" people (dancers, actors, orchestral members, etc.) to perform (interpret) while allowing others (writers, painters, composers, etc.) more freedom to express the new and the different.
  
The word "creativity" conveys an implication of constructing [[novelty]] without relying on any existing constituent components (''ex nihilo'' - compare [[creationism]]). Contrast alternative theories, for example:
+
The word "creativity" conveys an implication of constructing novelty without relying on any existing constituent components (''ex nihilo'' - compare [[creationism]]). Contrast alternative theories, for example:
  
* artistic [[inspiration]], which provides the transmission of [[Vision (religion)|vision]]s from divine sources such as the [[Muse]]s; a taste of the Divine. Compare with [[invention]].
+
* artistic inspiration, which provides the transmission of visions from divine sources such as the Muses; a taste of the Divine.  
  
* artistic [[evolution]], which stresses obeying established ("classical") rules and imitating or [[appropriation (art)|appropriating]] to produce subtly different but unshockingly understandable work. Compare with [[crafts]].
+
* artistic evolution, which stresses obeying established ("classical") rules and imitating or appropriating to produce subtly different but unshockingly understandable work.
  
In the [[art]] [[practice]] and [[theory]] of [[Davor Dzalto]], [[human]] creativity is taken as a basic feature of both the personal [[existence]] of [[human being]] and [[art]] [[production]].
+
In the art, practice, and theory of [[Davor Dzalto]], human creativity is taken as a basic feature of both the personal existence of human beings and art production.
  
===Creative industries & services===
+
===Creativity in science, engineering and design===
Today, creativity forms the core activity of a growing section of the [[global economy]] &mdash; the so-called "[[creative industries]]" &mdash; capitalistically generating (generally non-tangible) [[wealth]] through the creation and [[exploitation]] of [[intellectual property]] or through the provision of [[creative services]]. The [http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/Publications/archive_2001/ci_mapping_doc_2001.htm Creative Industries Mapping Document 2001] provides an overview of the creative industries in the UK.
+
[[Image:NewtonsPrincipia.jpg|thumb|250px|right|[[Isaac Newton]]'s law of gravity is popularly attributed to a ''creative leap'' he experienced when observing a falling apple.]]
 +
Creativity is also seen as being increasingly important in a variety of other professions. [[Architecture]] and [[industrial design]] are the fields most often associated with creativity, and more generally the fields of [[design]] and [[design research]]. These fields explicitly value creativity, and journals such as ''Design Studies'' have published many studies on creativity and creative problem solving.<ref>K. Dorst, and N. Cross, "Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution." ''Design Studies'' 22(5) (2001): 425-437.</ref>
  
===Creativity in other professions===
+
Fields such as [[science]] and [[engineering]] have, by contrast, experienced a less explicit (but arguably no less important) relation to creativity. Simonton<ref name="Simonton99"/> shows how some of the major scientific advances of the twentieth century can be attributed to the creativity of individuals. This ability will also be seen as increasingly important for engineers in years to come.<ref>National Academy of Engineering ''Educating the engineer of 2020: adapting engineering education to the new century.'' (National Academies Press, 2005).</ref>
[[Image:NewtonsPrincipia.jpg|thumb|180px|right|[[Isaac Newton]]'s law of gravity is popularly attributed to a ''creative leap'' he experienced when observing a falling apple.]]
 
Creativity is also seen as being increasingly important in a variety of other professions. [[Architecture]] and [[industrial design]] are the fields most often associated with creativity, and more generally the fields of [[design]] and [[design research]]. These fields explicitly value creativity, and journals such as ''Design Studies'' have published many studies on creativity and creative problem solving.<ref>for a typical example see (Dorst et al., 2001)</ref>
 
  
Fields such as [[science]] and [[engineering]] have, by contrast, experienced a less explicit (but arguably no less important) relation to creativity. Simonton<ref name="Simonton99"/> shows how some of the major scientific advances of the 20th century can be attributed to the creativity of individuals. This ability will also be seen as increasingly important for engineers in years to come.<ref>(National Academy of Engineering 2005)</ref>
+
===Creativity in business===
 +
Creativity, broadly conceived, is essential to all successful business ventures. Entrepreneurs use creativity to define a market, promote a product or service, and make unconventional deals with providers, partners and lenders.  
  
Accounting has also been associated with creativity with the popular euphemism ''[[creative accounting]]''. Although this term often implies unethical practices, Amabile<ref name="Amabile98"/> has suggested that even this profession can benefit from the (ethical) application of creative thinking.
+
Narrowly speaking, there is a growing sector of "creative industries" &mdash; capitalistically generating (generally non-tangible) wealth through the creation and exploitation of [[intellectual property]] or through the provision of creative services.<ref>[https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/creative-industries-mapping-documents-2001 Creative Industries Mapping Documents 2001] ''gov.UK''. Retrieved July 16, 2020.</ref>
  
===Creativity and innovation===
+
Amabile<ref name="Amabile98"/> argues that to enhance creativity in [[business]], three components were needed: Expertise (technical, procedural, and intellectual knowledge), Creative thinking skills (how flexibly and imaginatively people approach problems), and Motivation (especially intrinsic [[motivation]]). Nonaka, who examined several successful Japanese companies, similarly saw creativity and knowledge creation as being important to the success of organizations.<ref name="Nonaka91">I. Nonaka, "The Knowledge-Creating Company." ''Harvard Business Review'' 69(6) (1991): 96-104.</ref> In particular, he emphasized the role that tacit knowledge has to play in the creative process.
  
In many cases in the context of examining creativity in organizations, it is useful to explicitly distinguish between ''creativity'' and ''innovation''. <ref>(Amabile et al., 1996)</ref>
+
In many cases in the context of examining creativity in organizations, it is useful to explicitly distinguish between "creativity" and "innovation."<ref name=Amabile>T.M. Amabile, R. Conti, H. Coon, et al. "Assessing the work environment for creativity." ''Academy of Management Review'' 39(5) (1996): 1154-1184.</ref>
  
In such cases, the term ''innovation'' is often used to refer to the entire process by which an organization generates creative new ideas and converts them into novel, useful and viable commercial products, services, and business practices, while the term ''creativity'' is reserved to apply specifically to the generation of novel ideas by individuals, as a necessary step within the innovation process.
+
In such cases, the term "innovation" is often used to refer to the entire process by which an organization generates creative new ideas and converts them into novel, useful and viable commercial products, services, and business practices, while the term "creativity" is reserved to apply specifically to the generation of novel ideas by individuals, as a necessary step within the innovation process.
  
For example, Amabile et al. suggest that while [[innovation]] "begins with creative ideas,"
+
For example, Amabile et al. suggest that while innovation "begins with creative ideas, creativity by individuals and teams ''is a starting point for innovation''; the first is a necessary ''but not sufficient'' condition for the second" (emphasis added).<ref name=Amabile/>
:". . . creativity by individuals and teams ''is a starting point for innovation''; the first is a necessary ''but not sufficient'' condition for the second". <ref>(Amabile et al., 1996 p. 1154-1155, emphasis added)</ref>
 
 
 
===Creativity in organizations===
 
Amabile<ref name="Amabile98"/> argued that to enhance creativity in business, three components were needed: Expertise (technical, procedural & intellectual knowledge), Creative thinking skills (how flexibly and imaginatively people approach problems), and Motivation (especially [[intrinsic motivation]]). Nonaka, who examined several successful Japanese companies, similarly saw creativity and knowledge creation as being important to the success of organizations.<ref name="Nonaka91">(Nonaka, 1991)</ref> In particular, he emphasized the role that [[tacit knowledge]] has to play in the creative process.
 
  
 
===Economic views of creativity===
 
===Economic views of creativity===
 +
In the early twentieth century, [[Joseph Schumpeter]] introduced the [[economics|economic theory]] of "creative destruction," to describe the way in which old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by the new.
  
In the early 20th century, [[Joseph Schumpeter]] introduced the economic theory of ''[[creative destruction]]'', to describe the way in which old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by the new.
+
Creativity is also seen by economists such as Paul Romer as an important element in the recombination of elements to produce new technologies and products and, consequently, economic growth. Creativity leads to [[capital]], and creative products are protected by [[intellectual property]] laws. Creativity is also an important aspect to understanding [[entrepreneurship]].
 
 
Creativity is also seen by economists such as [[Paul Romer]] as an important element in the recombination of elements to produce new technologies and products and, consequently, economic growth. Creativity leads to [[capital]], and creative products are protected by [[intellectual property]] laws.  
 
 
 
Creativity is also an important aspect to understanding [[Entrepreneurship]].
 
 
 
The ''[[creative class]]'' is seen by some to be an important driver of modern economies. In his 2002 book, ''The Rise of the Creative Class'', [[economist]] [[Richard Florida]] popularized the notion that regions with high concentrations of [[creative professional]]s such as hi-tech workers, artists, musicians, and creative people and a group he describes as "high bohemians", tend to have a higher level of economic development.
 
  
 +
The "creative class" is seen by some to be an important driver of modern economies. In his 2002 book, ''The Rise of the Creative Class,'' economist Richard Florida popularized the notion that regions with high concentrations of creative professionals such as hi-tech workers, artists, musicians, and creative people and a group he describes as "high bohemians," tend to have a higher level of economic development.
  
 
===Creativity, music and community===
 
===Creativity, music and community===
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania Social Impact of the Arts Project <ref> (Jones, 2005)</ref>found that the presence of arts and culture offerings in a neighborhood has a measurable impact on the strength of the community. Arts and culture not only attract creative workers, but also is a key element in the revitalization of neighborhoods, and increases social well-being. They also found that music is one of the key arts and cultural elements that attracts and retains “creative workers”. To slow down the large emigration of young cultural workers from Pennsylvania, this study proposed enhancing school-based music education and community-based musical cultural offerings. This study discovered the following traits in creative workers: individuality; creativity; technology and innovation; participation; project orientation; and eclecticism and authenticity. They found that music education helps foster all these traits to help Americans realize their creative potential. As a result, the author claims, music education not only nurtures creativity but also plays a crucial role in the knowledge economy, and in strengthening communities.
+
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania Social Impact of the Arts Project<ref>Patrick M. Jones, "Music Education and the Knowledge Economy: Developing Creativity, Strengthening Communities." ''Arts Education Policy Review'' 106(4) (Mar/Apr 2005): 5-12, 3 charts.</ref>found that the presence of [[arts]] and [[culture]] offerings in a neighborhood has a measurable impact on the strength of the [[community]]. Arts and culture not only attract creative workers, but also is a key element in the revitalization of neighborhoods, and increases social well-being. They also found that [[music]] is one of the key arts and cultural elements that attracts and retains “creative workers.To slow down the large emigration of young cultural workers from Pennsylvania, this study proposed enhancing school-based music education and community-based musical cultural offerings. This study discovered the following traits in creative workers: individuality; creativity; technology and innovation; participation; project orientation; and eclecticism and authenticity. They found that music education helps foster all these traits to help Americans realize their creative potential. As a result, the author claimed, music education not only nurtures creativity but also plays a crucial role in the knowledge economy, and in strengthening communities.
  
==Measuring creativity==
+
==Measuring Creativity==
===Creativity Quotient===
+
===Creativity quotient===
Several attempts have been made to develop a ''creativity quotient'' of an individual similar to the [[Intelligence quotient]] (IQ), however these have been unsuccessful.<ref>(Kraft, 2005)</ref> Most measures of creativity are dependent on the personal judgement of the tester, so a standardized measure is difficult to develop.
+
Several attempts have been made to develop a "creativity quotient" of an individual similar to the [[IQ test|Intelligence quotient]] (IQ), however these have been unsuccessful.<ref>U. Kraft, "Unleashing Creativity." ''Scientific American Mind'' 2005 (April): 16-23.</ref> Most measures of creativity are dependent on the personal judgement of the tester, so a standardized measure is difficult to develop.
  
 
===Psychometric approach===
 
===Psychometric approach===
[[J. P. Guilford]]'s group,<ref name="Guildford67"> which pioneered the modern [[psychometric]] study of creativity, constructed several tests to measure creativity:
+
[[J. P. Guilford]]'s group,<ref name="Guildford67"/> which pioneered the modern [[psychometric]] study of creativity, constructed several tests to measure creativity:
 +
* '''Plot Titles''' where participants are given the plot of a story and asked to write original titles.
 +
* '''Quick Responses''' is a word-association test scored for uncommonness.
 +
* '''Figure Concepts''' where participants were given simple drawings of objects and individuals and asked to find qualities or features that are common by two or more drawings; these were scored for uncommonness.
 +
* '''Unusual Uses''' involves finding unusual uses for common everyday objects such as bricks.
 +
* '''Remote Associations''' where participants are asked to find a word between two given words (such as Hand _____ Call)
 +
* '''Remote Consequences''' where participants are asked to generate a list of consequences of unexpected events (such as loss of gravity)
  
* Plot Titles, where participants are given the plot of a story and asked to write original titles.
+
Building on Guilford's work, Torrance<ref>E.P. Torrance, ''Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking'' (Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior, 1974).</ref> developed the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. They involved simple tests of divergent thinking and other [[problem-solving]] skills, which were scored on:
 
+
*'''Fluency''' The total number of interpretable, meaningful, and relevant ideas generated in response to the stimulus.
* Quick Responses is a word-association test scored for uncommonness.
+
*'''Flexibility''' The number of different categories of relevant responses.
 
+
*'''Originality''' The statistical rarity of the responses among the test subjects.
* Figure Concepts, where participants were given simple drawings of objects and individuals and asked to find qualities or features that are common by two or more drawings; these were scored for uncommonness.
+
*'''Elaboration''' The amount of detail in the responses.
 
 
* Unusual Uses is finding unusual uses for common everyday objects such as bricks.
 
 
 
* Remote Associations, where participants are asked to find a word between two given words (e.g. Hand _____ Call)
 
 
 
* Remote Consequences, where participants are asked to generate a list of consequences of unexpected events (e.g. loss of gravity)
 
 
 
Building on Guilford's work, [[Ellis Paul Torrance|Torrance]]<ref>(Torrance, 1974)</ref> developed the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. They involved simple tests of divergent thinking and other problem-solving skills, which were scored on:
 
*'''Fluency.''' The total number of interpretable, meaningful, and relevant ideas generated in response to the stimulus.
 
*'''Flexibility.''' The number of different categories of relevant responses.
 
*'''Originality.''' The statistical rarity of the responses among the test subjects.
 
*'''Elaboration.''' The amount of detail in the responses.
 
  
 
===Social-personality approach===
 
===Social-personality approach===
Some researchers have taken a social-personality approach to the measurement of creativity. In these studies, personality traits such as independence of judgement, self-confidence, attraction to complexity, aesthetic orientation and risk-taking are used as measures of the creativity of individuals.<ref name="Sternberg99"/> Other researchers<ref>for example McCrae (1987)</ref> have related creativity to the [[Big Five personality traits|trait]], ''openness to experience''.
+
Some researchers have taken a social-personality approach to the measurement of creativity. In these studies, [[personality]] traits such as independence of judgement, self-confidence, attraction to complexity, aesthetic orientation, and risk-taking are used as measures of the creativity of individuals.<ref name="Sternberg99"/> Other researchers<ref>R.R. McCrae, "Creativity, Divergent Thinking, and Openness to Experience." ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology'' 52(6) (1987): 1258-1265</ref> have related creativity to the [[Personality#The Big Five Factors|trait]], "openness to experience."
 
 
===Other approaches to measurement===
 
[[Genrich Altshuller]] in the [[1950s]] introduced approaching creativity as an ''exact science'' with [[TRIZ]] and a [[Level of Invention|Level-of-Invention]] measure.
 
 
 
The creativity of thousands of Japanese, expressed in terms of their problem-solving and problem-recognizing capabilities, has been measured in Japanese firms.<ref>Details: http://iccincsm.at.infoseek.co.jp</ref>
 
  
 
==Fostering creativity==
 
==Fostering creativity==
 +
Daniel Pink, repeating arguments posed throughout the twentieth century, has argued that we are entering a new age where creativity is becoming increasingly important. In this "conceptual age," we need to foster and encourage "right-directed thinking" (representing creativity and [[emotion]]) over "left-directed thinking" (representing [[logic]]al, analytical [[thought]]).<ref>D.H. Pink, ''A Whole New Mind: Moving from the information age into the conceptual age'' (Riverhead, 2005, ISBN 1573223085).</ref>
  
 
+
The following is summary<ref>R.S. Nickerson, "Enhancing Creativity." ''Handbook of Creativity.'' </ref> of techniques to foster creativity, including approaches developed by both academia and industry:
Daniel Pink, in his 2005 book ''A Whole New Mind'', repeating arguments posed throughout the 20th century, argues that we are entering a new age where creativity is becoming increasingly important. In this ''conceptual age'', we will need to foster and encourage ''right-directed thinking'' (representing creativity and emotion) over ''left-directed thinking'' (representing logical, analytical thought).
 
 
 
Nickerson<ref>(Nickerson, 1999)</ref> provides a summary of the various creativity techniques that have been proposed. These include approaches that have been developed by both academia and industry:
 
 
# Establishing purpose and intention
 
# Establishing purpose and intention
 
# Building basic skills
 
# Building basic skills
Line 264: Line 177:
 
# Providing balance
 
# Providing balance
  
Some see the conventional system of [[education|schooling]] as "stifling" of creativity and attempt (particularly in the [[pre-school]]/[[kindergarten]] and early school years) to provide a creativity-friendly, rich, imagination-fostering environment for young children. Compare [[Waldorf School]].
+
A growing number of psychologists are advocating the idea that one can learn to become more "creative." Several different researchers have proposed approaches to support this idea, ranging from psychological-cognitive, such as:
 +
* Osborn-Parnes' Creative problem solving
 +
* Synectics;
 +
* Purdue Creative Thinking Program;
 +
* lateral thinking of Edward de Bono,
 +
to the highly-structured, such as:
 +
* Theory of Inventive Problem-Solving (TRIZ);
 +
* Algorithm of Inventive Problem-Solving (ARIZ), both developed by the Russian scientist Genrich Altshuller;
 +
* Computer-Aided Morphological analysis<ref>[http://www.swemorph.com Swedish Morphological Society]. Retrieved July 16, 2020.</ref>
  
A growing number of psychologists are advocating the idea that one can learn to become more "creative". Several different researchers have proposed approaches to prop up this idea, ranging from [[psychology|psychological]]-cognitive, such as:
+
==Origins of Creativity==
 +
While scientific approaches have struggled to understand, describe, and explain the creative phenomenon, [[Creativity#Religions|religion]] and [[Creativity#Philosophy|philosophy]] has addressed the fundamental question of the origin of creativity in a number of ways.
 +
===Religions===
 +
According to many religions, [[God]] as the original creator of the world initiated the first act of creativity. Human beings, variously conceived of as made in God's image or as manifestations of God, consequently also have the ability to create. The artist, scientist and designer takes after the creativity of God; indeed it is God who impels him or her to create. Thus the Japanese new religion ''Perfect Liberty Kyodan'' begins its precepts:
  
* Osborn-Parnes [[Creative problem solving]]
+
<blockquote>''Life is art.''<br/>
* [[Synectics]];
+
''The whole life of man is self-expression.''<br/>
* Purdue Creative Thinking Program;
+
''The individual is an expression of God.''<br/>
and
+
''We suffer if we do not express ourselves. (Precepts 1-4)''</blockquote>
* [[lateral thinking]] (courtesy of [[Edward de Bono]]),
 
to the highly-structured, such as:
 
* [[TRIZ]] (the Theory of Inventive Problem-Solving);
 
* [[ARIZ]] (the [[Algorithm of Inventive Problems Solving|Algorithm of Inventive Problem-Solving]]), both developed by the Russian scientist [[Genrich Altshuller]]; and
 
* Computer-Aided [[Morphological analysis]] (presented at [http://www.swemorph.com  Swedish Morphological Society]).
 
  
==Social attitudes to creativity==
+
In the Bible, in Genesis 1 God creates the earth and all its creatures. In the next chapter, God tells [[Adam]], the first man, to give names to all the creatures. This act of naming was also a kind of creation, for God accepts the results:
<blockquote>''"The man who invented fire was probably burned at the stake."''  '''Ayn Rand'''</blockquote.>
+
<blockquote>''Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. (Genesis 2:19)''</blockquote>
<blockquote>''"To be creative means to become profoundly individualized thus separating one's self from the crowd."''  '''Paul Palnik'''</blockquote.>
 
Although the benefits of creativity to society as a whole have been noted,<ref>(Runco 2004)</ref> social attitudes about this topic remain divided. The wealth of literature regarding the development of creativity<ref>see (Feldman, 1999) for example</ref> and the profusion of [[creativity techniques]] indicate wide acceptance, at least among academics, that creativity  is desirable. 
 
  
There is, however, a dark side to creativity, in that it represents a ''"quest for a radical autonomy apart from the constraints of social responsibility"''.<ref>(McLaren, 1999)</ref> In other words, by encouraging creativity we are encouraging a departure from society's existing norms and values.  Expectation of conformity runs contrary to the spirit of creativity. Nevertheless, employers are increasingly valuing creative skills. A report by the Business Council of Australia, for example, has called for a higher level of creativity in graduates.<ref>(BCA, 2006)</ref> The ability to "[[think outside the box]]" is highly sought after. However, the above-mentioned paradox may well imply that firms pay lipservice to thinking outside the box while maintaining traditional, hierarchical organization structures in which individual creativity is not rewarded.
+
God does whatever He will, but it is only when human beings know of it that God's work of creation is confirmed and glorified. A human being's ability to know, and to consciously utilize things according to his knowledge, makes him a creative being. In the Jewish tradition, Rabbi Akiba taught:
 +
:''Beloved is man, for he was created in the image of God. But it was by a special love that it was made known to him that he was created in the image of God. (Mishnah, Avot 3.18)''
  
==Notes==
+
All these concepts point to the idea that human beings are "co-creators" with God. The [[Qur'an]] uses the term "vicegerent":
<references/>
 
  
==References==
+
<blockquote>''I will create a vicegerent on earth. (Qur’an 2:30)''</blockquote>
* {{cite book | author=Albert, R.S. & Runce, M.A. | chapter=A History of Research on Creativity | editor=ed. Sternberg, R.J. | title=Handbook of Creativity | year=1999 | publisher=Cambridge University Press | id=ISBN 0521576040}}
 
* {{cite journal | author=Amabile, T.M. | year=1998 | title=How to kill creativity | journal=[[Harvard Business Review]] | volume=76 | issue=5}}
 
* {{cite book | author=Amabile, T.M. | year=1996 | title=Creativity in context | publisher=Westview Press | id=ISBN 0813330343}}
 
* {{cite journal | author=Amabile, T. M., R. Conti, H. Coon, et al. | year=1996 | title=Assessing the work environment for creativity | journal=Academy of Management Review | volume=39 | issue=5 | pages=1154-1184}}
 
  
* {{cite book | author=Anderson, J.R. | year=2005 | title=Cognitive psychology and its implications | publisher=Worth Publishers | id=ISBN 0716701103}}
+
Do human beings create in the way that God creates? Not if one conceives of divine creation as an act of pure speech, as in: "And God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." (Genesis 1:3) Yet elsewhere Scripture describes creation as effortful. God expended such energy to create that on the seventh day he "rested from all his work which he had done." (Genesis 2:3) To create human beings, God acted the part of a sculptor working with clay:
* {{cite journal | author=Balzac, Fred | year=2006 | title=[http://www.neuropsychiatryreviews.com/may06/einstein.html Exploring the Brain's Role in Creativity] | journal=NeuroPsychiatry Reviews | volume=7 | issue=5 | pages=pp. 1, 19-20}}
+
<blockquote>''The Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. (Genesis 2:7)''</blockquote>
 +
The artist likewise works with a medium and breathes his life—his spirit, into his work. Then it can be said to be art.
  
* {{cite book | author=BCA | year=2006 | title=New Concepts in Innovation: The Keys to a Growing Australia | publisher=[http://www.bca.com.au Business Council of Australia]}}
+
In the Eastern religions, where there is no absolute distinction between God and human beings, the concept that human creativity takes after the original divine creativity is more explicit. Take this passage from the [[I Ching]]. It teaches that the creative moment cannot be forced, but requires waiting until the time is ripe, while preparing one's mind to receive it:
* {{cite book | author=Boden, M.A. | year=2004 | title=The Creative Mind: Myths And Mechanisms | publisher=Routledge | authorlink=Margaret Boden | id=ISBN 0465014518}}
+
:''Vast indeed is the sublime Creative Principle, the Source of all, co-extensive with the heavens. It causes the clouds to come forth, the rain to bestow its bounty and all objects to flow into their respective forms. Its dazzling brilliance permeates all things from first to last; its activities, symbolized by the component lines [of the hexagram], reach full completion, each at the proper time. [The superior man], mounting them when the time is ripe, is carried heavenwards as though six dragons were his steeds! The Creative Principle functions through Change; accordingly, when we rectify our way of life by conjoining it with the universal harmony, our firm persistence is richly rewarded. (I Ching 1: The Creative)''
* {{cite journal | author=Dorst, K. | coauthors=Cross, N. | year=2001 | title=Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution | journal=Design Studies | volume=22 | issue=5 | pages=425-437}}
 
  
* {{cite book | author=Feldman, D.H. | chapter=The Development of Creativity | editor=ed. Sternberg, R.J. | title=Handbook of Creativity | year=1999 | publisher=Cambridge University Press| id=ISBN 0521576040}}
+
Another religious insight is that creativity originates in a state emptiness, an unconscious state where one is not "trying" to do anything (corresponding to Wallas's "[[Creativity#Creativity in psychology & cognitive science|incubation]]" stage.) Scriptural accounts of "creation ''ex nihilo'' (out of nothing) point to the truth that to create, we too have to begin in a state of nothingness. Thus is the first creative moment described in this Hindu text:
* {{cite book | author=Finke, R. | coauthors=Ward, T.B. & Smith, S.M. | year=1996 | title=Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications | publisher=MIT Press| id=ISBN 0262560968}}
+
:''This universe existed in the shape of darkness, unperceived, destitute of distinctive marks, unattainable by reasoning, unknowable, wholly immersed, as it were, in deep sleep.''
* {{cite book | author=Florida, R. | year=2003 | title=The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life | publisher=Basic Books | authorlink=Richard Florida | id=ISBN 0465024777}}
+
:''Then the Divine Self-existent, himself indiscernible but making all this, the great elements and the rest, discernible, appeared with irresistible power, dispelling the darkness… created all beings. (Laws of Manu 1.5-16)''
* {{cite book | author=Guilford, J.P. | year=1971 | title=The Nature of Human Intelligence | authorlink=J. P. Guilford | publisher=McGraw-Hill | id=ASIN B0007C4LM4}}
 
* {{cite book | author=Johnson, D.M. | title=Systematic introduction to the psychology of thinking | year=1972 | publisher=Harper & Row | id=ISBN 0060433310}}
 
* {{cite journal | author=Jones, Patrick M. | title=Music Education and the Knowledge Economy: Developing Creativity, Strengthening Communities.Authors |journal=Arts Education Policy Review | year= 2005 | volume=Mar/Apr Vol. 106 Issue 4, |pages=5-12, 8p, 3 charts}}
 
* {{cite journal | author=Kraft, U. | title=Unleashing Creativity | journal=[[Scientific American Mind]] | year=2005 | volume=April | pages=16-23}}
 
  
* {{cite book | author=Koestler, A. | title=The Act of Creation | year=1967 | authorlink=Arthur Koestler | publisher= Macmillan | id=ISBN 0330244477}}
+
The Bible also begins creation from a moment of darkness:
* {{cite book | author=McLaren, R.B. | chapter=Dark Side of Creativity | editor=ed. Runco, M.A. & Pritzker, S.R. | title=Encyclopedia of Creativity | year=1999 | publisher=Academic Press | id=ISBN 0122270754}}
+
:''The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. (Genesis 1:2)''
* {{cite journal | author=McCrae, R.R. | title=Creativity, Divergent Thinking, and Openness to Experience | journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | year=1987 | volume=52 | issue=6 | pages=1258-1265}}
 
  
* {{cite book | author=Michalko, M. | title=Cracking Creativity: The Secrets of Creative Genius | publisher= Ten Speed Press | year=2001 |id=ISBN 1580083110}}
+
In [[Daoism]], a religion which has been the creed of most Chinese artists, creativity likewise begins from a low place, the "gate of the subtle and profound female":
* {{cite book | author=National Academy of Engineering | year=2005 | title=Educating the engineer of 2020 : adapting engineering education to the new century | publisher=National Academies Press | authorlink=National Academy of Engineering | id=ISBN}}
+
<blockquote>''The spirit of the valley never dies.''<br/>
* {{cite book | author=Nickerson, R.S. | chapter=Enhancing Creativity | editor=ed. Sternberg, R.J. | title=Handbook of Creativity | year=1999 | publisher=Cambridge University Press | id=ISBN 0521576040}}
+
''It is called the subtle and profound female.''<br/>
* {{cite journal | author=Nonaka, I. | year=1991 | title=The Knowledge-Creating Company | journal=Harvard Business Review | volume=69 | issue=6 | pages=96-104}}
+
''The gate of the subtle and profound female''<br/>
 +
''Is the root of heaven and earth.''<br/>
 +
''It is continuous, and seems to be always existing.''<br/>
 +
''Use it and you will never wear it out''. (''Tao Te Ching'' 6, translated by Wing Tsit Chan)<ref>quoted in Ian S. Markham, ''A World Religions Reader'' (Blackwell Publishing, 2000, ISBN 0631215190).</ref></blockquote>
  
* {{cite book | author=Pink, D.H. | year=2005 | title=A Whole New Mind: Moving from the information age into the conceptual age | publisher=Riverhead Hardcover | id=ISBN 1573223085}}
+
Finally, according to the [[Baha'i Faith]], the inspiration for creativity originates from communication with the [[afterlife|spirit world]], where artists and inventors on the other side continue their work and then communicate their energies to earthly artists and inventors:
* {{cite journal | author=Rhodes, M. | year=1961 | title=An analysis of creativity | journal=Phi Delta Kappan | volume=42 | pages=305-311}}
 
  
* {{cite journal | author=Rushton, J.P. | title=Creativity, intelligence, and psychoticism | journal=Personality and Individual Differences | year=1990 | volume=11 | pages=1291-1298 | authorlink=J. Philippe Rushton}}
+
:''The light which these souls [of departed saints] radiate is responsible for the progress of the world and the advancement of its peoples. They are like leaven which leavens the world of being, and constitute the animating force through which the arts and wonders of the world are made manifest''.<ref>[https://reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/GWB/gwb-81.html LXXXI: And now concerning thy question regarding…] ''Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh''. Retrieved July 15, 2020.</ref>)
  
* {{cite journal | author=Runco, M.A. | year=2004 | title=Creativity | journal=Annual Review of Psychology | volume=55 | pages=657-687}}
+
===Philosophy===
 +
Philosophers such as [[Nikolai Berdyaev]] and [[Alfred North Whitehead]] have addressed the question of human creativity, and the problem of how anything novel can be produced if the world originated from and operates according to fixed principles. For if there are no fixed principles, then we can never understand the world or ourselves, nor have any control over our own destiny. Inevitably, their discussions of human creativity lead back to nature of God as the origin of creativity.
  
* {{cite book | author=Simonton, D.K. | year=1999 | title=Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity | publisher=Oxford University Press | id=ISBN 0195128796}}
+
'''Berdyaev'''
* {{cite journal | author=Smith, S.M. & Blakenship, S.E. | year=1991 | journal=American Journal of Psychology | title=Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving | volume=104 | pages=61&ndash;87}}
 
  
* {{cite book | author=Sternberg, R.J. | coauthors=Lubart, T.I. | chapter=The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms | editor=ed. Sternberg, R.J. | title=Handbook of Creativity | year=1999 | publisher=Cambridge University Press | authorlink=Robert Sternberg | id=ISBN 0521576040}}
+
[[Nikolai Berdyaev]] regarded creativity as the ultimate destination of human beings. For him, the end of objectivization means the recognition of creativity as each person's highest purpose and fulfillment, for "only he who is free, creates."<ref name=Kelder>Dirk H. Kelder,  
* {{cite book | author=Tatarkiewicz, Władysław | authorlink=Władysław Tatarkiewicz | title=A History of Six Ideas: an Essay in Aesthetics | location=Translated from the Polish by [[Christopher Kasparek]], The Hague | publisher=Martinus Nijhoff | year=1980 | id=ISBN 9024722330}}
+
[http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Philosophy/Sui-Generis/Berdyaev/bp.htm Nikolai Berdyaev] 1998. Retrieved July 16, 2020. </ref> Creativity does not just mean producing a work of art. Rather it is the transformation of self and the world:
* {{cite book | author=Taylor, C.W. | chapter=Various approaches to and definitions of creativity | editor=ed. Sternberg, R.J. | title=The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives | year=1988 | publisher=Cambridge University Press | id=ISBN 0521338921}}
+
<blockquote>In every artistic activity a new world is created, the cosmos, a world enlightened and free.<ref name=Berdyaev>Nicolai Berdyaev, ''The Meaning of the Creative Act'' Trans. Donald A. Lowrie (Semantron Press, 2009, ISBN 978-1597312622).</ref></blockquote>
* {{cite book | author=Torrance, E.P. | title=Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking | year=1974 | publisher=Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior  | authorlink=Ellis Paul Torrance | id=ISBN ASIN: B00070RSJY}}
 
*Unification Thought Institute, ''Essentials of Unification Thought: Head-Wing Thought'', Tokyo: UTI, 2002. Older text based upon Dr. Sang Hun Lee’s lectures on Unification Thought. http://unification.org/ucbooks/euth/index.html
 
  
* {{cite book | author=Wallas, G. | title=Art of Thought | year=1946 | authorlink=Graham Wallas | publisher= Watts |id=ASIN B0007JI0SS}}
+
Berdyaev's view of creativity was not of something measurable by scientific or external means, for it is an internal aspect of human nature:
* {{cite book | author=Weisberg, R.W. | year=1993 | title=Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius | publisher=Freeman | id=ISBN 0716723670}}
+
<blockquote>Creativity is something which proceeds from within, out of immeasurable and inexplicable depths, not from without, not from the world's necessity. The very desire to make the creative act understandable, to find a basis for it, is failure to comprehend it. To comprehend the creative act means to recognize that it is inexplicable and without foundation.<ref name=Berdyaev/></blockquote>
  
 +
He could see the coming of a time when our creative potential will be more developed. We will then be in a position to collaborate with God to re-create the world:
 +
<blockquote>The dawn of the creative religious epoch also means a most profound crisis in man's creativity. The creative act will create new being rather than values of differentiated culture; in the creative act life will not be quenched. Creativity will continue creation; it will reveal the resemblance of human nature to the Creator. In creativity the way will be found for subject to pass into object, the identity of subject with object will be restored. All the great creators have foreseen this turning-point. Today, in the depths of culture itself and in all its separate spheres, this crisis of creativity is ripening.<ref name=Berdyaev/></blockquote>
  
==External links==
+
Berdyaev's vision is of humanity overcoming the gap that separates us from God through the creative act, and in the process becoming divinized:<ref name=Kelder/>
 +
<blockquote>The third creative revelation in the Spirit will have no holy scripture; it will be no voice from on high; it will be accomplished in man and in humanity - it is an anthropological revelation, an unveiling of the Christology of man.<ref name=Berdyaev/></blockquote>
  
*[http://www.creativity-portal.com/ Creativity Portal] - Explores the multi-faceted world of creativity through articles and coaching modules on the creative process, inspiration, imagination, and play.
+
'''Whitehead'''
*[http://www.creativethinking.net Creativethinking.net, By Michael Michalko.]
+
[[Alfred North Whitehead]], in his [[Process Theology]], saw God in cosmological terms as an "actual occasion" functioning within nature, reflective of "the eternal urge of desire" that works "strongly and quietly by love," to guide the course of things within the world into "the creative advance into novelty." Whitehead's philosophy of the "beginningless endless creative advance into newness" inspired what is became known as "Process New Thought." Human beings are considered co-creators of life with God as the senior partner.  
*[http://www.crinnology.com/ A wiki for Creativity Techniques] With a list of [http://www.mycoted.com/creativity/techniques/index.php Creativity Techniques]
 
*[http://www.swemorph.com/pdf/gma.pdf  General Morphological Analysis: A General Method for Non-Quantified Modelling] From the  [http://www.swemorph.com  Swedish Morphological Society]
 
* [http://www.m1creativity.com/tube/tube.htm Creativity & Innovation Tube line] - a novel visual representation of the creativity & innovation process
 
* [http://www.swemorph.com/zwicky.html  About Fritz Zwicky] From the [http://www.swemorph.com  Swedish Morphological Society]
 
* [http://www.anti-knowledge.com/book/00_Title.htm Knowledge Machine] - Online book with chapters on creativity including 1) creativity fallacies, 2) the sum of creative method, and 3) intelligence, genius, creativity, and knowledge creation
 
* [http://www.creativityforce.com The Creativity Force] - Writings about creativity, education, democracy and more
 
  
'''Essays:'''
+
The following are the major characteristics of Process New Thought as related to creativity:
* [http://members.aol.com/mindwebart3/marcel.htm ''The Creative Act'' by [[Marcel Duchamp]]. (1957)]
+
#It accepts science's discovery of a process-relational outlook, but with a Whiteheadian recognition of the creative, living nature of the pulses or bursts of energy (called occasions of experience by Whitehead), with energy recognized as what we experience as feeling. Occasions of experience are the basic building blocks of reality.
*[http://cogprints.org/1569/ Metaphor and Mental Duality]
+
# Life is that in which there is (a) aim (relatively free choosing of possibilities), (b) creative activity (transforming potentiality into actuality), and (c) enjoyment of the process (of creating a new unity out of the combined many coming to an occasion from the past—which is composed of a multitude of earlier choices).
*[http://cogprints.org/1627/ Creativity: Method or Magic?]
+
#The creative process is the taking (prehending, feeling, including, absorbing) of the many units of the past and blending their influence with also-prehended divinely given possibilities, thus producing unique new creations. The job of all existence is the creation of new unities. "The many become one, and are increased by one. In their natures, entities are disjunctively 'many' in process of passage into conjunctive unity." <ref>Alfred North Whitehead, ''Process and Reality'' (New York: Free Press, 1979, ISBN 0029345707).</ref> Unity is an ongoing process of unifying, not a static state of a changeless one.  
 +
#As the new many new units of reality are created, they are added to God's awareness (prehension, inclusion), resulting in God's endless growth.
 +
#Living in the moment is required by serial selfhood. Since concretely one has only a moment to live, one should make the most of it. Understanding that we are new creations moment by moment can provide a powerful psychological impetus to drop old limitations and to accept divinely-given opportunities for fullest living.
 +
#There is no unilateral creation, by God or by any other experience. All creation is co-creation. The pattern of creation by means of blending the contrasting influences of the God-given initial aim and the past is the most basic reality, that which always has been and always will be. Our task and privilege is to learn to co-create with God in the most conscious and effective ways.
  
 +
==Social attitudes to creativity==
 +
<blockquote>"The man who invented fire was probably burned at the stake." ([[Ayn Rand]])</blockquote>
 +
Although the benefits of creativity to society as a whole have been noted,<ref> M.A. Runco, "Creativity." ''Annual Review of Psychology'' 55 (2004): 657-687</ref> social [[attitude]]s about this topic remain divided. The wealth of literature regarding the development of creativity<ref>D.H. Feldman, "The Development of Creativity." ''Handbook of Creativity.'' </ref> and the profusion of creativity techniques indicate wide acceptance, at least among academics, that creativity is desirable.
 +
<blockquote>"To be creative means to become profoundly individualized thus separating one's self from the crowd." (Paul Palnik)</blockquote>
 +
There is, however, a dark side to creativity, in that it represents a "quest for a radical autonomy apart from the constraints of social responsibility."<ref>R.B. McLaren, "Dark Side of Creativity." ''Encyclopedia of Creativity,'' eds. M.A. Runco, & S.R. Pritzker, (Academic Press, 1999, ISBN 0122270754).</ref> In other words, by encouraging creativity we are encouraging a departure from society's existing [[norm]]s and values. Expectation of conformity runs contrary to the spirit of creativity.
  
 +
Nevertheless, employers are increasingly valuing creative skills. A report by the Business Council of Australia, for example, called for a higher level of creativity in graduates.<ref>[https://www.bca.com.au/new-concepts-in-innovation-the-keys-to-a-growing-australia New Concepts in Innovation: The Keys to a Growing Australia] ''Business Council of Australia'', July 14, 2006. Retrieved July 16, 2020.</ref> The ability to "think outside the box" is highly sought after. However, the above-mentioned paradox may well imply that firms pay lipservice to thinking outside the box while maintaining traditional, hierarchical organization structures in which individual creativity is not rewarded.
  
 +
==Notes==
 +
<references/>
 +
==References==
 +
* Anderson, J.R. ''Cognitive Psychology and its Implications.'' Worth Publishers, 2005. ISBN 0716701103
 +
* Berdyaev, Nicolai. ''The Meaning of the Creative Act''. Trans. Donald A. Lowrie. Semantron Press, 2009. ISBN 978-1597312622
 +
* Boden, M.A. ''The Creative Mind: Myths And Mechanisms.'' Rutledge, 2004. ISBN 0465014518
 +
* Finke, R., T.B. Ward, and S.M. Smith. ''Creative Cognition: Theory, Research, and Applications.'' MIT Press, 1996. ISBN 0262560968
 +
* Florida, R. ''The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life.'' New York: Basic Books, 2003. ISBN 0465024777
 +
* Guilford, J.P. ''The Nature of Human Intelligence.'' McGraw-Hill, 1967.
 +
* Johnson, D. M. ''Systematic Introduction to the Psychology of Thinking.'' Harper & Row, 1972. ISBN 0060433310
 +
* Koestler, Arthur. ''The Act of Creation.'' Macmillan, 1975. ISBN 0330244477
 +
* Kraft, U. "Unleashing Creativity." ''Scientific American'' Mind (April 2005): 16-23.
 +
* Markham, Ian S. ''A World Religions Reader.'' Blackwell Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0631215190
 +
* Michalko, M. ''Cracking Creativity: The Secrets of Creative Genius.'' Ten Speed Press, 2001. ISBN 1580083110
 +
* Nagel, L. (ed.). ''Encyclopaedia of Cognition''. New York: Macmillan, 2003.
 +
* National Academy of Engineering. ''Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century''. National Academies Press, 2005.
 +
* Nickerson, R.S. "Enhancing Creativity." In ''Handbook of Creativity,'' edited by Sternberg, R.J. Cambridge University Press, 1998. ISBN 0521576040
 +
* Pink, D.H. ''A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age into the Conceptual Age.'' Riverbed, 2005. ISBN 1573223085
 +
* Runco, M.A., and S.R. Pritzker. ''Encyclopedia of Creativity.'' Academic Press, 1999. ISBN 0122270754
 +
* Simonton, D.K. ''Origins of Genius: Darwinian Perspectives on Creativity.'' Oxford University Press, 1999. ISBN 0195128796
 +
* Sternberg, R.J. (ed.). ''The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives.'' Cambridge University Press, 1988. ISBN 0521338921
 +
* Tatarkiewicz, Władysław. ''A History of Six Ideas: an Essay in Aesthetics,'' Translated from the Polish by Christopher Kasparek. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980. ISBN 9024722330
 +
* Torrance, E.P. ''Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking.'' Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior, 1974.
 +
* Wallas, G. ''Art of Thought''. Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1926.
 +
* Weisberg, R.W. ''Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius.'' Freeman, 1993. ISBN 0716723670
 +
* Whitehead, Alfred North. ''Process and Reality.'' New York: Free Press, 1979. ISBN 0029345707
  
 +
==External links==
 +
All links retrieved January 11, 2024.
  
 +
*[https://www.mycoted.com/Category:Creativity_Techniques Creativity Techniques]
 +
*Tom Ritchey. [http://www.swemorph.com/pdf/gma.pdf General Morphological Analysis: A General Method for Non-Quantified Modelling] From the Swedish Morphological Society
 +
*[http://www.swemorph.com/zwicky.html  About Fritz Zwicky] From the Swedish Morphological Society
 +
*[http://members.optusnet.com.au/~charles57/Creative/index2.html Creativity Web]
 +
*[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-philosophy/ Process Philosophy] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
 +
*Stevan Harnad. [http://cogprints.org/1569/ Metaphor and Mental Duality]. Chapter from book. ''Cogprints.org''.
 +
*Stevan Harnad. [http://cogprints.org/1627/ Creativity: Method or Magic?] ''Cogprints.org''.
  
 
{{Credit1|Creativity|78268053|History_of_creativity|81390028|}}
 
{{Credit1|Creativity|78268053|History_of_creativity|81390028|}}

Latest revision as of 06:21, 11 January 2024


Leonardo Da Vinci is well known for his creative works

Creativity is a process involving the generation of new ideas or concepts, or new associations between existing ideas or concepts, and their substantiation into a product that has novelty and originality. From a scientific point of view, the products of creative thought (sometimes referred to as divergent thought) are usually considered to have both "originality" and "appropriateness." An alternative, more everyday conception of creativity is that it is simply the act of making something new.

Although intuitively a simple phenomenon, creativity is in fact quite complex. It has been studied from numerous perspectives, including psychology, social psychology, psychometrics, artificial intelligence, philosophy, history, economics, and business. Unlike many phenomena in science, there is no single, authoritative perspective, or definition of creativity; nor is there a standardized measurement technique. Creativity has been attributed variously to divine intervention or spiritual inspiration, cognitive processes, the social environment, personality traits, and chance ("accident" or "serendipity"). It has been associated with genius, mental illness and humor. Some say it is a trait we are born with; others say it can be taught with the application of simple techniques. Although popularly associated with art and literature, it is also an essential part of innovation and invention, important in professions such as business, economics, architecture, industrial design, science, and engineering. Despite, or perhaps because of, the ambiguity and multi-dimensional nature of creativity, entire industries have been spawned from the pursuit of creative ideas and the development of creativity techniques.

This mysterious phenomenon, though undeniably important and constantly visible, seems to lie tantalizingly beyond the grasp of scientific investigation. Yet in religious or spiritual terms it is the very essence of human nature. Creativity, understood as the ability to utilize everything at hand in nature to transform our living environment and beautify our lives, is what distinguishes human beings from all other creatures. This is one way that human beings are said to be in the image of God: they are second creators, acting in a manner analogous to God, the original Creator.

Moreover, all people, regardless of their intellectual level, are co-creators of perhaps the most important thing—their own self. While God provides each person with a certain endowment and circumstance, it is up to each individual to make what he will of his life by how he or she choses to live it.

Definitions of Creativity

"Creativity, it has been said, consists largely of re-arranging what we know in order to find out what we do not know." George Keller

"The problem of creativity is beset with mysticism, confused definitions, value judgments, psychoanalytic admonitions, and the crushing weight of philosophical speculation dating from ancient times." Albert Rothenberg

More than 60 different definitions of creativity can be found in the psychological literature.[1] The etymological root of the word in English and most other European languages comes from the Latin creatus, literally "to have grown."

Perhaps the most widespread conception of creativity in the scholarly literature is that creativity is manifested in the production of a creative work (for example, a new work of art or a scientific hypothesis) that is both "novel" and "useful." Colloquial definitions of creativity are typically descriptive of activity that results in producing or bringing about something partly or wholly new; in investing an existing object with new properties or characteristics; in imagining new possibilities that were not conceived of before; and in seeing or performing something in a manner different from what was thought possible or normal previously.

A useful distinction has been made by Rhodes[2] between the creative person, the creative product, the creative process, and the creative "press" or environment. Each of these factors are usually present in creative activity. This has been elaborated by Johnson,[3] who suggested that creative activity may exhibit several dimensions including sensitivity to problems on the part of the creative agent, originality, ingenuity, unusualness, usefulness, and appropriateness in relation to the creative product, and intellectual leadership on the part of the creative agent.

Boden noted that it is important to distinguish between ideas which are psychologically creative (which are novel to the individual mind which had the idea), and those which are historically creative (which are novel with respect to the whole of human history).[4] Drawing on ideas from artificial intelligence, she defines psychologically creative ideas as those which cannot be produced by the same set of generative rules as other, familiar ideas.

Often implied in the notion of creativity is a concomitant presence of inspiration, cognitive leaps, or intuitive insight as a part of creative thought and action.[5] Pop psychology sometimes associates creativity with right or forehead brain activity or even specifically with lateral thinking.

Some students of creativity have emphasized an element of chance in the creative process. Linus Pauling, asked at a public lecture how one creates scientific theories, replied that one must endeavor to come up with many ideas, then discard the useless ones.

History of the term and the concept

The way in which different societies have formulated the concept of creativity has changed throughout history, as has the term "creativity" itself.

The ancient Greeks, who believed that the muses were the source of all inspiration, actually had no terms corresponding to "to create" or "creator." The expression "poiein" ("to make") sufficed. They believed that the inspiration for originality came from the gods and even invented heavenly creatures - the Muses - as supervisors of human creativity.

According to Plato, Socrates taught that inspired thoughts originate with the gods; ideas spring forth not when a person is rational, but when someone is "beside himself," when "bereft of his senses." Since the gods took away reason before bestowing the gift of inspiration, "thinking" might actually prevent the reception of divinely inspired revelations. The word "inspiration" is based on a Greek word meaning "the God within." The poet was seen as making new things—bringing to life a new world—while the artist merely imitated.

In the visual arts, freedom was limited by the proportions that Polyclitus had established for the human frame, and which he called "the canon" (meaning, "measure"). Plato argued in Timaeus that, to execute a good work, one must contemplate an eternal model. Later the Roman, Cicero, would write that art embraces those things "of which we have knowledge" (quae sciuntur).

In Rome, these Greek concepts were partly shaken. Horace wrote that not only poets but painters as well were entitled to the privilege of daring whatever they wished to (quod libet audendi). In the declining period of antiquity, Philostratus wrote that "one can discover a similarity between poetry and art and find that they have imagination in common." Callistratos averred that "Not only is the art of the poets and prosaists inspired, but likewise the hands of sculptors are gifted with the blessing of divine inspiration." This was something new: classical Greeks had not applied the concepts of imagination and inspiration to the visual arts but had restricted them to poetry. Latin was richer than Greek: it had a term for "creating" (creatio) and for creator, and had two expressions—facere and creare—where Greek had but one, poiein.[6] Still, the two Latin terms meant much the same thing.

Although neither the Greeks nor the Romans had any words that directly corresponded to the word creativity, their art, architecture, music, inventions, and discoveries provide numerous examples of what we would today describe as creative works. At the time, the concept of genius probably came closest to describing the creative talents bringing forth these works.[7]

A fundamental change came in the Christian period: creatio came to designate God's act of "creation from nothing." Creatio thus took on a different meaning than facere ("to make"), and ceased to apply to human functions.

The influential Christian writer Saint Augustine felt that Christianity "played a leading role in the discovery of our power to create" (Albert & Runco, 1999). However, alongside this new, religious interpretation of the expression, there persisted the ancient view that art is not a domain of creativity.[6] This is also seen in the work of Pseudo-Dionysius. Later medieval men such as Hraban the Moor, and Robert Grosseteste in the thirteenth century, thought much the same way. The Middle Ages here went even further than antiquity; they made no exception of poetry: it too had its rules, was an art, and was therefore craft, and not creativity.

Another shift occurred in more modern times. Renaissance men had a sense of their own independence, freedom, and creativity, and sought to give it voice. Baltasar Gracián (1601-1658) wrote: "Art is the completion of nature, as it were 'a second Creator'"; … Raphael, that he shapes a painting according to his idea; Leonardo da Vinci, that he employs "shapes that do not exist in nature"; Michelangelo, that the artist realizes his vision rather than imitating nature. Still more emphatic were those who wrote about poetry: G.P. Capriano held (1555) that the poet's invention springs "from nothing." Francesco Patrizi (1586) saw poetry as "fiction," "shaping," and "transformation."

Finally, the word "creation" appeared in the writings of the seventeenth-century Polish poet and theoretician of poetry, Maciej Kazimierz Sarbiewski (1595-1640), known as "the last Latin poet." In his treatise, De perfecta poesi, he not only wrote that a poet "invents," "after a fashion builds," but also that the poet "creates anew" (de novo creat). Sarbiewski even added: "in the manner of God" (instar Dei).

By the eighteenth century and the Age of Enlightenment, the concept of creativity was appearing more often in art theory, and was linked with the concept of imagination.[6] There was still resistance to the idea of human creativity which had a triple source. The expression, "creation," was then reserved for creation ex nihilo (Latin: "from nothing"), which was inaccessible to man. Second, creation is a mysterious act, and Enlightenment psychology did not admit of mysteries. Third, artists of the age were attached to their rules, and creativity seemed irreconcilable with rules. The latter objection was the weakest, as it was already beginning to be realized (for example, by Houdar de la Motte, 1715) that rules ultimately are a human invention.

The Western view of creativity can be contrasted with the Eastern view. For the Hindus, Confucius, Daoists and Buddhists, creation was at most a kind of discovery or mimicry, and the idea of creation from "nothing" had no place in these philosophies and religions.[7]

In the nineteenth century, not only was art regarded as creativity, but "it alone" was so regarded. When later, at the turn of the twentieth century, there began to be discussion of creativity in the sciences (e.g., Jan Łukasiewicz, 1878-1956) and in nature (such as Henri Bergson), this was generally taken as the transference to the sciences of concepts proper to art.[6]

The formal starting point of the scientific study of creativity is sometimes considered to be J. P. Guilford's address to the American Psychological Association in 1950, which helped to popularize the topic.[8] Since then (and indeed, before then), researchers from a variety of fields have studied the nature of creativity from a scientific point of view. Others have taken a more pragmatic approach, teaching practical creativity techniques. Three of the best-known are Alex Osborn's brainstorming techniques, Genrikh Altshuller's Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ); and Edward de Bono's lateral thinking.

Creativity in psychology and cognitive science

An early, psychodynamic approach to understanding creativity was proposed by Sigmund Freud, who suggested that creativity arises as a result of frustrated desires for fame, fortune, and love, with the energy that was previously tied up in frustration and emotional tension in the neurosis being sublimated into creative activity. Freud later retracted this view.

Graham Wallas, in his work Art of Thought, published in 1926,[9] presented one of the first models of the creative process. Wallas considered creativity to be a legacy of the evolutionary process, which allowed humans to quickly adapt to rapidly changing environments.[10]

In the Wallas stage model, creative insights and illuminations may be explained by a process consisting of 5 stages:

  1. preparation (preparatory work on a problem that focuses the individual's mind on the problem and explores the problem's dimensions),
  2. incubation (where the problem is internalized into the subconscious mind and nothing appears externally to be happening),
  3. intimation (the creative person gets a "feeling" that a solution is on its way),
  4. illumination or insight (where the creative idea bursts forth from its subconscious processing into conscious awareness); and
  5. verification (where the idea is consciously verified, elaborated, and then applied).

Wallas' model has subsequently been treated as four stages, with "intimation" seen as a sub-stage. There has been some empirical research looking at whether, as the concept of "incubation" in Wallas' model implies, a period of interruption or rest from a problem may aid creative problem-solving. Ward[11] lists various hypotheses that have been advanced to explain why incubation may aid creative problem-solving, and notes how some empirical evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that incubation aids creative problem-solving in that it enables "forgetting" of misleading clues. Absence of incubation may lead the problem solver to become fixated on inappropriate strategies of solving the problem.[12] This work disputed the earlier hypothesis that creative solutions to problems arise mysteriously from the unconscious mind while the conscious mind is occupied on other tasks.[13]

Guilford[14] performed important work in the field of creativity, drawing a distinction between convergent and divergent production (commonly renamed convergent and divergent thinking). Convergent thinking involves aiming for a single, correct solution to a problem, whereas divergent thinking involves creative generation of multiple answers to a set problem. Divergent thinking is sometimes used as a synonym for creativity in psychology literature. Other researchers have occasionally used the terms "flexible" thinking or "fluid intelligence," which are similar to (but not synonymous with) creativity.

In The Act of Creation, Arthur Koestler[5] listed three types of creative individuals: the "Artist," the "Sage," and the "Jester." Believers in this trinity hold all three elements necessary in business and can identify them all in "truly creative" companies as well. Koestler introduced the concept of "bisociation"—that creativity arises as a result of the intersection of two quite different frames of reference.

In 1992, Finke[15] proposed the "Geneplore" model, in which creativity takes place in two phases: a generative phase, where an individual constructs mental representations called preinventive structures, and an exploratory phase where those structures are used to come up with creative ideas. Weisberg[16] argued, by contrast, that creativity only involves ordinary cognitive processes yielding extraordinary results.

Creativity and intelligence

There has been debate in the psychological literature about whether intelligence and creativity are part of the same process (the conjoint hypothesis) or represent distinct mental processes (the disjoint hypothesis). Evidence from attempts to look at correlations between intelligence and creativity from the 1950s onwards regularly suggested that correlations between these concepts were low enough to justify treating them as distinct concepts.

It has been proposed that creativity is the outcome of the same cognitive processes as intelligence, and is only judged as creativity in terms of its consequences. In other words, the process is only judged creative when the outcome of cognitive processes happen to produce something novel, a view which Perkins has termed the "nothing special" hypothesis.[17] However, a very popular model is what has come to be known as "the threshold hypothesis," stating that intelligence and creativity are more likely to be correlated in general samples, but that this correlation is not found in people with IQs over 120. An alternative perspective, Renculli's three-rings hypothesis, sees giftedness as based on both intelligence and creativity.

The frontal lobe (shown in blue) is thought to play an important role in creativity

Neurology of creativity

Neurological research has found that creative innovation requires "coactivation and communication between regions of the brain that ordinarily are not strongly connected."[18] Highly creative people who excel at creative innovation tend to differ from others in three ways: they have a high level of specialized knowledge, they are capable of divergent thinking mediated by the frontal lobe, and they are able to modulate neurotransmitters such as norepinephrine in their frontal lobe. Thus, the frontal lobe appears to be the part of the cortex that is most important for creativity.[18]

Creativity and madness

Creativity has been found to correlate with intelligence and psychoticism,[19] particularly in schizotypal individuals.[20] To explain these results, it has been hypothesized that such individuals are better at accessing both hemispheres, allowing them to make novel associations at a faster rate. In agreement with this hypothesis, ambidexterity is also associated with schizotypal and schizophrenic individuals.

Creativity in various contexts

Creativity has been studied from a variety of perspectives and is important in numerous contexts. Most of these approaches are unidisciplinary, and it is therefore difficult to form a coherent overall view.[8] The following sections examine some of the areas in which creativity is seen as being important.

Henry Moore's Reclining Figure

Creativity in art and literature

Most people associate creativity with the fields of art and literature. In these fields, "originality" is considered to be a sufficient condition for creativity, unlike other fields where both "originality" and "appropriateness" are necessary.[21]

Within the different modes of artistic expression, one can postulate a continuum extending from "interpretation" to "innovation." Established artistic movements and genres pull practitioners to the "interpretation" end of the scale, whereas original thinkers strive towards the "innovation" pole. Note that we conventionally expect some "creative" people (dancers, actors, orchestral members, etc.) to perform (interpret) while allowing others (writers, painters, composers, etc.) more freedom to express the new and the different.

The word "creativity" conveys an implication of constructing novelty without relying on any existing constituent components (ex nihilo - compare creationism). Contrast alternative theories, for example:

  • artistic inspiration, which provides the transmission of visions from divine sources such as the Muses; a taste of the Divine.
  • artistic evolution, which stresses obeying established ("classical") rules and imitating or appropriating to produce subtly different but unshockingly understandable work.

In the art, practice, and theory of Davor Dzalto, human creativity is taken as a basic feature of both the personal existence of human beings and art production.

Creativity in science, engineering and design

Isaac Newton's law of gravity is popularly attributed to a creative leap he experienced when observing a falling apple.

Creativity is also seen as being increasingly important in a variety of other professions. Architecture and industrial design are the fields most often associated with creativity, and more generally the fields of design and design research. These fields explicitly value creativity, and journals such as Design Studies have published many studies on creativity and creative problem solving.[22]

Fields such as science and engineering have, by contrast, experienced a less explicit (but arguably no less important) relation to creativity. Simonton[10] shows how some of the major scientific advances of the twentieth century can be attributed to the creativity of individuals. This ability will also be seen as increasingly important for engineers in years to come.[23]

Creativity in business

Creativity, broadly conceived, is essential to all successful business ventures. Entrepreneurs use creativity to define a market, promote a product or service, and make unconventional deals with providers, partners and lenders.

Narrowly speaking, there is a growing sector of "creative industries" — capitalistically generating (generally non-tangible) wealth through the creation and exploitation of intellectual property or through the provision of creative services.[24]

Amabile[21] argues that to enhance creativity in business, three components were needed: Expertise (technical, procedural, and intellectual knowledge), Creative thinking skills (how flexibly and imaginatively people approach problems), and Motivation (especially intrinsic motivation). Nonaka, who examined several successful Japanese companies, similarly saw creativity and knowledge creation as being important to the success of organizations.[25] In particular, he emphasized the role that tacit knowledge has to play in the creative process.

In many cases in the context of examining creativity in organizations, it is useful to explicitly distinguish between "creativity" and "innovation."[26]

In such cases, the term "innovation" is often used to refer to the entire process by which an organization generates creative new ideas and converts them into novel, useful and viable commercial products, services, and business practices, while the term "creativity" is reserved to apply specifically to the generation of novel ideas by individuals, as a necessary step within the innovation process.

For example, Amabile et al. suggest that while innovation "begins with creative ideas, creativity by individuals and teams is a starting point for innovation; the first is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the second" (emphasis added).[26]

Economic views of creativity

In the early twentieth century, Joseph Schumpeter introduced the economic theory of "creative destruction," to describe the way in which old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by the new.

Creativity is also seen by economists such as Paul Romer as an important element in the recombination of elements to produce new technologies and products and, consequently, economic growth. Creativity leads to capital, and creative products are protected by intellectual property laws. Creativity is also an important aspect to understanding entrepreneurship.

The "creative class" is seen by some to be an important driver of modern economies. In his 2002 book, The Rise of the Creative Class, economist Richard Florida popularized the notion that regions with high concentrations of creative professionals such as hi-tech workers, artists, musicians, and creative people and a group he describes as "high bohemians," tend to have a higher level of economic development.

Creativity, music and community

Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania Social Impact of the Arts Project[27]found that the presence of arts and culture offerings in a neighborhood has a measurable impact on the strength of the community. Arts and culture not only attract creative workers, but also is a key element in the revitalization of neighborhoods, and increases social well-being. They also found that music is one of the key arts and cultural elements that attracts and retains “creative workers.” To slow down the large emigration of young cultural workers from Pennsylvania, this study proposed enhancing school-based music education and community-based musical cultural offerings. This study discovered the following traits in creative workers: individuality; creativity; technology and innovation; participation; project orientation; and eclecticism and authenticity. They found that music education helps foster all these traits to help Americans realize their creative potential. As a result, the author claimed, music education not only nurtures creativity but also plays a crucial role in the knowledge economy, and in strengthening communities.

Measuring Creativity

Creativity quotient

Several attempts have been made to develop a "creativity quotient" of an individual similar to the Intelligence quotient (IQ), however these have been unsuccessful.[28] Most measures of creativity are dependent on the personal judgement of the tester, so a standardized measure is difficult to develop.

Psychometric approach

J. P. Guilford's group,[14] which pioneered the modern psychometric study of creativity, constructed several tests to measure creativity:

  • Plot Titles where participants are given the plot of a story and asked to write original titles.
  • Quick Responses is a word-association test scored for uncommonness.
  • Figure Concepts where participants were given simple drawings of objects and individuals and asked to find qualities or features that are common by two or more drawings; these were scored for uncommonness.
  • Unusual Uses involves finding unusual uses for common everyday objects such as bricks.
  • Remote Associations where participants are asked to find a word between two given words (such as Hand _____ Call)
  • Remote Consequences where participants are asked to generate a list of consequences of unexpected events (such as loss of gravity)

Building on Guilford's work, Torrance[29] developed the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. They involved simple tests of divergent thinking and other problem-solving skills, which were scored on:

  • Fluency The total number of interpretable, meaningful, and relevant ideas generated in response to the stimulus.
  • Flexibility The number of different categories of relevant responses.
  • Originality The statistical rarity of the responses among the test subjects.
  • Elaboration The amount of detail in the responses.

Social-personality approach

Some researchers have taken a social-personality approach to the measurement of creativity. In these studies, personality traits such as independence of judgement, self-confidence, attraction to complexity, aesthetic orientation, and risk-taking are used as measures of the creativity of individuals.[8] Other researchers[30] have related creativity to the trait, "openness to experience."

Fostering creativity

Daniel Pink, repeating arguments posed throughout the twentieth century, has argued that we are entering a new age where creativity is becoming increasingly important. In this "conceptual age," we need to foster and encourage "right-directed thinking" (representing creativity and emotion) over "left-directed thinking" (representing logical, analytical thought).[31]

The following is summary[32] of techniques to foster creativity, including approaches developed by both academia and industry:

  1. Establishing purpose and intention
  2. Building basic skills
  3. Encouraging acquisitions of domain-specific knowledge
  4. Stimulating and rewarding curiosity and exploration
  5. Building motivation, especially internal motivation
  6. Encouraging confidence and a willingness to take risks
  7. Focusing on mastery and self-competition
  8. Promoting supportable beliefs about creativity
  9. Providing opportunities for choice and discovery
  10. Developing self-management (metacognitive skills)
  11. Teaching techniques and strategies for facilitating creative performance
  12. Providing balance

A growing number of psychologists are advocating the idea that one can learn to become more "creative." Several different researchers have proposed approaches to support this idea, ranging from psychological-cognitive, such as:

  • Osborn-Parnes' Creative problem solving
  • Synectics;
  • Purdue Creative Thinking Program;
  • lateral thinking of Edward de Bono,

to the highly-structured, such as:

  • Theory of Inventive Problem-Solving (TRIZ);
  • Algorithm of Inventive Problem-Solving (ARIZ), both developed by the Russian scientist Genrich Altshuller;
  • Computer-Aided Morphological analysis[33]

Origins of Creativity

While scientific approaches have struggled to understand, describe, and explain the creative phenomenon, religion and philosophy has addressed the fundamental question of the origin of creativity in a number of ways.

Religions

According to many religions, God as the original creator of the world initiated the first act of creativity. Human beings, variously conceived of as made in God's image or as manifestations of God, consequently also have the ability to create. The artist, scientist and designer takes after the creativity of God; indeed it is God who impels him or her to create. Thus the Japanese new religion Perfect Liberty Kyodan begins its precepts:

Life is art.

The whole life of man is self-expression.
The individual is an expression of God.

We suffer if we do not express ourselves. (Precepts 1-4)

In the Bible, in Genesis 1 God creates the earth and all its creatures. In the next chapter, God tells Adam, the first man, to give names to all the creatures. This act of naming was also a kind of creation, for God accepts the results:

Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. (Genesis 2:19)

God does whatever He will, but it is only when human beings know of it that God's work of creation is confirmed and glorified. A human being's ability to know, and to consciously utilize things according to his knowledge, makes him a creative being. In the Jewish tradition, Rabbi Akiba taught:

Beloved is man, for he was created in the image of God. But it was by a special love that it was made known to him that he was created in the image of God. (Mishnah, Avot 3.18)

All these concepts point to the idea that human beings are "co-creators" with God. The Qur'an uses the term "vicegerent":

I will create a vicegerent on earth. (Qur’an 2:30)

Do human beings create in the way that God creates? Not if one conceives of divine creation as an act of pure speech, as in: "And God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." (Genesis 1:3) Yet elsewhere Scripture describes creation as effortful. God expended such energy to create that on the seventh day he "rested from all his work which he had done." (Genesis 2:3) To create human beings, God acted the part of a sculptor working with clay:

The Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. (Genesis 2:7)

The artist likewise works with a medium and breathes his life—his spirit, into his work. Then it can be said to be art.

In the Eastern religions, where there is no absolute distinction between God and human beings, the concept that human creativity takes after the original divine creativity is more explicit. Take this passage from the I Ching. It teaches that the creative moment cannot be forced, but requires waiting until the time is ripe, while preparing one's mind to receive it:

Vast indeed is the sublime Creative Principle, the Source of all, co-extensive with the heavens. It causes the clouds to come forth, the rain to bestow its bounty and all objects to flow into their respective forms. Its dazzling brilliance permeates all things from first to last; its activities, symbolized by the component lines [of the hexagram], reach full completion, each at the proper time. [The superior man], mounting them when the time is ripe, is carried heavenwards as though six dragons were his steeds! The Creative Principle functions through Change; accordingly, when we rectify our way of life by conjoining it with the universal harmony, our firm persistence is richly rewarded. (I Ching 1: The Creative)

Another religious insight is that creativity originates in a state emptiness, an unconscious state where one is not "trying" to do anything (corresponding to Wallas's "incubation" stage.) Scriptural accounts of "creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) point to the truth that to create, we too have to begin in a state of nothingness. Thus is the first creative moment described in this Hindu text:

This universe existed in the shape of darkness, unperceived, destitute of distinctive marks, unattainable by reasoning, unknowable, wholly immersed, as it were, in deep sleep.
Then the Divine Self-existent, himself indiscernible but making all this, the great elements and the rest, discernible, appeared with irresistible power, dispelling the darkness… created all beings. (Laws of Manu 1.5-16)

The Bible also begins creation from a moment of darkness:

The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. (Genesis 1:2)

In Daoism, a religion which has been the creed of most Chinese artists, creativity likewise begins from a low place, the "gate of the subtle and profound female":

The spirit of the valley never dies.

It is called the subtle and profound female.
The gate of the subtle and profound female
Is the root of heaven and earth.
It is continuous, and seems to be always existing.

Use it and you will never wear it out. (Tao Te Ching 6, translated by Wing Tsit Chan)[34]

Finally, according to the Baha'i Faith, the inspiration for creativity originates from communication with the spirit world, where artists and inventors on the other side continue their work and then communicate their energies to earthly artists and inventors:

The light which these souls [of departed saints] radiate is responsible for the progress of the world and the advancement of its peoples. They are like leaven which leavens the world of being, and constitute the animating force through which the arts and wonders of the world are made manifest.[35])

Philosophy

Philosophers such as Nikolai Berdyaev and Alfred North Whitehead have addressed the question of human creativity, and the problem of how anything novel can be produced if the world originated from and operates according to fixed principles. For if there are no fixed principles, then we can never understand the world or ourselves, nor have any control over our own destiny. Inevitably, their discussions of human creativity lead back to nature of God as the origin of creativity.

Berdyaev

Nikolai Berdyaev regarded creativity as the ultimate destination of human beings. For him, the end of objectivization means the recognition of creativity as each person's highest purpose and fulfillment, for "only he who is free, creates."[36] Creativity does not just mean producing a work of art. Rather it is the transformation of self and the world:

In every artistic activity a new world is created, the cosmos, a world enlightened and free.[37]

Berdyaev's view of creativity was not of something measurable by scientific or external means, for it is an internal aspect of human nature:

Creativity is something which proceeds from within, out of immeasurable and inexplicable depths, not from without, not from the world's necessity. The very desire to make the creative act understandable, to find a basis for it, is failure to comprehend it. To comprehend the creative act means to recognize that it is inexplicable and without foundation.[37]

He could see the coming of a time when our creative potential will be more developed. We will then be in a position to collaborate with God to re-create the world:

The dawn of the creative religious epoch also means a most profound crisis in man's creativity. The creative act will create new being rather than values of differentiated culture; in the creative act life will not be quenched. Creativity will continue creation; it will reveal the resemblance of human nature to the Creator. In creativity the way will be found for subject to pass into object, the identity of subject with object will be restored. All the great creators have foreseen this turning-point. Today, in the depths of culture itself and in all its separate spheres, this crisis of creativity is ripening.[37]

Berdyaev's vision is of humanity overcoming the gap that separates us from God through the creative act, and in the process becoming divinized:[36]

The third creative revelation in the Spirit will have no holy scripture; it will be no voice from on high; it will be accomplished in man and in humanity - it is an anthropological revelation, an unveiling of the Christology of man.[37]

Whitehead Alfred North Whitehead, in his Process Theology, saw God in cosmological terms as an "actual occasion" functioning within nature, reflective of "the eternal urge of desire" that works "strongly and quietly by love," to guide the course of things within the world into "the creative advance into novelty." Whitehead's philosophy of the "beginningless endless creative advance into newness" inspired what is became known as "Process New Thought." Human beings are considered co-creators of life with God as the senior partner.

The following are the major characteristics of Process New Thought as related to creativity:

  1. It accepts science's discovery of a process-relational outlook, but with a Whiteheadian recognition of the creative, living nature of the pulses or bursts of energy (called occasions of experience by Whitehead), with energy recognized as what we experience as feeling. Occasions of experience are the basic building blocks of reality.
  2. Life is that in which there is (a) aim (relatively free choosing of possibilities), (b) creative activity (transforming potentiality into actuality), and (c) enjoyment of the process (of creating a new unity out of the combined many coming to an occasion from the past—which is composed of a multitude of earlier choices).
  3. The creative process is the taking (prehending, feeling, including, absorbing) of the many units of the past and blending their influence with also-prehended divinely given possibilities, thus producing unique new creations. The job of all existence is the creation of new unities. "The many become one, and are increased by one. In their natures, entities are disjunctively 'many' in process of passage into conjunctive unity." [38] Unity is an ongoing process of unifying, not a static state of a changeless one.
  4. As the new many new units of reality are created, they are added to God's awareness (prehension, inclusion), resulting in God's endless growth.
  5. Living in the moment is required by serial selfhood. Since concretely one has only a moment to live, one should make the most of it. Understanding that we are new creations moment by moment can provide a powerful psychological impetus to drop old limitations and to accept divinely-given opportunities for fullest living.
  6. There is no unilateral creation, by God or by any other experience. All creation is co-creation. The pattern of creation by means of blending the contrasting influences of the God-given initial aim and the past is the most basic reality, that which always has been and always will be. Our task and privilege is to learn to co-create with God in the most conscious and effective ways.

Social attitudes to creativity

"The man who invented fire was probably burned at the stake." (Ayn Rand)

Although the benefits of creativity to society as a whole have been noted,[39] social attitudes about this topic remain divided. The wealth of literature regarding the development of creativity[40] and the profusion of creativity techniques indicate wide acceptance, at least among academics, that creativity is desirable.

"To be creative means to become profoundly individualized thus separating one's self from the crowd." (Paul Palnik)

There is, however, a dark side to creativity, in that it represents a "quest for a radical autonomy apart from the constraints of social responsibility."[41] In other words, by encouraging creativity we are encouraging a departure from society's existing norms and values. Expectation of conformity runs contrary to the spirit of creativity.

Nevertheless, employers are increasingly valuing creative skills. A report by the Business Council of Australia, for example, called for a higher level of creativity in graduates.[42] The ability to "think outside the box" is highly sought after. However, the above-mentioned paradox may well imply that firms pay lipservice to thinking outside the box while maintaining traditional, hierarchical organization structures in which individual creativity is not rewarded.

Notes

  1. C.W. Taylor, "Various approaches to and definitions of creativity." in The Nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives, ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1988, ISBN 0521338921).
  2. M. Rhodes, "An analysis of creativity." Phi Delta Kappan 42 (1961): 305-311.
  3. D.M. Johnson, Systematic introduction to the psychology of thinking (Harper & Row, 1972, ISBN 0060433310).
  4. M.A. Boden, The Creative Mind: Myths And Mechanisms (Routledge, 2004, ISBN 0465014518).
  5. 5.0 5.1 A. Koestler, The Act of Creation (Macmillan, 1975, ISBN 0330244477).
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Władysław Tatarkiewicz, A History of Six Ideas: An Essay in Aesthetics, Translated from the Polish by Christopher Kasparek, (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980, ISBN 9024722330).
  7. 7.0 7.1 R.S. Albert and M.A. Runce, "A History of Research on Creativity" in Handbook of Creativity, ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 0521576040).
  8. 8.0 8.1 8.2 R.J. Sternberg and T.I. Lubart, "The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms." Handbook of Creativity, ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 0521576040).
  9. G. Wallas, Art of Thought (Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1926).
  10. 10.0 10.1 D.K. Simonton, Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity (Oxford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0195128796).
  11. T. Ward, "Creativity." In Encyclopaedia of Cognition, ed. L. Nagel, (New York: Macmillan, 2003).
  12. S.M. Smith and S.E. Blakenship, "Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving." American Journal of Psychology 104 (1991): 61–87.
  13. J.R. Anderson, Cognitive psychology and its implications (Worth Publishers, 2005, ISBN 0716701103).
  14. 14.0 14.1 J.P. Guilford, The Nature of Human Intelligence (McGraw-Hill, 1967).
  15. R. Finke, T.B. Ward, and S.M. Smith, Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications (MIT Press, 1996, ISBN 0262560968).
  16. R.W. Weisberg, Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius (Freeman, 1993, ISBN 0716723670).
  17. L.A. O'Hara and R.J. Sternberg, "Creativity and Intelligence." in Handbook of Creativity, ed. R.J. Sternberg, (Cambridge University Press, 1998).
  18. 18.0 18.1 Fred Balzac, Exploring the Brain's Role in Creativity NeuroPsychiatry Reviews 7(5) (2006): 1, 19-20. Retrieved July 16, 2020.
  19. J.P. Rushton, "Creativity, intelligence, and psychoticism." Personality and Individual Differences 11 (1990): 1291-1298.
  20. Melanie Moran, Odd behavior and creativity may go hand in hand Vanderbilt University, September 6, 2005. Retrieved July 16, 2020.
  21. 21.0 21.1 T.M. Amabile, "How to kill creativity." Harvard Business Review 76(5) (1998).
  22. K. Dorst, and N. Cross, "Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution." Design Studies 22(5) (2001): 425-437.
  23. National Academy of Engineering Educating the engineer of 2020: adapting engineering education to the new century. (National Academies Press, 2005).
  24. Creative Industries Mapping Documents 2001 gov.UK. Retrieved July 16, 2020.
  25. I. Nonaka, "The Knowledge-Creating Company." Harvard Business Review 69(6) (1991): 96-104.
  26. 26.0 26.1 T.M. Amabile, R. Conti, H. Coon, et al. "Assessing the work environment for creativity." Academy of Management Review 39(5) (1996): 1154-1184.
  27. Patrick M. Jones, "Music Education and the Knowledge Economy: Developing Creativity, Strengthening Communities." Arts Education Policy Review 106(4) (Mar/Apr 2005): 5-12, 3 charts.
  28. U. Kraft, "Unleashing Creativity." Scientific American Mind 2005 (April): 16-23.
  29. E.P. Torrance, Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior, 1974).
  30. R.R. McCrae, "Creativity, Divergent Thinking, and Openness to Experience." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52(6) (1987): 1258-1265
  31. D.H. Pink, A Whole New Mind: Moving from the information age into the conceptual age (Riverhead, 2005, ISBN 1573223085).
  32. R.S. Nickerson, "Enhancing Creativity." Handbook of Creativity.
  33. Swedish Morphological Society. Retrieved July 16, 2020.
  34. quoted in Ian S. Markham, A World Religions Reader (Blackwell Publishing, 2000, ISBN 0631215190).
  35. LXXXI: And now concerning thy question regarding… Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh. Retrieved July 15, 2020.
  36. 36.0 36.1 Dirk H. Kelder, Nikolai Berdyaev 1998. Retrieved July 16, 2020.
  37. 37.0 37.1 37.2 37.3 Nicolai Berdyaev, The Meaning of the Creative Act Trans. Donald A. Lowrie (Semantron Press, 2009, ISBN 978-1597312622).
  38. Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality (New York: Free Press, 1979, ISBN 0029345707).
  39. M.A. Runco, "Creativity." Annual Review of Psychology 55 (2004): 657-687
  40. D.H. Feldman, "The Development of Creativity." Handbook of Creativity.
  41. R.B. McLaren, "Dark Side of Creativity." Encyclopedia of Creativity, eds. M.A. Runco, & S.R. Pritzker, (Academic Press, 1999, ISBN 0122270754).
  42. New Concepts in Innovation: The Keys to a Growing Australia Business Council of Australia, July 14, 2006. Retrieved July 16, 2020.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Anderson, J.R. Cognitive Psychology and its Implications. Worth Publishers, 2005. ISBN 0716701103
  • Berdyaev, Nicolai. The Meaning of the Creative Act. Trans. Donald A. Lowrie. Semantron Press, 2009. ISBN 978-1597312622
  • Boden, M.A. The Creative Mind: Myths And Mechanisms. Rutledge, 2004. ISBN 0465014518
  • Finke, R., T.B. Ward, and S.M. Smith. Creative Cognition: Theory, Research, and Applications. MIT Press, 1996. ISBN 0262560968
  • Florida, R. The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books, 2003. ISBN 0465024777
  • Guilford, J.P. The Nature of Human Intelligence. McGraw-Hill, 1967.
  • Johnson, D. M. Systematic Introduction to the Psychology of Thinking. Harper & Row, 1972. ISBN 0060433310
  • Koestler, Arthur. The Act of Creation. Macmillan, 1975. ISBN 0330244477
  • Kraft, U. "Unleashing Creativity." Scientific American Mind (April 2005): 16-23.
  • Markham, Ian S. A World Religions Reader. Blackwell Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0631215190
  • Michalko, M. Cracking Creativity: The Secrets of Creative Genius. Ten Speed Press, 2001. ISBN 1580083110
  • Nagel, L. (ed.). Encyclopaedia of Cognition. New York: Macmillan, 2003.
  • National Academy of Engineering. Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. National Academies Press, 2005.
  • Nickerson, R.S. "Enhancing Creativity." In Handbook of Creativity, edited by Sternberg, R.J. Cambridge University Press, 1998. ISBN 0521576040
  • Pink, D.H. A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age into the Conceptual Age. Riverbed, 2005. ISBN 1573223085
  • Runco, M.A., and S.R. Pritzker. Encyclopedia of Creativity. Academic Press, 1999. ISBN 0122270754
  • Simonton, D.K. Origins of Genius: Darwinian Perspectives on Creativity. Oxford University Press, 1999. ISBN 0195128796
  • Sternberg, R.J. (ed.). The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, 1988. ISBN 0521338921
  • Tatarkiewicz, Władysław. A History of Six Ideas: an Essay in Aesthetics, Translated from the Polish by Christopher Kasparek. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980. ISBN 9024722330
  • Torrance, E.P. Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior, 1974.
  • Wallas, G. Art of Thought. Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1926.
  • Weisberg, R.W. Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius. Freeman, 1993. ISBN 0716723670
  • Whitehead, Alfred North. Process and Reality. New York: Free Press, 1979. ISBN 0029345707

External links

All links retrieved January 11, 2024.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.