Perhaps this discussion should be called Contextualizing Creativity.
Issues of the context for creativity have been raised by everyone who
has participated in this thread.
Ken noted that: "In science or mathematics, progress often takes place
when someone finds a way to think around what has been done, and to
think in new ways. In some cases, those new thinkers build very
clearly on the work of their predecessors, listening to their elders
as it were. In other cases, only by ignoring or neglecting elders and
conventional wisdom does progress occur." While agreeing with the need
to escape from conventional wisdom in order to be creative I submit
that science and mathematics actually require and promote acts of
creativity-in-context for progress to occur. (Validations don't
usually qualify as creative.) Amanda rightly pointed out that
creativity is always situated in some context and Cameron seemed to
think that it had perverse effects on how people ought to work
together. My view is that people are being educated to conform to the
norm rather than to develop their creativity for the purposes of
improving whatever they confront. Because the information before us
is complex, disjointed, and subject to misinterpretation I believe
that the education, particularly of children, should reinforce the
correlates that Mackinnon so carefully uncovered, egomania be damned.
Creatively seems to frighten or confuse people when it should
challenge them to be so. Where did we go wrong?
Chuck
|