 |
 |
On Jul 22, 2009, at 12:49 PM, David Sless wrote: > > In the first, researchers start from the proposition that creativity > is something that exists. The job of research then is to establish > exactly what it is, what gives rise to it, what nurtures it, what > destroys it, and so on. I take Charles Burnette to be starting from > that position. You are right! That is why to me Mackinnon's research was seminal. He made a great effort not to define creativity but to get a large number of people to identify who they considered to be creative in their field. He then used the many psychological assessment tools then available to determine what about these people might contribute to their creativity. The correlates of creativity he uncovered suggested the qualities that produce and sustain creative thought and behavior. The follow on issues for research are those you suggest - what gives rise to these qualities, what nurtures them, what destroys them, etc. Since I am primarily a design educator interested in how the mind works the issues of how to nurture creativity are of most interest to me. There is plenty of evidence on how to destroy creativity, a lot of which can be found in the way education is conducted and how creativity is "contextualized" if not destroyed altogether. Thanks for you input. Chuck