Driving the Creative Machine
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Reference
Harold Cohen: Driving the Creative Machine. Orcas Center, Crossroads Lecture Series.
DOI
Abstract
A few weeks ago I found myself in my habitual pre-writing condition, wondering, that is, how long I could put off making a start on this talk, when – a gift from heaven! -- there was Thomas Friedman, in his Op-Ed column in the New York Times, writing about creativity – more precisely, about a Newsweek article about creativity. New York Times? Newsweek? Wow, I thought, is everyone talking about creativity these days? “To be creative requires divergent thinking (generating many unique ideas) and then convergent thinking (combining those ideas into the best result).” So says Newsweek. But if that's all there is to it, how come we don't see creative behavior all around us? Ah, well, of course there's the divergent thinking bit. Where does divergent thinking come from? Friedman is clear about that, though: “It comes from being exposed to divergent ideas and cultures and people and intellectual disciplines. As Marc Tucker, the president of the National Center on Education and the Economy, once put it to me: “One thing we know about creativity is that it typically occurs when people who have mastered two or more quite different fields use the framework in one to think afresh about the other. Intuitively, you know this is true. Leonardo da Vinci was a great artist, scientist and inventor, and each specialty nourished the other. He was a great lateral thinker. But if you spend your whole life in one silo, you will never have either the knowledge or mental agility to do the synthesis, connect the dots, which is usually where the next great breakthrough is found.” “ Sounds very authoritative, and you might suppose that I'd agree, given that I've spent half my life trying to get a computer program to do what only rather talented human beings can do. But, in fact, I don't know, intuitively or otherwise, that what he's saying is true. Citing Leonardo to make a point is a bit like yelling a slogan at a political rally; you can't argue with Leonardo. Actually, Leonardo was a single example of the Renaissance ideal of the Universal Man – the educated individual who could turn his head and his hand to anything. So were Giotto and Piero dell Francesca and Raphael and Donatello and Brunelleschi and Michelangelo and Giorgioni and whoever else you care to name. That isn't what Tucker's addressing, though; he's talking about the 20th century Specialist; specifically, the atypical one who crosses the boundaries of his own specialty. Two specialisms do not a broad education make, and even with their broad education you'd have a hard time finding evidence that Piero's design of 1public events nourished his painting; or that Giotto's painting influenced his design of the campanile in Florence; or that Leonardo's expertise in painting led to his invention of a non-functional helicopter. Where, exactly, was the next great breakthrough in these cases? Did Leonardo invent a helicopter that could paint landscapes? ...
Extended Abstract
Bibtex
Used References
Links
Full Text
http://www.aaronshome.com/aaron/publications/orcastalk2s.pdf
