for me "creativity" is taking the path less trodden.

Maths and formal logic are exemplars of disciplines that don't afford much importance to creativity. They are very A to B.

On the other hand, poetry, riddles, parables and figurative language that may on the surface say "one thing literally" but beg to be interpreted outside of that restrictive field, are perfect examples of creativity.

Creativity is for this reason often associated with abstraction. Concreteness is contrarily objective in nature.

While firm logic/reason argues for an occams razor type approach. Cut out the middle man. Speak plainly Dear, creativity butts its head and says "why go straight from A to B when you can meander through C-Z on your way?

The idea of 'the less trodden' may be important because it may take an important step in innovation to seek innovation. It may correspond with evolutionary pathways, and difficulties or conflict may be the starting point for the search for new possibilities.

It is interesting that you see creativity in connection with abstraction because I have always seen it as being about the breaking free from abstractions, especially in the way in which experience often challenges the nature of theory.

I definitely see concreteness of thinking as being opposed to the spirit of creativity. Thinking creatively, as a part of philosophy, may be like a form of mental gymnastics. It can include the many variables, ranging from the logical, rational, aesthetic and psychological dimensions of human understanding.

It is interesting that you see creativity in connection with abstraction because I have always seen it as being about the breaking free from abstractions, especially in the way in which experience often challenges the nature of theory. — Jack Cummins

I see your point here. Very much so. I understand that theory is technically abstract in the sense that it is not yet established or agreed upon as logical, sterile, simple and concrete fact. Facts being usually devoid of creativity.

Except perhaps the "fact that creativity exists and is useful."

However, theories are usually well defined. They tend to be attempts to tie loose ends together in a flow of reason. And are thus specific and do not deviate. So it can be equally argued that theory is not creative based on its sole aspiration to be taken as verbatim, as fact.

Copernicus' theory that the Earth actually revolves around the sun in the histórical context of mysticism and religion, can be seen as an abstraction reaching out far beyond the purview of the "rational" - what is assumed to be true, the status quo, dictated by the church. Therfore it was considered absurd, heresy.

Now of course it is a basic fact that lacks creativity. It's logical. It's concrete (through demonstration and experiment, and it's ability to predict things much better than a terrestrial-centric solar system would.

Therefore, it is my opinion that there is a playful dynamic between creativity/imagination, the abstract (a novel proposition) and the paradigm of "established" facts, of best knowledge to date.

What was once abstract, considered far fetched and the realm of pure imaginary indulgence, is now fact.

What was once fact, is now absurd, the realm of creativity and far-fetchedness - like flat earthers.

To what extent is creativity valued or undervalued in the twentieth first century? — Jack Cummins

What counts as creativity?

A scientist, an artist, a citizen is not like a child who needs papa methodology and mama rationality to give him security and direction; he can take care of himself, for he is the inventor not only of laws, theories, pictures, plays, forms of music, ways of dealing with his fellow man, institutions but also of entire world views, he is the inventor of entire forms of life.”

― Paul Karl Feyerabend, Science in a Free Society

In a way, creativity can be a blurry concept philosophically. However, the idea of innovation, the 'new, as well as modification of ideas may be important. In understanding, both mythos and logos may be essential too, because divisions of reason, emotion and intuition may be partial aspects of creativity in the nature of understanding

I guess then creativity may be found everywhere - in business, politics, health.. in every day life. Could it be that just in being human and making choices we are engaged in a creative process?

Of course, all the aspects of business, politics and health are important as aspects of creativity?
My own questioning would be how this relates to the deepest aspects of creativity. I have a bias towards the arts, but acknowledge my own bias. So the question of creativity and its understanding of it may come back to the underlying one of what does it mean to be human? The ideas and ideals generated by people rest on so many assumptions and ideals of the idea of 'creativity' and other intrinsic values.



.

I always found Nietzsche's account of creative inspiration to be extremely interesting and evocative:

Has any one at the end of the nineteenth century any distinct notion of what poets of a stronger age understood by the word inspiration?

If not, I will describe it. If one had the smallest vestige of superstition left in one, it would hardly be possible completely to set aside the idea that one is the mere incarnation, mouthpiece, or medium of an almighty power. The idea of revelation, in the sense that something which profoundly convulses and upsets one becomes suddenly visible and audible with indescribable certainty and accuracy—describes the simple fact. One hears—one does not seek; one takes—one does not ask who gives: a thought suddenly flashes up like lightning, it comes with necessity, without faltering—I have never had any choice in the matter.

There is an ecstasy so great that the immense strain of it is sometimes relaxed by a flood of tears, during which one's steps now involuntarily rush and anon involuntarily lag. There is the feeling that one is utterly out of hand, with the very distinct consciousness of an endless number of fine thrills and titillations descending to one's very toes;—there is a depth of happiness in which the most painful and gloomy parts do not act as antitheses to the rest, but are produced and required as necessary shades of colour in such an overflow of light. There is an instinct for rhythmic relations which embraces a whole world of forms (length, the need of a wide-embracing rhythm, is almost the measure of the force of an inspiration, a sort of counterpart to its pressure and tension).

Everything happens quite involuntarily, as if in a tempestuous outburst of freedom, of absoluteness, of power and divinity. The involuntary nature of the figures and similes is the most remarkable thing; one loses all perception of what is imagery and metaphor; everything seems to present itself as the readiest, the truest, and simplest means of expression. It actually seems, to use one of Zarathustra's own phrases, as if all things came to one, and offered themselves as similes. ("Here do all things come caressingly to thy discourse and flatter thee, for they would fain ride upon thy back. On every simile thou ridest here unto every truth. Here fly open unto thee all the speech and word shrines of the world, here would all existence become speech, here would all Becoming learn of thee how to speak.")

This is my experience of inspiration. I do not doubt but that I should have to go back thousands of years before I could find another who could say to me: "It is mine also!" — Nietzsche, Ecce Homo

A very romantic account.

Yeah no one ever said that Nietzsche lacked literary skill, for all his many faults. The guy could write.

But its also interesting (and instructive, imo) that Nietzsche is using the language of religious revelation or mystical experience to describe the aesthetic experience of creative inspiration, despite his being very explicitly both an atheist and an anti-theist/anti-Christian; for Nietzsche, it is the aesthetic experience that is the true religious experience... more traditional religious or mystical experience being an illusion or a second-best thing.

Maths and formal logic are exemplars of disciplines that don't afford much importance to creativity. They are very A to B — Benj96

This thinking is so shallow it sinks below wrong. :roll:

This thinking is so shallow it sinks below wrong. — jgill

Well then enlighten me. Please elaborate.

I don't speak for formal logic. However, original research is normally required for a doctorate in math. The word "original" implies at least a small amount of creativity, as well as discovery.

Creativity: The Essence of Mathematics

Understanding Creativity in Mathematics

An example of minor creativity

Yup.

The notion that creativity is limited to a certain group of activities is wrong. People are creative all the time, no matter what they are doing.

The scope of the understanding of what it means to be creative may be restrictive, just as the value of other ideals and goals may be. It may come down to the construction of values, including those underlying philosophy and science. It may be asked to what extent is creativity important?

Take for example the forum we are posting on. Every time I write something, even out of habit or mistake, I'm being creative.

Wouldn't it depend upon the venue we're being creative in, to evaluate to what extent creativity is important?

If we want a traditional meal from our childhood, we wouldn't value creativity as much as sameness. It's the habit, rather than the novel creation, that is attractive.

But if we want something novel, for whatever reason (I can think of too many), we'd value creativity.

Maths and formal logic are exemplars of disciplines that don't afford much importance to creativity. — Benj96

This is exactly wrong. Pure mathematics is nothing but creativity. That's why math is usually classified as an art rather than a science.

'Creativity is fundamentally the ability to come up with new ideas. An alternative term for it might be free imagination.' — Jack Cummins

Platonists would account for creativity by saying that new ideas are "discovered" rather than created. Ironically, Plato himself demonstrated this description to be inaccurate, turning instead to "the good" as the source of creativity. Appeal to "discovery" is like a cheat, avoid the difficult question of how a new form comes into existence, by saying that it already existed eternally, and was merely discovered. Determinism and "eternalism" use the same cheat, anything which appears to be new is said to have been predetermined for all time.

Interesting topic Jack. Creativity & philosophy are to be found in novels, movies, plays, etc. Didn't know this until I saw a review of Sartre's play No exit online.

I was probably fortunate in having the English teachers which I had, especially in sixth form. They opened up a world of philosophy in Shakespeare's 'King Lear'. I also remember reading Blake's 'The Marriage of Heaven and Hell' many times as it raised so much to think and worry about. And, it really was 'worry,'. My school friends probably got fed up with me moaning and groaning about such ideas, just as I go on about things on this forum!

It is interesting how some philosophers also write fiction, including Camus and Iris Murdoch. But, it may be that fiction comes from a slightly different place or state of mind.

I was probably fortunate in h — Jack Cummins

Great! What about aesthetics, allegedly a branch of philosophy?

Aesthetics appreciation is important as well as the philosophy ideas in the arts. I know people who have studied art based degrees and they have looked at aspects like aesthetic tastes from the point of view of phenomenology. I have a friend who did an art MA and wrote a paper on transience in still life.

Aesthetics includes art in all its forms it seems.

Too, do you recall there was a thread on Marcel Duchamp's urinal (Fountain)? Art, philosophy, art, philosophy. Interesting, oui, mon ami?

What I do remember is having a discussion with you at some point, in your former reincarnation identity, about urinals as art, because I had a friend who used to have many in his art. He used to create designs on them to make them look like gothic temples. This was a statement about religion and sexuality. Actually, one of my English 'A' Level teachers has written a book, 'Sin, Sex and Psychology.'

On the subject of art...I am curious about your new picture, wondering if it is really YOU. However, you may wish to keep quiet in case someone with the technology gives you a sex change...

On the topic of Plato, the question about where images come from is a question which I do wonder about a lot. That is because Plato's idea of Forms or archetypes corresponds with Jung's ideas of the collective unconscious and archetypes.

Based on my own experiences of not just dreams but also on borderline sleep experiences and lucid dreaming, I would say that they come from some kind of objective source. At times, I have visionary experiences which are like intricate art work and they seem as if they are far beyond my own rational creative power. I would like to do art based on these but it is difficult because I can't recall the exact details when my eyes are open.

However, if one does believe in the existence of the collective unconscious as objective, the realm between the personal and collective sphere may be complicated. That is because characters in novels may be sub personalities of the authors.

Generally, I think that many do not believe in the validity of the collective unconscious and the forms. This is connected to the predominant influence of physicalist models of the mind. I am aware that my own point of view is not a common one within philosophy and is more in line with esoteric ideas, especially the Hermetic tradition.
.

:rofl:

Creativity - you should watch TikTok or the shorts section on youtube. Need I mention memes? Bullseye after bullseye after bullseye - it should be made into an Olympic sport (mind games?), medals, endorsements and all.

Believe it or not, I can't get into You Tube. I like listening to albums on CD and reading books, especially paper ones. To some extent I think that the internet is changing the shape of art. There may be some positives, especially in the way that many fiction authors who would probably have never managed to publish are able to do so. Also, Kindles are wonderful. I managed to download so many classics a few years and read them, and probably would not have done so.

With music, even though you are not a pop and rock fan, one of the problems which many people find is that on music made digitally is that it is different from that made in studios. In particular, the vocals often are often muffled in what may be regarded as soundscapes.

If anything, my biggest gripe is where the arts become light entertainment as opposed to being made and appreciated as works of art. One of the reasons why records may be popular is that they give scope for sleeve artwork and lyrics to be part of the creative process.

Based on my own experiences of not just dreams but also on borderline sleep experiences and lucid dreaming, I would say that they come from some kind of objective source. At times, I have visionary experiences which are like intricate art work and they seem as if they are far beyond my own rational creative power. I would like to do art based on these but it is difficult because I can't recall the exact details when my eyes are open. — Jack Cummins

If I were you, I would not assign the creative power to the rational element. The rational element, by what it means to be "rational" is quite simply conformed through training and societal forces. Training and habituation robs the rational element of the capacity for creativity.

I discussed this briefly recently in the thread called "The Will". the need to separate the will as the initiator of action, from the rational mind, as the judge of which course of action to take.

In this case, where you are looking to promote creativity, originality, it is imperative to separate the will as the creator, from the control of the habituated rational mind which stifles creativity, in order to let the creative juices flow. Meditation might be a good practise, but your description of borderline sleep, and lucid dreaming provides another approach. In sleep, the creative mind is freed from rational influence, so to harness the creative power you would need to have the rational mind play the role of a passive observer, without influencing the direction of the creative power. What I do sometimes is when I wake up after a dream I memorize key ingredients of the dream which appear to possess creative potential.

However, if one does believe in the existence of the collective unconscious as objective, the realm between the personal and collective sphere may be complicated. That is because characters in novels may be sub personalities of the authors. — Jack Cummins

I look at the unconscious as the instinctual, the intuitive, what is given or inherited through genetics. In this sense it is "collective" as what has been collected over millions of years of being, but this might not be "collective" in the way you are using it. Each person's collection of past experiences (prior to one's birth) is unique to the person, and so it is not "collective" in the sense of a person being a part of a united whole, rather "collective" in the sense of being a united whole composed of a collection of parts. It is interesting though, how different people share many identical parts (indicated by genetics), having common ancestors. And then there are mutated parts, which are the source of creativity within the being, and the essential aspect of evolution.

I keep the widest possible understanding of what creativity means. It may be subjective. I may have a slight fixation on the notion of creativity as the two activities which I chose to do within my nursing job were creative art or creative writing groups. Of course, many may see so many activities as having creative potential and funnily enough, I don't remember any science based activities In the hospital where I worked. If I ever go back to work in mental health, perhaps I should do a creative science group. I am not sure about a philosophy group in a psychiatric setting, it may be too overstimulating and it may even provoke conflicts and literal fights!

Your aethetic sense is more evolved + refined than mine mon ami! That's all I can say.

I don't disagree with your understanding based on evolution and even Jung was ambiguous on the matter. He was juggling between biological naturalism and Kantian metaphysics. Schopenhauer tried to bring Kant's idea of the transcendent down to human experience and the will. This would be equal to understanding the numinous down to creativity in the realm of the arts. However, the question as to whether there is anything beyond is another matter and it could e lead into the quantum level of the notion of the multiverse. There is also David Bohm's idea of the explicate order and the implicate order.