Creative Thinkering

You said:
---
Remember an atom is an atom and cannot be anything else, and neither can you. You cannot learn how to be a creative thinker any more than an atom can learn how to become a banana.
---
I don't think you meant to have that paragraph where it appears in your blog. It seems rather out of context. :)

Really? Scientific thinking is all about viewing problems in as many different ways as possible in order to find as many possible solutions/variations as possible in the discovery of things. I can't think of anything more creative that that. It may not lead to a novel to screenplay or oil painting, but I am pretty certain the patient who gets better because their doctor worked the diagnosis in as many different ways as possible is happy...

Einstein did not think your way. In fact, he did not think in terms of numbers or words at all. Michael Faraday had absolutely no background in science and looked what he discovered. Thomas Edison said his greatest blessing in life was the lack of a formal education. Had he been educated, he said, he would have learned that what he accomplished was not possible at all. Noble laureate Richard Feynman would always invent a new way of thinking even when he knew all the old ways. He found that the most important thing he learned in life was to disregard what other scientists were doing. Oh and the great maligned American genius Nikla Tesla who would daydream about the future might hold and then work backwards to something he could do. None of these thinkers followed what the average scientist claims is the only way for scientist to work. You scoff at artists. I'm reminded of Einstein's lectures about the similarities between the artist's imagination and his. He even once said "Imagination is more important than knowledge." Pablo Picasso's cubism is a pictorial representation of Einstein's theory of relativity. I often think of all the phsycists who were much smarter and better degreed than Einstein an followed your advice. None of them accomplished anything of note and none of them are remembered. As Neils Bohr once said in exasperation to a colleague "NO, no, I don't you to be logical. I want you to think. Finally, Einstein would conjure up combinatory play of images in his mind to inspire ideas because he once said if at first your idea is not absurd, there is no hope for it. Finally, Einstein would be affronted at your suggestion that there are different kinds of creativity. This is another bill of goods that linear thinkers spew when they are accused of aways thinking the same old way they've always thought.

That is so true about self-limiting beliefs and myths. How we think about having and developing abilities can have a strong impact on actually using our talents. If we think creative expression has to wait for inspiration from a muse, or that there are only a few “chosen” geniuses with exceptional “gifts” in computer graphics, fashion design, writing novels or whatever – and think we aren’t one of those few – we may not even explore our talents well enough to create something worthwhile.
Continued in my post "Creative talent: genetics, a muse, or hard work?"
http://talentdevelop.com/2658/

Is it possible there is another sin; the fear of succeeding? Put anther way, it is when talented, creative people keep their thoughts and ideas to themselves to avoid setting a level of expectation they were uncomfortable with. Although the creative spirit and capability is there it is meaningless until put to use.

Thoughts?

Hi Carlos,
I understand and appreciate your perspective about education. Unfortuneately, I've come to believe that education is a great inhibitor of our natural creativity. Beethoven's parents were told he was too stupid to be a music composer; Isaac Newton's parents were told that he was the most unlikely student they ever had. Leonardo da Vinci was not allowed to attend university because he was the child of a single woman and, consequently, taught himself how to think; when Einstein was a child his teachers thought he was mentally disabled, in college his professor called him the "laziest" dog I ever had because he rarely went to class. His roommate took great notes and Einstein would memorize them the night before a test; and Pablo Picasso's teachers thought he was emotionally unstable.

To me it seems that in the real world those who know more, create less; and those who know less create more. Robert Goddard, the father of modern rocketry, was ridiculed by every scientist for his revolutionary liquid-fueled rockets. Even the New York Times chimed in with an editorial in 1921 by scientists who claimed that Goddard lacked even the basic knowledge ladled out daily in high school science classes. Pierrre Pachet a renowned physiology professor and expert declared, “Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction."

When Charles Darwin displayed his famous Galapagos specimens in London. Within six months of his return, most of the top naturalists in Britain had seen Darwin's Galapagos finches and reptiles, and hence the crucial evidence that converted Darwin to evolution (and that we now consider the textbook case of evolution in action). None saw the connections. This included John Gould considered to be the greatest ornithologists of the nineteenth century

This is a classic example of the expert (John Gould) looking at nature with a fixed mindset for years and not being able to make the connections because of his long held hypothesis. Whereas Darwin looking at nature in much more open-minded way with no hypothesis made the connection immediately. Hence the man who knew more saw less, and the man who knew less saw more.

I think Edison summarized it best when he said to always ask an expert if something is possible. If they say "no," then go ahead and do it.

I enjoyed reading this article until I read the author's response to comments. It is poorly written, poorly punctuated, poorly expressed, and has a nasty and accusatory tone.

My hat is off to the PT editor who managed to create a readable article from what have been one big mess of a first draft, if it was anything like the author's unedited response above.