(All quotes without permission)
From https://www.academia.edu/802921/Rational_versus_intuitive_problem_solving_How_thinking_off_the_beaten_path_can_stimulate_creativity
From https://www.academia.edu/802921/Rational_versus_intuitive_problem_solving_How_thinking_off_the_beaten_path_can_stimulate_creativity
Quotes from the article:
"We compared the effects of rational versus intuitive problem solving on creativity... problem-solving approach and individual differences in thinking style interact such that creativity is highest when individuals use a non-typical problem-solving approach" meaning when a person, who prefers intuition to rational thinking, uses rational thinking he tends to be more creative and vice versa."
"Moreover, this approach would allow researchers to investigate whether problem-solving approaches and typical thinking styles have different effects on the two dimensions of creativity [usefulness and originality]. For example, it may be that those who are low on rational engagement produce ideas of greater usefulness when instructed to produce ideas rationally, whereas those who are low on intuitive engagement produce ideas of greater originality when instructed to produce ideas intuitively."
Wowowow.
Another nice article: http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/Underwood96.htm
Quotes from this article:
Wowow. What a beautiful way to define creativity...
"idea prove practically useful in some way" - from the quote above. Unless a thought is useful and can be used to solve a problem, the thought has no use. "Let me grab a pizza" is neither an original thought nor a useful one.
Additional reading:
Another nice article: http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/Underwood96.htm
Quotes from this article:
On other occasions, however, this cognitive effort proves fruitless and the correct solution eludes the thinker []meaning rational procedure fails sometimes]. In these cases, Wallas argued, thinkers enter an incubation stage in which they no longer consciously thinks about the problem. Wallas (1926) actually distinguished between two forms of incubation: "the period of abstention may be spent either in conscious mental work on other problems, or in a relaxation from all conscious mental work" (p. 86). Wallas believed that there might be certain economies of thought achieved by leaving certain problems unfinished while working on others, but he also believed that solutions achieved by this approach suffered in depth and richness. In many cases of difficult and complex creative thought, he believed, deeper and richer solutions could be achieved by a suspension of conscious thought altogether, permitting "the free working of the unconscious or partially conscious processes of the mind" (p. 87).1 In either case, Wallas noted that the incubation period was often followed by the illumination stage, the "flash" (p. 93) in which the answer appears in the consciousness of the thinker."
"The term [intuition] refers to the person's feeling that a decision, judgment, or solution is correct, in the absence of supporting evidence (Bowers, 1994). Thus, problem solvers' feelings of warmth reflect their belief that they are getting closer to a solution, even though they do not know what the solution is." Intuition (N) seems so similar to F (as in MBTI). The rational and intuitive approaches are T and N. And N seems to go more with F than with T. How do N and T coexist? Simlarly how do S and F coexist? In other words how can a person with a strong F not have any N?
"Mednick defined creative thinking as the combination of ideas that were not previously associated with each other: 'The more mutually remote the elements of the new combination, the more creative the process or solution.'"
Wowow. What a beautiful way to define creativity...
"These associations may occur in a number of ways: serendipitously, by means of similarity between the previously unassociated elements (e.g., words that rhyme but are semantically unrelated), or through mediation by a third idea. In order to distinguish creative associations from the products of mentally retarded or thought-disordered individuals, Mednick further required that these new ideas prove practically useful in some way. It was not enough that they be merely original. It follows from Mednick's definition that creative individuals are disposed to generate remote associations -- literally to connect ideas that other people fail to see as related."
"idea prove practically useful in some way" - from the quote above. Unless a thought is useful and can be used to solve a problem, the thought has no use. "Let me grab a pizza" is neither an original thought nor a useful one.
Additional reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment