 |
| Neuron: Artline Pen Sketch, Matt Bacon |
I have been reading an article on by Arne Dietrich about cognitive neuroscience and creativity. His basic premises is that science still doesn’t have a handle on how creativity occurs in the brain or even where it occurs.
For the past 50 years the disciplines of pycology and near science have, according to Dietrich, been barking up the wrong tree and perpetuating misnomers about creativity.
For the past 50 years the disciplines of pycology and near science have, according to Dietrich, been barking up the wrong tree and perpetuating misnomers about creativity.
The four main areas which need to be re-framed are:
1. Creativity is divergent thinking
2. Creativity is in the right brain
3. Creativity occurs in a state of defocused attention
4. Altered states of consciousness facilitate creativity
2. Creativity is in the right brain
3. Creativity occurs in a state of defocused attention
4. Altered states of consciousness facilitate creativity
1. At a basic level Divergent thinking is allowing as many different ideas as possible to be generated from which to find a direction. ie. Brainstorming, mind-mapping, journaling. Bt it itself is not creativity, as divergent thinking also occurs in conjunction with convergent thinking to produce creative results.
2. There is no left brain, right brain. There’s just your brain. Really creativity occurs throughout the brain. The brain is not divided but is a networked group of creative pockets.
3. Creativity not only occurs in a state of defocused attention i.e. I had a most amazing idea when I wasn’t thinking about the problem. But it also occurs in a focused state of attention. i.e. specifically focussing attention on a particular problem that needs a creative solution.
4. Altered states (drug induced, specific meditation or mental illness) may enable you see things differently but don’t actually foster creativity. The altered state may be creative but cannot continuously produce creativity.
After debunking these four ideas which have much traction in the creativity research field, Dietrich, in conclusion, espouses the need for creativity to be seen not as a “monolithic entity” which can be pin-pointed to one area of the mind or one expressive output but as a conglomerate of processes and neurological parts working together.
After debunking these four ideas which have much traction in the creativity research field, Dietrich, in conclusion, espouses the need for creativity to be seen not as a “monolithic entity” which can be pin-pointed to one area of the mind or one expressive output but as a conglomerate of processes and neurological parts working together.
Arne Dietrich, Who’s Afraid of a Cognitive Neuroscience of Creativity?, http://www.harford.de/arne/articles/Reprint%20CNC%20Methods.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment