Reflection, Refraction and Fresnel

Reflection, Refraction and Fresnel

Three Principles for Creative evaluation. Reflection, Refraction and Fresnel. All three offer us different perspectives as we move through a creative domain. Let’s start with the more obvious one of the three: Reflection.

Reflection

Reflection is known to us as a way of stopping. It is a way of re-evaluating. To step back from the closeup view of ourselves or work and to reconsider our heading. By its nature reflection is looking into oneself. Examining the entity before us we look at the details and how they pertain to the whole. Once we have stepped back and observed we then take action to change or concur that we are in the right place. Reflection shows us what is.

Refraction

Refraction is the bending of light. The distortion of vision. Most commonly seen in a glass of water but also occurs when a filter of some kind is placed over our vision. Refraction breaks our fixation on the regular and focus our attention on what is the essence of what has been. Consider the scientist who used a glass of water and a straw to argue that reality is based on perception. He asked his colleagues whether straw’s true nature was straight. They all agreed it was. He then took the straw and placed it in a glass of water. Of course, now the straw appeared to be bent. Their perception of the straw had changed the straw had not. By using refraction to look at our work and ideas we can see things in a different way.

Fresnel

Lastly there is Fresnel. Augustin-Jean Fresnel was a french inventor and scientist who lived in the 1800’s he is most famous for inventing the Fresnel lens which is used on lighthouses to maximise the throw and intensity of the light behind. Fresnel is also known for his observation of a phenomena in water. When one stands back from a body of water what is visible is the reflection of the sky. As you get closer to the edge of the water the angle of light changes and you begin to see down through the water to the bottom.

So Fresnel is another way of looking. By moving closer to a concept we can see what lies underneath. Moving closer may mean immersing ourselves in a topic so we understand the contexts in which we work. Again this gives us a different perspective from which we can branch out from to move forward into new areas.


We should then make use of Reflection, Refraction, Fresnel in our creative practice to shift us through different conceptual spaces to enable more creative work to happen.

Creativity: The Monolithic Entity

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.

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

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.

Arne Dietrich, Who’s Afraid of a Cognitive Neuroscience of Creativity?, http://www.harford.de/arne/articles/Reprint%20CNC%20Methods.pdf