What is creativity and how it shapes our future

[FriendlyHacker]

Being creative is about coming up with the unexpected. Mixing peanut butter and jelly might have seemed weird at first, an accident maybe, but the sum of two parts can become something greater than the parts could ever be individually.

Creativity is reached by learning a wide range of disciplines. In order to connect seemly unrelated ideas in a creative way, one first needs to understand the ideas well enough to see the connection.

The statements above seem in stark contrast with the current educational model though, how are students expected to learn to be creative, when they learn by memorization and teachers teach by repetition? How is Academia reaching new levels of understanding, when it places higher value in specialization than in understanding many disciplines? How are people expected to learn from their mistakes when they are not allowed to err?

Edison had to try thousands of different materials before finding one that would work on his newly invented lamp. Mistakes are expected to happen when trying things that were never tried before, mistakes are the stuff invention is made of, so when someone is punished for failure in school, there is a hidden lesson being taught, the lesson of conformism, the lesson to never try something new but instead closely follow the footsteps of those in position of authority.

This results in the denial of the very thing that moves civilization forward: The ability to not accept things as they are. And also acts as a clear incentive for individualism instead of teamwork, on covering ones tracks instead of teaching how to avoid mistakes, and more importantly, it teaches that it's OK to lie and cheat as long as nobody is caught doing it.

Children that get punished for making mistakes are more likely to repeat the behavior when parents and educators are not watching, and more likely to lie about it if they get caught. This happens because focusing on the negative aspect of a behavior teaches nothing about turning it around into something positive. Children need parents and educators who can show the way by example, they need to understand and be understood.

When one understands the consequences of one's actions, it makes it difficult to justify the repetition of said actions. A population that can't understand the consequences of its actions will be held hostage by the few who do. In this regard the educational system is incredibly successful, it takes in highly creative individuals and delivers obedient workers. But is obedient workers what the world needs?

Einstein was not always considered a genius, in fact, his groundbreaking theories were created on the spare time of the only job he could find: office clerk. An integral part of what made Einstein a genius was questioning authority, but when Einstein told his teachers that they were wrong, instead of recognition he received a bad recommendation letter.

There is resentment in being wrong, there's resentment in failing to grasp new ideas, but is there resentment in keeping things as they are and avoiding conflicts? The problems being faced today need to be solved by new technologies and new ways of thinking. A population of 7 billion would have been unsustainable had agriculture not gone through radical changes the past decades, and this never before seen population guarantees a constant stream of new problems that won't be solved by obedient workers.

As long as people with an Einstein level of ingenuity have to pretend being something they're not, they will end up working as clerks, driving the bus and bagging groceries instead of changing the world.

But civilization will continue to march forward on the backs of a great few who reject authority and suffer the consequences of social ostracism, that invent by striving in failure and fight for progress every step of the way, they will risk their lives for a chance of shaping the future, while countless others never reach their true potential, for society rather pay lip service to the end result of invention than to reward the process that makes innovation possible.

In closing, the future is uncertain, but progress is not to be found in blindly going where every man has gone before.

[Buggy]

I have reached the same conclusion, creativity is the ability to compose "new" from "old" by combining more than one "old" element (existing ideas, knowledge, principles, variables etc.).

Deprivation of cognitive "content" would then inevitably lead to reduced practical potential (qualitatively), and the education being based on repetition further reduces the capacity to combine (qualitatively). 

 

We don't need to give kids more time... We could take away their artificial emotional stimulants and substitute them with their interests... And the magic happens - you've got 10 year olds reading about transistors, practical calculus, game strategies and so on. But then there is the state... Or:

 

 

[WasatchMan]

"The power to rearrange the combinations of natural elements is the only creative power man possesses. It is an enormous and glorious power—and it is the only meaning of the concept “creative.” “Creation” does not (and metaphysically cannot) mean the power to bring something into existence out of nothing. “Creation” means the power to bring into existence an arrangement (or combination or integration) of natural elements that had not existed before. (This is true of any human product, scientific or esthetic: man’s imagination is nothing more than the ability to rearrange the things he has observed in reality.)" - Ayn Rand

[luxfelix]

How is Academia reaching new levels of understanding, when it places higher value in specialization than in understanding many disciplines? How are people expected to learn from their mistakes when they are not allowed to err?

 

These two questions remind me of the 'T'-shaped Employee Model sought after by Valve: 

 

http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/valve-employee-big.jpg

 

 - and -

 

the mantra of "fail faster" (and the corollary, "fail smarter") which fits with the Edison example.

[PGP]

I have some thoughts on this. What has been said so far is spot on and I want to add some thoughts I have had on education that came to me while pondering MGTOW, something that has alot of my attention lately.

In the hunter-gatherer sense, women need "consensus" and social harmony, almost at any other expense. Human endeavour has centred around delivering the resources to women in greater quantity and quality and in more efficient manners. Once this could have been training men to go to war to secure resources, sail to undiscovered lands, dig deeper into the earth, develop new tech etc. 

With the welfare state and the state education system, we have seen in Western countries, women do alot better than men and stay in education alot longer in recent years and this trend does not seem to be changing anytime soon. It is a logical jump to make that conditions in society and education have made it more advantageous for women to remain in education than men. Some examples of this could be the use of ritalin, control on "aggressive" play, affirmative action, the "everyone wins" phenomenon and so on.

I posit that women do not need men as providers any longer. Indeed, they do not need men as WILLING providers. This is done through the state. Furthermore, Western women may not even need Western men as UNWILLING providers as immigration  from other nations, currency devaluation through future borrowing and subsidisation of basic produce continue. 

In short, the structure of education is now centred on conformity because this is the best structure that currently delivers resources to women. It delivers consensus, resources, "independence" etc. The cost of this, is IMO, enormous not just to men but to society. The very driving force of competition and incentive for men to risk all is disappearing. Watching other people achieve and vicarious existence has replaced real experience and endeavour. Risk-taking behaviour and therefore risk-taking are now "anti-social" where once it was lauded and to be aspired to. 

What concerns me now is that I can see these things because I remember a time and experienced a time in school where competition, aggression in sports and manliness were allowed. If we had a problem we sorted it between ourselves in whatever manner we saw fit and we had a code between ourselves for example that protected the weaker. Young men and boys are currently growing up where they have no idea what went before. For example in fatherless homes, the man-deserts of northern england and wales, almost exclusive female teachers, the drive to have "equality" in kids toys in Scandanavia etc. It is a big experiment in nature versus nurture and I fear for what will result. 

 

These are some random thoughts that are not fully formed and I recognise that and welcome correction and disagreement.

[FriendlyHacker]

Education is centered in conformity because that is how you get law abiding citzens, as some smart guy once said: "If people knew how much they are being fucked over by the system, there would be a revolution tomorrow."

 

Conformity in education and even the kind of sports being practice in schools, is what a government needs to convince people to serve and protect the illusion of a country, and the disease of nationalism, ultimatelly there is no such thing as a "government", government is an idea, a concept, the actual government are the individuals who protect the idea.

As a kid in Brazlilian public school, I had to sing the national athemn every friday, and if you read into the lyrics you realize that this song is a promise to kill and die for the country.

All of this was not created to serve either men or women, the idea of the Leviathan is that in middle ages people were too violent for their own good, so they had to fear something in order to behave, that something turned out to be hell and the use of force by governments. It is not fundamentally related to the difference in sexes you have mentioned, but these issues you mention are a result of middle age politics being applied to a modern technological civilization.