Talk:Creativity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Creativity is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
September 5, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted


Why is value mentioned in the definition of creativity?[edit]

Why must something need to have value to be created? Value is highly subjective and you are essentially saying that some of the best artists technically were not creative, since their art was not appreciated or "valued" at its time of creation. Much better to say "something which can be perceived to have meaning" rather than treating art like a product in a supermarket. (regarding the 1st sentence of the article) J-E-N-O-V-A (talk) 07:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

This is from the creativity research literature, and it's there for a reason (and so absolutely should be in the article). The definition needs to cover creativity across all domains, not just art - science, mathematics, architecture, history etc. "Value" is one word used to describe the concept. Also "appropriacy", or "usefulness" and various other words are found in the literature to try and capture this idea. Basically, along with being "new" or "original" or "innovative", something is seen as being more creative the more "value" it has. If it's a work of art, it's how "good" the work is.
You're absolutely right that this can be a very subjective determination, but that doesn't mean it can't be part of the definition. It clearly is part of how we ascribe creativity to a person or a creative work. It just means that we don't always agree on what is or isn't (more or less) creative. As it happens, inter-rater reliability in judging how good artistic works are tends to be quite high - we tend to agree - so it's not all that crazy. It's also true that what we see as "good" can vary over time. Csikszentmihalyi writes about this in his book on the subject. It might sound odd that the creativity of a work of art can vary over time, but that's only weird if you think of creativity as something inherent and decontextualised.
As an example of how including value as well as novelty matters: It helps us to understand differences in understanding of creativity in western and far eastern cultures. Western (particularly American) culture has tended in the past century to emphasise newness and originality, whereas East Asian cultures have tended to emphasise value (particularly social value) more. As a result, tests of creative ability focussed on divergent thinking have suggested that westerners are more creative than those raised in East Asian countries. This is straightforwardy a cultural bias in the test, as there is little evidence of a comparative lack of creativity in these cultures when it comes to science and the arts. (This hasn't stopped writers - including some East Asian ones - claiming that confucian cultures suppress creativity.)
Does this help? OsFish (talk) 10:19, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Malevolent Creativity Documentation[edit]

There are a few good sources of information and research on Malevolent Creativity. I suggest one source: "A New Tool to Measure Malevolent Creativity: The Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale" by Hao, Tang, Yang, Wang, & Runco (2016) in Frontiers in Psychology. Psychologist are developing ways to measure it as well as this source provides definitions and references about prior research on the topic.Klmay1029 (talk) 18:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klmay1029 (talkcontribs) 17:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

The seminal work would Cropley, D. H., Cropley, A. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Runco, M. A. (Eds.). (2010). The dark side of creativity. Cambridge University Press. I'll have a look at it when I have time to see what can be added. OsFish (talk) 03:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Hao, Tang, Yang, Wang, & Runco (2016). A New Tool to Measure Malevolent Creativity: The Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale. "Frontiers in Psychology", 7(682), 1-7. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00682

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Creativity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Reading Wikipedia's article on creativity, I noticed that the very basic mechanics of creativity aren't mentioned or at least, aren't underlined as much as they sould, COMPARING, COMBINING, ASSEMBLING. Everything else then in the article will complement the basic definition to give it the necessary depth, like who possess it and how, is it nature or nurture, the driving forces etc.

What in my opinion distinguishes creative thought, and defines it uniquely, is the manipulation of elemental units of information with comparisons and the subsequent combination of these for the assemblage of an entity that didn't exist before. Can one find such mental process that must not be labeled creative.Fay's unkle (talk) 14:22, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Creativity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)