new creative processes (1) · 2012. 3. 23. · example 1: above we have a model of an alpha...

Bangkok, December 2010

A Typology of Creative Processes within the Context of their Subject-Object Relations

JOANA STELLA KOMPA CREATIVE PROCESSES (1)

2 | C r e a t i v e P r o c e s s e s ( 1 )

In memoriam Uwe Steinhauser

Abstract

Creativity is attributed to constitute a merely subjective phenomenon that escapes both, qualitative as well as quantitative assessment. It has never been attempted to identify and classify creative processes within the framework of a comprehensive process typology. The following paper discusses a typology of creative processes in nature as well as in the cognitive domain within the context of their subject – object relations. This wider approach includes an exploration of the prerequisites for the identification of creative processes as well as their implications for creative teams and society besides the obvious benefits to the creative individual.


Introduction

The latest paradigm changes in understanding nature and our universe in general have shifted from an object-oriented point of view to constituting the universe as an information processing superstructure with verifiable evolving and creating properties [1]. With the advent of the cognitive domain Stephen Hawking elaborates on the continuous evolution of the universe in the human mind [2].

We seem to be able to think of a universe without an observer, but can’t have one - supporting the weak anthrophic principle [3]. The cognitive domain appears as a logical consequence within the potential of our current universe, albeit a rare one. The questions that logically arise are: what are the key driving processes in nature and how are these processes ‘mirrored’ in the human mind? Which processes are congruent and which are exclusively available within the cognitive domain? How can we describe and categorize such processes? What is their significance to us, society and the world at large?

We need to find out which types of creative processes we are dealing with, to find out which factors inhibit creativity and how creative processes drive and illuminate the physical and cognitive world.

Example 1: Above we have a model of an alpha amino-acid and the beginning of Chick Corea’s Children Song No.1 as structures from completely different domains: one has been created by the laws of nature and the other has been created by human free will. Although they are completely different they share some common properties - they are compositions, both follow the framework of a notational system, both are made of relational elements, both form a coherent Gestalt (holistic formative appearance) and both demonstrate obvious symmetries. The substituent (R) stands an alternatively connected side-chain or branch as an optional potential for a hydrogen link. Nature is a language. What we can’t see but employ is our ability to read and interpret both compositions.

One could even argue that similar to a molecular equilibrium the totality of the music composition forms a coherent balance of its own. What we advocate in the following is a wider interpretation of creativity: creative are not just artists and designers but creativity involves all processes that lead to new phenomena and experiences.


1.1 Constituting and Creating Reality What is whose reality? The assumption that there can only be a single, properly defined reality for all goes hand in hand with the presumption that there is only one model of our world that wouldn’t conflict with any others – a last ‘objective’, ‘true’, unifying ground beyond diversified argumentation. The idea of transcendental or religious absolutes is incompatible with the notion of different measurements made by different observers, their subsequent verification of results and the concept of a continued updating of varying world-models.

Reality is what we have found to be true by going through the processes of mutual measurements and their communicative verification. Reality as such – to use the Kantian expression - is thus no last save ground but rather a process of approximation to find out reliably of what is and what isn’t - or by simulating reality of what could probably happen next.

In science we talk about the level of detail in our synthesized observations, models and simulations.

The works of Freud, Einstein, Planck or Wittgenstein e.g., all explore different types of access to what we consider reality: the subconscious, the scientific - or the language-based approach. To play out one type of access to reality against another limits the diversity of interpretations and world-views. We may look at things differently: aesthetically and artistically, intuitively, socially, legally, economically, technologically, medically, ethically, ecologically, psychologically and so on.

Reality is neither a single ontological certainty nor an eternal concept in a Platonian way, but that it consists in fact of a multitude of dynamically created, temporarily valid speaker-dependent models of our world. This is one more good reason to ask how realites (plural) for speakers are created and composited. The inter-subjective domain is the actual plane for competing and complimenting models of reality. We could call it the Single Point of View Paradox: we can’t look at things without employing a Point Of View to look at things. To claim that either what we see or how we see things is finite equals the claim that there can be no further claim. This however, can be proven wrong with any further argument, be it logical or illogical, and any new Point of View.

The communicative and historical plane encompasses us even in a far more profound existential manner; or as Hans-Georg Gadamer once formulated: “Into question is neither called what we do, nor what we should have done, but what happens to us beyond our wanting and doing.” [4]


1.2 Taking Symbolic Measurements in Time as a Prerequisite for Human Consciousness

Having decided for a reasonable communicative approach we can now focus on the significance of memory structure, measurements, language and the observer in relation to the observed world.

Taking measurements is just a general term for scientific fact finding. More specific we would talk about research methodologies and options later. However, starting from a philosophical level we could argue that the ability to take comparative measurements is not only a prerequisite for the creation of language, but is a prerequisite for any living organism to succeed from the very beginning of biological evolution.

For example, to be able to differentiate between hostile versus habitable environments implicates the prerequisite ability of simple pattern recognition and feature extraction.

The difference between the measurements of simpler organisms and human measurement is fundamental: we can code our measurement in language that buffers the experience outside the flow of time allowing for comparisons. Most life-forms, by contrast, can only react to sensory stimulation in real-time but they cannot carry the experience outside the flow of time and compare it with other measurements retrospectively. Encountered experience is stored non-consciously either chemically or in DNA. The human memory structure by contrast is highly differentiated: information is passed on from the storage in short-term memory to the hippocampus for evaluation and revision for approximately one year before it is permanently stored in grey matter. At any time can we recall and evaluate not only one, but an almost indefinite number of measured experiences consciously. Furthermore information is not stored centrally, but distributed over different regions of the brain that deal with different type of perception [5].

We can speculate about the neurological basis and thresholds about why and since when we can hold moments meta-temporally in language whereby our nearest primate sisters and brothers can’t. Another consequence of meta-temporality is that we can plan actions in the future and not only learn by experience, but also by anticipation. Not only is scientific methodology based on these premises, but in fact all human life: experienced events are verifiable with others, communicable and we can sufficiently differentiate between unique events and repetitive patterns. Most importantly; we build our world-model based on observational evidence. To take measurements in time [in its simplest form like m1(t1), m2(t2) etc.] and to formulate them symbolically in language is probably the most significant prerequisite for the creation of consciousness. The neurological memory structure of our brain follows likewise a world-reading, decoding, evaluation, reformulation and final network storing process. The reading process relates to fact finding, measurement taking, orientation, navigation and finding connections to related concepts. This is followed by a processing and reformulation stage to test the new model against the actual world and to store the updated experience and concept individually as well as socially in cultural network memory (See Figure 1.: Reading and Writing Model).


Figure 1. Reading and Writing Model: The flow starts from the reading stage (left) to the processing stage (middle) to the writing stage (right). In cognitive processes we pre-structure ideas and group them to more complex concepts. Concepts are models of supporting and relating ideas: the higher the quality of the relations the higher the quality of the creative concept. Within the processing stage processes follow a logical sequence of analysis and synthesis. Creative processes produce reversed entropy: the more chaotic states in the beginning get structured into more orderly models at the end of the process.

1.3 Subject – Object Dualism and Permeability In the classical Western philosophical tradition the subject sees him or herself ‘thrown’ against the world that appears as an object (from the Latin obicere, to throw against). The duality of subject and object itself is perhaps an over-rated philosophical issue. Where does the mind start and where does the world end? Is our body part of the World, part of the Self or both? Is it mind over matter?

As for most transcendental ideas it is useful to abandon the concept that subject and object are absolutes. A simplistic subject-object duality runs into problems when we ask e.g., what technology actually ‘is’ since it is objects created by subjects. Does it have an in-between status? Even when looking at nature, a strict subject-object duality is highly questionable: is inorganic matter ‘object’ and is organic life a ‘semi-object’? The belief in ‘spirited nature’ and animism is held in traditional disregard by Western philosophy and the objectification of the universe is widely seen as a triumph of the Age of Enlightenment. Japanese robot development, in stark contrast, is rooted deeply in animism. Japanese Ethics and Shinto believe in a spirited super-nature. To find a more useful and tangible understanding of object-subject relations we can go back in time where all of us have been at the object-subject (Self) borderline – the time when all of us have been infants.


Jean Piaget’s model of early child development [6] and the differentiation of the Self are based on the assumption of two diametrical and mutual processes: assimilation and accommodation. The child lives, to start from, in a quasi subject-object ‘proto-form’ that appears as a mobile and plastic sequence of image-reality and does not differentiate World from Self as neither a notion of time nor space or causality have yet been developed. In the process of assimilation the child takes in new information and in the process of accommodation existing schemata are changed an altered. Piaget believed that children try to balance both processes, which he called equilibration.

Piaget explicitly notes the change of perspective that is tied to the ongoing differentiation process of Self and World, starting from the sensorimotor to the pre-operational to the concrete-operational and finally formative operational state in which creative problem solving, the notion of others and abstract thought are being established. If this understanding is correct then it leaves us with a phenomenological dilemma: we can access the World only for the ‘price’ of forming a conscious Self which is an indirect and retrospective access to nature. (See Figure 2 below)

Figure 2. Subject-Object Differentiation: Our language ability is pre-structured in our brain (internally), but we only learn to speak via the cultural passing-on of competencies (externally). There are no genes that make us speak all by ourselves. Human language ability is based in both, cultural-cognitive as well as physical prerequisites. This implies a fairly different concept of genesis where ‘mind’ and ‘matter’ do not come together additively like ‘Spirit/God’ and ‘World’, but where both spring from the same ground.


We can conclude that an ‘objective’ reality does not exist per se and the concept of reality can logically not be separated from its observers. Scientific hypothesis, theories and application are peer reviewed inter-subjectively on verifiable grounds. The only difference to e.g., inter-subjective ethics and political consensus is the focus of study and application, which is society in one versus nature in the other. The logical process of inter-subjective fact finding (measurement), idea generation, research- and solutions-development is shared in science and ethics in the same manner.

2.1 An Introduction to Creative Processes

A logical approach is to start from the simple and to continue to the more complex which however does not imply that the complex is a mere summation or result of previous simpler stages. The following differentiation of processes is both, rooted in verifiable experience and it is abstracted from there.

The evolution of subject-object relations as illustrated before plays a big part in the typology of processes – so what are the dimensional planes of creative processes?

The non-deductable quality of creative process typology stages and their integrity can be traced back to their original subject-object relation planes. We can logically differentiate by perspective between

a.) Simple object to object relations that seem to exclude any observer and that form the most basic patterns of life and nature

b.) Subject to object relations that form the cognitive and technological world around us and c.) Inter-subjective (subject to subject) relations that deal with the perspective and frame of

reference of the observers and discourse participants

All creative processes evoke the manifestation of new phenomena. The opposite of creative processes would be processes that lead either to ‘blocked’ formations that defy further evolutionary development, continuous (repetitive) loops or processes of degradation, erosion and decay. [7]

An example for a.) would be to look at a pencil, how it is made, how the pencil relates in comparison to other grades and types of pencils etc. This means we only deal with the direct properties of the object. b.) deals with the way I see the pencil, my evaluation and experience of how I use it. This means that we include meta-information and propositions about the pencil in relation to us as users and creators whereby c.) would be e.g., defining the pencil’s target audience by marketing professionals, the pencil in environmental context, assessing its manufacturing process or getting boxes of pencils ready for a children’s charity. This means that our frame of reference includes any type of context in which pencils could possibly appear in. We continuously switch between micro-, meso- and macro-views on the same subject naturally (See Figure 3).

By changing the view we also change the focus on process sets. 1st order processes exclude the observer for the benefit of a narrow, but detailed view. 2nd order processes include the subject as observer, user and creator. 3rd level processes appear on the communicative plane between subjects.


Figure 3. Perspective Lens: In the following we group creative processes according to their speaker and world relation. Simplified we could say that 1st order processes are focused only on the object or concept at hand, 2nd order processes include the mutual dependencies between subject and object. 3rd order processes are based on networked inter-subjective speaker and world perspectives. There is no hierarchy among these processes as they can interact freely with each other: creative processes are multi-directional and multithreaded by default. In informatics a 3rd order representation example would be a relational databank (the inventor was Edgar Frank Codd) that structures itself according to the chosen user input. 1st orders would only include object property data whereby 2nd orders include meta-data on object-sets defined by the subject.

2.2 Conceptual Reality

A concept is a model of mutually relating and supporting ideas. It is a coherent and complex system of integrated representative thought. Factual changes by the world’s dynamic evolution engage our imagination and we form, as elaborated before, temporary models about the aspects of our world: what is the concept of e.g., a good airport, good education, a fulfilled life or a sustainable economy?

Conceptual reality is the highest form of creative expression as it engages all potential perspectives that we can take on a subject. Concepts are handed to us by tradition, historical context and at the same time we re-construct them continuously, amend existing ones and create new ones. People once assumed that the world is a flat disc in the center of the universe and declared this concept as the absolute. This stopped them from advancing their positioning within the universe further. In the following we talk about concepts for the cognitive domain and models to describe physical reality.

Anything can serve as a concept as long as we frame it properly according to the hierarchy and dependencies of its underlying ideas that support its coherency (also see here: concept-maps in chapter 4: ‘Creative Processes in Assessment and Application’).


2.3 Object to Object Relations: Re-combinations

The most basic ability that is implied in any comparison is to find out what is similar and what is different and to which degree. e.g., for an organism to differentiate between favorable and non-favorable living conditions or for us to continuously evaluate our position in the world by comparing ourselves with others by mere relation.

A good example from nature’s recombinations would be the positioning of carbon within the periodic table. Housed between metals and non-metals it can interact with both of them and it can form long chains of itself which no other element can. Carbon’s potential of re-combination with itself and other elements makes is thus the most ‘communicative’ and flexible element in the periodic table with endless potential for variations. [8] Conscious concept creation works similar on the same premises: day and night, positive and negative, creation (Brahma) and destruction (Shiva), Ying and Yang, Hegel’s thesis and anti-thesis all work on the implication of dual reality (= combining opposites) which are all based on the prerequisite of making comparisons. An example from technology would be the combination of content and form: honey-comb geometry plus composite materials equal super-strength structures.

Logically the following re-combinations are possible (given that ‘the same’ equals the observer’s frame of reference of what he/ she has already established as an integral part of their world) - in order of familiarity:

a.) The same with the same b.) The same with the similar (but not the same) c.) The same with the opposite d.) The same with the unknown or random

Keywords for the processes dealing with these re-combinations are chaining and clustering, copying and pasting, sequencing, categorization, analysis (feature extraction), the creation of feedback mechanisms, loops and patterns.

Although this schemata may at first sight appear like a ‘Lego’ world concept, things are far more complex in reality: Recombination imply transactions which in return change a system’s parameters (such as an environment or the structure of a concept).

The evolution of the early universe that consisted mostly only of Hydrogen and Helium may serve as a good example. How can complexity arise from the combination of only two basic elements? Couldn’t evolution just have stopped at this level? The forces of gravity led to the formation of the first generation of stars that bred, generation for generation, heavier new elements that – at the end of their life cycle – got distributed throughout the universe when they exploded as supernovae. [9]


In creative advertising, option c.) is often used extensively to create new original concepts. e.g., we can combine unrelated adjectives and nouns with each other and end up with an ‘itchy message’ or ‘liquid architecture’ or a ‘moon safari’. Conservative clients prefer combinations with the same or similar whereby more progressive clients explore more daring and less familiar re-combinations which define an important basic set of communication strategies. [10]

The ability to recognize and create more complex patterns from a limited set of pre-existing components allows for the creation of a first- generation syntax. The first human alphabets, the Phoenician as well as the Chinese symbol sets started both as simple sets of pictograms that subsequently got sequenced more sophisticatedly. The evolution of our natural language from the use of images (as a mere mirror and depiction of life) over pictograms (that only stand symbolically for images such as the Phoenician alphabet and early Hebrew) to abstract symbols (that are completely detached from their original images) is another illustration for the development from mere world object-mirroring to the creation of an abstract plane of cognitive reality. On individual level as infants and children as well as on cultural level we have all gone though these distinct evolutionary phases. Even our current use of abstract symbols is certainly not the last step in the evolution of language but, to speak with Wittgenstein, it is the only border of our world that we can currently relate to. Artificial computer languages are already processing information that our analogue brain can’t. Re-combinations form the most basic group of creative processes as even the notion of being able to make comparisons depends on stating the degree of similarity and difference, be it the object, its time-frame of measurement or its relation to other objects and concepts.

2.4 Object to Subject Relations: In-formations

A subject’s ability to put objects and symbols into new forms creates the group of informational processes. The use of the word ‘information’ is here not identical with ‘data’ and implies a far greater meaning since it is the key for the creation of semantics.

A new assumption of form can imply the following:

a.) To modify and transform the dimensions and properties of an object or a concept. This means to engage a morphology and define change of the underlying syntax (genotype and phenotype)

b.) To simplify, abstract and collapse created complexity into new code and thus create new semantic relations for the observer

c.) To change the typos or direction of carrier-energy of an object or a concept

Keywords for the processes dealing with in-formations are qualitative change (physical and cognitive), semantic development inclusive of semantic extensions and reductions, mutation, synthesis, morphology of identity and change in subject-object interactive relations and the change of subject-object interfaces.


The great variety of biological life as well as our conceptual formation of qualitative change is nested in the in-formational plane. Our world-cognition is intrinsically intertwined with the observer’s motives, interests, world-assessment and choice of assessment tools, the choice of focus and change thereof. The animus carrier-energy can shift and change from the introverted to the extroverted, the exploratory to the composed etc.

Most importantly, the informational plane creates semantic relations without whom all information would be without meaning. The creation of meaning for the subject would deserve a chapter by itself. However, in short some of the main semantic sources shall be listed as follows:

1.) The creation of meaning based on our mortality as finite beings woven into an infinite process form/ language as measurements of the finite (existential argument)

2.) The need for communication and mutual understanding (societal and cultural argument) 3.) The need to define our world-view with and against others (cognitive-developmental argument) 4.) The desire to live life to its fullest and desire to sincerely participate (motivational argument)

The origin of the term information follows back to the Latin informare which means originally ‘to form an idea of, to describe’, which is a composite of older Greek terms. It is fundamentally connected to competence of the creative subject to form ideas (Greek: idea), to change them (Greek: morphe) and arrange them into typologies and semantic hierarchies (Greek: typos).

2.5 Subject to Subject Relations: Transcendations

Transcendations (third-level creative processes) deal with the definition of concepts on an abstracted level among other observers and discourse participants. They necessarily deal with

a.) The change of perspective (the view of Self, World and Others) b.) The competence to assess concepts critically against others c.) The relation of concepts to new contexts d.) The change and revision of the underlying axioms and paradigms of existing concepts e.) The actual symbolic and normative change of society and culture at large

Keywords for the processes dealing with transcendations are the integration of world-and speaker perspectives, re-interpretation of context and normative settings, constitution of the social Self and social networks as well as changes in social and cultural memory structure.

Transcendere (Latin) originally means to climb over, to go beyond which has derived from ascendere (to climb up, to go) and scandere (to climb, mount, to ascend). To transcend concepts and arguments involves an elevation of perspective beyond the original starting point in form of an illuminating learning experience. Besides finding answers it also implies to end up with more and deeper puzzling questions at the end, rather than solving a differentiated equation by converging it to a singular viewport.


3.1 Summary: A Typology of Creative Processes

The initial question was ‘How can we describe creativity?’ On the gradient scale of potential subject-object relations we established three main categories:

a.) Re-combinations are simplified, basic building blocks for patterns, syntax and concepts b.) In-formations are the main processes accounting for diversification and constitution of

semantics c.) Transcendations are a collection of all inter-subjective and observer dependent processes

As all subject-object relations are ruled by permeability none of the described processes works in strict isolation. Creative processes apply to both, local content and overlapping process-form. Furthermore creative processes share common universal characteristics:

1. They can be nested into each other (one process can be a parallel sub-process of another) 2. They produce quantitative and qualitative measurable outcomes 3. They are reiterative (which means they can be applied over and over again) 4. They result in evolutionary and perceptual change 5. They share the same reading-processing-writing structure 6. They are multidirectional and multithreaded in form and content 7. Cognitive creativity involves intuition /communication to the subconscious

Below a summary of all explored creative processes

Process Type

Associated Creative Processes/ Keywords

Recombinations

Object- oriented (Type 1)

Feature extraction, recombination, chaining and clustering, copying and pasting, sequencing, categorization, analysis, creation of feedback mechanisms, loops and patterns , sorting, permutation, syntax formation, transactions, mutual benefit and amplification (attraction), building information hierarchies, synthesis among uniform building blocks, chaos theory, uncertainty, laws of Gestalt (by proximity, motion etc.)

Informations

Subject-Object (Type 2)

Qualitative change (physical and cognitive), semantic development inclusive of semantic extensions and reductions, mutation, creation of new forms, morphology of identity and change in subject-object interactive relations, diversification, change of subject-object interfaces, restructuring typology , intuitive and associative processing, creation of identity, game theory, originality/ uniqueness

Transcendations

Intersubjective (Type 3)

Integration of world-and speaker perspectives, re-interpretation of context (physical, symbolic, normative and cultural settings), constitution of the social Self and social networks as well as updating of social and cultural memory structures, collective measurement against other concepts and contexts, socio-political and economical context change, collective planning and decision making, critical thinking


Obstacles to creative processes and counter-productive developments logically strike either in the reading stage (in form of cognitive biases, censorship, lack of motivation, opportunity, misinterpretation etc.), on the level of the processing stage (in form of reduced interpretation competency, interruption or interference of external interests, procrastination, lack of resources/ cooperation or inaccessible sources) or on the level of the writing-stage (in form of censorship, distorted distribution channels, hostile or indifferent reviewing environment, lack of communication skills etc.). The regress from a reading- and writing to a read-only culture (RO) that merely copies, pastes, forwards and shares without processing is probably one of the biggest collective threats to creativity within social networks.

Example 2: The change of perspective in three pictures of Pablo Picasso – Nude Act on the Beach (1927), Woman in Shirt (1905) and Bathing People at the Beach with Ball (1928). The first picture takes an objectified late cubistic view; the figure is devoid all personality and the body has been reduced to mere relational and balancing geometry. The second picture is introspectively emotive and focuses compositionally on the face, revealing the melancholic inner world of the portrayed woman. The last picture on the right takes on a child-like, extroverted and naïve view as borderline Kitsch – a good example for changing the creative animus quality.

3.2 Domain Progressions and Process Stages

Cognitive processes follow a logical reading-, processing and writing sequence. In the reading stage information is acquired and composed in lose pre-conceptual form as a basis for processing. The process stage involves as a first step the contextual assessment of existing information, acquisition of new knowledge and re-formulation of the initial pre-compositions. The second processing stage is the synthesis of confirmed new information into new concepts and solution-developments. The final writing sequence is the presentation and storage of new and updated concepts in cultural networks.

Natural processes work in an analogue manner in terms of information input, processing of information and newly synthesized output. The process of photosynthesis e.g., works procedurally not differently than a computer software program: Information is read, decomposed, converted and processed into new output that goes into a designated storage medium. Once information flows have been stabilized into a self-sustainable form we can define this form as a domain.


Once stabilized domains reach a saturation point where the freely available energy exceeds the stabilized and looped existing domain, a new child-domain will eventually evolve. Each domain shares the following three traits:

1.) Inherited Legacy: properties of the parent domain are directly passed on to the child domain without change. We could also call the initial information the history root of the parent domain.

2.) Resonance: properties of the parent domain are passed on to the child domain but only in a similar and modified form

3.) Distinct Freedom: new emerging properties of the child domain that have not been present in the parent domain

Parent- and child domains are nested: the physical universe is the parent domain for biological life which forms the sub- (child) domain of self-conscious, intelligent life which forms the sub-domain of technological evolution. We could also talk about the domains of autotrophs and heterotrophs and so on and so forth, depending on where we define the brackets for domain boundaries which, within a framework of observable process-stages, cannot be arbitrary.

4. Creative Processes in Assessment and Application

The advantages of the understanding of creative processes as previously explained are manifold: in the educational sector it is beneficial for students to be able to switch between 1st, 2nd and 3rd order processes that are associated with their respective perspectives. Some simple examples:

For the levels of perceptional reality we can differentiate between [11]

a.) the immediate level of attractiveness of a product or a service (subjective “love or dislike at first sight”) b.) the interactive experience once the product or service is obtained (subject-object) and c.) the relation to society and the world at large (such as building communities, supporting charities, endorsing environmentally friendly processes, healthier living, promoting social and corporate responsibility etc.)

In the area of research methodology we can differentiate between primary research which involves gaining information from direct and indirect users and participants (source data), secondary research extracted from experts and specialists (data and meta-data processors) as well as tertiary research via literature, publications and communities (interconnected and peer-reviewed knowledge).

We see now more clearly how the same perspective matrix permeates practically all aspects of information gathering, processing and synthesis.


If we see the entire problem solving process in the context of a team we find ourselves in the same familiar process stages [12]. These can be described very simplified as follows: The (tutorial) group meets and the group’s facilitator (tutor) ensures that all participants are comfortable and at ease (climate setting). After presenting the problem or issue at hand the facts need to be extracted from the rest of the presented data by the team and the problem will need to be recaptured and if necessary reframed. Based on the extracted facts initial ideas and learning issues are outlined. It is important that the tutor engages at all times a meta-cognitive line of reasoning in the form of qualitative questioning for all participants. This practice draws on the communicative competence of the entire group. After the allocation of learning resources the participants enter a phase of research and research review before proceeding to any application of knowledge and solutions development. Apart from the obvious solutions development presentation a debriefing on what has been learned and a summary on how all participants have been performing in their various roles sum up the process.

Since facts (1st order processes) get linked by the group (3rd order processes) to ideas (2nd order processes) problem-based learning encompasses practically all process configurations. A heart the group develops a new concept which is continuously refined under the critique and input of 3rd order processes. Free enquiry is allowed and encouraged during any process stage. The most significant issue is that it is not important who the most intelligent individual is, but that for a successful solutions development all participants are equally empowered and connected. [13] Pedagogically it is beneficial when both, learning outcomes as well as the learning process to encompass all three levels of perspective matrix in order to foster meta-cognitive competencies in the widest spectrum possible.

The most difficult task is to strike the balance between individual and collective creativity or as Prof. Howard Barrows once put it “Mona Lisa hasn’t been painted by a committee”. During the tutorial process the best of individual contributions need to get respected and developed further by the creative team which requires advanced communicative skills by the tutor or process facilitator.

The ultimate goal is to find an adequate balance between immersion and critical distance within processes that manage creative outcomes, echoing Piaget’s idea of equilibration. However, the open process of navigation trough concepts in order to plan and create new ones requires the employment of concept maps. Concept maps are different from simple ad-hoc mind-maps as they offer the following additional attributes: they frame the context by anchoring the initial focus question. Secondly, they cross-link to other domains which mind-maps don’t. Concept maps also take the dependencies between its branched elements into account whereby mind-maps merely state arbitrary relations. Concept-maps handle concepts as coherent and mutually relating semantic units. Joseph D. Novak differentiates between initial ‘Rote Learning’ that requires little or no relevant knowledge (as well as no emotional commitment to relate to new knowledge) versus ‘Meaningful Learning’ in well organized knowledge structures that require emotional commitment in order to integrate with existing knowledge: without emotional involvement there can’t be development of creative processes.


5. Summary

We are already immersed in processes and that we can’t simply treat them as instrumentalized tools to merely ‘create’ or ‘manufacture’, something. The fact that our very Being is connected and immersed in process feedback loops forces us to self-reflection and awareness about how we transform ourselves and society by our actions; hence the introductory Gadamer quote in the opening chapter.

In order to make any kind of verifiable statements we need to define the context and field of application first, followed by the outcomes we strive for (be they intended or observational) before we may arrive at our paradigm – our employed narrative model of understanding that forms the frame of reference. This implies a complete reversal of traditional modes of theory creation.

We could state in a simplified manner:

Choose your context - state your outcomes - define your paradigm.

Figure 4, Nestedness of domains: each evolutionary stage has lesser available free energy at its disposal than the preceding one. Evolutionary diversification is the universally observable result of transformational creative processes.


6. Glossary

In a nutshell below some of the most commonly used terms in this paper

Term Definition

Application Applying creative processes back to the life-world either technologically or expressive-aesthetically. This is similar to the use of the term in computing where a small program applies a specific type of processing to user-information input. Application implies that the solution has already been synthesized and is ready for translation into a specified context

Concept A model of relating and supporting ideas. A concept is created within the framework of a context

Consolidation (domain)

When process-stages have become stable enough to support an environmental system or a reiterative-prominent system development stage we talk about domain consolidation

Context A user-defined system of interaction, a framework for concepts or hierarchy of nested concepts

Creativity A universal property of the universe as well as the cognitive domain to evolve and diversify into new forms and for the mind to develop new ways of perception

Distinct Freedom The characteristic of a new domain to develop properties and features that the parent domain has not previously developed, a set of new emerging properties that is unique to the child-domain

Domain a.) A distinct and re-appearing (reiterative) process development stage b.) A sustainable environment c.) A specific area that is tied to the observer’s chosen level of detail

(e.g., ecological domain-level, molecular domain-level, subatomic domain-level etc.)

Informations 2nd level creative processes that deal with the relation between object and subject such as the observer, user or creator from Lat. informare: to put (something) into form, thus in-formation

Inherited Legacy A set of properties that get passed on from the parent to the child domain without modifications

Object The perception that the material world reveals itself to the observer as an external reality

Process An observable reiterative flow of measurable events that reveal themselves in discrete developmental stages

Proto-form The concept that the actual form of the universe is only accessible to us indirectly via measurements. Aesthetically and intuitively we enjoy however immediate and direct access to perceived realities

Re-combinations 1st level creative processes that focus on the object only and exclude the observer, user or creator. In most of these cases it is understood that these are temporary sub-processes to 2nd and 3rd level creative processes.

Resonance The property of a child domain to develop similar but not identical traits as the parent domain

Subject The perception of Self, Self-Consciousness and Self-Awareness that divide the speaker (and his/ her experienced internal world) from the external world

Transcendations 3rd level creative processes that deal with the communicative and inter-subjective processing of information and thus cross any contextual or conceptual boundaries


References [1] Universe as information processing superstructure:

James Gardner, The Intelligent Universe, New Page Books; 1st edition February 15, 2007/ ISBN-10: 1564149196

Baris Baykant Alagosz, Open Universe Modeling: Information Layer and Time Dilation; Oncu Biim Algorithm and Systems Lab Vol.10, Art No.01, 2010/ http://arxiv.org/abs/1010.2365

Anders Sandberg, The Physics of Information Processing, December 22, 1999/ Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies. Retrieved 2009-08-28

Seth Lloyd, Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes on the Cosmos, Knopf; 1st Edition March 14, 2006/ ISBN-10: 1400040922 [2] Stephen Hawking, Lecture ‘Life in the Universe’ to be found on his own website http://hawking.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65

Hawking writes: “But we are now entering a new phase, of what might be called, self designed evolution, in which we will be able to change and improve our DNA (…) .But with the human race, evolution reached a critical stage, comparable in importance with the development of DNA. This was the development of language, and particularly written language. It meant that information can be passed on, from generation to generation, other than genetically, through DNA.”

[3] The Anthropic Principle, Victor J. Stenger , Colorado University (PDF), also published in The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief; Prometheus Books, October 25, 2007/ ISBN-10: 1591023912

[4] Hans Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method 2nd edn, Sheed and Ward, London 1989, 438,

Quoted here my own translation from the German 2nd edition’s original “Nicht, was wir tun, nicht, was wir tun sollten, sondern was ueber unser Wollen und Tun hinaus mit uns geschieht, steht in Frage.”

[5] Human Brain and Memory Structure:

A very readable introduction to memory by David MacKay, Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/jmb86/memory.pdf

Alan D. Baddeley, Human Memory: Theory and Practice, Revised Edition, Allyn & Bacon; Rev Sub edition, September 24, 1997/ ISBN-10: 0205279481 [6] Jean Piaget, The Construction of Reality in the Child, last chapter The Elaboration of the Universe, Routledge 1999/ ISBN-10: 0415210003

[7] John L.Casti, Verlust der Wahrheit Droemer Knaur,1990 pg.176:

Casti quotes the British mathematician John Horton Conway and his ‘life-game’ which explores evolving patterns across several generations. Dying out, freezing into non-evolving blocks and repetitive oscillation between two states were some of the non-creative outcomes.

Cellular Automatists: Richard Feynman, John Von Neumann, Martin Gardner, John Horton Conway, Stephen Wolfram, Stanislaw Ulam, Edgar F. Codd Books LLC, September 14, 2010/ ISBN-10: 1155333187 [8] Clayden, Greeves, Warren and Wothers, Organic Chemistry, OUP Oxford, 20th July 2001, ISBN-10: 0198503466


[9] First Stars in the Universe; Scientific American 2004, http://www.astro.yale.edu/larson/papers/SciAm04.pdf

Against popular belief most of the elements of the periodic table were not created with the Big Bang (or Big Crunch) which only created the four lightest elements of hydrogen, helium and trace amounts of beryllium and lithium. After only 15 minutes the cosmic nucleosythesis stopped and the universe was already too cool to create any heavier elements. The other 88 elements of the periodic table formed much later in population I-III stars whose collapsing cores provided enough energy to e.g., create carbon from fusing three helium atoms together. Heavy elements such as Bismuth were formed in collapsing Red Giants whereby any elements heavier than Bismuth could only be created in supernovae blasts.

[10] Mario Pricken: Creative Advertising, Hames & Hudson; illustrated edition edition, May 2004/ ISBN-10: 0500284768

Mario Pricken’s book is most comprehensive overview on creative communication strategies for advertising. The following list of creative strategies listed in this book is not exhaustive, but indicated in brackets are the categories of creative process as previously discussed. Creative advertising strategies are e.g., to

1 express a concept without words, by pictures/ graphics only [1/ relational combination] 2 play with words, phrases, mottos, slogans, typography, writing copy [2,3/ language-based strategies] 3 combine and connect new things together [1] 4 compare: before/ after, with/ without [1] 5 exaggerate or understatement [2/ qualitative change] 6 turn around 180 degrees into the opposite [3/ change the Point of View] 7 replacement and hint [2/semantic extension] 8 provoke & shock [2/qualitative change] 9 show the influence of time, repetition [1] 10 stage a parody [3/ based on societal norms] 11 invite to play/ play a game [2] 12 tell stories around the product [3/ inter-subjective narration] 13 create the surreal, fantastic and bizarre, out-of-this-world [2/qualitative change] 14 reframe the product in a bigger context, to show the bigger picture [3/ see the context] 15 use a metaphor: our product is like…[1/comparison] 16 to employ alternative advertising, e.g.; unusual places or use of space [2/ subject interface] 17 change the perspective [3]

[11] Prof. Paul Turnock from Brunel University, London, gave a lecture at Temasek Polytechnic in Singapore in 1999 elaborating on the three levels of perception as they subsequently unfold in our history with products and services

[12] Prof. Howard Barrows, The Tutorial Process, revised edition, Southern Illinois School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois 1992/ ISBN 0-931369-25-8, see also

Wee Keng Neo, Lynda, Kek Yih Chyn, Megan, Authentic Problem Based Learning, pg.40ff, Prenctice Hall, 2002/ ISBN 0-13-009756-X

[13] Prof.Joseph D. Novak, The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct and Use Them, Technical Report IHMC Cmap Tools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008

http://cmap.ihmc.us/publications/researchpapers/theorycmaps/theoryunderlyingconceptmaps.htm

Noteworthy is Novak’s link to human memory structure pg.7

Seth Lloyd, Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes on the Cosmos, Knopf; 1st Edition March 14, 2006/ ISBN-10: 1400040922Alan D. Baddeley, Human Memory: Theory and Practice, Revised Edition, Allyn & Bacon; Rev Sub edition, September 24, 1997/ ISBN-10: 0205279481Cellular Automatists: Richard Feynman, John Von Neumann, Martin Gardner, John Horton Conway, Stephen Wolfram, Stanislaw Ulam, Edgar F. Codd Books LLC, September 14, 2010/ ISBN-10: 1155333187

new creative processes (1) · 2012. 3. 23. · example 1: above we have a model of an alpha...

Documents