Creative THINKing

image courtesy of  http://www.writingforward.com

A word can’t be a word without defining it. As we proceed with this world, we asked for every definition of everything. In connection with this, I am still puzzled on how we are going to define CREATIVITY. A lot of explanations were already given but I am left confused because all the given definitions are with the application of the word creativity (to make, to grow, something new).

 If I am going to define the word creativity as redefining what is the norm, weird per se.

(1)

If a man did a painting in a blank sheet of paper and he used white paint. You will see nothing; perhaps you will judge that it is a senseless move to put some white paint in a white sheet of paper. However, you have to realize that it is only about 30% of creativity is the final product the other 70% will fall to the motive and other inspiration.  If you could judge that painting based on the total appearance, maybe you will give him a failing grade. Although, man exerted extra effort with his painting we never knew why he did that. With so many questions, you begin to wonder on the reasons. As you look into the painting, you realized that the title is “Cleanliness”.

Is he creative?

Is it appropriate?

Is it new?

(2)

When I am writing a book, I copied several ideas from different sources. I copied the first chapters of a great book who is part of literature but somehow managed to twist the story, used a solid character from other book, got the ending of another book and made it different. I did not copy the exact words and I used different language or attack in writing the story.

Is it creativity?

Is it inspiration or a stolen idea?

A classic explanation of this is even unconsciously we are create a second rate copy, we are copying from another source. The same plots of The Unkabogable Praybeyt Benjamin in the contrary of a Disney princess Mulan, The Avatar and Pocahontas and the recurring plots Filipino teleseryes.

Are we just limited to others’ idea?

We are done with modernity when “new” ideas are simple mathematics. Now, we are facing the post-modernism dilemma where you can’t create new one because everything is already created. Yes, new is a general term that can “new idea”, “new use” or “new item” but we can’t deny that in this world every idea is already been tampered.

(3)

How are we going to measure creativity in different sides of intelligences? If we have the prominent people who measure this one, how did they qualify? Creativity is neither quantitative nor qualitative, it is immeasurable or if it can be measured, it requires a solid formula. Let’s say, what is good to me, is not with you; it is mainly subjective. Even, I got a degree in creativity, I can’t say that I have the guts to say you are the most creative person because of the things you did.

How can we measure creativity without being bias?

Is creativity absolute or very limited?

So many questions left unanswered because of the limitation of our creativity. If creativity came from intelligence, why there are people choose not to be creative?

How about you?

What are your qualifications to be creative?

How are you going to define creativeness?

                                                                 

The THINKing Brain

image courtesy of   http://mindfulbalance.org/  

The most reflective, autistic, deep, immeasurable, indescribable, unknowingly, weird, eclectic, imbalance, unexplainable, self-centered, developed, interesting, majestic, witty, stressful, in control, inconsiderate, mysterious, quirky, amusing, piercing, gay, whimsical, clever, adept, dippy, concealed, puzzling, and enigmatical part of the body is the brain. Yes, words are not enough to describe how uniquely created this body part is. (I know some of these words are negating but that’s how the brain works)

What if the brain is obvious and we can peek into the ideas of people? Do we need to live life and understand what it is or do we just sit on the couch and die? What if the brain doesn’t need any exercise and it is equally divided for each person? And is there even a need to study?

A lot of studies are actually written in books but nothing explains how my brain is different from yours. It is measured by how we adopt to certain situations and how we learn, work, and live but not any single thing explains the science of the thinking. The Brain is just a necessary part of the body – some are bigger than others, while some have lesser IQ, and some possess a mental capacity that most people don’t have. 

If the brain would be a teaser to one’s soul, we might as well live in a neurotic world.

Certain studies have been discussed but it just made my brain work and think. If others are logically inclined and others are communicators, how are we going to measure it? Medical people, theorists, teachers, and pragmatists are all looking to details on how it works but no one can provide a measurable answer. If a no brainer guy hooks you up, would you be surprised to know that he knows nothing?

In my opinion, the importance of discovering how the brain works is just a societal responsibility. We can adapt easily to our surroundings and just change every time we deal with it. One of the characteristics of man is said to be being contagious that we are living in a world of affection. If we measure the brain based on creativity we can say that Michael Angelo was a genius boy, Shakespeare sang most number of pop music, and Da Vinci walked in a straight path. However, Einstein is our standard of being a genius for he discovered the E=MC2 and we can’t deny that fact - that he is indeed, the epitome of “intelligence”.

Based on the Whole Brain Model, the brain has four functions. If you are logical, organized, creative and emotional, you must be hitting a side on your brain. As man continues to discover or do a research regarding the brain, they are limited on the HOWS of the brain and not on the WHATS. Indeed, the brain is the main source of creativity and it is very hard to question or study the brain, because we can only get the answers from brain itself. My main concern, though, about the brain is not on the style or on the mode of learning, thinking and working but on how we become creative as we use this vital part of the body. If we visualized something, it is like a “theory” inside the brain that is waiting to be explored and defined.

Thinking has been a practice ever since the world began. Man thinks according to what he sees, knows , or according to what is inside his brain. If we look into history, man also evolved in thinking as per, visual thinking -  by becoming more imaginative and creative. But we don’t limit ourselves by identifying that the “modern man” thinks more creatively than the traditional ones. All I am suggesting is that in today’s world, one must be creative to survive

We can’t define man based on the part of brain he is using. If a left-brainer is said to be more logical, we can’t typecast everyone that every right-brainer is not logical or nonetheless intuitive. Studies have shown the IQ is not affected by the part of the brain a man uses but on the process which he used the specific part. If we describe a right-brainer person, it should be holistic, random, concrete, intuitive, non-verbal/spatial , and fantasy -oriented , but at the end of the day, we need both users to project a specific task. 

As once quoted, “thinking styles indicate preferred modes of learning and working, not competence.” Thus, the use of thinking style in identifying your mode of learning will not affect your competence. You may be an organizer but you can also be a communicator. Competence is not measured on the process, but by the end product. Everyone has their own way to enrich his competence and it will not be determined by the type or style by which we learn.

In a nutshell, a great mind doesn’t use a specific part of the brain. This helps in identifying your potential but the result will still vary according to the degree of willingness to learn. A student can grow more, certainly, but it is not assured that with all those theories and principles, one will top the class. For man can’t decipher how the brain functions and we can only make all necessary tests, but at the end,  it will not provide us definite answers because our brain is unique, each working different from the rest.

Think Like An Object

image courtesy of  http://www.objectifiedfilm.com/

The documentary film started with plastic chair factory and followed by a narration about appreciation and assumptions of the word “object”. Then, came all the speakers who tell us things about it.

 A short title analysis 

Objectified; from the root word “object” – meaning a thing, a concept or a being. It is a simple thing with a simple concept and a unique being. In English, it is identified as an object in grammar. That is oftentimes described as a part of predicate that denotes something about the subject. Thus, it is not mainly a subject. Furthermore, it is part but not the central part and a great definition of a support to a sentence (just a support and not the heart of the sentence). In the connection to the film, objectified it is a form that can be experienced by others. Objects are simple things that made a difference and impact. Therefore, it is not just an expression that we are being objectified.

D.E.S.I.G.N.

DESIGN, a recurring word in the film, showed a lot of reasons that we should not neglect every single object that has specific history to be told.

D is for development. As history unfolds, the pickiness of the emperor of China gave a single shot on the development of design that is very crucial to the film. Design is simply a hybrid of another design. Based on previous design and/or other design, every object is a result of another object. As a matter of fact, objects are not simply created to be original rather to inspire for another.


Development of design constitutes history of man. As man continues to search for specific use and innovation of object, we can say that it is paralleled to the development. Object is a product of development and it is not behind our history. As we continue to search for the maturity of earth, we are being compelled to the notion that we are developed and we should have set of objects for the developed era.


E is for efficiency. Every object comes with every use. We derived spork based on the usage and the appeal of spoon and fork. If we are going to compare the object into a man; efficiency is simply its competence. If man is obsessed with his competence, objects are solely based on its efficiency and it is used for the arrival of our comfort. Efficiency is the main root of why every single object exists. It is why designers put so much effort on every detail that an object has, for an object without efficiency is a waste of money and effort. As cited in the film, we have so many things now that has no efficiency or outdated by other things and we have to make a move to clear these things. In addition to that, the term efficiency is set to be the most important description of a single object. It may not be the perfect object because of its design but it can help us do our job easily.


S is for style. The film talked about two important concepts of the object – the functionality and the physical impact of an object. As per film, nowadays, functionality is only an underlying use of an object. It is still the physical impact of an object and why people are attached to it. Furthermore, the great idea of hiding the functionality into its design is a continuous trend of the today’s view of an object. For example, the vacuum cleaner, it is still the design of the literal vacuum cleaner mattered to the one who is using it.


Style is also one of the reasons why an object is located to the place where people can see it. Aside from the colors and the features, style has been the main concern of the manufacturer. They put it on a test. Let’s take for example two objects with same features and use, the next thing that people will look is the style and how it was devised to appeal to the audience’s taste. Apple (as per film) is one of the companies that took style seriously compared to the other manufacturer. The uniqueness of every product showed the elegance of each product and put them on the top of the market next to functionality and price.


I is for individuality/ iconic. The individuality of the object constitutes to its target audience. Every object has the individuality that treated as the reason on why specific audience used it. Per se, the target market of a product is only for this set of group age but as years passed by it will become iconic to its user and turned into one of the necessities in life. With the number of objects available on the market, consumers think that individuality of the object still matters. We, as the consumers, are looking to specific object with specific use and it is an additional point if we discovered some of the object with multi-function (but that is the individuality of the product).


G is for goal oriented. As time has been offered to every design of an object, we realized that it is an industry driven by specific goal. As the film exampled about the handles of a sheer, they even put some explanation on its curve design and indeed, some companies spend millions of dollars just to arrive to something that they are looking for because of the continuous effort to attain their goals and they have to be on the market to sell /earn and they have to help consumers to have easier life and of course to compensate on their loss. 


N is for necessary and new. As one of the focuses of the film is the design, it also clearly explained that it should be something necessary and new. The new will become the old and there will be the new new. It is necessary for us people to use these objects but it would turn out as the new and it will be interchange by the new design and that is how the cycle of the design of object works. 


In general, we are being surrounded by objects every day. We take objects as the unnecessary things in life but this documentary film opened my eyes about how the objects are created and how other people put their lives and works into the simplicity of an object. The design of an object is made up of different stories from different walks of life. It is not a simple a, b and c that a designer will just draw the design and put it in the manufacturing site. It is the blood and sweat of every designer that people owed too much and because of this object, we have the simplicity on how we live and how we used it to cope with everyday tasks and adversity. 


The film is not just a film for objects. It is created to make us realize that life is not a simple task without the object they created and designed. The lives of people now are dependent too much on their creation that each and every day we take it not in a serious manner. Objects are not just objects because they just produced it with power and practicality and each of it, is to set a difference. It is not about the standardized consumption or that every object is just a part of manufacturing business, it is about the story behind the specific object.