Thoughts on Creativity

On Creative Process and Cognition



For years I have been observing and thinking about how and why we make...and the cognitive processes that underly them. This blog is called making is thinking because the two together are intimately linked...and I am convinced that creativity is one of the fundamental aspects of being human and something which is true for all of us...whether we are designers or not. The question for me, though, is how we harness what is an essential part of our biology to consistently "make" the world around us in ways that are more than just about ego. Much of this blog will be focussed on topics that explore the nature of creativity and demystifying it, both for myself and for others. My hope is that through understanding of creativity's role in who we are, that we can all tap into it and engage in thoughtful and focussed play...with each other and the world around us.

Biological Foundations for Creativity
In Photography there is a term called depth of field which describes how light passing through smaller or larger lens apertures affects how in-focus objects at different distances from the lens appear on the picture plane. When there is a large aperture, only things at the focal length of the lens appear in focus and everything else is out of focus. Where there is small aperture, everything is in focus.

There is a similar effect at work in the perceptual & cognitive functions of the brain that are a result of how our brains identify (and focus on) things which differentiate themselves from that which is already known in the perceptual and cognitive fields. When we first look at something, our brain actively scans the perceptual field for things that it recognises and things it does not. Recognition is determined by things which appear to fit a known (experienced) pattern. Things which are not recognised (ie do not fit a known pattern, or appear to be a new variant of a known pattern) quickly come under scrutiny in order to make sense of them. If we look at something which shows little change (or which we know very well) for a long time, it is pushed below the threshold of our conscious and largely becomes invisible. This can be experienced directly if you paint your bedroom a bright new colour, at first you will always notice it, but over time it begins to be taken for granted. Similarly, when you stare into a snowstorm, at some point you become blind, not because it is bright but because there is so little differentiation possible that the brains cognitive functions with respect to vision simply shut down because they are no longer necessary…the brain has come to understand all it can about what it perceives.

The reason this happens is because the brain is trying to optimise its response to the environment and only process what is new (or apparently new). This enables the brain to quickly understand and map out an environment and then respond quickly to any changes because it only has to consciously process new information (changes to the environment). In order for this to happen, the brain codifies information into patterns (i.e. gives meaning to them) and determines an automated response to that pattern. This means that the conscious part of our brains can focus on identifying and codifying new patterns and not have to always process every stimulus to the perceptual apparatus. This is a highly effective mechanism for survival because it enables us to carry forward experiences from the past, anticipate what may happen in the future and react more effectively.

The effect of this process is that there is a "waterline of visibility" and a "horizon of knowing". Below the waterline of visibility lie the things we know but have ceased to observe as well as the things we have yet to observe (and therefore are yet to know or understand). Above the waterline of visibility lie the things we are presently observing. When something rises from below the waterline into view, we either respond with curiosity, surprise or fear depending on both what we are doing and how different the thing appears from things we know. Things which are unknown (or at least un-recognised) lie on the other side of the "horizon of knowing". As a result of not knowing or recognising something which comes into view, we immediately focus on that thing to the exclusion of other things and begin a process of scrutiny and pattern synthesis that finishes only when the thing is made sense of and passes into the realm of the known (i.e. crosses the "horizon of knowing" to become something understood), whereby it sinks yet again below the waterline of visibility and becomes part of our unconscious model of the world.



This process in our brains with respect to knowledge is similar in effect to changing the depth of field on a camera. In one instance we see everything within the field of vision, and the next we see only the thing we are focused on understanding. The drive to understand is so strongly encoded in our cognitive system that it takes a great deal of effort not to focus on something that makes itself present to us. This is because it triggers an adrenal fear response which prepares us for taking immediate action should the thing observed prove to be dangerous to us. Thus, the unknown causes us to become afraid or anxious. However, if we are able to quickly identify that the thing matches (or is similar to) a known pattern, the anxiety is removed and we cease to focus with such exclusivity on it and begin to see the larger perceptual field again. Conversely, when we are placed in a situation in which we are certain of everything around us, we enter a state of bliss associated with a lowered fear response. This is often the state associated with meditation or with the warm embrace of a loved one.

You can observe how the mind focuses and de-focuses in response to uncertainty by imagining the following scenario: You are in a familiar environment (say sitting under a favourite tree in a favourite park reading a book) and an unexpected change to that environment (say the sound of a voice behind you) causes you to become startled. Your body tenses and prepares for action and you turn around and focus intently on the source of the unexpected change. If it turns out to be familiar (your friend walking up to say hello), you relax and de-focus. If, on the other hand, it turns out to be something unfamiliar (a stranger addressing you and walking toward you), you remain on guard and begin scrutinising the situation to identify what you should do next. The process of scrutinising is one of attempting to quickly match the current set of events to a previously learned pattern in order to more successfully negotiate an outcome which results in your safety. The failure to find a matching pattern will trigger a fight or flight response and a rush of adrenaline. This response can emerge as anger, aggression, defensive posturing, cowering or flight, but your brain will use that fear as a way of marking a failure of the pattern recognition response. This means that the event becomes "significant" in memory so that it can be processed and understood after the event in order to ensure that a similar situation does not occur in the future. This is why people spend lots of time "reviewing the video tapes" of their lives after an upsetting event to understand what happened and try and find a pattern in it.

Education vs Training
The ability to exert control over that fear response is what discipline, training and experience provide. Training is not the same as education, however. Education provides us with the codified knowledge (patterns) of others without direct experience of the circumstances that generated those patterns. Training recreates the circumstances of those patterns so that we can generate them ourselves with guidance from someone more experienced. The rapid acquisition of patterns through direct experience enables us to understand and more effectively negotiate the uncertainties of the world around us. While education provides the patterns for us to reference, it fails to provide the circumstances to use (and therefore understand) those patterns. As a result, in spite of what we may have read or learned, we often fail to apply that knowledge effectively the first time. This is why most educational programs also have experience-based learning periods where students can learn by direct experience.

The fundamental operations by which we understand and encode what we perceive (learn) are differentiation and synthesis. These are also the fundamental processes of creativity. They are what enable us to both understand the world give meaning to it. When we apply differentiation and synthesis to our own storehouse of patterns (experience) we then begin to generate patterns from patterns (second and third-order patterns or derivative knowledge). This allows us to see relationships across patterns and link together different experiences to then anticipate responses to things we have yet to experience (like inventing a tool). This is creativity.

So far from being a specialist activity of a few lucky (or odd) individuals...creativity is, then, the result of the most basic functional activities of the brain. It is born out of that implicit anxiety response to an unknown environmental circumstance which leads us generate patterned responses to that environment. The goal, then, of this process is to create meaning, to understand the world and the things we perceive in order to better negotiate uncertainty and to survive.

Anxiety and Motivation
This is why creativity (and being consistently creative) is hard. Most of us, if given the choice, would rather feel bliss than anxiety. However, to be creative you have to be willing and able to negotiate uncertainty and trust that you will succeed. This is tantamount to being able to take on something which emotionally feels like danger and risk and know that you can survive. While this may sound somewhat over-exaggerated, the reality is that the adrenal fear response triggered in our brain when we are placed in a situation of uncertain intellectual outcome is the same as when we are physically at risk. This is why people suffer from stage fright and test anxiety.

For many people the adrenal response associated with the process of not knowing (which leads to creative thinking) is uncomfortable and so they seek out environments where things are more known, knowable and safe (e.g. less risky).

And yet, there are people for whom the dive into the uncertain, and the need to understand it are necessary and not optional. They are drawn, by whatever combination of reasons in their formative years, to seek out that adrenal response to not knowing. They seek out environments which are "riskier" because it is challenging and enables them to have a sense of satisfaction (and perhaps profound relief) from overcoming the fear of the unknown. Often they view the world as something to be understood and expressed in outward form, or as something to be taken apart and remade to suit a particular vision. In these people there is a drive to not simply be, but to create.

As a result of this drive, the people who continually seek out this challenge tend to be more well-equipped to deal with diverse adverse situations because they have a broader and richer set of patterns to draw upon which they can use to interpret and respond to the world. They also tend to be the people who are seen as more creative, though they are not necessarily in "creative" professions. The need for challenge which is present in creative individuals, is evident in all walks of life...and, regardless of the particular application of creativity, the ability to deal constructively with fear of the unknown is the hallmark of successful creative thinkers.

The Myth of "the artist"
What becomes clear then is that creativity is nothing special (in spite of its celebrated status in the world)...though some are more talented that others (for reasons I will talk about later). Creativity is, in the end analysis, not only a fundamentally human process...it is a fundamentally necessary process for our survival. It is what our brains do when we interpret the world around us and give meaning to things (e.g. create patterns).

So while the underlying process is not particularly special, talent...and ultimately, skill are. Talent is likely the result of a combination of factors both biological and environmental. Each individual due to their particular circumstances, inherits and develops a bias of skill strengths (or talents) which are ultimately reinforced or supressed by their upbringing and socialisation. While there is little we can do about our raw talent...we can, however, augment our raw talent by developing skill.

Skill is about being able to harness the creative process in order to generate new ideas, invent new things or solve problems. True skill, like talent, is both special and difficult...especially in creativity. This is because learning to observe the underlying cognitive processes that enable us to survive and honing them in order to be more facile at both generating first order-patterns (from direct experience) and second-order patterns (intuition) is not easy. It is what people in "creative" professions do, though usually not consciously. A designer, writer, engineer or entrepreneur simply take what they know from experience (first-order patterns) and generate ideas (second-order patterns) and give them form. Learning to do this consistently is about becoming a skilled creative practitioner.

This is, of course easier said than done. There is being "creative" (raw unbridled talent and instinct) and then there is the consistent application of creative process toward a specific end whose success can be measured. This latter form of creativity requires sophisticated second-order pattern synthesis and rigourous observation, analysis and validation/measurement techniques. As with any skill, this level of sophistication can only be achieved through training, disciplined practice and experience. And as one becomes more practiced and experienced, one is becomes more facile expedient and effective in one's ability to create. This is why individuals who have mastered a particular field (eg Einstein, Michealangelo, Goethe, Nietzsche, Strauss, LeCorbusier) appear to work a kind of magic and draw things out of thin air. However, what they are actually doing is drawing on a vast library of detailed 2nd, 3rd and 4th-order patterns to generate even more patterns. That they are successful in doing this is a result both their experience and the rigour with which they interrogate what they observe and what they make.

Patterns are the result of explicit and implicit observation and represent efficient codifications of experience and knowledge. They are what the mind uses to rapidly assess a new and unexpected situation in order to identify a shortlist of appropriate responses in an infinitude of possible responses. The generation and manipulation of patterns is what allows us to anticipate things we have yet to experience and are the foundation of invention. By asserting an understanding of something (an idea) and giving that idea a form that can be placed in the world for others to observe (a story, a work of art, a solution to a problem), we create meaning and enable understanding of both the world and ourselves in relation to that world. It is through creative acts of will that the inner world of perception and understanding is made visible in the outer world. It is how we communicate with both ourselves and with others.

The Craft of Meaning
So fundamentally, creativity is about making visible the invisible, about making tangible the intangible, about making known the yet-to-be-known and creating meaning (and order) out of chaos. It is what enables us to give form to the dreams, musings, fantasies and horrors of the unconscious. The output of creativity reminds us of who we are and shows us who we can be. It is how invent the tools that enable us to adapt our environment to suit us as well as adapt to that environment. It is what it means to be human. And as people's capacity for negotiating uncertainty and risk varies, so to does the quality (or success) of creative output. The ability to measure the quality of creative output is largely determined by the degree of utility it has beyond meeting the needs of the person creating it.

In the case of a story, work of art or music, the utility is its ability to successful conjure up feelings and images in many different people. Whether good feelings or bad, ugly or beautiful, these things effectively communicate some aspect of the inner world of their creator that makes tangible (or resonates with) the inner world of the viewer.

In the case of a tool or designed object, the utility is defined as the degree to which it meets the specific needs for which it was made. Sometimes that utility is purely functional (as in the design of a cam in an engine). In other cases function and aesthetic are equally important (as with a car or a fine pair of shoes). And in still other cases, aesthetics are more important than function (as with a decorative chandelier).

In all cases, craft (the skill with which the thing is made as compared to others like it) is also used as an assessment of quality or success of creative output. Something being well made is seen as something that reflects upon the care and attention given to it by the creator. This reflects both the skill (facility) and passion of the maker and so is seen as being more valuable because it represents the amount of care they have invested in making it "right". Being well made, particularly in the case of things which have a functional purpose, is also seen as a measure of their degree of reliability, stability and safety.

Vitruvius, the Roman architect and writer of the "Ten Books on Architecture" summed up these measures as "Utilitas, Firmitas, & Venustas" (Firmness, Commodity and Delight). Firmness was the ability for the thing in question to be sound in principle, structure or form such that it was reliable, Commodity was the value attributed to its use, and Delight was the ability for the thing to conjure up a sense of joy in its existence. In his mind, in order for a work of architecture (or any creative endeavour) to be successful, it was not sufficient to simply be one or the other. It had to meet all three of these criteria. This is made possible through Rigour and Experience. Rigour and Experience are the underpinnings of successful creative work.

The origin of Intuition
Experience can either be explicit (I learn something by going to school or reading a book) or implicit (I experience it directly whether I wanted to or not). Experience encompasses both success and failure. While success is nice to enjoy, without failure, there is no desire evolve an idea (or pattern of response to an environment) and to improve it. Repeatedly succeeding (especially if that success is achieved after one or more failed attempts) not only improves the chances of success for a creative endeavour but also builds confidence in one's ability to successfully negotiate uncertainty and risk. Confidence is the essential ingredient of trust. And trust in oneself is what enables one to be rigourous. This is why failure is such a good (but difficult) teacher.

The true value of experience is that it enables intuition. Intuition is simply the unconscious bringing together of information (synthesising a second-order pattern from two or more first-order patterns) in order to generate an insight. Intuition is also a fundamental cognitive operation. It occurs when we process things we have already observed but perhaps not fully acknowledged (ie they lie below the waterline of consciousness). We cannot be intuitive about things we have never experienced, but we can be intuitive about things we have never consciously thought about. This is because all conscious pattern-generation deals with primary data and secondary data that describes the nature of a particular environment in order to derive a pattern.

For instance, primary data about recognising rain is that the sky is grey and there are droplets of water falling from the sky. Secondary data may be what it was like just before the rain fell or the smell of the air after the rain. These are things that are part of the scenery but which may or may not be necessary to identify in order to identify the primary pattern. However, they are things which are nonetheless encoded in the pattern and become part of what we know about the world. So when we then smell something that smells like the air after a rainstorm, it triggers a recognition of something familiar (even if we don't process it as rain).

The use of secondary pattern data enables us to discover things about the world that appear to us to be based on nothing more than "a feeling". In fact, this "feeling" is simply a derivation from experiences we have ceased to remember directly. The strength of one's intuition is directly related to the sophistication of one's observational skills or sensitivity to the more subtle aspects of an environment.

Innovation or Invention?
There are two fundamental forms of creative thinking: Rational and Intuitive. Most of what is colloquially termed "creative" is based on Intuitive thinking. Intuitive thinking is often the source of invention while Rational thinking is the often the means for innovation. This is because Intuitive thinking is indirect and open. It allows for (and encourages) random associations in the generation of ideas. Rational thinking, however, excludes all derivations that can not be derived linearly according to a codified set of (logical) rules based on observed "facts" using either induction (deducing general principles from particular facts) or deduction (deducing particular facts from general principles).

Intuition works by making leaps of faith based on often disconnected pieces of information. Often in intuitive thinking, things just "feel" right. This is because they emerge out of a process of (sometimes random) association that is based on lived experience of the world using primary and secondary pattern data. In a logical process, all knowledge is derived above the waterline of consciousness. In an intuitive process, knowledge is derived below the waterline of consciousness and emerges into consciousness only at the point when it appears relevant. It is a by-product of conscious observation and thinking…of lived experience. As a result, intuition becomes more accurate with the amount experience one has.

Beyond Talent - the rigour of practice
However, whether through a rational or intuitive process, all successful creative outcomes (whether strategy, writing, problems-solving, design or art) can only be achieved through the application of rigour. The creation of a pattern (ie the codification of experience into knowledge) is an assertion of the will…of the ego (whether the ego of a single individual or the collective egos of a group). To assert that something is true or right or good is fundamentally about taking a risk that you might be wrong (the social consequences being that you appear stupid, are laughed at or are rejected by your social group - something which we are all socialised to fear). Trusting yourself to know what you know (as well as what you don't) and to recognise when you have got it wrong in order to make adjustments is what confidence and experience provide. Rigour is fundamentally about observation and critique. It is about always questioning what you see, what you know, what you believe in order to either invalidate, validate or evolve it.

To be rigourous is to accept the limitations of (but not doubt) ones own assertions and to validate them externally. It is about being assertive yet open and flexible to change. It is about being able to let go of an idea knowing that another will come along. To be rigourous is to never assume you know (but believing you can) while asserting what you do know in order to externalise it and make it visible. By making it visible we are then able to interrogate it more effectively and create a space that enables others to interrogate it as well (the value of design crits). Interrogation is what allows us to see the gaps between what we think we know and reality in order to adjust our position, idea or pattern and evolve our understanding.

Rigour is the essential differentiating factor between great creative work and average (or shoddy) creative work. Rigourous creative activity is marked by process (which ensures you have the tools and techniques to generate ideas even when you lack the experience), discipline, persistence and courage. A rigourous thought (or creative) process passes through a sequence of stages beginning with the identification of an idea to be explored (whether through intuition or logic), observation (detailed examination of the idea and its context), analysis (differentiating between the what is essential for understanding and what is peripheral), synthesis (the establishment of the idea in form and representation of all likely possible forms of the idea), and validation (testing the idea in context to see how well it performs).

The validation stage is where an idea is refined, accepted (proven) or thrown out. If it is accepted then no further work is needed to perfect the idea. If it is not accepted then (depending on the degree of failure of the idea in context) it is either modified (via further observation, analysis and synthesis) or abandoned (and a new idea must be identified).

This process repeats in a series of iterations that feed in the knowledge from the previous round of thinking until the idea converges on a "right" answer. Seen over time, this appears like a cone shaped spiral where the idea is rather loose and ill-defined at the large end of the spiral and each successive loop gets closer and closer to a final solution. Often, the process of discovery that this iterative process describes opens up new territories of knowledge that can undermine the trajectory of the original idea. This then means that the original idea is shown to be inadequate. There is then a need to generate a new set of possible ideas to explore (whether through an Intuitive or Rational process). This then results in an opening out of the spiral as new ideas have to be incorporated to accommodate the new knowledge. Then the iterative refinement process proceeds as before.

This process of generating ideas and refining them down through a series of iterative Observation/Analysis/Synthesis/Validation loops is repeated until a satisfactory outcome is found. This is the creative process. It is fraught with uncertainty at every stage. Often it can appear to be leading nowhere. Other times the answers seem to come straight away. It is the ability to persist and to trust the process (and oneself) that ensures a successful outcome. And it is the ability to continually question the process and the outcomes (even if it "feels" right or there appear to be no other options) that defines rigour. All of this demands trust and courage, not to mention keen observation, analysis and synthesis skills.

Embracing Uncertainty
When one enters the tunnel of uncertainty that is the creative process, one has to be prepared to stumble and fail and to continue feeling around in the dark until something comes to light. In the anxiety that one feels when faced with a great deal of uncertainty, one also has to resist "jumping to form"(going for the most obvious or easiest solution). Rigour entails withholding the satisfaction (and release from a state of anxiousness) that comes from having an answer until all possible solutions have been identified and eliminated. Sometimes this means focusing on something in order to understand it more thoroughly. Other times it means taking in everything and focusing on nothing in particular in order to observe larger (more subtle) patterns. In all cases, one relies heavily on one's experience and the tools, techniques and methods of the process to overcome creative block and continue to make progress.

For many people, this process, while they may do it, is not visible to them. It is like walking. They have done it so long they don’t even know that they do it or how they do and (like walking) if they focus on how they do it, it suddenly becomes difficult. However, to be rigourous is to make visible your own process in order to be able to refine or redefine it and to create new tools to help you along. Making it visible also means you are codifying your own process into patterns (knowledge) which can be shared. This means you are more able to communicate those patterns to others in order to both share with them and to learn from them.


The making of a great talent
So what determines how good someone is at the creative process?

There are many creative people who get by simply on talent alone (without apparently applying rigour to their work). This is often called creativity...but in-fact is quite a basic form of creativity.

Some would say that talent is more critical…or even luck. But in fact, talent is just the sum total of experience and natural facility...and luck is just about the factors that lie outside ones control that either promote or hinder the success of an idea. To some extent, the appearance of luck can be mitigated by experience...but only insofar as one is able to consistently position oneself in the right place at the right time.

Facility is the result of fundamental biases (strengths) we are born with (both physically and mentally) combined with the particular experiences of our lives that reinforce those natural strengths. If one is lucky enough to be given experience in an area that one is naturally strong in, it will be said that that person has facility, or talent. Talent can be developed however…through training. Thus, anyone can, with enough practice, become talented at something (though those with less natural facility will always have to work harder than those with it).

Tune in, turn on & respond
But at the end of the day...creativity is about our relationship with the world...and we engage the world through a the reciprocal process of making (or asserting things into the world) and seeing how the world responds (assessing) and then thinking about a way to improve or tune the response to what we want as a result. This is the essential feedback loop between thinking and making...and it is the basis for all thought and creativity...and ultimately the underpinning of craft (or quality). Without making there can be no thinking...and without thinking there can be no making.

And yet, people often stop themselves from engaging in this most essential process because they are afraid of the uncertainty of it...they do not know what to make or think about. But a painting is not thought through before it is painted...a painting is thought through AS it is painted. And it begins with a mark...any mark. The same is true with writing or music or any other type of creative activity. One cannot wait to begin only when one knows what one is doing. One has to simply start...somewhere...and respond. Each action leads to the next...and as the work progresses...it begins to define what it needs to be as much as what it is because you come to know more about what you are trying to achieve by doing it. This is not to say that you cannot begin with an idea...but rather to say that the idea of a starting point should not be confused with the ending. Begin at the beginning...but let the end unfold through the feedback of making and thinking.