View Full Version : possibly links with mental illness and creativity


daveddd
02-18-16, 06:00 PM
nothing here that will prove or disprove anything

just an interesting paper with an open mind

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4166997/

couple things that stuck out for me

he highest loaded items in the third factor for the three factor solution were “I am frequently so ‘hyper’ that my friends kiddingly ask me what drug I'm taking,” “I am considered to be kind of a ‘hyper’ person,” and “People often look at me as if I'd said something really weird.”


This result indicates that traits associated with psychoticism, such as impulsivity and sensation-seeking, may benefit creative achievement.

daveddd
02-18-16, 06:54 PM
NCBINCBI Logo
Skip to main content
Skip to navigation
Resources
How To
About NCBI Accesskeys
Sign in to NCBI
PubMed
US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health
Search databaseSearch termSearch
AdvancedHelp
Result Filters
AbstractSend to:
Mem Cognit. 2015 Nov 2. [Epub ahead of print]
Flexible or leaky attention in creative people? Distinct patterns of attention for different types of creative thinking.
Zabelina D1, Saporta A2, Beeman M2.
Author information
Abstract
Creativity has been putatively linked to distinct forms of attention, but which aspects of creativity and which components of attention remains unclear. Two experiments examined how divergent thinking and creative achievement relate to visual attention. In both experiments, participants identified target letters (S or H) within hierarchical stimuli (global letters made of local letters), after being cued to either the local or global level. In Experiment 1, participants identified the targets more quickly following valid cues (80 % of trials) than following invalid cues. However, this smaller validity effect was associated with higher divergent thinking, suggesting that divergent thinking was related to quicker overcoming of invalid cues, and thus to flexible attention. Creative achievement was unrelated to the validity effect. Experiment 2 examined whether divergent thinking (or creative achievement) is related to "leaky attention," so that when cued to one level of a stimulus, some information is still processed, or leaks in, from the non-cued level. In this case, the cued stimulus level always contained a target, and the non-cued level was congruent, neutral, or incongruent with the target. Divergent thinking did not relate to stimulus congruency. In contrast, high creative achievement was related to quicker responses to the congruent than to the incongruent stimuli, suggesting that real-world creative achievement is indeed associated with leaky attention, whereas standard laboratory tests of divergent thinking are not. Together, these results elucidate distinct patterns of attention for different measures of creativity. Specifically, creative achievers may have leaky attention, as suggested by previous literature, whereas divergent thinkers have selective yet flexible attention.
KEYWORDS:


what is leaky attention?

Lunacie
02-18-16, 09:15 PM
This is when I most miss Dizfriz, McTavish and Amtram ... they were able to decipher the academia and translate it into something I can understand.

namazu
02-18-16, 09:25 PM
Haven't had time to read the actual papers in detail, but here's an article from Northwestern University about a related paper from the same authors (http://www.printfriendly.com/print/?source=homepage&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.northwestern.edu%2Fnewscenter %2Fstories%2F2015%2F03%2Fcreative-genius-driven-by-distraction.html)...gives a layperson's intro to what they were looking at.

acdc01
02-18-16, 11:13 PM
This is when I most miss Dizfriz, McTavish and Amtram ... they were able to decipher the academia and translate it into something I can understand.

Yeah. It's the long paragraphs with tiny font that get me. I just space out too often while reading. I wish everyone wrote in short bullets and large font.

Brain feels really fuzzy today. Maybe I'll try to read again when I can think more clearly though these kinds of documents always take me forever if I can even get through them.

daveddd
02-19-16, 11:28 AM
Haven't had time to read the actual papers in detail, but here's an article from Northwestern University about a related paper from the same authors (http://www.printfriendly.com/print/?source=homepage&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.northwestern.edu%2Fnewscenter %2Fstories%2F2015%2F03%2Fcreative-genius-driven-by-distraction.html)...gives a layperson's intro to what they were looking at.


“Leaky” sensory gating, the propensity to filter out “irrelevant” sensory information, happens early, and involuntarily, in brain processing and may help people integrate ideas that are outside of the focus of attention, leading to creativity in the real world, said Darya Zibeline, lead author of the study, calling the finding “impressive.”


thanks, that helps my earlier question

the length a terms are tough

i forget that, i have to picture myself having to read history or pretty anything i don't like (so everything but psychology and football)

then i remember how hard it is

despite being terrible at so many things, when i can 'hyper focus ' i can read at a ridiculous speed and scan for relevant words

i don't understand it, i can't even type a sentence without zoning out and looking back to realize half the words and all the grammar is wrong

daveddd
02-19-16, 11:49 AM
“Leaky” sensory gating, the propensity to filter out “irrelevant” sensory information, happens early, and involuntarily, in brain processing and may help people integrate ideas that are outside of the focus of attention, leading to creativity in the real world, said Darya Zibeline, lead author of the study, calling the finding “impressive.”


thanks, that helps my earlier question

the length a terms are tough

i forget that, i have to picture myself having to read history or pretty anything i don't like (so everything but psychology and football)

then i remember how hard it is

despite being terrible at so many things, when i can 'hyper focus ' i can read at a ridiculous speed and scan for relevant words

i don't understand it, i can't even type a sentence without zoning out and looking back to realize half the words and all the grammar is wrong

funny the reading thing, its the most accurate gauge of if my meds are working

when they're not,(about 80% of the time) i find myself 'hyper focusing all day, i can't pull myself away

when they are , i can read whatever i have to at an equally average pace, i don't find any urge to research or read excessively, and when i do talk its more in a social manner as opposed to facts

acdc01
02-20-16, 07:37 AM
I don't understand something or most probably, I didn't read something right since that document is too loquacious for me to read well.

I think it said that the "leaky filter" was what was associated with real-world creative achievement, not divergent thinking. In fact for most people, the stronger the divergent thinking, the less of a "leaky filter" they have. Although they did note that ADHDers were found to be both stronger on average in divergent thinking AND have a more "leaky filter".

Did I read that right? I'm really surprised there isn't really a correlation in divergent thinking with real-world creative achievement. Though maybe they are talking about writing and the arts and not problem solving in that case or something? I would think divergent thinking would help in problem solving.

I guess the most important thing (at least to me) is that the study suggests that us ADHDers experience more real-life creative achievements. So it goes against what some argue - that our "creativity" does absolutely nothing for us but come up with ideas that are useless. Our creativity is actually helping ADHDers on average even if not everyone experiences the help?

Let me know if I misread anything.

sarahsweets
02-20-16, 09:46 AM
i forget that, i have to picture myself having to read history or pretty anything i don't like (so everything but psychology and football)

then i remember how hard it is

despite being terrible at so many things, when i can 'hyper focus ' i can read at a ridiculous speed and scan for relevant words

i don't understand it, i can't even type a sentence without zoning out and looking back to realize half the words and all the grammar is wrong
Thats very interesting because as hard of a time I have sitting still, focusing my thoughts and such I am an excellent, quick reader. With boring stuff I can skim like nobody's business, and with stuff I like I can lose myself for hours. I read like 16 news apps every morning. I am the kind of person that will find that obscure article about someone doing something ridculous.
And when I type its like my hands and mind are to fast to bother with proper punctuation and spelling sometimes.
I really wish I understood why this is. I have an English Lit degree and its the only thing Ive ever done well at, and it doesnt matter whether its that Im in hyperfocus, or not, although the hyperfocus helps.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 09:51 AM
“Leaky” sensory gating, the propensity to filter out “irrelevant” sensory information, happens early, and involuntarily, in brain processing and may help people integrate ideas that are outside of the focus of attention, leading to creativity in the real world, said Darya Zibeline, lead author of the study, calling the finding “impressive.”


thanks, that helps my earlier question

the length a terms are tough

i forget that, i have to picture myself having to read history or pretty anything i don't like (so everything but psychology and football)

then i remember how hard it is

despite being terrible at so many things, when i can 'hyper focus ' i can read at a ridiculous speed and scan for relevant words

i don't understand it, i can't even type a sentence without zoning out and looking back to realize half the words and all the grammar is wrong

Sensitive not Leaky ?

Yes - it's harder to be concise than it is to be verbose - with/being ADHD - we generally have a point we want to get across - which may be gotten across most effectively using few words.

why does distraction lead to creativity ?
Being bored out of our skulls - we tend towards finding something that isn't boring in order to keep our minds above water.

It's REALLY hard doing something that's both pointless and trivial.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 09:58 AM
verbose
loquacious

ADDers do quite like getting to the point.

Imagine a starving man needing to read a thousand page document to find food - when all he needs is for somebody to point out that it's over there.

What's the magic solution to ADHD and why we can't get no satisfaction ?

The mind is supposed to know morality.
And then do morality.

And if it knows and then does - then it'll find natural reward in all that it does - and if it doesn't (as we find people do in this current world) - we'll need to take something to lessen the pain/increase the pleasure.

Might work - but if it's not naturally rewarding - is it likely that you're learning anything useful from the experience ?

The world'd be a better place without the prospect of medication - because we'd then be forced to find an environmental solution to prevent the problem from occurring in the first place.

Taking stimulant medication is akin to a slave taking ecstacy - so - sure they're happy - but but but

Little Missy
02-20-16, 10:18 AM
Thats very interesting because as hard of a time I have sitting still, focusing my thoughts and such I am an excellent, quick reader. With boring stuff I can skim like nobody's business, and with stuff I like I can lose myself for hours. I read like 16 news apps every morning. I am the kind of person that will find that obscure article about someone doing something ridculous.
And when I type its like my hands and mind are to fast to bother with proper punctuation and spelling sometimes.
I really wish I understood why this is. I have an English Lit degree and its the only thing Ive ever done well at, and it doesnt matter whether its that Im in hyperfocus, or not, although the hyperfocus helps.

yes, yes, YES!

SB_UK
02-20-16, 11:05 AM
“Poor sensory gating, the ability to filter unnecessary stimuli from the brain, correlated with a higher number of lifetime creative achievements.”


Being a highly sensitive person may include letting an unusually high level of information in to our nervous systems, which can lead to feeling overwhelmed by emotional and sensory input at times, but may also help explain why sensitive people are often artists and creators.
http://blogs.psychcentral.com/creative-mind/2015/04/leaky-attention-and-being-more-creative/

Why ?
Pain from over-sensitivity provides the sensitive with the motivation to do things differently.

If you can't stand the nonsense people spout - creativity manifests itself in finding something different to concern one's mind ie a switch from 'gossip' to ideas.
If you can't stand the workplace - the people or the point - creativity manifests itself as novel ways of living without money - of re-defining the workplace away from co-ercive into liberating.
If you can't afford food or the tedium of cooking - then creativity manifests itself as novel ways of generating food without the need for preparation - the raw vegan approach requires little effort.

The ADDer has a motivation (completely separating oneself from the pointless immoral life all people lead in a capitalist, selfish mindless social environment)
- and since necessity is the mother of creative invention ... ... ... the ADDer's entire life becomes an exercise in creativity (defining novel ways of living).

Follow the ADDer path - and it's a fast-track to minimalism - to a sustainable, happy existence.
This'll seem creative (a new way of thinking relative to the way people think currently) - but it's not that we've any choice - it's just that difficult talking (for that's all that's talked no matter the educational level of those involved) nonsense to other people.

acdc01
02-20-16, 11:49 AM
ADDers do quite like getting to the point.

You got exactly why I can't read these papers.

Why don't medical and I think scientific in general research papers ever have some quick summary bullet points? Even their "conclusions" are verbose.

This practice is so different from pretty much any type of technical writing I've ever seen in other technical fields. Everyone writes simple to read bullet points. Maybe they don't want us layfolk reading their papers or something.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 11:54 AM
This result indicates that traits associated with psychoticism, such as impulsivity and sensation-seeking, may benefit creative achievement.

Underlying sensitivity.

I think that as long as this underlying creative (Sensitive) type is grounded in reality (ie science) - then the consequence of creativity will be useful creative insight.

Problem - when somebody takes creativity and uses it to create an entirely fabricated world - can lose oneself in this world.

Creativity needs to have its feet firmly planted within the real (scientific evidence) world - otherwise quite fantastic (destabilizing) realities can be formed.

daveddd
02-20-16, 11:55 AM
You got exactly why I can't read these papers.

Why don't medical and I think scientific in general research papers ever have some quick summary bullet points? Even their "conclusions" are verbose.

This practice is so different from pretty much any type of technical writing I've ever seen in other technical fields. Everyone writes simple to read bullet points. Maybe they don't want us layfolk reading their papers or something.

different strokes for different folks

SB_UK
02-20-16, 11:57 AM
You got exactly why I can't read these papers.

Why don't medical and I think scientific in general research papers ever have some quick summary bullet points? Even their "conclusions" are verbose.

This practice is so different from pretty much any type of technical writing I've ever seen in other technical fields. Everyone writes simple to read bullet points. Maybe they don't want us layfolk reading their papers or something.

I agree - scientific papers have too much padding.

If you could generate a paper by hyperlinking ie to methods, other publications etc we could eliminate the extraneous padding and get to the point.


Luckily we have an abstract !

daveddd
02-20-16, 11:59 AM
I agree - scientific papers have too much padding.

If you could generate a paper by hyperlinking ie to methods, other publications etc we could eliminate the extraneous padding and get to the point.


Luckily we have an abstract !

i like reading the whole thing, maybe I'm a weirdo

SB_UK
02-20-16, 12:00 PM
different strokes for different folks

So much of what we do hasn't adapted to the Internet.

I remember the pain (particularly) of having to reformat papers ie change the number of words in the title, or abstract, or the style of references or ... ...

- the sciencey bit was easy in comparison to the mindless bureaucracy involved with submitting a paper.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 12:01 PM
i like reading the whole thing, maybe I'm a weirdo

Now that you've said that - time to read the whole thing.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 12:09 PM
That's funny - the paper's from 'Frontiers' which claims to do things differnently - and run by the Markrams which're the scientists who can take the credit for nailing the basis to sensitivity.

Real-world creative achievers appear to have broad or “leaky” attention, as well as leaky sensory filters

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3010743/

Such hyper-functional microcircuits ... leading to the core cognitive consequences of hyper-perception, hyper-attention ... ...

daveddd
02-20-16, 12:13 PM
That's funny - the paper's from 'Frontiers' which claims to do things differnently - and run by the Markrams which're the scientists who can take the credit for nailing the basis to sensitivity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3010743/

the intense world theory makes sense to me

SB_UK
02-20-16, 12:16 PM
Three points covering the Introduction

1. Sensitivity (Markram model) confers capacity for creativity
2. Pain (sensitivity challenged) provides impetus for creative pursuit
3. Application of creativity when not grounded (factual) may lead the individual's mind (through exercising creativity) into a land of quite intricate nonsense.

daveddd
02-20-16, 12:16 PM
Three points covering the Introduction

1. Sensitivity (Markram model) confers capacity for creativity
2. Pain (sensitivity challenged) provides impetus for creative pursuit
3. Application of creativity when not grounded (factual) may lead the individual's mind (through exercising creativity) into a land of quite intricate nonsense.

so its settled, ADHD is a gift

acdc01
02-20-16, 01:16 PM
Three points covering the Introduction

1. Sensitivity (Markram model) confers capacity for creativity
2. Pain (sensitivity challenged) provides impetus for creative pursuit
3. Application of creativity when not grounded (factual) may lead the individual's mind (through exercising creativity) into a land of quite intricate nonsense.

Thanks for the short and organized points.

I'll say, point 3 may be true for scientific creativity but I would think it'd still be good for creative writing and the arts.

Personally, I think one of the primary differences (though not the only difference) between a creative ADHDer and noncreative one is how strong their motivation is and where their motivations lie. If you're extremely passionate about something that's useful and helpful, then your mind will keep thinking and thinking about the subject until you find a solution. And since the subject is useful, then the creative idea is considered "creative" instead of just nonsense. I'm guessing Einstein and other creative geniuses were mostly extremely passionate in their fields (though you need more than just passion to become an Einstein of course).

ginniebean
02-20-16, 02:14 PM
Forgive me for being creative and diverging somewhat, errr.. maybe a lot.

I'm going to define sensitivity as the ability to bring to the surface that which is subconscious such that it can be fully seen or suggested.

I think sensitvity is "life" and I'm not talking about the same sort of sensitivity that makes people sensitive lil flowers, but a cognitive sensitivity that may or may not include limbic/emotional participation.

I don't think it's just those with mental illness that fabricate their own worlds etc there may just be a bit more tinsel on the trees and such flashiness gets noticed more.

The buddhists and other esotericists all say humanity lives within an illusion and it's been my experience that this is accurate.

I have no trouble believing that the divergent thinking associated with adhd leads to more creativity, but I'd balance that out with productivity issues that would interfere in a major way. And the constantly finding novel ways to do things that have more eficient means would also claw back productivity time.

daveddd
02-20-16, 02:22 PM
Forgive me for being creative and diverging somewhat, errr.. maybe a lot.

I'm going to define sensitivity as the ability to bring to the surface that which is subconscious such that it can be fully seen or suggested.

I think sensitvity is "life" and I'm not talking about the same sort of sensitivity that makes people sensitive lil flowers, but a cognitive sensitivity that may or may not include limbic/emotional participation.

I don't think it's just those with mental illness that fabricate their own worlds etc there may just be a bit more tinsel on the trees and such flashiness gets noticed more.

The buddhists and other esotericists all say humanity lives within an illusion and it's been my experience that this is accurate.

I have no trouble believing that the divergent thinking associated with adhd leads to more creativity, but I'd balance that out with productivity issues that would interfere in a major way. And the constantly finding novel ways to do things that have more eficient means would also claw back productivity time.

i feel like, and this would need the stars to align just right, productivity can be excellent in a creative project of interest to an ADHD person

in a manner almost like a hypomanic state , but brought on environmentally

SB_UK
02-20-16, 03:01 PM
so its settled, ADHD is a gift

In the right social / environmental / learning context.

But not in our current context.

Having ADHD in this world is an exercise in finding a bomb shelter and taking cover until people come to their senses.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 03:22 PM
Thanks for the short and organized points.

I'll say, point 3 may be true for scientific creativity but I would think it'd still be good for creative writing and the arts.

Personally, I think one of the primary differences (though not the only difference) between a creative ADHDer and noncreative one is how strong their motivation is and where their motivations lie. If you're extremely passionate about something that's useful and helpful, then your mind will keep thinking and thinking about the subject until you find a solution. And since the subject is useful, then the creative idea is considered "creative" instead of just nonsense. I'm guessing Einstein and other creative geniuses were mostly extremely passionate in their fields (though you need more than just passion to become an Einstein of course).

Yes - that's interesting - addressing 2 valid definitions of creativity - why they exist and how they're related

[1a]
A take on creativity - from first mind - to extend itself using every tool at its disposal to understand its own context. This is very much in the realm of science.
[1b]
A take on creativity - from first mind - to extend itself using language to express itself - which I think has some alignement with above- with the understanding of reality ie as we understand more we extend our vocabulary.

So - would connect language and understanding.
[1c]
A take on creativity - art - hasn't art (imagery,vision) often pre-empted language pre-empted understanding ... ... potentially tying art -> language -> understanding into sequential order ?

General idea I'm making is that the entire thrust of man up until very recently (Einstein) was to understand reality and that following on from an understanding - we've shifted to creativity in a different context eg music does not have language or understanding required for an individual to compose and another individual to enjoy.

-*-

So - suggesting that what we're observing is a shift from 1 definition of creativity to another.

One definition (man with mind) - relates to gaining a perfect understanding of our context.

[2]

The subsequent definition of creativity relates to 'quality' of experience.

-*-

How do we reconcile these 2 definitions ?

The evolutionary/creative thrust dependent on which world-view one takes results in a mechanism which imparts complexity.

The main thrust for most of human history has been to understand ourselves (to find a suitable conceptualization of 'creator')
- but once that's done - and the conceptualizatio of 'creator' is towards increasing informational complexity in the known Universe
- then another definition of creativity needs to come into play as the means by which the creative impulse manifests.

-*-

So - absolutely - we appear to have a switch from understanding to 'quality' as 2 different important definitions of creativity - which might make sense of the data.

-*-

Yes - exactly what you've said - it's not fair for me to suggest that creativity is only driven by pain - there's also the 'love' (which you mention) - but it's easy to lose sight of that driver. But yes - in a different world
In the right social / environmental / learning context.
But not in our current context.
- that will be our key driver.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 03:32 PM
Forgive me for being creative and diverging somewhat, errr.. maybe a lot.

I'm going to define sensitivity as the ability to bring to the surface that which is subconscious such that it can be fully seen or suggested.

I think sensitvity is "life" and I'm not talking about the same sort of sensitivity that makes people sensitive lil flowers, but a cognitive sensitivity that may or may not include limbic/emotional participation.

I don't think it's just those with mental illness that fabricate their own worlds etc there may just be a bit more tinsel on the trees and such flashiness gets noticed more.

The buddhists and other esotericists all say humanity lives within an illusion and it's been my experience that this is accurate.

I have no trouble believing that the divergent thinking associated with adhd leads to more creativity, but I'd balance that out with productivity issues that would interfere in a major way. And the constantly finding novel ways to do things that have more eficient means would also claw back productivity time.

I'm going to define sensitivity as the ability to bring to the surface that which is subconscious such that it can be fully seen or suggested.


Exactly - that's the point above that I was trying to reach for in art pre-empting language - on the level of creativity employed in understanding context.

Totally - ADD is so unpleasant that it took a while to understand acdc01 's point that there might actually be a positive rather than negative (running for cover) motivation to creativity.

Yes - that's absolutely the way it could be for ADDers - but as for now - it's very difficult to imagine some positive driver for creativity - so much needing to change before the ADDer can settle into a warm, cosy, silent space and explore.

Nearly every comment I make appears to relate to all of our problems residing in bad decisions which we make for reasons of greed ... .... an easy way of putting it - is that we can see all of the landmines that human beings place on the planet - and so many are there - that we can't take a single step without being blown up.

'The eyes to see' - which inevitable means that we can't find that space to enjoy.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 03:35 PM
i feel like, and this would need the stars to align just right, productivity can be excellent in a creative project of interest to an ADHD person

in a manner almost like a hypomanic state , but brought on environmentally

There certainly is the prospect of ADDer sensitivity (in another socio/environmental world) leading to complete immersion ('in the zone' mindset) in a project of worth - from 'cradle' to grave -

I'd have to suggest that this is pretty much the only way that life *should* be.

Blink and it's gone.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 03:39 PM
The buddhists and other esotericists all say humanity lives within an illusion and it's been my experience that this is accurate.

Exactly

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Albert Einstein (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/albert_einstein.html)


-*-

But it has to be - there was once nothing and now there's something - what has happened is an impressive illusion. There's nothing fundamental like lego blocks to build legoville - it's all fabricated from nothing that can be found in our Universe.

SB_UK
02-20-16, 03:45 PM
the intense world theory makes sense to me

It's excellent - can unravel the whole story of man from that 1 observation.

ginniebean
02-20-16, 06:10 PM
SB, and others if interested. There have been two words here being used almost intetchangeably and those are creativity and fabrication.

Fabrication seems to means putting together in novel ways those materials that are found in creation. (The products of creative)

Fabrication isn't alive, just dead components. Creation requires life, However short a life span. I'm thinking of the word vivification. Sorry if this seems muddy and possibly hard to follow. Any thoughts?

dvdnvwls
02-21-16, 12:33 AM
ginniebean: I think creativity doesn't imply a godlike being creating novel materials (new chemical elements, new laws of nature, etc) from nothing. A comedian, a painter, a musician... all of them would be classed as creative, but none of them creates anything. The comedian puts existing words and ideas together in novel ways, the painter does the same with colours and textures, the musician with sounds. I don't yet understand the distinction you're making.

ginniebean
02-21-16, 01:12 AM
SB, and others if interested. There have been two words here being used almost intetchangeably and those are creativity and fabrication.

Fabrication seems to means putting together in novel ways those materials that are found in creation. (The products of creative)

Fabrication isn't alive, just dead components. Creation requires life, However short a life span. I'm thinking of the word vivification. Sorry if this seems muddy and possibly hard to follow. Any thoughts?


I'm certainly not suggesting any sort of 'god like ability of creation". creation happens all the time around us. What I am speaking of has to do with vivification.

Let's take a sweatshop in some country churning out novelties and an artist/carpenter who with master skillfulness designs and crafts an heirloom quality piece. There is a vivification in art, even if the components themselves are dead creations.

When it comes to breakthrough ideas it has been noted that very often there was a moment of incredible insight that was not arrived at via the a-b-c-d of logical thinking but rather a leap in logic that arrived (was born) and only later were the pieces of logic placed together that could 'show' how this could be arrived at. Einstein, Bohr, and etc etc etc.. have all remarked on this phenomena. Maybe for ease of speaking I can call this vivifying thought?

I dunno. I'm playing with an idea here..

ginniebean
02-21-16, 01:13 AM
wierd, sorry I thought I was copying dvd's post. oops!

dvdnvwls
02-21-16, 01:27 AM
How is vivifying thought different from insight or intuition?

ginniebean
02-21-16, 01:34 AM
How is vivifying thought different from insight or intuition?


I don't know. I mean, I can't tease this quite out, an insight may or may not be vivifying, an intuition.. yeah not able to tease this out.. sorry.

Intuition, and not all things ascribed to intuition are in fact intuitive, but Intuition seems to be an instinctive quality and why not? A real intuition would be included.

acdc01
02-21-16, 03:20 AM
I think it said that the "leaky filter" was what was associated with real-world creative achievement, not divergent thinking. In fact for most people, the stronger the divergent thinking, the less of a "leaky filter" they have. Although they did note that ADHDers were found to be both stronger on average in divergent thinking AND have a more "leaky filter".

Did I read that right? I'm really surprised there isn't really a correlation in divergent thinking with real-world creative achievement. Though maybe they are talking about writing and the arts and not problem solving in that case or something? I would think divergent thinking would help in problem solving.

Guess I'm quoting myself here but I'm interested in knowing the answer and think my question may have been lost in the shuffle. So divergent thinking does not lead to real world creative achievement according to their study? Am I reading/interpreting the article right? It's just hard to believe in terms of science (though not the arts).

acdc01
02-21-16, 03:47 AM
I don't know. I mean, I can't tease this quite out, an insight may or may not be vivifying, an intuition.. yeah not able to tease this out.. sorry.

Intuition, and not all things ascribed to intuition are in fact intuitive, but Intuition seems to be an instinctive quality and why not? A real intuition would be included.

I don't think I follow your train of thought here either.

I think How Einstein came up with ideas did have a logical train of thought. It just didn't appear that way to the normal person. Like the example of how Einstein would imagine riding a beam of light and that thought would lead to another thought and then another until he developed the theory of relativity.

That's considered creativity from divergent thinking. There's connections, just loose ones. And personally I think intuition and insight actually follows the same pattern of very loosely connected thoughts. It's just that the subconscious realizes it before the conscious mind fleshes out the thought.

acdc01
02-21-16, 04:47 AM
An example: Einstein was riding an elevator and thinking about how he felt lighter or heavier based on the motion, and pondered the idea that things like gravity and velocity are relative. He imagined what the world would look like if he was riding a beam of light. He went on to change the way people looked at physics and the world.

I just remembered KarmanMonkey posted the beginning of the Einstein theory of relativity story. Einstein's idea started with a leaky filter/leaky attention. Not divergent thinking. He was sensitive to the motion of the elevator. And then divergent thinking, loose connections made developed the original thought into other thoughts and other thoughts that lead to the theory of relativity.

It really took both a leaky filter and divergent thinking to develop the theory of relativity.

SB_UK
02-21-16, 05:14 AM
SB, and others if interested. There have been two words here being used almost intetchangeably and those are creativity and fabrication.

Fabrication seems to means putting together in novel ways those materials that are found in creation. (The products of creative)

Fabrication isn't alive, just dead components. Creation requires life, However short a life span. I'm thinking of the word vivification. Sorry if this seems muddy and possibly hard to follow. Any thoughts?

So - we might think of fabrication as making things better 'out' there and creativity as making things better 'in' here.

Becoming intrinsically better on the levels of understanding / quality.

SB_UK
02-21-16, 05:34 AM
I'm certainly not suggesting any sort of 'god like ability of creation". creation happens all the time around us. What I am speaking of has to do with vivification.

Let's take a sweatshop in some country churning out novelties and an artist/carpenter who with master skillfulness designs and crafts an heirloom quality piece. There is a vivification in art, even if the components themselves are dead creations.

When it comes to breakthrough ideas it has been noted that very often there was a moment of incredible insight that was not arrived at via the a-b-c-d of logical thinking but rather a leap in logic that arrived (was born) and only later were the pieces of logic placed together that could 'show' how this could be arrived at. Einstein, Bohr, and etc etc etc.. have all remarked on this phenomena. Maybe for ease of speaking I can call this vivifying thought?

I dunno. I'm playing with an idea here..

If wd define complexity as expression of creator - then true creative (increasing informational complexity) would be what we should look for in man.

It should be an irrepressible aspect of man.

How would it announce itself ?

Severe pain in people who do not get with the program of exercising creativity - first at the level of knowing understanding and then at the level of knowing beauty.

What would inspire the scientist ?
What should inspire the scientist ?

The scientist should feel stupid because they can see that we exist, that severe mental disease exists -

and then what follows should follow the use of imagination to align observable facts with aspects of reality which seek understanding.

The scientist should feel stupid if the scientist cannot answer questions which need be answered.

If one cannot imagine the solution - how ever can we prove the unimaginable ? We'll simply miss the pointers in the data.

The interesting thing about imagination is the relationship between understanding and imagination ie with understanding - imagination itself changes ie things like human beings evolving time travel, human beings destroying the planet, human beings parasitizing the stars, human beings destroying all planetary life, human beings re-introducing dinosaurs - cease to appeal.

All that I can see is a sudden and powerful thrust towards the realization that the 2 definitions of creativity - are both internal - within our heads.

It doesn't matter (in fact it's better to leave the material world alone) - human evolution at the level of understanding / quality represent the array of neural networks - where - we don't even need to understand how -
just that we can do - and that we do through learning and practice.

We probably need optimized learning schedules so that an individual can be helped into understandign and quality in an enjoyable fashion.

Enjoyable learning.
Enjoyable practice.

It's all simply - an exercise - the process of realising creativity in knowing fun.

SB_UK
02-21-16, 05:41 AM
I don't know. I mean, I can't tease this quite out, an insight may or may not be vivifying, an intuition.. yeah not able to tease this out.. sorry.

Intuition, and not all things ascribed to intuition are in fact intuitive, but Intuition seems to be an instinctive quality and why not? A real intuition would be included.

If we can accept that creativity (understanding / quality) is an in-built quality - then we could call the wholly unexpected process of walking a path which has been pre-determined as the creative / intuitive process.

Evolution then becomes an unimaginable deterministic process which we're programmed to align ourselves with - so the existence of a Universe which is founded upon an interesting creative principle which exerts itself through human beings - as the triumph of complexity on the planet - in our own first (understanding) and then acquisition of quality.

Under the cover though - it's informational complexity simply undergoing rediscovery from its roots in Planck time - to its current instantiation in human beings being able to feel nuance.

Sensitivity is clearly the latest instantiation of the evolutionary directive.

SB_UK
02-21-16, 06:03 AM
Guess I'm quoting myself here but I'm interested in knowing the answer and think my question may have been lost in the shuffle. So divergent thinking does not lead to real world creative achievement according to their study? Am I reading/interpreting the article right? It's just hard to believe in terms of science (though not the arts).

Divergent thinking applies more to the scientific model of understanding than to the acquisition of personal quality (which can bypass mind).
Divergent thinking - level 1 creativity
Generating beauty - level 2 creativity

If we're on the scientific model of creativity - then the problem we encounter are 'divergent models' of reality with no bearing on reality - these are often encountered in individuals who fail to read through the metaphor of religion - which is not aiming to provide a rigorous scientific basis to reality.

Divergent thinking will certainly help creative real world achievement.
So - we can see this in eg Hubbard whose capacity in imagination in sci-fi permitted him to write and also to create an 'appealing' religion of sorts ... ... the quesiton then becomes whether divergent thinking which results in creative real world achievement at the level of mind - is useful - unless it's scientifically rigorous - that is - that we've obsreved much suffering/nonsense arise from the movement which arose through Hubbard's mind.

Wondering whether lack of grounding in science + capacity for divergent thinking is a potentially harmful combination. Presumably the world's great dictators have some deep, potentially intricate world-view which involves the world being saved if some ethnic group is 'cleansed'.

-*-

So - at the level of understanding - the need for scientific rigour and morality are required to prevent human beings entering dangerous territory.

But what about the acquisitio of quality ? Can this be acquired in the absence of any understanding of reality.

I'm noting that many classically creative types self-destruct ... ... lose touch with reality.

-*-

Wondering whether we all need to pursue (and simultaneously) balance in understanding (scientific rigour) AND personal quality (balance, art) AND empathizing (language (social -> morality).

-*-

Things now become a little difficult as I'm switching from

science -> quality into

Quality (systematizing,empathizing,balance,sensory) simultaneously - which is what the school does - albeit badly.

-*-

Trying to identify what the nonADDer to ADDer divide is ?

Is it simply all (systematizing,empathizing,balance,sensory) of the same qualities but shifted up in resolution (by virtue of our increasing sensitivity) ?

But how do we shift systematizing (as soon as we understand context ie wisdom) to a higher level ? Perhaps some clue is provided by the 'idiot savant' property ?

-*-

So - why don't ADDers exhibit enhanced functioning on these (systematizing,empathizing,balance,sensory) levels ?
Because of the social environment - it's impossible to learn (defined as unfurling these sensitivity circuits) when you've somebody with a sharp stick forcing you to pay through engaging in immoral (by definition) pursuits.

SB_UK
02-21-16, 06:11 AM
What's the problem in the section above ?

Creativity must (to man) have been important in understanding our own context.
We can only understand reality once though.

Historically - we've multiple times when we've believed we're entering a 'renaissance' which has been used to herald the coming of an 'enlightened' age.

I'm suggesting that this transition must occur through individual/group acquisition of wisdom.

Now - it's generally considered that the renaissance would bring with it the tendency towards living for the higher things in life - which neatly feeds into the emergence of sensitivity at multiple levels in brain.

We need to have a transition from wisdom into quality governing reward.

IE from reward gained through understanding context into reward from other aspects of life.

The tricky thing here - is that it's hard to know what to do with the mind which is struggling to understand its context - when it understands its context ie we've the capacity to problem solve - which ahs characterized man - but no problem left to solve.

-*-

Simplest possible route through all of the above.

[1] The emergence of modern man was characteized by the drive towards arriving at collective wisdom
[2] In the process towards arriving at collective wisdom - a further evolutionary property (sensitivity) arose - which increased the resolution that the individual experienced reality - making life (potentially) a more immersive experience - similar to the adverts which sell the next higher resolution in technology and which promise an immersive experience.

The thing about this entire story - is that it's all individual-centric ie we don't really need to generate any thing - but are tasked with shaping our internal environment - our pattern of understanding and our sensitivity of experience.

-*-

Understanding context gets us out of jail ie frees us from addictie propensity ie once we see reality for what it is - we're no longer attracted to greed/material wealth etc ?
But we have to do something - and that something becomes to simply make a personally satisfying better.

What is personally satisfying ? - aiming personal sensitivity propensity (ie novel learning) towards acquiring personal quality - and once acquired - then experiencing quality.
Resolution, beauty, elegance and efficiency.

Resolution (sensory), Elegance (balance), Efficiency (systematizing), Beauty (communication)

SB_UK
02-21-16, 06:39 AM
Apologies - this is a little difficult to put into order.
I think that the best way of putting it might be:

[1] Emergence of modern man
Low resolution definition of balance, systematizing, empathizing, sensory qualities not rewarding in and of themselves - subservient to materialism (placeholder during incompletion in understanding) reward system.*
->- Following understanding of context [overcoming materialism reward system/greed] ->-
[2] Post-modern man
High resolution (sensitivity) definition of balance, systematizing, empathizing, sensory qualities - now rewarding in and of themselves ie no longer subservient to materialism reward system.**

* Explanation - material world attachment (greed) definitions of:
balance -> eg professional sport reward through winning/money
systematizing -> eg publication count and reward through power (heading a Department)
empathizing -> eg sophism (lawyer) - to make personal gain through playing with words
sensory qualities -> eg modern art where the point is to make most money and not produce anything of any lasting worth

** Explanation - post-material world attachment definitions of:
balance -> personal reward (intrinsic personal improvement) in developing elegance and teaching others how to attain (intrinsic collective improvement) the same
systematizing -> personal reward (intrinsic personal improvement) in generating sustainable, efficient systems which improve the lives (intrinsic collective improvement) of others
empathizing -> personal reward (intrinsic personal improvement) through communication of information in the best interests (intrinsic collective improvement) of others
sensory qualities -> personal reward (intrinsic personal improvement) through producing something sensory which activates the collective's reward (intrinsic collective improvement) system (eg music)

Under this higher model - all human beings will want all other human beings to be the best that they can be - and NOT (as we observe in this current world) to suppress others for per$onal gain.

-*-

The core factor here is a transition (enlightenment) which reflects understanding ... overcoming the individual's tendency towards 'wrong intention' underlying pursuits of quality - into 'right intention' ... ... it's the nature of the reward system propelling behaviour and not the behaviours themselves or a shift in the motivation from selfish to collective benefit which we're observing currently.

daveddd
02-21-16, 06:46 AM
Guess I'm quoting myself here but I'm interested in knowing the answer and think my question may have been lost in the shuffle. So divergent thinking does not lead to real world creative achievement according to their study? Am I reading/interpreting the article right? It's just hard to believe in terms of science (though not the arts).

yes thats right


i don't see your original question

SB_UK
02-21-16, 07:24 AM
Divergent thinking is found to rely on focused attention
Divergent thinking is found to rely on selective sensory filters
Additionally, executive functions “updating,” which is closely associated with the concept of working memory and “inhibition,” or the ability to suppress a dominant, but irrelevant response significantly predict divergent thinking
“shifting”—the process of switching between different tasks or mental sets does not

Divergent thinking appears to be defined as the capacity to demonstrate the discipline [1] to maintain one's attention in supplying an original AND useful [3] solution to a specific [2,4] problem.


None of the psychopathology-spectrum scales reliably predicted scores on the timed divergent thinking scored with the manual method.

Being able to solve all of our problems and not being able to apply these solutions is though depressing.

... meaning ...

So divergent thinking [most likely will] not [immediately, though will in the future] lead to real world creative achievement

Divergent thinking appears to be defined as effective problem solving capacity - defining the perfect solution to a problem does not mean that the real world problem will then be solved - since application (which requires people - many of whom will resist change) is required.

acdc01
02-22-16, 02:54 PM
Divergent thinking appears to be defined as effective problem solving capacity - defining the perfect solution to a problem does not mean that the real world problem will then be solved - since application (which requires people - many of whom will resist change) is required.

You're right, that probably contributes.

Another thing, I believe when they talk about "real world creative achievement", they are talking about doing something that is truly innovative/different based on what I read. I can see how divergent thinking might not do that as well as a leaky filter. It's like leaky filters will drive you to see the world differently, so you'll automatically come up with questions that were never thought to even be asked before so it really is truly different. Whereas divergent thinking - maybe that's more often used to solve problems when a question has already been asked? Just a thought that might not be right.

I'm really surprised that most people who are stronger in divergent thinking tend to have less leaky filters (if I read the papers right). The reason for this they explained (cause divergent thinking takes focused attention) makes sense but then I still get this feeling it doesn't make sense. Another weird thing is that I think ADHDers break this pattern - I think we are stronger on both. Though it didn't seem like the paper explicitly said that besides saying that was the general belief on ADHDers.

Have a bad feeling I read something wrong so if I did, please correct me.

SB_UK
02-22-16, 03:58 PM
You're right, that probably contributes.

Another thing, I believe when they talk about "real world creative achievement", they are talking about doing something that is truly innovative/different based on what I read. I can see how divergent thinking might not do that as well as a leaky filter. It's like leaky filters will drive you to see the world differently, so you'll automatically come up with questions that were never thought to even be asked before so it really is truly different. Whereas divergent thinking - maybe that's more often used to solve problems when a question has already been asked? Just a thought that might not be right.

I'm really surprised that most people who are stronger in divergent thinking tend to have less leaky filters (if I read the papers right). The reason for this they explained (cause divergent thinking takes focused attention) makes sense but then I still get this feeling it doesn't make sense. Another weird thing is that I think ADHDers break this pattern - I think we are stronger on both. Though it didn't seem like the paper explicitly said that besides saying that was the general belief on ADHDers.

Have a bad feeling I read something wrong so if I did, please correct me.


Creativity appears to also be associated with atypical attention: adults diagnosed with ADHD are suggested to have higher real-world creative achievements (White and Shaw, 2011 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4166997/#B69)), and outperform those without ADHD on divergent thinking tasks (White and Shaw, 2006 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4166997/#B68)). creativity + divergent thinking characterizes ADDers ?

divergent thinking - novel solution ? - domain thinking mind (science)
creative - just novel ? [worthwhile] - need not be in domain of science eg music (lovely post-rock was a creative leap involving a notable absence in words)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzIK5FaC38w&index=3&list=PL86mPT5_-6Szq77tTgF7O_mkF5mPaa0fC

SB_UK
02-22-16, 04:12 PM
why divergent + creative ?
mostly boredom

'you can't go out and play until you've done your chores'

life need not be such a chore

acdc01
02-22-16, 05:41 PM
I'm really surprised that most people who are stronger in divergent thinking tend to have less leaky filters (if I read the papers right). The reason for this they explained (cause divergent thinking takes focused attention) makes sense but then I still get this feeling it doesn't make sense. Another weird thing is that I think ADHDers break this pattern - I think we are stronger on both. Though it didn't seem like the paper explicitly said that besides saying that was the general belief on ADHDers.

Have a bad feeling I read something wrong so if I did, please correct me.

I realize what I wrote here may sound confusing. What's surprising to me is that people who are more divergent thinkers tend to be able to focus their attention better (thereby having less leaky filters). And typically the more leaky of a filter you have, the more real-world creative achievement you show. So to me that would suggest that the more divergent a thinker you are, the less real world creative achievement you should have based on the way they measure creative achievement where it isn't just problem solving but innovative inventions and art. But ADHDers are BOTH divergent thinkers and have more real world achievement?

daveddd
02-22-16, 06:31 PM
I realize what I wrote here may sound confusing. What's surprising to me is that people who are more divergent thinkers tend to be able to focus their attention better (thereby having less leaky filters). And typically the more leaky of a filter you have, the more real-world creative achievement you show. So to me that would suggest that the more divergent a thinker you are, the less real world creative achievement you should have based on the way they measure creative achievement where it isn't just problem solving but innovative inventions and art. But ADHDers are BOTH divergent thinkers and have more real world achievement?

thought it said ADHD was correlated negatively with divergent thinking

acdc01
02-22-16, 07:49 PM
thought it said ADHD was correlated negatively with divergent thinking

Creativity appears to also be associated with atypical attention: adults diagnosed with ADHD are suggested to have higher real-world creative achievements (White and Shaw, 2011), and outperform those without ADHD on divergent thinking tasks (White and Shaw, 2006).

Woah. You're right. They did say that. My mind is blown. That's contrary to everything else I've read and what I've always believed. With all the contrary articles, I'm not sure what to believe - I still think we are divergent thinkers AND we have more real-world achievement.

Was the test for "divergent thinking" in this study timed? Cause I would think it would take us longer to come up with more creative answers cause our "leaky filter" causes a number of detours that slow us down but because we "divert farther" and sometimes in a useful direction depending on if we are motivated, we'd still have more creative problem solving ideas in the end through divergent thinking.

This really contradicts what the general feeling on this board has been. Most haven't questioned us ADHDers as being more divergent thinkers, but they have questioned whether we showed more real world achievement.

acdc01
02-22-16, 08:24 PM
Daveddd, thanks for correcting me by the way when I misread.

It feels really nice to be a place where I can misread over and over again and not have people become exasperated or think I'm stupid.

Well, most of the people who's opinions are important to me irl don't think I'm stupid but even those people can't help but be exasperated on occasion.