Intelligence is not enough for creativity. So intelligent people defend the position given them by their intelligence by claiming that creativity is not a learnable skill but an inborn talent – which they cannot be expected to acquire.
These are some of the traditional reasons why we have paid very little attention to creativity.
BRAINSTORMING FOR CREATIVITY
This method originated in the advertising industry as a formal approach to creativity. It has some value, but overall it is very weak.
Imagine a person walking down the road. This is an ordinary person – not a musician. This person is then tied up with a rope. Someone now produces a violin. Obviously the person tied up with the rope cannot play the violin. It is then suggested that if the rope is cut, the person will be able to play the violin; to become a violinist. This is obviously nonsense, but it is similar to what happens in brainstorming – simply removing inhibitions (as in cutting the rope) is not enough.
If you are inhibited and if people attack every one of your ideas, then creativity is indeed difficult. So if we remove the inhibition and we remove the attacks, surely everyone will be creative. This has a little bit more logic than cutting the rope in the above example because it assumes that everyone has some creative talent.
Brainstorming does have a value, but it is a very weak process compared with some of the formal tools of lateral thinking. Just removing inhibitions and suspending judgement is not enough. The traditional process of brainstorming sometimes gives the impression of shooting out a stream of (often crazy) ideas in the hope that one of them might hit a useful target.
There is a need for more deliberate processes to encourage and enhance creativity actively.
CREATIVITY: TALENT OR SKILL?
This is a very fundamental question. If creativity is an inborn talent then we can search for that talent, nurture it, develop it and encourage it. But there is nothing we can do for those who do not have this inborn talent.
I remind you that I am writing about idea creativity and lateral thinking rather than artistic talent.
If idea creativity is a skill then everyone can learn this skill, practise it and apply it. As with any skill, such as tennis, skiing and cooking, some people will be better at the skill than others. Everyone, however, can acquire a usable level of the skill. Idea creativity can be taught and used as formally as mathematics.
BEHAVIOUR
There are some people who do seem to be more creative than others. This is because they enjoy and value creativity. As a result they spend more time trying to be creative. They build up confidence in their creative abilities. All this does is make them more creative. It is a positive feedback system.
Some people seem more curious than others. Some people seem to enjoy creativity and new ideas more than others.
This does not mean that those who do not have this temperament cannot be creative. They can learn the deliberate skills of lateral thinking just as they might learn the basic skills of mathematics. Everyone can learn to add up numbers and multiply them.
The argument that creativity cannot be taught is usually based on pointing to extreme cases of creativity and talent, such as Einstein, Michelangelo, Bjorn Borg. But imagine a row of people lined up to run a race. The starting signal is given and the race is run. Someone comes first and someone comes last. Their performance depended on their natural running ability.
Now if all the runners have some training on roller skates, they all finish the race much faster than before. However, someone still comes first and someone still comes last.
So if we do nothing about creativity then obviously creative ability depends only on 'natural' talent. But if we provide training, structures and systematic techniques, then we raise the general level of creative ability. Some people will be much better than others but everyone will acquire some creative skill.
Then how is this skill to be acquired? Exhortation and example do have some effect, but only a weak one. There is a need for specific mental tools, operations and habits, which lead to creative new ideas. These tools and techniques can be learned, practised and used in a deliberate manner.
It is no longer a matter of sitting by a stream and listening to Baroque music and hoping for the inspiration of a new idea. You can try that, by all means, but it is far less effective than the deliberate use of a lateral thinking technique.
As you acquire skill in the techniques, you develop more confidence and the result is that you get better and better ideas.
All the lateral thinking tools are designed on the basis of understanding the brain as a self-organising information system that forms asymmetric patterns. Over 40 years of use, the tools have been shown to be effective across a wide range of ages, abilities, backgrounds and cultures. This is because the tools are so fundamental. This is because the tools affect behaviour.
THE LOGIC OF CREATIVITY
It may surprise many people to learn that idea creativity is a logical process, because they believe that logic can never achieve creativity. Creativity is indeed logical, but it is a very different sort of logic.
Logic defines the rules of behaviour within a certain universe. With our normal logic, the universe is one of language or discrete elements: language refers to separate things like box, cloud, smile, etc. These are discrete or separated elements. With creativity, the universe is that of a self-organising patterning system that makes asymmetric patterns. Logic defines the rules of behaviour within this rather special universe.
Patterns
One morning a fellow gets up and realises he has 11 items of clothing to put on. In how many ways can he get dressed?
He sets his computer to work through all the ways of getting dressed. The computer takes 40 hours to go through all the ways (this was tested some years ago; today's computers will be faster but the concept is the same). With 11 items of clothing, there are 39,916,800 ways of getting dressed.
There are 11 choices for the first item, 10 choices for the next, and so on.
If you were to spend just one minute concentrating on each way of getting dressed, you would need to live to the age of 76 years old – using every minute of your waking life trying ways of getting dressed.
Life would be impractical and rather difficult if the brain worked that way. You would take forever to get up in the morning, cross the road, get to work, read and write.
But the brain does not work that way. We exist because the brain is a self-organising information system that allows patterns to form from incoming information. That is its excellence. All we then need to do is to recognise the routine 'getting dressed' pattern, switch into it and go through that normal routine. That is why you can drive to work in the morning, read, write, and all the other things you do in your day-to-day life.
Imagine you have a piece of paper and you make marks with a pen on that surface. The surface records the marks accurately. Previous marks do not affect the way a new mark is received.
Change the surface to a shallow dish of gelatin. You now put spoonfuls of hot water on to the gelatin. The hot water dissolves the gelatin. In time, channels are formed in the surface. In this case previous information strongly affects the way new information is received. The process is no different from rain falling on a landscape. Streams are formed and then rivers. New rain is channelled along the tracks formed by preceding rain. The gelatin and landscape have allowed the hot water and rain to organise themselves into channels or sequences.
In my 1969 book The Mechanism of Mind I showed how the brain, unlike computers, is this second type of information-receiving surface. I showed how neural networks act like the gelatin or the landscape.
What is a pattern?
There is a pattern whenever the change from one state to the next one has a higher chance of happening in one direction than in any other. If you are standing on a path in a garden, the chances of you proceeding another step down the path are much more likely than of you wandering off the path.
How the brain forms patterns is described in my book The Mechanism of Mind.
We can even represent a pattern by that path. At each moment we are more likely to take the next step in one direction than move down the path in any other direction. Under given circumstances a certain 'state' in the brain is more likely to be followed by one particular other state than by any other.
Asymmetry
Patterning systems tend to be asymmetric, though.
As above, we can represent a pattern by a path, since at every next step the highest probability is to move along the path rather than stop and consider every side track. Point A is at the beginning of the path towards point B; point C is at the end of a side track. All this means is that the route from A to C is not the same as the route from C to A. You can go from A to C (you follow the usual routine or path towards B and in a roundabout way you come round to the other end of the side track, i.e. C) whereas, if you were to enter the side track from another point at point C, route C to A is very straightforward (you go straight down the side track to the main path or route).
Consider instead that the main path from point A then narrowed to a point D. The narrowing of the track means that, while going from A to D is difficult, the reverse is not so difficult. Then the path from A to B is wide open in comparison so the possibility of taking the track to D is remote.
This asymmetry is the logical basis for both humour and creativity.
HUMOUR AND CREATIVITY
Humour is by far the most significant behaviour of the human brain, far more significant than reason. Humour tells us more about the underlying system. Humour tells us that the brain makes asymmetric patterns.
In humour, we are led along the main path from A and then suddenly we are shifted to the end of the side path (B) and immediately we see the track we might have taken (from B to A). Once there, we can see that it actually makes sense and is perfectly logical.
For example, an old man of 90 goes down to hell. Wandering around, he sees a friend of his of a similar age. Sitting on the knee of this friend is a beautiful young blonde.
He says to his friend: 'Are you sure this is hell? You seem to be having rather a good time!'
The friend replies: 'It is hell all right. I am the punishment for her.'
The explanation is perfectly logical but reverses the situation completely. That is the surprise of humour.
An Englishman on a railway station in Ireland storms into the stationmaster's office to complain that on the platform there are two clocks each showing a different time.
The stationmaster looks at him and says: 'To be sure, and what would be the use of having two clocks if they showed the same time?' There is an unexpected logic in the reply. It is the surprise element of suddenly switching perceptions that makes us laugh.
Two blondes are walking along a canal, one on each side of the canal. One blonde calls out to the other, 'How do I get to the other side?' The other blonde replies, 'But you are already on the other side.'
Humour derives part of its effect by bringing in various prejudices and preconceptions.
Returning to my seat on an aeroplane I hit my head on the overhead luggage locker. The person next to me said, 'I also hit my head on that locker. It must be too low.'
'On the contrary,' I said, 'the trouble is that the locker is placed too high, not too low.'
There is nothing humorous about this exchange but there is the same sudden switch in perception, which eventually makes sense. If the luggage locker were placed really low, you would realise you must duck your head. If the locker were placed really high, it would not matter whether you ducked or not. If the locker is placed at a level that suggests you do not need to duck, you do not duck and you hit your head.
The humour model of the asymmetric pattern is also the model for creativity. You suddenly see something differently and it makes sense in hindsight.
All valuable creative ideas will be logical in hindsight. In a sense, the definition of 'valuable' means logical in hindsight.
For the first time in human history we have a logical basis for creativity. Creativity is no longer a mysterious gift or special talent. We can now see creativity as the behaviour of a self-organising information system that makes asymmetric patterns (the brain).
Once we can understand the underlying system, then we can design tools for the deliberate use of creativity. These tools can be very powerful. It need no longer be a matter of sitting and waiting for ideas and inspiration. We can do certain things that will result in the brain having new ideas. This is a big step forwards in the history of mankind.
Being without this for 2,400 years has caused immense problems and explains why we have done nothing about creativity.
If an idea is 'logical' in hindsight, then we claim that it could have been obtained by 'logic' in the first place. So we do not need creativity because all such ideas should have been reached by logic.
This is complete and perfect nonsense. In an asymmetric system what is obvious and logical in hindsight may be inaccessible in foresight.
Because philosophers have been playing with words and not considered self-organising pattern-making systems they have not been able to see that obvious in hindsight is not at all obvious in foresight. That is why we have done nothing about creativity.
THE RANDOM WORD TOOL FOR CREATIVITY
This was the tool that generated over 20,000 new ideas for a steel company in a single afternoon from a workshop. I have chosen this lateral thinking tool first for a number of reasons.
1. It seems totally illogical and unlikely to work.
2. It may be the easiest of the tools to use.
3. It is very powerful.
4. It is actually totally logical.
Process
You have your focus. You know where you want to generate new ideas.
You then obtain a 'random word'. Nouns are easiest to use, so use a noun. You can obtain your random word in several ways.
You may keep a list of 60 words on a card in your pocket. You then glance at your watch. If the second hand shows 27 seconds, you select word number 27 from your list.
You could also choose a page number in a dictionary and then specify the tenth (or other) word down on that page. You continue downwards until you come to a noun. You could do this with any book with a page and line number.
You could put words written on slips of paper into a bag and then pick one out.
You could close your eyes and stab your finger at a page of a newspaper or book. You take the word nearest to your finger.
All of these are practical ways of obtaining a random word. Once you have your random word, you then use this random word to generate ideas about the subject. This is a mental operation called 'movement' and quite different from 'judgement', which I describe elsewhere. The task is to use the random word to open up new lines of thinking. It is not a matter of finding a connection between the random word and the subject.
Logic
At first sight the process seems totally illogical. The essence of logic is that what comes next is relevant and related to what is being considered. With the random word technique, what comes next is completely irrelevant and unrelated.
If a random word is truly random then it will be equally related to any possible focus. Indeed, any random word will be related to any focus. Logicians would point out that this is complete nonsense. Yet it is totally logical – in the universe of asymmetric patterning systems. I shall explain the logic in more detail elsewhere, but here is a simple explanation.
You live in a small town and when you leave home you always take the main road, which satisfies your travel needs. There are many side roads that you ignore. One day your car breaks down on the outskirts of the town and you have to walk home. You ask around for instructions. You find yourself arriving home by a route you have never taken before. You note that this is a much better way of getting to your favourite restaurant. The logic is simple. If you start from the centre, your path i
s determined by the pattern probabilities at that point – so you take the familiar route. If you have a different starting point at the periphery and make your way to the centre you open up a new route.
Shaping
Shaping is a broad term, which covers influencing, changing, concept transfer, effect, etc.
You are trying to get some new ideas for a restaurant. You use the random-word technique. The word is 'cinema'.
The shaping could be very direct. Diners could order a DVD player and earphones and watch a movie as they ate. Some couples have more need to eat than to talk.
The shaping could be more indirect. Cinemas are usually in darkness. So a rather dark restaurant where you might appreciate more the taste of the food. And it would not matter who you were with as no one could see. From that we could move on to a very discreet restaurant where each couple had its own private cubicle.
Cinemas have set times to show a movie. Maybe a restaurant could have different menus at different times so you chose your time according to the menu you preferred.
How might the word 'bible' shape 'exams'?
The bible is unchanging so perhaps the questions in an exam would always be the same. Each question, however, would be designed to test the candidates' knowledge of the subject.
The bible is about 'truth'. So perhaps exams would allow candidates to reply in two distinct ways. There would be the 'truth reply' and then there would be the 'speculative reply' signalled as such.
THE RANDOM WORD EFFECT
Considering asymmetry it is easy to see why the lateral thinking 'random word' tool works.
The random word comes in from direction C. This has two effects. The first is that the dominance of the A to B path is avoided. The second is that the new direction of C is opened up.
The random word is not the idea itself. The random word is not itself 'C'. The random word opens up the path, which can lead to the idea at C.