The idea of starting a business has been brewing for some time among my friends and I. It takes courage and conviction, but the payoff could be good in terms of monetary payoff and impact on a field.
I think the direction I would want to head in is some sort of creative consulting. But this would not be anything new. There are creative consultants in many fields, and they have to do with marketing, advertising, and positioning a product in a new and meaningful way. What I think I would like to pursue is creative problem solving. Actually helping in the design process for products that, preferable, are dedicated to helping people be creative. I like to deal with creativity at a meta-level and think about how it works and how to facilitate it.
I’ve been starting to work on the neuroscience of creativity by integrating biofeedback into the creative process using NeuroSky’s MindSet. In my most recent PhD project, I am recording brainwaves to analyze how creativity affects the mind, and also to integrate those neural impulses into the creative process.
I’ve long dreamed of a creative medium that directly interfaces with the brain and allows one to dream up creations and then manipulate them with the hands. Very similar to an early video that envisions the future of augmented reality in World Builder:
Continue from last post…..The desire for creative liberty seems to be like a pressure valve that needs to be released every so often, at indeterminate intervals. Depending on what kind of problem, one’s mood, how efficiently one is working, the pressure rises, and once it reaches a threshold, one will run into a problem or creative roadblock in the project.
At this point, it is necessary to do some action to relieve this creative urge. This can be in a number of ways. The difference between the two poles of the model I have just presented in the last article, supporting creativity, is that stage one, creative liberation, could be summarized as action, and stage two, creative delibaration, could be summarized as thinking. However, this is a slightly different kind of thinking in the head. This type of thinking follows more closely with the distributed cognition definition of thinking. Humans use our environments in order to work out problems and manipulate material and physical entities (words, paint, objects, etc.) to help conceptualize a problem.
The four step theory of creativity widely cited in the creativity theory literature is a good place to begin thinking about computational approaches that can augment and supplement the process.
This kind of thinking usually happens in the context of problem solving. It is usually not an open ended creative context, such as the scenario of abstract art I have discussed before. However, on this side note, the abstract art previously discussed enters into this phase after a perceptual logic has been constructed.
The art of science. A seeming dichotomy, which may be less distinct than once imagined. Science is the careful crafting of knowledge through experimentation and verification. Methodology varies, but verification typically relies upon statistical, computational, logical, or a combination thereof in order to make its way into the realm known as knowledge. Science, as a totality of human effort, is an organic being. And knowledge, as its extension, is also an amorphous, far-reaching entity in itself. The digestion and interpretation of knowledge in humans breeds an entirely new creature: thought. (These terms are here loosely defined in order to put forth a feeling of an idea that I have. This may be a typical occurrence in this space, analytic philosophy aside…)
Learning how to craft new materials enables the mind to conceive of novel manipulations, therefore expanding the realm of thinkable thoughts within one’s mind. For example, a sculptor may look at a pile of scrap metal and see a creation, whereas a layperson will see trash.
There may or may not be a difference between an artist and a creator. I’ll explore this line of thought here, as a fun tangent. An artist, let us say, a sculptor, as the example earlier utilizes, may view the pile of rubble as a potential. However, he may not view a pile of sticks as a potential art piece, or a tree as a sculpting aparatus, as a land artist would (a medium that has inspired me lately, and one I have explored in the past). However, a creator, always seeking to enrich and enliven one’s environment sees potential whenever in the write mood. If in the creative spirit, the creator can make art out of whatever is close by. Paint is a convenient method of expression and is often close to the creator, that is, if he is well versed in listening to the ever-so-subtle whisper of creative force coming from within.