Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 118 posts

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#71

Post by technological »

mbrumlow wrote: post #23

This is something we as humans are going to have to deal with at one point or another. While some people would have it that "we are all the same" - the fact is that we are not. It tends to become a touchy subject when you suggest that brain functionality differs between people but we seem to blindly accept that some people make better athletes than others. It is particularly hard because you can't simply look at some…

I understand and agree to large extent regarding your statement "While some people would have it that "we are all the same" - the fact is that we are not."

What is your take on each individual has his or her own strong quality which is different from others ?

Like some may good at managing people, some good at analysis

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#72

Post by pmoriarty »

eachro wrote: post #63
pmoriarty wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The genetic lottery is unfair; and some people are just better than you no matter what you do, and no matter what they don't do." This is clearer in some fields than others -- particularly in fields where there are child prodigies, like in chess, music, or mathematics. In other fields, child prodigies are rare or perhaps even non-existent. There are, to my knowledge, no child prodigies who've written brilliant novel…

Child prodigies are rare by definition though. Whether or not you've heard of them, I think, is more a function of what media chooses to shine a spotlight on. On the top of my head I'd probably say Chistopher Paolini( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Paolini ) qualifies as a child prodigy author - his first book, Eragon, was published when he was 19. Granted, it was his parent publishing company, but it stil…

Bestseller lists are an even less reliable way of measuring talent than the Nobel Prize. There have been numerous articles about how flawed and subject to manipulation the NYT Bestseller List is, for instance.[1][2][3][4]

Calling a 19-year-old a "child" is really stretching the definition of a "child", in my view. Compare that to chess and music prodigies, for instance, who are already performing at levels above those of most adults even before their teens.[5][6]

[1] - https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/27/16208294/handbook-for-mor...

[2] - http://gary-lindberg.com/do-you-trust-the-nyt-bestseller-lis...

[3] - http://www.hughhowey.com/the-nyt-and-wsj-best-seller-lists-m...

[4] - http://www.politicususa.com/2010/12/02/palin-bestseller-frau...

[5] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_prodigy

[6] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_prodigy

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#73

Post by chipfunk »

Judgmentality wrote: post #5
chillwaves wrote: post #2

Some people are better athletes than others, but anyone who trains will be better than someone who does not, regardless of any innate potential. I see creativity along the same lines. Many folks are conditioned to memorize, follow processes, follow norms and paths laid by others, it may not occur to them to seek out originality. It is another form of learned helplessness. Creating is hard, especially when judged in a…

> but anyone who trains will be better than someone who does not, regardless of any innate potential I disagree. The genetic lottery is unfair; and some people are just better than you no matter what you do, and no matter what they don't do.

This is incorrect in many cases. The relative importance of innate potential vs focused practice differs wildly based on the activity. Certain activities (powerlifting, sprinting, competitive programming, singing) depend very heavily on genetic abilities such as IQ, muscular strength, etc. Other activities (assembling wooden ships and putting them in bottles, sailing, choreographed dances, becoming an expert on world history) depend more on improving muscle memory or on learning specific skills/strategies/techniques that don't simply appear without practice.

Most skills are somewhere between the two extremes. If success relative to your peers is the goal, the former type of skill should only be pursued by those with some degree of pre-existing talent, whereas the latter type of skill provides opportunities for talentless but hard-working individuals to outshine their lazier peers.

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#74

Post by WhitneyLand »

Is one answer psychedelic substances? At a high level it seems consistent with the article conjecture. I haven’t checked research recently, but there sure are some compelling anecdotes.

It’s interesting to me some (based on comments here and elsewhere) many would be opposed to personal experiments under professional medical care.

Even for a very skeptical person (as I would self identify), consider the countless profound experiences recounted, even by people who might be considered equally skeptical.

Either these experiences are valid, with respect to enabling some sort of beneficial expansion of brain activity, or they are not.

If it is valid, how could such a rare and potentially transformative opportunity be ignored? If it’s not valid, risks seem negligible under professional supervision, and you still might experience a once in a lifetime fantastic journey.

It’s so easy for us to grok what, say a blind from birth person can’t experience through words alone, yet somehow difficult to imagine ourselves having a similarly untapped perspective, through which difficult to imagine insights might be possible.

Hopefully it won’t take too many years for the data to yield an answer. Maybe Steve Jobs and others chose not to wait based on similar cost/benefit analysis.

https://patch.com/california/santacruz/can-psychedelic-drugs...

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#75

Post by randcraw »

supreme_sublime wrote: post #16

> Some ideas were more creative than others. For the sock, one participant suggested using it to warm your feet—the common use for a sock—while another participant suggested using it as a water filtration system. > We also ranked their ideas for originality: Common uses received lower scores (using a sock to warm your feet), while uncommon uses received higher scores (using a sock as a water filtration system). > Ove…

The article did suggest that a creative act had to be both novel and useful. There are an infinite number of useless uses for a sock. Enumerating them is not creative; it's random, like rolling a die.

Creativity requires both imagination and judgement -- for each idea you conceive, you must also judge its practical utility to serve some known purpose. Or imagine some unknown purpose that it also might serve...

"In shoe world, all hats look just like shoes, but no one wears shoes on their feet. As such, nobody ever invented a sock, nor can they imagine any use for it. After all, why would you put a sock on your head?"

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#76

Post by WhitneyLand »

WhitneyLand wrote: post #74

Is one answer psychedelic substances? At a high level it seems consistent with the article conjecture. I haven’t checked research recently, but there sure are some compelling anecdotes. It’s interesting to me some (based on comments here and elsewhere) many would be opposed to personal experiments under professional medical care. Even for a very skeptical person (as I would self identify), consider the countless prof…

Downvote with no comment? Love to have counterpoints, always regret not having a chance to learn from them.

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#77

Post by munchbunny »

chipfunk wrote: post #73
Judgmentality wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but anyone who trains will be better than someone who does not, regardless of any innate potential I disagree. The genetic lottery is unfair; and some people are just better than you no matter what you do, and no matter what they don't do.

This is incorrect in many cases. The relative importance of innate potential vs focused practice differs wildly based on the activity. Certain activities (powerlifting, sprinting, competitive programming, singing) depend very heavily on genetic abilities such as IQ, muscular strength, etc. Other activities (assembling wooden ships and putting them in bottles, sailing, choreographed dances, becoming an expert on world…

On the topic of talent-heavy activities though: I think it's important to point out that you should only consider talent when you are trying to make a living doing it, because competition is high and thus you're likely going to get out-competed by people who have innate advantages.

But if you're just doing it for fun and not to earn a living, you can actually get quite good at any of them with focused training. You might not get professional level good, but you can become objectively quite skilled.

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#78

Post by beagle3 »

Some studies find lefties are more creative, and some don't, see e.g. [0] for some discussion. My anecdata is that three times in unconferences for which creativity was a theme, 30%-50% of the people were lefty (compared to 10% in the general population).

[0] http://mentalfloss.com/article/84560/are-lefties-really-more...

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#79

Post by dkarl »

pmoriarty wrote: post #26

As an artist and musician, I often encourage my friends to draw something, paint something, or make some music. The reply I hear over and over again is, "oh, no, I don't have the talent" or "oh, no, I'm awful at drawing". It's like they don't realize that what they attribute to "talent" is attainable through practice and hard work. When I point that out and encourage them to just try, that it might be fun, they make…

It's like they don't realize that what they attribute to "talent" is attainable through practice and hard work. When I point that out and encourage them to just try, that it might be fun, they make some other excuse.

That's a bit of a bait and switch, to say, why not try this simple thing just for fun, and then say all it takes is a lot of practice and hard work. Not only do you have to make a long-term commitment that this is going to be one of the few things in your life that you invest a lot of time and energy in, you also have to either enjoy being bad at it (which is even harder as an adult than it is when you're a kid) or stick with it through a lot of thankless effort.

Re: Why Are Some People More Creative Than Others?

#80

Post by chillwaves »

dkarl wrote: post #79
pmoriarty wrote: post #26

As an artist and musician, I often encourage my friends to draw something, paint something, or make some music. The reply I hear over and over again is, "oh, no, I don't have the talent" or "oh, no, I'm awful at drawing". It's like they don't realize that what they attribute to "talent" is attainable through practice and hard work. When I point that out and encourage them to just try, that it might be fun, they make…

It's like they don't realize that what they attribute to "talent" is attainable through practice and hard work. When I point that out and encourage them to just try, that it might be fun, they make some other excuse. That's a bit of a bait and switch, to say, why not try this simple thing just for fun, and then say all it takes is a lot of practice and hard work. Not only do you have to make a long-term commitment th…

> enjoy being bad at it

You don't have to enjoy being bad, you just have to value the process of getting good more than the pain of being bad.

Post reply on HN