The faltering state of creativity is suggestive of the current condition of societal interaction that lacks a profound sense of originality, imagination and vision. That is only the starting point of the perspective that points in the direction of society’s failure to ascend to higher levels of intellectual awakening. Creativeness transcends all that has gone before and provokes a different way of looking at the reality of human actions. The quest is to transform and rise above through a myriad pathways to a loftier level of thought and subsequent achievement.
Visionary resourcefulness is the formulation and implementation, from ideation to discovery, the fighting spirit to journey into forgotten realms of self-evolution. For the quest to unfold the mysteries of discovery in the adventure of the personal journey, it should not take a psychologist, or anyone else from the assorted fields of pseudoscience to tell us what is or is not creativity. That is the essential task of human individuality to embrace the journey. Yet, by cowardly resistance, many forsake the sacred nature of the hunt, for the safe consensus of ease and comfort.
Faltering, failing and fading into the abysmal eventuality of extinction by boredom, as well as other devolving degradations, the human species presently suffers a degrading lack of creativity. From academia to the political arena, including commerce and news reporting, the bland and uninspiring communal nexus daily demonstrates a slant toward implosive stupidity. While nothing new under the sun stirs a probability of dissent as to an ideological lamentation, to suggest creativity as an absolute would not be the claim in this writing.
Instead, the perspective is multifaceted. To be resourcefulness infers activity which is intricate and includes physical and mental actions engaged in a synchronized process of purposeful instigation. Such inclination, matched by personal proclivity and a bunch of other complex dimensions, exudes and expresses a mindset determined to bring about an intended reality. To what has gone before and do something from a different perspective, using the same foundational basis, strikes at the central nature of creativity. Yet, with that comes a sense of humility.
While all human actions reflect choices, to demonstrate by humble essence artful endeavors, self-evolution speaks toward the maturity of the innovator. Controlling the egoistic and prideful arrogance as the artist or inventor, shows an aspect of character that gives special meaning to that which has been presented. Creativity ought to reflect a higher state of vision.
To break the habitual way of doing things, bravely questioning the world and continuing inquiry in spite the answers given, the inquisitive “mind” ceaselessly torments itself with different ways of thinking. Problem solving engages the hidden and the known to circumvent the boring diversions of daily distractions. Urgency to explore the real and unreal possesses the scary notion of finality at some distant moment. The primacy of thinking is such that it never ceases in the present points of reference. So a different perspective outside the normal is important.
Maybe not different in the sense that historical references have already suggested similarities, but inspirationally fine tuning the personal perspective. In order to let play passionate thinking, that otherwise unleash the imaginative forces within, courageous acts of presence dares one to be set free. Yet, overall, maturity raises the criticality of unselfish motivations. Liberation challenges all the sensory mechanisms to get on the fringes of divergence. Bias precludes the pure efficacy of absolute objectivity, yet influences just long enough to provoke maturity.
But for the bias of subjective validation, the player brings his or her shortcomings to the arena, to claim some diminutive right of acclaimed validation. To every entry upon a social interaction, everyone bring preconceptions to the self-interests of the venture. Bias unduly influences the conclusion, as the observer makes person the observation as well as the intent of purposeful design. Whether an act of construction, investigative query, or marking strategy, the observer hastens the onset of a biased observation. As such, care ought to be exercised closely, with healthy skeptical inclination toward the experienced inclination of cynical maturation.
Over a decade ago, a major collegiate business magazine, presumably a prestigious Ivy League publication, lamented the eroding state of American creativity. Once powerfully the “land of opportunity”, the sad reality mourns the loss of a competitive edge. While some would argue the threat is of an external nature, others counter such claims by suggesting the danger comes from within American society. In a measure called the “Creative Class Index”, the U.S. struggles to maintain 11th place among 25 others countries. Innovation slowly devolves over time.
Not only is “stupid thinking”, or alternatively, “anti-thinking”, in vogue, the perpetual regurgitation of consistent redundancy takes mainstream center stage. Mundane, lackluster, and dull might be negative descriptors that could be applied to the “infotainment”, or entertainment realm. While this segment of society represents one part of the many faceted aspects of creativity, the potential influence is significant. This includes artists of every kind, writers of various genres, movie and television production, and 24-7 news reporting and social commentary.
From the classroom to the boardroom, to commerce and industry, to the crime lab and the sci-fi wizardry of computer technicians, the potential for innovation begins with clever, cunning and calculated ideation. Human ingenuity goes beyond whining and complaining about hurt feelings or the foolish intolerance to tolerate the differences of others. Yet, the majority suffer the subjectivity of self-imposed victimization in their intentional immaturity. Claiming authority, for instance, where no experience and deeply researched factual analysis exists foments the illicit redundancy of repetition in foolhardy ways. As such, in any claim of fame to assert some nebulous notion of authority on anything ought to be greeted by healthy skepticism.
A claim of special insight, unique exceptional knowledge or boast of a “new study”, is matter of intentional arrogance by the claimant, unless validation is invited by the necessity of proof. In short, a matter at hand demonstrates an element of creativity when open-minded debate and analysis is encouraged. For the betterment of individuality, wiser enhancements are afforded through mutually accepted skepticism and rigorous investigation. Uncertainty warrants deeper thinking, suspiciousness figures the probability of error or deception, and cynicism encourages alternatives. With that, the consideration of inventiveness likely comes from the purposeful ideation formulated through the introspection of serious meditative analysis.
In a devolving society, bent on self-destruction, the cowardice of conventional conformity, as well as mundane repetition in clichéd or stereotyped characterizations, as in movies and television, hasten the faltering state of creativity. In various media of the vast social networks for “infotainment”, personal opinion increasingly supersedes reliance upon facts, figures and relevant evidentiary validation. Productive civil engagement for remedial articulation of serious social issues mires in the abundance of uneducated, ill-experienced and otherwise poorly informed claimants of one form of “authority” or “expertise” in favor of another.
Lazy thinking permeates the mainstream replete with countless examples of intellectually barbarous acts of stupidity. A societal shift beyond the efficacy of commentary based on the factuality of data, toward a demeaning and condescending erosion of interactivity debases the prospects of creative individualism. The shallow nature of conjecture is destructive. Nebulous conjecture pretends to be ascended efficacy of intellectual pretentions. With advances in technology comes foolhardy efforts to prefer playing with apps versus investigating critical social issues. In a bland, unimaginative and mundane atmosphere in which creativity is neither inspiring nor motivational, a debasing prospect suggests regressive inclination toward collapse.
In an overly pampered, gluttonous, and shallow thinking culture, one in which alleged “social warriors” pontificate egregious fallacies of bogus conjecture, the warning signs are evident of an “empire’s” eminent collapse.
By easy and willful seduction, many allow their senses to be dulled to the extent necessary to their self-validation that overrides the necessity to be artistic. At a rudimentary level of ideation, originality is likely no more than taking the known aspects of reality and reconstructing the elemental materiality in more resourceful ways. Of such proclivities, the primacy of thinking, or provoking imaginative prospects, is essential. According to some who philosophize on these matters, the creative person is a risk taker in a process of maturation. By neither rule nor restraint, creativity is the boundless process of rising above the mainstream.
Likewise, moving oneself to become a mature adult, who seeks wisdom at more enlightened and liberated levels, relates to the vitality of inspirational creativity. Self-evolving to become a more differentiated personality requires hard work to become a better version of the original self. Therein resides the spooky and creepy aversion to inventiveness. Relentless self-reliance in rigorous energetic actions to ensure intellectual, experiential and skillful productive development demands arduous labors. With that heavy mindful lifting, diligent dedication is exhausting. For the immediacy of the moment, a potent inner sense of urgency pursues a fanciful notion that demonstrates imaginative workings of willful effort.
The thinker dreams in farsighted ways to chase an adventure through the multidimensional intricacy of inventive ideations. Even though fearful, threatening and debasing the animosities might be, the images of dreaming insights beyond the normal realm necessitate ignoring the detractors. Determination in personal differentiation for the wholeness of individuality within, invites the strength of healthy skepticism, tinctured by a modicum of cynical insightfulness. That’s of the utmost necessity to avoid submission to the constraints of normalcy.
On that, who decides the delineation between normal and abnormal? For the sake of status quo, the easy way is opposite the well-worn paths of “playing the game” and avoiding risks. It’s all too simple to follow the rest of the group and avoid controversy. Such does not require a lot of thought, habits, patterns and redundancy are simplistic. Routine emotional reactivity is not as demanding and doesn’t require deeply researched data or thoroughly substantiated evidence. If abnormal, for instance, is viewed outside the safe space of conformity to “social rules”, then who makes the distinction? Noted here are the duly constituted ordinances and statutes, as matters of codified law, that officially define “normality” in terms of civil and criminal behavior.
As to the realm of social interaction, public discourse, goings and comings in various relationships, at play, in school or at work, an unimaginative sense of complacency disturbs the thrills of adventure. Added to that, is the regressive reactivity of economic and political activities that devolve to the level of infantile narcissism in spiraling negativity. In all probability, the lethargy of stagnant, dull, and unoriginal inventiveness kills any semblance of productive abnormality. In the view of some passionately creative people, being abnormal is an act defiance against the mundane, the superficial and fraudulent. Atypical artistry is shunned. Acting outside the cubical of standard societal templates is alarming to those inside cubic limitations.
Templates for which the conjecture is that one size fits all remain persistent against the artisans of desirable transforming processes. Yet, normalcy decries the abnormality of being different from the rest. Other than legally defined statutory prohibitions, who or what decides what is normal? Self-differentiation in a self-evolving quest of personal growth and maturity, is all about being different than everyone else. By contrast, mass marketing, global consumerism, educational and political status quo processes, collude to promote sameness. From school yard to workplace, a submissive haze of consensus is better described as acceptance of “manufactured consent”.
Others will readily proclaim that everyone is different, unique and special, yet at some point, below the horizon of creative enterprises, acquiescence gives way to status quo symbiosis. The suggestion here is, the inclination to suggest a healthy sense about interdependence, is misleading and dangerous. Perhaps a better term is parasitic, to describe a lackluster state of affairs in which dull and boring is view as exciting. Unoriginal, unimaginative and unmotivated, additionally describe a social drama that cuts across socio-economic and political boundaries. To paraphrase a famous scientist of the last century, more important than knowledge is imagination.
It doesn’t take an academic to come up with a “startling revelation” that the U.S. suffers a loss of creativity across the wide spectrum of social endeavors. While some would accuse one generation over another, the loss of inventiveness crosses generational boundaries. As societies devolve, the fearful and ignorant hesitation to free oneself from all the gluttonous proclivities of crowd consensus, from assumption to consumption, from reason to emotion, breeds the bleeding discontent of defeatism. For all human history’s lessons, the species ignores and forgets the essentiality of the prologues to subsequent generational consequences. The descriptions of some describes others as stupid, inept, and incompetent.
Serious self-reflection, profound self-transformation and calmness are often vacant upon the isles of wisdom’s serenity. To be alone in persistent and profound introspection is to be a rebel. A few brave ones can do that. The desire to be left alone, to escape and evade the herded busy intersections of social media and communal groupings, is a proclamation of independence. It is a mature and wise insistence of choice and requires action that adversely goes against the toleration of unquestioned consensus. Being a “social warrior” does not require either crowd or faction, and neither following nor fans. Instead, such is a state of exceptional creativity that ceaselessly wanders beyond the normal range of imagination. Fantasies come out of the shadows to share in the self-reliance.
It is a perpetual dream state, beyond being awake and asleep. Realms of creativity are those mental places that transcend an awakened consciousness and pursues a persistent quest of discovery. For that, the valiant knight, the crusader, or the warrior perseveres in cautious proximity to the admonitions and desecrations of mainstream society. As there are many critics, there are fewer artists, as there are multitudes of detractors but a handful of innovators. In the sensual touch of creative instigation, to the culmination of “out of the box” inclination, some would argue the decline of human innovation. Such is a generalization with many aspects.
Nonetheless, some researchers would contend that creativity in the U.S. has regressed since the 1990’s. The proactive introduction of that which is a variation on something, and can be described as being creative or imaginative for a moment in time, seems increasingly rare. One study suggests that in the marketplace of competitive commerce, competency relies more and more on being creatively engaged within the organization. To that end, as one business review magazine laments, openness to alternative viewpoints appears constrained by easy acceptance of the status quo. Personal ingenuity is out in front of doing things that might be considered edgy.
Creativity lurches in many directions to enhance and expand the reaches of the imagination toward a more ascended transformation. Inventiveness suffers the decline of its relevance in a mechanistic consumption oriented society. Thoughtful innovations in arts and entertainment struggle for the passionate zealousness to fuse feeling and meaning. A recent assessment from a major business institute challenges the current educational model in America’s K-12 and collegiate school systems. The accusation is made that contemporary education stifles a student’s creativity in condescending and counterproductive ways. By the promotion of a “one size fits all” template, or persistent admonitions to avoid risk taking, problem solving, inventiveness and being different. The condescending regression becomes more oppressive with the adherence to outdated and worn out instructional rubrics. Inventiveness has for the most part greatly diminished.
Self-imposed stifling of individuality in sacrifice to the deities of mass consumption is a part of personal and group consensus to ensure the perpetuity of material gain. For the majority, status quo reliance on simplistic consistency does not require imaginative processes of serious introspection. To be a good worker, to fit into a slot and to allow pacification into the so called American Dream is the path of least resistance most desire to follow. Production of sameness, replicant and robotic imitation reduces the risks of taking leaps out of the box.
As society regresses to the devolution of contrived extinction, the arrogance of shallow perspectives spins comforting tales of pabulum enriched trouble-free mediocrity. From academia to social media, the reaches of magical thinking for the sustenance of banal conformity traverses every aspect of human activity. Insipid dumbed down regurgitations of cinematic remakes comforts the ever burgeoning blather of juvenile multimedia genre. In movies for instance, not much strain of “acting” is demanded for American audience to be enthralled by CGI.
Neither academic nor political enterprises strive for ascended radical departures from “standard operating procedures”. Intellectualism is shunned in favor of feelings. Emotional reactivity attempts to use force or abuse in the anti-logic of stifling an alternative viewpoint. By the illogic of immature self-promotion in the neediness of cognitive bias, many will viciously attack another who dares disagree with the former claimant perspective. The social imbalance of negativity permeates daily life from academia to news reporting.
As such, innovative mature thinking processes are thwarted in favor of the pleasures to be found in various forms of infantile narcissism. Persistent redundancy in anecdotal sufficiency lazily perpetrates the speciousness of alleged “scientific” revelation. Swift and certain actions to quicken the imaginative prospects of change, individuation, and visionary discovery were long since killed by public educational templates. Taxonomies, rubrics, and domain competencies pretentiously masquerade as learning initiatives. Unfortunately data does not support a positive outlook.
In the superficial realms of movie making, for example, persistent remakes wallow in the sloppy reliance on technology to entertain, rather than inspire and educate. Acting remains uncomplicated in the classic sense for a matters of seconds and then lots of CGI. At the same time, not expressing much knowledge about much of anything, younger generations prefer the simplistic to the complex. In trouble-fee thinking, the scope and depth of deep thinking remains fixated on the cell phone or the next “fun” thing to do. So, mediocre attempts at various contemporary art forms, like movies, television, writing, etc. maintain a “middle school” level mentality.
Unfortunately, in the diverse realms of “arts and entertainment”, not to forget the vast reaches of academia and other societal institutions, the devolution of creative enterprises hastens social regression. Even the supposed intellectual bastions of ivory towers, educationally insulated and protected in sacred fiefdoms, alleged academic research perpetrates the redundancy of status quo consensus. In the “social studies” area, as in criminology, sociology and psychology, conventional textbook blathering often demonstrate the persistence of nothing new and different. Unproductive replication ensures the unimaginative consistency in unexciting simplicity.
Any challenges to the time worn theories of the past generally incur the backlash of those desiring to safeguard the status quo. As one researcher points out, the American culture is filled with people who easily accept the ordinariness of unenthusiastic efforts to become innovative. Little changes over time and place where people are concerned. While American education is fixated on the same old rubrics, so called competencies, purported matrices and taxonomies, the competitive edge continues to slip away. Innovation erodes to boring complacency.
Pointedly, the lack of serious talent in creativity reverberates through the many mainstream venues of infotainment. Of recent concern, a large west coast metropolitan newspaper reported the results of a ten-year study of American literacy. By comparison, researchers asserted that reading levels for American adults are significantly lower than for adults in other countries. Literacy levels were cited as below average with the U.S. falling behind Scandinavian countries, Japan, Australia and Korea. Others have offered the critical perspective that Americans have been mostly “educated” to become reliable workers as oppose to imaginative and inventive thinkers.
In a faltering state of creativity, with the shallow divisive atmosphere of murky conjecture, magical thinking and bitter condescension, the downward trend of negativity actuates the human species driver toward extinction. Some scientist, the real ones, not the fake ones, already concluded time is running out for the human race. For a few, the brave artistic souls, to be creative means freedom. To be free, is to unleash personal liberation for the hallowed sanctity of personal enlightenment. Such is a journey to transform oneself into a better version than original.
With a sense of profound of self-evolving maturity, the ascension to higher levels of insight comes through a personal quest to become a well-differentiated individual. Nonetheless, the detractors, the haters, the inept and incompetent, will harass and plague the existence of each moment. Some researchers and analysts of natural biological progressions have suggested humans in general are no longer evolving. In a physical sense, they are instead devolving.