Entropy, Creativity and Choice

Charles Debelak
This series of blogs is taken from articles by Charles Debelak in the Birchwood School of Hawken's Clipboard during the 2012-13 school year. The purpose of Mr. Debelak's Clipboard articles is to provide parents with information about sound educational principles and child development issues gleaned from history, contemporary research, and Mr. Debelak's 40+ years educating, coaching, and counseling children, young adults, and parents.


Before examining what we need to do in order to educate our children for creativity, I need to offer an addendum to last month’s discussion on entropy and creativity. I cite the work on creative production from Joseph Renzulli (Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Connecticut) and David Yun Dai Ph.D (Professor of Educational Psychology and Methodology at the University at Albany), pre-eminent scholars and researchers in creativity. If you will recall, entropy, in its subtle form, offers us excuses to avoid those problems, opportunities and challenges that, if addressed, might lead to meaningful growth, development, creativity, and innovation.

According to Renzulli and Dai, any creativity occurs at “the edge of chaos,” “a juncture between the known and the unknown, the old and the new, or at a marginal state between two systems of thoughts, cultures or artistic expressions.” The authors explain that “most people settle down with a version of reality they have created and gradually lose an innovative edge.” It is a dilemma of every great scientist, artist, poet, writer, or statesman; and it is also our dilemma, the “everyman.” In other words, when faced with a new problem, an opportunity for advancement, or a challenge that might inspire us to action, it is easy to let entropy kick in. Avoid the psychological tension. Avoid conflict and effort. Cling to the known. Justify yourself, justify what you believe, and dig your heels in against any change. Renzulli and Dai note that the process of creativity teeters on the fence between rigidity and chaos, between maintaining the status quo or moving into unknown territory.

Tony Wagner, co-director of the Change Leadership Group (CLG) at the Harvard Graduate School of Education,  in Creative Innovators writes, “[creativity requires] a willingness to experiment, take risks, tolerate failure.” In other words it begins with an attitude, with the realization that there is a choice, and from this position, we can make the decisions that lead to creativity and innovation. Put another way, Daniel Pink in Drive suggests that the innovator has a desire and drive to “make a difference.” It may imply a difference in our personal life, our profession, the organizations to which we belong, or social groups.

Nancy Andreason, is an American neuroscientist and neuropsychiatrist who was awarded National Medal of Science in 2002. In The Creative Brain Andreason points out that the brain is a self-organizing system. By design it enables us to face and accommodate the problems and challenges of life. In a sense the brain is always creative. But that creativity will either yield excuses for withdrawal from problems and challenges, or reasoning that leads to innovation and change. In other words, this self-organizing system we call the brain also has choices. When faced with problems, opportunities and challenges it can choose to withdraw and protect itself, that is, let entropy kick in, or it can choose to march forward into the unknown, siding with creative impulses. The brain can be very creative in giving us countless excuses for avoiding the creative impulse. It provides clever arguments to avoid change. It, ever so reasonably, explains why we should avoid effort, risk, unease and uncertainty. The arguments are so good that we usually find ourselves siding with them. It comes naturally, but it also kills creativity and innovation.

Not only so, opposition to creativity may stem from the entropy-bound environment we live in. Nearly every creator in history had to not only struggle against his or her own internal drive toward entropy, but also had to fight against a culture or society that resisted change. On two fronts – internal and external – entropy said, “No!” Before creativity and innovation occurred, the creator had to deliberate over and then choose an attitude that would win this battle. He or she had to face personal reluctance and societal resistance.

The story scenario spans time, place and domain. The history of creativity and innovation in music, literature, theater, science, technology, or sports, repeats. Creators fight the internal and external battles against entropy. It is no wonder that the challenge of “everyman’s creativity” is the same. Creativity, at its origin, requires a choice. Whether we are faced with the great issues of our times, or whether we are faced with everyday challenges.

It is fair to say that the creative “everyman” begins with a keen sense of self-awareness. “Everyman’s creativity” begins when we understand ourselves; we understand our internal impulses and reasoning. It begins when we understand the excuses that empower us to withdraw from problems and opportunities. It begins when we recognize our natural tendency to resist change. When we are aware of the human inclination toward entropy versus the human inclination for newness, change and improvement, we have a starting point for creativity. This is the first lesson we can teach our children.
 
 
From the December 2012 Birchwood Clipboard 
Back

Recent Posts

List of 12 news stories.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

4400 West 140th Street  |  Cleveland, OH 44135  |  216.251.2321

Privacy Policy 
Birchwood School of Hawken: No mobile information will be shared with
third parties/affiliates for marketing/promotional purposes. All the above
categories exclude text messaging originator opt-in data and consent;
this information will not be shared with any third parties.