From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Fri May 16 2003 - 06:38:17 MDT
Michael Wiik writes about the creative process
> To me it's all design. And when I design, first I build
> up, then I take away. I design a bit beyond the requirements,
> so I can see where I can add value within the budget. I keep
> awareness of constraints, but experience teaches what issues
> can be bypassed in this phase.
>
> Then I begin to trim away redundancies, and extraneous material. When
> there is nothing else to take away, then I'm done. But the idea must be
> allowed time and space to grow. If I begin to take away too early, then
> I limit my possibilities.
Hmm, at each stage in the creative, and even problem-solving phase,
I'm undergoing conjecture and refutation over and over and over.
"Hmm, that could be it. No, wait. Maybe this. Hmm, no, that can't
be right..." and so on.
> I trust my background thinking, and unless
> it's some sort of dire emergency, avoid designing and implementing on
> the same day. I 'sleep on it', and before I sleep, try to think how it
> could be different or if I've failed to see some error. Sometimes just
> the build-up can take weeks.
Well, this "trying to see an error" is subjecting your thoughts
to (self) criticism, as you conjecture here:
> How do you develop your own ideas? Do you alternate mental sentences of
> creativity with criticism? Do you find yourself constantly shooting down
> your own thoughts, before they're allowed to take flight? If not, why do
> you have the need to do so to others?
"Shooting down thoughts before they're allowed to take flight...",
---an interesting revelation. As for me, the good ideas take off
despite any headwind. Yes, some of it is "what if we *could*
do xyz...". As to "why do it to others"? Why not? People with
ideas are usually pretty head-strong in the sense of not being
easily dissuaded from them. All too often, on this list, it is
widely proclaimed that *this* is the problem: folks are too
stubborn in maintaining their position even after "contrary"
facts and criticisms have been generated.
> Take a another look at your post. Is there any constructive criticism?
> Do you suggest any improvements or alternates? Or do you immediately and
> simply reject the notion we can become more productive if we structure
> our discourse a bit. Does your post do anything to extend the
> conversation, or does it just attempt to end it?
Sorry that you perceive me (or anyone) as having attained
such powers as to be able to single-handedly end conversations.
I think that that is ridiculous.
> My post had been up there for a good day. No one had responded. The
> topic was dead as far as I was concerned.
And so you are complaining!? Gee, I noticed that, and had
the temerity to suppose that I was doing you a favor. To
me, to be ignored completely is worse than someone at least
taking the time to attempt to refute what I am saying. I
always consider myself fortunate and lucky whenever someone
has the time to attend to anything I say---when it is so
absurdly easy (unlike at a party) to just pass over something
in silence.
> Your post had no value whatsoever, except to demonstrate
> to yourself your alleged 'PCR' skills and stroke your own ego.
Good old Mike---unwilling to take further time to attack the
ideas, you just attack the person instead, and lapse into
speculation concerning the base motives of the person who
disagrees. But you will note that there was a more positive
reply after your reply to me; thus I have saved your ideas
from the graveyard after all. Some gratitude you show. ;-)
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 16 2003 - 06:50:13 MDT