Ideas in Motion: Exploring the Heart of Creativity

America’s most trusted dictionary, Merriam-Webster, defines creativity as “the ability to create.” Frankly, when I first read this, I believed it came up way short and absolutely sucked. While this dictionary has a reputation for being thorough, precise, and utilizing comprehensive resources, I believed it failed to incorporate the ideas of some of the most prominent and credible literature in this area of study.

Mark A. Runco and Garrett J. Jaeger released The Standard Definition of Creativity in 2012, and their definition emphasized that creativity involves not just producing something new, but also ensuring that it is useful or meaningful within the given context. It’s an interesting perspective that I can relate to, but I still do not believe this tells the whole story.

This idea relates very similarly to one of the earliest comprehensive theories surrounding creativity by J.P. Guilford. In 1950, Guilford defined creativity as “the ability to produce something that is original and relevant to the task at hand.” Guilford is known for creating Guilford’s Alternative Uses Test, which is one of the most well-known methods of measuring creativity. It focuses on divergent thinking by highlighting how people can come up with multiple solutions to a problem, and it is even still utilized today in research settings to gauge the creativity of an individual.

Beyond these sources, there are countless additional pieces based on the philosophy of creativity, all with a similar theme: one’s ability to generate new ideas in search of a solution to a problem, or, in the words of Runco and Jaeger, to ensure that the ideas generated are useful or meaningful. My curiosity revolves around the idea that what if creativity doesn’t need to have meaning? What if generating new ideas for the sake of generating new ideas, regardless of the context, is what it’s truly all about? Arthur Koestler has a similar viewpoint, which is expressed in his book The Act of Creation. Koestler brings up the idea of “bisociation,” or the process of connecting two unrelated ideas to generate creative insight. His view on creativity is that it doesn’t always have to have a clear, immediate purpose, but rather helps to open new pathways of thought and understanding.

Tying this all back to Merriam-Webster’s definition of creativity, I can’t help but understand the need to leave the definition so simple. With so many schools of thought around the subject, maybe “the ability to create” really is what it’s all about. At the end of the day, we are all just existing on a giant rock hurtling through outer space in a universe we don’t truly understand. With that, I’ll end it on one of my favorite quotes from one of the most prominent artists of the twentieth century:

“Creativity takes courage.” — Henri Matisse