Imagination: A Way to the Creativity - Literature review Example

Imagination: A way to the Creativity Imagination is the father of invention. Mental imagery has been a fairly constant topic in philosophy of mind, as has artistic creativity in aesthetics, and both issues have been hotly debated in psychology and cognitive science. But there has been much less concern to offer philosophical clarification of our various concepts of imagination and creativity – of what it means to ‘imagine’, be ‘creative’, and so on – and the relationships between these concepts. In recent years, however, this has begun to change, and the central aims of this book are to explore some of the different conceptions of imagination that can be found in western philosophical thought and to introduce and elucidate some of the philosophical issues that arise concerning imagination and creativity. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, imagination is “the ability of the mind to be creative or resourceful.” Thus, it is traditionally believed that creativity is the manifestation of the imagination. From the way in which we use the term "imagination," it appears that it is thought that the two can be equated; that telling someone to "be more creative" is exactly the same as saying, "use the imagination." That the imagination can be associated to creativity is clearly indubitable, but it is the type of association that is questionable. Before the discussion link between creativity and the imagination, it must be stated first what constitutes creativity and secondly what we mean by the term "imagination." According to Gaut there are three conditions of creativity. First, creativity must be original. There would be no point in creating a sonnet in which one can compare his love to a summers day, as it would not be original. Even if one did, the sonnet would be of no value - the second condition of creativity. Kant has pointed out that even the most nonsensical work of art can be original, but it is not creative unless it is exemplary i.e. of value. The third condition of creativity is that it has to have flair; an artist must have the intention to create the work in that way. If one splatter link across a page, it may be original, but since the end product is arrived at inadvertently, one must have had no style or flair and thus it is not creative. Subsequently, in Gauts words, “Originality, value and flair are the vital ingredients in creative making.” There are a number of different uses of the term "imagination." First, "imagine" can mean, "falsely believe" such as in a situation whereby a person is told that he is "imagining things" in the context that he has misperceived something. Secondly, "imagination" can be used as a close synonym for creativity (as in the sentence, "Use imagination.") Finally, it is used to mean mental imagery, as in the case that someone is describing a person and can imagine his face. Whilst all these definitions of imagination are correct within their contexts, it is widely agreed between philosophers that imagination cannot be defined in one way. It does not necessarily have to entail a false belief, nor does it need to involve mental imagery. With these understandings of creativity and the imagination, it seems unlikely that creativity absolutely requires the imagination. This is also made clear by the two different types of creativity: passive and active. The former takes place when we are unaware of the creative process, when something creative is arrived at without much thought. For example, Russell claimed that when writing Principia Mathematica he would frequently go to bed not knowing the answer to a particularly troublesome problem, but would wake up the next morning able to solve it. By comparison, active imagination occurs when we attempt to find various works of creativity and consciously arrive at one. While this type of creative act requires the imagination, passive creativity proves that the imagination it not a necessity to creativity. On the same level, many philosophers do not believe that every imagining absolutely requires creativity. If imagination is taken to mean a false belief, for example, then creativity is not a necessity; one can imagine that his car is going to be clamped in ten minutes, but by the stated conditions of creativity this imagining is neither original nor valuable enough to be "creative." Similarly, fantasizing is a kind of imagining, but many of us have the same fantasies, so they also lack the conditions to earn the label "creative." Thus, it is Gauts view that there are only two ways in which we can credibly link the imagination to creativity. He named the first way the "display model," which maintains that my unconscious generates a creative idea to me through my imagination. This model appears to be present in passive creativity, for the imagination doesnt have a necessary role, but a display function. It can be compared to the monitor of a computer, which has the peripheral role of displaying the creative results of a computer, but does not aid the creation of the software. The second way, the "search model," is more apparent in active creativity, as it holds that the imagination has a central position in the creative procedure. Gaut states that, “according to this model, when one comes up with a new idea or invents a new object, one can be thought of as having worked through various possibilities ordered in a logical space.” In other words, the imagination is used to visualize several different outcomes before selecting and settling on the most relevant one. In this way, it is clear that Gaut believes that the imagination is suitable to be the vehicle of active creativity. It is clear that associating the imagination with creativity is correct. However, our misuse of the term "imagination" in our everyday language has meant that the specific association has been construed. Because it is used as a near-synonym for creativity, they are frequently confused to mean the same thing; people equate having a vivid imagination with being extremely creative. In reality, the two cannot be equivalent, for as we have seen with the above example of Russell, it is possible to be exceptionally creative without using the imagination at all. Similarly, confusion has arisen from our understanding of the use of the imagination in active creativity; rather than being the source of creativity, as it is often perceived to be from such an understanding, the imagination is in fact the vehicle for active creativity. Finally, because of our misuse of the term "imagination," it is always supposed that the imagination should have a central role in creativity, yet from Gauts "display model" it is clear that in fact it can have a peripheral role. Now the point imagination pushes to the creatively will described by a story of invention of electricity battery. Electricity has fascinated human kind since our ancestors first witnessed lightning. In ancient Greece, Thales observed that rubbing amber, for which the Greek word is electron, could generate an electric charge. In 1938 a jar was found just outside Baghdad, Iraq (that may be, could be or is believed to be) the first battery. The jar is about 2000 years old from the Parthian period. The jar is composed of a clay jar with a stopper made of asphalt. Sticking through the asphalt is an iron rod surrounded by a copper cylinder. When filled with vinegar - or any other electrolytic solution - the jar produces about 1.1 volts. But, such ancient knowledge in the history of electricity bears no known continuous relationship to the development of modern batteries. Its form, though, is nearly identical to the principles that are in use today. The German physicist Otto von Guericke experimented with generating electricity in 1650. The English physicist Stephen Gray discovered electrical conductivity in 1729. The American statesman and inventor Benjamin Franklin studied the properties of electricity by conducting his famous experiment of flying a kite with a key attached during electrical storms in 1752. Luigi Galvani is famous for his experiments concerning "the electrical forces in muscular movements", leading up to his theory of animal electricity. This began with the accidental observation, in 1780, of the twitching of the legs of a dissected frog when the bared crural nerve was touched with the steel scalpel. He worked diligently along these lines, but waited for eleven years before he published the results and his ingenious and simple theory. This theory discovered that when nerve and muscle touch two dissimilar metals in contact with each other, a contraction of the muscle takes place. But he incorrectly thought fluid in the frogs body was the source of the electricity. Scientists on account of later discoveries by Italian inventor Alessandro Volta have abandoned the theory. Volta proved that the source of the electricity was a reaction caused by the animals body fluids being touched by two different types of metal. Beginning his work in 1794, Volta observed the electrical interaction between two different metals submerged near each other in an acidic solution. Based on this principle, his first battery consisted of a series of alternating copper and zinc rings in an acid solution known as an electrolyte. His device for generating a consistent flow of electricity was invented in 1800. He called his invention a column battery, although it came to be commonly known as the Volta battery, Voltaic cell or Voltaic pile. Volta’s discovery of a means of converting chemical energy into electrical energy formed the basis for nearly all modern batteries. Volta researched the effects which different metals produced when exposed to salt water. In 1801, Volta demonstrated the Voltaic cell to Napoleon Bonaparte (who later ennobled him, Count, for his discoveries). In 1800 , William Nicholson and Anthony Carlisle used a battery to decompose water into hydrogen and oxygen. Sir Humphry Davy researched this chemical effect at the same time. Davy researched the decomposition of substances (called electrolysis). In 1813 , he constructed a 2,000-plate paired battery in the basement of Britains Royal Society, covering 889 ft² (83 m²). Through this experiment, Davy deduced that electrolysis was the action in the voltaic pile that produced electricity. In 1820, the British researcher John Frederic Daniell improved the voltaic cell. The Daniell cell consisted of copper and zinc plates and copper and zinc sulphates . It was used to operate telegraphs and doorbells. Between 1832 and 1834, Michael Faraday conducted experiments with a ferrite ring, a galvanometer, and a connected battery. When the battery was connected or disconnected, the galvanometer deflected. Faraday also developed the principle of ionic mobility in chemical reactions of batteries. In 1839, William Robert Grove developed the first fuel cell, which produced electrical energy by combining hydrogen and oxygen. Grove developed another form the electric cell using zinc and platinum electrodes. These electrodes were exposed to two acids separated by a diaphragm. The next step in the evolution of electrical energy storage was the invention of the lead acid storage battery in 1859 by the French physicist Gaston Plante. This chemical battery used a liquid electrolyte, and was not easy to move. Based on the pioneering work done between 1867 and 1877 by Georges Leclanche in France, the situation showed promise of changing to a more portable battery. Around 1881, Emile Alphonse Faure , with his colleagues, developed batteries using a mixture of lead oxides for the positive plate electrolyte. From the above discussion and the given example of “invention of electronic battery” It is clear that beside demand of time another one factor always works behind every invention or creative things that is imagination. To make strong the argument another one example should give of Computer technology. As 100 years ago all the operation system was DOS based. It was very tougher to use computer, as user have to remember several command because the operating system was command based. It was a great problem for user of computer that to some extend user cant use computer frequently. A little mistake in command restricted user to get his expected result. From that time people imagine an operating system that will lessen their problem. From this imagination researcher of IBM started working on new technology. And after some time they invent the “Mouse” which made a great revolution in the computer industry. For which now people can use computer more easily. This only happened because of imaginations of the people and researcher of that time whose were related to the computer industry. Lastly it can be said that Noting should be happen unless there is a dream. And a dream is nothing but an imagination. From the beginning till now what people have invented and tend to invent is from the only basis of imagination. So finally this can be said concepts of imagination is not only related to the issue of creativity, but it’s the major surrogate indicator for all creative invention. As once people imagined that if they could fly on the sky and the creative result of that imagine is plane, rocket etc by using which peoples are moving one place to another. References: 1) Ajad, Ak: 1998, “History of Battery” Urvin Publisher, Dhaka-1230, Ch-3, pg. (156-178). 2) Definiton of Imagination available at “ Oxford Dictionary”. 3) Arendt, Hannah; 1959, The Human Condition. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books 4) Gentile, Emilio. 2007. Il fascino de persecutore: George L. Mosse e la catastrophe delluomo moderno. Rome: Carocci editore. Read More