Re: OT: Tinkering versus creativity

Sally Caves wrote:
> "Thinking outside the box" is a cliche, And.  I was not being reductive,
> trivializing or uninsightful.
I think anyone who thought Sally was being reductive, trivializing or
uninsightful just don't know Sally  :)

> I was being sardonic, ;) and trying to
> point out, as I have in my previous posts, a basic truth: that even
> "thinking outside the box" is based on a prior box.
Quite so - you simply cannot think outside the box, unless there is a
box to think outside off! As Andrew asks:
andrew wrote:
[snip]
 > Don't you mean "Tinkering outside the box"? </me ducks>

Quite so - and I'm not ducking   ;)

 > My most recent conlanging had already led me to conclude that I tinker
 > with language rather than be creative with it before I read the essay.
 > I do not have the time nor the vision to aspire to creativity.

IMO you underestimate yourself. I think that your creation of Brithenig
was creative, and not just tinkering. 'Just tinkering' would have
produce 'yet another Romconlang' (many of us have done one in our time).
==================================

I have read Steven Dutch's article now. I am not over-impressed. In an
earlier mail Sally referred to his being 'binary' - I think I would use
the term 'dualistic'. He opposes opposites throughout and seems to allow
for no grey areas. I am not impressed by his list of examples of the
'Standard Model' or of the counter examples. Does he really think that
if the Phoenicians/Carthaginians had beaten Rome, they would have been
so very different as the imperial power in the Mediterranean? It wasn't
curiosity that led the Phoenicians to explore the Mediterranean, sail to
Britain etc - it was the practicality of trade. The reason the Romans
didn't explore the Baltic is because the Germanic peoples didn't let
them  :)

Under Augustus there was indeed a serious effort to move the frontier
from the Rhine to the Elbe, since it was realized that the Elbe-Danube
line would make an more easily defensible frontier. The Roman legions
were slaughtered in the Teutoburg Forest. It wasn't because the Romans
tinkered & weren't creative that they didn't explore the Baltic or
penetrate into India or China - it was just pragmatics: other people
sort of opposed them, and they had an Empire to keep running.

Indeed, until comparatively recently the main concern of the vast
majority of mankind was simply _keeping alive_. What may have dampened &
killed off the innate curiosity of a medieval peasant child is certainly
not harsh & inhibitive schooling - because s/he would never get in a
school - it was the harsh reality of everyday life. Whatever innate
genius Wolfang Amadeus might have had would have been of no avail if he
had been born to poor peasant scraping a living from the soil. He
wouldn't have had time to tinker, let alone be creative.

The article seems to me to push evidence to two extremes: (a) those
supporting the author's thesis, and (b) those against.

There is no grey area and, as Sally observed, it takes no account of the
dialectic approach towards seeking truth. Indeed, the author's dualistic
approach is hostile to it, as far as I can see.

When I was at school we were encouraged to think for ourselves, to be
able to explain our own position _rationally_ and, maybe even more
importantly, to *try and understand the other person's point of view.* I
am grateful to my schooling for these lessons.

I cannot help but agree with Sally that opening with: "you first have to
answer this question: What evidence would it take to prove your beliefs
wrong" is not exactly helpful. From my perspective I would say, this is
my position (and explain it reasonably), what is your position? We can
then start to identify similarities and differences: we have *dialog* -
i.e. our discussion is dialectic.

But to return to the subject line. IMHO "Tinkering versus creativity"
exhibits precisely the dualistic attitude. For me Dan Sulani summed it
up nicely:

 > "I am creative!
 > You tinker!
 > He fumbles around meaninglessly".
 > ;-)

--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"A mind which thinks at its own expense will always
interfere with language."         J.G. Hamann, 1760