Why Are We So Afraid of Creativity

7/28/2019 Why Are We So Afraid of Creativity

1/4

WHY ARE WE SO AFRAID OF CREATIVITY?

Does society really value creativity? People say they want more creative people, morecreative ideas and solutions, but do they really?

The Greek philosopher Democritus (460-370 BC) promulgated the atomic theory, whichasserted that the universe is composed of two elements: the atoms and the void in whichthey exist and move. Many contemporary historians of the philosophy of science considerDemocritus to be the father of modern science because of his stunning insight about theuniverse centuries before our understanding of atomic structure, which did not occur untilthe early 19th century.

All of his ideas were rejected by all of the Greek philosophers and scientists at the timebecause his beliefs contrasted with those of Aristotle who, according to his followers, wasthe ultimate authority about the universe. Their commitment to Aristotle and his theoriesabout the universe caused them to feel a great uncertainty in imagining any other

possibility. Plato is said to have disliked him and his atomic theory so much that he wishedall his books burned. Democritus was ignored by the Athens intellectual community for therest of his life.

Did the ancient Greeks desire creative ideas? Yes. They prided themselves for theircreativity in the arts, science and society. They proclaimed Greece as the enlightenedsociety, and built architectural monuments to their creativity. Yet the rejection ofDemocritus is just one of many historical examples of breakthrough ideas that wereautomatically rejected because of their novelty and their nonconformance with existingbeliefs which caused a general feeling of uncertainty.

History also recounts how physicists could not see Einsteins theory of relativity because oftheir established, accepted views. For years, they tried to incorporate his view into theestablished view without success. Interestingly, the skeptical physicists never did accept histheory, instead they eventually died and subsequent generations of physicists who were notprejudiced by the past were able to accept and understand Einstein. What we learn fromhistory is that our established view interferes with our perception and understanding of newideas and concepts.

Do people desire creative ideas and innovation today? Most us would answer with a loudYES, OF COURSE asserting that creativity is the engine of discovery in the arts, scienceand industry, is the fundamental driving force of positive change, and is associated with

intelligence, wisdom, and goodness.

Still while most people strongly endorse a positive view of creativity, historians havediscovered that scientific institutions, business, education, medical, military, nonprofit,political organizations, and leaders and decision-makers in all fields routinely rejectcreative ideas much like the Greeks rejected atomic theory.
http://creativethinking.net/articles/2012/05/26/why-are-we-so-afraid-of-creativity/http://creativethinking.net/articles/2012/05/26/why-are-we-so-afraid-of-creativity/


2/4

Robert Goddard, the father of modern rocket propulsion, endured ridicule and derision fromhis contemporary scientific peers who stated his ideas were ludicrous and impossible. TheNew York Times even chimed in with an editorial written by scientists that Goddard lackedeven a high school understanding of rocket propulsion. This example is not unique. AppleComputer Inc. founder, Steve Jobs, attempted, without success, to get Atari and Hewlett-

Packard interested in his and Steve Wozniaks personal computer. As Steve recounts, Sowe went to Atari and said, Hey, weve got this amazing thing, even built with some ofyour parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or well give it to you. We just wantto do it. Pay our salary; well come work for you. And their experts laughed and said,No. So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, Hey, we dont need you. Youhavent got through college yet.

Ken Olsen, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., thought the idea of apersonal computer absurd, as he said, there is no reason anyone would want a computer intheir home. Other examples are:

Pierrre Pachet, a renowned physiology professor and expert declared, LouisPasteurs theory of germs is ridiculous fiction.

Every major corporation in the country rejected Chester Carlsons invention ofxerography. They said, Why would anyone buy an expensive copy machine when carbonpaper is so cheap and plentiful.

Fred Smiths Yale University management professor gave Fred a C becauseFreds paper proposal to provide overnight delivery service was not a feasible idea. Fredsproposal became Federal Express. Incidentally, every delivery expert in the U.S. doomedFedEx to failure as they said no one will pay a fancy price for speed and reliability.

Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899 said.Everythingthat can be invented has been invented. He urged the closing of the patent office as thereno longer was a need for it.

Western Union president William Orton, rejected Bells offer to sell his strugglingtelephone company for $100,000. He said This telephone has too many shortcomings tobe seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no valueto us. What use could this company make of an electrical toy?

The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay fora message sent to nobody in particular? said David Sarnoffs associates, in response to hisurgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.

TV wont be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first 6 months.People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night.(Darryl F. Zanuck, headof 20th Century Fox, 1946).


3/4

Airplanes are interesting toys for hobbyists but of no military value.(MarshalFerdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre / French commander ofAllied forces during the closing months of World War I, 1918).

THE WATCHMAKER

Frank was a watchmaker. The watches he made

consisted of 1000 parts each. Frank would handle and inspect each part and think

about where it should be placed. Each watch was constructed in a slightly different

way which made each watch unique and special.

One day, a teacher arrived and taught him a new way of watch making. He showed

him how to make watches by categorizing all the parts and putting together

subassemblies of about ten elements each in a certain order and each with a certain

label. Ten of these subassemblies could be put together into a larger subassembly and

a system of ten constituted 100 parts and, eventually a system of 100 groups would

constitute the whole watch of 1000 parts. He became very efficient and could now

make watches in a fraction of the time it took before without much thinking at all.

His system of watch making by identity, classification and categorization was carried

on by his descendants and became the accepted system of making watches throughout

the world. All watches were made the same way and things were good. Everyone was

comfortable and secure as they robotically continue to make watches using Franks

system, which they all agreed was the only way to make watches and profitably.

One day an inventor who had little knowledge about Franks system decided to invent

a new watch. At first he tried combing the subassemblies in different ways but nothing

seemed to work. He gave up and tossed all the subassemblies against the wall where it

fell apart into 1000 parts.

Instead of thinking about improving the watch, he thought about the concept of time

and how people throughout history kept track of time and how animals and birds

understood time. He suddenly had a mind popping idea for a new concept of how to

measure time. Working hard, he created a unique and novel watch.
http://creativethinking.net/articles/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/watchmaker.jpg


4/4

All the watchmakers looked at and thought it was indeed a novel concept. Yet none

would accept it as a watch because it didnt look like a watch, feel like a watch, sound

like a watch, made of gears and wheels like a watch and wasnt made the way watches

are supposed to be made. None would accept it so they continued to make watches the

way they are supposed to be made. This forced the inventor to start his own company

and became the richest man in the world.

The above is, of course, a fable. In real life in 1968, the Swiss dominated the world watchindustry. The Swiss themselves invented the electronic watch movement at their researchinstitute in Neuchatel, Switzerland. It was rejected by every Swiss watch manufacturer.Based on their experiences with watches, they believed this couldnt possibly be the watchof the future. After all, it was battery powered, did not have bearings or a mainspring andalmost no gears. Seiko executives, with no background in the watch industry, took one lookat this invention that the Swiss manufacturers rejected at the World Watch Congress thatyear and took over the world watch market.

Once people establish a hypothesis about theway things are, they develop a deeply-rooted bias against anything that causes them to feel

uncertain, anxious or confused about their pre-established hypothesis. The novelty of thenew watch caused great uncertainty in the minds of the watchmakers. This bias againstuncertainty is activated when people are asked to evaluate new, novel ideas and interfereswith the participants ability to recognize a creative idea. The insidious nature of this bias isthat there is strong societal pressure to endorse creativity and its products and a strongsocial desirability bias against expressing any view of creativity as negative. The resultingstate is similar to that identified in research on racial bias; a conflict between an explicitpreference towards creativity and unacknowledged negative associations with creativity.

So we say we strongly support creativity while routinely rejecting creative ideas and neveradmitting it is because creative ideas are novel and different that makes us feel uncertain

and afraid.
http://creativethinking.net/articles/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/uncertainty2.jpg

Documents

Why Are We So Afraid of Creativity