I found this video the other day and though it was so valuable I had to share it. In it, John Cleese gives his views on creativity and it seems he agrees that there are two components to the mind!
Category Archives: Personal Development - Page 4
John Cleese on Creativity
Posted by Richard
on August 23, 2010
No comments
A Positive Definition
Posted by Richard
on August 17, 2010
No comments
I was reading an article on a web page that came to my attention courtesy of the Birmingham Humanists blog a few days ago. In it the author covered a few things, mainly related to Humanism and differences among some sub groups. But while doing that, he mentioned the fact that we usually focus more on our differences than the things that we have in common.
What piqued my interest further was the mention of ‘pushing away’ as a process. The idea was that the author had defined himself during his formative years as a Humanist by pushing away from elements of religion and superstition. He then pointed out that we tend to carry this process over to people.
The author described his own growth into Humanism in these terms, he talked of the things he was pushing away from. He then observed that many Humanists still do this, which helps to cause much fracturing in the community. The whole thing put me in mind of “The Judean Peoples Front” and the “Peoples Front of Judea” in Monty Python’s The Life of Brian.
In my view the author was describing a Taoist style process of definition by negation. In other words that’s when you define a thing by what it’s not. The Tao itself tends to be defined in these terms, and as you’re tend to be thinking in terms of emptiness it’s a natural way to do it.
Defining a stance by negation might seem like allowing others to take the initiative, that Humanism can only be defined by it’s opposition to much of religious thought, but it isn’t necessarily the case. Of course, the danger for Humanism in this is that we risk losing sight of the positive expression of our stance. We know what we’re against, but what how well do we put across what we’re for? Do Humanists risk becoming better known for haranguing believers than offering a better alternative to religious indoctrination?
My comment here is that definition by negation does not have to be seen as reactionary and negative. I could say that I’m “against indoctrination” or I could say that I’m “for free thought”. This goes deeper than spin, as expressing these things positively will build habits of thought that I feel will prove very beneficial and much more attractive.
The Freedom of Emptiness
Posted by Richard
on August 3, 2010
No comments
I’d like to continue from a previous post, about The Cult of Knowledge. I’d like to do a little musing.
I was musing on the Taoist idea of emptiness recently, emptiness in Taoism doesn’t mean the same thing as we Westerners are used to. It’s more the idea of a space filled with potential. In fact it’s emptiness that gives things their value.
Don’t believe me? Consider a cup. There’s a handle, and possibly a nice pattern, but what makes it a cup is the space for the drink, the emptiness where the contents must go. In fact the handle wouldn’t be much use without a hold in the middle would it? It’s the same with more or less anything you look at, the emptiness it what gives a thing value, the thing that really brings it to life.
Okay, let’s start working back to the subject of my previous post. I suggested last time that knowledge wasn’t the be all and end all, that the fixation with the accumulation of knowledge could be a bad thing. Which is, as far as I am concerned, true. There’s nothing worse than a know it all, and the know it all misses a lot because his or her head is full. But I will allow a short Zen story to illustrate my point:
A university professor went to visit a famous Zen master. While the master quietly served tea, the professor talked about Zen. The master poured the visitor’s cup to the brim, and then kept pouring. The professor watched the overflowing cup until he could no longer restrain himself. “It’s overfull! No more will go in!” the professor blurted. “You are like this cup,” the master replied, “How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup.”
In the martial art of Taijiquan, we are not taught lists of counters and blocks. Rather, we are led to a way of moving and being. Not rigid and full, but flexible and empty. It is this emptiness that frees us to react.
How does this relate back to my point on knowledge? Consider that knowledge provides a space, it can frame an area, in the same way as our cup. Within this framework, we deploy our skills and abilities, we adapt and change. These qualities are the things that make this knowledge actually useful.
When we hoard too much knowledge, it will fill the space, thus putting us in a position of inflexibility. We may be unable to innovate and unable to move, we suffer “Paradigm Paralysis”, becoming so fixated with current models and knowledge that we cannot see beyond them and it.
Creative Commons Acknowledgement.
The yellow cup image is by Eric Brian Ouano and is under by-nc-nd.
