I don’t know about you, but to me there is something deeply satisfying in the knowledge that the universe appears to be the result of an imbalance. Those old Navajo weavers were exactly right to put a flaw intentionally into their perfect rugs; the Japanese idea of wabi sabi captures this notion aesthetically, that a slight asymmetry makes for the greatest beauty.
What struck me about this Scientific American article on creativity is what an impoverished notion of creativity the scientists have. Solving that little problem about how to get out of a tower with a rope is “creative”? If you’re a ten-year-old, maybe. Or a psychologist. Creativity as problem solving. Is that what scientists really think? Maybe the imagination does interest itself in problems, or is engaged by problematic situations (to grab a term from John Dewey), but the process is more open-ended than the scientists appear to think it is.
I know the American radical right has a problem with science, but I had no idea they had adopted the doctrine of the four humors; next thing you know, Sarah Palin will be talking about the four fundamental elements of earth, air, fire & water. Oh, read it yourself, as much as you can take before you bust out laughing, but the upshot is that the choleric John McCain will make a better president than the phlegmatic Barack Obama.
For a Coming Extinction
Now that we are sinding you to The End
That great god
That we who follow you invented forgiveness
And forgive nothing
I write as though you could understand
And I could say it
One must always pretend something
Among the dying
When you have left the seas nodding on their stalks
Empty of you
Tell him that we were made
On another day
The bewilderment will diminish like an echo
Winding along your inner mountains
Unheard by us
And find its way out
Leaving behind it the future
When you will not see again
The whale calves trying the light
Consider what you will find in the black garden
And its court
The sea cows the Great Auks the gorillas
The irreplaceable hosts ranged countless
And fore-ordaining as stars
Join your work to theirs
That it is we who are important
From one of my favorite blogs, Neurophilosophy, comes this lovely image of a 19th century papier mache brain. Be sure to click through the caption so you can see the whole thing in multiple views. Speaking of brains, I enjoyed reading Jonathan Mayhew’s inventory of his own neurological state, especially as it relates to music. What I know about music I’ve had to learn by conscious effort & my interest has been driven mostly by a love of language set to music. Song seems to me the very highest art. Here is a piece on the Miller-McCune blog about MRI studies of musicians’ brains done while they are actually playing. (Unfortunately, the Youtube videos have been removed, thought it is still possible to find tape of Monk & Bird playing.) The problem of how the brain creates our human worlds is, I think, the basic problem of philosophy & science. Is the process of consciousness linguistic? I think so. That is, I don’t think modern consciousness could have evolved without language. Consciousness requires a symbolic system. Not quite sure what to make of this large-scale color-naming experiment, but it suggests that there is strong clustering in color names among English speakers. Apparently, when babies — before they develop the ability to talk — see colors, a “non-linguistic” part of their brains processes the information. Not sure that makes the color perception any “purer,” as the headline suggests, unless you want to associate language with impurity. Which, come to think of it, makes sense philosophically & mythologically: Eden & the Fall, the use of tools for labor, including language . . .