Spontaneous Social Creativity

Some societies have demonstrated a capacity for spontaneous creativity. At times this has evolved into complex social and material structures. The Social structures and the Material structures depend upon the other. It is necessary for a complex, cohesive, interrelated and coordinated social behaviour to exist alongside any coordinated complexity of structural assemblage. Ultimately the purpose of these structural assemblages is to protect humans by providing shelter, nutrition, resistance to intruders and defence against pathogens.

Weak attempts have been made to predict the necessary and sufficient factors in social behaviour patterns, which allow these complex constructs to evolve.

Curiously attempts have also been made to deny these factors, and indeed to deny the existence of the pulse of such evolutions. What are no more than weak excuses for “failed societies” have been proffered repeatedly. These include nebulous factors such as “absence of education”, “climatic handicaps” and much more. It has also been vehemently denied, by these same groups, that there could be an intrinsic and probably fatal genetic deficiency in those groups which do not spontaneously evolve .

Others have made what are no more than feeble attempts to determine these factors using various (nebulous) psychological and psychometric tests – all weak and insufficient measures of the complexity. Intelligence quotient has been pursued as a possible form of explanation. This is flawed for a great many reasons, which need not be pursued currently.

It is difficult to understand why psychometric measures are needed, since empirically it is quite clear that some groups are extremely successful in this form of creativity. One has to ask whether any additional “proof” is useful, necessary or productive.

However, it does seem that there are some requirements of such successful groups. These all display (and likely require) variants of insight, with various temporal connotations such as hindsight and foresight.

Weak attempts to measure insight have been attempted. Foresight has been approached via the psychometric parameters of “delayed gratification” “deferred discounting” and “theory of mind”. All are unconvincing as to their precision. The qualities of insight, although readily understood as a notion are exceptionally difficult to define and measure, as is the case with hindsight. It does, however, appear that these are essential ingredients in the construction of “social civility” which must exist before the various mutually dependent layers and stratifications of complex social systems are built, each level necessarily dependent upon the next of the lamina.




About jp

Orthopaedic Surgeon
This entry was posted in Humans as social animals, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s