The general public lacks knowledge in the field of creativity, aside from using creativity throughout the day.  Although creativity has an enormous amount of potential, there are very few places where it can be defined.  In certain types of literature, author may try to define it, but the results tend to be bias or too theoretical.  This creates confusion for those who are more analytical.  It is not being properly defined, because the conversation is too one sided.  The science and phycological areas need to develop a better understanding of creativity.  Due to the confusion caused by the current understanding of creativity it would be best to do their own research and come to their own conclusion.  There are no beneficial excuses for a lack of information or research, regarding the understanding of creativity.  The effects of not understanding or not properly publicizing what is understood about creativity, is the hindrance of other research.  To avoid further negative effects from this lack of knowledge, either more research needs to be done or the current conversation needs to have more publication.

This is not about the creativity that Dennis Vilorio speaks of in his article “Careers for Creative People.”, he defines the technical definition of creativity “Creativity can be defined as the ability to produce something of value that did not exist before. You could harness creativity to design a product, make a blueprint, or write a script, for example. The outcomes of creative work may be wildly different among individual people or disciplines, but there are often similarities in the process.”  This is about defining creativity as something more understandable. When researching creativity, the main points that arise involve the benefits of creative learning in schools.  Yet, there is hardly anything for those who are trying to learn about it.  In Abdulla, Ahmed M’s and Cramond, Bonnie’s article, “After Six Decades of Systematic Study of Creativity: What do Teachers Know about What it is and How it is Measured?”, they state “there is not complete agreement on what creativity is.”  It has been Six decades and the disagreement is disturbing enough to mention it and not a general idea.  As many distinguished people have said, “United we stand, divided we fall.”  If the topic is so difficult that six decades, with professional research, cannot reach a semi conclusive analysis then there is an issue.  Have you ever heard of something that was difficult to understand and not important?  In the past science was not understood, but it turned out to be an important part of progressing the human species.  Now is the time to unite our differences and expand what is known.   

It is good to know that there are a lot of people do believe in the potential of creativity.  Some even devote their lives to understanding it, aside from artists.  The philosopher Stephen Davies speaks of a lot of different questions of art in his book, “The Philosophy of Art”.  Asking questions such as “When and why did art originate?  What kinds of things are art and what makes them art?  What is the purpose of interpreting art and what constraints, if any, govern its interpretation?”  These questions are closely related to questions that could be asked about creativity.  As Davies is a philosopher, having him try to ask questions in art before creativity could be key to understanding creativity.  There are also those who are trying to explain creativity in a.  Such as, Zeki in his article “Artistic Creativity and the Brain”.  For example, he says, “Visual art contributes to our understanding of the visual brain because it explores and reveals the brain's perceptual capabilities. As Paul Klee once wrote, "Art does not reproduce the visible; it makes things visible." But visual art also obeys the laws of the visual brain, and thus reveals these laws to us. Of these laws, two stand supreme.”, where he explains how the brain is related to artistic creativity. 

Theodore Hill and Erika Rogers note that, “Among the scores of characterizations in the psychology literature, there is no single, authoritative definition of creativity.” in their article “Gender Gaps in Science: The Creative Factor.”   This is true, it is difficult to find any literature of a scientific base to define creativity in a straightforward way.  Why would anyone without a degree in these areas have any say.  This essay is not here to say if defining creativity is possible or proper yet.  The point is to say that the way things are currently is not sufficient and is causing problems.  At the very least, we need someone who is authoritative on the subject to make the current knowledge of creativity understood.  Why are the answers to creativity to the current knowledge on so ambiguous?  Although, most people have their own idea and state what they believe creativity to be, why are the prominent options not taught in schools?  It is not that creativity has no studies that have been done.  There are several studies that show evidence that creativity can help mental patients.  All of these are but few of the examples of something creativity may be able to do.  So, with so much potential, why is this not one of the most highly researched topic?

There is a technical definition for creativity in the dictionary, but there is still a need for more research on the subject of creativity. Many people know there is potential in this, and yet it is hardly spoken of in common conversations.  The effects of this lack of knowledge or publication are potentially detrimental to the pursuit of knowledge.  Not only affecting this area of study, but others as well.  There may be more that is understood about creativity than is seen.  However, because of the lack of publication, it still hinders research. To change this more research needs to be done, and a properly publicized definition needs to be announced.

The solution to this problem will need the support of people from all walks of life.  Creative people need to attempt to explain what they understand about creativity with the analytical audience involved.  Scientists and Psychologists need to do more research considering possibilities outside of what is known.  Both types of studies will also need support from the population in backing such projects.  As many distinguished people have said, “United we stand, divided we fall.”  

There may be some concerns from people about the cost of financing such research.  However, the benefits far outweigh the costs.  By having a better understanding of creativity and how it is useful in other subjects, interest will grow.  With more people interested in these types of fields innovation and advances in related fields of study will also increase.  The recent amount spent on creative careers is already very high.  According to Dennis Vilorio’s article “Careers for Creative People.” on the Burau of Labor and Statistics website, “Most occupations involve some form of creativity.”  So, if understanding creativity can help productivity even a little bit, it would save a lot.   “Engaging in a creative activity is, for many workers, its own reward. Workers do interesting or unique projects while adding their own style. Producing something that didn’t exist before leads to a sense of accomplishment. “Being creative is really fulfilling,” says wedding photographer Kyle Carnes of Portland, Oregon.”  Also, knowing this, we can infer, that it could be a benefit for everyone who is under stress.  These are already several places you can see the potential behinds understanding creativity.  

A recent up and coming research topic in psychology involving creativity is of the use of a creative outlet, such as art, to improve mental health.  There are many examples of how the expression of creativity has potential.  According to Sapouna and Elisabeth in “The Transformative Potential of the Arts in Mental Health Recovery – an Irish Research Project.”, there have been an increasing number of studies about the effects of art and creativity on the mentally ill.  This is researched mainly on the specific implications of use by the mentally ill and stroke patients.  An example of this type of study is “Theorizing How Art Gallery Interventions Impact People with Dementia and Their Caregivers.” by the authors Paul Camic, Erin Baker, and Victoria Tischler.  An example for its potential is in the study “Creative Art Therapy to Enhance Rehabilitation for Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial” in which it was concluded that “ Creative art therapy combined with conventional physical therapy can significantly decrease depression, improve physical functions and increase quality of life compared with physical therapy alone.”  Outside of controlled situations there are also other miraculous stories of art or creativity helping people through mental disorders.  For instance, there is an article about one of these stories by Patricia Brown “She’s Her Own Artist. And a Daughter’s Muse.”  In which the mother of Beth recovered from depression with the help of art.  However, improving mentality is not the only potential art has shown recently.  

The use of more complicated scientific actions in art has become more popular in recent years.  However, the potential of its use in the scientific field can be seen in Yoko Shimizu’s presentation “Integration of Art and Science | Yoko Shimizu | TEDxTokyo.” at TED x Tokyo, the possibilities are given form as a mix of both communities. In the video, she presents examples such as a bottomless container of water.  Also, using science and the materialization of natural forms, she shows how complicated shapes, that are difficult to calculate and create ourselves, can form naturally in an instant.   By doing this, she is presenting examples of how art, science and nature still have more potential that have yet to be discovered.  It also shows that art, creativity, and nature would be a game changing factor in the science community. Therefore, the understanding of creativity needs to become more of an important interest to the science community understanding art and creativity, but the expression of creativity through art is still being debated as necessary.  If this is not taken as a serious potential, then something amazing could be lost.  

On the opposite side of those who don’t view creativity as important, are those who view creativity as uncontainable therefore undefinable.   However, this isn’t right either.  Warning, this is a lot more theoretical, since there are very few analytical arguments on this topic as is.

Yes, the lack of sturdy evidence opposing this idea of unobtainability is part of the reason for this thought.  The thought or view of creativity being uncontainable contains it and makes it known. To be viewed as vast and never ending is its container.  Delving deeper, being contained is only from the current perspective of a human. The word, defined by humans, therefore contained by humans.  The idea for something to be uncontainable has to be beyond the word.  Yes, there is the possibility that certain things can or cannot be contained physically.  However, the moment this became anything other than physical words lose their original meaning.  On a more reasonable level, let’s say creativity is uncontainable.  If that were true, it would still be beneficial to pursue a better understanding something that cannot be understood.  

At the very least, for our own sanity.  As Carl von Clausewitz said, “Although our intellect always longs for clarity and certainty, our nature often finds uncertainty fascinating.”  Clarity is longed for and the uncertainty of creativity will lead us to pursue it one day.  The journey has already begun, slowing it down would only be a hindrance to society.

Imagine, all of the inventions that could have been a part of our society.  For something that is supposed to be free it seems like it is being divided.  If little to nothing is done this society will slowly or never improve.  As Dr. Seuss wrote in his book “Oh the Thinks you can Think”, “Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try.”  Although this is not what you would expect as a convincing quote, it is something that has a good meaning.  It can represent not only “the thinks you can think”, but also the things you can do.  You have to try to do something, the things that could be missed could have been done if only it had been tried. Zeki, Semir notes the main benefits and doubts about researching creativity, "Artistic Creativity and the Brain." “Variability confers huge advantages: it enriches our cultures immeasurably and is a key factor in the further evolution of human societies. Yet, as an evolutionary imperative, it also exacts a high price. It is often the cause of serious injustice and marginalizes from society those whose conduct or inclinations are judged to be deviant from the norm. Paradoxically, this may benefit art and hence contribute to cultural evolution.”  However if these thoughts are contemplated too long then we will not progress as a society.  Also being deviant from the norm has been proved to be more desirable later.  As with Albert Einstein, Walt Disney, Madonna, etc.. different is not always bad. 

If creativity is as infinitive as some assume, it should be investigated more. That people, whose topic had little to do with creativity, had to note that there wasn’t enough information is not a very good sign of the current knowledge of our most trusted minds.  Creativity has been around longer than there is documentation.  What is known of the human past, art has always been one if the more prominent things that are highly valued.  The sphinx, hieroglyphs, literature, and clothes are just a few examples of what is viewed as important to this day.  How much money and time is spent on art is abnormal considering that we are in a time where it would be more efficient to expand our knowledge and focus our spending on doing so.  However, currently people still tend to favor pleasing objects.  Despite this, locating any research on the reason behind the human desire for art and creativity is difficult to find.  There are many opportunities art could be an important part of discovering something that could be beneficial. However, this cannot be researched as much because of the lack of knowledge in the creativity field.  There are studies using art as a healing method for the mentally ill.  This could be an incredible discovery, but one that cannot be fully understood by the general population.  Creativity is not talked about often as something with a potential outside of design.  Why is so much instinctively put into it then?   Does fine art represent the creative prowess of a culture?  These are some of the many types of questions that are going unanswered.  It will take more than any one subject area to find the answers.  However, due to the confusion caused by the current understanding of creativity it would be best to do their own research and come to their own conclusion.  There is a need for the understanding of creativity from the more analytical community.  The cost of the hindrance this lack of knowledge causes outweighs the cost of attempting to gain a better understanding.  Creativity needs to be researched for the benefit of society, and to prevent further deterrents.
