Rethink be an iconoclast


Published on

To see things differently than other people, the most effective solution is to bombard brain with things it never encountered before.

Published in: Spiritual, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Rethink be an iconoclast

  1. 1. 1
  2. 2. ReTHINK SYMPOSIUM :Iconoclasts: Creating Grea Minds tha think different t t 2
  3. 3. 3
  4. 4. 4
  5. 5. To see things differently than otherpeople, the most effective solution is tobombard brain with things it neverencountered before.Novelty releases the perceptual processfrom the shackle or grip of pastexperiences and forces the brain to makenew judgments. 5
  6. 6. Be an iconoclast Highly creative and innovative people’s brains actually function differently than theaverage person’s. Gregory Berns ( a neuroscientist) refers to these types of people as “iconoclasts,”which is also the title of his newest general audience, non-technical book, Iconoclast: A NeuroscientistReveals How To Think Differently. He defines an iconoclast as “a person who does something otherssay can’t be done,” and explains “perception lies at the heart of iconoclasm…. Iconoclasts see thingsdifferently than other people.” Perception is not the same thing as vision. Instead, it is the complex process by which weinterpret our experiences of the world. Those interpretations are wired through experientialrepetition and at the neurological level include extracting or discarding information. Iconoclasts differfrom most people in how they filter information. The importance of the distinctions in how each of us sees the world cannot beunderestimated. Berns writes that, “perception is not something that is immutably hardwired into thebrain.” “The critical fears that inhibit people from sharing their ideas: the fear of being rejected. At its core, this fear has its origin in social pressure, which is one of the most common of human phobias.” 6
  7. 7. Recent neurological findings show that we are fully capable of changing how we perceivelife. However, this ability to redirect neurological firing requires an extraordinary amount of mentalenergy, a principle fundamental to neuroeconomics. As it turns out, one of the brain’s primary survivalmechanisms is conserving energy. The brain does this by limiting energy expenditure during normal everyday awareness – anactivity that is simultaneously and inextricably tied to the neurological shortcuts it learns and habituallyrepeats. For most people, though, breaking out of the comfort zone of their energy conservativeperceptions is often a fearful proposition. This means is that the brain will draw on both past experience and other source ofinformation such as what other people had said, to make sense of what it is seeing. This happens allthe time. In other words brain takes the shortcut in the interest of efficiency. Maybe we are hardlyaware of this process. But what eventually bubbles to the surface of consciousness is an image in the“mind’s eye” 7
  8. 8. Fear is the biggest hurdle to become iconoclast. Fear relates primarily to survival. So any situation that threatens survival activates the fearsystem and puts the body in motion to do something and that something tends to be – retreat. The fear system has evolved over millions of years to essentially protect animals frompredators in situations in which they would be eaten or killed. When an animal’s fear system isactivated, and that includes humans, it provokes a retreat. It is very rare, if not impossible, when thefear system is active, to promote the opposite of retreat, which would be exploration. These arefundamental principles of evolution. Why do we have a fear system in the first place? What are the predominant fears thatanimals have? It comes down to survival. If you think about it, the few things an animal has to do areto survive and reproduce. Fear relates primarily to survival. So any situation that threatens survivalactivates the fear system and puts the body in motion to do something and that something tends to be– retreat. That makes a lot of sense for animals, and it probably made sense for our ancestors100,000 years ago, but in situations today, there are not very many circumstances where our verysurvival is threatened in such an imminent way. Nevertheless, we have brains that still respond thesame way to activate that fear system, which is still very sensitive and tends to provoke the samereaction. 8
  9. 9. There are many things that can trigger the fear system, a lot of very genericthings like phobias, but those are not particularly relevant to the current situation. The onething that does trigger it, pretty much universally although not to the same degree, isuncertainty. We are not exactly sure why that is, but the neuroscience evidence is prettystrong that when people have to face decisions in which they don’t have completeinformation, we will see activity in parts of the brain associated with fear. In particular, we seeactivity in a structure called the amygdala and we also tend to see activity in anotherstructure called the insula. Both of these structures are generally associated with negativeemotional states. Potentially. However, when you are talking about uncertainty, there are two verydifferent types of uncertainty. One is what economists refer to as risk. That’s like playing thelottery where you have to make a decision. There’s a possibility of failure, but you know whatthe odds are and you can at least come to some estimate of the likelihood of success andfailure. 9
  10. 10. As long as you can come to some estimate, you can make a reasonable and rationaldecision based on that. Now, each person might have a different tolerance for the risk, but at least youcan make that decision. That’s quite different than the circumstance when you don’t even have completeinformation and you don’t know what’s going to happen and you can’t even estimate the odds ofsomething bad happening. That’s called ambiguity Those are two different terms for two very .different situations. Most everyone seems to have an innate aversion for ambiguity. Given the choice betweena circumstance in which they have incomplete information and one in which they have completeinformation but it’s still risky, people will generally prefer the risky option, even if it is completelyirrational. Again, we don’t know exactly why that is, but that’s how our brains evolved. They takesituations in which they can’t really anticipate what’s going to happen, but then cognitively reframethem so as to estimate some kind of likelihood of success or failure to make a decision. This is a big inhibitor of risk taking and innovation because if you are doing something veryinnovative, you aren’t going to have a track record that you can project on a likelihood of success. Youwill be faced with situations of ambiguity and situations where you don’t know the odds of success. Formost people, that is an impediment and it will stop them. It makes them afraid. 10
  11. 11. Iconoclast in workplace There’s a tremendous amount of fear in the workplace because people areconcerned as to whether or not they are going to be laid off, which is very rational. But theproblem is that this is extremely detrimental to business operations. When people are afraid, itbecomes difficult if not impossible to do innovative work, because you have this internal systemtelling you to retreat and take the safest course. When people are afraid, it becomes difficult if not impossible to do innovativework, because you have this internal system telling you to retreat and take the safest course.It is incumbent on business leaders and high level managers to get that fear under control. Thatis precisely what leadership is: to manage the fears of the people working there and projectsome level of confidence and optimism. The ship might be sinking but you have to project thatoptimism. If you want the novel ideas to emerge, you can’t play it safe. It’s in thesecircumstances that you need to look to the most innovative and iconoclastic people in anyorganization. Now, they might not be the most outspoken, as there are different personalitytypes that go with being an iconoclast. Some people are socially awkward, some are shy andsome like to provoke. Iconoclasts are not usually your mainstream persons. Managers need tobe aware of that and be a little more in tune than they would be normally which of course isdifficult because everyone is under pressure to manage costs. But this is a low cost strategy thatdoesn’t cost much other than attention. 11
  12. 12. Iconoclasts are people who manage to achieve things that others say can’t be done.In doing so, they overcome mental barriers that stop most of us cold. My definition implies thatthese people are different from the rest of us, and they are, but more precisely,their brains are different. Until Walt Disney came along, cartoons were only used as advertisements betweenmovies. His great insight was to recognize that cartoons could actually be the main form ofentertainment. This insight, which came to him as he was working in animatedadvertising, was the key to his success, more than any other personal asset or quality hepossessed. By all accounts, Disney was a difficult person to work with, but on the strength of thisinspiration, he was able to convince people to invest in his enterprise. His investorswere initially his family, and by relying on their support, he was able to build an empire from theground up.Ray Kroc turned McDonald’s into the most successful fastfood operation in the world. There isone particular example from his story that interests me. McDonald’s is not an organizationknown for innovation in general: the entire business model is based on recreating the sameenvironment in each location. 12
  13. 13. Kroc’s innovation came in the marketing realm. In the late 1960s, he startedmarketing children by creating the character of Ronald McDonald. That was a stroke of genius interms of a social understanding of the customer. Until that point, no one had marketed tochildren because the conventional wisdom was, ‘Why bother? They don’t have any money’. Inessence, Kroc’s response was, ‘That may be true, but their parents do’. He created a connectionto that particular audience through a clown, and he correctly predicted that by getting the kidsto want to go to a restaurant, they would convince their parents to take them there. His insightinvolved social intelligence and how to connect to people in a completely novel way.Like other investors who bill themselves as ‘contrarians’, David Dreman (founder and CEO ofDreman Value Management) has built his portfolio – and indeed his reputation – on the idea ofgoing against popular opinion on Wall Street. This is an extremely difficult thing to do, becausepeople on Wall Street are subject to strong social forces, and tend toward conformity andchasing fads. Look at the mess the markets are in right now: it’s the result of herd behaviour, andof the belief that certain investments are good because everyone else is pursuing them.Dreman’s example is significant because he has been able to fight the urge to do what everyother investor is doing, and instead, to invest in things that are out of favour. This is one ofWarren Buffett’s strengths as well. 13
  14. 14. Both men have somehow managed to keep their ‘fear of being different’ incontrol, and to reap the rewards. They may experience the fear of social disapproval, but theycertainly don’t let it inhibit their actions. Iconoclasts acknowledge the fact that creation is also anact of destruction: that to create something new, you have to tear down conventional ways ofthinking. Whether you want to be an iconoclast or not, it is crucial for success in any field tounderstand how the iconoclastic mind works. The first roadblock is perception, which is also the most importantfactor for coming up with new ideas. Perception is the process by which the brain takes inputsfrom the senses – typically through the eyes – and converts them into mental images that webecome conscious of. Unfortunately, the brain takes plenty of shortcuts along the way. Tounderstand how it does this, consider the bandwidth of the optic nerve – the main conduit ofinformation from the eyes into the brain. Its information flow has been measured,and it only adds up to about 10 megabytes per second – about the speed of a cable modem. 14
  15. 15. Anyone who has used a cable modem and tried to watch video over the Internet quicklyrealizes there are compromises in terms of information flow: images tend to be pixelatedand jerky. Even though our brains are being fed information at the same rate through our eyes, this isnot how we see the world, because the brain is constantly making predictions and interpretationsabout what it sees. The problem is that these predictions are based largely on past experience: ourbrains make their best guess as to what they are seeing based on what we have experienced up tothat point. The issue of how the brain creates perceptions from raw visual inputs is of criticalimportance to being an iconoclast. The iconoclast doesn’t literally see things differently than otherpeople; more precisely, he perceives things differently. Breakthroughs tend to come from aperception system that is confronted with something that it doesn’t know how to interpret. Great innovators challenge our flawed perception by taking themselves out of theirnormal circumstances. By exploring new environments and interacting with new people, theyessentially prevent their brains from relying on previous experiences too much, both in terms ofperception and imagination. 15
  16. 16. Iconoclasts’ key insights tend to be triggered by visual images, so the key to seeing likean iconoclast is to look at things that you have never seen before. Sometimes a simple change ofenvironment is enough to jog your perceptual system out of its familiar categories. This may beone reason why restaurants figure so prominently as sites of perceptual breakthroughs. Newacquaintances can also be a source of new perceptions, because other people frequently lend theiropinion of what they see, and these ideas may be enough to destabilize our familiar patterns ofperception. In short, by forcing our visual system to see things in different ways, we can increasethe odds of new insights. 16
  17. 17. The second mental roadblock that iconoclasts overcome has to do with the humanfear response. We know quite a bit about how the fear system works and what triggers it. Thissystem is largely unconscious or subconscious, and it is triggered by very primitive aversionsrelating to survival. The one that is most important in inhibiting innovation is the fear of failure,and in particular, the fear of looking stupid. Our brains are very social – we evolved in social environments – and because of that,we are deeply hardwired to care what other people think about us. You can imagine that 100,000years ago, it was very important for our ancestors to belong to a community, both for the sake ofsurvival and reproduction. Fast-forward to today, and our brains are exquisitely tuned to whatother people are thinking about us. The fear of being humiliated, of looking stupid in front of yourpeers, or of being shunned from the group is an incredibly powerful impediment to doingsomething differently. It is fascinating how much social influence and messaging get mixed in withour own judgements and opinions. 17
  18. 18. By definition, if you’re doing something differently, you’re doing something outside ofwhat everyone else does, and that is a situation we are all made to fear and avoid. The third barrier that iconoclasts overcome involves social skills, and again, thesecome into play because our brains are built for social environments. If you conquer the first twoimpediments– perception and fear – and actually arrive at an idea that is truly novel, you are thenfaced with the task of finding ways to convince other people of its merits. Persuading othersrequires a fair deal of social intelligence, since most people will react with aversion to anything thatis different. 18
  19. 19. Where do new ideas actually come from? What we have found is that when people imagine new ideas, they use the same partsof their brain as in perception. Imagination, then, is like perception running in reverse. Imaginationis therefore subject to all the same problems that perception is: the brain will imagine things inways that are most familiar to it, in ways it has experienced in the past. The challenge is gettingaround the brain’s limitations. There are several different routes to forcing the brain out of its lazy mode ofperception, but the theme linking these methods depends on the element of surprise. The brain must be provided with something that it has never before processed to force it out of predictable perceptions. When confronted with places never seen before, the brain must create new categories. It is in this process that the brain jumbles around old ideas with new images to create new syntheses 19
  20. 20. In order to think creatively, and imagine possibilities that only iconoclasts do, onemust purge out of the cycle of experience-dependent categorization-or what Mark Twain called“education.” For most people, this does not come naturally. Often the harder one tries to thinkdifferently, the more rigid the categories become. There is a better way, a path that jolts the brainout of preconceived notions of what it is seeing: bombard the brain with new experiences. Onlythen will it be forced out of efficiency mode and reconfigure its neural networks. It typically takes a novel stimulus – either a new piece of information orgetting out of the environment in which an individual has become comfortable-to jolt attentionsystems awake and reconfigure both perception and imagination. The more radical and novel thechange, the greater the likelihood of new insights being generated. To think like an iconoclast, youneed novel experiences.” 20
  21. 21. The human brain comes to like that with which it is familiar. And it is this sort offamiliarity that the successful iconoclast must strive for. Rightly or wrongly, people put their moneyinto things that they are familiar with. The brain is lazy. It changes only when it has to. And the conditions that consistentlyforce the brain to rewire itself are when it confronts something novel. Novelty equals learning,and learning means physical rewiring of the brain. How can you think differently, better and deeper, and create a better future for yourself, your business, and the world? Ideas are the new currency of success The world is changing at a phenomenal pace. Seismic shifts are transforming your markets -often invisible, but with immense implications. New technologies, economics, fashion and culture have transformed people’s expectations and dreams. Survival and success requires you to explore places no business has gone before, to be more curious and creative -to see things differently, and think different things. 21
  22. 22. “To see things differently than other people,the most effective solution is to bombard thebrain with things it has never encounteredbefore. Novelty releases the perceptualprocess from the shackles of past experienceand forces the brain to make new judgments. 22
  23. 23. The key to seeing like an iconoclast is to look at things that you have never seenbefore. It seems almost obvious that breakthroughs in perception do not come I from simplystaring at an object and thinking harder about it. Break-throughs come from a perceptual systemthat is confronted with something that it doesn’t know how to interpret. Unfamiliarity forces therain to discard its usual categories of perception and create new one. Imagination comes from the visual system. Iconoclasm goes hand in hand withimagination. Before one can muster the strength to tear down conventional thinking, one mustfirst imagine the possibility that conventional thinking is wrong. But even this is not enough. Theiconoclast goes further and imagines alternative possibilities 23
  24. 24. 24
  25. 25. When Gutenberg was asked how he arrived atthe invention of the printing press, heconfessed it was as simple as seeing a newconnection between two existing products:the wine press and the coin punch. 25
  26. 26. 26
  27. 27. 27
  28. 28. 28
  29. 29. Fun and function combinations 29
  30. 30. Imagine weird combinations 30
  31. 31. Imagine weird combinations 31
  32. 32. Imagine weird combinations 32
  33. 33. Your combination 33
  34. 34. intelligence does not equal better thinking Heres a fundamental question that we rarely try to answer: Are intelligent peoplecapable of better thinking?‘ The assumed answer is yes, because that is part of our definition of intelligence. Anintelligent person is someone who seems more capable of thinking than other people. Yet withEdward De Bono (founder for lateral thinking technique)experience across a very wide range ofpeople, the obvious answer is not true. Certainly intelligence, understanding and analysis do seem to go together. Yetsomebody may be very good at analysis but poor at design thinking or operational thinking –the type of thinking involved in making things happen. With design you put things together to deliver a desired value. Excellence atanalysis does not mean excellence in design. Some countries teach philosophy as part of theschool curriculum. The intention is very good because the plan is to teach thinking. Butphilosophy teaches analysis; it does not teach design thinking. Then there is information. Intelligent people understand and absorb informationmore readily. So they tend to have more information to play with. Often the right informationacts as a substitute for thinking. 34
  35. 35. Intelligent people working in a particular field pick up the idiom of that field andthen become capable of juggling information in that field. The result can be a powerful new idea.But take that same mind and apply it to a completely different field and the generalised skill ofthinking is not there. Intelligence is like the horsepower of a car. In other words, intelligence is apotential (which may be determined by the speed of transmission along the neurones in thebrain).Thinking is like the skill with which the car is driven. The driver of the fast car may, intime, acquire the skill needed to drive the fast car. But that is not the same as driving skill inits broad sense of reacting to conditions and other road users. Thinking and intelligence do overlap in the area of understanding, but can diverge inother areas. For example, an intelligent person may take up a view on a certain subject. This viewmay be determined by personal experience, emotions and even prejudice. The intelligence isthen used to defend this view. This is not an example of good thinking. Good thinking would involve exploration ofthe subject, the generation of alternative views, listening to the views of others, consideringthe context and purpose of the thinking – and then designing a way forward. Defence ofa point of view, no ma tter how brilliant is not enough. , There are general habits and intentions which good thinkers are supposed to have.These might include considering all factors, generating alternatives, listening to others anddefining the objective. While these may exist as intentions, they are not necessarily used bythinkers. 35
  36. 36. The need for new way of thinking To this day, Western culture depends on this type of thinking. In family arguments,in business discussions, in the law courts, and in governing assemblies, we use the thinkingsystem of the Greeks, based on argument and critical thinking.THE GANG OF THREESocrates (469-399 B.C.)Socrates was trained as a "sophist." Sophists were people who played with words and showedhow careful choice of words could lead you to almost any conclusion you wanted. Socrates wasinterested in challenging peoples thinking and, indeed, getting them to think at all instead ofjust taking things for granted. He wanted people to examine what they meant when they saidsomething. He was not concerned with building things up or making things happen.From Socrates we get the great emphasis on argument and critical thinking. Socrates chose tomake argument the main thinking tool. Within argument, there was to be critical thinking: Whydo you say that? What do you mean by that? 36
  37. 37. The need for new way of thinkingPlato (c. 427-348 B.C.) Plato is generally held to be the father of Western philosophy. He is best-known forhis famous analogy of the cave. Suppose someone is bound up so that the person cannot turnaround but can only look at the back wall of the cave. There is a fire at the mouth of thecave. If someone comes into the cave, then the bound person cannot see the newcomer directlybut can only see the shadow cast by the fire on the back wall of the cave. So as we go throughlife, we cannot see truth and reality but only "shadows" of these. If we try hard enough andlisten to philosophers, then perhaps we can get a glimpse of the truth. From Plato we get thenotion that there is the "truth" somewhere but that we have to search for it to find it. The way tosearch for the truth is to use critical thinking to attack what is untrue. 37
  38. 38. The need for new way of thinkingAristotle (384-322 B.C.) Aristotle was the pupil of Plato and the tutor of Alexander the Great. Aristotle was avery practical person. He developed the notion of "categories," which are really definitions. Soyou might have a definition of a "chair" or a "table." When you come across a piece offurniture, you have to judge whether that piece of furniture fits the definition of a chair. Ifit does fit, you say it is a chair. The object cannot both be a chair and not be a chair at thesame time. That would be a "contradiction." On the basis of his categories and theavoidance of contradiction, Aristotle developed the sort of logic we still use today (basedlargely on "is" and "is not"). From Aristotle we get a type of logic based on identity andnon-identity, on inclusion and exclusion. 38
  39. 39. THE OUTCOME OF THE GANG OF THREE So, this was the gang of three. The outcome was a thinking system based on thesearch for the "truth." This search was going to be carried out by the method of argument.Within argument there was to be the critical thinking that sought to attack "untruth." Thisattack was going to use the methodology of Aristotles logic. To this day, argument is the basis of our normal thinking. The purest form of thistype of thinking is in the law courts where the prosecution takes one side of the argument andthe defence the other side. Each strives to prove the other side wrong. The "truth" is to bereached by argument 39
  40. 40. THE INADEQUACY OF ARGUMENT There is a place for argument, and argument is a useful tool of thinking. Butargument is inadequate as the main tool of thinking. Argument lacks constructive energies,design energies, and creative energies. Pointing out faults may lead to some improvement butdoes not construct something new. Synthesizing both points of view does not produce a streamof new alternatives. Today in business, as elsewhere, there is a huge need to be constructive andcreative. There is a need to solve problems and to open up opportunities. There is a need todesign new possibilities, not just to argue between two existing possibilities. “The brain is lazy. It changes only when it has to. And the conditions that consistently force the brain to rewire itself are when it confronts something novel. Novelty equals learning, and learning means physical rewiring of the brain.” 40
  41. 41. 41
  42. 42. iconoclast When confronted with information streaming from the eyes, the brain will interpret thisinformation in the quickest and most efficient way possible. Time is energy. The longer the brain spendsperforming some calculation, the more energy it consumes. They see things differently because theirbrains do not fall into efficiency traps as much as the average person’s brain. Iconoclasts, either becausethey were born that way or because they learned how to do it, have found ways to work around theperceptual shortcuts that plague most people. 42
  43. 43. iconoclast The problem with novelty, however, is that, for most people, novelty triggers the fearsystem of the brain. Fear is the second major impediment to thinking like an iconoclast and stops theaverage person dead in this track. There are many types of fear, but the two that inhibit iconoclasticthinking are fear of uncertainty and fear of public ridicule. “To see things differently than other people, the most effective solution is to bombard the brain with things it has never encountered before. Novelty releases the perceptual process from the shackles of past experience and forces the brain to make new judgments.” 43
  44. 44. iconoclast Iconoclasts have existed throughout history. A name was given to this type of person whenLeo III, emperor of Constantinople, destroyed the golden icon of Christ over his palace gates in AD 725.Leo’s act of defiance against the church was to consolidate his power, but the word iconoclast, whichmeans literally “destroyer of icon,” stuck. In the same vein, the modern iconoclast, whether consciouslyor not, acknowledges the fact that creation is also an act of destruction. To create somethingnew, you also have to tear down conventional ways of thinking. 44
  45. 45. 45
  46. 46. Whenever you want to reject an idea. Think twice and rememberbelow statements 46
  47. 47. In the late 30’s, Chester Carlson tried unsuccessfully to sell his mimeograph-replacingtechnology to IBM,Kodak and others. Not until 1960, after $75 million in research, did Xerox unveil thefirst copier using Carlson’s technology. The result? A $15 billion business.The point: don’t kill new ideas before you fairly consider them.Another classic example :Have you got any idea when Xerox marketed the colour printer that found in 1971 ? Not because of costor quality. Reason is that there was nothing in the office in colour. Everything was black and white.The typewriter … 47
  48. 48. Edison had a simple way of conducting interviews. Hed invite prospective employees to joinhim for soup in the company cafeteria. If they salted their soup before tasting it, the interview was over.But why?Edison could not afford to surround himself with people ruled by faulty assumptions.Of all the roadblocks of being and iconoclast and for innovation, assumptions are the worst. THEYSTOP US BEFORE WE EVEN START Einstein was asked what the difference between him and average person. He said : “ If you asked the average person to find a needle in haystack, the person would stop when he or she found the needle. Me, on the other hand, would tear through the entire haystack for all possible needles” 48
  49. 49. When confronted with problems, we fix that on something in our past that has workedbefore.We ask, “ what I have been taught in my life, education, or work that will solve thisproblem.” Analytically we select most promising approach based on past experience.And work in a clearly defined direction toward the solution of the problem.Because of the apparent soundness of the steps based on past experiences, We becomearrogant certain of correctness of our conclusions.In contrast, iconoclast will ask themselves how many different ways they can look at theproblem. How they can rethink it, and how many different ways they can solve theproblem. Instead of asking how, they was taught to solve it 49
  50. 50. In 1968, the Swiss dominated the watch industry. The Swiss themselves invented electronic watchmovement at their research institute in Neuchtel, Switzerland. It was rejectedby the every Swiss watch manufacturer. Seiko took a look at this inventionthat the Swiss manufacturer rejected at World Watch Congress that year andtook over the world watch market. 50
  51. 51. 51
  52. 52. 52
  53. 53. 53
  54. 54. … … 54
  55. 55. We need a better word for mistake People are reluctant to be creative out of fear of making "a mistake." Problem is (atleast in the English language) we dont have a good word to describe creative ideas that justdont work...except to call them "mistakes." That is, we do not have a good word for this: "Fully justified venture which forreasons beyond our control did not succeed." If you do not succeed with your creative ideathis is called a "mistake." And people generally like to avoid "mistakes." (We need a better word!) so anything that doesn’t succeed we call it mistake and people don’t like mistake.Because that stands in the way of their promotion and career. 55
  56. 56. ReThink If our brain is a computer, then the software were using was largely designed 2,400 yearsago. Weve done virtually nothing about thinking since the days of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. (In hisbook Six Thinking Hats de Bono suggests that thinking systems based on analysis, judgement, and logicalargument are excellent in the same way that the left front wheel of a car is excellent. That is, there isnothing at all wrong with it, but it is not sufficient). Creativity is more than just being different. The creative idea is not just different (for thesake of being different). Creative ideas must necessarily have or add value. The soft-minded man always fears change. He feels security in the status quo, and he has an almost morbid fear of the new. For him, the greatest pain is the pain of a new idea. – Martin Luther King Jr. 56
  57. 57. 57
  58. 58. 58