Obvious things first: creativity implies creation. And not just any creation. Kraft mentions how creativity is a process, a combination of right inspiration and right action, or as stated by Edison, perspiration. It is easy for us to recognize our individual creative capacity, but that doesn't mean that everything we create is good. On the contrary, one can argue that we've done a pretty darn bad job of taking care of our surroundings. We need not get into statistics. All we need to do is open our eyes.
There is a tendency to romanticize broad worldwide issues and to cringe from the foul stench of immediate reality. It's easy to say you want to free Tibet and feel sympathy for all those "poor African children", but harder to sustain what people really need to live decent, dignified lives. I currently volunteer for a youth emergency shelter and witness that the majority of donations roll in during the holidays and decrease as the year goes on. It's easy to feel good about donating to organizations that provide band aid relief, but people really need a whole lot more than an occasional meal and a pair of socks. Healthcare, education, decent housing, love, friendship, etc. are all things that everyone deserves. I am aware of the broad scope of socioeconomic inequity and its systemic as well as individualized roots, so I hope I don't offend anyone with these generalizations. What I'm trying to suggest is that in order to address pressing issues such as hunger and poverty, one needs to utilize Kraft's idea of creativity, not only in initial creation, but practice.
没有评论:
发表评论