창의성 역설: 창의성이 중요하다고 믿을수록 타인의 창의적 특성을 더 바람직하게 평가하는가?

서희영,장재윤 한국산업및조직심리학회 2023 한국심리학회지 산업 및 조직 Vol.36 No.4

본 연구는 사회 전반에 걸쳐 창의성이 강조되나 창의적인 사람은 환영받지 못하는 현상을 조명하고 이에 영향을 미치는 개인차 변인을 탐색하고자 하였다. 미국 교사들의 창의적 성 격특성에 대한 역설적 지각을 재확인한 선행 연구(Kettler et al., 2018)를 따라 연구 1에서는 한국 초․중․고등 교사 172명을 대상으로 개인차 변인을 조사하고, 학생들의 성격특성(창의 적 및 반창의적 특성)을 평가하게 하였다. 그 결과 한국 교사들 역시 창의적 성격특성을 덜 바람직하게 평가하는 것으로 나타나 선행 연구의 결과를 재확인하였다. 이를 확장하여 연구 2에서는 한국 기업의 정규직 331명을 대상으로 창의성 역설 현상과 이에 대한 창의적 마인 드셋의 영향을 살펴보고자 하였다. 분석 결과, 창의성에 대한 역설이 직장 맥락에서 더욱 두 드러지게 나타났다. 선행 연구 및 연구 1에서와 같이 타인의 창의적 성격특성 평가에 유일 하게 영향을 미치는 개인차 변인은 자기 창의성 지각으로 나타났으며, 이를 창의적 성장 마 인드셋이 조절하는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 본 연구가 갖는 시사점과 연구의 제한점 및 향후 연구 방향에 대해 논의하였다. This study aims to shed light on Creativity Paradox which is a phenomenon that creative people are not appreciated where creativity is emphasized, and to explore individual differences that affect the phenomenon. As per the previous research (Kettler et al., 2018) that even teachers who say they value creativity as educational goals actually find creative characteristics undesirable through the replication from school (Study 1) and expansion to organization (Study 2). In Study 1, 172 schoolteachers in Korea completed 2 waves of survey for the importance of educational goals including creativity and personal creativity with the desirability on characteristics for both creative indicative and contraindicative. In study 2, 331 fulltime employees completed 2 waves of survey including creative mindsets. Result indicated that both teachers and employees in this study rated characteristics associated with creativity as less desirable than those characteristics that are considered contraindicative, which confirms the Creativity Paradox. No effects were found based on the individual differences, but the level of personal creativity related to how desirable they rate others’ characteristics associated with creativity. As a result of hierarchical regression analysis, the moderating effect of creative growth mindset was partially presented in the relationship between the personal creativity and the members’ perception of creative characteristics, while no effect of fixed-creative mindset was presented. This study was intended to highlight the need of examining the implicit theory of, attitude toward, and changes of norms and climate related to creativity in the organizational context The implications, limits and future research suggestions were discussed.

Why Grand Theories of Creativity Distort, Distract, and Disappoint

John Baer 대한사고개발학회 2011 The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Vol.21 No.1

The success of physics and other sciences is in many ways attributable to unifying theories that bring seemingly disparate phenomena together under a single conceptual framework. This model is inviting for creativity theorists because grand theories have great power, but there is no guarantee that any large theory can describe the many very different kinds of cognitive processes that underlie cre-ativity in diverse domains. Trying to force creativity into an ill-fitting Procrustean bed can distort both theory and practice (such as in creativity-training programs and in creativity assessment) and in doing so cause us to misunderstand what we observe and to promote activities that may be counter-productive. Domain specificity, which argues that the skills and other factors leading to creative performance vary across domains, cautions against seeking grand, domain-general theories. Although there has been increasing interest in domain specificity in recent years, creativity researchers remain divided regarding the extent to which creativity is domain specific and the likelihood that there may be any significant domain-general factors in creative performance. Because this question is unlikely to be resolved soon and domain-specific theories of creativity are less likely to mislead us, practitioners should resist the allure of grand theories and try to understand and promote creativity on a smaller, domain-by-domain scale. Some limited general creativity meta-theories can be useful as heuristic devices to point us toward possibly productive domain-specific theories of creativity, however, if their limitations are clearly recognized and understood.

지식수준의 다양성과 네트워크 구조가 팀 창의성에 미치는 영향에 관한 종단분석 연구

이건창(Kun Chang Lee),최도영(Do Young Choi),서영욱(Young Wook Seo) 한국경영학회 2010 경영학연구 Vol.39 No.6

Creativity management has remained one of hot issues in the realm of management studies. However, previous studies about creativity were divided into several kinds of approaches such as personal traits, network approach, etc. Creativity can be described as an individual creativity. team creativity, and organizational creativity in the context of organization. Since individuals are working under a team, and organizational creativity is a result of team creativity, team creativity has been at the center of debates regarding how to improve corporate performance. Though many approaches were proposed to tackle the team creativity research issues, this study adopts a network structure approach which assumes that the network structure formulated by interrelationships among team members decide individuals` position in the complicated network, and their performance due to varying quality of information flow and information diversity. Typical examples of network structure under consideration in this study are degree centrality and structural hole Research framework proposed in this study is composed of hypotheses saying that (1) diversity of individual knowledge will be in a positive relationship with team creativity. (2) degree centrality implying how much individuals take central position at the network will affect team creativity positively, and (3) structural hole will have a positive influence on team creativity. Structural holes in social structure are buffers like an insulator in an electric circuit. The structural hole between two groups does not mean that people in the groups are unaware of one another It only means that the people are focused on their own activities such that they do not attend to the activities of people in the other group In other words! structural holes are an opportunity to broker the flow of information between people, and control the projects that bring together people from opposite sides of the hole. To prove the validity of the research hypotheses, we adopted ABM (agent-based modeling) simulation rather than questionnaire survey method because we want to investigate the long-term patterns of team creativity in response to individual knowledge (diversity), degree centrality. and structural hole- For the sake of ABM experiments. Netlogo language was used to build up a prototype named ABCS (Agent-Based Creativity Simulator). Simulation results from ABCS revealed that team creativity shows en inverted-U pattern as time dimension is expanded in the long run. Especially, in the long run view, network structures such as degree centrality and structural hole have more impact en team creativity than individual knowledge itself.

창의성에 대한 제거주의 정의 비판: 가치 있는 산물의 제작은 창의성에서 정말 불필요한가?

임수영 한국미학회 2023 미학(美學) Vol.89 No.4

창의성에 대한 표준적인 정의는 심리학자들이 창의성 연구에서 널리 받아들이고 있는 정의로, 이 정의에 따르면 창의성이란 새롭고 가치 있는 산물을 만들어내는 것이다. 하지만 심리학에서는 이러한 의미의 창의성에 기여하는 심리적, 환경적 요인들에 대한 탐구는 많이 이뤄졌지만, 정작 산물의 ‘새로움’과 ‘가치’의 의미가 무엇인지에 대한 논의는 많이 이루어지지 않았다. '창의성은 어떻게 정의되어야 하는가?’라는 철학적 질문을 둘러싼 논의는 2000년 이후 몇 철학자들에 의해서 시작되었으며, 이 시기부터 표준적인 정의의 요소들이 실제로 필요한지, 창의성의 정의에 추가로 필요한 요소가 없는지를 묻는 철학자들이 등장하기 시작했다. 이 중 힐즈와 버드의 가치 없는 창의성 정의, 그리고 스톡스의 최소한의 창의성 정의는 표준적인 정의의 일부인 ‘가치 있는 산물의 제작’을 제거하고, ‘새로운 아이디어를 갖는’ 심리적 과정을 창의성의 핵심이라고 보았다는 공통점을 갖는다. 이 글에서는 이 정의들을 ‘제거주의 정의’라고 명명하고, 이 정의의 지지자들이 가치 있는 산물의 제작이 창의성에 필요하지 않다고 본 이유, 가치 있는 산물 대신 내세운 다른 조건들에 대해서 살펴볼 것이다. 다음으로는 제거주의 정의의 한계를 지적하고 이를 바탕으로 창의성에 대한 정의에서는 가치 있는 산물의 제작이 배제될 필요가 없다는 점을 논증하고자 한다. he standard definition of creativity is widely accepted by psychologists in the study of creativity. According to this definition, creativity is the production of new and valuable things. However, while the psychological and environmental factors that contribute to creativity in this sense have been thoroughly explored by psychologists, there has been little discussion about what is meant by “new” and “valuable”. Discussions surrounding the philosophical question of "how should creativity be defined?" began to emerge after 2000, when a number of philosophers questioned whether the elements of the standard definition were really necessary and whether there were additional elements that could be added. The definition of “value-independent creativity”(Alison Hills & Alexander Birds) and the definition of "minimal creativity"(Dustin Stokes) remove the “production of something of value” part of the standard definition, and see the psychological process of “having new ideas” as key to creativity. In this article, I'll refer to their definition of creativity as the “eliminationist definition” and discuss why its proponents believe that the production of a valuable product is not necessary for creativity, and what other conditions they put forward in place of a valuable product. Next, I will point out the limitations of the eliminationist definition and argue that a definition of creativity need not exclude the production of valuable products.

창의성, 어떻게 만들어지나? (뇌과학을 기초로 한 일고(一考))

나승용 ( Na Sung-yong ) 창조교육학회 2019 창조교육논총 Vol.21 No.-

There are many definitions of creativity, but I will easily define it as “the ability to solve problems when we do not know the knowledge and procedures”. But what matters more than the definition of creativity is how and where we get the ability to solve problems we’ve never encountered. Just as science begins where human senses end, creativity that humans pursue in many ways begins with the stereotypes and senses that humans have. There’s a movie called The Matrix; where a young man who sells illegal hacking programs realizes that the world he knows is all fictional. The question is how do I know this? Of course, until now, a lot of people have suggested a way to think about how to think creatively, and I think it is being presented. I personally recommend the 13 methods presented in the book Spark of Genius written by Robert Root-Bernstein. The presented contents were observing, imaging, abstracting, recognizing pattern, forming pattern, analogizing, body thinking, empathizing, dimensional thinking, modelling, playing, transforming, synthesizing. What really interests me was what was common in these 13 contents. I summarized it in three ways: accumulation of memories, utilization of memories, and compilation of memories. I studied these three things from view point of neuroscience. First of all, how do you see creativity in neuroscience? To do this, we need to know the activities of the cells. In neuroscience, nerve cells are connected to each other, so that creativity means how to strengthen, speed up, and maintain the accuracy of the connections between nerve cells through continuous training. Next, is there any part of the brain responsible for creativity? Unfortunately, brain scientists suggest that there are some places which deal with emotions in the human brain, but that there are no places which deal with reason or creativity. In neuroscience, human creativity has led to the question of how to effectively and efficiently use the information of memory in the process of diverse and newly connected human consciousness to solve the uncertainty. Next is memory and emotions. Many things can be mentioned, but to sum up, ①the memory circuits and emotional circuits are closely related, ②rich emotions improve memory, ③people who have a lot of connections between the frontal lobe and the memory cortex are more creative, ④of course, in modern society, rather than emphasizing the use of hippocampus that transforms short-term memory into long-term memory, it is important to use the frontal lobe that quickly scans information and find necessary information. Therefore, the ratio of utilization to the parts of usage seems to be somewhat different. Finally, it’s about a neuroscience stance on the human mind. Recently, Harvard University psychiatrists have published a decade-long study of what the human brain does, and say there are three modes. salience mode, executive mode and default mode. What’s noteworthy about the results made by Harvard psychiatrists is that we humans use about 80% for the default mode among all three modes. So why should we care about the default mode? First of all, the default mode is ①to expand the human field of view. ②Secondly, the default mode is to endlessly reflect on your past and present and relationships with others. Lastly ③the default mode tries to talk to yourself internally and ultimately make some decision makings through your life. I think this is a truly meaningful discovery. There’s a good reason why we humans have to look deeper into the default mode for the sake of creativity. So what can we do now to apply for creativity in education? Here are six alternatives. ①Settle into culture, ②Continuously recategorize for concepts, ③Book reading exercise, ④Give time for doodle try ⑤Encourage writing notes, ⑥Social atmosphere that encourages failure. I assumed creativity as the ability to solve problems without knowing knowledge or procedures, I talked about the approach based on neuroscience. Based on the rapid progress of the study of neuroscience, I hope that human creativity will become more common and applicable to many people.00

예술적 창의성과 합리성 — 예술적 창의성의 조건들을 중심으로

임수영 서울대학교 인문학연구원 2021 인문논총 Vol.78 No.4

Creativity is the main subject of inquiry in interdisciplinary research. It is discussed in various disciplines including psychology and anthropology. In this context, it is not surprising that scholars attempting a philosophical exploration of creativity have emerged. This article focuses on artistic creativity rather than creativity in general and intends to explore the necessary conditions of artistic creativity. Ambitious attempts to reveal the necessary conditions of creativity that can be applied to all fields can face skepticism that it is difficult to grasp creativity. On the other hand, elucidating how the concept of creativity works in particular practices, like art, is a relatively achievable goal and worth trying. The necessary conditions of artistic creativity suggested in this article can be divided into the conditions related to the features of the work and the conditions related to the features of the agents who created the work. The discussion on the features of the work consists of analyzing the meaning of novelty as originality, a value-implied novelty. An original work is different from existing works in terms of its display of a unique style, and this style is artistically valuable. The discussion on the features of the agent is composed of the analyzation of relevant agency that is exercised in the creation of works of this style. In addition, this article examines the relationship between two seemingly irrelevant concepts, artistic creativity and rationality. 창의성은 심리학, 인류학을 비롯한 다양한 학문들의 논의 대상으로, 학제 간 연구의 중심에 있다. 이런 상황에서 창의성을 철학적으로 탐구하려는 학자들이 등장하는 것은 그다지 놀라운 일이 아니다. 이 글은 창의성 일반보다는 예술적 창의성에 초점을 맞춰서, 어떤조건들이 만족되어야 한 작품이나 그 작품을 만든 사람을 창의적이라고 할 수 있는지 탐구하고자 한다. 모든 분야에 일괄적으로 적용될수 있는 창의성의 필요조건들을 밝히려는 야심찬 시도는, 자칫 창의성이 붙잡기 어려운 실체라는 회의주의에 빠질 수 있기 때문이다. 반면, 예술이라는 특정한 관행에서 창의성이라는 개념이 어떻게 작동하는지 밝히는 것은 비교적 달성이 가능한 목표라는 점에서 시도의가치가 있다. 이 글이 제안하는 예술적 창의성의 필요조건들은, 작품의 특징에관한 조건과 작품을 만든 행위자의 특징에 관한 조건으로 나뉜다. 작품의 특징에 관한 논의는, 작품의 새로움의 의미를 가치 함축적인 독창성으로 분석하는 것으로 이뤄진다. 작품은 독특한 양식을 보여준다는 의미에서 기존의 작품들과 다르며, 이 새로움은 가치 함축적이다. 행위자의 특징에 관한 논의는 독특한 양식을 가진 작품을 만드는데 개입하는 적절한 행위자성에 대한 규정으로 이뤄진다. 또한, 이글에서는 적절한 행위자성과 관련된 논의가 예술적 창의성과 합리성이라는 서로 무관한 것처럼 보이는 두 개념 간의 관계에 대해서무엇을 밝혀줄 수 있는지도 살펴보고자 한다.

‌대학 창의 교양교육 체계의 실제와 대안 탐색

권정언,권상집 한국교양교육학회 2014 교양교육연구 Vol.8 No.4

Creativity in the workplace and universities has become an increasingly significant factor of national creative economy policies and needs of firms on high talented people. Therefore, the aim of this study is to comprehensively explores the creative education curriculum of universities in Korea and examines the links between a Chungnam-based university's creativity curriculum reorganization direction and practical implications on overall creativity curriculum design. For the practical contribution, separated but interrelated studies are conducted with more specific approaches of creative learning. At first, our study focused on creative curriculum information through Korea national institute for general education. The objective of this research is to search a current status of creativity contents and teaching-learning methods of universities in Korea. Also, our studies were undertaken to investigate the needs of students in a J university. Results of the preliminary study revealed that diversification of creativity curriculums, reorganization of creative contents including practical implications, active participations of the learner based on discussion, and professors' encouragement of autonomous atmosphere and brainstorming. This research also found that creativity education has lacked any enhancing creativity factors. A case sample J university in Korea has attempted to rectify these weaknesses in many ways. This case study found that (1) the fit between cultivating creativity and the role of each department was associated with reorganizing creativity education process. For example, liberal art programs train basic creativity concept and understanding. Also, each department is responsible for in-depth education on creativity. (2) When the environment become more dynamic, more multiple integrative roles based on convergence between contents and learning methods are needed for the successful improvement of creativity education. (3) Finally, a J university may find it useful to encourage discussion, brainstorming, and presentation so that active behaviors are exhibited by many students. Therefore, our study provides evidence for reorganization of creativity curriculum as potential crucial elements for learners and professors. Our study illustrates the future creativity curriculum direction based on previous literature of individual and group creativity and case study result, and further sheds light on the important relationships of critical roles of universities on reorganization of creativity curriculum in the expansion process of creativity learning. 본 연구는 창조경제의 정책기조와 더불어 기업들의 창의적 인재 수요에 대한 실효성 있는 대응으로 대학 창의 교육의 필요성을 바탕에 두고 시작하였다. 본 연구의 목적은 각 대학의 창의 교육을 살펴보는 한편, 충남지역 소재 J대학의 교육과정 개편 방향을 통해 창의 교양교육 체계의 설계 및 운영 시 고려해야 할 시사점을 제공하는데 있다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 개인 및 집단 창의성과 관련된 이론적, 실증적 선행 연구결과에서 창의성 증진 요인을 고찰하였다. 그리고 한국기초교양교육원에서 제공하는 자료를 토대로 창의 교육과정의 내용과 교수-학습법을 조사, 분석하여 현황을 살펴보았으며, 실제 창의 관련 교양과목을 수강한 학생들을 대상으로 교육과정에 대한 요구도 청취하였다. 개괄적인 현황 탐색 및 학생들의 요구 분석 결과, 창의력 교육과정의 다양화, 실제성 높은 교육내용의 개편, 토론과 논의 등 학습자 참여의 활성화, 교수의 자율적인 분위기 독려 및 브레인스토밍 강화가 필요한 것으로 드러났다. 본 연구의 사례 대상인 J대학교는 창의 과목을 교양과목에 국한하지 않고 전공 영역별로 확대·심화시키는 이원화 방향을 마련하였다. 기초적인 창의성의 함양은 교양과목으로, 학과에서는 창의성을 심화하는 전공과목을 통해 유기적인 교육과정으로의 개편을 모색하고 있다. 특히, 창의와 관련된 이론적 내용을 전달하는 것이 아니라, 교과목 내용 간의 융합, 방법 간의 융합을 바탕으로 협업 과정으로 창의력을 폭넓게 학습할 수 있도록 제안하였다. 더욱이 기존 선행연구와 학생들의 요구분석 결과, 수업 과정에 많이 참여할 수 있도록 브레인스토밍과 토론의 활성화를 기본 학습방법으로 채택하였다. 이러한 결과는 향후 국내 대학이 교육과정을 개편하고 어떻게 창의성을 확산시켜야 할지에 대해 중요한 실무적 시사점을 제공했다는 데 연구의 공헌도가 있다.

창조성과 청소년의 자아개념 형성에 관한 고찰

김정아 ( Kim Jeong-a ) 창조교육학회 2016 창조교육논총 Vol.18 No.-

This Study is the views on creativity and the formation of adolescent self. For the study, creativity and the formation of adolescent self are discussed, accordingly, the formation of the concept of adolescent self basd on the educational meaning of human creativity are examined. Creativity is a human nature, and humans can form their character in pursue of the wisdom and value of life by exhibiting creativity educationally. The concept of self is formed on the basis of human creativity, which is the core concept to affect human behaviors. Thus, the concept of self makes individuals have internal consistency to form their identity and chracter, through creative system by human creativity. Adolescent period is a decisive period of the development of the concept of self. During the adolescent period, individuals can understand abstract concept, think, and utilize the abstract concept to solve problems by increasing their abilities to apply logical thinking process, then creative self using creative can be manifested. The pursuit of value for the domain of human creativity is related to the formation of positive concept of self in adolescent period. It is to form creative concept of self to attain creative value by the creative self as the formation of independent identity, forming the concept of self-regulating self as the concept of self in the adolescent period. During the adolescent period, the creation of value can be displayed base on the experience and interest in the creative value through the concept of self. That is, the development of the concept of self in the adolescent period leads to creative development, thus, creativity in the adolescent years can be exhibited. The formation of the concept of self for human self can be formed based on the domain of human creativity. Such domain of creativity exists in human life, and creative value can be formed as the criteria of the concept of self, the belief system of the self. Since diverse creative value can provide the foundation to form the concept of self, the creative value can be educational foundation to form the concept of adolescent self, as creative value can be the standard of the concept of value and act as educational reference system. Therfore, the adolescent period is the optimum period to form the concept of self as well as the exhibition of creativity, based on the creative education.

유아교사의 창의성과 창의성 교육활동 경험

김혜전,전우용,이예린 한국인격교육학회 2019 인격교육 Vol.13 No.2

The aim of this research is to explore the creativity that teachers have experienced during their growth process and experiences of classroom activities promoting creativity through in-depth interviews. It gave teachers the opportunity to look at their own creativity from a new perspective and provide educational implications for teachers planning and implementing creativity for educational activities in the future. Research participants were seven teachers from various types of early childhood education institutions. The research data were collected using methods such as interview, audio recording, and writes-ups in the field. The analysis was conducted by categorizing the transcripts made from the collected data. Study results were as follows: First, teachers found their creativity potentials and experienced ordinary creativity not only in their daily lives but also in the art and formal curriculum. Teachers experience creativity in the process of discovering new methods that did not exist before and produced results. They experienced creativity within the process of forming relationships and communicating with others. Teachers also experienced creativity not only in the artistic area where they could express their thoughts and feelings freely, but also by carrying out a task, and by exploring with curiosity when opportunities or environments present itself to express creativity in the formal curriculum. It led teachers to recognize that creativity is available to anyone, and can be developed through training, education and efforts. Second, teachers provided classroom activities to promote creativity that reflected the teacher’s own strength and interest, while showing low self-confidence in their creativity. They encouraged children to participate in creativity educational activities. Teachers wanted to support the individual child to express their own unique creativity, while providing them with the opportunities to think and express themselves freely. It is expected that the result of this study will help to understand and raise the awareness of creativity, so that effective creativity educational activities can be planned and implemented toward the desirable direction. 본 연구는 유아교사의 창의성과 창의성 교육활동 경험을 심층면담을 통해 살펴봄으로써 새로운 시각에서 창의성을 인식할 수 있는 기회를 제공하고, 향후 유아 창의성 교육활동을 계획ㆍ실행하는 교사들에게 교육적 시사점을 제공하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 연구참여자는 다양한 유형의 유아교육기관에 근무하고 있는 교사 7명으로, 2013년 10월 초부터 11월 말까지 면담을 통해 자료를 수집하고, 수집된 자료의 전사본을 만들어 범주화해나가며 분석했다. 연구결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 교사들은 일상생활에서뿐만 아니라 예술영역과 정규교육과정 안에서 그들에게 잠재된 창의성을 발견하고 평범한 창의성을 경험했다. 교사들은 기존에 존재하지 않았던 새로운 방법을 발견해 결과물을 산출하고, 타인과 관계를 형성하고 소통하는 과정 안에서 창의성을 경험했다. 또한, 자신의 생각과 느낌을 자유롭게 표현할 수 있는 예술영역뿐만 아니라 정규교육과정 안에서 창의성을 발현할 수 있는 기회나 환경이 제공되었을 때 호기심을 갖고 탐구하며 주어진 과제를 수행함으로써 창의성을 경험했다. 이를 통해 교사들은 창의성은 누구나 가질 수 있으며, 훈련과 교육, 노력을 통해 계발될 수 있음을 인식했다. 둘째, 교사들은 자신의 창의성에 대해 낮은 자신감을 보이면서도 교사 자신의 강점과 흥미를 반영한 창의성 교육활동을 제공하면서 유아들이 창의성 교육활동에 참여할 수 있도록 지원했다. 그들은 개별 유아가 자신의 특수한 창의성을 발현해내도록 지원하는 동시에 유아들이 자유롭게 생각하고 다양하게 표현할 수 있는 기회를 제공하고자 했다. 본 연구의 결과가 유아교사의 유아 창의성 및 창의성 교육활동에 대한 이해를 돕고, 교사의 창의성에 대한 관심이 높아져 창의성 교육활동이 바람직한 방향으로 계획ㆍ실행되기를 기대한다.

창조성을 추동하는 사랑에 관한 논의

송주한(Sohng Jhu han) 창조교육학회 2012 창조교육논총 Vol.14 No.-

Creativity is one of the essential characteristics of mankind, and the essence of human education lies in the enhancement of creativity. Through the approach to the aspects of whole-person, this principle of creativity education closely examines the essence of creativity and its essential attributes, and acknowledges love as the source of creativity. This study makes some arguments to look into the essence of creativity based on the essential attributes of love as a source of creativity. As a result of this study, I understand that creativity which is a human essential attributes and love have a casual relation of inside and outside. I, on the basis of the casual relation of inside and outside, make the essential attributes of creativity and its essence a starting point of retroactive demonstration, considering the mutual relation of the essence and its attributes, Hence, replacing the both sides of love and creativity with essence and essential attributes, I develop the discussion for the close examination of the essential attributes of creativity-driving love. As a result, I come to the conclusion that the essential attributes of creativity-driving love are, firstly love is not a special talent of man but a human fundamental trait, secondly love comes from the source of life not from something superhuman or miraculous, thirdly love is, as a motive power of desire, thought and activity, aiming at a new value, fourthly love is the source of the creation of value, fourthly love is the source of the creation of value, maximized when granted freedom and spontaneity. Furthermore, through the discussion about the meaning of love-driving love which is the essence of creativity, I consider that love, as the essence of creativity, involves some degree of conquest of self-love and its sublimation, and self-dependence(Self-reliance) as a value of pan-religion.