Intelligence and Creativity:

(1) All cognitive endeavours require new associations to be made, or old ones to be reviewed. (2) There are marked differences between individuals in the speed with which associations are formed. (3) Speed in the formation of associations is the foundation of individual differences in intelligence. (4) Only a sub-sample of associations is relevant in a given problem. (5) Individuals differ in the range of associations considered in problem-solving. (6) Wideness of range is the foundation of individual differences in creativity. (7) Wideness of range is in principle independent of speed of forming associations, suggesting that intelligence and creativity are essentially independent. (8) However, speed of forming associations leads to faster learning, and hence to a greater number of elements with which to form associations. (9) The range of associations considered for problem-solving is so wide that a critical evaluation is needed (comparator) to eliminate unsuitable associations. (10) Genuine creativity requires (a) a large pool of elements to form associations, (b) speed in producing associations, and (c) a well-functioning comparator to eliminate false solutions. 

Genius - H. J. Eysenck

"Indeed, often the most creative act is the selection of the problem! Such a selection takes into account the importance of the problem, how much is known about it, previous attempts, possible remote sources of information not previously considered, probability that the problem is soluble at the present time, and many more;"

Genius - H. J. Eysenck

Association and Creativity:

"As a preliminary statement, we may consider the usual associationistic approach to creativity (Spearman, 1931), according to which a creative idea results from the novel combination of two or more ideas that have been isolated from their usual association. Mednick (1962; Mednick and Mednick, 1964) has defined the creative process as 'the forming of associative elements into new combinations which either meet specified requirements or are in some way useful. The more mutually remote the elements of the new combinations, the more creative the process or solution' (Mednick, 1962, p. 221). Creativity thus becomes a function of people's 'associative hierarchy', which can be defined as generalization gradients of differing degrees of steepness, with associations to words, percepts or problems ranging from common to unique. Individuals with steep gradients are likely to give common associations at high strength, but few or no uncommon associations; persons with less steep or even with flat gradients are more likely to make uncommon or unique responses."

Genius - H. J. Eysenck

Solution Horizons:

"In Eysenck's (1985a, 1986a, 1987b) theory of intelligence, speed of information-processing is a crucial ingredient, itself a consequence of (comparatively) error-free cortical processing. What, in such a scheme, would be the role of creativity? Any meaningful mental search process which has some empirical support requires qualification of the search domain in terms of relevance. Given a particular problem, we only search our memory store in terms of the requirement of that problem. Given the problem: 

1 3 6 10 15 21 ? 

we do not draw upon our knowledge of the causes of the Peleponesian War, or the quantum mechanics 'graviton' theory of gravitation; we confine ourselves to a heuristic search for numerical solutions fitting the progression indicated by the problem. Any problem defines its solution horizon, limiting its search to a given, circumscribed area. While Campbell, Simonton and Furneaux do not formally state such a limitation on their concepts of random or blind search, it does not seem likely that they would disagree and would insist on a truly blind/ random search involving the whole of our knowledge background. However, they fail to introduce the important concept of relevance, which clearly needs explicit treatment - particularly as it is a vital component of creativity."

Genius, H. J. Eysenck

Über den Umgang mit der Zeit:

"Dementsprechend haben wir alle unsere Privatmethoden, mit der Zeit umzugehen:

Da sind einmal die Tüchtigen, die ein Arbeitsprogramm aufstellen und mit eiserner Energie durchführen. Was nicht unbedingt dazugehört, wird konsequent auf die Seite geschoben; Vergnügen und sonstige Allotria werden nur rationiert genossen. Zweifellos leisten diese Menschen erstaunlich viel Arbeit; indessen ist es fraglich, ob sie - und insbesondere ihre Familien - damit auch glücklich sind.

Am entgegengesetzten Ende stehen die Augenblicksmenschen. Diese stellen nie ein Programm auf, sondern handeln nach dem augenblicklichen Einfall. So haben sie für den gegenwärtigen Menschen immer Zeit; sie sind verfügbar, wenn man sie ruft; alle Leute haben sie gern. Dafür können sie keine Verabredung einhalten; denn immer wird sie im letzten Augenblick von etwas anderem durchkreuzt. Leicht fangen sie ein Werk an, nie wird es beendet, da inzwischen zehn andere begonnen und verlassen wurden.

Zwischen diesen beiden Extremen stehen wir alle, die wir aus der Menge unserer Aufgaben eine gute Auswahl zu treffen versuchen."

Theodor Bovet

[Auf der einen Seite Personen, bei denen das Planen ins Zwanghafte geht. Das andere Extrem repräsentieren jene, bei denen Spontanität weit eher als hochgradige Desorganisiertheit bezeichnet werden müsste.]

Prospection Theory:

"pragmatic prospection theory says the main thrust in thinking about the future is less to predict what will happen than to predict points at which multiple different outcomes are possible and incompatible (so some will come true while others will not) - and, crucially, that oneself can exert some control over which ones come true. The important thing is predicting the choice points, not the eventual outcomes. Put another way, the purpose of prospection is not so much to predict future reality as to predict future possibilities - especially situations based on offering competing, incompatible ones. Those choice points and performance demands are the raison d'etre of agency.

Indeed, ... we seriously entertain the notion that consciousness creates alternative possibilities (in the sense that it makes it possible for them to become reality). It is precisely because people can imagine alternatives to the present that they can implement them, sometimes by creating a future situation that is importantly different from the present one."

------

"People think about the future, not primarily as an attempt to predict what is bound to happen, but as a series of points at which events can go in different directions. The future is less a matter of something to be known than something to be shaped and guided amid multiple alternative possibilities."

------

Consciousness of the Future as a Matrix of Maybe
R. F. Baumeister, H. Maranges, H. Sjåstad (2018)

Über das Entscheiden:

Jede getroffene Entscheidung lässt sich schließlich als ein Opfer verstehen. Als ein Opfer der Möglichkeit, für die man sich nicht entschied.