Summary comments regarding the limitations and the enhancement of creative thought

One can arrive at some practical conclusions from the theory as presented above:

• Innovation, being the result of a combinatorial process, depends on both, the suitability of foci and the mental building blocks available to the creative minds, whether in individuals or in teams. The realization of this fact leads to an understanding of some of the limitations and possible enhancements of creativity. The realization of this fact can also lead to a learning process directed toward improved creativity.
• Without thought focus, open questions, or new perspectives, no creative thought can be expected. Inversely, thought focus on tasks, open questions, and new perspectives prompt creative thought as suitable mental building blocks or observations become available. Thus, alertness, work environment, culture, and psychological attitudes also influence creativity.
• In the start-up phase of an innovative process, individuals with a wider scope or a wider variety of experiences, or team compositions combining a variety of backgrounds add to the availability of a variety of mental building blocks (Darwin and Wallace both discovered the evolution theory upon reading Malthus’ Principles of Population). In the detailed phase, more narrowly focused experts may offer more and more suitable building blocks in better accessibility.
• Innovation also depends on the accessibility (associative connection in the brain) of the mental building blocks for the thought process, either from learning or through communication from the environment (one of the “Silicon Valley”-effects). Accessibility can be improved through use of memory elements in a variety of mental or personal associations. Building blocks are more interestingly available for individuals with a wide variety of active experiences or active contacts.
• The combinatorial character of creative thought indicates that innovation is necessarily continuous (gap-less). For example, a culture that does not know the wheel can not invent cars and machines till the wheel becomes known to it. The recent development of the data processing industry is another example of the continuity in innovation.
• With personal “valuation” of associations and perceived consequences being so important in thought sequencing, new-concept generation through back-referencing, and sudden idea generation, certain psychological factors, such as the traits of personal temperament, the psychology of the work environment, and established thought patterns significantly influence creativity. The psychological factors, already empirically known and widely respected, include shyness or daring, presentation skills, liking or seeking of innovation (some of which was proven to be birth-order related), acceptance and reward for new ideas in the given environment, the right middle between pressure and relaxation, and more.
• Not only the indicated relationship of synaptic formation to the limbic system, but also the increasingly better-known brain chemistry, explain the impact of stimulants, sedatives, and other psycho-medications on creativity, be they coffee, alcohol, or neurotransmitters or hormones produced by the body, some influenced by proper nutrition and exercise.
• Considering the brain’s selection of a course in thought sequencing, one can say that the brain optimizes speed, economy, and personal comfort in handling common tasks, problems, or threats over exhaustiveness of inquiry, optimizing of results, and personal exposure. In other words, the brain provides, at first, a likely solution or idea in the shortest time and with the least effort based on past experience, not the best solution based on tedious search.
• By means of this theory, it was shown that the brain is the combination of an analog and a digital signal processor (without “clock” synchronization). The analog parameters of brain processes (synaptic strength and nerval firing rate) gain new significance (in combination with the “digital” modeling of the brains synaptic interconnectivity) for the full understanding of mental creativity and “idea” appearance.
• Much practical innovation and problem-solving are actually based on pattern recognition, not on forming new concepts. New concepts may be the result of a newly recognized pattern. Therefore, possibly the major portion of all research effort lies in searching for a large quantity of new data points for statistical evaluation and/or subsequent pattern recognition. Some pattern recognition of sensory inputs, even some highly complex pattern recognition, is provided by the subject sensory reception areas of the brain - for example, the visual cortex. The question arises whether a more complex or abstract pattern recognition among perceptions, thought, or research-originated data points can be called a “creative process”. Judged by consequences, it certainly is. Is the interpretation of a Rorschach blot a creative skill? Is pattern recognition, whether in science or business, a special skill? How does it function? Indications are that the explanation of the process of complex pattern recognition lies close to the combinatorial creative process described in this paper.