I've enjoyed the comments about novelty posted by Eric, Mike, and others.
Although I'm not sure this was the intent, when I think of "novelty" I
am reminded of research in the psychology of creativity. Perhaps there's
a relation between the structure-agency debate in social theory, and some
pressing issues in creativity theory.
From an emergentist, or systems perspective, novelty at a level of
analysis is compatible with some degree of causal influence from the next
higher level of analysis. Novelty can originate in the individual even
though those individuals are constrained (and enabled) by sociocultural
properties. So I think that creativity can be "emergent" from individuals
and at the same time, influenced (perhaps heavily) by socal and cultural
contexts, conventions of a creative domain, and the internalization of
that domain through training and education. This is the view advocated by
Mike Csikszentmihalyi, Howard Gardner, and other proponents of a "systems
view" of creativity.
Novelty can be emergent at other levels of analysis, too, not only the
individual. From a sociocultural perspective, one could say that a
society or group is "creative." Ed Hutchins documents the naval ship's
navigation team generating a creative group solution to a problem. My
studies of improv theater groups show them collectively creating theater
performances. These group creative products then influence the
individuals in the group as they continue to act.
R. Keith Sawyer
http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~ksawyer
Washington University
Department of Education
Campus Box 1183
One Brookings Drive
St. Louis, MO 63130
314-935-8724
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 01 2002 - 01:00:11 PDT