Creativity: The Most Common Tool to Explain Human Origin?

Creativity: The Most Common Tool to Explain Human Origin? Has Creativity Been the Most Common Tool to Explain Human Origin? Bryan Perez   Abstract The creative process is directly involved in the development of theories that explain the mans origin. In like manner, the religion and the science are connected by their provenance. The contemporaneous beliefs and the cultural stories from ancient civilizations are also influenced by creativity, equally, evolution shows a creative development located in some stages that shows morphological and psychological changes. This paper evaluates the creative influence in the development of theories which explain the mans origin. Web sources and also relevant books were used to identify and link different points of view about the topic. The most remarkable results locate the creativity as the process that humans develop all along, with attention to chronological interpretations such as the evolution stages and also common points in different religious and cultural beliefs. Finally, the conclusion stablishes how creativity may influence the theories postulation, issue where it should be as obj ective as possible to attempt to explain facts instead of thoughts. Introduction It is said that God has created man in his own image. But it may be that humankind has created God in the image of humankind (Hanh, 1999). Sometimes, people ask themselves how everything around them was created. What or Who is the creator of everything? Answers to these questions are generated by the same common people, children, teachers, youths and scientists, who constantly ask for explanations about their origin. This origin is usually related to some theories (creationism and evolutionism), which come from a process of investigation and a little part of imagination. Even when these theories explain facts (National Center for Science Education, n.d., para. 3), scientists do not have enough evidence about the first yoctosecond of the Universes existence. They may be obligated to complete the missing piece of the puzzle with some ideas elaborated by their creative minds. The evolution theory has undergone some changes throughout history. It is a consequence of the creative influence on the development of new theories. For interesting topics, creativity is really useful. Scientists should be conscious of the information they provide with their theories. Mans creativity has been an important part of the explanation of his origin, this statement is sustained in three relevant aspects: mans creation theories with a common theme about a creator, human evolutive process and its refutations, and lastly, the creative development that leads to reason beyond simple ideas. Common theme in creation theories Have been heard about humans out of yellow and white corn (Batz, 2012)? Or maybe Lake Titicaca Story? Those are theories that explain mans origin on the Mayas and the Incas creation. In another part, the Creationist theory is really linked with these, concluding that there are different theories about mans origin, but all of them have a common point of a unique Creator. Humans origin theories To understand the influence of creativity on these humans origin theories, it is necessary to explain three common examples. As the Bible says: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them (Gen. 1:27 English Standard Version). For Christianism, like a monotheistic religion, God is the only explanation for all questions about how man has come into existence until now. In another place the Mayas theory tells that the Creators (à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦) wanted to create human beings with hearts and minds who could keep the days (Batz, 2012). This last phrase complicated the situation for the Mayas gods, because they had to create three different types of humans. The first group was made of mud, but rain destroyed them and moreover they could not speak. Gods tried again, and created mans of wood, but these did not revere them. When these deities finally created humans out of yellow and white corn who could talk, they were satisfied (Batz, 2012), because these had intelligence and respect for their creators. In a last comparative theory, Incas converge in a general idea. God Viracocha created Manco Capac and Mama Ocllo[1], who emerged from the Lake Titicaca and walked guided by a wooden bar directly to El Cuzco, place where they found the Inca Empire (Cobo, 1979). Creativity on this common point As it is remarkable, the theories have showed a common theme in the idea of an only Creator or Creators. For Christianism, the human being was created from mud, while for the Mayas, muds man was a failure. The Incas, for their part, create a couple similar to Adam and Eve in Christianism but one more time, their God was who create everything around. Except for Christianity, the others are polytheistic, but this does not change that in almost every culture around the world, the religion of a particular culture began with a concept of a masculine, creator God who lives in the heavens (Zukeran, 2007). In the same line, creativity is therefore, responsible for this common point. Human beings develop creative ideas from 6 resources- intellectual processes, knowledge, intellectual style, personality, motivation, and environmental context (Sternberg Lubart, 1991). In consequence, it is thinkable that Individuals may be driven to try to create a sense of coherent self-identity through time, in particular in self-narratives of their development (Feinsten, 2006, p.26); in other words, past civilizations have developed the necessity to create a God in who believed and whom they can worship. To sum up, the similarities founded reflect that there is a common point that prevails between the theories analyzed, this point reflects the creative influence that man uses to explain his own origin in a religious context. Human evolutive process and its refutations It has been thought that evolution is the most acceptable theory to explain the mans origin. The theory bases its main argument on the most evidence that has been discovered through time, nonetheless, this theory has its own refutations, too. On this way, scientists are creative people who beyond postulate a theory, postulate a creative bond that establish the evolution as the explanation for the mans origin. The process of the evolution A Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics, Georges Lemaà ®tre proposed the Big Bang theory in 1933. For Catholicism, it was declared as a scientific validation, however, Lemaà ®tre resented this proclamation, stating that the theory was neutral and there was neither a connection nor a contradiction between his religion and his theory (Landsberg, 1999). As it is seen, this theory has a religious origin; but at the same time, it is considered like a valuable explanation for the current science. Lemaà ®tres thought gave birth the Evolution theory by explaining the Earth origin, place where human beings evolved from apes. It was only late in the Tertiary period (about 3-4 million years ago) that one of the branches of the Primates evolved into humans (à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦) Human fossils as well as molecular genetic and biochemical evidence demonstrate the existence of early life forms, which developed before and prepared the present living beings (Facchini, 2002). Do the refutations show a creative intervention of scientists? A 2010 study found no net fruit fly evolution after 600 generations (Thomas, 2012). This fact demonstrates that scientists do not concordat in a common explanation for the evolution process. In addition, another evidence tells that the transition from an amphibians three-chambered heart to a mammals four-chambered heart would require either a new internal heart wall that would block vital blood flow (Thomas, 2012). On the other hand, fossils are the main evidence to support the evolution theory; but as Ph.D. John D. Morris says, fossils appear abruptly in the record, fully formed and fully functional without less adapted ancestors in lower levels that would have preceded them in time (2003). This shows that fossils do not explain evolution as such, so it may be considered that scientists created the bonds between missing links of the evolution theory. The article Scientists are more creative than you might imagine, shows that the improvising brains (à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦) let the ideas bubble to the surface (Ossola, 2014). Some lines after, the article explain that its going to be the same phenomenon on scientists. Thus, it is reasonable to identify that scientists may develop an involuntary process of creativity when they try to explain unlinked ages of the evolution theory. The reason of all Creativity is the process of having original ideas that have value (Robinson, 2006), thus, it is possible to ask, how may the people create their own origin story by using their creativity? The creative development leads to establish questions or answers about this topic. Scientific postulations and also religious theories have a little influence of subjective thoughts. Indeed, the creativity is much more than an innate quality, it is a state where it is possible to create something. It is exemplified in the students who may demonstrated this by developing their skills into the schools. So, teachers have the big duty of drive the way students learn and what they need to learn (Segan, 2016), because it is changing rapidly. The reason of all comes from this fact, even with the scarcity of modern (à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦) supplies in poor parts of the world (Childress, 2007), creativity may be developed in every sense; including the development of new theories applicable to the subject of evolution or the mans origin. The reason of all also involves a great link between actual teachers and future scientists, something similar to the educational development of Finland (Faust, 2011), where the creativity is one of the pillars of the education. Therefore, the creative process shows that creativity is the question and the answer for this topic, it is involved in developing or repairing ideas to connect everything related in a theory postulation. In conclusion, the explanation for the mans origin is due to the creative process. This idea is based on three relevant aspects: theories of mans creation, human evolutive process, and lastly the creative development that leads to establish questionable answers about our origin. For the etymology of the Incas and also the Mayas, their existence comes from a gods creation. Historically, the Christianity changed these thoughts into a conventional belief in an only almighty God, who answers every question about human existence. On the contrary, the evolution theory postulates a continuous process of development during several generations in past ages of life. The creative intervention is located in every theory. Humans have a psychological need for a transcendent being that provides meaning and hope to their existence in this vast impersonal universe (Zukeran, 2007). This phrase clears the idea about how the man may include his own thoughts in objective statements like theories. Sometimes, creativity is underestimated in several ways, especially for science works, but it is an inherent quality of the human existence; so, the creativity influences our thoughts. The human being and his origin is a questionable topic. There are some theories of how he could exist from the first period of time. Creator or creators, evolution or not, the creativity was shown as the question and the answer for this topic because it is involved in developing or repairing ideas to connect everything related in a theory postulation. [1] The first couple of human beings in the Incas theory.

1:45 British Time, 11th September 2001 Was When the Unthinkable Happened Essay

1:45 British time, 11th September 2001 was when the unthinkable happened. One of the tallest buildings in the world was hit by a passenger jet. The people on the streets of New York could only watch in shock, horror and disbelief as the low-flying aircraft headed straight for the northern tower of the world trade centre. The jet headed for roughly the 65th to 70th floor of the tower. In a split second, the jet disappeared into the side of the tower, exploding as it did so. Only ten minutes later, when television crews had been alerted to the scene by the first incident, another low-flying aircraft was spotted. Live on US television, the jet banked left and disappeared into the southern tower, exploding as the first one had. As I stated in the first sentence, this all happened at about a quarter to two in the afternoon. On arriving home from school, I still wasn’t aware of what had happened a couple of hours ago. I went down to the newsagents down the road to buy a magazine. I noticed that the shop assistants were paying very close attention to the radio, yet it still didn’t come to me that something was up. At around half past four I turned on the television and couldn’t believe what I saw. There were images of the disaster, being shown over and over again. It didn’t come to me immediately how serious the incident was. As I carried on watching, I began to understand more clearly the significance of the disaster. And seeing images of people coming out of the buildings with blood all over them made me wonder who on earth would want to do a thing like that. The slow motion replays of the crashes showed how the jets simply tore through the walls of the towers like cardboard, and exploding as they went through the walls. It was painful to watch, and sickening to think of all the people on board the plane and inside the buildings. These terrorist attacks had been extremely well planned. Both of the jets were on domestic flights, where the security is not as tight as international flights are. It would be easy, experts say, to take a knife on board. In addition to this, both the flights would have been 6 hours long had the disaster not happened, so there was a lot of fuel on board which would have aided the fire spreading down through the building. It really hit home to me how dreadful it must have been inside the buildings as television pictures showed numerous people jumping to their death from the towers. How desperate must the situation inside have been to jump from 80 floors up? I dread to think. Soon the situation worsened. I gasped with horror as pictures of one of the towers collapsing to the ground were broadcasted by the English stations. It was simply horrible to see, and the dust created was so thick that some of the pictures showed nothing because of the dust in front of the camera. A few minutes later the other tower disappeared from that famous New York skyline as well, and the terrorists had fully succeeded. The terrorists must have also been able to fly the aircrafts. Surly no American pilot (or any nationality pilot for that matter) would fly an aircraft into the Twin Towers, whether threatened with a knife or not. I can’t believe that American Airlines would be so careless, as the crime rate in America is extremely high anyway. Of course I am not saying that any normal American would want to fly a plane into a major building in their own country, but if there was a mentally disabled person who got on a plane with a knife you never know what they might do. If security on these flights had been tighter none of this would have happened, surly. The disbelief was still around for many days after the disaster actually happened, and fire fighters were still searching through the rubble, hoping to find a few survivors among the mess. A few days after the crashes, it was thought that the person responsible was Asuma Bin Laden. As time went on it became more and more certain that Bin Laden was responsible, and eventually the man himself admitted as much on Afghan television. He is now the most sought after person in the world, with George W. Bush offering a $25,000,000 reward for anyone who can tell the USA where Bin Laden is hidden. Even thought I’m not American, everytime I see Bin Laden on the news, anger builds up inside me. How could someone do what he did? He doesn’t look like someone who has killed thousands, but he has, and he’s possibly the most hated man in the world. Having been to New York, (and incidentally, opting to go up the Empire State Building rather than one of the Twin Towers, which I now slightly regret), I feel that I can relate more to what has happened than I would have been able to otherwise. The photos I have of the skyline of New York obviously include the Twin Towers, and I can imagine how wrong the skyline now looks. When I look back on the photos, it makes me wonder why those buildings, which fitted into the skyline so well, are nolonger there. Why did Bin Laden do this? In conclusion, my feelings now, compared to my feelings right after it happened haven’t really changed. Having found out who was responsible, I now know what direction to put my hate towards, and the initial shock has faded, gradually. But when September 11th is mentioned, I still spare a thought for the people in the buildings and on the aircrafts and their families. I dearly hope that nothing of this nature ever happens again. And to finish I think that it is worth asking the question: If God does exist, where on earth was he on September 11th?

Glow Stick Experiment - Rate of Chemical Reaction

Who doesnt love playing with glow sticks? Grab a pair and use them to examine how temperature affects the rate of chemical reactions. Its good science, plus its helpful information for when you want to make a glow stick last longer or glow more brightly. Glow Stick Experiment Materials 3 Glow sticks (the short ones are idea, but you can use any size)Glass of ice waterGlass of hot water   How To Do the Glow Stick Experiment Yes, you can just activate the glow sticks, put them in the glasses, and see what happens, but that wouldnt be an experiment. Apply the scientific method: Make observations. Activate the three glow sticks by snapping them to break the container inside the tube and allowing the chemicals to mix. Does the temperature of the tube change when it starts to glow? What color is the glow? Its a good idea to write down observations.Make a prediction. Youre going to leave one glow stick at room temperature, place one in a glass of ice water, and place the third in a glass of hot water. What do you think will happen?Conduct the experiment. Note what time it is, in case you want to time how long each glow stick lasts. Place one stick in the cold water, one in the hot water, and leave the other at room temperature. If you like, use a thermometer to record the three temperatures.Take data. Note how brightly each tube glows. Are they all the same brightness? Which tube glows the most brightly? Which is the dimmest? If you have time, see how long each tube glows. Did they all glow the same length of time? Which lasted the longest? Which stopped glowin g first? You can even do math, to see how much longer one tube lasted compared with the other.Once you have completed the experiment, examine the data. You can make a table showing how brightly each stick glowed and how long it lasted. These are your results.Draw a conclusion. What happened? Did the outcome of the experiment support your prediction? Why do you think the glow sticks reacted to temperature the way they did? Glow Sticks and the Rate of Chemical Reaction A glow stick is an example of chemiluminescence. This means luminescence or light is produced as the result of a chemical reaction. Several factors affect the rate of a chemical reaction, including temperature, concentration of reactants, and the presence of other chemicals. Spoiler alert: This section tells you what happened and why. Increasing temperature typically increases the rate of the chemical reaction. Increasing temperature speeds up the motion of molecules, so they are more likely to bump into each other and react. In the case of glow sticks, this means a hotter temperature will make the glow stick glow more brightly. However, a faster reaction means it reaches completion more quickly, so placing a glow stick in a hot environment will shorten how long it lasts. On the other hand, you can slow down the rate of a chemical reaction by lowering the temperature. If you chill a glow stick, it wont glow as brightly, but it will last much longer. You can use this information to help glow sticks last. When you are done with one, put it in the freezer to slow down its reaction. It may last until the next day, while a glow stick at room temperature would stop producing light. Are Glow Sticks Endothermic or Exothermic? Another experiment you can perform is to determine whether or not glow sticks are endothermic or exothermic. In other words, does the chemical reaction in a glow stick absorb heat (endothermic) or release heat (exothermic)? Its also possible the chemical reaction neither absorbs nor releases heat. You might assume that a glow stick releases heat because it releases energy in the form of light. To find out whether this is true, you need a sensitive thermometer. Measure the temperature of a glow stick before activating it. Measure the temperature once you crack the stick to start the chemical reaction. If the temperature increases, the reaction is exothermic. If it decreases, its endothermic. If you cant record a change, then the reaction is essentially neutral as far as thermal energy is concerned.

Due To The Allure Of Star-Crossed Romance, Intelligent

Due to the allure of star-crossed romance, intelligent witticisms within quid pro quo, and illustrious balls, the novel, Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen, has established a name for itself amongst brainy, female youths and underappreciated wives as merely a â€Å"Mom’s Romance Novel.† But contrary to popular belief, Austen’s novel not only tackles issues on public perceptions and the impacts of inbred prejudice, but it also reinforces that idea right away, with evidence of it living in the often overlooked title, â€Å"Pride and Prejudice† itself. Although, who could forget the Hollywood drama of a poor, intelligent young woman who seeks contentment in life, and the chiseled, broken Mr. Darcy who longs only for solitude and a good, intelligent†¦show more content†¦Simple practices in communities relies on â€Å"harmless† pressure towards those around them. Elizabeth Bennet is a victim to social pressure as well, but chooses later to fight it than embrace it. There lies a key component of characterization – if one realizes one is being socially manipulated, is it in one’s interest to contest it? In the developing mind of a citizen in a thriving community, it is important to acknowledge the distinct difference between first-hand acquired knowledge (i.e familiarity) and second-hand information (i.e stereotypes), which both contribute to formulating an impression of someone (Cordon 75). These are the early-on developments, and the basis for all human judgement. But circumstances become unfortunate when â€Å"first-hand acquired knowledge† becomes less and less abundant. Familiarity to someone creates stronger memory traces about the person, therefore making the brain more resistant to misinformation and suggestibility (76), but it has a knack for creating perfectly sculptured bubbles around those within a close-knit community. When a group of individuals share an â€Å"acceptable truth† like that of Austen’s opening line to Pride and Prejudice, the group completely disenfranchises themselves from outside influence. They harden the borders of their minds, an d discourage the new and changeable. This is what gives â€Å"second-hand information† so much power--separation from first-handShow MoreRelatedMarketing Mistakes and Successes175322 Words   |  702 Pagesoften never regain their former luster. Mistakes of commission are more spectacular. They involve hasty decisions often based on faulty research, poor planning, misdirected execution, and the like. Although the costs of eroding competitive position due to errors of omission are difficult to calculate precisely, the costs of errors of commission are often fully evident. For example, with Euro Disney, in 1993 alone the loss was $960 million from a poorly planned venture; it improved in 1994 with