- 오늘
카테고리
😹
재미트랜스크립트
00:00모두가 인공지능의 세상을 얘기하는 지금.
00:06여전히 인간 지능에 집중하는 사람이 있습니다.
00:11하워드 가드너.
00:16심리학 전공자였던 그는 다중지능 이론을 발표하며 교육계의 슈퍼스타로 떠올랐죠.
00:23말 그대로 인간의 지능이 하나가 아니라는 겁니다.
00:40전세계 부모 마음을 움직인 다중지능.
00:45RQ 말고 다른 지능을 찾고 싶다면 이 강의를 추천합니다.
00:53전세계에 흩어져 있는 위대한 생각들을 모았습니다.
01:02어떤 생각은 우리를 저 먼 곳으로 데려갑니다.
01:06전세계에 흩어져 있는 위대한 생각들은
01:36저는 Harvard Gardner, I am a research professor
01:39at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.
01:42And the work of mine that's best known
01:45is the theory of multiple intelligences,
01:48which can be summarized succinctly.
01:52Standardly, when we use the word intelligence,
01:54we assume there's a single computer inside the skull.
01:58That's exactly what the theory of multiple intelligence rejects.
02:02Our claim is that the human brain and the human mind
02:06are better understood if we think of
02:09several relatively independent intelligences.
02:14This theory has gotten a lot of attention,
02:16particularly in education,
02:18and I've developed some ideas about
02:20how one can educate from multiple intelligences.
02:24But there also are two questions
02:26which come up quite regularly to me.
02:28One question is,
02:30how do the intelligences relate to being creative?
02:34And what does it mean when somebody is a leader?
02:37What kind of intelligences does that person have?
02:40And so I'm going to be speaking about
02:42both of these issues in the next minutes.
02:46Creativity.
02:47That's become a very much of a buzzword.
02:50It's good to be creative.
02:52It's not to be creative.
02:53And I noticed 20, 30 years ago,
02:56people would come into my office
02:57with a paper and pencil and say,
02:59please tell me the four steps to be creative.
03:01One, two, three, four.
03:04And I kind of scratched my head
03:05because creativity is not the kind of thing
03:08where you can just lay out a formula.
03:11It's much more complex than that.
03:13Also, at our research group,
03:15which is called Project Zero,
03:17we once were talking about
03:18what it meant for somebody to be creative.
03:20And one person said,
03:22well, you have to practice doing certain things.
03:26Another person said,
03:27you have to try to find out
03:30what hasn't been done before.
03:32And then the head of the project said to us,
03:35no, none of these things works.
03:37What you really have to do
03:38is to create obstacles.
03:40You have to make something difficult for people
03:42and then we find out who's creative.
03:44Well, that's a kind of a funny response.
03:46But I decided that it was worth my looking myself
03:51at what creativity is and what it's not.
03:55And it turns out to be very complicated
03:57and I think very interesting.
03:59One idea came from my close colleague,
04:02Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi.
04:04He said we shouldn't ask,
04:06what does it mean to be creative?
04:08We should ask, where is creativity?
04:10Where is creativity?
04:11And he claimed,
04:14and I think he's right,
04:15creativity is not something
04:16that's inside a person.
04:18You can't say a person isn't creative
04:21and that's the end of the discussion.
04:23Creativity is always an interaction
04:25between a person
04:26with his or her knowledge and skills
04:28and the area in which they work,
04:31the domain.
04:32Are they writing poetry?
04:34Are they carrying out physics?
04:36Are they political figures?
04:38Are they leading an organization?
04:39So you have the person
04:41and the sector or domain
04:43and they're working in.
04:45And then you have the judge
04:46because I might think
04:47I'm a very creative teacher,
04:49but if people who know something say,
04:50Howard, you don't know
04:51what you're talking about.
04:52I'm not creative,
04:53even though I think I am.
04:55So really understand creativity.
04:56You have to understand
04:57the person and his or her skills
04:59and motivation,
05:00the area in which they work.
05:02A simple example,
05:04Einstein came up with
05:05the theory of relativity.
05:06We all know that.
05:07It was quite complicated,
05:10even though E equals mc squared
05:11is simple.
05:14But once Max Planck,
05:16a colleague in physics,
05:18said the theory of relativity
05:20is correct
05:21and we're going to put it
05:22in the major physics journal,
05:24that was the field,
05:26the set of judges
05:28putting a vote of confidence
05:31in what Einstein did.
05:32And we all know about people
05:36who were not at all recognized
05:39when they were alive.
05:41The composer Bach comes to mind.
05:45It took 200 years for people
05:46to recognize Bach's genius.
05:49So it wasn't that he wasn't a genius.
05:51It was that we didn't know it
05:53until Felix Mendelssohn
05:55let us know how great his work was.
05:58A few years ago
06:00I began to listen
06:00to a composer.
06:02Her name is Florence Price.
06:14She was both black
06:16and a woman.
06:17Her music is wonderful,
06:18but she had to be dead
06:20for 70 years
06:21for people to be able
06:21to recognize her music.
06:23As a researcher
06:26I decided to look
06:28in great depth
06:29and great detail
06:30at a number
06:30of highly creative people
06:32and find out
06:34people who were judged
06:35from the 20th century
06:37as being exceptionally creative.
06:40So there was
06:41Picasso the painter,
06:43there was Virginia Woolf
06:44the writer,
06:47there was Martha Graham
06:48the dancer,
06:50there was Albert Einstein
06:51the physicist,
06:51The sample was skewed
06:55toward people in the West.
06:57I didn't know
06:57about Florence Price
06:58at the time.
06:59I didn't know
07:00about the Korean artist
07:03Namjoon Park.
07:05I studied people
07:06who got recognized
07:07by Western prizes
07:09like a Nobel Prize
07:11or Pulitzer Prize
07:12as being highly creative
07:14and tried to figure out
07:16what they were like
07:17and how they worked.
07:19The first question I ask
07:20is what intelligences
07:21did they have
07:22and the people
07:24were selected in part
07:25because I thought
07:26they were outstanding
07:26in one intelligence.
07:28I found out
07:29that every one of them
07:30was exceptional
07:31in more than one intelligence
07:33but nobody was exceptional
07:35across the board.
07:37The closest was
07:38Igor Stravinsky,
07:40a composer
07:41who was also trained
07:43as a lawyer
07:43and he had
07:44both traditional
07:45IQ intelligence
07:47but of course
07:48musical intelligence
07:49as well.
07:52On the other hand,
07:54while Picasso,
07:55the painter,
07:56wrote plays
07:57and nobody wants
07:58to see his plays,
08:00his talent was really
08:02in the visual-spatial area.
08:06So they were,
08:08the intelligences
08:08in which they excelled,
08:10different from one another,
08:11but nobody was good
08:12across the board
08:13and nobody was good
08:15in just one intelligence.
08:17It was more
08:17a set of intelligences
08:19which they put together
08:20and that's what
08:21made them very unusual.
08:24So the poet T.S. Eliot
08:25was very good
08:26with language
08:27but he also had
08:28what I call
08:28existential intelligence.
08:30He liked to ask
08:31very, very big questions
08:33and his poetry
08:35is known for that.
08:36So my first question
08:50was answered.
08:53They all have
08:53more than one intelligence
08:55but they don't have
08:56intelligences
08:56across the board.
08:58The second thing
08:59is for each of them
09:00it took about
09:01ten years
09:01for them to develop
09:02their gift,
09:03their talent.
09:05This is often called
09:06the ten-year rule
09:07and they all
09:09spent ten years
09:10developing
09:11the area of talent,
09:12the area of creativity.
09:14Interestingly,
09:15most of them
09:15did not live in cities.
09:16They lived
09:17in villages
09:18or in
09:19out in the country
09:21but
09:22by the end
09:23of the ten years
09:24they almost all
09:24moved to the city
09:25and at the time
09:27it was Paris,
09:28it was Zurich,
09:29it was London.
09:30They need to find
09:31other people
09:31who are like them,
09:32what we call
09:33conspecifics,
09:34people who sort of
09:35come from the same species,
09:36people who are
09:37very talented
09:38in a certain medium,
09:39in a certain area,
09:41in an area
09:41in a certain intelligence.
09:44They found people
09:45who were like them.
09:47They found
09:47people who
09:49were
09:50friends
09:52from whom
09:53they could share
09:53their abilities.
09:54Einstein had a group
10:01called the Olympiad
10:02of people
10:03who were very interested
10:04in big questions
10:05in physics.
10:08But
10:09the more their ideas
10:12became
10:12very unusual
10:14in my level,
10:16very creative,
10:17very off
10:18the beaten track,
10:19the more isolated
10:20they became
10:21because suddenly
10:22their group
10:23of friends
10:23didn't understand
10:25what they were
10:25talking about.
10:26And at that point
10:27it was extremely
10:28important for them
10:29to have support
10:30from somebody else,
10:31somebody who
10:32held their hand,
10:33literally or figuratively,
10:35hugged them,
10:35said,
10:36you're okay,
10:37you'll be understood.
10:39Sometimes this friend
10:40knew a great deal,
10:41the other time
10:41it was more
10:42affective support,
10:44just making them
10:46feel wanted.
10:47And out of the seven
10:48people I studied
10:49in one book,
10:50six of them
10:50had a nervous breakdown
10:51at the time
10:52when they were
10:53most isolated.
10:54So support
10:55for highly creative
10:56people is really
10:57important when
10:58they're really
10:59out on the precipice
11:00taking the greatest
11:01chance.
11:02But where they
11:03were exceptional,
11:05and maybe even
11:05among creative people,
11:07it just seemed like
11:08every decade or so
11:09they did something
11:10quite different.
11:11They didn't just
11:11rest on their laurels.
11:17Picasso's
11:17a wonderful example.
11:19He went through
11:19several periods,
11:20each quite different
11:21from one another.
11:34And the people I studied
11:35lived long enough,
11:36so they were able
11:37to go through
11:38various periods.
11:39Of course,
11:40if you die
11:40when you're 30 or 40,
11:42like many people did
11:43in years gone by,
11:45you wouldn't have had
11:46several phases,
11:48but these people tended
11:48to be highly creative
11:49more than once.
11:51But we talk about
11:52four levels of creativity.
11:55Big C,
11:56middle C,
11:57little C,
11:58and mini C,
11:59or tiny C.
12:01So big C creativity
12:03is a wonderful thing
12:04to study and understand,
12:05but most of us
12:06are not going to be
12:07big C creators.
12:08It is a reasonable
12:09chance that we'll do
12:10middle C creativity,
12:12which means something
12:13where we're recognized
12:13by other people
12:14as doing something
12:15in our medium,
12:16something in our
12:17subject matter,
12:18something in our discipline,
12:20something in our art form,
12:21which people notice
12:22and say,
12:22that's good.
12:24That might even change
12:24the way I do things,
12:26the way I understand.
12:27These are people
12:28who may write
12:30best-selling books
12:31or may get a prize,
12:33but they probably won't
12:34be studied 100 years
12:35from now.
12:36So they're middle C.
12:38Then,
12:39a much larger group
12:40is little C.
12:41This is what almost
12:43all of us can aspire to.
12:47When you're of little C,
12:48you can plan a great party
12:50or a wonderful vacation
12:51or switch from one job
12:53to another
12:53and do it in a way
12:55that really works.
12:57But then,
12:58in the age of computers
13:00and of social media,
13:02we've created the term
13:03tiny C or mini C
13:06because that's what
13:07a tweet is
13:08or a TikTok photo
13:11or something that you do
13:13on Facebook
13:14or some other kind
13:15of social medium.
13:17You have fun doing it.
13:18Maybe a few people
13:19notice it,
13:20but it's evanescent.
13:22It doesn't last
13:22and it probably
13:23makes very few changes
13:26in what anybody else thinks.
13:29And a word of advice
13:30I would give
13:31is it's much better
13:32to spend 10 years
13:33mastering something
13:34than to spend 10 years
13:35in social media.
13:37It may be more fun
13:37to master social media,
13:39but you're very unlikely
13:41to become even middle C,
13:43let alone big C creative,
13:46if you're spending
13:47most of your life
13:48in social media.
13:50And a very, very important point,
13:53which I think I want to end with,
13:55you have to be willing
13:58to take chances
13:59if you want to be creative.
14:01You have to be willing
14:01to try stuff,
14:03fall down,
14:04try it again,
14:05recover,
14:07try something new,
14:08not become depressed,
14:10as my creators did.
14:12You need someone
14:12to support you
14:13if you become depressed.
14:17And I think anybody
14:18who's a parent
14:19or a mentor
14:20or indeed looking at yourself,
14:21you have to say,
14:22am I willing
14:23to take chances
14:24and be laughed at
14:26and fall down
14:27and pick myself up?
14:28And most of us are not.
14:31And I think probably
14:32at the risk
14:33of being politically incorrect,
14:34I would say,
14:35in the West,
14:37we're somewhat more likely
14:38to do that
14:38than in Asia
14:40and in Orient.
14:41The notion of being,
14:43of doing something wrong
14:44and being embarrassed
14:45is very, very costly
14:46if you are
14:47in a Confucian society.
14:49And so being creative
14:50has been more difficult
14:51for people
14:51in those societies.
14:52and that's one reason
14:53why many of them,
14:54like Namjoon Park,
14:55come to the West
14:56because there,
14:58at least you don't get,
14:59you don't get ostracized
15:01if you try something new.
15:03So I want to leave you
15:05with a finally funny
15:07kind of conundrum.
15:09Let's say
15:10you do want to be creative
15:12and you do your best,
15:13you master a medium,
15:14you get to understand
15:15how the judges work,
15:17you're willing to try something
15:18even if it doesn't work
15:20and you'll try something again.
15:22The bad news
15:23is you might die
15:24without knowing
15:26you're creative,
15:27but the good news is
15:28you'll never know for sure
15:30that you weren't creative
15:31because even though
15:32somebody doesn't recognize you now,
15:34somebody may recognize you
15:35in the future.
15:37So thanks for listening
15:38to this discussion
15:40of creativity
15:41which grew out of interest
15:43in what does it mean
15:45to be creative
15:45and I'm going to turn soon
15:48to what we've learned
15:49about leadership
15:50in the eras in the past
15:53and in the era today.
15:55Thanks for your attention.
추천
24:25
|
다음 순서
1:26:19
1:30:29
1:12:52
1:18:07
1:13:01
46:35
1:06:05
1:05:33
1:05:08
1:28:01
48:37
46:25
1:12:47
52:54
1:19:31
1:10:55
58:21