Over the last few months I've come to the definition which may sound strange, but probably will be helpful in understanding.

Imagination is deliberate activation of some memory (i. e. some group of neurons). It may be a visual image, a scent, a tactile sensation, a sound. Commonly it is referred to visual images (hence the name) probably because Western people use their eyes much more than the other sensors.
It is probably mostly a function of N3.
For example: imagine a tasty strawberry cake. You just have fired at least two sensations in your brain: the visual image of the cake, and the taste of strawberry probably mixed with sugar. Further details of your image depend on individual circumstances in which you have ever experienced the strawberry cake.

Creativity is the process of creating new links between neurons in your brain. It is accomplished by finding similarities between some already existent non-linked groups of neurons (for example, distinct concepts such as pitchfork http://www.waycooljnr.com.au/wp-content … hfork1.jpg and chair http://www.foldingchairs-foldingtables. … 51-053.jpg) and combining them by using these similar patterns: http://www.tema.ru/travel/stockholm/_MG_5464.jpg.

Well, when you are creating something new, you certainly need to load something into your mind to work with. Although there are certainly not always visible images before you while you are creating. It can be just a vague "sense" of something present in your mental surroundings, but nevertheless it's a kind of "image", i.e. linked group of neurons.

For me personally, this shift of perception of memories from "visuals", "sounds", "smells" etc. to "linked groups of neurons" was fundamental to understanding the process of creation and learning. I wish I could somehow express it, but I doubt I can right now. It's just that memories don't really have some distinct categories - there are particular "senses" you develop when practicing any skill, and eyesight, for example, is just one of them. I feel like the sense of one's car is just as full-fledged as proprioception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception). Please correct me if I am damn wrong.

So! You don't need to necessarily form visual images to create, but if you want to operate in 3D-space this would be very valuable, since you can't rotate, fit and squeeze anything in your mind before you can see it before your eyes at least in some vague outline.

Re: Tesla

We all use our minds to simulate reality and estimate probabilities, and tend to do so pretty well in the niches we specialize in. =]

Hi all,
I've answered all the points in one mail -let's share  :  )

sakiro wrote:
i read that nikola tesla had a very strong imagination that he could close his eyes and was able to visualize a particular apparatus and was then able to actually "test run" it in his mind, etc.

I know an engineer who can do that with programs, she describes it as 'running the program in my head until I can see where the problem is'. This is Primary Process thinking, allied to conscious awareness and I wish I could do it with everything!  :  )

And:
“imagination makes possible all our thinking about what is, what has been, and, perhaps most important, what might be"
This is a great description!

Leftblank wrote:
when you are creating something new, you certainly need to load something into your mind to work with.
I would only add: this is not necessarily a conscious process.

Leftblank wrote: I feel like the sense of one's car is just as full-fledged as proprioception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception). Please correct me if I am damn wrong.

It may be that people only experience this if their rear nets work well?

We don't need to form visual images CONSCIOUSLY to create, but without them forming unconsciously, imagination can't function. How do we know that unconscious image formation is going on? At least two ways: (a) some people can bring unconscious processes into conscious awareness and (b) MRI shows us so.

So if you can't form conscious visual imagery, it doesn't mean you're not imaginative or creative! Many processes are more expedient precisely because they can remain unconscious, so we should never assume nothing is going on just because nothing conscious is going on.

Leftblank wrote: how can blind people use imagery in their association processes if they haven't ever experienced any?

(a) They have experienced internal eidetic amagery because its hard wired whether we can see or not, and (b) By rewiring the visual cortex to take in data from tactile formats and output image based formats. Even the difference between colors can be felt! The brain is using the hands to double up as eyeballs.

This is not that weird -with no vision at all computer software can construct an image on a screen. We too can run algorithms to construct images in our inner screen. Bats do exactly the same thing when they construct an inner map from ultrasound sonar- they are literally 'seeing sound'.

Best,
AR

PS:
Interesting Ted talk related to creativity mentioned in another forum. Highly recommended!

http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_limb_y … mprov.html

Sorry I forgot...

I think the links I give will only work for those using https.
Sorry; long years of habit!  :  )
AR

Hi dudes,

I have to pick out three bits of Sakiro's post and clarify them, before any of us do ourselves a mischief...

1. “Our imaginations were not structured according to some existing concept or category.”

This is true, but only because of schooling. A naturally developing imagination (and ours, if we develop it) is very tightly structured according to existing hard wired concepts and categories. When it isn't, there is poor association.

2. We are educated to be analytical, logical thinkers. Consequently, we have the ability to make common associations between subjects that are related or at least remotely related.

Being educated to be an analytical logical thinker ahead of time actually PREVENTS us making natural associations from core eidetic bases, replacing them with synthetic associations such as that between fatness and wealth or that between work and learning.

3.
Developing the skill of forcing connections between unrelated things will tear down the walls between related and unrelated concepts

The word 'forcing' should have set off alarm bells in your head. This is a very bad idea, because without base associations with core eidetics, we can easily make connections between things that are in reality unconnected -and that will cause incongruity and uncomfortable feelings of anxiety, because your imagination is not aligned with reality. Indeed advertisers use this weakness all the time; forcing connections between money, sex and cars for example, or sugar, corn products and a good diet. Making these associations that are not aligned with reality is wrong input.

A great example is in the extract itself: There is no natural association between a can opener and a pea pod. Can openers belong in our procedural database/tools/hand/metal and pea pods in spatial memory/where to find food/green.

Making connections where none should naturally exist is wronguse, and its exactly what advertising does.
Once we're healthy, we don't have to force ourselves to associate apparently unrelated things; when imagination is aligned with reality, things that are associated in reality are automatically associated in imagination, because one is an accurate copy of the other. Lateral thinking for problem solving is about finding REAL associations that others haven't found; and it happens when we have strong congruity. Creating or 'forcing' false ones will only slow down overall ability.

Sure its great to get out of that 'logical analysis only' trap and realize that we can think laterally and creatively and in many other ways, but this is not the way to train yourself to do it. The main reason most people cannot make sense out of their lives and feel they cannot cope is the false association forced in by schooling & society.

I am currently updating tutorial 7, which covers a lot of this. Please be patient and I will have it online asap. The new T6 explains the preliminaries.
Best,
AR

PS Actually tutorial 7 is gonna have some bits of these forum posts in it...that way I can do 2 things at once  :  )

hi dudes,

well, that's where I find the analogy of "the flow of the universe" is truly useful. Cause, as with sailing, if you intend to go in the direction from where comes the wind you have to "zig-zag" using the wind's force "laterally". If you try to go straight towards it, which would be "forcing", it doesn't work.

Now, if that kind of zig-zagging may be useful/necessary sometimes, I always find that going with the flow IS the way to go. You might tell me: "yeah, but you won't be able to decide where you will end up". M'yeah... sure... but in the mean time, I usually don't have to, the flow of the universe is going where "I" intend to go ;)

Have fun dudes,

Scalino