Abstract
Ideas build on one another in a manner that is cumulative and adaptive, forming open-ended lineages across space and time. Thus, human culture evolves. The pervasiveness of cross-domain creativity—as when a song inspires a painting—would appear indicative of discontinuities in cultural lineages. However, if what evolves through culture is not discrete ’memes’ or artifacts but worldviews—the webs of thoughts, ideas, and attitudes that constitute our ways of seeing and being in the world—then the problem of discontinuities is solved. The state of a worldview can be affected by information assimilated in one domain, and this change-of-state can be expressed in another domain. In this view, the gesture, story, or artifact that constitutes a specific creative act is not what is evolving; it is merely the external manifestation of the state of an evolving worldview. Like any evolutionary process, cultural evolution requires a balance between novelty, via the generation of variation, and continuity, via the preservation of variants that are adaptive. In cultural evolution, novelty is generated through creativity, and continuity is provided by social learning processes, e.g., imitation. Both the generative and imitative aspects of cultural evolution are affected by social media. We discuss the trajectory from social ideation to social innovation, focusing on the role of self-organization, renewal, and perspective-taking at the individual and social group level.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aerts, D., & Gabora, L. (2005). A state-context-property model of concepts and their combinations II: A Hilbert space representation. Kybernetes, 34(1&2), 192–221.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-5533-8.
Anderson, R. (1998). Truth and objectivity in perspectivism. Synthese, 115(1), 1–32 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/20118040.
Barton, S. (1994). Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. American Psychologist, 49, 5–14.
Caulier-Grice, J., Davies, A., Patrick, R., & Norman, W. (The Young Foundation). (2012). Defining social innovation. Social Innovation Overview: A deliverable of the project “The theoretical, empirical and policy foundations for building social innovation in Europe,” (TEPSIE), European Commission – 7th Framework Programme, Brussels: European Commission, DG Research.
Christensen, C. M., Baumann, H., Ruggles, R., & Sadtler, T. M. (2006). Disruptive innovation for social change. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 94–101.
Combs, A. (1996). The radiance of being: Complexity, chaos and the evolution of consciousness. St. Paul, MN: House Paragon.
Domingues, J. M. (2000). Social creativity, collective subjectivity and contemporary modernity. New York: St. Martin’s.
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. London: Basic Books.
Freeman, W. J. (1991). The physiology of perception. Scientific American, 264, 78–85.
Gabora, L. (1995). Meme and variations: A computer model of cultural evolution. In L. Nadel & D. Stein (Eds.), 1993 lectures in complex systems (pp. 471–486). Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Gabora, L. (1998). Autocatalytic closure in a cognitive system: A tentative scenario for the origin of culture. Psycholoquy, 9.
Gabora, L. (2004). Ideas are not replicators but minds are. Biology and Philosophy, 19, 127–143.
Gabora, L. (2008). Modeling cultural dynamics. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Fall Symposium 1: Adaptive Agents in a Cultural Context (pp. 18–25). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Gabora, L. (2013). An evolutionary framework for culture: Selectionism versus communal exchange. Physics of Life Reviews, 10, 117–167.
Gabora, L. (2017). Honing theory: A complex systems framework for creativity. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 21(1), 35–88.
Gabora, L., & Carbert, N. (2015). Cross-domain influences on creative innovation: Preliminary Investigations. In R. Dale, C. Jennings, P. Maglio, T. Matlock, D. Noelle, A. Warlaumont, & J. Yashimi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 758–763). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Gabora, L., & Firouzi, H. (2012). Society functions best with an intermediate level of creativity. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles, & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 1578–1583). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Gabora, L., Scott, E., & Kauffman, S. (2013). A quantum model of exaptation: Incorporating potentiality into biological theory. Progress in Biophysics & Molecular biology, 113, 108–116.
Gabora, L., & Tseng, S. (2014). Computational evidence that self-regulation of creativity is good for society. In P. Bello, M. Guarini, M. McShane, & B. Scassellati (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2240–2245). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Gabora, L., & Tseng, S. (2017). The social benefits of balancing creativity and imitation: Evidence from an agent-based model. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(4), 457–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000132.
Hämäläinen, T. J., & Heiskala, R. (Eds.). (2007). Social innovations, institutional change and economic performance: Making sense of structural adjustment processes in industrial sectors, regions and societies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Leijnen, S., & Gabora, L. (2010). An agent-based simulation of the effectiveness of creative leadership. In R. Camtrabone & S. Ohlsson (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 955–960). Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Moradkhah, V., & Alborzi, M. (2016). Relationship between emotional awareness and social creativity in primary school students. International Journal of Medical Research and Health Sciences, 5(5S), 222–228.
Mumford, M. D. (2002). Social innovation: Ten cases from Benjamin Franklin. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 253–266.
Neumeier, S. (2012). Why do social innovations in rural development matter and should they be considered more seriously in rural development research? – Proposal for a stronger focus on social innovations in rural development research. Sociologia Ruralis, 52(1), 50.
Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43.
Pribram, K. H. (1994). Origins: Brain and self-organization. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ranjan, A. (2014). Understanding the creative process: Personal signatures and cross-domain interpretations of ideas. Ph.D. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Ranjan, A., Gabora, L., & O’Connor, B. (2013). The cross-domain re-interpretation of artistic ideas. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3251–3256). Houston, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Scheopner, C. (2013). Perspectivism. In C. E. Cortés (Ed.), Multicultural America: A multimedia encyclopedia (Vol. 1, pp. 1695–1695). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452276274.n686.
Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper.
Scotney, V., Weissmeyer, S., & Gabora, L. (2018). Cross-domain influences on creative processes and products. In C. Kalish, M. Rau, J. Zhu, & T. Rogers (Eds.), Proceedings of 40th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Szerszynski, B., & Urry, J. (2006). Visuality, mobility and the cosmopolitan: Inhabiting the world from afar. The British Journal of Sociology, 57(1), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2006.00096.x.
Tomasello, M., Kruger, A. C., & Ratner, H. H. (1993). Cultural learning. Behavioral and Brain Science, 16, 495–511.
Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Veloz, T., Temkin, I., & Gabora, L. (2012). A conceptual network-based approach to inferring the cultural evolutionary history of the Baltic psaltery. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles, & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2487–2492). Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Watson, E. (2007). Who or what creates? A conceptual framework for social creativity. Human Resource Development Review, 6(4), 419–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484307308255.
Weisberg, R. W. (1995). Prolegomena to theories of insight in problem solving: Definition of terms and a taxonomy of problems. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 157–196). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Westley, F., & Antadze, N. (2010). Making a difference: Strategies for scaling social innovation for greater impact. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 15(2), article 2. Retrieved from http://www.innovation.cc/scholarly-style/westley2antadze2make_difference_final.pdf
Acknowledgements
This research was supported in part by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gabora, L., Unrau, M. (2019). Social Innovation and the Evolution of Creative, Sustainable Worldviews. In: Lebuda, I., Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research. Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_34
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95497-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95498-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)