Post by JPD Post by tom g
True. First he defines creativity in a very limited way
I don't think he defined creativity in that clip.
Yes, that's true but only partly. I think it is explicit that he doesn't step outside a reductive dictionary definition of creativity. Instead, he defines it by inference by describing creative people. They are a) "smart" b) have 'divergent thinking capaibilities' c) are "really different from non-creative people" d) want to "experience novelty , e) "want to chase down aesthetic experiences" f) want to "attend movies and read fiction and to go to museums, to enjoy poetry and to enjoy music that is not conventional music".
It seems that he is expressing an educational ideal of the cultured individual rather than defining a creative person which is almost impossible. Well, sometimes creative people are not cultured in these ways and some are also sometimes tunnel-visioned and mostly only interested in what they are doing.
If you are not "smart" you will just "get to where other people have already got" which is "not creative by definition". Well, let's define "smart" and now let's define "intelligence" and so on. Such definitions by necessity are reductive.
Jordan Peterson is a psychologist: his intention is that people don't lead unhappy lives because they wrongly imagine that they are creative or believe that their creativity is necessarily a good thing. OK, good, but saying what constitutes a creative individual is too far outside his field, and, in the end, who you believe to be truly creative is really quite subjective.
I should say that I'm a big fan of Jordan Peterson but I think that sometimes, by excess of intellectual energy, he is too expansive.