In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Journal of Aesthetic Education 38.1 (2004) 53-64 [Access article in PDF] Emotion and Creativity Mike Radford Introduction Creativity may be seen as a complex process of informational processing within a given framework, or, as Margaret Boden has termed it, "conceptual space." 1 It is in the context of such frameworks that the process of managing information makes sense. The framework offers the possibilities within which information can be (...) combined and separated, grouped and regrouped,and may be seen to define the boundaries of that which makes sense both within the space and at its parameters. Boden suggests that we can, by playing around with the variables within a "conceptual space," be creative. We can generate multiple possibilities in terms of meaningful articulations.We can also aspire to a more fundamental level of creative thought oraction by engaging in the high-risk process of challenging the very rules that support the coherence of the space itself. In other words we can think, hypothesize or "play" at the boundaries of sense. Such explorations might result in changing those boundaries, thus transforming the conceptual space. Such changes might be minor but at other times dramatic, constituting major transitions in human thought and expression. This account seems to explain both the gradual process of creative development in the arts and sciences as well as the dramatic transformations that we observe in the history of intellectual and cultural development. Some conceptual spaces may be clearly defined with relatively closely controlled parameters. Others might be more open, more accommodating both within and at their boundariesA number of questions arise in the context, two of which are of particularinterest. First, how do novel combinations or reorganizations of information within the conceptual space come to be made and how they are recognized as sensible and of value within the system? Second and more fundamentally, how are new and original articulations that stand at the parameters or boundaries of the sense-making system constructed? How are we guided [End Page 53] when we seek to make sense at its very boundaries? It may be that few are called to such profound levels of creative articulation but for the rest of us, how do we recognize these creative articulations when they are made? How do we make sense of an activity, a new scientific theory, or work of art when it challenges the very principles that govern its sense in the first place?It is important to give full cognizance to the complexity of the information-processing task being performed and it is highly doubtful if all elements, all items of information, and the relationships between them, are before the conscious mind of the individual creative intelligence at any one time. There may be a sense of consonance or harmony within this system that enables us to recognize its sense or coherence. In this way much of the information contained within it is simply not noticed. Only when some item of information or process is out of place, dissonant with the organization, do we perceive difficulties. All systems contain dissonances either obvious or manufactured. In science for example there are items of evidence that do not fit within the theoretical frameworks or the paradigms that it has to offer. There are also substantial areas of human experience that might seem to fall outside the paradigm altogether. For many years scientists have been able to predict the exact day, time, and locality within which we may observe an eclipse of the sun. What they have been unable to do, even within a few hours of the event, is predict whether the weather conditions will be such that we can actually observe it. In time it may be that there is the development of a new paradigm that promises accuracy in weather predictions or newly discovered evidence that warrants a review of particular theories within a paradigm.Sometimes it may seem that there is a perversity in human intelligence, particularly in the arts, that seeks out or deliberately manufactures such dissonances in order to challenge us in the way that we are thinking, to shake complacency... (shrink)

This paper considers the impact of complexity theory on the way in which we see propositions corresponding to the reality that they describe, and our concept of truth in that context. A contingently associated idea is the atomistic expectation that we can reduce language to primitive units of meaning, and tie those in with agreed units of experience. If we see both language and the reality that it describes and explains as complex, this position becomes difficult to maintain. Complexity theory, (...) with its emphasis on non‐linear and dynamic interactions between multiple variables, within indeterminate and transient systems, supports the case for a connectionist and holistic analysis. Theories are more likely to be under‐determined by evidence and open to interpretation, with the potential for ‘certainties’ weakened. If educational situations are complex, then the drive towards specific and focused research findings that will support policy and practice, and the associated notion of control, is illusory. Rather than providing evidence for prescription, research is thus understood as descriptive and explanatory, within a range of interpretative possibilities. Action takes place within a necessarily incomplete and constantly changing situation, more appropriately understood in terms of survival than control. (shrink)

David Carr argues that the intelligibility of spiritual development as an educational activity is dependent upon there being a framework of propositions that relates to spiritual experience and that there is a methodology for establishing their truth. These propositions and the accompanying methodology need to be constructed along the lines of a traditional but re-worked form of religious education. Michael Hand argues to the contrary that there can be no methodology for the evaluation of the truth claims in relation to (...) 'spiritual'propositions since they invariably psychologically, if not logically, involve reference to a transcendental being and are therefore seen as substantially matters of faith. Since the presentation of faith-based propositional knowledge is inappropriate to the secular school, the only route for spiritual education is in terms of those emotional qualities that we identify with the human 'spirit', that is, generosity, magnanimity, good heartedness, etc. In this paper it is argued that neither position is satisfactory in addressing the existential anxieties and tensions that underlie the construction of religious and other spiritually relevant forms of articulation. We do not need Carr's 'true' spiritual propositions. Analysis of spiritual discourses can take the same epistemological form as enquiry in arts criticism, one that recognises the elasticity of its propositions in terms of meaning and a fluidity in terms of its boundaries. The 'truth' of such propositions depends upon how they answer to the existential tensions felt by the pupil. Insofar as Hand's analysis is concerned, to reduce spiritual education to a form of emotional and social development neglects the clear intelligibility of spiritual discourse to the religious and non-religious minded alike. The unifying element in spiritual discourse is those existential questions that lie at its foundations. Spiritual education seeks to address these questions as ones of both passion and intelligibility, helping pupils to make choices in light of their own experience of the tensions and anxieties that are embedded within them. (shrink)