Luova mieli : lähikuvassa muusikoiden luomisprosessit

This work studied the creative process of musicians. The subject was chosen partly due to the attention given to creativity in social discussion. The approach was material-based, because during the work it became clear that the theoretical models describing the creative process in general did not provide adequate tools for the examination of musical creation. In this study, the creative process was defined as a process, which generated a work found by the musician novel to him or her. There were two principal research questions: 1) How does the creative process of musicians progress? 2) What makes a process creative? The main emphasis was on the first question, because the study aimed at modeling the creative process of musicians. The material for this study was collected by interviewing five professional musicians, each qualified by an expert of music to be creative. The interviews were thematically linked with each musician’s recently implemented creative process. The work generated in the process was used as a stimulant in the interview. The main themes of the interview dealt with the musician’s concrete action, cognitive functioning and affective experience during the process. Secondary themes included his or her goals as well as the factors that enhanced or inhibited the process. A material-based analysis was made of the interviews. The conceptualization and modelling of the creative process was founded on a phenomenological-hermeneutic interpretation. In addition to the primary interviews, also supplementary interviews were made in order to ensure that the description of the musician was understood correctly. Further supplementary interviews were made when the material was analyzed and results were deduced. This aimed at increasing the reliability of interpretations and conclusions. The study resulted in a four-level model representing the progress of a creative process. The levels were defined by means of the conception of state. The levels used in defining the process were 1) the state determining the potential of the process, 2) the state delimiting the process, 3) the state orienting the process, and 4) the state determined by the process. The progress of the process was described as changes taking place in the state. It was discovered that the factors having an effect on the creativity of the process were the dynamism of the process, the musician’s work in relation to his or her inner standard and the impulses that caused variation in the musician’s thinking. The interview method used in this study proved to be a very suitable tool in an examination of a creative process. Thus it may well be applicable in other research contexts associated with creative processes. The outcome of this study, the model of the progress of a creative process, should also provide a feasible basis for the examination of different kinds of creative processes. It enables a comprehensive examination of a creative process, simultaneously justifying the dynamic nature of the process.

Imagination and diversity in the philosophy of Hobbes

This dissertation is a study of some aspects of theoretical philosophy of the early modern thinker Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679). The focal point of the work is Hobbes s conception of imagination, which is discussed from both a systematic and a historical point of view, as well as in the light of contemporary scholarship. I argue that though there are significant similarities between the view of Hobbes and that of his predecessors, he gives a novel theory of imagination, which clarifies not only early modern discussions on human nature, knowledge, science, and literary criticism, but above all his own versatile philosophy. The prologue of the dissertation introduces methodological principles and gives critical remarks on the standard view of Hobbes. In Chapter II, I discuss the prominent theories of imagination before Hobbes and link them to his account. I argue that though Hobbes adopted the Aristotelian framework, his view is not reduced to it, as he borrows from various sources, for instance, from the Stoics and from Renaissance thought. Chapters III and IV form the psychological part of the work. In the Chapter III I argue that imagination, not sense, is central in the basic cognitive operations of the mind and that imagination has a decisive role in Hobbes s theory of motivation. The Chapter IV concentrates on various questions of Hobbes s philosophy of language. The chapter ends with a defence of a less naturalistic reading of Hobbes s theory of human nature. Chapters V and VI form the epistemological part of the work. I suggest, contrary to what has been recently claimed, that though Hobbes s ideas of good literary style do have a point of contact with his philosophy (e.g. the psychology of creative process), his ideas in the field are independent of his project of demonstrative political science. Instead I argue that the novelty of his major political work, Leviathan (1651), is based on a new theory of knowledge which he continued to develop in the post-Leviathan works. Chapter VII seeks to connect the more theoretical conclusions of Chapters V and VI to Hobbes's idea(l) of science as well as to his philosophical practice. On the basis of Hobbes s own writings as well as some historical examinations, I argue that method is not an apt way to conceptualise Hobbes s philosophical practice. Contemporary readings of Hobbes s theory of science are critically discussed and the chapter ends with an analysis of Hobbes s actual argumentation. In addition to the concluding remarks, the epilogue suggest three things: first, imagination is central when trying to understand Hobbes s versatile philosophy; second, that it is misleading to depict Hobbes as a simple materialist, mechanist, and empiricist; and, third, that in terms of imagination his influence on early modern thought has not been fully appreciated.

From Creative Ideas to New Emerging Ventures: Entrepreneurial Processes among Finnish Design Entrepreneurs

This study focuses on self-employed industrial designers and how they emerge new venture ideas. More specifically, this study strives to determine what design entrepreneurs do when they create new venture ideas, how venture ideas are nurtured into being, and how the processes are organized to bring such ideas to the market in the given industrial context. In contemporary times when the concern for the creative class is peaking, the research and business communities need more insight of the kind that this study provides, namely how professionals may contribute to their entrepreneurial processes and other agents’ business processes. On the one hand, the interviews underlying this study suggest that design entrepreneurs may act as reactive service providers who are appointed by producers or marketing parties to generate product-related ideas on their behalf. On the other hand, the interviews suggest that proactive behaviour that aims on generating own venture ideas, may force design entrepreneurs to take considerable responsibility in organizing their entrepreneurial processes. Another option is that they strive to bring venture ideas to the market in collaboration, or by passing these to other agents’ product development processes. Design entrepreneurs’ venture ideas typically emerge from design related starting points and observations. Product developers are mainly engaged with creating their own ideas, whereas service providers refer mainly to the development of other agents’ venture ideas. In contrast with design entrepreneurs, external actors commonly emphasize customer demand as their primary source for new venture ideas, as well as development of these in close interaction with available means of production and marketing. Consequently, design entrepreneurs need to address market demand since without sales their venture ideas may as well be classified as art. In case, they want to experiment with creative ideas, then there should be another source of income to support this typically uncertain and extensive process. Currently, it appears like a lot of good venture ideas and resources are being wasted, when venture ideas do not suite available production or business procedures. Sufficient communication between design entrepreneurs and other agents would assist all parties in developing production efficient and distributable venture ideas. Overall, the findings suggest that design entrepreneurs are often involved simultaneously in several processes that aim at emerging new product related ventures. Consequently, design entrepreneurship is conceptualized in this study as a dual process. This implies that design entrepreneurs can simultaneously be in charge of their entrepreneurial processes, as they operate as resources in other agents’ business processes. The interconnection between activities and agents suggests that these kinds of processes tend to be both complex and multifaceted to their nature.