Slashdot Mirror


Allowing the Mind To Wander Aids Creative Problem Solving

ananyo writes "From the Nature story: 'Scientists from Archimedes to Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein are said to have had flashes of inspiration while thinking about other things. But the mechanisms behind this psychological phenomenon have remained unclear. A study now suggests that simply taking a break does not bring on inspiration — rather, creativity is fostered by tasks that allow the mind to wander.' The researchers gave 145 students 2 minutes to list as many possible uses for an everyday object (the creative thinking task). Participants then either rested, undertook a demanding memory activity that required their full attention or engaged in an undemanding reaction-time activity known to elicit mind-wandering. A fourth group of students had no break. The researchers then set the students a second set of unusual-uses tasks and found those that had, in the interim, been set the undemanding task that encouraged mind-wandering performed an average of around 40% better than they did before. The students in the other three groups showed no improvement."

185 comments

  1. Creativity by The+God+of+Code · · Score: 5, Insightful

    rather, creativity is fostered by tasks that allow the mind to wander.

    And this is why mild drugs should be legal. The effects greatly increase mind wandering and in right amounts, lead to highly increased creativity. I don't support highly abusive drugs as they have risky side effects, but for example marijuana should be legal.

    It is actually even more healthy and good for the society than alcohol. For most people alcohol drinking tends to bring out their bad sides like aggressiveness, health problems and uncontrolled thinking. Pot on the other hand increases creativity, brings relaxation and has no negative effects on your health (especially if you don't smoke it but eat with browns or pizza [tastes like oregano actually, but better]).

    1. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      In AA I was introduced to the M.M.P., Marijuana Maintenance Plan.

      Basically for an Alcoholic that is drinking enough to eventually kill them it provides them a very effective way to quit drinking. And eventually they "should" quit smoking pot after they have gotten over the worst parts of early sobriety. And quitting pot is so so so much easier than quit drinking.

      This has saved hundreds of lives, but it's illegal.

    2. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And this is why mild drugs should be legal.

      No, mind-altering drugs should be legal because there should be no law against harming yourself. Marijuana should be legal because there's no reason whatever (besides right-wing lies) why it should be illegal. And yes, it does help creativity. Often some of my best stories come from a pot haze. Unfortunately half the time I forget what I was going to write before I get it written down.

      As to the study, once again science has proven that which most of us have noticed. But proving it scientifically is a GOOD thing. Without testing one can never be sure.

    3. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rather, creativity is fostered by tasks that allow the mind to wander.

      And this is why mild drugs should be legal. The effects greatly increase mind wandering and in right amounts, lead to highly increased creativity. I don't support highly abusive drugs as they have risky side effects, but for example marijuana should be legal.

      No, the reason mild drugs should be legal is because nobody has any moral justification to make them illegal. By accepting their right to forbid you to consume a substance unless you can prove it beneficial, you've already acceded to tyranny, and are reduced to pleading with your masters to temper their whims with common sense. (SPOILER: not gonna happen)

      Oh, and the same goes for "highly abusive drugs", wtfever that phrase even means.

    4. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, mind-altering drugs should be legal because there should be no law against harming yourself

      The self-harm argument falls to pieces when you consider that people are not islands unto themselves, and that the actions of one person often have detrimental effects on others. Pot should be legal because its social benefits outweigh the risks. Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit. I wouldn't mind if meth users simply killed their brain cells and then left the rest of us alone, but that's simply not the case.

    5. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny (well, for me). I had to go to AA for my pot bust. Addiction isn't the funny part. So don't think I find that part funny.

    6. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% of criminals consume oxygen we should make that illegal too.

    7. Re:Creativity by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      I'm sorry. I was busy being creative on your time... What was your question again? Surely, you don't mind repeating, if only to allow more opportunity for me to develop my brilliance! :-)

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    8. Re:Creativity by imbusy · · Score: 1

      Social benefits of oxygen outweigh the risks while for meth it's not true.

    9. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, nothing has been "proven" here. Please look into how science works and stop using that word.

    10. Re:Creativity by vlm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit

      As an ex totally legit chemist not involved even remotely in the amateur pharm trade, I none the less know that the cost of precursor chemicals would make legal meth roughly (very roughly) as expensive as your average OTC generic pharmaceutical. There's nothing in that chemical structure that should cost much more than psuedoephedrine cold medicine and its biologically active "around" that level. A couple days worth of the stuff, if legalized, would cost about as much as a weeks worth of cold medicine, in other words pretty damn cheap compared to the cost of food, etc.

      When you have to steal copper cable every day to get one day's illegal supply society has a big problem. When the cost of a 6-pack of beer is more than the cost of a months supply then society has no real problem. It is true that scum occasionally kill for the cost of a soda, but its rare enough to be an outlier, thankfully.

      It would be cheap enough that junkyards could give it away in order to improve their public image (hey general public, we don't accept stolen goods anymore because we give the addicts stuff for free, so stop blaming us for your stolen catalytic converters, mkay?)

      Its much harder on the body than alcohol, so unlike drinking where you have senior citizen bums, meth heads, especially if given all-you-can-smoke-for-free would not live long, leading to a ridiculously lower total lifetime cost and a much smaller population.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    11. Re:Creativity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, mind-altering drugs should be legal because there should be no law against harming yourself.

      Well, yes and no. While I agree that mind-altering drugs should be legal, there are behaviors that are self-destructive that end up costing society a whole lot, say, motorcyclists not wearing a helmet or at least goggles. When I first started riding in my late teens, I never wanted to put anything on my head and goggles interfered with my then-long hair flowing in the wind making me look just a little less cool. I was on 94 headed out toward the Western Suburbs when a small stone got kicked up and sent right into my eye. The weather was perfect, but it sent me into a long slide that could have easily ended up with a lot more people hurt or dead besides just me. After that, I always wore goggles, and after a close friend who was doing an emergency room rotation back then told me she wouldn't be my friend any more unless I started wearing a helmet, I actually managed to live long enough to see the wisdom in these simple requirement. About the same time, I realized that no, I did not in fact drive better after getting a few ounces of ethanol behind my belt. Funny, I was absolutely sure about that one, but no. Also, that the fragrant and sticky red bud did not actually improve my musical ability.

      Nobody's behavior is unconnected to other peoples' lives. Nobody makes it all on their own and nothing a person do "has no effect on anyone else. The "this is a free country and if I want to kill myself I will" argument makes a lot more sense before you grow up than after.

      But certainly there is no good reason to make the growing or use or purchase of marijuana illegal. And sale and distribution should be regulated, if only to make sure one doesn't end up being sold an ounce of rosemary for $120 by those high school juniors over on Jackson Blvd. The little shits.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    12. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't support highly abusive drugs as they have risky side effects

      I'm glad you've decided what I should be allowed to put into my own body on my own time in the privacy of my own home.

    13. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit. I wouldn't mind if meth users simply killed their brain cells and then left the rest of us alone, but that's simply not the case.

      First, I'm suspicious of that statistic in particular, and generally in the accuracy of statistics (including real, as opposed to made-up, ones) about illegal activities like speed use.

      Second, even allowing, for the purpose of argument, that statistic to be true as stated, it's true under a regime where meth is highly illegal, thus carries an artificially high black-market price to cover the risk of being caught (so it takes serious cash flow to support a habit), and thus meaning, by definition, only criminals use it (and this cuts both ways -- maybe some people with better impulse control who avoid it because they just don't care to mess with Johnny Law would, if legalized, take it recreationally, and never resort to crime to support a habit, and maybe some people who do take it now think "oh, what the hell, the sentence for stealing car stereos is less than I'm risking for the speed -- in for a penny, in for a pound!", and might reconsider the crimes if the meth was perfectly legal. It's quite obvious a lower percentage of meth users would resort to crime if it were legal and cheap; it may not be obvious how much lower percentage, or whether that would also represent a lower total incidence of crime (or if crime would rise because of a slightly lower percentage, times a greatly increased population of users), but since you're the one advocating wholesale deprivation of people's natural rights, the burden is on you to prove that it would still be a significant problem. (Historical data, before the Harrison Act, suggests it would not be a bigger problem than it is now, as there was no such violence pandemic associated with then-legal narcotics and stimulants.)

    14. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fair enough on the cost of the product itself.. And I think your argument would actually go a long way in regards to something like heroin. I was wrong to state that the meth addicts steal or kill to support their habit.. They steal and kill because meth eats away everything but the base animal instincts, and they essentially steal and kill for fun at that point. Also, unlike heroin addicts, meth users tend to have lots of children to whom they do irreparable harm. If we had a program of "all you can smoke, provided you are permanently sterilized and live in this fenced off area away from people who actually contribute to society", I'll be all for it.

    15. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 2

      Protip: 99.9% of the time, when someone says "99.9% of x", they're saying it to illustrate a point, and not to cite an actual statistic.

    16. Re:Creativity by Jeng · · Score: 1

      The equivalent of "Drunk for a penny Dead drunk for twopence" is not a solution to the Meth issue.

      There is no solution except at the level of the individual.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    17. Re:Creativity by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      So by your logic steroids should be legal since they have a positive side effects?
      And since Speed (I think that is the name) makes you stronger and able to work faster it should be as well?
      I don't think there exists an illegal act/substance in existence that does not have some benefit.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    18. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I blogged about your comment on angrylibertarian.tumblr.com if you care (I did it even if you don't care too).

    19. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes.
      yes.
      All drugs should be legal, because humans should be free.

    20. Re:Creativity by travbrad · · Score: 1

      Do you really think it's illegal because of "right-wing lies"? Why did Obama recently refuse to even entertain the idea of decriminalizing marijuana, despite most of Latin America being in favor of it? Meanwhile Ron Paul wants to decriminalize ALL drugs, so the idea of it being "right-wing lies" is silly. It's POLITICIAN LIES, it has nothing to do with right vs left, Republican vs Democrat.

      Don't you think it's more likely that there is a lot of profit to be made from privatizing the prison-industrial-complex and using the cheap prison (slave) labor? Or the CIA getting their cut by facilitating trade from Latin America, Afghanistan, etc?

    21. Re:Creativity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      I blogged about your comment on angrylibertarian.tumblr.com if you care (I did it even if you don't care too).

      This is from your blog:

      Iâ(TM)m pretty sure that nobody in their right mind is claiming that âoeWhat I do doesnâ(TM)t affect youâ but rather the claim is âoeNot everything that affects you allows you to legitimately respond with violenceâ.

      Now since you were responding to me, and I was talking about helmet laws, how do you get "respond with violence" from "require motorcycle riders to wear helmets or goggles"?

      I think this is how libertarians get their reputation as being a little bit goofy.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    22. Re:Creativity by shiftless · · Score: 0

      I was wrong to state that the meth addicts steal or kill to support their habit.. They steal and kill because meth eats away everything but the base animal instincts, and they essentially steal and kill for fun at that point.

      Right! And "Reefer" causes "Madness."

    23. Re:Creativity by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Also, that the fragrant and sticky red bud did not actually improve my musical ability.

      Maybe you should have tried a different strain.

      Or maybe you just aren't cut out for music.

      The "this is a free country and if I want to kill myself I will" argument makes a lot more sense before you grow up than after.

      Only if you define "growing up" as "bowing down and kissing the King's hand."

    24. Re:Creativity by SomeJoel · · Score: 3, Funny

      I blogged about your comment on angrylibertarian.tumblr.com if you care (I did it even if you don't care too).

      This is from your blog:

      Iâ(TM)m pretty sure that nobody in their right mind is claiming that âoeWhat I do doesnâ(TM)t affect youâ but rather the claim is âoeNot everything that affects you allows you to legitimately respond with violenceâ.

      Now since you were responding to me, and I was talking about helmet laws, how do you get "respond with violence" from "require motorcycle riders to wear helmets or goggles"?

      I think this is how libertarians get their reputation as being a little bit goofy.

      Hey man, calm down, there's no reason to get all violent!

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    25. Re:Creativity by SomeJoel · · Score: 1

      Do you really think it's illegal because of "right-wing lies"? Why did Obama recently refuse to even entertain the idea of decriminalizing marijuana, despite most of Latin America being in favor of it?

      I can answer this one at least. It turns out politicians don't really care much about "winning votes". They are far more concerned about not losing votes. If you embrace a change which is unpopular with a significant subset of your voter base, then you are going to lose.
      That's why it's mildly surprising that Obama came out pro-gay marriage. Although, I guess the subset of his voter base that is against it is pretty small.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    26. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This argument again. It's filled with made-up figures and subjective reasoning. I can just as easily argue that the social benefits of Alcohol (practically 0) are insignificant to the risks (drunk driving for one). Is there any social benefit to smoking at all? If not then just a 1:1'000'000'000 shot of a person getting cancer through second-hand smoke would be enough to get it made illegal by your argument.

      Perhaps a licence to buy and use meth would be more appropriate than outright banning it. Why do responsible users have to suffer just because idiots can't be trusted.

    27. Re:Creativity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Only if you define "growing up" as "bowing down and kissing the King's hand."

      "King"?

      Have you been spending too much time with Game of Thrones again?

      What is it with the eternal-undergrad libertarians and the ridiculous hyperbole? "Man, that cop gave me a ticket for running a red light. That's proof that we've got the Jackboot of the Tyrant on our neck."

      Also, libertarians capitalize a lot of stuff, apparently.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    28. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit.

      That's simply collective punishment. Throw the ones who commit crimes in prison (or whatever it is you wish to do with them), but don't punish the rest. It's simply a waste of time, manpower, and money.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    29. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2

      Nobody's behavior is unconnected to other peoples' lives.

      Suddenly we're limiting people's freedom simply because something may inadvertently affect others in some way if something goes wrong. I'd much rather accept the occasional casualties just like I'd much rather accept the risk of terrorist attacks than resort to idiocy like the Patriot Act and the TSA (which, most likely, don't accomplish anything, anyway).

      The "this is a free country and if I want to kill myself I will" argument makes a lot more sense before you grow up than after.

      Right. They just need to grow up if they don't agree with you.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    30. Re:Creativity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I'd much rather accept the occasional casualties just like I'd much rather accept the risk of terrorist attacks than resort to idiocy like the Patriot Act and the TSA (which, most likely, don't accomplish anything, anyway).

      And what does the TSA and Patriot Act have to do with motorcycle helmet laws?

      The "this is a free country and if I want to kill myself I will" argument makes a lot more sense before you grow up than after.

      Right. They just need to grow up if they don't agree with you.

      No, the don't "need" to grow up. But if they happen to do so, they will learn that "free country" does not mean the right to piss in the public swimming pool.

      Although I am told that Aqua Buddha (praise be upon Him) allows pissing in the swimming pool.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    31. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      And what does the TSA and Patriot Act have to do with motorcycle helmet laws?

      I considered the possibility that you'd ask, but I thought it was obvious. Risk. Casualties. In those cases, terrorist attacks. In your case, accidents. Of course, helmets are more effective at stopping casualties than the other two, but I believe the point is obvious. I would much rather accept casualties than limit everyone's freedom simply because someone's actions may or may not inadvertently affect someone else in some way if something goes wrong. In most cases. I do not believe in collective punishment (or anything similar).

      No, the don't "need" to grow up. But if they happen to do so, they will learn that "free country" does not mean the right to piss in the public swimming pool.

      Right. Any True Grownup would agree with you. Anyone who doesn't isn't a True Grownup.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    32. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      I was wrong to state that the meth addicts steal or kill to support their habit.. They steal and kill because meth eats away everything but the base animal instincts, and they essentially steal and kill for fun at that point.

      Right! And "Reefer" causes "Madness."

      You ever met anyone who did meth more than a few times? Yeah, didn't think so.

    33. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit.

      That's simply collective punishment. Throw the ones who commit crimes in prison (or whatever it is you wish to do with them), but don't punish the rest. It's simply a waste of time, manpower, and money.

      No, learn to deal with having to get a damn prescription for sudafed.

    34. Re:Creativity by Capsaicin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right. They just need to grow up if they don't agree with you.

      I think the point is that the angry young libertarian males need to grow up if they are still manifesting their late adolescent rejection of paternal authority after about the age of 24. From the point of view especially of those of us who used to identify as "libertarian" (even though in years past that may have meant an anti-properterian libertarianism, or even anarcho-communism), older men who persist in imagining that political utopia is to be found in their unresolved familial issues seem slightly pathetic.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    35. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that the angry young libertarian males need to grow up

      And what does that even mean? Who decided that they "need" to grow up? What does "grow up" even refer to? Agree with someone else's opinion? Because that's all it is. An opinion. It sounds awfully arrogant to me.

      older men who persist in imagining that political utopia is to be found in their unresolved familial issues seem slightly pathetic.

      Older men who disagree with some, I suppose. But I wouldn't call it a "utopia" by any means. I think it's a bit too much of a harsh world to be considered a "utopia."

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    36. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Then... learn to deal with me... not having to get a prescription? Or at least that would be the case if such laws weren't in place, and laws can be changed.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    37. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      Not sure what your point is, but my point is that all you need to do to eliminate the meth problem is disrupt the supply chain. And unlike cocaine, heroin, etc., meth can be stopped by simply regulating the ingredients necessary to make it. And unlike pot, it's actually harmful enough to make that a worthwhile venture.

    38. Re:Creativity by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      I read it as, it was time to put all those artists on factory production lines and reduce copyright duration to keep them there. Paying them more doesn't produce more creative work, the just die of drug overdoses in mansion, keeping them on the factory floor or as waitresses well keep those creative juices flowing ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    39. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2

      meth can be stopped by simply regulating the ingredients necessary to make it.

      What would prevent them from creating it in another country and bringing it here? You'd need nearly universal regulations.

      And I don't care too much for that solution, anyway. I say if someone wants to take drugs, let them. If they then commit a crime, punish those people.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    40. Re:Creativity by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      And what does that even mean? Who decided that they "need" to grow up? What does "grow up" even refer to? Agree with someone else's opinion? Because that's all it is. An opinion. It sounds awfully arrogant to me.

      Of course it's an opinion, just as yours is. What distinguishes my opinion from yours (or mine some 30 years ago for that matter) is simply my greater wisdom. I agree that must sound awfully arrogant to you and I would go further and point out that in truth the presumption that one opinion carries as much weight as any other is itself as much an opinion as it is a nonsense.

      Who decided that they "need" to grow up?

      Why put quote marks around the word you introduced into the conversation? I could have written "ought to", or "it is healthier if", or something similar, but I was replying to you. And why ask "who"? You can see whom you responded to, and who responded to you.

      What does "grow up" even refer to?

      It simply means that what is appropriate behaviour for a 5 year old when manifested in a 50 year old will be regarded as developmental retardation. That's clear enough, isn't it? But look, if you are still in your early 20s chronologically, pay us no heed, you just go ... sock it to the man! Simple solutions and overconfidence in their application are completely appropriate at that developmental stage.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    41. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      What distinguishes my opinion from yours (or mine some 30 years ago for that matter) is simply my greater wisdom.

      Oh, I see. You're making assumptions about my age, are you? Interesting "wisdom."

      There is nothing distinguishing your opinion from mine (unless you wish to appeal to a higher power). Even if you are more "wise" than me, as you claim, that is quite irrelevant. My (and your) feelings exist in a certain way, and our priorities are simply different.

      I would go further and point out that in truth the presumption that one opinion carries as much weight as any other is itself as much an opinion as it is a nonsense.

      I see. I disagree with your opinion, then. I have no idea if there is a magical opinion fairy, but I certainly don't believe in one.

      And why ask "who"?

      If their answer was simply "someone who is a human," I would've asked them how they can decide what someone "needs" to do and expect it to be anything more than an opinion.

      It simply means that what is appropriate behaviour for a 5 year old when manifested in a 50 year old will be regarded as developmental retardation.

      What is "appropriate"? Define it. And then tell me why your version is the "correct" one (if that is what you believe).

      Perhaps, in my view, you're the one suffering from "developmental retardation."

      But look, if you are still in your early 20s chronologically, pay us no heed, you just go ... sock it to the man!

      Well, if that's what you believe my current thought process is, then it shouldn't matter whether I'm 20, 30, or some other age.

      Simple solutions and overconfidence in their application are completely appropriate at that developmental stage.

      "Simple"? "overconfidence"? Now, where did I say I was confident about anything?

      Of course, I do not see anything wrong with my "solutions" even if you deem them "simple." My priorities simply lie in a different place than yours.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    42. Re:Creativity by the_arrow · · Score: 1
      --
      / The Arrow
      "How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
    43. Re:Creativity by hazah · · Score: 2

      Growing up doesn't mean you realize you don't have the right to piss in the swiming pool. On the contrary. It's realizing that you do, just as much as others have the right to punch you for it.

    44. Re:Creativity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Growing up doesn't mean you realize you don't have the right to piss in the swiming pool. On the contrary. It's realizing that you do, just as much as others have the right to punch you for it.

      Go look at the definition of the word "right" again.

      The right to free speech does not mean others have the right to stop you from speaking.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    45. Re:Creativity by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      Oh, I see. You're making assumptions about my age, are you? Interesting "wisdom."

      How so? Later I wrote " if you are still in your early 20s" just carry on and ignore us, which is a statement I would hardly make were I aware of your actual age. There is no basis for reading into my contrasting my opinions of 30 years ago, your opinions of now and my current greater wisdom, any assumption as to your age. To patronise you with a concrete example: What distinguishes my next door neighbour's motorcycle from my car (or the pushbike I rode as a kid for that matter) is the number of wheels.

      I would go further and point out that in truth the presumption that one opinion carries as much weight as any other is itself as much an opinion as it is a nonsense.

      I see. I disagree with your opinion, then.

      You can't!

      If you reject my "opinion," namely that not all opinions carry the same weight, you must accept the negation as true (ie in your opinion, all opinions are indeed of the same weight). Therefore you must hold my opinion as being of equal weight with yours and you can no more disagree with my opinion than your own (which would of course be a nonsense). And yes, I am presuming that you are not merely an irrational madman, which presumption is rebuttable. OTHO, I suffer no such impairment in disagreeing with your opinions.

      The educated reader will recognise this as the famous argument against Protagoras from Plato's Theaetetus, of course.

      There is nothing distinguishing your opinion from mine (unless you wish to appeal to a higher power).

      The only "higher power" we are dealing with here is my ego. ;) That was a joke, of course, despite what you may think.

      It simply means that what is appropriate behaviour for a 5 year old when manifested in a 50 year old will be regarded as developmental retardation.

      What is "appropriate"?

      I would have thought it very clear what "appropriate behaviour" meant in the context of that sentence?! Your English comprehensions skills seem compromised, perhaps your love of the halfling's leaf has slowed your mind?

      Define it.

      Buy a dictionary! Better still, come to grips with the body of literature pertaining to child developmental psychology.

      Well, if that's what you believe my current thought process is, then it shouldn't matter whether I'm 20, 30, or some other age.

      Firstly, this isn't really about so much about your individual thought processes (go back to my original contribution). Secondly if you stop to consider what you wrote, namely that if I believe what is appropriate at one developmental stage may not be so at another, " then it shouldn't matter whether [said man is] 20, 30, or some other age" you will surely recognise the invalidity of your statement. Please tell me you can.

      The point is that if you are a young adult male (I will not presume here to talk for women), you are not to be admonished for rejecting parental and especially paternal authority. And it is easy for this to transfer to authority in general. This is, especially in our culture, part of emerging into independent adulthood. However maturity allows you to develop a more nuanced relationship with authority. And as a mature person, when say you may be responsible not only for yourself but for others (who are perhaps subject to your authority), greater sagacity is called for.

      Now, where did I say I was confident about anything?

      Now, where did I say you were confident about anything?

      I do not see anything wrong with my "solutions" even if you deem them "simple."

      I agree you do not see anything wrong and I concede I used the wrong word when I wrote "simple." I meant simplistic, of course. What I can't work out is where the word 'solutions' is being quoted from? W

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    46. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit.

      So, you think Minority Report's precrime unit is a good thing? Stealing and killing are already against the law. "Put him in jail because he might steal or kill" is a terrible argument. I'll bet you thought 1984 had a utopian society, too.

    47. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I have, and I say you're clueless. I don't know where you got your misinformation, but you might want to do a bit of research. Hint: look for unbiased sources, preferably on a site with an .edu extension. You might also have a look at the wikipedia entry on sociopathy and psychopathy.

    48. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      Yeah, let's wait until after someone dies to anything about anything. Let's say Billy wants to build a nuke. He should be allowed to have plutonium, right? Then we'll just punish him later if he kills someone with it.

    49. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Of course it's an opinion, just as yours is. What distinguishes my opinion from yours (or mine some 30 years ago for that matter) is simply my greater wisdom.

      Yes, oh sage? Wise old wizard? Listen, grandpa, I've been smoking pot for 41 years and in my youth did a lot of dangerous shit I no longer do, too. The wise don't force their opinions of things that don't affect them personally on others in the form of law, insecure authoritarians do. The wise give council, not edicts.

      I've been wearing seat belts far longer than they've been mandatory, because not wearing one is just fucking stupid. But I'm not about to take away your right to be stupid; I value freedom. Apparently you do not.

      You also refuse to look at the math. The societal cost of drug illegality far outweigh the societal cost of the druggies. The Chicago gang wars and resultant bloodshed (often of innocent bystanders, often children) are a direct result of drugs' illegality. The Mexican beheadings are the result of these incredibly STUPID laws.

      It simply means that what is appropriate behaviour for a 5 year old when manifested in a 50 year old will be regarded as developmental retardation.

      In other words, failure to learn from your mistakes. Read a little history of the 1920s when they outlawed alcohol -- exactly the same thing we're seeing with drug prohibition. Why do you (and you're not alone by any means) refuse to learn from the mistakes of the past?

      I suspect that those in favore of continued prohibition are making tons of money because of those laws.

    50. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Do you really think it's illegal because of "right-wing lies"?

      SomeJoel answered your question pretty well, it's because only half of voters think pot (let alone other drugs) should be legal (up from 12% in 1968) I'll add that the War On Drugs has historically been a Republican thing. Nixon started the first War On Drugs, Carter (terrible President) pretty much ignored drugs, Reagain starte dthe WOD bullshit again and it escalated under Bush Sr.

    51. Re:Creativity by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      Listen, grandpa, I've been smoking pot for 41 years

      Clearly it's addled your brain!

      I'm only joking, and if your think I'm arguing in favour of drug prohibition your are wildly mistaken. See my last response here especially the last two paragraphs. The "wise"-crack was only because he accused me of being arrogant. And who you calling grandpa, I first smoked it for 35 years (mind I was relatively late in starting, no longer in HS)! Well I gave it up when I went to law school (fairly late in life), kinda goes with the territory

      I value freedom. Apparently you do not.

      I value freedom very highly. I just don't believe that it's the one word answer to every conceivable question.

      You also refuse to look at the math.

      Show me the maths. :)

      The societal cost of drug illegality far outweigh the societal cost of the druggies ...

      I could not agree more. The social costs both for any particular nation and internationally are simply atrocious. As I wrote in the linked post, prohibition is morally indefensible. It's so whichever way you cut it whatever ideological orientation you claim, if you claim to be acting to increase human freedom or to relieve human suffering.

      In other words, failure to learn from your mistakes.

      Yes it's that, but it's also learning from life's experiences that aren't necessarily failures and the position you are placed in as life progresses, son, friend, father, boss... More than that though it's also a question of the development of cognitive abilities. And on that score sadly many supposed adults are developmentally retarded, preferring the simple and false to the nuance and realistic. This in fact is a factor in the continued existence of the failed drug control regime.

      I suspect that those in favore of continued prohibition are making tons of money because of those laws.

      I have always thought so too. And because it is easier for the police to take the small time operators out, even without the existence of corruption (which the current regime undoubtedly fosters), honest police end up acting in the interests of big organised crime.

      But this alone is not enough to account for the continued stupidity. We are having this debate in Australia at the moment (check out smh.com.au), and polls apparently show the vast majority in favour of continued criminalisation. Politicians are shit scared to do what many of them must know is right. Why is this. Simply because people don't like to think. Apparently studies also show the majority of adults are either incapable or disinclined to indulge in abstract thought.

      One line I hear/read all the time is that decriminalisation will lead to vast increases in usage. But the empirical evidence (Netherlands, Spain) simply doesn't bear this out. The entire presumption that underlies the regime, namely that criminalisation leads to lower usage rates needs to be challenged. Once people see that there is no good reason to believe that, maybe the will be more inclined to think about it.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    52. Re:Creativity by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      Sorry, that would be mcgrew's original statement.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    53. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that the angry young libertarian males need to grow up if they are still manifesting their late adolescent rejection of paternal authority after about the age of 24.

      Needing a father figure is harldy adult behavior.

    54. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you still fucking here?

      your first comment was shit.

      and you're still piping up?

      foad.
      wtmkf

    55. Re:Creativity by hazah · · Score: 1

      I don't think we're hitting the same nail -- I agree with you on your point. I'm referring that you're still not free from consequences. For instance, the infamous example of yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theatre. Even if not illegal, someone may indeed punch you for it. I'm certain I understand the word just fine, my friend.

    56. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It appears we agree a lot more than I thought we did.

    57. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      I have, and I say you're clueless. I don't know where you got your misinformation, but you might want to do a bit of research. Hint: look for unbiased sources, preferably on a site with an .edu extension. You might also have a look at the wikipedia entry on sociopathy and psychopathy.

      Well I have and I've seen pieces of shit steal copper wiring out of houses and kill dogs for fun at 3 am. I'm not going to look for the citations at work, but I've read plenty such studies, and largely what they found is that the sleep deprivation from prolonged meth use causes large amounts of damage to the higher functions of the brain. But the real visceral understanding comes from having to sleep with a weapon beside your bed because the neighbors that robbed half the neighborhood might decide to go for your house next.

    58. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      Meth should be illegal because 99.9% of meth users eventually start stealing or killing to support their habit.

      So, you think Minority Report's precrime unit is a good thing? Stealing and killing are already against the law. "Put him in jail because he might steal or kill" is a terrible argument. I'll bet you thought 1984 had a utopian society, too.

      I'd ask you if you were 15, but your id shows you couldn't be. Life can't be summed up in dystopian novels. There are shades of grey. Laws exist to protect the public good, not to validate your view that you should be allowed to do anything you want, then pay for any harm you do later. Drunk driving is a great example of this -- you might get home perfectly fine. Or you might kill someone. I'd bet $5 you'd sit there and tell me that you should be allowed to drive drunk, and if you kill someone, you'll have to go to jail. But guess what? Your going to jail isn't going to bring that person back to life. Punishment is not compensation, and because of that we have to have a certain level of public order and perform a cost/benefit analysis. In my estimation, the cost of marijuana prohibition is high and the benefit is negligible (possibly even negative). The cost of meth prohibition is low and the benefit is immense.

    59. Re:Creativity by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I only wear clothes under threat of imprisonment and violence. I am prevented from taking a dump in the street by jack booted thugs. (Libertarian world)

    60. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Well I have and I've seen pieces of shit steal copper wiring out of houses and kill dogs for fun at 3 am

      Again, look up sociopathy. I've seen stone cold sober rednecks deliberately run over cats because they just hate cats. The same mechanism that makes these evil people use the drugs (and not all the drug users are stealing, see below) makes them theives.

      It's been said (and the city denies it) that mine is the third most dangerous city in the US. There's a bar I frequent in the very worst part of town with a very wide variety of patrons. The bar's owner also owns a construction company, half of his bar customers are his construction employees and the rest run the gamut from business owners to state employees to the chronically unemployed. Many of these people are addicted to meth and crack, but only half of these people are sociopaths (the sociopaths usually wind up barred before too long).

      Sleep depravation does cause damage to the brain, but so does alcohol. Yet I don't see alcoholics stealing copper for their next drink; it usually results in them winding up in jail for DUI.

      Do you know what the very worst abusable substance there is for your brain? Toluline; paint thinner. The idiots who huff this stuff get so brain damaged that they develop speech impairmants that don't go away when they're sober. Yet toluline is legal and available at any hardware store, and so cheap that these morons don't steal for it (most of them are selling dope to get money).

    61. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I'd ask you if you were 15, but your id shows you couldn't be.

      Multiply by four.

      Life can't be summed up in dystopian novels.

      Of course not, it was simply an illustration.

      Laws exist to protect the public good, not to validate your view that you should be allowed to do anything you want, then pay for any harm you do later.

      Which is why there are laws against theft and assault. I'm no "do what you want and pay later" libertarian, I simply believe in FREEDOM. If my activity doesn't harm anyone, why should I be punished for it? Your having ten beers in an hour doesn't affect me so it should be legal. But if you're one of those mean drunks that want to fight, you deserve to spend a night or two in jail. If you get in your car and drive home you should also be in jail, because you are endangering my life. But if you're a happy drunk and walk home there's no reason whatever to keep you from drinking. Alcohol prohibition to prevent DUIs and fistfights is a "Minority Report" mindset, and I don't like the paternalistic attitude at all. The libbies put the label "nanny state" on damned near everything, but in this case it fits.

      The cost of meth prohibition is low and the benefit is immense.

      There's your problem. The cost of meth is very high to the idiot that would do that stuff, but far lower to society than incarcerating every dumbass stupid enough to snort the shit and the resultant violence caused by its prohibition.

      My grandpa's generation (he had a beermaking kit in his barn in the '20s) learned the lesson of prohibition. Too bad his generation didn't pass the info along.

      Oh wait, they did.. To bad Bush Jr didn't learn what similar policies on another subject did to the economy. If you'd like to read the whole book, here is the index. That particular tome was required reading in an undergrad history class I took at SIU in the late '70s, and is a very good book (quite readable).

    62. Re:Creativity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      . Even if not illegal, someone may indeed punch you for it.

      What's with all the "punching"? Why distill all human rights down to who gets to punch whom? Let's start from a position that punching is not necessarily the measure of a person's rights.

      If a certain behavior causes negative consequences for your neighbors, even unintentionally (but if there's a pattern), you probably don't have a "right" to engage in that behavior, whether or not your neighbors decide to line up and take turns punching you.

      I don't think you would say, "A woman has a right to terminate a pregnancy, but then some anti-abortion activist has a right to punch that woman."

      If your behavior does not cause negative consequences for your neighbors, then as far as I'm concerned, you have ever right to engage in that behavior.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    63. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Often some of my best stories come from a pot haze. Unfortunately half the time I forget what I was going to write before I get it written down."

      Try recording them while you're stoned. Then play them back later to see how good they really are. Or, maybe others will need to be stoned in order to adequately appreciate your "creativity"?

    64. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      I understand your point here, but I still think that meth is a very different animal from alcohol. I actually think one of the biggest things we can do to cut down on the meth problem is to legalize pot. You see, pot is a gateway drug, but not in the way that they make it sound. In order to buy it, you gotta talk to a drug dealer. Guess what drug dealers also stock, and make a much better margin on? Meth.

      Also, I think we're also talking crosswise on exactly what to do with it. I want to control the chemicals necessary to produce it easily. Much like piracy, you're not going to stop everyone from doing it. The goal is to make it enough of a pain in the ass that people who aren't completely predisposed to use it won't seek it out.

    65. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      wow, you've been following me around for quite some time. it seems someone has a crush on me

    66. Re:Creativity by hazah · · Score: 1

      You've taken me a bit too literaly. "punch" could be a physical fist in the face, sure. But I've used it in a metaphorical sence. We are on the same page otherwise.

    67. Re:Creativity by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I actually think one of the biggest things we can do to cut down on the meth problem is to legalize pot. You see, pot is a gateway drug, but not in the way that they make it sound. In order to buy it, you gotta talk to a drug dealer. Guess what drug dealers also stock, and make a much better margin on? Meth.

      I've been saying the same thing for years. Marijuana doesn't lead to harder drugs, drug laws do.

      I want to control the chemicals necessary to produce it easily.

      Well, that's pretty hard to do since there are so many different ways of making it, using different chemicals and techniques to do so. It would be nice to not have to show ID for cough medicine just to keep the junkies sober, especially since the laws against meth and its precursor chemicals are obviously not working.

    68. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      Here is a nice story that involves the two places where I have spent most of my life. I've lived in the reddest state and the bluest city.. I'm back in OK now, but I think Portland had the right idea with 99% of its drug policy.

    69. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Yeah, let's wait until after someone dies to anything about anything.

      There are no perfect solutions. Someone will die no matter what you choose. I don't like this "I'll accept no casualties" mentality. Especially when they then use it to restrict others' freedoms.

      Let's say Billy wants to build a nuke.

      Unlikely. But if he shows intent to commit a crime (which is, I find, likely if he's building a nuke), arrest him.

      Not really similar to taking meth.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    70. Re:Creativity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      How so?

      I read that later on, and that is something I forgot to remove.

      If you reject my "opinion," namely that not all opinions carry the same weight, you must accept the negation as true (ie in your opinion, all opinions are indeed of the same weight).

      I was referring to objective "weight," not subjective. I do not believe opinions hold any objective value (as in, some opinions are factually more important), and are therefore all of equal value. This means you can hold your opinion in a higher regard.

      You may not have been speaking of some opinions being more objectively important than others, but at the time, that's what I was speaking of.

      I would have thought it very clear what "appropriate behaviour" meant in the context of that sentence?! Your English comprehensions skills seem compromised, perhaps your love of the halfling's leaf has slowed your mind?

      It's subjective. What may be "appropriate" to one may not be to all. Indeed, I still don't know what you meant by "appropriate." What is "appropriate" for a 5 year old? A 50 year old? Why?

      What I can't work out is where the word 'solutions' is being quoted from?

      "Simple solutions"

      But I was really referring to my own solution of legalizing all drugs.

      While I could not entertain the naive libertarianism which would so categorically shackle the legislature

      With all the garbage they put out, I'd say shackling it is indeed in order. I don't think of that as "naive." It depends more on the degree of shackling.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    71. Re:Creativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alcohol users harm other people more than meth users do http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HarmCausedByDrugsTable.jpg . Just because violent acts committed under the influence of meth are given a lot more publicity than those due to alcohol is no justification for imprisoning drug users who don't harm other people. Drug possession for personal use should be legal.

    72. Re:Creativity by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      If you wouldn't mind indulging me I am interested to know why you would bring up Heroin addicts in a meth head thread. Do you see an equivalency between them bar your less children point?
      I am truly interested to hear your point of view on the subject.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    73. Re:Creativity by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      No, I think heroin addicts are far less dangerous, for a number of reasons.. For one, they usually have access to methadone clinics, which allows them to avoid withdrawal symptoms, preventing them from having the incentive to go out and steal. For another thing, the meth addict psychosis comes largely from the massive sleep deprivation, which is not an issue for heroin addicts. And finally because unlike meth addicts, heroin addicts don't tend to do anything when they're high other than lie on a bean bag.

    74. Re:Creativity by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the response. I actually know several long term Heroin users who all are either successful in their fields or have been. One of them is in his early seventies, still uses Heroin daily and has for over half a century. If you use a computer you will most likely be running software that contains his code or some sort of derivative. I am in awe of this old bloke's mind which appears just as bright today as it was when I met him a quarter of a century ago.

      I also went to school with some guys that got into Heroin. They are all either dead or in gaol. So just to clarify for those that are easily misled -

      Heroin will not give you a big special binary brain. If you do not have access to huge sums of money and/or the ability to earn them you will not have a good time and even those that currently love and care for you could be driven away by the loathsome bastard you will likely become

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    75. Re:Creativity by paxcoder · · Score: 1

      Oh, cut the crap, 2641925.

      Alcohol and marijuana do not make you inventive. Creative? Sure, since anything is called art these days.
      I do realize you didn't argue in favor of alcohol. But if "wandering" is the key, and it is what drugs do, then so does alcohol. In fact, you can just start flapping around on the floor like a fish, or rolling in the dirt, like they used to do in psychiatric sessions of the 70s. You'll achieve the same "wandering" state of mind.

      No. It is when you learn things, and then your mind wanders, that you make connections, discover, imagine new things. It's also called called thinking about things. If you go into a world with white rabbits that lead you through holes, it might make for a wild children story, but it won't cure cancer. Despite the fact that those 3 or so Nobel prize winners, whom you can undoubtedly name by heart, experimented with LSD.

      P.S. While often arguing "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" is a description of a trip, none of Lewis Caroll's biographers implied drug abuse on his part. Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (real name of Lewis Caroll) was a mathematician, and a logician.

  2. In the Shower by InfiniteZero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some of the best ideas I've come up with happened in the shower, usually after a long day of working on a project.

    1. Re:In the Shower by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 1

      +1 for the shower. I've had many problem breakthroughs in the shower. It's a good reason to refrain from washing your *ahem* bits and pieces any more than is necessary during shower time.

      --
      "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    2. Re:In the Shower by The+God+of+Code · · Score: 0

      Pff, shower. It's funny for those of us in countries that have saunas.And yes, it is absolutely fantastic place to think about things and get new ideas. I used to enjoy that as teen and get lots of fantastic game development ideas. I still do when I have some problem to think about, or when I want inspiration. Compared to saunas, shower just seems stupid.

    3. Re:In the Shower by mindwhip · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For me its not dreams, rather its lying in bed late at night or on lazy Sunday mornings daydreaming for an hour or two. I'll just let my mind run 'in neutral' not thinking about anything in particular. Sometimes I'll end up thinking about what I did today or will be doing tomorrow. Sometimes its more abstract stuff like what does the square root of -1 actually mean. Sometimes its about the people around me, either friend or foe. Sometimes just about one pointless thing like a slashdot post I made, over and over again but considering it from every angle.

      Every so often these random 'wanderings' result in me linking two previously unrelated facts together to get a better understanding or in me having an idea to solve some problem or issue.

      Either way without letting my mind wander I wouldn't have anywhere near as many 'eureka' moments and would probably have missed out on promotions etc as a result.

      --
      [The Universe] has gone offline.
    4. Re:In the Shower by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I regularly have ideas on my research while I'm trying to fall asleep. I have my ipad on the nightstand so that I can send myself an e-mail explaining it.

    5. Re:In the Shower by elucido · · Score: 1

      I regularly have ideas on my research while I'm trying to fall asleep. I have my ipad on the nightstand so that I can send myself an e-mail explaining it.

      I have ideas while I'm in my sleep. I dream about my research. I don't see why others don't also.

    6. Re:In the Shower by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 0

      Some of the best ideas I've come up with happened in the shower, usually after a long day of working on a project.

      Stop "working on your project" in the shower, you'll go blind.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    7. Re:In the Shower by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I still remember one of the first programs I did in college. There was a bug, and I'd been trying to find it until I went cross-eyed. Finally, I took a break, went to the bathroom, and while crapping I came up with the answer.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    8. Re:In the Shower by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, that's the best time to come to grips with yourself.

    9. Re:In the Shower by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fully agree - I think it must be the combination of:

      - Not being able to bring the laptop into the shower (disconnect)
      - Carrying out an activity (washing) that your brain can do on auto-pilot

      A great place to get insight!

    10. Re:In the Shower by eulernet · · Score: 1

      My recipe for creativity:

      Step 1: Search for a solution as if my life depends on it. In general, I find bad solutions at this stage. This is called "bad spontaneous solutions", I tend to defend them, even though they don't solve the problem.
      Step 2: Stop searching for a solution. It's difficult to stop searching, but there are several ways to do that, like sleeping or concentrating on something else but not using logical reasoning. It's important to forget about the problem.
      Step 3: The solution appears !

      It's a mysterious process, but I applied this technique to most parts of my life and it works, for example, I found my wife this way.

    11. Re:In the Shower by GerryHattrick · · Score: 1

      At Hitler's lunch table, Dr Dietrich boasted he got his best ideas in the bath. "Then you should bath more often", said Dr Goebbels. ...true. But seriously, you get more ideas if you have time to think about them - how surprising is that, Herr Professor?

    12. Re:In the Shower by jedwidz · · Score: 1

      That's actually a pretty standard methodology for enterprise software, once you look past the various buzzwords and processes.

  3. Well Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another words a whole pile on money has been spent/wasted to prove that

      - When you are stuck on a problem, take a break, do something different and then come back to it refreshed and you are more than lilely to solve it.

    Pah.

    1. Re:Well Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another words a whole pile on money has been spent/wasted to prove that

      "In other words" Read a little. Spelling and grammar are not places for creative problem solving unless you're playing Planetfall.

    2. Re:Well Doh! by Lundse · · Score: 1

      I know all the CEOs of the world bow to your expertise and slavishly follow your every tidbit of advice, but for the few unfortunates who do not have a direct connection to, and trust in, your infinity wisdom, having a study prove these things may be a step in the right direction in implementing this particular nugget in the workplaces.

      --
      IAIFARSIJDPOOTV - I Am In Fact A Reality Star; I Just Don't Play One On TV
  4. Camping by Hatta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is why I like camping. Nothing like being stuck outside, hopefully far away from any sort of electrical devices, alone with nothing but your mind and dappled sunlight through the trees to keep you company. I'm never more productive than the week after I spent a weekend sleeping under the stars.

    Stuck at home, my hobbies use a lot of the same parts of the brain my work does. But I enjoy them more, so I work harder at them. That often leaves me wearier on Monday than I was on Friday.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Camping by sohmc · · Score: 1

      While I love the great outdoors, my back has precluded this activity for me. So now, I "don't do computers" at home. DVR and phone is the maximum of what I'll do.

      It usually while I'm mopping the floor or washing the dishes that I'll think of a solution to a problem I'm having. Maybe not so much of a solution as a different way to approach the problem. (e.g. iterating through a users list to find which of them belong to a group because I can't query the group.)

      --
      We don't live in Shouldland.
    2. Re:Camping by strength_of_10_men · · Score: 2

      Nothing like being stuck outside, hopefully far away from any sort of electrical devices, alone with nothing but your mind and dappled sunlight through the trees to keep you company.

      I guess along the same line, if I'm ever stuck on a hard problem, I either go for a long bike ride or a long steady run; something that's not so hard that I have to focus on form. Some of my best problem solving has been done while on a contemplative ride or run, by myself, in the middle of nowhere.

      I don't know if it's the release of endorphins or the tranquility that the setting provides, or the isolation from distractions such as phones and email (and yes, people) that does the trick but if I'm struggling on something, I grad the bike or running shoes and head out the door.

      Plus it allows me to eat a little more for dinner. :)

    3. Re:Camping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I think it's a combination of effects, but I'm lucky enough to live on the outskirts of a small town, so 5 minutes gets me onto low-traffic roads in farm country; a 15-mile cruise is just the thing for letting all sorts of problems sort themselves out in my head.

      (Not much for running, personally, for any reason at all, but if that's your bag, I can see how it'd work the same way. For me, it's just a good way to get tired and angry at my belly for flapping up and down and reminding me how fat I am.)

    4. Re:Camping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your *aha* moments consist of things like implementing a linear search? Yikes.

  5. It's the step back effect by jholyhead · · Score: 5, Funny

    I expect those of us in intellectually demanding jobs have encountered the step back effect.

    You'll spend three hours banging your head against your desk trying to find a solution to a tricky problem. Eventually, the caffeinated beverages you've been throwing back conspire against you and you have to make a trip to the bathroom. I solve more tricky problems during those 2 minute bathroom breaks than at any other point in the day.

    Incidentally I find I can use this effect to justify all kinds of frowned upon office behaviour. I'm not watching cat videos on Youtube, I'm stepping away from the problem. I'm not browsing the Dilbert archives, I'm putting some distance between myself and the dilemma. I'm not facebook stalking the temp on reception, I'm seeking an alternative perspective on the issue du jour.

    1. Re:It's the step back effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in ye college days, I found that attempting to explain the problem to an uninvolved bystander (one who could understand the problem, not just some random art history major) was often enough to realize the solution. I wasn't alone in seeing this method of debugging, and it has happened a fair number of times in paying work as well.

      I suppose it's a hybrid of stepping back and looking from a different perspective at the same time, and sometimes all it takes is the other person asking "is that a semicolon or a regular colon?" (memories of Perl)

    2. Re:It's the step back effect by jholyhead · · Score: 1

      Totally, just saying the problem out loud leads you to view the problem from a different perspective. 50% of the time you've got the answer before you're halfway through explaining the problem.

    3. Re:It's the step back effect by vlm · · Score: 1

      Incidentally I find I can use this effect to justify all kinds of frowned upon office behaviour.

      You forgot posting on /.

      Crazy as it sounds I've solved more problems while on /. than while doing any other activity.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:It's the step back effect by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      Totally, just saying the problem out loud leads you to view the problem from a different perspective. 50% of the time you've got the answer before you're halfway through explaining the problem.

      I definitely agree with you, but I don't think that's the same phenomenon that is described in the article.

      Usually when I find the answer in the process of explaining to somebody else, it's because I already have the answer, but can't see that I've misapplied it. When looking at my work, my brain sees what should be on the screen, not what actually is on the screen. I skip steps because I've done them so often that I already know what the result should be. Then I try to explain it to somebody else, and the mind is forced to pull away from the tunnel vision. You stop thinking about what you have or haven't done, and start thinking about, "given this guy's knowledge, how do I explain the steps I should take in order to solve it?" At which point, once you get to the step you weren't paying much attention to, you immediately realize that you missed it.

      Same reason pilots have actual checklists they're supposed to go through for the pre-flight check, before takeoff, etc. You do it enough times, you end up skipping a step. You have it written there in front of you, and you avoid that problem.

      The situation described in the article is a little different. You're not thinking about the original problem at all anymore, but the solution just pops in your mind. Just the other day I was in a car with a friend, and couldn't think of the name of an actor. I spent maybe 5 minutes trying to remember, and then gave up, and changed the subject. 20 minutes later, after I hadn't given the thing any thought whatsoever, we arrived where we were going, and the name just popped in my head.

      There's a weird background processing thing that goes on when you stop thinking about stuff.

    5. Re:It's the step back effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to call these "train platform revelations" because that's where they happened for me: while waiting for a train at the end of the day. Being in the city and taking walks around the block helps too. Don't sit still for more than 2 hours. Even if you are in a stupid office park in the middle of suburbia where you have to drive to get anywhere, you should still walk around the building every once in a while.

    6. Re:It's the step back effect by Bengie · · Score: 1

      I find when I talk to other people, I try to mirror what they're thinking about what I'm saying. By having someone to listen, just me talking at them allows me to activate this part of my brain and help me criticize my own logic as I attempt to explain it. Thinking or talking to myself does not activate this brain pathway for me.

      One of my favorite things to do is analyze what I think and why I thought it.

    7. Re:It's the step back effect by Bengie · · Score: 1

      There's a weird background processing thing that goes on when you stop thinking about stuff.

      I love taking advantage of this by looking at a problem, identifying the issue, then I go to browse the web, like /., techdirt, ars, etc. Then I come back after 5-10 minutes and attempt to create a solution. I find this process tends to help me best when solving new problems. Really tough problems(starting a new project) can take a few days of this back-and-forth, which also includes researching the subject, identifying possible issues, and going home to "sleep on it".

  6. Mind to wander - mindulfness. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those of you who are practicing mindfulness - you know:when you're washing the dishes; wash the dishes - being in the present and concentrating on what you're doing, On the other hand, it seams that Mindfulness practice would negate creative thinking. Granted, there are plenty of times where I've come up with some creative ideas during meditation only to have to put them aside and go back to the breath - and then struggle to remember WTF I thought of.

    I don't know ... maybe it's my own dichotomy that I've created in my own mind .....

    1. Re:Mind to wander - mindulfness. by jholyhead · · Score: 1

      Mindfulness doesn't mean you can never let your mind wander so long as letting your mind wander is what you are trying to do.

    2. Re:Mind to wander - mindulfness. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having watched someone (a daydreamer) succumb to Alzheimer's recently, I have begun to wonder if people who are prone to bouts of free-association are more susceptible to brain maladies like dementia & Alzheimer's. I often employ the thousand yard stare when I'm problem solving/ daydreaming, and it doesn't feel like the same type of "thinking" that, say, posting on Slashdot or riding a bike, feels like; it lacks the immediacy of a focused effort. When I see elderly people engaged in things like crossword puzzles or active debate, it seems to me they are exercising a neural "muscle" that an intellectual wanderer forgoes for generality.
      Like anything, I'm guessing too much disembodied time is probably as unwise as none.

  7. Yes yes yes! by ohnocitizen · · Score: 4, Funny

    When I am working on a particularly difficult problem, I read Slashdot for a bit. After drinking down an article about the TSA or censorship, boom! The solution just pops into my head and away I go. That's the Slashdot Advantage(tm)!

    1. Re:Yes yes yes! by PRMan · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm not sure if you are joking, but this totally happens to me all the time.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:Yes yes yes! by Nrrqshrr · · Score: 1

      TSA-Bashing: aka the official sport of Slashdot denizens.

    3. Re:Yes yes yes! by Jeng · · Score: 1

      That and Spot the Shill

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    4. Re:Yes yes yes! by ignavus · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you are joking, but this totally happens to me all the time.

      I started reading your post, but my mind wandered.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  8. Re: Or dreams by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When it's something I work really intensely, I often come up with the best solutions indirectly in a dream. That is, I'll dream of a solution - usually it's not directly helpful, but upon waking it's easy to follow the impractical dream solution to its roots and find the real answer. Usually in a "oh that's so obvious, why didn't I see it sooner?!" kind of way.

    Walking is another good time for me - unless I"m listening to an audiobook, which seems to suppress the necessary 'mind wandering'.

  9. This is news? by __aaeihw9960 · · Score: 1

    It's not news, it's a euphemism that's been around for years: "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."

    In other news, water - wet, air - dry, penguins - little Hitlers in tuxedos.

  10. Sleep eurekas by fleeped · · Score: 1

    I usually have my algorithmic eurekas when I sleep, but I never seem to recall the solution when I wake up. Damn.

    1. Re:Sleep eurekas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Solution, don't move when you wake up. Literally, don't move a muscle. Instead, when you realize you're waking up, or have awoken, stay as still as possible and reflect on your dream.

      This is a trick used for lucid dreaming, and when I was a kid worked rather well. Not so much as an adult. But regardless if you want to remember what you were dreaming about, moving your muscles somehow hastens the retreat from memory of your dream. It has something to do with the different parts of your brain taking over.

  11. Re: Or dreams by The+God+of+Code · · Score: 1

    The dreaming way can go bad quite quickly. Nowadays, due to too much internet use, I keep seeing dreams of internet articles, forum posts, slashdot posts.. All written by different persons with different styles, and actually quite interesting and technical posts. But all generated in my head. Hilarity ensues later when you try to figure out what information has been real and what has been dreaming.

  12. problem by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    problem is, my mind keeps wandering all day long, so no work is being done.. LOL...

  13. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was that?

    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, what were you saying? I was, uh, solving problems...

      I'm sorry, I missed what you were saying. I guess my mind was wandering.

  14. Just Remember by Normal+Dan · · Score: 1

    Green is not a creative color.

    --
    A unique way to learn a language: http://languageloom.com
  15. So I shouldn't take my ADD meds? by Danathar · · Score: 1

    And I thought "focus" was what I needed! Thanks! I'm pouring the methylphenidate down the toilet. Wandering mind here I come! No effort needed.

    1. Re:So I shouldn't take my ADD meds? by Jeng · · Score: 1

      It can be beneficial to go without every once in a while, but usually best to do it on a day you don't have to work.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
  16. Re: Or dreams by s.petry · · Score: 2

    I have had these also, usually very early REM sleep I wake up and say "Wholly crap that is the Fix!". I found at least for myself that I don't even have to keep a pencil and paper near the bed. These ideas are remembered in the morning, and usually refined while getting ready for work.

    For TFA, I wonder what they did for "mind wandering" activities? They don't mention their specific method, and most that I know of like meditation require training.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  17. I'm taking the time for a number of things by wooferhound · · Score: 1

    I'm fixing a hole where the rain gets in
    And stops my mind from wandering
    Where will it go

    I'm filling the cracks that ran through the door
    And kept my mind from wandering
    Where will it go

    I'm painting the room in a colorful way
    And when my mind is wandering
    There I will go . . .

    --
    We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
  18. What they aren't saying: by Poltron+Inconnu · · Score: 4, Funny

    An undemanding task that lets the mind wander... I think they're not wanting to come right out and admit that most people do their best thinking on the toilet.

    1. Re:What they aren't saying: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An undemanding task that lets the mind wander... I think they're not wanting to come right out and admit that most people do their best thinking on the toilet.

      It becomes a whole lot more demanding when the grapes are down, I can tell you. FWIW, they're usually brought on by stress...

  19. Nice to have scientific proof ... by Aviation+Pete · · Score: 0
    ... but this is nothing new. Guess why Steve Jobs made long walks when he had difficult problems to solve. Not being locked into the same room, but with new impressions all the time, the mind receives new inspirations, instead of following the same path of thoughts over and over.

    Receiving an extra dose of oxygen comes as a bonus on top. Many original thinkers have used techniques like this over the years.

    Sorry, you [citation needed] nazis. Look up the references yourselves. Ideally while being on a long walk, not sitting at the same desk the whole day.

    --
    You know it's time for the next revolution when your rulers' names end with roman numerals.
    1. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by elucido · · Score: 1

      ... but this is nothing new.

      Guess why Steve Jobs made long walks when he had difficult problems to solve. Not being locked into the same room, but with new impressions all the time, the mind receives new inspirations, instead of following the same path of thoughts over and over.

      Receiving an extra dose of oxygen comes as a bonus on top. Many original thinkers have used techniques like this over the years.

      Sorry, you [citation needed] nazis. Look up the references yourselves. Ideally while being on a long walk, not sitting at the same desk the whole day.

      ... but this is nothing new.

      Guess why Steve Jobs made long walks when he had difficult problems to solve. Not being locked into the same room, but with new impressions all the time, the mind receives new inspirations, instead of following the same path of thoughts over and over.

      Receiving an extra dose of oxygen comes as a bonus on top. Many original thinkers have used techniques like this over the years.

      Sorry, you [citation needed] nazis. Look up the references yourselves. Ideally while being on a long walk, not sitting at the same desk the whole day.

      Tell that to the parents and teachers who are over medicating students who have ADHD.

    2. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Are you one of those idiots who think that somehow we are turning kids into mindless zombies because they are prescribed an amphetamine?

      If an amphetamine is allowing them the ability to sit still and study then they had a serious issue.

      If you give an amphetamine to a kid who does not have a serious issue they are not going to be sitting still and studying.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    3. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by jpapon · · Score: 1

      That's not true at all. For instance, I've seen Ritalin cause people who definitely don't have ADHD to become focused on studying for hours on end.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    4. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Age group and setting?

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    5. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by Bengie · · Score: 1

      "If you give an amphetamine to a kid who does not have a serious issue they are not going to be sitting still and studying.

      My doctor said the same thing. He said the amount of amphetamine I was taking would normally make a person very hyper, but it settled me down. He even recommended small dosages of caffeine, which also settled me. Not so much large dosages.

    6. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Since I'll be leaving work soon and won't look for a response until tomorrow.

      In my post I said "kids" ie, children. People who are under 13 years of age I would consider kids.

      Yes, if you give an adolescent or above Ritalin for the purpose of focusing on school work in a school setting it will most probably work for that use, same as caffeine. It will also though give them a "high" off of it which is quite distracting that ADD people do not get. A child with that "high" will bounce off the walls, not study. The only reason an adolescent or above isn't bouncing off the walls on the medication is self discipline which children lack.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    7. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by elucido · · Score: 1

      Since I'll be leaving work soon and won't look for a response until tomorrow.

      In my post I said "kids" ie, children. People who are under 13 years of age I would consider kids.

      Yes, if you give an adolescent or above Ritalin for the purpose of focusing on school work in a school setting it will most probably work for that use, same as caffeine. It will also though give them a "high" off of it which is quite distracting that ADD people do not get. A child with that "high" will bounce off the walls, not study. The only reason an adolescent or above isn't bouncing off the walls on the medication is self discipline which children lack.

      Not true at all. I had ADHD as a kid and was given those meds and quit taking them precisely because the "high" was dumbing me down and causing me to have a slower yet more focused brain. Focus is good and all for something like math where you just do the same series of problems for an hour but it's horrible for anything which requires creativity or out of the box thinking. Ritalin also messed things up with regard to social skills.

      So unless you've been on ritalin as a kid to know, maybe you wouldn't know there was or wasn't a high but I recall there was. As a kid I knew when I was on it and didn't necessarily like it.

    8. Re:Nice to have scientific proof ... by elucido · · Score: 1

      "If you give an amphetamine to a kid who does not have a serious issue they are not going to be sitting still and studying.

      My doctor said the same thing. He said the amount of amphetamine I was taking would normally make a person very hyper, but it settled me down. He even recommended small dosages of caffeine, which also settled me. Not so much large dosages.

      I think what makes kids hyper is the sugar they were putting in the food. Hyper activity is related mostly to the diet.

      Ritalin makes the brain focus on boring uninteresting tasks for longer. It helped me to do my math homework but that is about it. For just about everything else from social skills (sense of humor) to creativity to innovative type thinking this kind of focus didn't help and in fact hindered my ability to thought drift my way into unique perspectives or solutions. The thought drift that people with ADHD have is perceived as negative and for some people with ADHD it really is, but in my case it was more I wasn't doing my math studies because I got so bored that I would thought daydream or thought drift onto something I was more interested in. I existed in the moment, and I didn't find school interesting or all that challenging at the time and was more interested in spending 8 hours straight playing video games than spend 8 hours studying algebra.

  20. Re: Or dreams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At one job I had where we were working 10+ hour days, continuously for over a month I would occasionally have wet dreams about inanimate objects at work.

    Deeply Disturbing.

  21. Vacation by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    I get my best ideas while on vacation. Unfortunately, my employer fails to realize that, so I'm stuck being unproductive in an office 40 hours a week.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  22. ADHD is good for creativity. by elucido · · Score: 1

    If your mind wanders a lot and you know how to make good use of it it's a bonus feature but if your mind wanders a lot and you don't know how to make good use of it them it's a mental disorder.

    1. Re:ADHD is good for creativity. by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

      Except that ADHD isn't a matter of the mind merely wandering -- the H means they're too hyperactive to remain still (they have to constantly be in motion of some sort), and the ADD means that they're completely distracted by sensory input and/or their brain leaps from one half-finished thought to the next. It's hard to make use of interesting ideas or solutions if it you're distracted by something else before you record it and/or can't focus long enough to work on it. I've had several ADHD friends, and my mother also has it. If they can work on something they're totally fascinated by, during the hours that work for them any particular day, move/pace as they need, avoid the foods/drinks that make it out of control, and control what they physically feel/hear/see/etc. then some of them can thrive. Mom is a classic case: she'll start cleaning her desk, then after five minutes remember that she wanted to make a phone call, start looking for her address book, find it but then notice that it's the shade of blue as her 2nd boyfriend long ago drove, try to look him up on Facebook -- so on and so forth.

      --
      Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
    2. Re:ADHD is good for creativity. by robsku · · Score: 1

      ADHD & ADD have also positive effects on attention sometimes, it's just that average people rarely hear about them and often understand "disorder" to mean same as "weak" - one symptom of ADD/ADHD is called hyperfocusing, and it's negative effects are quite opposite from getting distracted - it means that you can be totally oblivious to even things that would normally grab anybodys attestion from what they are doing, but what you are focusing on is getting 150% focus.

      I'm also talking out of experience - it's one of the good things with ADHD >:)

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
    3. Re:ADHD is good for creativity. by elucido · · Score: 1

      Except that ADHD isn't a matter of the mind merely wandering -- the H means they're too hyperactive to remain still (they have to constantly be in motion of some sort), and the ADD means that they're completely distracted by sensory input and/or their brain leaps from one half-finished thought to the next. It's hard to make use of interesting ideas or solutions if it you're distracted by something else before you record it and/or can't focus long enough to work on it.

      I've had several ADHD friends, and my mother also has it. If they can work on something they're totally fascinated by, during the hours that work for them any particular day, move/pace as they need, avoid the foods/drinks that make it out of control, and control what they physically feel/hear/see/etc. then some of them can thrive. Mom is a classic case: she'll start cleaning her desk, then after five minutes remember that she wanted to make a phone call, start looking for her address book, find it but then notice that it's the shade of blue as her 2nd boyfriend long ago drove, try to look him up on Facebook -- so on and so forth.

      But you never had ADHD yourself. You've had friends who had ADHD. I'll admit that I probably had the milder form, but I think the hyperactivity part is just the result of sugar and caffeine in children's diet. I don't think that is any syndrome and I don't accept the idea that hyperactivity is controlled by anything other than diet because they never revealed any section of the brain which makes a person hyper but we do know if you give any kid or any person a lot of sugar or excess energy that they'll have to burn it off somehow.

    4. Re:ADHD is good for creativity. by elucido · · Score: 1

      ADHD & ADD have also positive effects on attention sometimes, it's just that average people rarely hear about them and often understand "disorder" to mean same as "weak" - one symptom of ADD/ADHD is called hyperfocusing, and it's negative effects are quite opposite from getting distracted - it means that you can be totally oblivious to even things that would normally grab anybodys attestion from what they are doing, but what you are focusing on is getting 150% focus.

      I'm also talking out of experience - it's one of the good things with ADHD >:)

      That is exactly what I am talking about. I was exactly like that as a kid.

      The thing is the people who are talking about ADHD or discussing it usually never had it to begin with and don't know much about it. If you've had ADHD then they should be interviewing the successful people who overcame ADHD to find out what the positives of having ADHD are. If we listen to people who never had ADHD to begin with what do we expect to learn about the positive effects of ADHD?

      For some subjects like math ADHD doesn't help at all but when it's time to be creative or when it's a situation where there isn't some script or book or steps to follow then ADHD actually becomes normal if and only if you recognize your strengths and weaknesses with ADHD. If you think of yourself as a victim of ADHD and never recognize any strengths then that gives control and power over to people who want to call you disabled, say you've got a syndrome, say you're less intelligent, but use a condition like ADHD as a way of saying that without the social stigma of saying it.

      In the real world none of the myths are true. People with ADHD depending on the severity and type of ADHD can focus and some actually hyper focus to the point where they cannot think about anything else which would explain why they can't focus on their math homework for example. That is not the same as not being able to focus on anything at all. There may be some people with ADHD so severe that they can't focus on anything at all but I was never like that and I didn't know anyone with ADHD quite that severe.

  23. Try not taking them unless you really need them. by elucido · · Score: 1

    And I thought "focus" was what I needed! Thanks! I'm pouring the methylphenidate down the toilet. Wandering mind here I come! No effort needed.

    If you're an artist or in a creative profession you wont need them. Also if you can figure out how to have ADHD and make it work for you rather than against you then you don't need them.

  24. Huh? by kbob88 · · Score: 2

    I'm sorry, what were you saying? I was, uh, solving problems...

  25. US Business Reaction by bmo · · Score: 1

    "We don't pay you to think. Get back to work"

    --
    BMO

  26. Re:Psychology is ( Score: +5, Obvious ) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correction: (Score: -100, Stupid Bullshit; die in a fire)

  27. In Your Face Dad! by noc007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When I was in elementary school and day dream, my dad would tell me that I needed to "stop going to 'la la land'".He would even mockingly imitate me in "la la land" in the most obnoxious manner possible. This is one of the many BS things my parents did to me and my dad really doesn't get why our relationship is always on pins and needles. My mom OTOH doesn't realize our relationship is on pins and needles and copes with her own undiagnosed ADHD with a 2 liter diet soda everyday. My dad going diagnosed with ADD a few years ago and is completely ashamed of it; he doesn't want to talk about it, thinks everyone else must accommodate his BS because he has it, and refuses to accept that it's a reason for the behavior now but not an excuse now that he's diagnosed.

    Seriously didn't find out that I was ADD until my ADHD wife told me I'm probably ADD, would benefit by getting tested, and then working with professionals on finding the best solutions to my problems. Found out a couple of years later from my mom that they knew I probably had ADD, but didn't want to get me any help (drugs or otherwise). Instead yelling at me about was their accepted solution.

    My future daughter and potential children, I hope, will benefit from our experience as there's a good chance they'll have ADD. Pediatrician has already forbade computers and TVs being viewable by the munchkin; noise from the TV is discouraged as well, but classical music is encouraged. /Yeah I mommy and daddy issues. Hopefully my children won't.

    1. Re:In Your Face Dad! by Jeng · · Score: 1

      I finally got diagnosed at 29 after having a DWI and going to out patient rehab. The rehab people told me I should get checked out since drugs and alcohol were not the extent of my problems.

      I recently found out my mom wanted me to see a psychiatrist when I was in high school, but my step-dad (who was literally on crack) didn't think I needed it.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:In Your Face Dad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Letting one's mind wander is not necessarily the same thing as ADD. Not to detract from your sense of vindication, but I experience this fluid problem-solving by the unconscious mind all the time as well, but I don't suffer from symptoms of ADD/ADHD. The point is to not "over-concentrate" or enforce arbitrary boundaries within your thought processes -- don't censor yourself by trying to stay "on-topic." I will often solve problems during lunch without thinking about them consciously. I am actually surprised that this is considered noteworthy.

  28. And yet ... by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... Slashdot has a -1 Offtopic mod.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  29. Mind Wandering...Sorry what were we discussing by gpronger · · Score: 1

    My problem has never been allowing the mind to wander, it's always been chasing the damn thing down and getting to to do something constructive. Think outside the box they say, but what if you were born without one?

    1. Re:Mind Wandering...Sorry what were we discussing by turgid · · Score: 1

      My problem has never been allowing the mind to wander, it's always been chasing the damn thing down and getting to to do something constructive. Think outside the box they say, but what if you were born without one?

      There's a certain knack to it, but it's taken me well into my late 30s to be able to do it "on demand" and even then it's difficult sometimes.

      When I was younger, I used to try to force myself to concentrate but it was always counterproductive. At best I used to get bad butterflies in the stomach, and at worst migraines and aching muscles.

      With the experience of age, I've learned not to be so strict with myself, and kind of potter around the periphery of what I intend to do, maybe just reading and analysing very superficially. When I get it right, and if I am not interrupted too much (that's something other people are responsible for but you can hide away from them or make yourself unavailable), I drift as if by magic into "the zone." Very often I find that an hour and a half have gone by without noticing it, and I get much more done that I thought possible.

      The trick is to start off with something very easy, something that doesn't even feel like work, or like it requires any effort. If you can start with something very untaxing, the mind kind of wanders in to the main task...

      Oh, and the doctor has been giving me all sorts of pills for many years now, too. :-)

      There's a good one for anxiety-type disorders called Hydroxyzine. It's actually an antihistamine. I don't have to take it very often.

    2. Re:Mind Wandering...Sorry what were we discussing by gpronger · · Score: 1

      Sure, but if you're 57, how do you differentiate between my current and traditional thought process and the onset of senility???

    3. Re:Mind Wandering...Sorry what were we discussing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in my early 30s but I can definitely relate. Sometimes the ease in works best for me, sometimes it's just go do whatever is distracting me (visit the bank, hit the grocery store) then jump in. It's kinda like getting into a cold lake, sometimes easing in works sometimes you have walk around and get up the nerve to jump in. Once I'm in the zone watch out. I'll work 12 hours no problem and do it again the next day. The thing is I work for myself, so I can work whatever hours I want. I need the flexibility to start when I want and take breaks whenever I want. If I can only concentrate 6 hours one day, so be it. I get paid hourly, so clients love it if I can get more done in less hours total (depending on deadlines). I give my contractor the same flexibility. In 15hrs he gets more done than most office workers I've seen do in 40. We work independently (just msg online) and meet up for coffee or beer if we need to discuss something. It's the best, most relaxed and yet most productive I've ever been and as I hire more resources I hope to keep it that way.

      As others have mentioned, when I'm stuck showers help. Showers are therapeutic. I also like to get out to the beach (secluded, west coast Canada) or camping (as secluded and quiet as possible (which luckily is close).

    4. Re:Mind Wandering...Sorry what were we discussing by turgid · · Score: 1

      If you've been doing it all your life, it's not senility! :-)

      I find that my memory recall has been getting steadily worse as I get older, for example, not being able to think of words in the middle of sentences, forgetting what things are called, mixing things up etc.

      However, my ability to solve problems seems to have improved.

      I get a lot more done, but I get very tired more often. The more tired I am, the more muddles up I get...

      Actually, it was when I was about 14 or 15 years old that I noticed I was muddling things up. I am/was very good at maths, but I started to write numbers down in the wrong order, and there are many words I can't spell no matter how hard I try to learn them. When I'm tired, it's worse.

      The other trick I learned is to write down all my crazy, distracting but cool and exciting ideas in a note book or on post-it notes to free up my mind to get back to the job I'm supposed to be concentrating on.

      Text files, sed, grep and vi are very helpful too.

    5. Re:Mind Wandering...Sorry what were we discussing by gpronger · · Score: 1

      A number of years ago, I was out to dinner with a few friends and the girl who's now my wife (proof that women will marry nearly regardless of the underlying issues); I have no idea what I had said back then, but they looked at one another with the comment "if he were to go insane, how'd we know?" Sounds like you're in the same category. If you're familiar with Hitchhiker's Guide and the other books of the trilogy, I always felt close to Zaphod from the stand-point of his "nudgings" from his subconscious. I've been considered intelligent by some, but mostly I listen to whatever my subconscious tells me. Once in a while, I can puzzle it out after-the-fact, but I learned a long time ago, my subconscious had a lot more going for it than my conscious mind. Faced with a problem, my best course of action is to go away and get distracted for a while. The answer would "appear". I suspect this would worry some folks, but if that's been how it always has been, you learn to go with the flow.

      I've never been good at linear thinking, as you describe. Back when I was writing things out in school with pen or pencil on paper, it would quickly turn into a puzzle with inserted words, and sentences, side thoughts scribbled in the margins, etc. The advent of word processing (yes, I predate that indispensable tool of the computer age) was a monumental break-through. Though there was a lot of editing to get a thought down straight, at least I could simply stick the word or phrase where it needed to go. Before that it was note cards. Start writing sentence by sentence, and then move them around. And then onto a final copy (similar to your trick with post-its).

      Greg

  30. Didn't benefit me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I was in college during exams, I sometimes encountered an "unsolvable" problem. There was tremendous emotional pressure as the time slowly ran out. I would try to overpower my way to a solution by forcing my brain to hammer at the problem. Usually this was to no avail.

    Then after handing in the exam and walking back to my dorm the pressure was off, and suddenly the solution would come to me in a flash. Either I knew the solution or I knew how to solve the problem.

    If only there was a way to get into this psychological state under pressure. That is what elite athletes mean when they say they are in the "zone".

  31. I can vouch for that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I solve most of my problems by shitting, sleeping, or day dreaming about the hot chick who sits next to me in Engineering Physics.

  32. The demise of science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How quickly this thread took a nose-dive: to drugs. Drug use is just an experience, is not inspiration in and of itself, and rarely leads to creativity (especially marijuana-- sorry, we've seen the effects, let's not have it again).

    Creativity is more likely to occur by standing on one's own head, going for a long directionless walk, meeting new people and having random sex. Creativity is brought on by motion and a hidden, held tightly, seed.

    Poets, artists, writers, and musicians have long understood this yet scientists have not.

    I ask you, why is that scientists these days are merely scholars-- chuck-full of facts and logic with no vision, insight, inspirational, or life experience to derive from. TFA is just this.

    1. Re:The demise of science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, /. is the new reddit.

  33. I learned this a long time ago by redneckmother · · Score: 1

    This phenomenon was discussed in Robert Pirsig's classic novel Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance many years ago.

  34. Re:recipe for creativity by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    I'll reply to you since the top third of this story was all about drugs. Let's go back to fairly basic Psychology.

    Problem Arises.
    The reason it's a Problem(Capital P) is that there's no 8-minute fix.

    Dumb/Boring Managers like A-B-C-D work. It looks good on Activty Reports and Time Cards and Metrics and so on.

    Good Managers realize that Problem is not solved by screaming at your Go To Guy. So *IF* you trust your Go To Guy that he's not a lazy oaf, you have to be ready for some Non-Linear Chaos. And I mean Chaos. And there's 11 TV shows acting out the Chaos! Monk, House, Psych, your choice of 8.

    Dumb/Boring Managers like steps they can follow - while simultaneously NOT fixing the Problem. They just want to yell at people until it's solved.

    Smart managers give their Go To Guys three hours and see what shows up. It's not their concern (if they are smart!) if the steps from Problem to Solution contain the following steps: Sheep, Sheep Wool, Biogenetic Effects on Sheep Wool, Plant Color, Bio Effect on Plant Color, Workers as Plants, Worker Morale like Plant Color, Effects that affect Worker Morale, Hidden Conditions of Worker Productivity, and Voila!

    "Start a 3 month program with a 2-tier priority list and work on non-essential update technology in between crises".

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  35. Re: Or dreams by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    Thank you for posting anonymously.

  36. Mind wandering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am one of the few lucky people with creativity in many areas. Mutiple and inter disciplinary subject learning has helped me to get patterns from different domains and apply them to novel situations. Pattern recognition and pattern matching begin with our survival instinct. Mathematics teaches us to create and use patterns with approximation models . Arithmetic patterns and use of short-hand (reduction) patterns such as, multiplication is shorthand for successive addition, exponentiation is nothing but self multiplication, factorial is decreasing multiplication and so on. Unfortunately our teachers in the US have no clue about all these and just repeat what the text books say. So, while most of us are being creative, we have been converted into test takes and grade grabbers. A few exceptions end up as our inventors producing wealth for the whole world. We are afraid of failure, thus never try. Bill Gate et al., had failure but their creativity continued making tons of money for them. Academic smart, creative smart and street smart are all part of success. We only encourage academic smarts and street smarts who end up killing our economy. Historical patterns are repeating themselves yet our elected official show their ignorance and poor understanding of these historical patterns. Roman empire was destroyed by arrogant Romans and the arrogant GOPs are repeating the same patterns of destruction of our American dreams and economy. Where is the creativity?

  37. No thinking required by Capsaicin · · Score: 0

    [H]ow do you get "respond with violence"

    Oh simple. The Libertarian fundies regard all state action as violence since, following their unacknowledged philosophical mentor, Mao Tse Tung, they believe that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." :p

    I think this is how libertarians get their reputation as being a little bit goofy.

    This is surely not the sole source of their goofyness?

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    1. Re:No thinking required by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The Libertarian fundies regard all state action as violence since, following their unacknowledged philosophical mentor, Mao Tse Tung

      WTF? Shit, I've either been feeding a troll or you're clueless about history. Mao Tse Tung was about as far from a libertarian as one could possibly get.

    2. Re:No thinking required by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Mao Tse Tung was about as far from a libertarian as one could possibly get.

      I think he's talking about what's passing for "libertarian" in the US, today.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:No thinking required by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      WTF? Shit, I've either been feeding a troll or you're clueless about history. Mao Tse Tung was about as far from a libertarian as one could possibly get.

      That's what the poking tongue smiley was doing there (I don't know how to do a tongue-in-cheek smiley), I simply pointing out the delicious irony. If that fits your definition of a troll, then troll I am. And no, I'm anything but clueless about history. Of course a naive libertarian (if I may use that term) might simply observe that Mao is honestly laying bare the true nature of the state. And I wonder if the prominence of this quote in years gone by may not have in some way influenced the tendency among the more extreme of contemporary libertarians, such as AC above, to see absolutely all actions of the state as an expression of violence.

      C'mon, what AC wrote on his blog really made no sense at all, unless you remembered that they literally do believe that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Coming to "see the wisdom" of requiring helmets and goggles is violence!?

      The reason I wrote "Libertarian fundies" (or "naive libertarianism" above) was not merely to be derogatory, but to distinguish myself. As you would know (if you followed that link) I do endorse what I called the "libertarian imperative," my own ethics are based in part on respecting the dignity of the individual human being (and liberty is a requirement for such dignity), even if this has led me to consider the problematic cases under which freedom might to some extent be curtailed.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    4. Re:No thinking required by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Ah, I simply misunderstood. Thank you.

    5. Re:No thinking required by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      And look mate, if I personally insulted you (say with my quip about what is pathetic in older men), I apologise. I can be a real arsehole.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
  38. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder by simoncpu+was+here · · Score: 2

    I don't have ADHD, I'm just creative!

  39. Re: Or dreams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have had these also, usually very early REM sleep I wake up and say "Wholly crap that is the Fix!". I found at least for myself that I don't even have to keep a pencil and paper near the bed. These ideas are remembered in the morning, and usually refined while getting ready for work.

    For TFA, I wonder what they did for "mind wandering" activities? They don't mention their specific method, and most that I know of like meditation require training.

    From my experience, meditation--namely insight meditation and Zazen--require more practice and patience than training.

  40. Hammock Driven Development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well between programmers, we call it a Hammock Driven Development http://blip.tv/clojure/hammock-driven-development-4475586

  41. It's good to have proof because... by nashv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Try explaining to your boss or spouse, that the time spent playing a mindless game on the computer is actually an intense mind-wandering session that is going to boost your productivity. Or that you need this time to be your creative best.

    In my experience, few people 'get it'.

    --
    Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
    1. Re:It's good to have proof because... by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why you would marry someone to which you must explain/rationalize your gaming time...

  42. Re:Try not taking them unless you really need them by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

    I agree that if the person can find a way to structure their schooling/life/employment to work well with ADHD, then the meds are unnecessary. As an autistic, I'm very much against using drugs or "therapy" on someone with the goal of making them function like a semi-broken neurologically-typical person -- but sometimes (like for my mom) they're bouncing off the wall and have a minute-long attention span regardless of what they try. :-/ "If you're an artist or creative person you won't need them." Not true at all. People working as writers (as in my case), artists, etc. still need to be able to stay in one place and focus on their task for extended periods, typically in the same Zen-like state someone working on a program has. If they write three sentences or spend five minutes working on an image, then wander off for two hours to do other stuff, then wander back for another few minutes, it won't get done or will be of poor quality, and they won't get paid. Now, if they can find a way to set everything up that's AD[H]D-compatible, then they can probably pull it off, but that applies to programming or just about anything else.

    --
    Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
  43. Re:Try not taking them unless you really need them by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

    Okay, trying that again now that I have it set to Plain Old Text to get paragraph breaks...

    I agree that if the person can find a way to structure their schooling/life/employment to work well with ADHD, then the meds are unnecessary. As an autistic, I'm very much against using drugs or "therapy" on someone with the goal of making them function like a semi-broken neurologically-typical person -- but sometimes (like for my mom) they're bouncing off the wall and have a minute-long attention span regardless of what they try. :-/

    If you're an artist or creative person you won't need them.

    Not true at all. People working as writers (as in my case), artists, etc. still need to be able to stay in one place and focus on their task for extended periods, typically in the same Zen-like state someone working on a program has. If they write three sentences or spend five minutes working on an image, then wander off for two hours to do other stuff, then wander back for another few minutes, it won't get done or will be of poor quality, and they won't get paid. Now, if they can find a way to set everything up that's AD[H]D-compatible, then they can probably pull it off, but that applies to programming or just about anything else.

    --
    Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
  44. Not necessarily (or no more than non-ADHD) by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

    Rewriting since my last one lost its paragraph breaks and got off-topic...

    ADHD isn't a matter of the mind merely wandering, though -- the H means they're too hyperactive to remain still (they have to constantly be in motion of some sort), and the ADD means that they're completely distracted by sensory input and/or their brain leaps from one half-finished thought to the next. It's hard to make use of interesting ideas or solutions if it you're distracted by something else before you record it and/or can't focus long enough to work on it.

    I think it's possible to rearrange one's life so it works well with an ADHD brain, just like I've set mine up to match my autistic brain, and likewise, if we can find a talent that our brain type compliments then we're golden, so to speak -- but that's the reverse of finding a way to make our condition work with the circumstances. That's why disability accommodations exist: so we can work to our full ability without being placed at an artificial disadvantage (i.e. disabled) by the man-made environment/society being sculpted to suit a different kind of brain/body.

    --
    Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
    1. Re:Not necessarily (or no more than non-ADHD) by elucido · · Score: 1

      Rewriting since my last one lost its paragraph breaks and got off-topic...

      ADHD isn't a matter of the mind merely wandering, though -- the H means they're too hyperactive to remain still (they have to constantly be in motion of some sort), and the ADD means that they're completely distracted by sensory input and/or their brain leaps from one half-finished thought to the next. It's hard to make use of interesting ideas or solutions if it you're distracted by something else before you record it and/or can't focus long enough to work on it.

      I think it's possible to rearrange one's life so it works well with an ADHD brain, just like I've set mine up to match my autistic brain, and likewise, if we can find a talent that our brain type compliments then we're golden, so to speak -- but that's the reverse of finding a way to make our condition work with the circumstances. That's why disability accommodations exist: so we can work to our full ability without being placed at an artificial disadvantage (i.e. disabled) by the man-made environment/society being sculpted to suit a different kind of brain/body.

      The first step is to stop viewing it as if ADHD is a problem. Hyper activity may be a problem but that can be fixed by diet as I think giving sugar and caffeine to children is in direct correlation with the explosion of hyperactivity reported.

      I think hyperfocus can be an asset and it all depends on what the focus is on. People with ADD have the hyperfocus ability that people without ADD do not have. This would actually be a feature not a disorder. The man made society didn't even exist prior to 100 or so years ago so ADHD might have been evolutionary and beneficial. If a person is hyper-active then chances are they burned more calories and became more physically fit which would be beneficial in a less sedentary culture. The idea that children would be forced to sit in a classroom for hours a day is relatively new as is the idea that giving children sugar and drugs such as energy drinks is new. This could be the cause of hyperactivity and hyperactivity shouldn't be considered a disorder at all.

      ADD should only be considered a disorder if the child is complaining about their inability to focus. Most of the time the children aren't the ones complaining but the parents and teachers are the ones complaining. The parents and teachers expect the child to have the maturity of little adults, to sit down and basically go to their job every day (school), and soldier it out. Unfortunately the child isn't going to pick that up overnight and no amount of drugging is going to change a childs interests.

      If an individual has ADHD with hyper focus the best way to teach them is to take advantage of their hyper focus capability. If the child is hyper active then more time for exercise isn't actually a bad thing and a lot could be taught during that exercise. Basically there is no logical reason why classes have to be taught in doors, why students have to sit still, etc. You could take an extra couple hours out of the day and let students listen to an MP3 while they burn off the excess sugar, you could go for a walk and discuss certain subjects, you can go for a hike and teach certain things, I don't see why we should blame the kids for not sitting still but then after drugging the kids blame them for obesity.

  45. No distractions from technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember when I was younger we didn't watch a lot of television and we were very creative. We had to come up with ways to entertain ourselves and each other. Sometimes these ideas had practical applications that allowed us to do something easier. Some people who have disorders such as ADHD are very creative and they stay focused on their creative projects until they're done without interruption, their ability to stay focus on just that project is amazing and their attention to other things are more scattered.

  46. Yet another reason by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

    forcing kids to sit at a desk and focus on one thing doesn't work.

  47. Creative writing ... ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    The researchers then set the students a second set of unusual-uses tasks and found those that had ...

    First of all, thousands of apologies for being dense

    Read and re-read TFA multiple times but still couldn't figure out what the fuck is that " unusual-uses tasks " as quoted above

    Anyone cares to elaborate ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !