Mind set and tunnel vision is something we all fall into in one way or another. It is inevitable because of how mind works. Challenging our existing mind set is what allows for the breakthroughs and subsequent advances.
The question which arises is, “How do we challenge our mind set and is there one way that is better than another?”
One many not be able to say that one way of challenging mind set is better than another. However, the experiences of Twentieth Century physicists Neils Bohr and Albert Einstein provide a way to challenge mind set that provided to be revolutionary in their impacts. Although both these physicist were working in related areas of physics and what they did applied to different phenomenon, their approach was essentially the same.
Relative to our inherent creativity and what is available to us, in
many ways the mind set we have about our creative power and ability is
not unlike the mind set the physic community faced at the beginning of
the Twentieth Century. Physicist had their ideas and models about how
Nature worked. Many of those ideas continued to be pushed even when
they were obviously failing to predict the way Nature worked. Both
Bohr and Einstein found ways to step out and break that mind set.
We are faced today with a mind set about the nature of the internal and external reality we experience and the inner and outer creative power/Creative Power accessible to us. This mind set that exists today about our creativity is, in someways, much like the mind set that physicists faced relative to uncovering the physics of Nature. The mind set physicist had at this time prevented them from moving forward in unraveling the mysteries of the universe.
The problem the early Twentieth Century physicists faced was that the particular view or explanation of Nature held at that time worked well to explain many phenomena. But some phenomena just could not effectively be explained with the view the physicists held. Many physicist were very attached to the successes of their past scientific studies and were unwilling to give up the models and perceptions of reality that seemed to work so well - in some cases. These physicists seemed to be more intent on fixing and patching that which wasn’t working rather than finding a more coherent model and explanation for how the universe worked.
This is understandable because so many individuals had made a reputation on the past and had spent enormous amounts of their time and effort working with the models of the past. It is hard to give up to what we have become attached. This fact may be one reason why so many great discoveries and bold breakthroughs seem to be made in the early years of a career, before one become “set” in their ways and thinking.
Two particular individuals who caused a profound shift in the mind set of physicists in the early twentieth century were Neils Bohr (1885-1962) and Albert Einstein (1879-1955).
What is particularly intriguing about their stories for studying creativity is
- how much their approach is valid and applicable to the mind set we
have developed about looking into our internal subjective reality,
- and how our internal world relates to our external world. Their
approach help to address what interferes with what we need to
understand to release our unlimited creativity.
The work and impact of Bohr and Einstein is important for creativity
is was not only what, but how, they came to their ideas that
transformed the world of physics.
It was through their efforts that physicists broke free of their mind set, their old way of thinking, and launched a new era of understanding that revolutionized the world.
The same impact is possible for our creativity. The ideas presented
here allow us to break free of our current mind set about the nature
of reality and what it means to be human based so much in the past.
It allows us to embrace a new understanding of what it means to access
our unlimited creativity to create the reality of our choice.
The approach taken by Neils Bohr and Albert Einstein are discussed for two reasons.
- The first is that they challenged the existing mind set of physics by
stepping outside the then current thinking and way the world was
being viewed. That is they “stepped out of mind.” The stepped out of
the mind that physicists were using to explain the physics of nature.
In this regard, both used similar approaches in that each challenged
the existing mind set of physics at the time and from that
perspective an example of either one or the other would suffice.
However, each made a particular contribution to physics that is key
to the understanding creativity and our creative powers.
- It is their individual contributions that give us the second reason
for look at each of their approaches.
In the Bohr’s approach, the important point is that he looked to
nature itself to lead that way and provide the understanding. The
approach presented in the Releasing Your Unlimited Creativity material
is an approach analogous to that which Bohr employed. Because energy
and consciousness are seen as equivalent, nature, and the world of
energy, can provide many of the analogies necessary to understand how
to access and release our unlimited creativity. The reason for this is
that all of nature and all that we experience as energy or energy
based, is just an expression of consciousness.
In Einstein’s case, he did not look to nature for the answers. Rather,
he made postulates about nature that could explain the phenomena that
he experiences. He then look for experiment to verify that his
assumptions were indeed correct. For our purpose, it is the
assumptions he makes about the nature of light and energy that is
important to our discussion on creativity. Again, because energy and
consciousness are one and the same, we can apply the same assumptions
he made about energy in a new way expanding them to consciousness.
As for escaping mind set and tunnel vision, the key is to be will be willing to step out of mind and what we think and believe to both look
to nature as to how creation/Creation works and be willing to make
assumptions and then test the truth of those assumptions. If the
assumptions are valid, use them and allow effectiveness to be their
measure of truth.