Comparative creatology: Meta Analytical Comparative Study of Theories of creativity

Creativity, innovation, intuition, inspiration, composition and such terms are widely used in design and art studies, because, in fact, these words deal with the core of the mental process of creation. However, behind each of these words, is a different semantic and cognitive horizon. Different understandings of creativity lead to different understandings of design and art, while the origin of disagreements is not properly understood. Neglecting the differences of the definitions of creativity results in practical and pedagogical implications. The issue becomes more complicated when we consider that Creativity theories have a dialogue with each other, and, these theories depend on the epistemological structures of their time. Therefore, we have two relationships, the transverse relationship between theories and the longitudinal relationship between theories and structures. hence, we can say that creativity is a meta-concept, i.e., a concept that determine and define the other related concepts in design and arts. The key importance of this meta concept requires these questions to be seriously researched: what is creativity? and what are the differences between the theories of creativity? Therefore, the question of this research is: what are the points of similarity and dissimilarity of theories of creativity? The purpose of this study is to explain and describe the points of similarity and dissimilarity of theories of creativity, identifying the criteria for comparing those points, and finally presenting a classification of creatology theories. In terms of method, this research seeks to compare and contrast the theories related to the recognition of creativity, hence it is a meta-analytical research. Meta-analytical research is a comparative (qualitative case) study. To compare two or more theories (on a subject), the concepts and claims of those theories must be extracted, therefore analytical units have been extracted, using a combined method of Content Analysis and Grounded Theory Method (GTM). By this method, the analytical units extracted from the studied texts (sample size) have been coded (open, axial and selected). Finally, the theories are compared and categorized based on the homogeneity and heterogeneity of the categories. Sample size: The subject of creativity is researched and studied in various scientific fields with different discourses, concepts and words (Some domains directly deal with this issue and some indirectly and almost these domains do not reference to each other). As a result of the great diversity of fields and theories, it is very difficult to determine a sample size for a comparative study. Therefore, in this study, no attempt has been made to list all theories and compare and contrast all of them. Instead, (for better research efficiency) the sample size is limited to common theories in scientific and academic societies of design and art in Iran. Each of these theories represents a range of similar theories. These representatives are: theories of mythology, philosophy, Islamic theology, person-centered studies, context-based studies, literary criticism and the psychology of creativity. The domain of comparing for these theories is limited to their concepts about creativity. Steps of research: Six steps have been taken to answer the questions. First, a sample volume of theories related to creativity is prepared. In the second step, this sample has been studied.  In the third step, the analytical units are extracted from the targeted sources and open coding is performed. In the fourth step, axial and selective coding is done. In the fifth step, codes of the same categories (from different theories) are compared and contrasted. And finally, based on these findings, the theoretical farms of theories have been determined. The results of this study show that theories of creativity can be classified into three categories: The category of creativity as inspiration or imitation: The focus of these theories is "inspiration". They consider the source of creativity to be superhuman resources. Therefore, they explain how it works through the mechanism of inspiration or grace. This approach found a philosophical mechanism in the time of Socrates and Plato, and developed around concepts such as idea, imitation, fantasia, and techne. Plato's theories about the imitative arts fall into this category because they also see the source of creativity (the product of imagination) as a superhuman source. The category of creativity as genius or unconsciousness: The framework of these theories is organized around the concepts of unconsciousness and instinct. This category includes two seemingly different tendencies, romanticism and the theories of psychoanalysis. In the romantic view, creativity is something that originates from the rich genius and subconscious of the artist. This happens in a fraction of the time and quite suddenly and involuntarily. These ideas have been prevalent in European culture since the Renaissance. The peak of these ideas was in the early nineteenth century. In the school of Romantic philosophy, an attempt was made to establish acceptable theoretical and philosophical foundations for these theories. This view was quite common in the era of modern art and design. In other words, although modernists rejected the romanticism, they defined the author and the process of creation in the same way. From the late nineteenth century, Freud's theories promoted another definition of creativity, according to which creativity is not the product of genius but the product of frustrated complexities and their sublime process. It seems that This view is fundamentally different from the romantic view, but in fact they are not much different from each other because Both see the source of creativity in the subconscious of the artist and believe that only certain human beings (genius or patient) can perform creative action. The category of creativity as a mental action: In various fields related to the subject of creativity, theories are prevalent that are independent of each other in terms of subject and discourse (Such as the psychology of creativity, the theory of TRIZ, intertextuality, the image family theory, and even cognitive archeology). But they all define creativity with the same approach and framework. They define creativity as a mental and cognitive process. A process that has stages and levels. This theoretical framework shows creativity as a new arrangement of mental precedents, subject to mental functions and external stimuli. These theories consider creativity along previous perceptions (common sense, phenomena, texts, experiences) as well as contextual stimuli (cultural, social, historical, geographical, etc.). The theories of the first group in the form of the school of traditionalism and Islamic art wisdom, the second group in the form of psychoanalytic criticism as well as general notions of romanticism and the third group, more with the theory of intertextuality, are prevalent in Iran. This research shows that some schools have produced theories in more than one paradigm. The main finding of this research is to identify the new paradigm framework that has been formed by various theories. Theories that are often unaware of each other and they use different Terms, but have a similar description of the subject.