The Making of Culture and Creative Politics
![Picture](/uploads/1/0/0/7/10077573/2551727.jpg)
It is not enough to describe a problem-solving process and to describe how individuals differ in their approach to or use of it. It is also necessary to identify specific techniques of attending to individual differences.
Fortunately, a variety of problem-solving techniques have been identified to accommodate individual preferences.
Some of these techniques are oriented more to individuals searching for problem solving scientifically and is future oriented and for the ones that are oriented to reality in an organized manner, strives to be socially useful, and performs traditional duties within a structured framework.
Some individuals are likely to be interested in the laws or principles governing a situation and tend to overlook important facts and details and need help considering the impact of solutions on people. Other individuals strive to be socially useful, and perform traditional duties within a structured framework. They can be detail conscious, able to anticipate outcomes, and prefer evolutionary rather than revolutionary change; often need help in categorizing details into meaningful patterns and generating creative, non-standard alternatives.
Problem solving needs to focus on the two distinct types of knowledge: the knowledge that includes facts, concepts, and principles; in other words, the “know what.”
The other type of knowledge involves the structure they provide. I personally think that the problem-solving techniques are most powerful when combined to activate both the logical/rational and intuitive/creative parts of the brain. I believe that when individuals use exclusively either reflection or inspiration during problem solving, they tend to be less successful than if they use a moderate amount of both processes. Although some tasks draw on skills that fall within particular domains, many, if not most tasks and activities involve the coordination of different conceptual domains in development. One particularly good example of the coordination of multiple domains involves the development of moral judgment.
All domains of knowledge have their own sets of practitioners, infrastructures, bodies of legitimated information, and arrangements of capital, epistemologies and politics. For example, when it comes to practitioners, members of scientific communities are more likely to be elite, white, Western and/or male (or there would be little need for special programs to attract women and minorities into science). Members of religious communities are more likely to be non-elite, non-white, non-Western and/or female (the themes of spirituality, other ways of knowing, etc.). New technologies associated with globalization mean that producers and consumers of popular culture theoretically may be of all genders, races, ethnicities, sexualities and citizenship categories; yet those who are young, affluent and/or Western remain at the center. Moreover, science, religion and popular culture are not only grounded in distinctive material practices that construct their own practices; because they are arrayed in hierarchical fashion, these three areas of knowledge influence one another. Many of the intellectual controversies associated with postmodernity involve struggles for legitimation waged by advocates for science, religion and popular culture.
“Power and knowledge directly imply one another… There is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relation.” -- Michel Foucault
Fortunately, a variety of problem-solving techniques have been identified to accommodate individual preferences.
Some of these techniques are oriented more to individuals searching for problem solving scientifically and is future oriented and for the ones that are oriented to reality in an organized manner, strives to be socially useful, and performs traditional duties within a structured framework.
Some individuals are likely to be interested in the laws or principles governing a situation and tend to overlook important facts and details and need help considering the impact of solutions on people. Other individuals strive to be socially useful, and perform traditional duties within a structured framework. They can be detail conscious, able to anticipate outcomes, and prefer evolutionary rather than revolutionary change; often need help in categorizing details into meaningful patterns and generating creative, non-standard alternatives.
Problem solving needs to focus on the two distinct types of knowledge: the knowledge that includes facts, concepts, and principles; in other words, the “know what.”
The other type of knowledge involves the structure they provide. I personally think that the problem-solving techniques are most powerful when combined to activate both the logical/rational and intuitive/creative parts of the brain. I believe that when individuals use exclusively either reflection or inspiration during problem solving, they tend to be less successful than if they use a moderate amount of both processes. Although some tasks draw on skills that fall within particular domains, many, if not most tasks and activities involve the coordination of different conceptual domains in development. One particularly good example of the coordination of multiple domains involves the development of moral judgment.
All domains of knowledge have their own sets of practitioners, infrastructures, bodies of legitimated information, and arrangements of capital, epistemologies and politics. For example, when it comes to practitioners, members of scientific communities are more likely to be elite, white, Western and/or male (or there would be little need for special programs to attract women and minorities into science). Members of religious communities are more likely to be non-elite, non-white, non-Western and/or female (the themes of spirituality, other ways of knowing, etc.). New technologies associated with globalization mean that producers and consumers of popular culture theoretically may be of all genders, races, ethnicities, sexualities and citizenship categories; yet those who are young, affluent and/or Western remain at the center. Moreover, science, religion and popular culture are not only grounded in distinctive material practices that construct their own practices; because they are arrayed in hierarchical fashion, these three areas of knowledge influence one another. Many of the intellectual controversies associated with postmodernity involve struggles for legitimation waged by advocates for science, religion and popular culture.
“Power and knowledge directly imply one another… There is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relation.” -- Michel Foucault