4 ms·

Ask HN: How do i become inventive?

4 points by 8sigma 11y ago

If "inventiveness" can be described as a skill,how can anyone acquire it?

orionblastar 11y ago
Develop your imagination and learn how to find solutions to problems. Then figure out how to make those solutions real and workable. Break each detail down into a list of things you need to write code for in order to solve them one by one. Then build data structures and a database behind them. Build algorithms to solve them and make it into a program you can market and sell.
SCAQTony 11y ago
Build upon an existing or your very own idea but don't make it a one-off. explore at least a dozen different ways to make it better. Artist Winslow Homer would do sketch after sketch, study after study, before he did his final "one-off" masterpiece. Keep improving the idea. It is astonishing what serendipity that can occur. Here is a visual example: Andy Warhol's skulls: https://www.google.com/search?q=warhol+skull+collection&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIkamXmYjLAhVHRyYKHW9nCpUQsAQIJw&biw=1163&bih=631 https://www.google.com/search?q=warhol+skull+collection&tbm=...
- vitovito 11y ago
  This is a pretty good answer! For another example, in information architecture, one way to do that is according to LATCH, which I've previously written about here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1554237 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1554237 Another exercise is what I call "counterparts," what are all the ways other industries, other organizations, other people have solved this problem? And not just the problem as-is, but, when you simplify or abstract the problem, or you turn it into a process, or you approximate it into steps, how do those solutions go? Following a recipe in a cookbook feels very different from stepping through a software installation wizard, and yet they are both guiding us through a process. Take the time to actually explore the entire possibility space. You can't get to the really crazy, novel solutions until you've thought through all the obvious ones. "If you didn't have to build it" and "if money and physics were no object" are valuable constraints. Finally, spend your "inventive" energy where it matters, and don't value inventiveness for inventiveness' sake. Design has to serve masters: users, and business goals, and success metrics. If you're not testing your creative solutions against those and proving their value, then your "inventive" solution isn't any better than anyone else's "obvious" solution. An "obvious" solution that's cribbed from another industry but that tests out as a viable solution is way better than something super original that you have no idea how it's going to perform.
sklogic 11y ago
Not necessarily a "skill": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ
volaski 11y ago
While some of the approaches mentioned below do work to some extent (TRIZ, etc.), they won't really make you "inventive". Personally I think they're all gimmicks (although to be fair they are gimmicks that work). I think what you really want is to "become" an inventive person instead of trying to force invent stuff. Read this book for starters: http://www.amazon.com/Where-Good-Ideas-Come-From/dp/1594485380 http://www.amazon.com/Where-Good-Ideas-Come-From/dp/15944853...
- sklogic 11y ago
  TRIZ was not the only Altshuller invention. He was mostly interested in how exactly to develop a creativity trait, and came up with something called a "Theory of a Creative Personality Development", a further generalisation of TRIZ. There are some anecdotal confirmations from various schools across the former USSR that this approach is known to produce some stable results. So at least it worth looking into.
  - volaski 11y ago
    As i mentioned it does work. And it is a good guideline to look at when you're stuck. But it's not the fundamental solution. TRIZ teaches you to emulate creativity. The whole idea is "how can an even ordinary person come up with creative ideas?" My point was that's all fine and it's good to learn that skill, but it would be better if you shoot for actually "becoming a creative person" instead of "ordinary person coming up with creative ideas". I suggested that book above because I found it helpful from that point of view.
    - sklogic 11y ago
      I suspect, there is no such a thing as an inherently "creative" person. I very closely followed the biographies of many of the greatest minds, and I'm yet to see a compelling evidence that creativity is some kind of a special trait which cannot be acquired. There are just people who somehow know the creativity tricks (either deliberately learned or randomly discovered), and the "ordinary" people who happen to have a little gap in their education. Learning the formal approaches to creativity could help to close this gap.
hanniabu 11y ago
I'd say by broadening your interdisciplinary skills and life experiences. From first hand and what I've read others claim, these 2 things are key. Without a wide range of experience and knowledge it's still possible, but more of an innate skill. These characteristics allow you to pull different parts of knowledge and experience and combine, mix and match, and adult them to the real world.

4 points by 8sigma 11y ago

If "inventiveness" can be described as a skill,how can anyone acquire it?

Develop your imagination and learn how to find solutions to problems. Then figure out how to make those solutions real and workable. Break each detail down into a list of things you need to write code for in order to solve them one by one. Then build data structures and a database behind them. Build algorithms to solve them and make it into a program you can market and sell.

SCAQTony 11y ago

Build upon an existing or your very own idea but don't make it a one-off. explore at least a dozen different ways to make it better. Artist Winslow Homer would do sketch after sketch, study after study, before he did his final "one-off" masterpiece. Keep improving the idea. It is astonishing what serendipity that can occur. Here is a visual example: Andy Warhol's skulls: https://www.google.com/search?q=warhol+skull+collection&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIkamXmYjLAhVHRyYKHW9nCpUQsAQIJw&biw=1163&bih=631 https://www.google.com/search?q=warhol+skull+collection&tbm=...

vitovito 11y ago
This is a pretty good answer! For another example, in information architecture, one way to do that is according to LATCH, which I've previously written about here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1554237 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1554237 Another exercise is what I call "counterparts," what are all the ways other industries, other organizations, other people have solved this problem? And not just the problem as-is, but, when you simplify or abstract the problem, or you turn it into a process, or you approximate it into steps, how do those solutions go? Following a recipe in a cookbook feels very different from stepping through a software installation wizard, and yet they are both guiding us through a process. Take the time to actually explore the entire possibility space. You can't get to the really crazy, novel solutions until you've thought through all the obvious ones. "If you didn't have to build it" and "if money and physics were no object" are valuable constraints. Finally, spend your "inventive" energy where it matters, and don't value inventiveness for inventiveness' sake. Design has to serve masters: users, and business goals, and success metrics. If you're not testing your creative solutions against those and proving their value, then your "inventive" solution isn't any better than anyone else's "obvious" solution. An "obvious" solution that's cribbed from another industry but that tests out as a viable solution is way better than something super original that you have no idea how it's going to perform.

sklogic 11y ago

Not necessarily a "skill": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ

volaski 11y ago

While some of the approaches mentioned below do work to some extent (TRIZ, etc.), they won't really make you "inventive". Personally I think they're all gimmicks (although to be fair they are gimmicks that work). I think what you really want is to "become" an inventive person instead of trying to force invent stuff. Read this book for starters: http://www.amazon.com/Where-Good-Ideas-Come-From/dp/1594485380 http://www.amazon.com/Where-Good-Ideas-Come-From/dp/15944853...

sklogic 11y ago
TRIZ was not the only Altshuller invention. He was mostly interested in how exactly to develop a creativity trait, and came up with something called a "Theory of a Creative Personality Development", a further generalisation of TRIZ. There are some anecdotal confirmations from various schools across the former USSR that this approach is known to produce some stable results. So at least it worth looking into.
- volaski 11y ago
  As i mentioned it does work. And it is a good guideline to look at when you're stuck. But it's not the fundamental solution. TRIZ teaches you to emulate creativity. The whole idea is "how can an even ordinary person come up with creative ideas?" My point was that's all fine and it's good to learn that skill, but it would be better if you shoot for actually "becoming a creative person" instead of "ordinary person coming up with creative ideas". I suggested that book above because I found it helpful from that point of view.
  - sklogic 11y ago
    I suspect, there is no such a thing as an inherently "creative" person. I very closely followed the biographies of many of the greatest minds, and I'm yet to see a compelling evidence that creativity is some kind of a special trait which cannot be acquired. There are just people who somehow know the creativity tricks (either deliberately learned or randomly discovered), and the "ordinary" people who happen to have a little gap in their education. Learning the formal approaches to creativity could help to close this gap.

hanniabu 11y ago

I'd say by broadening your interdisciplinary skills and life experiences. From first hand and what I've read others claim, these 2 things are key. Without a wide range of experience and knowledge it's still possible, but more of an innate skill. These characteristics allow you to pull different parts of knowledge and experience and combine, mix and match, and adult them to the real world.