We're more familiar with drew, but apparently drawed is a thing. [0]
On another note: who claimed that 10,000 hours of practice leads to creativity? The author says that
>This wealth of research on creativity contradicts the notion that deliberate practice is the sole-- or even the most important-- aspect of creativity.
but this is the first time I've heard of anyone having this idea.
Later down the piece we see
>I have immense respect for Ericsson's body of work on deliberate practice, and do believe that deliberate practice can help you get better in virtually any skill. However, I also believe that an accurate understanding of creativity is important for how we recognize, nurture, value, and ultimately, reward it, across all sectors of society.
But again, it doesn't seem like the author is disagreeing with Ericsson. Am I missing something, is there something in Ericsson's book that would make it clear that Kaufman is not simply attacking a straw-man? Maybe it is from Gladwell using creative people and groups as examples in Outliers?
Yeah, it's Gladwell's conflation, I think. (And the writer's conflation of Gladwell's assertions with Ericsson's.)
If you're interested in this type of thing, I'd recommend ":59 Seconds" for a somewhat more down-to-earth and research-based approach. Amongst many of the more interesting findings is that just having actual physical plants around[1] helps improve creativity and that brainstorming in groups (as opposed to separately and then comparing results later) is counterproductive.
(Of course that's also provisional, so some of the research referenced therein may have been refuted, so... Such is that Way of Science.)
[1] Interestingly, pictures of plants/nature don't work.
On another note: who claimed that 10,000 hours of practice leads to creativity? The author says that
>This wealth of research on creativity contradicts the notion that deliberate practice is the sole-- or even the most important-- aspect of creativity.
but this is the first time I've heard of anyone having this idea.
Later down the piece we see
>I have immense respect for Ericsson's body of work on deliberate practice, and do believe that deliberate practice can help you get better in virtually any skill. However, I also believe that an accurate understanding of creativity is important for how we recognize, nurture, value, and ultimately, reward it, across all sectors of society.
But again, it doesn't seem like the author is disagreeing with Ericsson. Am I missing something, is there something in Ericsson's book that would make it clear that Kaufman is not simply attacking a straw-man? Maybe it is from Gladwell using creative people and groups as examples in Outliers?
[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/drawed