Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Page Header Logo

Articles

No. 2(11) (2016): Boredom

On Two Concepts of Boredom in the Context of Reflections over Whether Boredom is Creative

  • Monika Chylińska
DOI
https://doi.org/10.51196/srz.11.8
Published
1. 11. 2016

Abstract

This article exposes the specific relations between a situational experience of boredom and states of mind described by the author as being constrained (blocked) or unconstrained (open). Some researchers in the field of boredom say that “boredom is creative” and explain their claim by the neurological fact that a lower degree of arousal of the brain is associated with a widening of the field of attention, and by the disposition of bored individuals to make distant associations. Other people consider that “boredom is creative” because being bored involves the experience of some situational limitations that need to be overcome, thus inspiring (previously) bored people to act creatively. The question that emerges here is the following: Should the mental state connected with being bored be described in categories of the experience of constraint or is it rather related to a sense of openness? Hopefully, an analysis of this particular issue will bring us closer to understanding the essential question of the nature of boredom.

References

  1. Burkus D. 2014. The Creative Benefits of Boredom, „Harvard Business Review”, https://hbr.org/2014/09/the-creative-benefits-of-boredom/; dostęp: 10.07.2015.
  2. Doehlemann M. 1991. Langeveile?: Deutung eines verbreiteten Phanomens, Suhrkamp.
  3. Eastwood J.D. i in. 2012. The Unengaged Mind, „Perspectives on Psychological Science”, nr 7(5), s. 482–495.
  4. Gasper K., Middlewood B.L. 2014. Approaching Novel Thoughts: Understanding Why Elation and Boredom Promote Associative Thought More than Distress and Relaxation, „Journal of Experimental Social Psychology”, nr 52, s. 50–57.
  5. Goetz T. i in. 2014. Types of Boredom: An Experience Sampling Approach, „Motivation and Emotion”, nr 38(3), s. 401–419.
  6. Kolańczyk A. 2011. Uwaga ekstensywna. Model ekstensywności vs. intensywności uwagi, „Studia Psychologiczne”, nr 49(3), s. 7–27.
  7. Mann S., Cadman R. 2014. Does Being Bored Make Us More Creative?, „Creativity Research Journal”, nr 26(2), s. 165–173.
  8. Mednick S.A. 1962. The Associative Basis of the Creative Process, „Psychological Review”, nr 69, s. 220–232.
  9. Nęcka E. 2003. Psychologia twórczości, Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
  10. Nietzsche F. 2003 [1882]. Wiedza radosna, tłum. L. Staff, Zielona Sowa.
  11. Philips A. 1993. On Kissing, Tickling, and Being Bored: Psychoanalytic Essays on the Unexamined Life, Harvard University Press.
  12. Stein M.I. 1953. Creativity and Culture, „Journal of Psychology”, nr 36, s. 311–322.
  13. Svendsen L. 2005. A Philosophy of Boredom, Reaktion Books.
  14. Wemelsfelder F. 1984. Animal Boredom: Is a Scientific Study of the Subjective Experiences of Animals Possible?, [w:] Advances in Animal Welfare Science 1984/85, red. M.W. Fox, L.D. Mickley, The Humane Society of the United States, s. 115–154.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.