This or That? | A homeostatic approach to success

One central theme in teaching biology is the concept of homeostasis, that is, a natural balance between two ends. It’s our body’s physiological process to keep us stable in response to the dynamic environments we exist in. If we get hot, we sweat and cool down; if we get cold, we shiver and warm-up. However, our bodies must also be able to present feedback to itself to know when to turn on and shut off each mechanism. Afterall, we don’t want to sweat or shiver forever. Therefore, it’s not necessarily our ability to perform each action but the knowing of the when and why. I think this balance is present all around us in just about everything we hear, see, and do. Anytime I reflect on something I keep coming back to this same concept of a homeostatic stability. Should we be ‘this’ or ‘that’? Well, both, but we need to know when to turn off ‘this’ and turn on ‘that’ and so on.

For coaches, from a schematic perspective, should we focus on offense or defense? Should we work on skill or strength? I think any good coach would tell you we need to be able to do both, maybe not in a 50/50 split but certainly not 100/0. We can score at will but we need to be able to get some stops. We may have a ton of agility or feel but we can’t afford to simply get pushed around. This is sort of the coaching equivalent of not placing all your eggs in one basket. The difficulty is then figuring out how to divide up the time and task for each priority. But then again, can you have too many priorities? (I’d argue yes - if you emphasize everything, you emphasize nothing). So again, where’s the balance? 

I recently came across a section on “Antithetical Traits” in Mihaly’s Csikszentmihalyi’s Book Creativity. His aim in this book is to pinpoint what makes a creative person, well, creative. Are there traits, environments, or other reasons why someone shows more creativity than others, and why does that make them successful in their particular “domain” or “field” as he calls them? I will contend that these traits of creativity are what many would consider the traits of success in any given field. There are creative writers, artists, physicists, physicians, coders, maintenance workers, chefs, teachers, coaches, and so on. It is therefore my assumption moving forward that the creative traits discussed can simply be substituted for “successful” ones. 

Mihaly’s argument is that creatives are “complex” and their creativity is a byproduct of this complexity. He argues that these traits are present in all of us but the most creative (most successful) are the ones that don’t show these traits in segregation, rather in a “multitude”. While most people exhibit traits on one end of the dialectic pole, the creatives are able to show one extreme or the other at different times or even both on a spectrum at the same time depending on what the situation calls for. Their repertoire for how they respond to dynamic ecological environments is essentially doubled from those that are less creative or capable of such adapatilty. 

Should a person be outgoing or reserved? Aggressive or cooperative? Humble or proud? Just thinking very quickly on these binary choices you can see where each person exhibiting one extreme or the other can be successful given the proper environmental conditions, yet would just as easily (if not more so) fail in the opposite. Their ability to shine may be there on one hand but the utter lack of adaptability would be easily exposed in an instant. Swiss psychologist Carl Jung calls this ability to adapt and show capabilities along both poles as a “mature personality”. You may call this person someone who is emotionally intelligent, disciplined, or adaptive. Regardless of the nomenclature, what we see is laws of nature at play.

Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection (i.e. survival of the fittest) is an easy corollary. Evolution is not fixed. Just because one species is suited for an environment now doesn’t mean they will be forever when change inevitably comes. Entropy of a system is constant and always in play. Their choices? Adapt or die. The key is knowing when to stay put and when to change. The laws of nature are alive and well even in our own comfortable social environments and it’s my belief we should draw more from what we already have seen and known for billions of years. Why not use this homeostatic developmental model to our advantage? What are the traits we need to actively be working on? If we borrow from Carol Dweck and assume we are not all born with fixed mindsets, rather each of us are equipped with the capability of growth and improvement we then can treat each of these traits as skills. Skills that can be developed, just as we would any other in our skill development programs. Why can’t we improve at either end of the spectrum, expand our range of responses, and equip ourselves with a better chance of survival? 

In the remaining sections of the article I will give a brief overview of the ten “Antithetical Traits” that Mihaly recognizes and how each polar extreme can be responsible for certain creativity or success. Keep in mind this list does not imply these are the only traits that exist. You could easily argue there are others or that one of these shouldn’t be on the list at all. The important point to keep in mind as you read through each pair is that these traits are usually difficult to find in the same individual. For any successful creative it will take both the ability to have a deep understanding of their domain yet at the same time have the willingness and ability to stretch beyond what they already know, think of something in a different light, or question what they know all together. One final point: this does not mean that if we focus on both ends we are being half-hearted, non-committal, or simply trying to be average at two things. Rather, these successful creatives know and understand what both extremes look and feel like, they have experience at both ends, and then are able to navigate the in-between, as Jung might say, in “mature” fashion. 

Antithetical Traits - The Paradox of Creativity

#1 - Physical Energy vs Rest
-Creatives work long hours with great concentration, yet seem to always be fresh and enthusiastic 
-This energy is internally generated, rather than some genetic super power
-Their ability to take rests and understand when to conserve energy illustrates a power to control their own energy
-The energy is never seen as hyperactive or constantly churning 
-The rhythm of activity followed by reflection or rest flows after benign learned through trial and error 

#2 - Smart vs Naive 
-How important is being “smart” when it comes to creativity? 
-Important perhaps, but only up to a point
-In terms of IQ having a higher one (to a point) is most likely better than a lower one
-But having a super high IQ doesn’t guarantee anything
-Another way of viewing these traits would be wisdom vs childishness 
-“Too much smarts” may inhibit creativity- those that think they know it all or fail to question things and see them in an original or novel way 
-Finally, viewing things as divergent or convergent
-It’s one thing to come up with a bunch of great new ideas but you must also be able to pick -out the “right” ones that are worth pursuing 

#3 - Playfulness vs Discipline 
-(Also described as responsibility & irresponsibility)
-It’s takes a certain light, playful, carefree & almost joking attitude to come up with ideas as a creative 
-In order to explore you have to let go in a sense and be able to let your guard down 
-However, once the idea comes to light it’s just that, an idea, until hard, disciplined work puts it into action & to endure and persevere until it is complete 
-One must have the actual means, materials, skills, etc to make the idea come to life 
-That can not occur with discipline & responsibility 
-David Riesman refers to it as “detached attachment”

#4 - Fantasy vs Reality
-Creativity takes those with strong imaginations that envision new worlds that have yet to be invented however that fantasy is still rooted in reality 
-The interesting point that is made on reality is that it is relative, and it’s the perception of someone’s reality that matters
-Reality is also every changing (perhaps in part due to creative advances) - it’s an evolutionary process 
-The creative and novel ideas, as strange as they may seem at the time, eventually become true - our new reality 

#5 - Extrovert vs Introvert
-I think it seems quite necessary for someone that is creative to have the time shut off from everyone with time to immerse themselves in quite thought, uninterrupted 
-It also takes a quiet solitude to learn the necessary backbone skills of your domain 
-But on the other hand many ideas and the sharpening of ideas can only occur when we are interacting with others 
-Seeing, hearing other people, exchanging ideas, asking for feedback is necessary to that idea that may have come to light while along can truly come to life 

#6 - Humility vs Pride 
-The respect successful creatives have for their domain keep the perspective of those that have come before them 
-They understand what role that plays in their successes
-They also understand the degree to which luck has played it’s role 
-They are also so focused on what’s next that they don’t have much time really too look back and reflect on what’s already been accomplished 
-However these people are not unaware of their impact on the domain and those in it 
-Especially when compared to others 
-Their ambition/competitiveness assumes great things can be done 
-This leads to success yet their cooperation and selflessness in seeing themselves as part of something much bigger keeps their frame of mind that they are serving the domain and those in it 
-Their role is to be like those that came before them and leave something for the next generation

#7 - Masculine vs Feminine
-Creatives seem to break away from typical gender roles/stereotypes/traits 
-While men and women keep their traditional traits of gender they also, in comparison to others, showed more access to the opposite role as well
-Men, while perfectly masculine compared to other men, also showed more feminine or sensitivity than other men - more attuned to subtleties and tied to their families, etc
-Women’s, while perfectly feminine, we’re more aggressive and self-confident than women counterparts 
-This “psychological androgyny” effectively doubles their tool box in ways they respond and interact with the world 
-These creatives could be both aggressive and nurturant, sensitive and rigid, dominant and aggressive 

#8 - Conservative vs Rebellious 
-In order to change the dominant one must first understand it 
-You must believe in the importance of the domain and have learned its rules and tradition
-However simply being a traditionalist doesn’t change the domain 
-Chances must be taken or even a certain level of dissatisfaction with the domain in order to change it 
-One must break away from ease of playing it safe to leave their mark 
-But those chances must be taken with an account of the past in mind - not just being different for the sake of being different 

#9 - Passion vs Objectivity 
-Passion is what keeps us interested and coming back to the task at hand
-It’s what sparked that interest in the first place 
-If we have passion we care about what we are doing 
-But we also must be able to look at it objectively, not blindly 
-Our objectivity is what gives our idea credibility and turns that idea fueled by passion into something of quality 
-These traits float us back and forth from a sense of attachment and detachment 

#10 - Suffering/pain vs Enjoyment 
-Creatives have a low threshold for pain 
-They put themselves out there, they care 
-It bothers them to see something of low quality, bad design, or little imagination 
-Putting yourself “out there” also means exposing your true desires, beliefs, or interests, you’re vulnerable
-This naturally leaves you open to criticism which can sometimes be down right vicious or attacking in nature 
-The amount of time spent in between ideas can cause grief as well or if that person is unable to work 
-If you are a writer but experience writer’s block then you aren’t writing, it’s as if your entire identify is at stake 
-However one can’t fully devote themselves and be immersed in the task if they didn’t enjoy it 
-We can’t be the best creative we can be if we are half hearted, losing focus, or watching a time clock driven by external factors 

#STayEssential