[A]s people get older, the push for creativity diminishes. Creativity is often relegated to drawing, making music, or writing. People who don’t consider themselves artistic may falsely believe that they are not creative.

But creativity is much more than art.  It is a part of nearly everything we do. And the more the creative brain is used, the stronger it becomes.

Creativity is the force that propels people forward, that allows an object or idea to come out of a place where there was nothing before. To create is to grow and change. Creativity is about culture and learning and problem solving.

Simply put, creativity is vital to life. 

There are many benefits of engaging in creative thinking. Here are just a few of them.

Creative thinking:

  • Improves problem-solving
  • Helps people think ‘outside the box’
  • Increases playfulness
  • Makes life more enjoyable
  • Allows for self-expression
  • Improves life
  • Encourages discovery and growth.

Meditation is more than just a relaxation technique — it can make you smarter and happier.

All you need is a few minutes out of your day. “Meditation can be the simplest of practices,” he said. “Meditation generally focuses on releasing thoughts about the past and future and becoming grounded in the present moment.”

Some tips from the article:

  1. View meditation as a simple relaxation technique.

  2. Choose a particular style.
    The goal is to pick a practice that “relaxes you enough to the point you feel that inner click.” 

  3. Schedule it.
    “If you can’t spare 3 minutes a day, you need to make big changes to your life.” 

  4. Don’t resist your thoughts.
    Acknowledge your busy brain, and let your thoughts come and go, Blake said. “Meditation is more about introducing peaceful thoughts into your thinking,” he said. 

  5. Reprogram your thoughts.
    It’s hard to meditate when negative thoughts bombard your brain. Blake teaches his students to reprogram their thoughts by using positive, affirming phrases. 

The video […] explains how sleep cycles work, and how power naps—or those naps that do the most to boost cognitive function during the day—take advantage of the first two phases of your sleep cycle: stage one, where you’re probably “dozing,” or feel relaxed but if someone woke you you probably wouldn’t even notice you’d been asleep, and stage two, where your brain starts to consolidate memories, organize its biological bookshelves, and shuts the brain off from external, non-dangerous stimuli.

This latest whitepaper from Box UK’s Head of User Experience Tom Evans combines psychological research with years of experience consulting on website usability to provide valuable insight into the online activities and decision-making of users. Focusing on six key areas, he reveals how wider behavioural trends affect our online interactions and offers clear and concise recommendations on how to use this information to improve user experience.

Topics covered include:

  • How users consume your content
  • Why you should be providing social validation
  • The problem with too much choice
  • Ways to approach effective user research
  • And much more…

Interesting, succinct (and free) whitepaper.

I’d like to get something off my chest. It’s been bugging me for a very, very long time. Sherlock Holmes is not a sociopath. He is not even a “high-functioning sociopath,” as the otherwise truly excellent BBC Sherlock has styled him (I take the words straight from Benedict Cumberbatch’s mouth). There. I’ve said it.

But the most compelling evidence is simply this. Sherlock Holmes is not a cold, calculating, self-gratifying machine. He cares for Watson. He cares for Mrs. Hudson. He most certainly has a conscience (and as Hare says, if nothing else, the “hallmark [of a sociopath] is a stunning lack of conscience”). In other words, Holmes has emotions—and attachments—like the rest of us. What he’s better at is controlling them—and only letting them show under very specific circumstances.

Great article.  Great TV show.

Here’s the thing about productivity: we only have a certain amount of time on our hands, and yet we have an ever-growing number of tasks to complete. […]

The reason we try to manage time is because we know exactly how much of it we have.  It’s finite.  Yet the number of tasks we have to complete isn’t.

And that’s the problem.

[M]anaging a task is far more – well, manageable – than managing time. You end up managing one thing at a time rather than something that is far greater in size – something that that no one has ever really mastered a battle with.

[W]hat we need to do is worry about figuring out how to do a great job with the tasks we’re given rather than with the time we’re given.

That’s how you can really become not just more productive – but a better kind of productive in the process.

If someone assaults you, steals from you, or cheats on you, you have every right to feel upset or angry — so, too, if you have suffered verbal or emotional abuse.  Many of you who have gone through, or are going through, a painful separation or contested divorce may understand what I mean. You will almost certainly need time to grieve the loss of your marriage or relationship. You may also need a good deal of time to work through feelings of anger, betrayal, and the downright “unfairness” of it all.

These feelings are entirely understandable — but past a certain point, they may do you more harm than good. They may even trap you in an endless loop of paralysis and negativity. Freeing yourself from this trap is critical to moving on with your life. As Dr. Mark Banschick put it in his blog of Jan. 31, 2012, “Radical Acceptance means that you understand that bad things do indeed happen to good people… all the time. You can stay mired in your sense of injustice and self-righteousness…But what purpose does it [serve]? …You lose a second time because you become a victim of your own victimhood.”

But what can be done to achieve this “radical acceptance” of life’s unfairness?  Enter the Stoics.

Stoics have helped shape our modern schools of cognitive-behavioral therapy. But before discussing some basic Stoic beliefs, it’s important to debunk a few myths. …

The Stoics were not joyless, godless, logicians! They saw a divine order in the world that united all mankind. They did not want to eliminate emotion, so much as to refine it. Rather than “sweating the small stuff,” the Stoics saw the larger picture of life, and focused on developing ethical and virtuous action — the only real and lasting “good,” in Stoic philosophy.

Stoic philosophy may be summed up in that well-known maxim associated with 12-step programs, but originating with theologian Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971):

“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

Stoicism holds that “things,” events and people do not really upset or disturb us — it is only our opinion of these that has the power to distress us. This is a very odd, counterintuitive idea for many people to grasp.

When buffeted by life’s many “slings and arrows,” you might find it helpful — as I do — to keep in mind an important ethical teaching of Marcus Aurelius: “I do my duty. Other things trouble me not.”

Related: For more about the broad ancient philosophical roots of cognitive behavioural therapy, check out Jules Evans’ book “Philosophy for Life and Other Dangerous Situations”, and various interviews/podcasts.

Anybody who has ever logged on knows that online writing begets exclamation points. A lot of exclamation points! Mocking this punctuational predilection is easy and fun. An amusing blog called “Excessive Exclamation!!” features photos …

David Shipley […] and Will Schwalbe, authors of “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” speculate that the trend stems in part from the nature of online media. “Because email is without affect, it has a dulling quality that almost necessitates kicking everything up a notch just to bring it to where it would normally be,” they write.

Internet writing also encourages extravagant combining of exclamation points and question marks. This punctuation yoking, traditionally confined to comic-book ejaculations such as “What the ?!…,” had a brief moment in the sun in the 1960s, when, according to a Web site devoted to this tale, an ad man named Martin K. Speckter promoted the idea of combining the two marks into one, called the “Interrobang.”

I’ve always had a soft spot for the interrobang.  It’s disappointing that it never caught on.

“The Stand” by Stephen King

“On the Beach” by Nevil Shute

“Oryx and Crake” and “The Year of the Flood” by Margaret Atwood

“The Age of Miracles” by Karen Thompson Walker

“The Drowned World” by J.G. Ballard

“World War Z” by Max Brooks

“The Last Man” by Mary Shelley

“A Canticle For Leibowitz” by Walter M. Miller Jr

“The Road” by Cormac McCarthy

“Blindness” by José Saramago

Of the books listed, I’ve only read The Road by Cormac McCarthy.  Breathtaking and thought-provoking stuff.  Most of the others look interesting, so I might check them out eventually.

I’ve read virtually all of Philip K. Dick’s work.  Some of his stories are set in post-apocalyptic times, and I’m surprised none made the list.

Here’s the top ten:

1. Harry Potter (series), by J.K. Rowling

2. The Hunger Games (series), by Suzanne Collins

3. To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee

4. The Fault in Our Stars, by John Green

5. The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien

6. The Catcher in the Rye, by J.D. Salinger

7. The Lord of the Rings (series), by J.R.R. Tolkien

8. Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury

9. Looking for Alaska, by John Green

10. The Book Thief, by Markus Zusak

Of all the 100 books listed, I’ve read and recommend numbers 3, 6, 8, 12, 18, and 25.