I just realised that my last book post was more than a month ago. And that last book was a comic (albeit a more ’serious’ one).

Well, it’s hard to be productive in your reading when you’re in the midst of a storm. I actually started on two other books, but couldn’t quite complete them yet. I hope to get back to those books soon, before the library starts to fine me.

Also, I’ve since developed or renewed other interests, such as cartooning (yes, only one cartoon so far), which leaves me with less reading time.

I’ve been trying to do a bit of photography too. Been bringing the camera around more often these days, which hopefully will translate into more pictures. Hopefully because I just came back from an overseas trip, camera in bag, camera never left bag.

A Whole New Mind comes along, advocating the so-called right-brain activities like art and design to complement the more logical and sequencial left, striking a chord in me.

You see, I’ve been realising the importance of creative/artistic activities for a while now, especially of recent days (thus my recent interest in cartoons and photography), and this book came at the right time to reinforce my beliefs. How convenient.

The book is subtitled Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age. According to Daniel Pink the author, we’ve moved from the Agriculture Age of farmers to the Industrial Age of factory workers to the Information Age of knowledge workers (nothing new so far), and now to the Conceptual Age of creators and empathizers.

Thus it’s not just about information these days, or even knowledge; it’s how you connect and combine knowledge to create something that’s greater than the sum of the parts. Pink also brought up something I hadn’t really thought much of, at least in this context - empathy. This fits in very beautifully with my post a month ago on the Autism Spectrum Quotient test.

So are we ready for the “Conceptual Age of creators and empathizers”?

In the chapter High Concept, High Touch,

To survive in this age, individuals and organizations must examine what they’re doing to earn a living and ask themselves three questions:

1. Can someone overseas do it cheaper?
2. Can a computer do it faster?
3. Is what I’m offering in demand in an age of abundance?

If your answer to question 1 or 2 is yes, or if your answer to question 3 is no, you’re in deep trouble.

Looks like not everyone will like this book.

Pink devotes the second part of the book on the 6 “high-concept, high-touch” senses or aptitudes necessary for this conceptual age:

1. Not just function but also DESIGN.
2. Not just argument but also STORY.
3. Not just focus but also SYMPHONY.
4. Not just logic but also EMPATHY.
5. Not just seriousness but also PLAY.
6. Not just accumulation but also MEANING.

Tell me about it.

What intrigued me most in the book is on the androgynous mind (incidentally Pink has nothing original to offer on this, as he’s only quoting Csikszentmihalyi):

Csikszentmihalyi has also uncovered a related dimension of the boundary crosser’s talent: those who posses it often elude traditional gender role stereotyping. In his research, he found that “when tests of masculinity/femininity are given to young people, over and over one finds that creative and talented girls are more dominant and tough than other girls, and creative boys are more sensitive and less aggressive than their male peers.” This bestows unique advantages, according to Csikszentmihalyi. “A psychologically androgynous person in effect doubles his or her repertoire of responses and can interact with the world in terms of a much richer and varied spectrum of opportunities.”

Intruiging, but not surprising.

To quote Samuel Taylor Coleridge,

I have known strong minds, with imposing, undoubting, Cobbett-like manners, but I have never met a great mind of this sort. The truth is, a great mind must be androgynous.