Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why do we culturally accept the distinction 'creatives' and 'non-creatives'. It's gross.


People like putting themselves in boxes, and the one he used is generally accepted classification. I don't think it's something to be offended about.

I think Tech community is quite elitist at times


No domain has a monopoly on original thought, so calling some of them 'creative' is just lazy and imprecise.

I'm just pissing into the wind. Ultimately it doesn't really matter and I agree it's not worth getting offended about.


Some people get paid to have original thoughts while others get paid to not have original thoughts. To me that seems like a pretty clear line. It isn't about whether the people can be creative or not, but whether they are expected to be creative at work.


Why do we "culturally accept" any distinction?

Also, the idea of "culturally not accepting" something seems gross. It's the antithesis of diversity.


[flagged]


It's gross because creativity is one of the fundamental properties of being human. Characterizing specific vocations or professional domains as creative or non-creative, regardless of how the industry may have boxed in the term, imbues distinct capability castes to the practitioners.


I think the word you're looking for is "incorrect".

But you're wrong actually, I'm making a very valid differentiation, bossing people around is not a creative task the people who does the thing you tell them is the creative: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_professional




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: