To quote a great military tactician, perhaps the greatest in history: “There is no plan. There’s no strategy.”

 

Mothers are incredibly creative! Just think about it...

No matter what happens—a power outage, someone trying to harm your child, or a disaster like an earthquake or flood—a mother will need to be incredibly creative to save her child's life or provide for their needs.

 

Cooks.

 

It is if done creatively. I know a person who as worked hard over the years 24/7, and after 10,000 hours is quite the Pro.

 

Hookers and Politicians always inventing new ways to screw you, one honestly one dishonestly

 

Last edited: Apr 7, 2026 at 11:11 AM

Firstly, this is a bad question. There is no system to quantify creativity, and the question did not solve this problem either.

But to entertain your silly question, none of those are creative. They all play a well-defined role within society, the expectations and ways to get there are pretty clear. All of these functions can be done at 0 creativity.

Who is truly creative then?

Homeless people.

 

quite the contrary, being a heroin addict is a full time job...

 

First you will need a measurable definition of creativity. I think real creativity is rather rare. A lot of it is just applying the stuff that you learned. The more you learned and the more rules you know and follow, the less creative you will probably be. Is it creative if you achieved the result through trial and error? All in all, I would argue that there are creative possibilities regardless of what you're doing.
I would call it creative if people discover a solution for a problem or task in a way that is new to them. If, however, they just try every possible way until they arrive at a solution, I would not see that as being overly creative. People can achieve the same result, and one person did it creatively and the other did not. How might one measure it at that stage?

 

The term scientist tends to encompass everything in a preferential way: you can be an astronaut without being a scientist, you can be a professor in academia, you can be a doctor (MD) without being a scientist, and so on.

Very interesting to see the inclusion of the musician here (contrary to what many might think, but not just any musician). Scientists and academic musicians, because they rely on systematic research and creative experimentation: scientists investigate phenomena and produce applicable knowledge, transforming sectors of society with new technologies, and academic musicians (who can also be scientists, by extension!) expand cultural and aesthetic frontiers. Through creative experimentation and technical knowledge production, they transform and broaden perceptions through art.
Both are grounded in systematic research and creative experimentation, and this dyad reveals that innovation, beyond being objective, can also be sensitive.

 

Last edited: Apr 7, 2026 at 12:21 PM

Aww, thanks for the compliment. But I've never been paid to do drugs, it's always been a passion project.

Well, okay. I've been paid with drugs to do other stuff, but I will not speak unless a priest is present.

 

You send the biggest army on the planet into battle without any tactical awareness, or should I say without foreseeing every possible outcome, your odds of winning become very limited. That is what makes a Grandmaster win at Chess against, you or I every time!

 

The desperate.

 

There is one factor that needs to be taken into account before that could possibly be answered because it is a huge ambiguous open door.

Which jobs allow for creativity? In other words do they have the scope within their job to be creative or they have as their duties only the ability to follow the guidelines without creativity?

The people who make the rules are the only ones who can be creative and in a musicians case, it is a performer or songwriter/composer and this is because they are their own boss unless contracted to a major label which then is the only one that can let them be creative or not, due to contractual obligations.