top of page

By:

Dr. Kishore Paknikar

29 January 2025 at 2:43:00 pm

A Universal Technique for Producing Ideas

I recently read James Webb Young’s ‘A Technique for Producing Ideas’ purely out of curiosity. The book was written primarily for people in sales, advertising, and marketing. At first glance, it did not seem relevant to science or technology. Yet, as I read on, it became increasingly clear that Young’s approach is not limited to any one profession. The method he outlines applies equally well to scientific research, technological innovation, and even everyday problem-solving. The language is...

A Universal Technique for Producing Ideas

I recently read James Webb Young’s ‘A Technique for Producing Ideas’ purely out of curiosity. The book was written primarily for people in sales, advertising, and marketing. At first glance, it did not seem relevant to science or technology. Yet, as I read on, it became increasingly clear that Young’s approach is not limited to any one profession. The method he outlines applies equally well to scientific research, technological innovation, and even everyday problem-solving. The language is simple, but the insights are deep. More importantly, it addresses a question every researcher faces at some point: where do ideas really come from? Young begins by challenging a belief that remains widespread in academic and research circles. Creativity, he argues, is neither mysterious nor accidental, nor reserved for a gifted few. Ideas do not appear as miracles. They are produced through a definite mental process. This is a comforting thought for researchers, especially younger ones who worry that they lack originality. It also carries a responsibility. If ideas follow a process, producing them is not a matter of waiting, but of working in the right way. Old Wine, New Bottle At the centre of Young’s thinking is a simple definition. An idea, he says, is a new combination of old elements. Nothing genuinely new appears from nowhere. Every idea is built from existing facts, observations, experiences, tools, and concepts. What changes is how these elements are combined. Seen in this light, creativity is no longer opposed to rigor or discipline. It depends on them. For researchers in science and technology, this idea feels familiar. A new hypothesis often emerges when known results are viewed from a different angle. A new method may arise when a tool from one field is applied to another. Even major breakthroughs usually grow out of earlier work. The originality lies in the connection, not in the raw material itself. Young explains that ideas emerge through a sequence of mental steps. These steps are not dramatic, but they are reliable. The first step is to gather raw materials. In research, this means developing a deep understanding of the problem. It involves careful reading of the literature, understanding previous successes and failures, knowing the limits of available instruments, and being aware of practical constraints. Many researchers underestimate this stage. We often assume we know enough and move quickly toward solutions. Young insists that this is a mistake. Without deep familiarity, the mind has too little material to combine meaningfully. Along with problem-specific knowledge, Young places equal importance on general knowledge. Creative thinkers tend to be curious about many things, not only their own narrow field. They read widely, observe carefully, and remain interested in how people think and behave. Ideas from history, psychology, sociology, art, or even daily life quietly enter the mind and wait. For scientists and engineers, this is an important reminder. Reading outside one’s discipline is not a distraction from serious work. It expands the mental storehouse from which new ideas emerge. Mental Digestion Once sufficient material has been gathered, the second step begins. Young calls this the stage of mental digestion. Here, the mind actively works on what it has collected. Facts are examined from different angles, and possible relationships are tested. This is the stage where rough hypotheses, sketches of mechanisms, or tentative explanations begin to appear. Mental digestion often leads to confusion and frustration. Many researchers recognize this phase. Progress feels slow, and nothing seems to fit neatly together. Young advises persistence. Just as the body can push beyond initial fatigue, the mind often has more capacity than we expect. The third step is incubation. At this point, conscious effort must stop. This may seem counterintuitive, especially in research environments that value constant productivity. Yet Young argues that incubation is essential. After intense conscious work, the problem is handed over to the unconscious mind, where ideas continue to combine quietly. This explains why insights often appear during walks, while listening to music, or in the early hours of the morning. For researchers, incubation is not wasted time but part of the thinking process. Without it, thought remains forced and narrow. Allowing the mind to rest after focused effort often creates the conditions for new connections to emerge. From incubation comes the fourth step, illumination. This is the moment when the idea becomes clear, often without warning. It may be a simple explanation that suddenly makes sense of confusing data, a missing control that resolves an argument, or a new way of visualizing results that reveals a hidden pattern. This moment feels special, and it is tempting to treat it as a stroke of luck. Young gently corrects this view. Illumination is the result of preparation, effort, and patience. It cannot be forced, but it can be encouraged. The final step is shaping and verification. Young calls this the least glamorous stage. The excitement of discovery fades, and careful work begins. The idea must now be tested, refined, and adapted to real-world conditions. In science, this means designing experiments, adding controls, checking assumptions, and inviting criticism. Many ideas fail at this stage because their creators are unwilling to modify them. Young warns against this. An idea must be strong enough to survive contact with reality. He offers a simple lesson: ideas sharpen when exposed to criticism. Colleagues spot flaws and possibilities their authors miss, which is why discussion and debate matter. Strong ideas grow by being tested, not protected. Creative thinking, in turn, depends on seeing connections rather than isolated facts. This habit cultivated through wide reading, reflection, and asking basic questions explains why many breakthroughs emerge at the boundaries between disciplines. Young also speaks of experience. Some ideas, he notes, cannot be produced until one has lived long enough. Professional and personal experiences slowly fill the mental reservoir. Knowledge gathered for its own sake often becomes valuable later in unexpected ways. For researchers in science and technology, the lessons are clear. Creativity is not a gift reserved for a few. It is a process that rewards patience, curiosity and discipline. Ideas do not appear simply by waiting or worrying. They emerge when the mind is prepared, allowed to rest and then tested against evidence. (The author is an ANRF Prime Minister Professor at COEP Technological University, Pune; former Director of the Agharkar Research Institute, Pune; and former Visiting Professor at IIT Bombay. Views personal).

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page