The way the topic of creativity is discussed in the neuroscience literature does

The way the topic of creativity is discussed in the neuroscience literature doesn’t really tell us much.
I can explain it largely because I”ve both worked on it since the late 70s, and taught creativity to my staff for a long time since then.
But it’s more akin to developing a ‘fitness’ like doing math, learning an artistic skill, or learning a sport – in that you’re trying to exercise your visualization capacity (visual imagination).
As in all things intelligence matters. But in others, it might matter more, what you’re focusing on. Because creativity and innovation… what’s the difference? Nothing. One might be more sensory and empathic, another might be more physical and systemic. But it’s the same discipline in all cases.
Simple version: the more you fantasize (imagine, visualize) about any subject. The more permutations you throw into that visualization in search for novelty. The more complex those imaginings and permutations are, the more likely you will spawn something creative.
It helps a lot if you can physically manifest whatever it is you’re imagining. So it’s a lot easier to be creative if you learn to draw etc.
I know from my own experience that learning to draw teaches you to see the world as it is, and over time, see more of the world.
I could write something longer and pretty thorough, but I have a meeting soon, and I haven’t had coffee yet. 😉

Reply addressees: @Eggggggg_ggggg