The Entropy of Creativity
CBS is opening an AI Literacy school in Brooklyn. Learn more →
There is a law that governs not just physical systems but human ones: left alone, things fall apart. Disorder increases. Structures that once held meaning lose it. Energy dissipates. In thermodynamics, this is called entropy: the tendency of closed systems to move from order toward chaos. But the principle extends far beyond physics. It describes what happens to a mind that stops questioning itself, to a friendship that goes untended, to a culture that loses its capacity for self-examination. The question is not whether entropy applies to how we think, relate, and change. It does. The question is what counters it.
The answer is agency, but not agency understood as mere willfulness or independence. Agency, properly understood, is critical thinking in action. It is the capacity to examine one’s situation, question its apparent fixity, and choose to act on it rather than be acted upon by it. It is what bell hooks called the practice of freedom: the refusal of the passive role of object in someone else’s story and the claim of the active role of subject in one’s own. Sustained, it is the only force reliably capable of reversing entropic drift in human life.
The Entropy of Understanding
Knowledge, in a person and in a culture, decays. The insight that was alive a decade ago grows brittle. The framework that once illuminated experience becomes the lens that distorts it. Certainties accumulate. Questions stop being asked not because they have been answered, but because they become uncomfortable, because asking requires admitting that what we thought we knew may not hold.
This is epistemic entropy: the slow hardening of understanding into dogma, the conversion of tools for thinking into substitutes for it. It happens to individuals throughout their lives: the gradual replacement of genuine curiosity with the performance of expertise, the moment when a person stops being someone who is learning and becomes someone who already knows.
The drift is comfortable. Received frameworks do not demand the energy that open questions do. To live with uncertainty is costly; to resolve it prematurely is a relief. The dominant model of education functions transactionally: knowledge is delivered to students who are expected to receive it, file it, and return it on demand. The model is efficient at producing certainty and catastrophic at producing thought. Most institutions, whether schools, communities of practice, or companies, are organized in roughly this way. They reward the correct answer over the genuine question, the accepted interpretation over the disruptive one. The result is not stability but stagnation dressed as stability.
The anti-entropic stance is older than any of its formulations: a willingness to remain a learner, to treat one’s current understanding not as an achievement to be defended but as a position to be tested. To refuse the role of expert is what keeps a mind alive.
The Entropy of Creativity
Creativity might seem immune to entropy. It feels like it should be self-sustaining, renewable by definition. But anyone who has lived inside a creative practice long enough knows the opposite to be true. Ideas lose freshness on the shelf. Aesthetic sensibilities become habits. What once felt like discovery now feels like repetition. The creative act, if left to its own momentum, tends toward the safe and the predictable, toward the already-known.
The entropic forces here are particular. Taste, paradoxically, becomes a liability. The more refined one’s sense of what works, the stronger the pull toward what has worked before. The same sensibility that enables originality begins to constrain it: every new impulse filtered through the accumulated authority of past judgment. This is why so many creative lives follow the same arc: early vitality, a fertile middle period, and then a long tail of diminishing strangeness, the person still technically capable but drawing from an ever-shallower well.
Imagination is not a free-floating gift but a discipline, and it requires the same habits of mind as critical inquiry: the willingness to ask what is not here, what is being excluded, what assumptions are shaping what feels possible. The person who has stopped asking those questions has stopped exercising the very faculty that made them creative. They have, in a quiet way, stopped thinking.
You cannot make something new from an unexamined position. You can only reproduce what is already in the room. Agency in creativity is the willingness to turn the critical gaze on one’s own practice, to ask what assumptions are structuring the work, to notice which constraints feel natural because they are useful and which feel natural because they have simply become invisible.