deletions | additions       diff --git a/bibliography/biblio.bib b/bibliography/biblio.bib  index 312690f..39eb732 100644  --- a/bibliography/biblio.bib  +++ b/bibliography/biblio.bib 
...
%% Saved with string encoding Unicode (UTF-8)   @book{austin2003chase,  title={Chase, chance, and creativity: The lucky art of novelty},  author={Austin, James H},  year={2003 [1978]},  publisher={Mit Press}  }  @article{mccrae1987creativity,  title={Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience},  author={McCrae, Robert R},  journal={Journal of personality and social psychology},  volume={52},  number={6},  pages={1258},  year={1987},  publisher={American Psychological Association}  }  @article{cropley2006praise,  title={In praise of convergent thinking},  author={Cropley, Arthur},  journal={Creativity research journal},  volume={18},  number={3},  pages={391--404},  year={2006},  publisher={Taylor \& Francis}  }  @article{wu2013curiosity,  title={{C}uriosity: {F}rom psychology to computation},  author={Wu, Qiong and Miao, Chunyan},  diff --git a/etymology.tex b/etymology.tex  index 2d0dc4d..662eeb7 100644  --- a/etymology.tex  +++ b/etymology.tex 
...
never have happened.}''~\cite{bergson2010creative}  \end{quote}  As we have indicated, serendipity would seem to require features of  both discovery and invention; invention:  that is, the discovery of something unexpected and the invention of an application for the same. We must complement \emph{analysis}  with \emph{synthesis} \cite{delanda1993virtual}. The balance Both  processes can be seen as ongoing and diverse, which underscores the  relationship  between these two features will differ from case serendipity and creativity. According  to case.  \citeA{creativity-crisis} write that: ``To be Arthur  Cropley \citeyear{cropley2006praise},  creativerequires  divergent  thinking (generating many unique ideas) and then convergent  thinking (combining those ideas into the best result).'' This is  exemplified involves  ``novelty generation followed  by Voltaire's \citeyear{zadig} character Zadig (a figure  inspired (or accompanied by) exploration of  the novelty from the point of view of workability, acceptability, or  similar criteria,  in part by order to determine if it is effective.''  Following \citeA{austin2003chase}, Cropley understands serendipity to  describe  the ``The Three Princes case  of Serendip''\footnote{\citeA[p. 19]{merton}.}) a person  who ``was capable ``stumbles upon something novel and  effective when not looking for it.'' Nearby categories are  \emph{blind luck}, the \emph{luck  of discerning the diligent} (or  pseudoserendipity) and \emph{self-induced luck}; however, Cropley  questions ``whether it is  a Thousand Variations matter of luck at all'' because of the  work and knowledge involved in the process of assessment.  %  The perspective developed here strengthens these criteria  in visible Objects, two ways:  firstly, we point out  that others, less  curious, imagin’d were all alike'' -- while work is  also possessing involved in  the complementary talent ``to render Truth as obvious as possible: Whereas  most Men study to render it intricate process of  uncovering,  and obscure.'' secondly, we defer ``novelty'' to the invention phase.  In other words, serendipity involves creative making. Furthermore, we  emphasise the importance of active, agential discernment over more  passive stumbling.