I think it might be worth distinguishing learning from innovation in
this conversation. I'd go about it this way:
Learning is a result of theory or concept and experience. The theory
or concept may be unaware or very "fuzzy" and the experience may be
merely mental. But they go together. That is, to make the point
starkly, we don't learn from experience. We first bring something to
our action (even if it's all mental) and learn from the resonance or
disonance of the two.
Innovation is a result of recombination (occasionally mutation or
purely random events) of what is already integrated with other things
and contained in some (mental) identity. Seeking innovation requires
different processes than seeking learning.
The connection between the two is that innovation will be followed by
learning if the innovation is to "stick" and become useful.
Is that useful?
-- Michael McMaster Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk