Throughout history links between creativity and mental illness have been examined meticulously due to numerous examples of deranged prodigious individuals. Names such as Ernest Hemingway, Sylvia Plath, Isaac Newton and Ludwig van Beethoven come to mind. Some argue that genius and madness are part of an undiscovered neurodegenerative disorder whereas alternative arguments suggest associations between creativity and mental health. However, many of history’s most influential geniuses have had little or no link to mental illness and many current examples may be attributed to our hectic lifestyle erasing the fine line between creativity and madness. With this in mind, this report intends to examine both sides of a contentious argument and explore the scientific evidence behind both.
For the purpose of this essay it is important that key terms be defined before delving into the topic. Numerous philosophers and scientists have attempted to define the word genius with Immanuel Kant eventually describing it as the ability to independently arrive at and understand concepts that would normally have to be taught by another person1. Although often given to mean an individual that excels in all areas, most commonly cited examples of geniuses are primarily experts in a very certain field. In particular, creativity seems to be an important characteristic in those we would consider geniuses.
Madness is commonly described as a severely disordered state of mind usually occurring as a specific disorder. Not all examples of insanity can be narrowed down into a particular disorder but the scientific research cited can only examine it within this scope.
FOR
Aristotle may have been the first to proclaim that “no great genius has ever been without some divine madness” but he certainly was not the last. Several historical individuals have given scientists reason to investigate this possible correlation.
Perhaps one of the first published research into the topic was Cesare Lombrero’s ‘Man Of Genius” which argued that creative genius was a hereditary form of insanity. Although largely outdated now, his work paved the way for future scientific investigation into the area. Initial studies relied on basic techniques where creative individuals were asked to take personality questionnaires such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). Early results indicated that highly creative individuals tended to score higher in areas associated with psycopathology2. The EPQ in particular when examined by Eysenck revealed positive correlation between creativity and psychotic tendencies3. Ludwig’s studies are some of the most commonly cited in this area and suggest that creative geniuses are about twice as likely to develop a mental disorder with depression, suicide and alcohol abuse occurring most frequently. Within the same study he convincingly proposed that the degree of creativity could be directly linked to the degree of pychopathology from studying a number of afflicted poets.
Genetic studies form some of the most compelling pieces of evidence in this regard. In particular, schizophrenia is one of the most commonly studied disorders regarding this topic. Relatives of individuals with this affliction have been shown to have a higher likelihood of exhibiting above average skills in certain areas. A 1963 report revealed that half of children with schizophrenic mothers grew up to be extremely successful and developed incredible creative talent4. Perhaps proving that creativity and mental illness are individually linked was an early 1973 study which proved that a group of gifted adopted children had biological parents afflicted by the illness5. Biotechnologists investigating the link between the neuregulin 1 gene associated with schizophrenia and creativity have admitted evidence both favours and negates the link between the two.
Bipolar disorder is another affliction that many believe may be related to creativity. Significant differences in the intelligence of children born to bipolar parent and those born to normal ones were discovered on the administration of an IQ test6. Of course, one of the most famous examples of a genetic link would be Eduard Einstein, the son of Albert Einstein who developed schizophrenia in his early twenties.
Aside from the obvious routes of investigation such as correlation and genetic studies, it is also important to examine the similarities between genius and madness. Theoretical interpretation of the traits involved in both cases shows many similarities meaning that sometimes creativity and madness may be misinterpreted for each other.
Once again, Eysenck’s study theorized that an overactive creative thinker is likelier to have a personality that relates in many incidences to the personality of a psychotic individual causing a higher likelihood of developing the disorder. His paper revealed 5 pieces of evidence which he believed corroborated a link between genius and mental disorders. The 5th reason being most important in this context.
1 People related to those with a diagnosed psychosis were found to have above average creative talent.
2 Correlations between psychoticism and intelligence tests.
3 Citing a study by K. Gotz, it was found that artists exhibited higher intelligence than their non-artist counterparts.
4 Historical individuals with known mental illnesses.
5 That countless creative individuality tests when compared with corresponding psychopathological tests are identical in manner meaning a link between the two must exist.
Perhaps the most important investigations which shed some light onto how cognitive creativity can lead to madness are studies carried out on the trait of latent inhibition. Latent inhibition can be defined as the retardation of Pavlovian conditioning after pre-exposure to the to be defined stimulus prior to its pairing with the unconditional stimulus. In simpler terms it refers to the idea that a familiar stimulus will take longer to acquire meaning than a new one. This is important as individuals with low LI and high IQs have been positively correlated with the development of creativity as they can constantly process their surroundings and develop new ideas. However low LI also means that there is a constant stream of incoming stimuli and inability to manage this can lead to increasing levels of distraction causing possible psychosis and the development of schizophrenia7.
Similarities in thinking may be a cause of mental illness but certain shared characteristics such as introvertedness, sensitivity and restlessness are shared by both sets of people8. Writers and poets often display these traits in abundance and a higher level of incidence has been found amongst these with hypotheses suggesting they may have fallen victim to their own sensitivity causing depression and a feeling of hopelessness9. Conversely, scientists are perceived to be more logical suppressed individuals and this also is observed by a decrease in incidence.
Thus we can say that although there is no concrete evidence linking creativity and madness, the volume of circumstantial evidence is quite high suggesting a definite correlation between the two. This remains to be investigated completely but creates a solid argument for this theory moving forward.
Against
In recent years, mental illnesses have often become glamourized by their supposed association with gifted children. Autism, although strictly speaking, not a mental illness is one of the most obvious examples with the majority of people believing that this syndrome is compensated for by a prodigious gift in another area. Similarly, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia have also become symbolic disorders for creative genius. Unfortunately this is not always the case and once again has been investigated multiple times with varying results. In preparing for this assignment, it immediately became clear that the media would indeed prefer there to be a link between the two. “Scientists finally find definite genetic link between creativity and madness”, I read, only to examine the article further and discover that the evidence was shaky at best.
Our aim is to examine the other side of this confusing argument.
Evidence supporting a link has always cited a relationship proved by corresponding IQ and psychopathological tests. When investigated further it can be revealed that although creative individuals do tend to score high on psychopathological, they do not score high enough to be classified as mentally affected, rather they tend to score between the normal and abnormal ranges8,3. This has often been misconstrued in literature causing the belief that every genius is insane or vice versa.
One of the simplest ways of examining this would be a contrast between the numbers of both. The WHO estimates that in this day over 450,000,000 people are living with poor mental health. No matter how much progress our generation may have made or how many “geniuses” we have in society, the number cannot be even close to that amount of people. Sure, this is a vague argument based on loose empirical data but the simple reality is that most creative people are not mad and most mad people are not creative geniuses. Further data can actually reveal again that the vast majority of creative people do not have defined pathological symptoms10.
In fact, one of the many important things to consider here is people’s perception. Psychologists have long ago accepted that our mind is programmed with a number of biases. Perales and Shanks suggest that our minds are more likely to integrate information if it occurs in conjunction with something we perceive as important11.Thus when asked whether we believe there is an association, our minds immediately jump to Michael Jackson, Virginia Woolf and Hemingway perpetuating something which has not been proved true. Composer Robert Schumann is often cited as a classic example of this link. He battled through bouts of manic depression and created some of the most beautiful music of his generation. However, a study carried out by psychologist Robert Weisberg examined his life by coordinating his diary with his musical output12. The study which judged qualitatively rather than quantitatively found that although numbers of compositions increased during his manic years, the quality remained the same. This speaks volumes, revealing that the madness had no impact on his creativity despite popular belief
In conclusion, this topic will not be solved by me today or by the looks of it, for a long time. Researchers continue to argue over the validity of their work while each newly published paper is combatted by the next one.
Data is given to us over and over again but has never strictly proved anything. Much of studies carried out examine artists, authors and poets for psychopathological symptoms but expect us to believe that these people are by definition “creative”. Although multiple studies seem to suggest an indirect link between both mental states, there has yet to be pieces of evidence published that can undoubtedly state that one leads to the other. Personally, I find it hard to examine the overwhelming data in favour of the link without believing slightly but look forward to a day where a gene or pathology may be discovered causing an end to this compelling argument.
1 Critique Of Judgement, Immanuel Kant
2 Creativity and psychological health : origins of personal vitality and creative freedom, Barron 1963
3 Eysenck 1995/1994
4 Psychiatric disorders in foster home reared children of schizophrenic mothers, Heston 1966
5 McNeil1994
6 Creativity in familial bipolar disorder, Simeonova, Chang, Strong, & Ketter 2005
7 Creativity and Psychopathology: A Shared Vulnerability Model, Carson 2011
8 Artists in the making, Barron 1972
9 Processes in Bipolar Affective Disorders, Jamison 1985
10 Cultural Psychiatry, Addiction, Alcohol Abuse, Attention Deficit Disorders, Schizophrenia, Simonton 2005
11 Models of covariation-based causal judgment: A review and synthesis, Perales and Shanks 2007
12 Genius and Madness? A Quasi-Experimental Test of the Hypothesis That Manic-Depression Increases Creativity, Weisberg 1994