• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

A not so profound question

SFG75

SFG75

Well-Known Member
Van Gogh, Nietzsche, Sylvia Plath, Dostoyevsky, Emily Dickinson, and many, many, more people were absolutely brilliant, but were insane, or at least had been treated for various mental illnesses. There is the old saying that ignorance is bliss-does ignorance also mean that you are more of a well-adjusted person in society? Now don't get me wrong, some people are pre-disposed to certain maladies due to genetics and some people might have lower chemicals that create problems for them. Barring these cases, we are talking about intelligence and sanity here.

The more intelligent a person is, do they move closer to the line of insanity? :confused:
 
"The more intelligent a person is, do they move closer to the line of insanity?"

That is incontrovertibly, incontestably, and demonstrably true.

Excuse me, I have to go take my meds.
 
SFG75 said:
The more intelligent a person is, do they move closer to the line of insanity? :confused:
Click to expand...
SFG,
I trend to think not so, even though there is a very similar perception that artisitc creativity occurs when people skirt along the edge of reason. In fact, one of the amazon reviewers of Sylvia Nasar's book, A Beautiful Mind, gives unquestioning voice to exactly that view, and uses the subject of the book, John Nash, as an example. John Nash was a brilliant American mathematician who also suffered from mental illness.
And people who take drugs to allegedly 'enhance' their creativity also seem to harbor the same delusion, I would say.
But WDIK? They would probably consider me just a schlepper.
(Just so happens that Nasar's book was under my hand here when I saw your post. Hence the seemingly speedy reference work :rolleyes:)
Peder
 
"The results of this research, a selection of which is summarized in the chart below, have found that rates of manic depression and cyclothymia, its milder form, are 10 to 20 percent higher among artists than expected for the general population.(1) Manic depression therefore occurs far more among artists than is likely just by chance. Though these studies have received some criticism for methodological problems, they all tellingly point to the same general trend- a trends that suggests that manic depression contributes to creativity in certain individuals."

http://www.molbio.princeton.edu/courses/mb427/2000/projects/0002/relation.html

Personally, I don't think it's cause and effect, more like a correlation.
 
I would also contest the notion that "10 to 20 %" is correctly characterized as "far more."
Peder
 
Good job Novella!. I'll PM to have threads merged. :) I do like Peder's comments. I'm not certain that if a person of average intelligence becomes more so by using illicit drugs. Could he/she become more creative?

Still's post brings to light a topic which I knew would arise sooner or later. Some would argue that creativity is separate from intelligence, but others woul argue that it is a part of it. If we agree with Howard Gardner and his multiple intelligences theory, then we don't make such a differentiation at all.
 
You also get people who are autistic savants, absolutely brilliant in one area but have a lot of difficulty with other things.
 
Doug Johnson said:
"The results of this research, a selection of which is summarized in the chart below, have found that rates of manic depression and cyclothymia, its milder form, are 10 to 20 percent higher among artists than expected for the general population.(1) Manic depression therefore occurs far more among artists than is likely just by chance. Though these studies have received some criticism for methodological problems, they all tellingly point to the same general trend- a trends that suggests that manic depression contributes to creativity in certain individuals."

http://www.molbio.princeton.edu/courses/mb427/2000/projects/0002/relation.html

Personally, I don't think it's cause and effect, more like a correlation.
Click to expand...
Doug,
That was a fascinating article to read! The chart of statistical results was especially amazing, showng small levels of illness for normal people, and wildly varying levels among artists depending on who did the research. Some levels reached as high as 60-70% [!], as I recall, for a single class of creative people studied, which is sufficient to make one wonder seriously where the 10-20% estimate came from and what it could possibly mean. The lack of internal consistency among the data itself suggests serious difficulty in trying to measure the effect, (and I can't help adding, if any). Overall, that strikes me as very poor experimental data on which to try to base any conclusions.
But the article does confirm that, anecdotally at least, there is a widespread suspicion that the correlation exists.
Peder
 
Hmm, I had never thought of it that way. I had always assumed that people with mental illnesses sought outlets to relieve their pressure, and that was why there were so many mentally ill artists and poets. You have made an interesting point, though.
It's possible that a person does become more likely to be insane as they become more intelligent, because now that I think about it, most serial killers that are psychopaths are geniuses. Not that that means every Albert Einstein is a serial killer, but I think you made a valid point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top