Anecdotes abound about the strange actions of the great, and popular literature is replete with images of mad scientists, artists, and poets. Plato earlier described poetic inspiration as a form of divine madness. Aristotle reportedly said that “no great genius was without a mixture of insanity.” Shakespeare, too, had one of his characters state, “the lunatic, the lover, and the poet/Are of imagination all compact.” At the beginning of this century, important psychiatrists, the most famous of whom is Cesare Lombroso, wrote extensive treatises connecting genius and creativity with insanity.
While tradition and anecdote point to a connection, there is no supporting empirical evidence. On the contrary, careful historical and epidemiological documentation of the incidence of mental illness among persons of manifest brilliance and creativity constantly shows a very high proportion of illness-free individuals throughout the course of history.
A key factor in the erroneous beliefs about a connection between creativity and mental illness is the deviation from ordinary norms of thinking or behavior manifested both by brilliant and creative persons and those with mental disorders. Creative persons especially think in out-of-the-ordinary ways to produce new and out-of-the-ordinary ideas and products.
I have carried out research interviews with more than 110 literary and art prizewinners and 45 Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, medicine, and physiology. Other than mild personality and character disorders, and substance abuse in approximately one fifth– no greater than the incidence in the general U.S. and European populations—there has been no serious mental illness among them. Also, I have carried out a detailed empirical investigation with a portion of the Nobel scientist group compared with control groups consisting of hospitalized mental patients and two groups of normal Yale college students identified as having high or low creative potential. By means of extensive psychological word association tests administered to all groups, the application of the factors lnvolved in the specific type of creative cognition, named janusian process, was measured–janusian process consists of actively conceiving multiple opposites and antitheses simultaneously (see earlier posts).
Experiment results were that the Nobel laureate group and the student group with creative potential both showed evidence for active conceptualization of the creative janusian process in distinct comparison with the hospitalized patients and the undergraduates with low creative potential, both of whom did not. Further, the Nobel laureate group differed sharply and significantly from all other groups in their predilection for this capacity. The psychiatric patients did not at all think in this way. […]