Talk:Creativity and mental illness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
Start This page has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance assessment scale

Bah. All this research shows is that the modern construct of "bipolar disorder" is very similar to our centuries old notion of how artists should act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrownApple (talk • contribs)

The concept of creativity covers much wider ground than merely individuals with bipolar disorder. Every person has the ability to be creative. There is no logical resaon for them to be linked together.

I can accept that there's no logical reason... But at least since the rise of Romanticism, we've idolized and encouraged representations of artists as emotionally and mentally unstable people. The romantics, of course, thought this instability was a sign of a deeper and more pronounced connection to humanity's emotional core (or something like that). If we'd stuck with the Englightenment ideal of the rational artist (e.g. DaVinci), things might look very different.

Contents

[edit] citations needed and articles that don't exist

The article requires citations. If material cannot be producted to support various statements, those statements should be deleted. Several of the articles "cited" are not available as cited, and so that material should also be deleted unless an interested editor can find material that meets the wikipedia standard of being verifiable. DPetersontalk 23:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Major rewrite needed

This article is in an extremely poor condition. As DPeterson says, proper cites are required for the assertions in the article: the current "works cited" format is less than ideal. -- The Anome 20:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The reference, "* Jamison, Kay Redfield, "Manic-Depressive Illness and Creativity," Mysteries of the Mind, February 1995" is not a valid source to support the "scientific" statements made in this encyclopedia article. The book is not peer-reviewed, not an empirical study, and merely a collection of essays and unfounded theories. DPetersontalk 14:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
For research to be scientific an empirical study is not a prerequisite, especially in social sciences. --Grace E. Dougle 15:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Regardless, the book is merely a collection of essays and unfounded opinion. DPetersontalk 17:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe people should make some effort to check and cite the existing references? I think there are about 6 references listed that aren't linked into the article. --Zeraeph 15:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point. DPetersontalk 17:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Note that DPeterson has deleted the references Zeraeph mentioned just minutes after finding his idea a 'good point' on here. --Grace E. Dougle 17:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Also note that "deleting" was NOT the approach Zeraeph had in mind when mentioning them... --Zeraeph 18:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Resolving the issues

Just an idea, but I don't have any preformed ideas or opinions on the topic of the article (except that, until it is established with me as a topic at all I am not sure if it should BE an article), I just floated in on a current of free association from a couple of other articles. Perhaps a good way to resolve this would be to try and "sell" me on your own opinions, and see who wins?

Let me point out that I'm only swayed by hard evidence I can check out for myself, and any kind of "politic" tends to prejudice me. So, even just for interest, why not make your cases and show me your evidence? --Zeraeph 18:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

This article is a wreck. Sources have been used that are "dead links." The article is just not supported with reputable citations or references. MarkWood 22:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Note: the article has been substantially rewritten from scratch since this comment. -- The Anome 14:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have an idea on how to reformat the article even further.

First there seems to be a number of mental illnesses that are anecdotally linked with creativity. To address this, as sufficient information supporting or refuting the connection with specific illness is acquired, let's create a section that addresses the specific link, or lack thereof.
Second, lets add or incorporate into an existing section, a discussion about the current challenges psychiatry faces establishing an answer to the question "Is there a linke between mental illness X and creativity?" As one reads some of the depression and creativity studies I've provided links to below you'll see acknowledgments of the limitations of the studies, by their own authors. In short, if a limitation of a study is important enough for the author to mention, it's important enough to consider mentioning in the article body.
Finally, as I read the discussion, the following question/idea comes to mind. If we adopt a policy of "one section per proposed mental illness and creativity link", should we also adopt a discussion area policy of grouping lists of related articles into their own sections within the discussion? (e.g. Schizophrenia and creativity articles would get their own section, and so would articles exploring the links between creativity and depression...etc)
-- Jason C Daniels 19:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Psychiatric Times article

I've found an excellent article published in Psychiatric Times in 2005, which cites a considerable number of sources:

Dean Keith Simonton (June 2005). Are Genius and Madness Related? Contemporary Answers to an Ancient Question. Psychiatric Times. Retrieved on 2007-02-20.

The list of citations given at the end of this Psychiatric Times article looks like a good place to start in a literature search on this topic. -- Karada 11:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Here are some articles in a peer reviewed journal discussing the link between depression and creativity. (Feel free to add to the list.) -- Jason C Daniels 19:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Schizophrenia

Perhaps we should also have some material on the recently suggested links between schizophrenia and creativity, and move this article to creativity and mental illness? -- The Anome 12:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

That would be good...but only if there are reputable citations to support the claims. The book, Touched With Fire, for example, is not an empirical study and while interesteding, is hardly a stronlgy supportive source. MarkWood 13:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

In the case of bipolar disorder, several other sources are also cited, which are published in peer-reviewed journals. TWF is important because of its influence on public perception of the postulated link, and its effect on public opinion and later research.

Regarding the postulated link between schizophrenia and creativity, a quick Medline search for "schizophrenia creativity" finds numerous papers, although I haven't got time to go through them now: until we have properly cited sources, I'm not going to address the suggested schizophrenia link. -- The Anome 14:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Blimey, I just noticed the edit summary on "Creativity and Bipolar" schizophrenia and flipped through to suggest the possibility of renaming!
Now THAT is censensus. Perhaps by telepathy?
We are borg, you will be assimilated :o) --Zeraeph 15:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Here's what appears (superficially) to be a well written, peer reviewed article online regarding the possible link between Schizophrenia and creativity. ::http://www.hubin.org/news/column/lucc1_creativity/creativity_en.html -- Jason C Daniels 18:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Those under treatment

Since I began taking drugs to help me cope with bipolar disorder, I have indeed noticed that my creativity has decreased. For years I have kept a catalogue of ideas I intend to develop; lately my catalogue has been receiving fewer and briefer entries, and I find myself disinterested in what has been committed to file. I have also found it harder to concentrate and recall how I came across a line of reasoning.

I know my personal account doesn't belong in the article, but I hope that at the very least, others could chime in about their experiences. This could also be another direction to follow with the article: that of contemporary people finding their creativity affected either by their illnesses or their treatment. Writers of antiquity probably didn't comment on their emotional experiences, much less how they were affected. —Nahum Reduta (talk) 03:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC)