ABSTRACT
A pathology-creativity link need not be specific, applying only to people with schizophrenia-spectrum or bipolar disorders, for example, or to those who use a particular form of associative process. It may be specific, but it may not. There are multiple reports linking a range of pathologies or adversities to creativity (e.g., Goertzel & Goertzel, 1962; Heston, 1966; Juda, 19491950; Ludwig, 1992; Richards, 1981). Included are bipolar and unipolar mood disorders, to be sure (all of which may relate to a bipolar risk in a family), various specific and nonspecific psychoses, and a range of anxiety and personality disorders. For persons with certain advantages and supports, coping with adversity can be a spur to creative accomplishment (e.g., Jamison, 1993; Kinney, 1992; Pennebaker, 1995; Richards, 1998; Runco & Richards, 1997; Zausner, 1996). This case falls under the question of whether there is an evolutionary creative advantage that can cross cultures and manifest differently across them: Pathology leads indirectly to creativity. Earlier, I (Richards, 1997, 1999a) applied a model of acquired immunity to this process. Some who cope with adversity may develop yet further creative abilities by virtue of their resilient coping, and at the same time the creative motivation to try to transform situations in the future, rather than flee from or blindly react to them (fight and flight reactions; see also Richards, 1994a).
