15 Frank Barron's Ecological Vision Alfonso Montuori “The work of Frank Barron already occupies crucial position in the can: text of creativity research In this chapter I argue tat there are neverte- Tess major aspects of Barrons thinking that have been largely over: looked and deserve great attention. The Institute of Personality ‘Assessment and Research (PAR) findings and ater research associated ‘with Barron have generally been incorporated into the larger body of ‘reativity research in a more or less piecemeal fashion, with les oe vance placed on the fact that Barron's work has infact sketched the ou: ineefan eteney important ew epee on ay, ce research and anew understanding of the person, one which i. temic and ecological atin a Barron (1885, . 80) defined creativity very broadly as the capac ity to ring someting new Into existence ‘Creativity i an abit to sespnd adaptively to the neds for nee approaches and new products It essentially the ait to Bing 8 FRANK BARRON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 9 something ne into existence purpiflly theugh the proces may Sve unconcious cr sbliunallyconetous a wala aly con 23bas components Navel sdaplton i seen to bein the service of [evens fut ond need power grow and/or survive. ‘Te ily wring someting ne no exten dos no oat eon bt ae its content fo Baron, aye oe i my om mind sora fan Slog pepe 0 eyewear pp 1/15, Drawing om sch vrs tne tngncr as Cesta ery andthe work of Teta de ott ys ages lent Begs, and WB ene aon po ar Malin andestandng oe enon an fhe ceive ws ze mae cpa nsec ort depen of acy omen. rnd tat “The way In wich both na and otecive eed a aor andthe pial an ok cat the sujet mate the logy of coscousno™ fim pon Tas tpruch was deny sya enc! by bth oly an te ia eyo evlogy asa branch of biology deals with the intereationships betwen plan and snimals snd their complete environments (Conssousnen ref the mysterious fc tha his primary mate ‘Sat enter somehow evelved the capacity Yo be aware of se nd even tbe seze oft oor awareness the pecallarly human ‘itinction ‘The cology of consciousnes then, must del with tbe ‘Complete envommeat Cat Man experiences and with the fterreh- ttonhip beween structure and proces ini that condition om ‘Sousnese (19725, » 98) ‘This also implies a holistic approsch to research including, therefore, conscious and unconscious, subjective and cbjective, social and psycho- logical processes. "An important part of Bacon's work forses on the research data ‘showing that creative individuals have been found to have certain char- Acteristcs or alts that differentiate them from less creative perzons {Gasron, 1963/1990), These inchade tolerance for ambiguity, complexity of outlook, independence of judgment, and a degree of androgyny. basron in elfct argues thal the characteristics of creative people work together to erate a paychic envionment that is very “fertile” and much ‘more open to cretiviy, innovation, and change. His concept of “psy- homaa" derived from the ecolgical term bions, points to the poten "a ferity ofa mental ecouystem and it potential creativity (1972). ‘Creativity cannot be forced, but the psychological conditions ‘can be made right for a flowering of creativity. Seen together, the traits150 MONTUORI iscussed by Baron for th bss for a cretveprycholoical eo ‘ne which willow fo he omen of new lesan prep ‘opposed tthe repetition of od nes xe McCarthy, ts vale, for an imal cicoson ofthe process) Tarorts approach to i subject mater has always been evo tionary in mature. "My own basi interest in resarch on entity” he Stated in 1985, “seme rom the hope it oles that one may find In pay he creation the sume formal varabls that cn be wed te deserve oe ative proces in ao nature. Pryhic creation i simply pec case hich gives you entree int the proben™Caylo, 196, p13) In fac, ‘Barron's work oulines the bomarphisms among ie bse, mena, snd socal characteris of systems tat ots catty Tanto’ approach erat redctoietc It dows not attempt to reduce psychological pienomens to biology or socal phenomena 1 psychology. Rather, inthe fashion of General Systeme Theory, he ‘tempts 0 understand the underlying pattern tat ae shared by all Phenomena at various level of comply (eg. Lass, 18725, 17a on Bertani, 1968, 1979 fos ths chapter on estaiching Some {the connections and potirns Baron pols to atthe bloc Pay. ‘chological, and social levels. re See BEYOND HOMEOSTASIS AND MECHANISM From the beginning, Barron moved away from a mechanistic, reductionse ie conception of the person, such as could be found in Behaviorism, fo ‘more organic one. A machine is of necesiy created by somebedly outside fi and likewise creativity, viewed from a mechanistic perspective, must eventually call onan ouside source of “inspiration” tha ono inberent in the person. n behaviorism this was the inevitable “stimulus” which was ‘ever qualitatively defined, hence, perhaps behaviors inal fo deal With creativity ad the persistence ofa dichotomy between the preston stimulus-response explanations of behaviors psychologists an the mys. tified theorizing of lypeope about inepiration Barron's organic approach has viewed creativity as something Inherent in the large feestback loop of self and eystem, pat of the stop sic GelFcreatng) tendency off (Matarana fe Varela, 1987, requiring the ‘development ofthe core social and psychological mati of personality, the fertile sol that allows navelly to appear as an emergeat property ‘Summarizing his esearch in 1968, Barron sated that his findings efor 2A further pret, examen ambien in nature ut erty worthwe and ‘implied in Bares we. would ole apn draw othe pyc of eatvtytoshed ight on lope erluton. ee FRANK BARRON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 181 serous hallenget the concept of amet, which poss a asc ‘Srocratve eacency i opiione a Gopostion nop pater ‘tbchavie tht an lective nrg he need for counteraction. ioe eh gna welds faahion mt poe an equrium payeho physiological. Bt thee abervaton pot othe ned fr mar comes ad incest {Ermuation Thor cnet be an eet snd continuing terion tween the maintrance of environmental consistencies and the “sterrpton of uch consistencies he intrest of ew postin rexpeen Garon 964 pp. 60.80) ‘This new input, brovght about by self-generated itrupton of cons {ences brings nena (psychologic aversity and heterogeneity. Sart 9720 we that one may concave ofa human beings a dynamical natural sper, bounded et open, thai it conti Std ot disequilibrium patti) In light ofthe work of Prigogine, Jane and tars sich assem wool now be feed wa ae rivng dspaive strate an open sytem that can survive ony thesogh ¢consan exchange of ate /enrgy an inermaton with reine Such en open syste salle by is wing, but ti nly relatively table, The stability a relative to the constant ‘mater/energy and inforiation fe. Without the conta input a = fem would di to much inputcan overwhelm the system and drastic Ice ge et 98 Gulden, 187; oh, 18, La, TBa7 ob: Pigogine & Stenger Th ment ecologies there ra considerable anoun of comple ty arang out othe selective capo tat logical systems such cols presumably do not share. The buman capt for ef reflecton Sows human sytems to consciously persteonthemeelves and on thet maps ofthe word They crate 4 mental ecology, an ecology of sind, In Baeson’s (1972 terminology, nd a representation ofthe Word nih heya Cente indians low hee become ned by consanty challenging the svampions of thi models {Tecives ae the work They det hr mental elbion—and ‘Snocqenly tnd fo score ger on some measures of psyehopatholo- {pr betuse they may be periodically “inbalanced”—and yet can rer Ba dynunicctable state soring unanually igh on eo-strongth ‘Crosive indivigoae constantly renew themselves by remaining ‘open to input thal may force ther o Yeon set ways of doing and ‘Ming: be eat incidoal ene who nt only attempts complex Solon of problems eterna to hime trough pec tenon and pret ‘rence fr apparent clcrde, but lo allemps fo crete inset O03 ‘Smmiment toa comple personal sta” Baro, 1963, p. 158 Increased autonomy and dierentiation goes hand in hand eth eater instability and openness and loosening of the Boundaries182 MONTUORI between what is inside and what is outside. tn a process world view Guch as evolutionary systems theory or Buddhism) there is really ng inside” or “outside” gr 828 Phlosopher and evoatonay thors Ervin Lasso (96 ‘Wie must do away with the subjectobject tinction in analyzing ‘experience. Thi des lea hat we ej teconep a rg Sand event handed dv by mat ee nly mean hat we conse of experiences inking rps and ‘Sivironment na continous han event from wich we rn, Without arbitrariness, abstract amenity called “organo nother ale “ervronment™ The erga i onc wh tt ‘vironment and ts experience refers fo series of rations co Stating the orgaisnenironmenteontinaur (p21) “This perspective on selfhood and autonomy is of great Interest ‘because it views growth not a8 nt att separton of ateton fs theme, at» rar aan Sneed and openness to process, pradonicaly coupled with greter differnt fon Flop and fey ps» crac pen the dey ‘ment of an “interior eslogy" pyehomass tha prove elle and ara ths capable of geerting new Wenoand making ne cone ‘A closed igi system ncaby hs fever connections ond provides ies fore pyc: When the distinction between subject (ell) and ob subject (land objet is most secure this distinction con wth on scanty bw allowed to dap Perr in yao) Ts ua en spy ‘ith the otal ith the ppt of he hing whch compre cena debian arr 965/990 p15. ee “The crucial factor is that the greater the compet of any 5p tem, the grater ils interdependence with is nvironmany, As Bloc (057) tate, hn pound ountitive hon forte individualist West ® fe ae [Now we begin o se some of the epistemological fallacies of edna ition in acodce ath te genera inate of ing in midninetcentvcetury England, Darwin proposed thoy rl lcton an latin wih he it fu vival was either the family ino the species or sepecis or some thing of he sot-But ody tage obvi tat nists not the un of survival in thevel Bg od The of arial sero FRANK BARRON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 153 fom pus enobonment We are lnring by biter experince tat the trgnism whic destays ie enonment destroys tal 0 we ‘Seat the Darwinian unt of survival fo iclue the environment nd the interaction betwen organism and envionment, a ery range and surprising iden tng th tof eltionry = ‘lf tf fe en he of fp 49) Casta the orga Barron’ concept of egostrength reflects an understanding ofthe ‘ealthy individual as somcone who & secure enough to be open, funda- mentally organized enough to become temporarily disorganized, sure ‘ough in hin-or herself to have baits and ident shaken and indeed profoundly questioned and changed. Creative individuals thrive on this roves, this dialectic of destruction and creation. Ident and peychologi- Ext growth involve nota hardening of boundaries, igi, unyielding ego, ‘Dut ability fo immerse oneself n the world, even lose oneself in i and then come back, From Bacon's perspective, the dichotomy between indir Widual and society, self and systems the product of a sat, ether /or ‘iewpoint: tis replaced by a procass in which an ongoing daiectic leads to allerating periods of innacence and experience, self-dssolution and sel-ctetion (Haron, 196,196), 1973, 1979, 1963/1950, 195), "The ecological approsch t6 the self therefore ecognizes the {nterconnecteiness between self and environment and attemps to dix Cover Homorphisms between them. These isomorphisms between sys tems at the biological, mental, and soca level ogether making up this systemic and ecological concept of “mind”) ean shed light on the evoke onary process and assist in the development of a more integrated, holst, and interdiscplinary research approach than the one offered by the fragmented approach of reductionism and methodological individ tlism. A conception of creativity based on such a systemic understand fing of self an system wil also have markedly different implications than an excessively indvidvalistic understanding of creativity, which ‘often sees the individual as locked in a stragale for dominion with the ‘environment (Monten, 1988) ‘THE CHALLENGE OF COMPLEXITY, CHAOS, AND DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS “AX the very heart ofthe creative proces,” wrote Basson (1969/1299, 249) "sts ably to shatter the rleof law and regulary in the ming” By remaining open to new Input and actively seeking out complex phe romena that cannot be explained, creative persons allow for periodic ‘moments of aieqirium In order to transform the complex input with ‘which they are faced. Campleity, in this sense, is any information thet134 MONTUORI doesnot ey fino pressing nd sot ‘enon being observed but in the observing weoniee goed n heen oan con on (963/180 fond that long witha presen eee ory plexity, ereative persons have pet ley, renee preference for asymmetrical forms oe cre he Seebeck ene ne ‘eH require the development etter the ron af na fo ‘opt sehemaia whi wil reesiablsh i he observe eng {Rite pheoena entigiewich syodee,orn nea a ‘Creative individuals favor disorder and complexity, ‘because they wish to integra ren) pecs integrate it into a higher order—yet simy a sn i ae ete re ance, “to allow into the tot ponthie reves rept sem gre eal ino the reply he pene on Ce p88) This Snston ues lends oe gyanaie ea S96 P89, hs dynamic, evaltions ystems ab opposed tthe state orn iSeries A ec dca vse cowpea ton inthe grow of romney or coms en the vo terms ar iseprle fp song ing te spl overlain some eo ving meaning to dsorder, snd ts andnmatally anno cto Plaget (1973) pt it in the tile (1878) pt it nthe le of one of is book, To Ustad eo respects very much ike diptive st utbeyond ones own boundaries in el ranaccnence integrin core plexity, and achieving higher levels of organization ar eee pay en unzation an heerenelty Diseusing an analogous proces en i J proces in natural systems Las nok: “The emergence of hgharievl sytem beso ‘butasinlifation of system Kncton” (p25). He suggested tet team roche pence (attrac aortic Lite fo cineagvaeaae _Samict of the lower evel anit. The aeectivenepet of ire vet anal poprty fil tls (6) Living systems are self-eplicating. In other words, ‘eile hepa at hey are mado for ttre hom cdo Gan, Living systems do ot tmnt eat. nagh sll-replication (or hablt-fermation in mental ecologies) FRANK BARRON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 185 areas se transcending 28 Jontsch 1980 pointed out “Bratton oS on tri con amis and ceetion, This ne alsin a sytem web whim perical, erated ayes olution of macto-andmirsytrs, Byway ofthis nar by crane, evoton also determines sown mein” (P emphasis oigna- 18h ct lary process of seiftranscendence ified by the aa aa y-simplicy compet thats the Ralimark in conformation and problem resoution, Create Pesons of cent aie fr and sordr inorder In Koon ters, hey reat oe oration te ges of the esting prem none f0 En ra ihe proceso developing understaring n are a cecal thought tobe ost ofthe bounds of human know! ene fronequlbrom systems yaar systems or hoe ee Oy alco thoceton of meagan of amc, Aon {Ragas thecoumolgial motive Dicusing creative ind a eatery often hs work, cen inthe perspective of 2 Fa etc toc tecenton ofa cones ofthe ow a5 ev i ce unfling el se ise has (p. 152. Pan prot the evolutionary urn, can be en snhis Ra he reton of kelp F world in apace and tie, in rough ou ve and in our atest give meaning 1° sae alse aneclogy of cnscousness i ow a environ eA aon th he capes W allow for the emergence and rec Se plarlity of words and piralityof cosmological see jut quanttasy (ware but quan (dvesi) ‘CREATIVE DYNAMICS ANO THE ECOLOGY OF SOCIAL SYSTEMS. Barron suggested that: the pyc condons wich make sce orn pach < Toe Fe em only niga have bee esac, bat seme TENIEA Stns arfopous to those een indivi erat seaport Fredo fexpreson and moverent ck of ae nnd, swings obra ih COME, @ oe ys ell oof dobeation 1 wos parame on and SPI BY esome ofthe altibutes which een ey, set cng can expected tive nr, 1963, p52) ‘A social system that encourages the development of indepe- dence of jadganat tolerance for armbiguty, preference fr complet,156 MONTUORI and so on, is nt simply educating for crantivty: nap! in thes tits ave also exain relations to authority, and willingnes fo question the tfatus quo which wilalmost inevitably bring sbout change. The psycho. logical characteristics oF erative individuals therefare have considera sociopolitical implications, and societies (and social systems in general) Influence erative development to the extent that these characteristics smeenouage i ;ppression of anxiety may be a strong factor in the perceptual decison nt “pay att” ad not lente my and com: plexity or to exercise independence of judgment (ch. Barron, 1 Hampden-Turne, 1971). Barron argu tha sig Repro prt he evi omens and so sere an conama fancton hts inlopenaa in maltiningthe one {nam inigralformin is envitonment However epresion maybe ‘err bce» sy whe nd oo fence ae lust 1 coracousnes through repression, the op ms ‘cad tore song, eae adap sea consequence Fo sie mat pute, pate rel Beep fon-machanism 5 ht hc peony be dt be opal tb epenen, hough ep of xing pho that camet beatae in he srt of he sl (9/1990 p13) Baron (1943) pot ou that although te the combination of xgaisaon and complenity Ut generis freedom, crganzaion may “operate in sucha fatuon sto maiain mladptve empl” (p13) Hz reminded that in lotallarian systems asin neuro inn suppression wed to achieve uni. Suppress appealing because thet to acm 9 wa Ron decd te poe in tema "shaw the human dinonson of el-ogicng disifrvestucurey ‘with hr ifareton point a farseoms elu slate a whch pola {hesystem can ave cir toa higherer ower level of complen Increasing complet pus asain upon an organism's abit 0 Intgate phenomena oe soon fe riy to lat development ofthe gent level of eps and hus avold Be temnporry disintegration that would sthersise have resulted Freedom ltd n'a very spsal manne fo depos aed kind ‘rpantion. In gnera gation, sn company wih compost, {enero Freedom the more comple the Iw! negation We {eae the repertoeof adaptive responses The kendency towed ‘Srgaization may, however operas sucha fasion a oon 2 naladaptve simplicity. Wi sr flr in the oll phere wh {otitaran tats whieh depend spon seppresion to are uy such ates are psychodynamic similar fo the nurotic ined FRANK BARRON'S BOOLOGICAL VISION 17 whe suppresses his own implies ac emotion in order to malt ins ssrtance fsb There reat had enough ese Ratres ‘St toth sch rpanzaton pola and private to make cle tat the sort of uni and balance tat depends upon oll suppresion of {he Gime of inorty affect aod opinions ie maladaptive inthe Teng un (965.0). “The kindof poycholgi characterises lose, ttalarian y= tems (whether the inva, group, osc ewe have fo enforce ‘NG’ etue contrmity a opposed to independence of Judgment ‘alerance as opposed (o tletance of abiguly, and simply as Vo complowty. Closed system sve or mpi homogene- Frond equllbrum:characteisic that ae the opposes of those ian cate systony, whether bloga paychologieo socop> eat aye ier, 587) arom C96) dscused the importance of orginabty and cre ativity stating that orginal meastred wo to be equivalent to the Caper for roducng adaptive esonses which are asi” (p18, Seisaty Gruso inequst responses he went on fo wr can Si be conde a function of “Be cba redo ofan organism, ‘fre end av the range of posse adaptive responses vale Mein all tuations p15 Inner to represent ihe ncesing complet creative indivi ss eho to eneourr and inte hey have thnk syste 1a ave Nexny asa “coding” or interpretive syst, Wilden (1967) “homed Achy’ prin of eget arty int a principle of req She tory. sty’ pricple state that a system encounters rete “ety nf environment than ican proces, the sytem’ Sabi s {ated beerse it wil be unable fo rece, absorb, spre, oF Atamform the unoded varey [the noel that threatens i” (Widen, {Ber ps0. Wide’s pnp of requ divert holds that stem ta beable to represent te base coding ofthe pes of varity int Creme ter wo uo nd 4 aie te nose “Bateson ele: proportion asthe strut verity of a mat fat sual eesyeem fe reduce, al ss Meaty to service {inv eoivonmenal uncertainties, Rebsctons of diver deplete he ‘Syste esures of uncoitedpenl or change” (1. “The uncomited potenti for ute change any system, which Batson (1079 ate gly th eile a human J {Whe beconatered to sme ete athe Sage of crest inkeent in tiiiduneo scl syste celogy. And the characteris of 9 Crete esogy have een ution by Bron in em of very Sony: al eteropency. which mai speclicaly trough th ‘Solatenct of consol of characters, such as independence of158 MONTUORI judgment, preference for complexity and so on, “Novel adaptation: Barron (198, pO wrote, "i seen tobe nthe service of increased exe Dilly and increased power o grow and/or survive” ‘We lam fom Post-Darwinin vews of evolution, particulary as developed by Stephon J. Could (987) snd Niles Eldredge 198), of 4 Sti from evotion a sen in Monod'scasal formulation of chance Gcandoo mutations) and ness adaptation the Blogs phys Cal enronmend, fo one hat see elution ss the ntecon beeen constants and posses (Cea, 199) One can draw pall beeen this change nour view of evolution andthe emergence a pew view a excativiy and change Crate seen a cance or nee sain othe formerly widely het view tht crestivity i either a serendipios ese ing that aficts persons randorly ori forced by environmental pres sues suchas was, pstlence, personal suffering and misfortune’ or & psvehologial imbalance (eg. Stor 1972). Ths form of repltce ‘roth n which eesti ultimately the rest of gente or sot Ick ofthe dave (Baron, 1979) is aso ander asic: theory of ereatvty, wherens Barron, who frst recognized the coreaton tween creativity and peychoogl health, proposed ore of “sro theory (rat leat am alternating “cart and std theory), partlarly ecru erenive persons seem atacted fo compen, dorde, and ehange and pain meaning from thei ongoing quest Fis quest for ‘wholeness an ulimately expresses nthe rats between sf Bn “other, where the “other” may be both tw and extrapeychic Barron, 1973). ‘The neo-Darwinian view sw evolution as a produc of genetic ‘mutation, withthe environment acing a a source of tral selection of the fitest, woeding out the unit mutations (eg, Campbell 1960). Tt sums though that complex systems show depress spontaneous oer tnd selRordering properties that cannot be interpreted solely os the rode of natural Seton Pagel 1988), Adaptation is now being to beseen nat asthe resul of nase in the envionment dete © hange in the organism, but rather a8 the onganat’s eve answer fered constraint in he environment (Cet 198, Barron's terms, ‘isthe result of percept choice of wha o attend to What we are beginning fo seis the proliferation ofan endless number of oie (as opposed to adapted) systems and a form of evo onary phialism that recognizes the conte creative nature of ech systems evolutionary process In humane our cosmologieal matives ‘xpress themscives in a myriad of interpretations ofthe world We Sdapenotto he environment but what went he envionment ‘Change depends onthe varity of ngs nd pee andthe Jnfrte posibe ways in which thi varity is coupled with ito FRANK BARRON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 139 ‘mental constraints Natural Nstory ba Nsory ofthe reproci pro- ‘Eocon af ne consis and new posses through he dnt of Stractral couplings between autonomous Tiving systems nd thei “vironment, and Betmonn difering sstonomeus living systems ‘in postin ecologies (Cera 1989, p. 158) Town mig denn amen ron ert earshot soe ci ete tee ey Herc ae ee Saseeea opel ten ance ene og soe Phe ene Si et ete cine seats oes area ana Sp a Oe carl Seley Se ee eae rch Beene i al nde vag a ee ey ee bongs were ie ee cp fe ot ae eee eae resin ge goer Mi rh sce ae erences at oie a et eet te eed Se oe ioe ee aia erica il teat ng fa se oe eee ea el ec ay melon etengel re aenae eee me eee re Sa i a eect ellie pia fe a een aaa Ee cree tn aon arteries one Seep lt eee an eae lt al nen pee aed Serre acca teen eae Sa te an ate Eales ce eee crea niente mgny oped Sar tintpasl ation inet ndry MONTUORI Creativity research itself has been the fist psychological ente- prise to point to ways of being that go beyond social adjustment sna pormaley but are also not pathological. Rather than focus on an “op ral” adjustment to the social environment, in which paychologien “eat” is defined in terme of social adjustment, creatvily research, ay ‘embodied specifically in Frank Barroa’s research, has pointed lo 8 Plat ‘lity offinesss reflecting different cosmological motives. ‘These diferent cosmological motives ate also expressed in a plurality of fit social systems. This plurals distinguishes set ftom Felativism—which recognizes no criteria for judgment™inastnich a txiterion for fitness may be the capacity for generating a prality of dis: ‘courses within the sstem isel: in other words, the extent to which het ferogencity, complet, and diversity are fostered, along with indepen dence of udgment, tolerance for ambiguity, androgyny (besking down, ‘of sexual stereotypes and the psychological boundaries they crete). end ‘0.0m. The emphasis is not so much on content as on capaci. This plurality af fitnesses coexists on the homs of seemingly ppsradoxieal atinemies or bisociations,allrating periods of diltason And integration, Innocence and experince, rebellion and stably. This pluralism manifests sel also in Unron's own eclecticism ard method ‘logical pluralism as the contributions to this volume attest. Barren (1995) pointed out thatthe dynamics af o-ereation regu ‘much farther study and will provide a rich vein for ereativity research a {ears to come. From an understanding ofthe self as separate from the fnvironment we can begin to move toward 2 more systemic and ecOlog ‘al understnding of self and environment that may drastically change he Way Wwe understand our own creativity, study i, and choose to apy i ‘The ecological and socal desinction created bya sel acting onthe env rorument onthe bass ofan ilasory separation betwen self and environ ‘ment might then begin to be remedied and reverse. This transformation and the creation of ecologis that foster creativity and paycho-soial heath ‘will owe much to the pioneering work of Prank Baron ConeLUsioN In this chapter Ihave hinted at some less wll known aspects of Barron's approach to creativity and personality. have suggested that systemic, ‘ecological approach permeates Barron's work and that he wae in fat poner in ecological approaches tothe study of consciousness—and of the new’ ecopsychology Read in this key, his work can be seen ina dif {event light and the research data reported in such volumes as Creat sn Psycholegieal Health (1953/1990) become far more than part of a ai "proach o personality [FRANK BARKON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 61 ‘Baron's work exalts the complesity ofthe elf places iin the context is enone, egies not Oly bilgi os but ‘Sho adreinvediference and brings a simple elegant and gener. ‘ive onder fo ber on i THs new simply reece th complenty of Symmes tht ha ed up fos Benga enormously ch ae le ‘BiB for the development and abortion of farther ideas gret Ind nourishing biomass. ame php ttl of arly me focusing on syste approaches and serouay considering {RR nero of cet Baron's work say beFgaredby Some ‘2'ing ptf the now unaeNonable personaly approach [have pte to show tht Barron's werk can infact be rend « Nghly SIGE sslogil and yeti erp to dacover system mor opin othe velo bilogeal ment aso phenomen, demon Faking ther itrconnectednss sn orhering n'a hew Won of an Meee ipinary ecology of conscoosnes, ich prefigures our new Staemctoenes eon REFERENCES Barron, F. (1958, September). The psychology of imagination. Scientific “Amero, 198, 151-166. ‘Barron F962), The needs for order and disorder as motives in re- itive action. ln CA, Taylor &e F. Barron (Eds), Scientific crest Its rection and development (pp, 133-10)-NNew York: Wiley. Bareon,F (18635). The disposition towards erginality. In CW Taylor & Barron (Eds), Seen crentiy: recognition and dewlopment (pp 139-152). New Yorks Wiley. ‘Berson, F. (1968), The relationship of ego difusion to creative percep ‘Son, In COW. Taylor (24), Widening horizons i ceatcity, The pro- eotings ofthe fifth Uta crestity conference (pp, 80-87. New York ‘Wiley deSons Barron, F (1968) Creativity and personal freedom. New York: Van Nostrand, Barron, F, (1969). Creative person and erative process, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston Barron, F (1972). Artist inthe making. New York Seminar Press Barron, F. (19728), Towards an ecology of consciousness. gy, 15,95 118 Barron F. (1978). The solitariness of self and its mitigation through ere “ative imagination. In LA. Taylor & JW. Getzes (Eds), Perspectives in cretity(pp-146-150), New York: Aldine.12 MONTUORI Barron, F (1979). Te shaping of personality. New York: Harper & Row. Barron, F. (1987). Bergson and the modern payehology of ereativity. In "AC. Papanicolaou fe P-AY. Gunter (Eds), Bergson and modern ‘thought (pp. 205-222), New York: Gordon & Breach Barron, F (1988) Potting ereatvily to work: In R. Sternberg (Ed), The ature of eratisity (pp. 7658). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ‘Barron, F (1950). Cretcty and psychological hath Butflo, NY: Creative "Education Foundation. (Original work published 1959) Barron, F. (1995). No rauless flower: Towards and cology of creativity ‘Creskill, Nj: Hampton Pres. Bateson, G, (172) Stops toa ecology of mind. New York Balint von Bertalanffy,L (1968, Genera system theory. New York al ‘von Bertalanffy, L (1975. Perspectios on ger system theory. Neve York: Brazier. Bocehi, Gy, & Cera, M Eds), (1987) La sia dla compete [The cb Tenge of complesty. Milano: Feltsinel Briggs, HP & Peat, FD. (198). Looking glass universe. The enersing si onc of wholeness. New York: Touchstone (Campbell DT (1860), Blind variation and selective retention in cresting thought asin other knowledge processes. Pyclogon! Revie, 67 a0, Cera, M, (1989). 1 oincolo ela posits [Constraint and possiblity ‘Milano: Felten, CCsanyi, V., & Kampls,G. (191). Modeling biological and social change: ‘Dynamical replicative network theory. In E. Laszlo (Ea), The mo evolutionary paradigm. New York: Gordon te Breach. Eldredge, N- 1986). Tine frames. The retkng of Darinianeouton and ‘the theory of punctuated ulti London: Heinemann Findlay, CS, & Lumsden, CJ. (1988) The creative mind: Toward an evolutionary theory of discovery and innovation. Journ of Socal nd Big Structures, 1, 3.55, Gould Sj, (1982). Darwinism and the expansion of evolutionary theory. ‘Scion, 216, 380-397, Guidano, VE. (1987) Complesity ofthe self A developmental appro to Psychopathology end therapy. New York Guilford. Hamptoa-Turmer, © (1971). Riel mar, New York: Doubleday. Jantsh, E1880. Te ef-ogunizing unites Neve York: Pergamon Laszlo, E. (1969). Sytem, strctue, and experience. New York: Gordon nd Broach Laszlo, E (19723). The systems vw ofthe world. The natural philosophy of the new declopments in the Slee, New York: George Brazil [FRANK BARRON'S ECOLOGICAL VISION 163 Lasso, E (1972). Introduction 1 systems pilosophy. Toward « nw para hel enemy ng San ones: Harpe ase G96 acon Te gon sytisi Baton: New Science Ubvary. Lasalo, (192). The age of ifweation, Understanding the changing word ‘New York Gordon de Breach, oye, Dy Elser, R, (1997), Chaos and transformation: fmplications of ‘nonequilibrium theory for socal scence and society. Behera Scene, 32, 53-68, Maturena, Hd Varela, F, (1987). The te of knowledge. Boston: Neve ‘Scienee Library Montuori, A fe Purser R, (Eds). (in ress. Social dimension of ereticiy (Wal 2) Cress Ni: Hampton Press. Montior, A. (192). Creativity, chaos, and self-renewal in human sy> tems, World Futures, 35, 195-208 Montuori, A. (1989). Evolutionary competence. Creating the fue. ‘Amsterdam: LC. Gide, : gels, H. (1968). The dra of reason. New York: Simon &e Schuster Plaget J (197). To understand sto soon. New York: Viking. Prigogine 1, & Stenger 1. (1984). Order aut of cacs. New York: Bann. Storr A. 972). The anies of erention. New York: Atheneum. {Taylor C. (1960. Process versut product in creativity: A spontaneous ‘discussion of the conference partcgants (pp. 112122). In C. Taylor (EA), Witning horizon erety. New York: Wiley. ‘Teithard de Chardin P. 196 The future of men London: Fountain, Wilden, A. 0987), Theale ate no game, New York: Routledge