Psychological Creativity

-Tiffany Zenhoihsang

Creativity is a form of intelligence. Highly creative people such as artists have this sort of artistic
intelligence that is unmatched from statistical or mathematical intelligence (even though the latter is
just as profound).

Creativity is so important and I believe that everyone has the capability to harness their inner
creativity, because creativity is simply to create. Is it simple? Yes it is, but it shouldn't be taken for
granted, as it's a very rare talent given that we nurture it. A quote I read from a random cardboard
delivery box, "I was created in order to create." Creativity comes from within when the inner soul
wishes to make something out of the conceptualized reality.

It seems that creative people are different from the layman in ways that they prefer to innovate rather
than imitate their surroundings.

"..Creativity is associated with a wide range of concepts, such as motivation, imagination, meta-
cognition, social influence, intuition, potential, leadership, humour and mental illness." (Runco, 2004)

Creativity and Intelligence and Personality (their interrelations)

Problems with the earlier definitions of creativity:-

Accordingly, a more accurate definition of creativity may be that of “the production of an idea or
product that is both novel and useful” (Sternberg & O’Hara, 2000, p. 611).

Is scientific thinking creative?

The philosopher of science Karl Popper (1902–94) argued that scientific knowledge can only advance
through testing existing hypotheses, which is what we do in psychological research.

So when creativity is defined in terms of mainly originality, but also has to pass the newly criteria of
being 'useful', scientific thinking is not completely original as explained above.

Secondly, how do we determine the specific usefulness of an idea to be called creative? Subjective
usefulness and objective usefulness both come in play.

To quote Oscar Wilde in The Picture of Dorian Gray: "all art is quite useless".

I believe that creativity shouldn't have a ‘usefulness’ criteria, because by doing so we inaccurately
measure the goal of creative thinking. The creative energy you feel once you're in a state of flow, of
being immersed in the activity of maybe writing an original idea for a book, or composing music is
very much novel and personally important. Is all art practically useless? Maybe or maybe not, but
does practicality in the real world equate to our existential worth? I beg to differ. Existentiality is
something that is the source of our purpose and meaning in life, an existential crisis as mostly
experienced during the adolescent phase, is when you come to question the meaning behind your
existence and it is the core behind your belief system, all unconscious energy may perhaps be related
with our search for existence, a concrete base. A quote I read from an existential psychologist
(Elizabeth? Or something..) Propounded human beings fear death because they cannot comprehend
the lack of their own existence. Religion provides a base of existential understanding, making
meaning out of our existence is what religion gives us. The idea of living after death, by the soul
living on in God’s kingdom tackles this sense of hopelessness that is met when we ask ourselves this
question, albeit in different ways and at different phases under different circumstances: “What
happens after we die? Do we just vanish like nothing mattered?’

Okay I kind of strayed off topic here. I was questioning the usefulness (practicality) of creative
thinking to existential concepts being tied to religion, and now we’re back (:

CREATIVE THINKING.

In the clinical sense, “mad genius”. In the biological sense, “prominent hemispheric activity” In the
behavioural sense “Insight and its processes involved” In the differential sense (as studied in
differential psychology), personality and intelligence in relation to creativity.

Understanding individual differences in creative thinking should be the core of psychological

creativity.