Influence of Mental Illness on Modern Physics

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jeremy</i>
<br />I don't think creative people are any less able to judge the merits of their creations.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The proposition at the start of this thread is that "creative" people in the defined sense might be less able to use logic than others. Toward investigating that thesis, did you ever take a course in logic, and if so, how did you fare grade-wise? Are you otherwise familiar with logical syllogisms and the rules of logic?

For example, let us assume we are given the following as a fact: "96% of heroin users previously smoked marijuana." Conclusion: Smoking marijuana has at least some tendency to lead to heroin use. Please comment. -|Tom|-

Larry Buford,

My guess is that you couldn't.[] But then I can't wiggle my ears either.


"Imagination is more important than Knowledge" -- Albert Einstien

I am a Lefty as well, and have some thoughts to share.

I think train of thought is an important aspect of understanding creativity. For instance, I often find myself in a conversation, especially with my siblings (they are honest), and we will be discussing one subject and I will begin discussing something entirely different. They will ask me where that came from, I can trace back through my train of thought and tell them exactly why and they will just call me "weird". Anyone else have a similar problem? Also, back in my college days, the professor would say something that did not sit well (imagine that) It would take me a couple of minutes to figure out why it did not sit well (meanwhile the class has moved on) and I would digress the whole class back to that point to clear up my objection. This drove my professors nuts, especially when my objections were valid and he/she would have to argue with me.

I also find that I learn more by being confrontational and playing devil's advocate. As for creativity and mental illness, I do not know. But, I think it has to with the expression of their creativity, I can't paint, draw or any of those things, my only expressive outlet is in finding alternatives to problems. I love subjective argument particularily those that are based on misinterpreted objective data. Thus, my Big Split. I think for highly creative people to avoid mental illness, it is important for them to be able to express their creativity in a manner that will be seen and appreciated or criticized by others. If they find themselves alone, or without an expressive outlet, the will continue to go inward and eventually fall over the edge. Creative people by definition are non-conformist, who need either approval or confrontation to keep it together. But, there must be some forum of social interaction to keep them in the "here and now". A creative person who cannot accept criticism and who will not "fight" but rather pull out of the public eye will find themselves in serious trouble.

Tom,
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
The proposition at the start of this thread is that "creative" people in the defined sense might be less able to use logic than others. Toward investigating that thesis, did you ever take a course in logic, and if so, how did you fare grade-wise? Are you otherwise familiar with logical syllogisms and the rules of logic?

For example, let us assume we are given the following as a fact: "96% of heroin users previously smoked marijuana." Conclusion: Smoking marijuana has at least some tendency to lead to heroin use. Please comment. -|Tom|-<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Before answering the questions, I want to expand somewhat on my proposition. Creativity and cognitive intelligence seem to be the pertinent traits here. Cognitive intelligence is necessary for reason and logic. Creativity is necessary for original thinking. A high degree of both with motivation is what is considered genius. However, if this creativity is accompanied by psychological conditions which significantly diminishes the influence of cognitive intelligence then one has the stereotypical "mad scientist" or "mad genius". Less extreme diminishment would result in "eccentric".

I took a course in logic. It was a required course for those on a B.A degree track, such as, Business, Education, MIS, etc. I took the course simply to satisfy my elective requirements and improve my grade point average. I was probably the only one on a B.S. degree track in the class. It was an easy "A" for me, but a majority of the class were clueless. I don't think we had time cover all the material due to the slow pace.

As for your example, the conclusion does not follow. The tendency for marijuana use leading to heroin use is determined by the percentage of marijuana users who go on to use heroin.


JR

rousejohnny,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b> Anyone else have a similar problem?</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

ANS: Yea. My wife.[] Never know what she is talking about. We can be talking about something and then she will say something right out of the blue about something totally unrelated. Drives me nuts.

"Imagination is more important than Knowledge" -- Albert Einstien

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
The proposition at the start of this thread is that "creative" people in the defined sense might be less able to use logic than others. Toward investigating that thesis, did you ever take a course in logic, and if so, how did you fare grade-wise? Are you otherwise familiar with logical syllogisms and the rules of logic?

For example, let us assume we are given the following as a fact: "96% of heroin users previously smoked marijuana." Conclusion: Smoking marijuana has at least some tendency to lead to heroin use. Please comment. -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Offhand I would say that the same logic in your example could be used to "prove" that an even higher percentage of heroin users have some tendency to use it after having drunk water.

I have not taken any formal logic classes other than what is necessary to write programs. Problems of the Raymond Smullyan type I find very difficult. I think I would compare myself with M.C. Escher perhaps. Escher was asked about one of his hyperbolic tesselations by a mathematician and Escher told him that he didn't know what the hell he was talking about. I have a little more math aptitude than Escher but I too tend to grasp things in a visual format. If something can be framed in a geometric or visual way I can grasp it almost immediately, but tough logic problems that I am forced to think of in a purely abstract way with no appeal to scribbling something on paper are definitely not my forte. I was above average in my math classes in school but not exceptional. Trig and geometry were easy for me and Calculus was the most difficult.