Reasoning and Personal Creativity

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511606915.007

5 - Reasoning and Personal Creativity

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 January 2010

Mark A. Runco

Edited by

James C. Kaufman and

John Baer

Show author details

Mark A. Runco: Affiliation:
Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, California State University at Fullerton, Fullerton, California, and, The Norwegian School of Education and Business, Administration Bergen, Norway
James C. Kaufman: Affiliation:
California State University, San Bernardino
John Baer: Affiliation:
Rider University, New Jersey

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Creative things are always original. Originality is not sufficient to guarantee creativity, for some original things are worthless, unattractive, or otherwise uncreative. It is a one-way relationship: creative things are always original, but original things are not always creative. The fact that originality is not sufficient for creativity indicates that creativity involves something in addition to originality. Usually that additional element is defined as a kind of usefulness, appropriateness, or fit (e.g., Runco & Charles, 1993). When the task at hand requires problem solving, creativity leads to a solution that is both original and effective. Bruner (1962) described that part of creativity that is not accounted for by originality as effective surprise. When the task is not a kind of problem, creativity leads to original and aesthetically pleasing results rather than a solution per se. Whatever term we use, this additional element of creativity is important for the present purposes because it requires reasoning. It is reasoning that insures that original things are effective and aesthetically appealing.

In that light, all creative performances depend on reasoning. It is unlike the reasoning that is involved in other cognitive activities, but similar to it – after all, all reasoning is reasoning. There is some sort of commonality. In fact, it is possible to model reasoning in such as way as to capture both creative and noncreative cognition. The differences between creative and noncreative reasoning are easily built into the model. Such a model is described late in this chapter.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development , pp. 99 - 116

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606915.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abra, J. (1989). Changes in creativity. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 28, 106–126.Google Scholar PubMed

Anderson, (1980). Cognitive algebra.

Anderson, N. H. (1980). Information integration theory in developmental psychology. In Wilkening, F., Beden, J., & Trabasso, T. (Eds.), Information integration by children (pp. 1–45). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Baron, J. (1988). Thinking and deciding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Barron, F. (1998). No rootless flower. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar

Bennis, W., & Biderman, P. W. (1997). Organizing genius: The secret of creative collaboration. New York: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar

Brower, R. (1999). Crime and creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 443–448). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Bruner, J. (1962). The conditions of creativity. In Bruner, J. (Ed.), On knowing: Essays for the left hand. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Cambell, D. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention. Psychological Bulletin.Google Scholar

Charles, R., & Runco, M. A. (2000). Developmental trends in the evaluative and divergent thinking of children. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 415–435.Google Scholar

Chown, S. M. (1961). Age and the rigidities. Journal of Gerontology, 16, 353–362.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behavior and the originality of creative products: A study with artists. Journal of Perspective Social Psychology, 19: 47–52.Google Scholar PubMed

Dawes, R. (1979). The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American-Psychologist, 34, 571–582.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dudek, S. Z., Strobel, M., & Runco, M. A. (1994). Cumulative and proximal influences of the social environment on creative potential. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 154, 487–499.CrossRef Google Scholar

Eisenman, R. (1994). Creativity in prisoners: Conduct disorders and Psychotics. Creativity Research Journal.Google Scholar

Eisenman, R. (1995). Contemporary social issues: Drugs, crime, creativity, and education. Ashland, OH: Book Masters.Google Scholar

Fraser, S. (2005, February 13). A lettered numbers man [Review of R. Parker's John Kenneth Galbraith: His life, his politics, his economics], Los Angeles Time Review of Books, p. R8.

Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Gruber, H. E. (1981). On the relation between ‘a ha’ experiences and the construction of ideas. History of Science, 19, 41–59.CrossRef Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Guilford, J. P. (1968). Creativity, intelligence, and their educational implications. San Diego, CA: EDITS/Robert Knapp.Google Scholar

Helson, R. (1999). Longitudinal study of creative personality in women. Creativity Reearch Journal, 12, 89–102.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kasof, J. (1995). Explaining creativity: The attributional perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 311–366.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kohlberg, L. (1987). The development of moral judgment and moral action. In Kohlberg, L. (Ed.), Child psychology and childhood education: A cognitive developmental view. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Langer, E., Hatem, M., Joss, J., & Howell, M. (1989). Conditional teaching and mindful learning: The role of uncertainty in education. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 139–150.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lines, Rune, & Gr⊘⊘nhaug, K. (in press). Rational processes vs. creative contexts in strategy formation. Unpublished manuscript, Norwegian School of Economics.Google Scholar

March, J. G. (1971). The technology of foolishness. Sivil⊘⊘konomen, 18(4): 4–12.Google Scholar

Meehl, P. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Meehl, P. E. (1960). The cognitive activity of the clinician. American Psychologist, 1960, 15, 19–27.CrossRef Google Scholar

Norlander, T., & Gustafson, R. (1997). Effects of alcohol on picture drawing during the verification phase of the creative process. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 355–362.CrossRef Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's theory. In Mussen, P. H. (Ed.), Carmichael's handbook of child psychology (3rd ed., pp. 703–732). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1976). To understand is to invent. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1981). Foreword. In Gruber's, H.Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar

Renzulli, J. (1978). What makes giftedness? Re-examining a defintion. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184.Google Scholar

Rothenberg, A. (1990). Creativity, mental health, and alcoholism. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 179–201.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rosenblatt, E., & Winner, E. (1988). The art of children's drawings. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 22, 3–15.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rubenson, D. L., & Runco, M. A. (1992). The psychoeconomic approach to creativity. New Ideas in Psychology, 10, 131–147.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rubenson, D. L., & Runco, M. A. (1995). The psychoeconomic view of creative work in groups and organizations. Creativity and Innovation Management, 4, 232–241.CrossRef Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (1995). Insight for creativity, expression for impact. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 377–390.CrossRef Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (1996). Personal creativity: Definition and developmental issues. New Directions for Child Development, 72, 3–30.CrossRef Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (1999a). Divergent thinking. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 577–582). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (1999b). The forth-grade slump. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 743–744). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (1999c). Misjudgment of creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 235–240). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (1999d). Tactics and strategies for creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 611–615). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (2001). Foreward: The intersection of creativity and culture. In Kwang, N. A., Why Asians are less creative than westerners. Singapore: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (2002). Critical creative processes. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (2004). Everyone is creative. In Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Singer, J. L. (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 21–30). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRef Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (2005). Motivation, competence, and creativity. In Elliott, A. & Dweck, C. (Eds.), Handbook of achievement motivation and competence (pp. 609–623). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1986). The threshold hypothesis regarding creativity and intelligence: An empirical test with gifted and nongifted children. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11, 212–218.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. (1993). Judgments of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 537–546.CrossRef Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. (1997). Developmental trends in creativity. In Runco, M. A. (Ed.), Creativity research handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 113–150). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., Lubart, T., & Getz, I. (in press). Creativity from the economic perspective. In Runco, M. A. (Ed.), Creativity research handbook (vol. 3). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Sakamoto, S. O. (1996). Optimization as a guiding principle in research on creative problem solving. In Helstrup, T., Kaufmann, G., & Teigen, K. H. (Eds.), Problem solving and cognitive processes: Essays in honor of Kjell Raaheim (pp. 119–144). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget Vigmostad & Bjorke.

Schutz, A. (1943), The problem of rationality in the social world. Economica, 10.Google Scholar

Singh, S. (2005, February 13). What a long, strange trip it would be [Review of M. Kaku's Parallel worlds: A journey through creative, higher dimensions, and the future of the cosmos]. Los Angeles Times Review of Books, p. R8.

Smith G. J. W. (1999). Perceptgenesis. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 347–354). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Suler, J. R. (1980). Primary process thinking and creativity. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 144–165.CrossRef Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth-grade slump in creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 12, 195–199.CrossRef Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why fly? Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Twain, M. (1999). Adventures of Tom Sawyer. New York: Scholastic. (Originally published 1876)Google Scholar

Wallace, D. B. (1991). The genesis and microgenesis of sudden insight in the creation of literature. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 41–50.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar

Weeks, D., & James, J. (1995). Eccentrics. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.