So what is the allure of the drugs and alcohol and creativity connection?

Posted on 30/09/2010 | 0 Comments

Another nail in the coffin
 
So, there is recent report of research that shows that creativity in the arts and literature is not improved by drugs or alcohol. On the contrary, drugs and alcohol use have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of what writers and artists and musicians produce when under the influence: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/drunk-writers-were-better-sober-says-psychiatrist-2010053.html
 
Shucks. Ever since I was a teenager (and that was some time ago), I was always intrigued by the hard-living experiences of famous writers and musicians. It was hard to believe that all those amazing adventures and the impact of drugs and alcohol somehow did not make them better artists or give them deeper insights into the human condition. I can still remember reading (many years ago now) a study that compared musician’s playing on and off drugs and demonstrating that off drugs was so much better in quality.
 
So what is the allure of the drugs and alcohol and creativity connection? Hard to say. Some very talented artists live with significant mental health problems including mental disorders. There may be a fine line between creativity and bipolar disorder for example. Substance abuse can be part of this mix. 
 
However, I think that this myth of the substance fueled writer or painter or musician producing wonderful work when stoned or drunk is the result of simple logical mis-reasoning. Its confusing co-relation with causality! Because a writer uses drugs does not mean that the drugs make him or her a good writer. Actually, as we know, it’s the opposite.
 
Now, we need to stop thinking its “cool” and start learning to think in a way that does not depend on our subjective biases and does not support creating “causal” linkages where they are not present. If there are one million possible reasons for a person writing a good story and we focus on just one – drugs, we are likely completely wrong; on the basis of statistics alone.
 
So, there we go. Stop the drugs and write the great Canadian novel!

Be the first to leave a comment

What do you think?


Filter by category

Filter by date

Recent Comment

This is a great set of comments and rings very true. 

I totally agree that scientists (just like everyone else) have their biases and foibles.  After all, scientists are human beings too!  But science is different than scientists. 

The scientific method is the most objective frame that we have by which to evaluate and predict.  Science is not about finding truth.  It is only about being less wrong most of the time.  The scientific method (experimental design and mathematics) gives us the ability to test what we believe.  The scientific method is not used to prove something is correct, on the contrary, the scientific method is designed to prove that something is not correct!  It is designed to test what is called the “null hypothesis”.  It takes ideas that come out of left field (or wherever else they come from) and puts those ideas to an independent test.

t does not drive our beliefs.  It does however challenge our beliefs.  In that way it is self-correcting. Of course scientific inquiry and understanding lives within a wider social context.  That is one of the great features of science. 

But gravity is gravity, social context notwithstanding.  And thus it is nasty, brutish and long.  As Brecht said, (something like this) - the purpose of science is to save us from everlasting error.

By Christina Carew on May 11th

You can find us here too!

  • image
  • image
  • image

We would like to say thanks...

Without their help this initiative would not be possible. Thanks for you help.

  • image
  • image
  • image