Advertisement

The Continuous Nature of Moral Creativity

  • Mark A. Runco
Chapter

Abstract

Moral creativity is increasingly important in today's complex world because rapid technological advances with unpredictable consequences are magnifying the effects of creative thought and action as well as the importance of ethical guidance for what we do. This chapter explores the relationships between giftedness, creativity, and morality. It also outlines some empirical evidence for these interconnections. Continua are employed to illustrate how individuals can move toward higher levels of creativity and moral action. Creativity can lead toward both negative and positive directions on the moral continuum. Bright people can be creatively benevolent or creatively malevolent and the moral nature of their creations depends on the intertwining of their actions and values. There are some reasons for optimism that people can achieve positive moral development through creativity.

This chapter focuses on creativity in the moral domain. It explores relationships that exist between creativity (the focus of this chapter) and “ethical gifted minds” (the focus of the book) and outlines a number of practical implications for encouraging both morality and creativity. The starting point is a thought experiment:

Think for a moment about your students and/or your children (if any) and what ideals you have for their growth and development. Who do you want them to become? What characteristics are most important for them to develop and express? If you could somehow select or even guarantee specific characteristics for your students and children, what would they be?

Very likely you would like your students and children (real or hypothetical) to be happy and healthy. Suppose you are lucky enough to have happy and healthy children – what would be next? In all probability you would like them to be good people. You might operationalize this in terms of honesty, integrity, or honor, each of which can be subsumed under the umbrella of ethics and morality.

The idea that health and happiness are somehow primary and morality and ethics are just below implies a hierarchy, not unlike Maslow's (1970) hierarchy of needs. Significantly, the peak of that hierarchy (self-actualization) includes creative potential, which is the focus of this chapter.

The point of this simple thought experiment is merely that morality and ethics are of enormous and universal importance. And if creative talents are by chance inextricable from morals and ethics, they too are of the same importance. Indeed, even if extricable, creative talents might facilitate or support morality, in which case they are nearly as important. Admittedly creative talents are probably on most lists of ideals for students and children, especially because they are related directly to psychological and physical health (Richards and Runco 1998) and to adaptability and coping (Flach 1990; Runco 1994).

Keywords

Moral Reasoning Creative Thinking Moral Action Divergent Thinking Creative Idea 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Agnew, R. (1989). Delinquency as a creative enterprise: A review of recent evidence.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 16, 98–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albert, R. S. (1990). Real world creativity and eminence: An enduring relationship.Creativity Research Journal, 3, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, G. (2000). The association of creativity and psychopathology: Its cultural-historical origins. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cropley, D., Kaufman, J., & Cropley, A. (2008). Malevolent creativity: A functional model of creativity in terrorism and crime. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eisenman, R. (2008). Creativity in prisoners: Conduct disorders and psychotics. Creativity Research Journal (in press).Eisenman, R. (2008). Creativity in prisoners: Conduct disorders and psychotics. Creativity Research Journal (in press).Google Scholar
  6. Epstein R. 2003. Generativity theory as a theory of creativity. In M. A. Runco, & R. S. Albert (Eds.). Theories of Creativity (pp. 257–293). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
  7. Flach, F. (1990). Disorders of the pathways involved in the creative process. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  9. Gruber, H. E. (1987). Creative altruism, cooperation, and world peace. In T. J. Hurley III (Ed.). The Greater Self: New Frontiers in Exceptional Abilities (pp. 103–118). Sausalito, CA: Institute of Noetic Science.Google Scholar
  10. Gruber, H. E. (1988). The evolving systems approach to creative work. In D. B. Wallace, & H. E. Gruber (Eds.). Creative People at Work (pp. 3–24). New York: Oxford UniversityPress.Google Scholar
  11. Gruber, H. E. (1993). Creativity in the moral domain: Ought implies can implies create. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guilford, J. P. (1968). Creativity, Intelligence and Their Educational Implications. San Diego, CA: EDITS/Knapp.Google Scholar
  13. Harrington, D.M., Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1987). Testing aspects of Carl Rogers' theory of creative environments: Child-rearing antecedents of creative potential in young adolescents. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 851–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kasof (1995). Explaining creativity: The attributional perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 311–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kim, K.-H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? A meta-analysis. Journal of Secondary Education, 16, 57–66.Google Scholar
  16. Kohlberg, L. (1987). The development of moral judgment and moral action. In L. Kohlberg (Ed.). Child Psychology and Childhood Education: A Cognitive Developmental View pp. (259–328). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  17. Maslow, A. (1970). The Farther Reaches of Human Development. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  18. Maslow, A. H. (1971). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  19. McLaren, R. B. (1993). The dark side of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Milgram, R. M. (1990). Creativity: An idea whose time has come and gone? In M. A. Runco, & R. S. Albert (Eds.). Theories of Creativity (pp. 215–233). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Mumford, M. D. et al. (2008). Creativity and ethics: The relationship of creative and ethical problem solving. Creativity Research Journal (in press).Mumford, M. D. et al. (2008). Creativity and ethics: The relationship of creative and ethical problem solving. Creativity Research Journal (in press).Google Scholar
  22. Piaget, J. (1932/1965). The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  23. Richards, R., & Runco, M. A. (Eds.) (1998). Eminent Creativity, Everyday Creativity, and Health. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  24. Rogers, C. (1970). Toward a theory of creativity. In P. E. Vernon (Ed.). Creativity (pp. 137–151). New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  25. Runco, M. A. (1993). Creativity: Intentional and unconventional. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Runco, M. A. (Ed.) (1994). Creativity and Affect. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  27. Runco, M. A. (1995). Insight for creativity, expression for impact. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 377–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Runco, M. A., and 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
  29. Sass, L. A. (2000). Schizophrenia, modernism, and the ‘creative imagination’: On creativity and psychopathology.Creativity Research Journal, 13, 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stein, M. I. (1993). Moral issues facing intermediaries between creators and the public. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wyszack, J., Runco, M. A., & Smith (2008). Deception and creativity. Creativity Research Journal .Wyszack, J., Runco, M. A., & Smith (2008). Deception and creativity. Creativity Research Journal.Google Scholar
  32. Wolpert, S. (2002). Gandhi's Passion. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark A. Runco

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations