Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2010, Page 24
within the context of the cold war. Competition with the Soviet Union motivated our
government to fund the research of creativity, having an impact on educational curriculum
and testing, among other outcomes. In 1954, humanist psychologist Carl Rogers warned
that ―[w]ithin the context of the high-stakes game during the nuclear arms race
―international annihilation will be the price we pay for a lack of creativity‖ (in Sawyer, 2006,
p. 41). Sawyer (2006) notes that ―… Like Carl Rogers and Morris Stein, [other] creativity
researchers believed they were defending freedom and helping to save the world from
nuclear annihilation‖ (p. 43).
Summarizing creativity as an intrinsic part of being, and integrating individualist and
contextualist perspectives on creativity, Csikszentmihalyi, states that ―a joyful life is an
individual creation that cannot be copied from a recipe‖ (1990, p. xi). The popularity of his
ideas is exemplified in the following excerpt, included in an online summary of his thinking
posted by University of Southern California Human Resources. It says,
According to Csikszentmihalyi, people focus their life activities in accordance
with two powerful motivations. One is the ability to enjoy being creative for
the sake of exploration and invention which has over generations enhanced
human society‘s ability to survive in an unpredictable world. The other is to
derive pleasure from comfort and relaxation which allows us to rejuvenate
ourselves and to recover our energy in order to maintain overall health and
well-being. A balance of these two motivations can lead to enhanced
creativity. (Enhance Your Wellbeing Through Creativity)
And with a global sense of urgency, Bronson and Merriman‘s Newsweek article cited earlier
states that if creativity is ignored,
The potential consequences are sweeping. The necessity of human ingenuity
is undisputed. A recent IBM poll of 1,500 CEOs identified creativity as the no.
1 ―leadership competency‖ of the future. Yet it‘s not just about sustaining our
nation‘s economic growth. All around us are matters of national and
international importance that are crying out for creative solutions, from
saving the gulf of Mexico to bringing peace to Afghanistan to delivering health
care. Such solutions emerge from a healthy marketplace of ideas, sustained
by a populace constantly contributing original ideas and receptive to the ideas
of others. (Bronson and Merryman, 2010)
The message of this and other recent articles (Cohen, 2010) is that creativity in the United
States has been declining continually since the 1990s. With society‘s urgent need to
understand what enhances creativity, I suggest that the articles in this special issue
contribute not only to the field of cultic studies, but also to the new field of the science of
creativity.
4. Cult Recovery Model: Humanism, Dehumanization, and Rehumanization
Freedom to imagine, to think, to feel, and to be self-defined are fundamental humanistic
values that underlie the view of creativity commonly noted by survey respondents and
authors. I find that the fundamental psychological impact of cults on members is
dehumanization through suppression of creativity and imagination, and more specifically
through suppression of the freedom to subjectively symbolize and express experience. As
noted above, this view builds on the concept that man is by nature the symbol-using
animal. Further building upon Lifton‘s description of thought reform in extreme circumstance
as a dehumanizing process (p. 67), I see cult recovery treatment as one that focuses on
rehumanization through the encouragement of spontaneous symbol creation to reclaim the
joy of creating subjective meaning in the form of humor, play, metaphor, analogy, and so
on, and in turn to enhance self-esteem and the potential to contribute to society.
within the context of the cold war. Competition with the Soviet Union motivated our
government to fund the research of creativity, having an impact on educational curriculum
and testing, among other outcomes. In 1954, humanist psychologist Carl Rogers warned
that ―[w]ithin the context of the high-stakes game during the nuclear arms race
―international annihilation will be the price we pay for a lack of creativity‖ (in Sawyer, 2006,
p. 41). Sawyer (2006) notes that ―… Like Carl Rogers and Morris Stein, [other] creativity
researchers believed they were defending freedom and helping to save the world from
nuclear annihilation‖ (p. 43).
Summarizing creativity as an intrinsic part of being, and integrating individualist and
contextualist perspectives on creativity, Csikszentmihalyi, states that ―a joyful life is an
individual creation that cannot be copied from a recipe‖ (1990, p. xi). The popularity of his
ideas is exemplified in the following excerpt, included in an online summary of his thinking
posted by University of Southern California Human Resources. It says,
According to Csikszentmihalyi, people focus their life activities in accordance
with two powerful motivations. One is the ability to enjoy being creative for
the sake of exploration and invention which has over generations enhanced
human society‘s ability to survive in an unpredictable world. The other is to
derive pleasure from comfort and relaxation which allows us to rejuvenate
ourselves and to recover our energy in order to maintain overall health and
well-being. A balance of these two motivations can lead to enhanced
creativity. (Enhance Your Wellbeing Through Creativity)
And with a global sense of urgency, Bronson and Merriman‘s Newsweek article cited earlier
states that if creativity is ignored,
The potential consequences are sweeping. The necessity of human ingenuity
is undisputed. A recent IBM poll of 1,500 CEOs identified creativity as the no.
1 ―leadership competency‖ of the future. Yet it‘s not just about sustaining our
nation‘s economic growth. All around us are matters of national and
international importance that are crying out for creative solutions, from
saving the gulf of Mexico to bringing peace to Afghanistan to delivering health
care. Such solutions emerge from a healthy marketplace of ideas, sustained
by a populace constantly contributing original ideas and receptive to the ideas
of others. (Bronson and Merryman, 2010)
The message of this and other recent articles (Cohen, 2010) is that creativity in the United
States has been declining continually since the 1990s. With society‘s urgent need to
understand what enhances creativity, I suggest that the articles in this special issue
contribute not only to the field of cultic studies, but also to the new field of the science of
creativity.
4. Cult Recovery Model: Humanism, Dehumanization, and Rehumanization
Freedom to imagine, to think, to feel, and to be self-defined are fundamental humanistic
values that underlie the view of creativity commonly noted by survey respondents and
authors. I find that the fundamental psychological impact of cults on members is
dehumanization through suppression of creativity and imagination, and more specifically
through suppression of the freedom to subjectively symbolize and express experience. As
noted above, this view builds on the concept that man is by nature the symbol-using
animal. Further building upon Lifton‘s description of thought reform in extreme circumstance
as a dehumanizing process (p. 67), I see cult recovery treatment as one that focuses on
rehumanization through the encouragement of spontaneous symbol creation to reclaim the
joy of creating subjective meaning in the form of humor, play, metaphor, analogy, and so
on, and in turn to enhance self-esteem and the potential to contribute to society.
