Justification accepted

The SMH (as the receptacle of the most wisdom of all Oz papers) today published an article about research done at the University of Newcastle (published in The Proceedings of the Royal Society) on the relation between creativity and sexual habits. The overall conclusions were that creativity is positively associated with a higher number of sexual partners and high scores on a schizotypal inventory (described in the artical as a "schizotypy inventory" Ha!). None of this is of course particularly surprising if one knows anything about Hemingway or Byron but it is interesting that the study supports a positive linear relation between amount of creative activity.

It is, however, their explanations for these correlations that i take issue with. Psychology lecturer, Dr Daniel Nettle suggested that it might be due to artists "higher levels of charisma" or their greater tendencies towards "bohemian lifestyles". There ARE NOT causal factors, if anything they are confounding variables. Even more likely than this is the possibility that all three tests (creativity, sexual history and the schizotypal inventory) are loading on the same factor or measure the SAME BLOODY THING. Psychologists really should be forced to study the humanities or actually do science. This sitting on the fence thing is totally unbecoming.

In spite of this rather dubious assertion of causality this research can still be used to justify any attempts to spend more time writing (i'll get laid more) or sleeping around (i'll become a better writer).