• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Are mathematical ability and mental illness linked?

Psychiatrist Nancy Andreasen researched the mad genius stuff in the 80s-90s. She expected to find a link with schizophrenia, but instead found a stronger link between creativity and mood disorders, both unipolar and bipolar. Psychologist Ruth Richards used one of those Scandinavian population registers to demonstrate that family members of mood disorder patients were more creative than the norm, suggesting a biological proclivity. Finally, Kay Redfield Jamison is a clinical psychologist who herself is bipolar and wrote a book on the link between madness and genius: Jamison, Kay Redfield (1993), Touched with Fire: Manic-Depressive Illness and the Artistic Temperament, New York: The Free Press, ISBN 0-02-916030-8 (includes a study of Lord Byron's illness).

None of these authors included autism in their studies, at least as far as I am aware. Remember that our current understanding of Aspergers/Autism didn't really make it into broad-based clinical awareness until the mid-90s and later. I read quite a bit about bipolar and creativity in the 1990s but haven't dipped into that topic since. All the same, for those interested in this topic, the above authors are a place to start.


Thank you for the links. It's a fascinating subject to me, l can already feel myself falling into my autistic rabbit hole and l would like to read about Alexander Grothendieck.

Pythagoras, often described as the first pure mathematican, went on to lead a strange cult. Isaac Newton , Kurt Godel, Florence Nightingale and John Nash all obtained mathematical prominence before succumbing to some type of psychopathology, including depression, delusions, and religious mysticism.
 
Last edited:
My special interests have always revolved around creativity, primarily writing, and since I became involved in autistic and disability advocacy I've found a useful channel for it. I've always needed a goal to work towards in order to focus my creativity and having one which is essentially boundless has helped no end.
I've never made a secret of my history with anxiety & depression and it's true that in such periods I can produce my most imaginative work, but it's only when my mind is calmer that I can focus well enough to channel that creativity towards the completion of projects.
Now maths... Tricky one. I am not dyslexic nor do I fit the criteria for dyscalculia yet I have a problem with equations. I can do the maths providing I visualise the systems mentally as the actual things they are. I cannot translate it into algebraic terms though, nor back again.
If I apply the principles and the numbers as objects, distances, forces etc. it's easy but I can't do it with abstract symbols. It caused me trouble at school and is why I was unable to pursue a career in the sciences. I can do the sums but I cannot show the tutor or examiner the workings on paper.
I've come across a few others with similar difficulties before but I've never come across a name for it or any research that seems to cover it.
 
Extreme cognitive styles map onto genius that autism is. And psychotic spectrum disorders such as bipolar, schizotypy, schizophrenia are disproportionately disgnosed in highly creative individuals.
The genius-madness debate is asking whether creative individuals are at a greater risk for developing mental illness then their noncreative peers.
A professor at UCLA dubs the Mad Genius Paradox as extraordinary creative individuals are more likely to exhibit psychopathology.
High productivity is associated with both intelligence and with high creativity, whether a schizotypal or autistic nature.
The normal process of demyelinatiin that begins in mid-forties leads to a weakening of executive networks that are neuroprotective. Myelin function impacts processing speed, so a highly intelligent person has a propensity to mental illness and may experince symptoms in this age range.Nash and Newton were both autistic and schizophrenic, proving that true genius represents an overdevopment of both.
What are your opinions?

I feel like there's a lot of equivocation happening here such as "high productivity" seeming to be equated to "creativity," and processing speed seeming to be implied as a factor in mental illness, which it may be, I don't know it not to be.

And any individual case, such as the ones offered or the ones being offered by other members, are not particularly relevant to the overall trend, which is what the issue at hand is as far as I can tell.

Actually, I'm not sure if the question is whether or not "genius," (don't know how that'd be defined) and mental illness are connected, or if the question is whether "high levels of creativity" (don't know how that would be measured) is associated with mental illness.
 
My special interests have always revolved around creativity, primarily writing, and since I became involved in autistic and disability advocacy I've found a useful channel for it. I've always needed a goal to work towards in order to focus my creativity and having one which is essentially boundless has helped no end.
I've never made a secret of my history with anxiety & depression and it's true that in such periods I can produce my most imaginative work, but it's only when my mind is calmer that I can focus well enough to channel that creativity towards the completion of projects.
Now maths... Tricky one. I am not dyslexic nor do I fit the criteria for dyscalculia yet I have a problem with equations. I can do the maths providing I visualise the systems mentally as the actual things they are. I cannot translate it into algebraic terms though, nor back again.
If I apply the principles and the numbers as objects, distances, forces etc. it's easy but I can't do it with abstract symbols. It caused me trouble at school and is why I was unable to pursue a career in the sciences. I can do the sums but I cannot show the tutor or examiner the workings on paper.
I've come across a few others with similar difficulties before but I've never come across a name for it or any research that seems to cover it.


It hasn't held you back, you are extremely creative!
 
Yes I forgot about the link to Mathematics when I answered, which is clearly in the title. Did I forget because I am creative and stereotypically scatty , or due to my high autistic traits or Aspergers that includes slower processing and poor executive function? Or both?

I was not great at maths at school, I think there were mixed reasons for that, there were ideas that girls might be expected to be less able or interested in maths, also in junior school they'd make us stand up and answer mental arithmetic questions, gosh that was harsh and off-putting.

But I think I might have enjoyed maths if it had been differently presented. The years up until sixth form were tough for me, I was happier when I could specialise. Then one was channelled into arts and humanities or maths and sciences, so I abandoned maths and science at that point.

I do recall questioning the point of the maths curriculum, a lot of it seemed irrelevant and unusable and I would have benefited from being told why anyone thought I should learn it. If I d understood that, I might have been more engaged.
 
I guess the inability to filter out seemingly irrelevant information is a hallmark of both creative ideation and disordered thought. This state is called reduced latent inhibition, allows more information to reach awareness , which can in turn foster associations between unrelated concepts.

Yes, I do that. Unfortunately it's chaotic and often confusing, and too often difficult to return back to ordered thinking.
 
One of the famous mathematical prodigies was Alexander Grothendieck. His father was a Russian Jew, and his mother was German. He innovated in pure mathematics, his work has applications in cryptography and coding theory. Using tools from algebraic geometry, category theory, and toplogy, he created an entirely new paradigm.
Autistic traits might play out in mathematical genius, as opposed to in computational savantism, which could be described as high intelligence devoid of creativity.

The counselor who diagnosed me told me that there is one phase of pre-natal brain development where the presence of testosterone leads men to have a more structured or systemized brain than women (neither an advantage nor a disadvantage - just a difference for the different evolved roles of the sexes. A more systematic, focused brain for the hunters, a more diverse, multi-tasking thought pattern for the gatherers).

One of the more popular working theories for the cause of autism is that an excess of testosterone at this time leads to an overly-structured brain - focus becomes hyper-focus and a well-working structure becomes an overly rigid, black-and-white style of thinking.

Having a brain that is overly-structured or highly-systemized could explain why I work so well within systems of rules. I excel at math, programming, games, and anything else that has a consistent system of rules I can understand.

It doesn't explain everyone, though.
 
The counselor who diagnosed me told me that there is one phase of pre-natal brain development where the presence of testosterone leads men to have a more structured or systemized brain than women (neither an advantage nor a disadvantage - just a difference for the different evolved roles of the sexes. A more systematic, focused brain for the hunters, a more diverse, multi-tasking thought pattern for the gatherers).

One of the more popular working theories for the cause of autism is that an excess of testosterone at this time leads to an overly-structured brain - focus becomes hyper-focus and a well-working structure becomes an overly rigid, black-and-white style of thinking.

Having a brain that is overly-structured or highly-systemized could explain why I work so well within systems of rules. I excel at math, programming, games, and anything else that has a consistent system of rules I can understand.

It doesn't explain everyone, though.

That's the "hyper-masculinity" theory that Baron-Cohen spewed out about 20 years ago that has thankfully been widely relegated to the bin. Whilst systemising is not uncommon amongst autistics it is as often a learned coping skill as it is inherent.
 
That's the "hyper-masculinity" theory that Baron-Cohen spewed out about 20 years ago that has thankfully been widely relegated to the bin. Whilst systemising is not uncommon amongst autistics it is as often a learned coping skill as it is inherent.

Oh. Thank you. Where can I learn more about this? Private conversation or in this thread - either one is good with me if you have material you can share.

The learned coping skill makes sense, though I have often wondered if I am good at analysis because it works for me, or if I analyze everything because I'm good at it. I suspect it's a feedback loop - start good, do it a lot, get better, do it more.
 
So the question is if scientists can alter living brain or edit human embryos to mitigate schizphrenia ( or autism?), do we risk excising brilliant outliers from the gene pool? A lot of forum posters have accepted their autism, and it is a part of their identity, so this is just a hypothetical question.


Imaging studies confirm that both highly creative individuals and those at risk for psychotic spectrum disorders exhibit unusual patterns of connectivity between the executive control (cognitive tasks), default mode (daydreaming, etc.,). So basically, feel free to daydream!
 
I read a book length study of difference between male and female brains which investigated all important research so far, and concluded there is very little difference and that in so far as gender difference is related to brains, it is at best soft wired, ie that cultural norms and conditioning , nurture, produce any difference there is, rather than nature.

The techniques for brain research are getting better, so it will be interesting to see what it can tell us about neurodiversity as time goes on.
 
I've always been awful at math. My creativity often comes in short yet powerful bursts which more often than not happens when I'm defecating.

People do generally seem to percieve me as intelligent and I suppose there is some validity to that claim. At my best however, I can only be someone else's Watson to their Sherlock.
 
Imaging studies confirm that both highly creative individuals and those at risk for psychotic spectrum disorders exhibit unusual patterns of connectivity between the executive control (cognitive tasks), default mode (daydreaming, etc.,). So basically, feel free to daydream!

Please, tell me where you read that. I am interested in this particular issue.
 
Please, tell me where you read that. I am interested in this particular issue.

This was touched upon in: The Mad Genius Mystery, by Kaja Perina, 50th Anniversary Issue of Psychology Today/August 2017

High intelligence is a protective factor in those with a genetic predisposition to develop schizophrenia, and this is derived from our executive function. Actually pointed out was that genius, autism, and schizophrenia are all so rare, that firm data is gleamed from biographies.

It currently is surmised that highly creative minds possess only part of the schizophrenic genotype.

Isaac Newton possibly was on the autism spectrum as he was always withdrawn. He suffered from psychosis and persecutory delusions in his fifties and overpowering spiritual obsessions thereafter. In his collection of thousands of pages, he wrote more than a million words on alchemy and biblical prophecy.
 
I went crazy trying to comprehend certain kinds of math, so I'm not doubting it. Great mathematical ability is quite the talent, one that I honestly envy a little bit, and it's sad that it sometimes comes with a burden.
 
Last edited:
I'm not convinced they are overly linked in terms of aptitude, but perhaps in terms of development. What I mean by that, is that an autistic person may tend to obsess in his or her area of increased aptitude.

Personally, I am mathematically and scientifically inclined, but I also deploy an immense wealth of time in that direction.

I have certain creative skills which may not be common to everyone, but certainly there are NTs with similar and greater such skills.

It's very hard to say definitively why I am able to perform math despite being dyslexic. Most would say this should effect this, but really all it really affects is my spelling.
 
It's very hard to say definitively why I am able to perform math despite being dyslexic. Most would say this should effect this, but really all it really affects is my spelling.

My father is like this. He has dyslexia but has always been talented with mathematics. Both of my parents are good with maths. However, I am not. My sister shows some dyslexic tendencies in terms of spelling, but I do not believe that she is dyslexic. She is good at maths also. I have visual processing issues, and whilst I am undiagnosed I seem to match the criteria for dyscalculia to a T. Unfortunately, I have not been taken seriously in the past due to doing well in other subjects such as English.

Both of my parents are the type to organise things in a systematic way. They are problem solvers. Planners. My dad alongside being good at maths is also a creative type. He enjoys science, philosophy and art. One day he might be obsessing over a theory regarding quantum physics, the next he's creating a painting or inventing something. He never seems to do anything halfheartedly, so it's not uncommon in my house to jokingly ask what his latest obsession is. I do wonder about him sometimes. He's a bit of a loner and a little socially awkward. People who don't know him tend to think he's unfriendly or unapproachable, but he's actually an incredibly open person once you get to know him.

My parents are both a bit unusual. They don't seem to understand what acceptable small talk is. My mother can be rather literal-minded and bluntly honest to a fault, but she still manages to maintain a large friendship group and is somewhat extroverted. Whereas my dad is more introverted in nature and focused on his interests (which he can talk about for a long time, so I only ask about them if I have time to spare. :D)

As for me, I would consider myself to be a creative person. When I was younger I was put into school counselling. At the time they didn't fully explain why I was there, they told me that it would "help me to think inside the box". I often wondered why they wanted this, and what exactly they were trying to achieve. Until I realised what the issue was. I had a tendency to assume that others automatically followed my line of thinking, that the connections I made were inherently obvious to everyone else. They weren't. Once I realised this, and I started to explain how I got from point A to point B people realised that there was actually a reasonable thought process behind my connections, and I wasn't just stating unrelated things for the sake of it.

Sometimes teachers would get annoyed at me whenever we would do thought exercises. I would offer them solutions that were technically plausible, but they didn't fit into the mark scheme. They were so off the grid that their answer book didn't cover what to do with my answers. So, it wasn't wrong per say...but it wasn't right either. The counselling I went through wasn't helpful. My counsellor never tried to understand me, in fact she ended up giving up on me and just spoon feeding me what answers to write in order to be correct. Or at least, correct in the sense of that's what her book of answers wanted from students. I tried to explain my reasoning and I'd ask why my answers weren't acceptable, but she didn't want to hear it. Kept asking me why I couldn't just be normal. She was a terrible counsellor.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom