A frank claim based on direct experience and bolstered by studies that theoretically support the claim

I believe artist, high in creative achievement, have a tendency to implicitly engage writing strategies that facilitate toggling up and down various internal cognitive, affective , and psychopathological risky conditions that contribute to various phases of creative processes, persistence and the backbone to breach social conventions. Is this the only act to facilitate this? Of course not. But based on the shear volume of makers that also write, i believe their acts as f writing are important in bolstering their other assets that lead to high creative achievement. Sure there are exceptions, outliers (of course, they are artists).

A dissertation to follow, but give me a year or so.

Oh yes, and i believe the same thing is happening across creative domains–artists and scientists alike. Perhaps one of the generalities of high creative function that is not domain specific.

PSS. Those of you that parse the facets of openness with intellect pointing to science achievements and the more aesthetic but not intellect point to the arts can kiss my artsy ass. My current samples number 540+ of famous artists and scientists writings do not support your claims generated from college students samplings (which likely predicts splits everyday creativity). Their is not statistical difference between artists and scientists linguistic cues of analytic thinking styles, cognitive complexities, and cog processes. High achieving artists are highly intellectual, have a strong need for cognition. Rant without my supporting p-values, lme modeling, anovas, and such.

Ps according to larry shiner this bias of artisan is evident as early as the greek “prejudices against manual production or performance… (regardless of) ‘cunning intelligence’…including dimensions of spontaneous tact…” (2001, 23)