This chapter focuses on the relationship between creativity and prosocial values, in particular those associated with cooperation and collaborative activities. Despite the fact that, in developmental studies and the literature on education, creativity and values are often treated separately, our premise here is that both psychological theory and educational practice would greatly benefit from reuniting them within an integrative framework. In this chapter, we consider creativity and prosocial values as they develop within the Self–Other dynamic specific for communal living and sociability (see Simmel, 1949; Jovchelovitch, 2015). We start by outlining the theoretical foundation for our argument and reflect on schools as socio-cultural contexts that socialize children to become creative and moral agents. We then unpack the relation between creativity, cooperation and prosocial values with particular reference to studies done in Brazilian schools. Following this, we propose a tentative set of guidelines for nurturing creativity and cooperation in the classroom. We conclude with a few reflections on the role of dialogue and reflexivity for enhancing moral creative behavior. However, before developing these ideas, a more basic question needs to be addressed first.
Why Creativity and Values?
In engaging with this question it is important, from the start, to stress the fact that the axiological dimension is typically included in the very definition of creativity. This makes it one of the few scientific concepts in psychology that are assumed to always contribute (by definition) to the well-being of individuals and the welfare of groups and communities. If creativity is characterized by novelty and value, as most researchers tend to think (Gruber & Wallace, 1999; Gruys, Munshi & Dewett, 2011; for an extension of this definition, see Kharkhurin, 2014), this value cannot be understood exclusively in terms of appropriate, fitting responses to the task at hand. Creative value ultimately derives from society's appreciation of what is an “appropriate” task, worthy of creative investment. This is what systemic models emphasize (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988): that is, that the meaning and value of a creative act, for it to be actually called creative, are related to socially and culturally instituted domains, safeguarded by gatekeepers and historically constituted within society.