Bohm writes: We can begin to see the meaning of the question [what is creativity?] by asking first: ‘What is characteristic of the results of creative action, i.e. the scientific theory, the work of art, the building, the child who has been rightly brought up and educated, and so forth?’ here, we must distinguish between an occasional act of penetrating insight and the discovery of something new that is really creative. In the latter, I suggest that there is a perception of a new basic order that is potentially significant in a broad and rich field. This new order leads eventually to the creation of new structures having the qualities of harmony and totality, and therefore the feeling of beauty. (139-40) Two questions posed by Dr. Golden: 1) Does Bohm require a product for there to have been creativity? Can there be creativity without a resulting product? I would say Bohm does not require a product in all acts of creativity, such as the learning process of some creative action, learning to walk or talk. And to bolster this portion of my answer I quote the following, “…and not mainly for the love of the action of learning itself” (Bohm 4). Also, on page 2 Bohm writes about the carrying out of research, being on the wrong track; both of which are not requiring a product. 2) How does this "perception of a new basic order" compare with Csik’s conception of creativity as the altering or an existing domain of knowledge or the creation of a new domain of knowledge? I think they are saying the same thing because Bohn does write, “…are needed to express the harmony and beauty that can be found in nature” (3) and Csik writes, “…to bring into existence something genuinely new that is valued enough to be added to the culture” (Csikszentmihalyi 25).
Works Cited
Bohm, David. On Creativity. London and New York: Routledge Classics, 2004. Print.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. The Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: HarperCollins, 1996. Print.