Process and Creation

Part of the Cognition and Language: A Series in Psycholinguistics book series (CALS)


Argument: Creativity is novelty in the domain of concepts. The creative idea is a cognitive whole that partitions into its varied expressions as concepts empty into acts, images, and objects. The errors of the brain-damaged and psychotic cases exhibit the same part-whole relations that characterize metaphor and new concept formation. The whole to part transition in cognition is a species of creative advance in physical passage.


Concept Formation Creative Thinking Creative Idea Object Concept Creative Evolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    For example, from C. Lombroso, The Man of Genius (London: Walter Scott, 1891) to H. Gardner, The Creators of the Modern Era (New York: Basic Books, 1993).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Related to this distinction is that of the genius as an explanation of historical events or a product of historical forces. See W. James, “Great Men and Their Environment,” in The Will to Believe (New York: Longmans, Green, 1896).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    See R. Finke, T. Ward, and S. Smith, Creative Cognition (Cambridge, MA: Bradford, MIT Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A.N. Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas (New York: Macmillan, 1933, 227); Also, Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution (New York: Holt, 1913), for whom God is creation or a creative principle.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Dewey, “Time and Its Mysteries,” in Philosophers of Process, ed. D. Browning (New York: Random House, 1965), 211. The same idea is found in H. Bergson, Creative Evolution.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Bohm, “On the Problem of Truth and Understanding in Science,” in The Critical Approach to Science and Philosophy, ed. M. Bunge (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1964).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    From this perspective, computer simulations of creative thought, e.g., S. Turner, The Creative Process (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1994) will be of interest only to the extent they capture the natural state, i.e., whole-part shifts.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. Hartshorne, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method (London: SCM Press, 1970).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Goldstein, Language and Language Disturbances (New York: Grune and Stratton, 1948); K. Goldstein, The Organism (Boston: Beacon Press, 1939).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A.R. Luria, Higher Cortical Functions in Man (New York: Basic Books, 1966).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Schweiger, K. Chobor, and J. W. Brown, “From Diffuse Meaning to Phonology” (Paper presented at meeting of the International Neurolinguistic Society, Krakow, Poland, September, 1995).Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    A. Marcel, “Phenomenal Experience and Functionalism,” in Consciousness in Contemporary Science, ed. A. Marcel and E. Bisiach (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988).Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    E. Weinstein, and R. Kahn, “Nonaphasic Misnaming (Paraphasia) in Organic Brain Disease,” Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry 67(1952):72–80.Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    S. Arieti, The Intrapsychic Self (New York: Basic Books, 1967).Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    S. Arieti, Intrapsychic Self (New York: Basic Books, 1967).Google Scholar
  16. 18.
    See also D. Krech and A. Calvin, “Levels of Perceptual Organization and Cognition,” Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology 48(1953):394–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 19.
    Though their interpretation differs from my own, some recent studies are described in L. Robertson, and M. Lamb, “Neuropsychological Contributions to Theories of Part/Whole Organisation,” Cognitive Psychology 23(1991):299–330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 20.
    M. Wertheimer, Productive Thinking (New York: Harper and Row, 1945), 235.Google Scholar
  19. 21.
    As noted by Karl Pribram. The psychological literature on this topic is extensive, as in science more generally. See; D. Leary, Metaphors in the History of Psychology (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1990); R. H. Brown, A Poetic for Sociology: Toward a Logic of Discovery for the Human Sciences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  20. 22.
    G. Lakoff, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987).Google Scholar
  21. 23.
    The inability of computational linguistics to account for metaphoric extensions of word meaning, N. Goodman and C. Elgin, Reconceptions in Philosophy (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1988), 103–110, may prove lethal to computer simulations of creative thinking.Google Scholar
  22. 24.
    This section is based on S. Glucksberg and B. Keyser, “Understanding Metaphorical Comparisons: Beyond Similarity,” Psychological Review 97(1990):3–18; and S. Glucksberg, “Beyond Literal Meanings: The Psychology of Allusion,” Psychological Science, 2(1991):146–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 25.
    Aphasic neology is usually semantic plus phonological errors; e.g., “twas brillig and the slithy toves.” As with errors of word meaning, phonological errors can be interpreted in terms of blends and contextual effects on phoneme production, See H. Buckingham “Phonological Processes in Aphasia.” (Paper presented at New York Academy Sciences meeting, October, 1994.)Google Scholar
  24. 26.
    For other examples, see M. Critchley, “The Neurology of Psychotic Speech,” British Journal of Psychiatry 110(1967):353–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 27.
    Conceptually original statements, not just novel sentences, which are the rule in language use. See J. Pind, “Computational Creativity: What Place for Literature?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17(1994):547–548.Google Scholar
  26. 28.
    L. Barsalou, “The Instability of Graded Structure,” in Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, ed. U. Neisser (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1987).Google Scholar
  27. 29.
    A. Koestler, The Act of Creation (New York: Basic Books, 1964).Google Scholar
  28. 30.
    F. Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Idea, vol. 3, ed. R. Haldane and J. Kemp (London, 1907–1909).Google Scholar
  29. 31.
    See N. Hirsch, Genius and Creative Intelligence (Cambridge, MA: Sci-Art, 1931).Google Scholar
  30. 32.
    Lakoff, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things.Google Scholar
  31. 33.
    See S. Carey and R. Gelman, The Epigenesis of Mind: Essays on Biology and Cognition (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1991); E. Markman, “Two Different Principles of Conceptual Organization,” in Advances in Developmental Psychology, ed. M. Lamb and A. Brown (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1981), 199–236; F. Keil, “Conceptual Development and Category Structure,” in U. Neisser, Concepts and Conceptual Development.Google Scholar
  32. 34.
    B. Tversky and K. Hemenway, “Objects, Parts, and Categories,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113(1984):169–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 35.
    G. Lakoff, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things.Google Scholar
  34. 36.
    G. Smith and I. Carlsson, The Creative Process, Psychological Issues 57 (Madison, CT: International Universities Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  35. 37.
    Cladistic categorization is based on a shared derivation in contrast to categories based on overall similarity. See E. Meyr, The Growth of Biological Thought (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1982), 226–233; see also Lakoff, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things, 118–121.Google Scholar
  36. 38.
    E. Kris, Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art (New York: International Universities Press, 1952).Google Scholar
  37. 39.
    A.N. Whitehead, Process and Reality (New York: Macmillan, 1929), 31; E. Pols, Whitehead’s Metaphysics (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1967).Google Scholar
  38. 40.
    H. Bergson, Creative Evolution, trans. Arthur Mitchell (New York: Modern Student Library, 1944).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1996

Personalised recommendations