Book Review - David Bohm - On Creativity

Written by Megan Seneque

The ability to perceive or think differently is more important than the knowledge gained.David Bohm. Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of London

On Creativity surveys two decades of David Bohm’s reflections on what distinguishes creative processes from those which are merely mechanical. Bohm links mind to the realm of natural process and suggests that manifestations of creativity in humankind are not only similar to the creative processes of nature – they are of the same intrinsic nature as the creative forces in the universe at large (Lee Nichol in the foreword to the book ).

The worldview appropriate to this reality is an integrated and participatory worldview, a worldview which sees self and world arising together. This is what French cognitive scientist, Francisco Varela, calls ‘an epistemology for laying down the world’. Bohm is insistent that our current worldview (derived from the scientific worldview) which sees reality as composed of separate and distinct things, is inappropriate to the broader reality and has contributed to a fragmentation in our perception and thought. This separation and fragmentation has contributed to many of the problems we now face – in our relationship with one another and with the natural world. Thus a transformation of worldview and a restoring to wholeness  is critical to overcoming the intense fragmentation which we currently experience. Such a worldview sees reality as unbroken and undivided movement. In Wholeness and the Implicate Order Bohm develops a theory of quantum physics which treats the totality of existence, including matter and consciousness, as an unbroken whole.

Bohm takes a radical view on the nature of art, science and religion (in the sense of going to the roots of these and other words such as ‘truth’, ‘know’, ‘theory’, ‘organise’ in order to uncover their meaning). All of these activities are concerned with ‘fitting’ and Bohm shows the ways in which both science and art are concerned essentially with the creation of new paradigms or worldviews, which enable us to perceive our environment in new ways, which in turn become the basis for further creation on a yet higher level. The scientific spirit, artistic spirit and religious spirit are an interwoven means of establishing a harmoniously ordered totality of structural relationships. He contends that what is natural and spontaneous to humankind is the wholeness of art and science, and that the present approach that is common is a form of fragmentation that has been brought about by a process of conditioning.

The sensibility most appropriate to restoring a non fragmented worldview is one which combines the scientific, artistic and religious spirit, a sensibility which enables each individual to see in his/her own mind the need to be an unbroken whole, and not a being who is separated into ‘technological, sociological and psychological fragments’. This means that in order to achieve ‘intelligent perception’ we need to be concerned with aesthetic and emotional fitting, as well as a rational/functional and ethical/moral fitting and fitting between one’s worldview and overall experience of reality, because these are part of a single whole. This also means that we need to be aware of and work explicitly with our worldviews if we are to give attention to all aspects of fitting and non-fitting.

This ‘fitting’ is at the heart of learning, which is the ability to see something new and original (and not simply accumulate knowledge). The action of learning is the essence of real perception: it is learning by noticing the difference between what actually happens and what can be inferred from previous knowledge. From this difference one is led to a new perception or a new idea that accounts for the difference   This is in line with the definition of ‘information’ offered by British anthropologist Gregory Bateson  as "a difference which makes a difference." Bohm defines all human activity – both in society and in the individual – as art, or the action of fitting. “We are thus always in the act of fitting an ever-changing reality so that there is no fixed or final goal to be attained. Rather, at each moment the end and the means are both to be described as the action of making every aspect fit” (p 106).

When we understand the core tenets of David Bohm’s On Creativity, we get a sense of why it is that all of those concerned with freeing people from habitual (and mechanical) ways of perceiving and thinking in order to bring about profound social change are so deeply influenced by his thinking and writing.  The Dialogue work of William Isaacs and those working with him in Dialogos (http://www.dialogos.com), the work of Peter Senge, Otto Sharmer and their colleagues at MIT in Presencing (http://www.presencing.com) and Theory U (http://www.theoryu.com), the work of Adam Kahane (http://www.generonconsulting.com) all reflect a belief in the power of dialogue and a participatory worldview to improve the quality of collective thinking and intelligence and to enhance the capacity for ‘leading from the future’ as it emerges. It is through dialogue that we are able to access knowledge as an ‘unbroken whole’ and to move away from the fragmented thinking that Bohm believes is responsible for so many of the apparently intractable problems that we face in the world. What is required is a movement that integrates science, consciousness and profound social change.

These various methodologies may collectively be termed a ‘social technology of freedom’ as they are intended to liberate us from constraining preconceptions and worldviews which do not fit with the broader reality. The growing global movement integrates science, consciousness and profound social change. While certain kinds of things can be achieved by techniques and formulae, originality and creativity are not among these. The work of creative transformation requires a creative state of mind, and each person has to discover what it means. This echoes William O’Brien’s view that ‘the success of an intervention depends on the interior condition of the intervenor’. What all of this implies for those  working in the field of organisational transformation and transformational leadership is that we need to be alert to the dangers of making an ideology of these technologies, or seeing them as blueprints for transformation. A creative state of mind requires alertness and sensitivity to ‘the differences that always exist between the observed fact and any ideas, however noble, beautiful or magnificent they may seem’ (p 23). Without this creative state of mind we are in danger of compounding the very problems we seek to address through imposing preconceived ideas or solutions.