The Act of Creation (Arkana S.)

Rating:
Summary: A rare masterpiece connecting the dots of insightful thought
Review: A fascinating read for the person who steps back and wonders - it gives glimpses and answers through an integrated body of research and a graceful and insightful fireside chat about it all. One of my all time favourite books. I can hardly wait to read it again!

Rating:
Summary: The most authoratative text on creative processes I know.
Review: The book looks at creativity from a broader perspective than what is generally portrayed in society. It looks at the creativity involved in sciences, humour and of course the arts, showing that the three types are inextricably linked, and that the creative process for genius in all areas follow incredible parallels. His theory on bisociative deductions is marvellous. One of my favourite books.

Rating:
Summary: The intersection of lines of thought
Review: This is the first of Koestler's big three serious science books. The second is "The Sleepwalkes", on the contribution of Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo. The third is "The Ghost in the Machine", which contains a critique of behaviorist psychology and Koestler's theory to account for the apparent self-destructiveness of human nature.

"The Act of Creation" offers a theory to account for the "Ah Ha" reaction of scientific discovery, the "Ha Ha" reaction to jokes and the "Ah" reaction of mystical or religious insight. In each case the result is produced by a "bisociation of matrices" or the intersection of lines of thought which brings together hitherto unconnected ideas and fuses them into a creative synthesis. When the lines of thought are scientic the result is a scientific discovery, when they are concerned with devotional matters the result is mystical insight and when they are on a more homely plane the result can be a joke.

The model is fleshed out with a great deal of information ranging from the religions of the world to a theory about the nervous system to account for the build-up of tension and its discharge at the puchline of a joke. Peter Medawar's review was scathing in his comments on Koestler's science, which is a shame because the book can have the desirable effect of encouraging young scientists to read far beyond the usual range of their literature.