Text Box:  

Text Box:   Introduction There is an urge in all humans to investigate.  Our analytic capacity is early developed, often before we have learned too much about the world and other people (Nagel, 1987: 3). Connected to this need to investigate and puzzle with existential and philosophical questions is our need to imagine and create. In this essay I will focus on the power of creativity within every person and how this power might help a person to find and understand meaning in own life, and how creativity becomes an important existential dimensions of life itself. The main Hebraic term for imagination is yester. It derives from the same root (yzr) as the terms for creation (yetsirah), creator (yotser) and to create (yatsar (Kearney, 1994: 39). This of course refers to God and creation in religious sense. The yetser, understood this way relate to mans ability to create and impulse to imitate God’s own creation and the dichotomy in ethical consciousness; good – evil, and an historical consciousness of past and future (1994:39). Eric Fromm defines the term yester as follows: “ The noun yester means ´form´, ´frame´, ´purpose´ and with reference to the mind, ´imagination´ or ´device´. The term yester thus means ´imaginings´ (good or evil)… The problem of good and evil arises only when there is imagination”(Fromm, 1966:126). The philosopher Martin Buber uses this approach when he identifies the ´dream-longing´ in human beings, as a longing for our ´first parents´(Buber, 1952: 70). Our only way to cope with this longing in daily life is to create and to imagine alternative possibilities of existence. As Buber says; “ The freedom to choose between good and evil, and to construct one’s story accordingly, is thus intimately related to the yester as a passion for the possible: the human impulse to transcend what exist in the direction of what might exist”(1952:91-92).   1. Creativity as an existential dimension In spite of the importance, creativity is less investigated among philosophers as well as among psychologists. All individual choices and decisions are more or less based on free will, and therefore include a moral dimension. Philosophers have dwelt with moral issues for a long period of time. Creativity is less mentioned. In English-speaking analytic philosophy, creativity is a neglected topic. Creativity might be closely connected to values, and then only a culture may decide what is creative and what is not, what is an innovation and what is not (Zamiara, 1993:31). It might then be a naturalistic error to treat the creative process in humans as a natural, culturally non-determined one. Zamiara claims that: “The cultural rules and principles (which in this case govern the particular domain of creativity a given product belongs to) are internal to the creative process and guide the creative activities”(1993:31). However, it might be seen from the opposite view; that creative thoughts are needed and produce deeper understanding, including an understanding of one’s own world-view (Franklin, 1993: 43). Seen in this way, creativity is one of our most important existential dimensions, and might be seen as a supplement to a spiritual dimension. I will investigate the use of creativity and imagination as an existential dimension included in the enormous task of building up a meaningful life and one’s own world-view.   1.1 World-views - Weltanschauung Analysing own world view is difficult, The main difference between a phenomenological and for instance a more psychological introspective approach, can be seen as two different ways of perceiving, or as different epistemologies of the world. Through introspection it is possible to take an approach towards the experience (epistemology) of the “world” and “the given” through subjective perception and experience, which artists (painters, musicians e.g. creative actors) often use in their work (Axell, 2002: 278). Humanistic psychology sees the function of creativity as a proof of the creators creative emotional forces (urges, desires etc.) are at work. According to Zamiara, “The functions of creativity are seen in the fact that it helps the individual to keep an internal mental balance (it makes him mentally healthy), it helps him to adopt to the needs of his social environment, to develop his personality and so on” (1993:29). It is a problem here; how can we distinguish between a creative and non-creative work (or result)? I will leave out the discussion of difficulties about definitions in this paper, but point out that it is hard to find independent psychological criteria to separate a creative problem or result or effect, from a non-creative one. An example of eminent creative work could be represented from a group that create ‘Weltanschauung’ value systems (e.g. mystics and ideologist), but they are normally left out of the class of defined creators in traditional psychology (Zamiara, 1993: 33).  On the other hand, intentions that are characteristic of creative work and activities are never of a purely individual (‘private’) nature. They are formed under rules and values in the cultural system in which they appear (ibid: 34). This cultural system is delivered to us through family, society, told stories and fairy tales and through myths. As mentioned, the process of creativity is poorly and not adequately investigated in contemporary psychology. One might find more insight into this phenomenon in mythology as in the myth of Promentheus (May, 1977:44) or in older fairy tales. Fairy tales plays a tremendous role in a child’s life. It enlightens the child about himself, and fosters his personality development. According to Bettelheim “it offers meaning on so many different levels, and enriches the child’s existence in so many ways, that no one book can do justice to the multitude and diversity of the contributions such tales make to the child’s life”. (Bettelheim, 1991:12). In my opinion this is what happens to adults too, during reading of literature as well as through own creation. What does this mean in creation of own world-view? How does this imply in our lives, our uncertainty and our anxiety?  According to May, we might understand Kierkegaard’s ideas on the relation between guilt and anxiety only by emphasizing that he is always speaking of anxiety in its relation to creativity (May, 1977:44): “One has anxiety because it is possible to create - creating one’s self, willing to be one’s self, as well as creating in all the innumerable daily activities (and these are two phrases of the same process). One would have no anxiety if there were no possibility whatever” (Ibid. 1977:44). It might be valuable to patients in therapy to know this – to point it out – that a feeling of anxiety is a proof of a conflict and problems and conflicts do have solutions (Ibid: 44). The problem is in the problem - in the meaning of defining what is the actual problem in the first place. The creative power lays first and almost in the possibility of insight and change in own judgements and value-system, on the way to create new and original forms of living. According to Kierkegaard, one is, or ought to be, continually creating his own selfhood every instant of his life (Kierkegaard, 1884/1994: 96). The ideal of phenomenology on the other hand, is to give an objective description of the “world” without any pre-judges of ones experience of the world as such. Husserl (the “founder” of phenomenology) describes his approach to phenomenology as a new foundation of the “pure logic and epistemology” (Zahavi, 1997:14).  Thus the anti-psychologism of the first part, Prolegomena zur reinen Logik (Husserl, 1900), quickly yielded to an overwhelming concern with the life of consciousness as the source of meanings (Mohanty, 1995). Phenomenology and the later existential-view, in common have a focus on immediate experience (Cohn, 1997:15). The phenomenologists tend to explore the process of experience, more or less disconnected from personal relations with others; being-with-others. Phenomenologists tend to make no presuppositions, to bracket all pre-knowledge, theory and bias, it is always ´transcendental´ because it ´transcendence´ our everyday ´natural´ approach to the world. Although, on a basic level, phenomenology presents itself as a science of experience, which includes all mental phenomena, such as wishes, memories, precepts, hypotheses, theories, ideas and fantasies etc. But how can this be included in therapy? The later approach through the existentialists were concerned with the experience of existence in itself (Cohn, 1997:), which also influenced the development in psychology and psychotherapy.   2 The power of storytelling might change ones world-view We always tells stories when someone ask us who we are. Telling stories is a part of our lives. Communication through storytelling is a basic human activity. Since stone-age, people have told stories, and today we find their messages in cave paintings. Through story telling we interpret our past memories and feelings and future anticipations. We interpret where we are now in terms of where we have come from, and where we are heading. In this way, we present ourselves and give a sense of ourselves as a narrative identity that develops and cohere over a lifetime (Kearney, 2002:4). Story telling is a way of constructing our experience, knowledge and understanding of the world. This is not a new invention; we find it in our culture, in our language and in our fairytales. One might correctly say that there are a lot of stories to be told in the world, and as many stories that ought not to be told at all. Plato was concerned about this. In the State, Plato mentioned the danger in storytelling, especially the art of poetry; which could influence people’s thoughts, and then become an intruder and conflict maker for the ideals in the establishing of an ideal State (Book 10). Later Freud’s contribution to science gave a new approach to science of psychology. He was an excellent writer and used storytelling to present his ideas. He was inspired by Greek mythology. In any intellectual evolution, it is difficult to pick out a single idea or theme to be the most important. Historians of science often use “discoveries” as milestones of progress (Schaffer, 1996: 13), and as important is the storytelling. All new discoveries need to be authorised by someone. Using the word discovery in science implies a reference to the results of actions, rather than the action itself (Schaffer, 1996:13). There is an intriguing relationship between the authorship of a discovery and its authorisation. The classical case is the so-called rediscovery of Mendel’s’ theories of genetics from 1866 in 1900. (Schaffer, 1996: 14). According to the sociologist, Augustine Brannigan: ”the transformation in the status of Mendel’s discoveries” shows that ”events are discoveries not in virtue of how they appear in the mind, but how they are defined in and by cultural criterion” (1981:90). The relationship between the authorship of a discovery and its authorisation is an essential theme in philosophy of science. We might ask then if this is not an overall human and existential issue. We interpret the world through stories of our past, our dreams and plans included in stories of our future. We may say that our life is in search of a narrative as well as in search of creating this narrative. According to Kearney, “The narrative imperative has assumed many genres – myth, epic, sacred history, legend, saga, folktale, romance, allegory, confession, chronicle, satire, novel among others” (Kearney, 2002:5). Stories addresses physical as psychological suffering. Stories are told mostly through language. Stories are told by words and that raises new problems, as Heidegger puts it: “When does language speak itself as a language? Curiously enough, when we cannot find the right word for something that concern us, carries us away, oppresses or encourages us… then we leave unspoken what we have in mind, and without rightly giving it thought, undergo moments in which language itself has distantly and fleetingly touched us with essential being” (Heidegger, 1959/82:59). Psychoanalytic theory describes a range of motives, mental states, and processes of which persons are ordinarily unaware, and which they can acknowledge, affirm and alter only with difficulty. Freud's collective term for these, and for the functional division of the mind to which he assigned them, was the unconscious. He believed that all mental activity is determined, and that free associations leads to a repressed wish hidden in the unconsciousness. He uses free association as a method to reach down the hidden wish, as a mean to the end of finding causes in the unconscious (Heaton, 2000:15). Much can be argued about Freud’s theories and practice of psychoanalysis. But the technique of free association might be good for other purposes. According to Heaton: ”When we free associate we let whatever comes to mind be said. This “whatever” is not to be taken as a statement of knowledge” (Heaton, 2000: 14). This might be seen more as a play, a game of language. It might be used as a creative tool, useful for storytelling, a tool to create words that might end up in a meaningful story on a later stage. Wittgenstein says: “Let the use of the words teach you their meaning” (Wittgenstein, 1958:220). Introspectionism and psychoanalysis are much more radical in their approaches to creativity, than more recent theories, which see creation in a wider perspective. But again, the various schools of psychoanalysis all seem to agree that the creative process takes place at the level of the unconsciousness (Zamiara, 1993:19-23). Creativity might as well be found elsewhere. Language is not only a strategic tool for communication with others, but also a tool for investigation of own experiences and existence in this world, and a tool for creating stories. In psychotherapy the whole issue of storytelling is included in the therapy itself. Our aim as therapists is to get the clients to reframe their worldview (through words) by telling. It might be easier to diagnose what is wrong in ones life and attitude, than to change ones actions. It is important to investigate and change actions, too. Emmy van Deurzen says:” Human life has to be understood in action, interactively” (van Deurzen-Smith, 1997:178), which means we cannot study another person objectively, from the outside. We need to be-with, to understand a client and not fall into the tempting trap of external explanation of others behaviour. And this being-with is a challenge for our own creativity and skills of imagination as therapists. To be able to help someone to face their own inner attitudes, values and later probably change of own actions, one needs to be open, imaginative and creative. According to van Deurzen the study of human beings is an ecological one, and has to take the entire context of human living into account (van Deurzen-Smith, 1997:178). It might be seen differently. Storytelling is a creation of own identity and might be ceaselessly reinterpreted by new narratives. Stories always create a relation to others. According to Kearney (1994:395) ”The identity of the narrative self is one that cannot be taken for granted. It must always be reinterpreted. He continues:” To reply to the question ‘who’? is to tell one’s story to the other. And the story is always one, which narrates a relation to the other, a tale of creation and obligation that never comes to an end. This is why the model of narrative identity is in contrast to that of ecological identity (permanent sameness) it includes change and alternation within selfhood. Such a model constitutes the self as a reader and a writer of his own life” (Kearney, 1994:395). I tend to agree with this.  In the end this implies the acknowledgment of the other (the listener) in an ethical dimension. And, as mentioned earlier, the relationship between the authorship of a discovery (here the told story) and its authorisation is essential. In psychotherapy the psychotherapist often do this authorisation. In existential therapy one of the fundamental characteristics is its openness towards individual creativity of the therapist and of the client (van Deurzen-Smith, 1997:189). The search for the fuller meaning of a phenomena or an experience in the client’s life, is the core of interpretation in existential therapy (Cohn, 1997: 41).  Each of us will explore the world from own position and none of us can simply by a mirror, which only reflects the world (Cohn, 1997: 40). According to the philosopher Henri Bergson there is a difference between how we perceive the world through our senses and notions, and the reality (the world) in itself (Kolstad, 2001:209). There might exist a veil between the human consciousness and the reality as such, that leads us to an epistemology of the world, which in turn might be wrong. The reason for this veil is that human beings only perceive what is useful for them. Our senses choose to acknowledge the phenomena that are necessary in our daily life. Our perceptiveness of the outer world consists of those phenomena that might guide our lives. This also concerns our inner-life. When we direct our attention towards ourselves (our inner selves through introspection), we only perceive what directly concern our actions here-and-now, what belongs to the surface of our lives (Kolstad, 2001:209). What escape us are the thousands of nuances and the deeper reconnaissance. In this way our individuality slip away from us within our own person. The solution to avoid this escape is through the same techniques as artists use, a subjective perception through introspection and experience of the outer world. To raise the total veil is almost impossible, but it might be roused in parts. The purpose (teleology) of art is to remove our epistemological connection to the usefulness of the world (Kolstad, 2001:210). One way to introduce a new epistemology of the world to our clients, and let them escape the connection to the usefulness, is to let them use their imagination and create fantasy stories. I will even go that far to state, that through crisis in ones life one might change even the ability to be more creative, in a positive manner.  However, yet I do not have any scientific research to support this hypothesis. I do believe this is connected to the motivation to come through the crisis. And again a useful tool might be to create dreams, hope etc. through storytelling. Henry Bergson says:” To act and to know that we are acting, to come into touch with reality and even to live it, but only in the measure in which it concerns the work that is being accomplished… is the function of human intelligence” (Bergson, 1911/1998: 191). And we may add, it is the function of human creativity leading to emotional and social intelligence at work within both an ethical, creative and existential sphere.   3 What is creativity? Imagination and creativity might be existential necessities of all human beings, and it is tempting to claim that all human beings are naturalistic creatives, but not all scientists agree to this.  One definition on creativity is that creative thinking occurs when a problem-solver invents a novel solution to a problem (Guilford, 1950: 444-54). Creativity is a paradox. It is very hard to detect from where original ideas arise. Many attempts have been made to discover a single general mechanism underlying all distinct creative processes. Even if creativity is a fairly neglected research topic in psychology, there have been many attempts to investigate this issue. During 1950s and 1960s research in creativity became a very hot, new topic. Creative people of all kind arose as new group of heroes. At the same time the advertisement agencies in Unites States rapidly grew up to be multinational companies. Recently APA (American Psychological Association) have paid attention to creativity research, by sponsoring a conference on creativity in 1995 and by featuring research on creativity in the APA Monitor in august 1995(Sternberg & Lubart, 1994: 679). It is still difficult to define creativity as such. To day we have more than 100 different theories and definitions on creativity. (Taylor, 1959 in Ekvall, 1979). Usually when we think of creativity or creative persons, we tend to think of someone who has become famous as a consequence of their ability to create. Their creativity is often results of judgements in the society. Csikszentmihalyi (1996) distinguishes three types of people who often are described as creative; (1) those who express unusual thoughts, (2) those who experience the world in novel and original ways, and (3) those who effects significant changes in their culture (1996:26). More important for psychotherapy, is that all three kinds of creativity enriches life for the individual (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996:27).   3.1 Creativity in psychotherapy However, purpose is essential to creative expression (Nickerson, 1999: 408). This is also essential from an existential view. Lack of purpose and lack of meaning of course leads to lack of creativity. Passion has been used to describe the attitude of a creative person, but more important is motivation. Motivation might be of internal or external type. According to Crutchfield: “what characterise external motivation, is that in which “the achievement of the creative solution is a mean to an ulterior end, rather than an end in itself” and internal motivation as that in which “the creative act is an end, not a means”” (Gruber & Terrell & Wertheimer, 1982:121). But with a very high level of motivation, one might become too focused on the goal, to concentrate effectively on the creative work itself, which implies that the process is sometimes more important than the result (Nickerson, 1999: 413). If it is true that process is more important than result, and because psychotherapy (sliding into the medical arena) is seen as a medical treatment, more research might be needed in this field, focusing more on the process and how creativity is involved, rather than focusing only on the result of the therapy, seen as a medical treatment. According to Wampold: “the medicalisation of psychotherapy might well destroy talk therapy as a beneficial treatment of psychological and social problems” (2001: 2). Carl Rogers states that the ideal therapist first of all is, emphatic (1980: 146), and empathy requires, in my opinion, a strong ability of imagination and an awareness of sensibility.  To grasp the good life (for yourself) it is necessary to understand what is important here and now, and what you can and will achieve based on your free will and power to create that life. This is even more essential when we shall help someone else in this effort.   4. Conclusion Compared to other topics and research fields in psychology, creativity is still premature. There is, however, a hope that further psychological research on creativity will occur. I believe creativity is an important research topic, both to society and to different approaches of therapy. I do rely on the individual’s own power to search for his or her creativity, and for its release and its use during the investigation of own world-view. Maslow (1967) made a general distinction between creativity; a primary and a secondary creativity. Primary creativity is used to become self-actualised, to find fulfilment in oneself and in life. Secondary creativity is the kind of creativity that leads to achievements, ideas or product in a field, of the type recognised by other in a field (Sternberg, 1999a: 85). This primary creativity is, in my view, closely connected to a search for meaning in life. To tell our stories is a creation of own identity and might be ceaselessly reinterpreted by new narratives. Stories always create a relation to others. We do take our observations of the world and construct them into stories. One way to introduce a new epistemology of the world to our clients, and let them escape their boundaries, is to let them use their imagination and create fantasy stories. Our aim as therapists is to get the clients to reframe their worldview by telling, and to help them to create a consistent world-view and find meaning in own life. To be able to help someone to face their own inner attitudes, values and later probably change of own actions, one needs to be open, imaginative and creative. When we construct new stories we will always include parts of old ones and add new material and fantasies. Our experiences, emotions motives etc. do affect our stories both new and old. Telling stories might lead to existential anxiety. According to Kierkegaard: “One has anxiety because it is possible to create - creating one’s self, willing to be one’s self, as well as creating in all the innumerable daily activities (and these are two phrases of the same process). One would have no anxiety if there were no possibility whatever” (May, 1977:44). In therapy it might be useful to point this out to our clients – because a feeling of anxiety of this kind, is a proof of a conflict and problems and conflicts do have solutions (Ibid: 44) and a lot of material to work with. The existential creative power lays first and almost in the possibility of insight and change in one’s own judgements and value-system, on the way to create new and original forms of living. This is a very lonely and isolated project, but still closely connected to other dimensions in life. As Nietzsche says: ”The sufferings of genius and their value. – The artistic genius wants to give pleasure, but if he stands on a very high level there can easily be a lack of others to enjoy it; he offers food, but no one wants it” (1878/1986: 83). However, the existential creative power does not necessarily belong in a spiritual dimension. Storytelling has a part in everyone’s life. An important task is to find the underlying theme in our stories and life. The stories we bring into the world help us to create this world to which we then react. We do not always agree to have a proactive role in this world, but through storytelling we might see our own participating and creative power hidden in our stories. Finally, Carl Rogers states: “Given a suitable psychological climate, humankind is trustworthy, creative, self-motivated, powerful and constructive, capable of releasing undreamed-of potentialities” (1980:201). Where there is a story and a life, there is hope for creativity.   References:   Barron, F. (1953)  “Complexity-simplicity as a personality dimension”. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 48, 163-172   Barron, F. (1955) “The disposition toward originality” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51, 478-485   Bettelheim, B. (1991) The Uses of Enchantment – The meaning and importance of Fairy Tales, England: Penguin Books   Bergson, H (1911/98) Creative Evolution, New York: Dover Publications Ltd.   Boden, M. (1996) Dimension of Creativity, US: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.   Brannigan, A. (1981) The Social Basis of Scientific Discoveries, Cambridge University Press.   Brzezi`nski, J. & Di Nuovo, S. & Marek, T.  Maruszewski, T (1993) (Ed.) Creativity and Consciousness - Philosophical and psychological dimensions, Rodopi, Amsterdam - Atlanta   Buber, M. (1952) Good and Evil, New York: Scribner   Cohn, H. W. (1997). Existential Thought and Therapeutic Practice. London: SAGE Publication Ltd.   Cox C. M. (1926) Genetics Studies of Genius: Vol. 2. “The early mental traits of three hundred geniuses” Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press   Crutchfield, R.S (1962) “Conformity and creative thinking” in (ed. Gruber, Terrell & Wertheimer 1982,) Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking, New York: Atherton   Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996) Creativity , USA: Harper Perennial   van Deurzen-Smith, E. (1997) Everyday Mysteries – Existential Dimensions of Psychotherapy,  London, Routledge    Ekvall G. (1979) Kreativitet och kreativ problemlösning,  Bohusläningens AB Uddevalla   Franklin R.L.(1993) Creativity  and depth in understanding,  In Brzezi`nski, Di Nuovo, Marek, Maruszewski (ed) Creativity and Consciousness: Philosophical and psychological dimensions, Amsterdam – Atlanta: Rodopi   Fromm, E. (1966), “You Shall be as Gods: A radical Interpretation of The Old Testament”,  In Kearney, R. (1994) The Wake of Imagination, London: Routledge   Galton F. (1869), Hereditary genius. New York: Macmillan   Gruber, H. & Terrell, G. & Wertheimer, M. (1982) Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking, New York: Atherton   Guilford, J. P (1950) Creativity, Amer. Psychol. Vol. 5 s. 444-54   Heaton, J.M, (2000), Wittgenstein and Psychonanalysis, UK: Icon Books   Helson R. (1968) “Generality of sex differences in creative style” Journal of Personality 36, 33-48   Helson R. (1971) “Women mathematicians and the creative personality” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 36, 210-220   Heidegger, M. (1959/82) On the Way to Language, New York: Harper& Row Publisher inc.   Kierkegaard, S. (1844/1994) The Concept of dread / Begrepet Angst, Denemark: Gyldendahl.   Kearney, R. (1994) The Wake of the Imagination, London, Routledge   Kearney, R (2002) On Stories – Thinking in Action, London, Routledge   Kolstad, H.(2001). Henri Bergsons filosofi - betydning og aktualitet. Oslo: Humanistisk forlag   MacKinnon D.W (1963) “Creativity and images of the self” in White R. W. (ed)  The study of lives s. 251-278, New York: Atherton,   MacKinnon D.W. (1970) “The personality correlates of creativity: A study of American architects” in Vernon (ed) Creativity p.p. 289-311. Harmonsworth: Penguin   MacKinnon D.W. (1992) “The highly effective individual” in R.S. Albert (Ed), Genius and eminence, 2 nd, ed. p.p. 179-193 Oxford: Pergamon    May, R.(1977) The meaning of Anxiety, New York, Norton.   Mohanty, J. N. (1995) The development of Husserls thought, in The Cambridge Companion to Husserl, (ed. Smith, B & Smith, D.W.) Cambridge University Press,   Nagel, T. (1987) What Does It All Mean? New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press Nickerson, R. S. (1999) “Enhancing Creativity” in (ed Sternberg) Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press       Plato (1992), Staten (The Republic) Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanums Forlag   Roe A. (1970), “A psychologist examines sixty-four eminent scientists” in P.E. Vernon (ed) Creativity s. 43-51. Harmonsworth: Penguin   Rogers, C.R. (1980) A way of Being, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company   Schaffer, S. (1996) “Making up Discovery”, in (ed. Boden, M.) Dimension of Creativity, US: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.   Sternberg, R. & Lubart, T. (1996) “Investing in Creativity”, American Psychologist, Vol, 51, no. 7, p.p. 677-688   Sternberg, R. (1999a) “A Propulsion Model of Types of Creative Contributions”, in Review of General Psychology, Vol. 3 No.2, p.p. 83-100   Sternberg R. (1999b) Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press   Taylor I. A. (1959) “The nature and creative process” in (ed Smith P.) Creativity - An Examination of the Creative Process, New York: Hastings   Terman L. M. (1906) “Genius and stupidity: A study of the intellectual process of seven ”bright” and seven ”stupid” boys”, Pedagogical Seminar 13, 307-373   Terman L. M (1917) “The intelligence quotient of Francis Galton in childhood”. American Journal of Psychology 28, 209-215   Terman L. M. (1924) “The mental tests and psychological method” Psychological Review 31, 93-117   Terman L. M  & Chase J. M. (1920)  “The psychology, biology, and pedagogy of genius”,  Psychological Bulletin 17, 397-409   Vernon P.E.  (1970) Creativity, Penguin Books Ltd.   Zahavi, D. (1997) Husserls Fænomenologi, Copenhagen-Denemark: Gyldendal Nordisk Forlag,   Zamiara. K. (1993) “The psychological approach to creativity. A critical appraisal” In By Brzezi`nski, Di Nuovo, Marek, Maruszewski, 1993 (ed) Creativity and Consciousness: Philosophical and psychological dimensions, Amsterdam – Atlanta: Rodopi   Wampold, B.E (2001) The Great psychotherapy Debate – Models, Methods and Findings. US: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher   Wittgenstein, L. (1958) Philosophical Investigations, UK: Anscombe, Blackwell  

Text Box: Filosofisk Ressurs Etablert i 1999 Text Box: Creativity as an existential dimension       By Pia Hverven Axell, DIHR, Cand. Philol (M.Phil), New School of Psychotherapy, Schiller University in London  and University of Sheffield Oslo January 2003 Axell@online.no