In this article, I address the distance between historical and psychol
ogical approaches to creativity (particularly cognitive approaches). I
argue that neither can get very far without the other, and I offer ex
amples from the creative work of Michael Faraday, the eminent 19th-cen
tury physicist These examples display similarities between the fine de
tail of Faraday's creative work and the broad sweep of his development
and illustrate the tension between historians' attention to particula
r features of creativity and cognitive scientists' desire for general,
preferably computable features. I conclude with a discussion of the d
ifficult issue of finding a common language based on agreement about a
ppropriate levels of abstraction.