Eight years ago, the authors carried out a study on scientific creativity. Thirty-four eminent scientists, who had gained great creative scientific achievements in five fields--mathematics, physics, chemistry, geography and life science--were chosen and interviewed. In the study, the authors tried to find out what made a person demonstrate outstanding scientific creativity. The result showed that eminent scientists had a variety of essential traits, such as intrinsic motivation, eruditeness, autonomy, and initiative. However, the authors also know that these traits are also possessed by many ordinary people to some extent. So these traits are necessary but not sufficient for preeminence. More importantly, along the pathway the interaction and the co-evolution are the keys to transcendence. It is lucky that the authors have a chance to read Ziegler and Phillipson's systemic theory of gifted education, which can shed more light on their findings. In this commentary, the authors first comment on the theory that inspires them, then reinterpret their findings in the light of it, and put forward some tentative suggestions in the end.