What if there are no formal ideas preceeding an art work? Suppose it's just trial and error, for the sake of trial and error, ceased only when an aesthetic best place of rest is DISCOVERED? This is an ACTION form of arriving at aesthetically pleasing expressions.
Basically, I totally disagree with your assessment of art as a single polarity of expression of ideas. I approach art as though it is fundamentally ACTION preceding expression OR simultaneously unfolding expression as an aspect of action.
Something always MOVES a person to create an art object. That which moves is action.
Terrorism, then, is action focused ONLY on DESTRUCTION for the sake of destruction, whereas art incorporates destruction for the sake of sculpting a creatively-resonant outcome.
A terrorist blows up a building to kill, instill fear, weaken, or destroy any form whatsoever, all for the sake of destruction itself, whereas an engineer blows up a building with a sensitivity for its inhabitants (making sure they are vacated) and with a sense of something better (more constructive) replacing it.
Both terrorism AND art are action, but the fundamental purpose of that action differs between the former and the latter.
______________click on picture for images