20. ANTHROPOLOGICAL CONTENT OF CREATIVITY

Beyond the limits of individual psychology and the creative process itself (which, as we have tried to show, can be creative, although at any stage, it really is such in some only “moments”) the fundamental question remains about the relation of creativity to self-assertion and self-realization its “self-change” and “self-creation” in the process and as a result of the activity. Of course, in this phenomenon the sphere of the individual psyche of the “creator” is not a purely passive side, and the psychological mechanisms are completely objective, however, we believe that in the process of activity “self-creation” - in the psychological aspect, first of all, but not only in the psychological - not is a unique consequence of either the epiphenomenon of creativity, but rather only one aspect of learning, i.e. the acquisition of individual experience in the course of life - in the process of activity. It is precisely because of this circumstance, since learning (and learning, of course, is one of the most important psychological mechanisms of creative activity, and in the aspect of self-creation of an individual almost dominant), not only is a sociocultural phenomenon, it seems not quite correct and the assignment of creativity only to the sphere of “cultural ", The discretion in the works of only the product of" social invention "[Druzhinin, 1999]. We fully agree that “self-creation” is rather not a psychological, but a sociocultural characteristic of creativity in its socio-historical role and conditionality. A different approach, in our opinion, to this manifestation of creativity is impossible in rational consideration. But for all that, the “life-creation” and “self-creation” of the individual are never reduced to merely creative activity; their main difference from any “local” process of activity and from each of the “moments” of creativity directed by us “outside” of the subject, just lies in the fact that the creative or non-creative nature of “self-creation” as a fundamentally incomplete process cannot be completely defined "from the inside" of the activity itself as self-sufficient and always completed (in the sense of discreteness, the completion of a specific task by a certain result) process. When we say that creativity in the aspect of the creation of the personality is not creativity in the human sense, we are still talking about the self-creation of the personality, that is, man in his social sense, man as a subject. And in this respect, the nature of the activity can not be and is not a neutral factor. Leaving aside the sociocultural issues of the impact of creativity on the “creator”, we will touch only those aspects of the “creative” or “uncreative” impact of a particular process of activity on its subject, which are directly and directly determined by the “creative” or “uncreative” position and role of the individual in this process.
Any process of activity — in one form or another and in a form — represents the actualization of its subject, self-realization in the subject and character of the activity and always more or less expression affects the “doer”, leads in it to some changes and both in the subject of activity and as a whole person. But with the “uncreative” role of the subject in the process of activity, the impact on its subject and the personal “trace” of the subject in the “product” turn out to be minimal: in any case, in relation to the capabilities of this particular subject.
Of course, the level of ability, professional and creative, has a huge impact on the result of activity and the level of creativity in its process. But, as a rule, the position of the subject of activity has no less influence: its creative or non-creative orientation and conscious installation — it determines to a great extent both the “efficiency” of the subject in the process of activity and the level of self-realization of the subject in the activity. Creative attitude to the world allows a person to overcome, as noted by S.L. Rubinstein, "suffering." In a non-creative attitude, a person turns out to be fatally dependent on the surrounding objective world, and this dependence would be fundamentally insurmountable if even in a non-creative attitude, in a situation of non-creative activity, let it be in the smallest degree, there would be no accumulation of life experience and its comprehension, t. e. would not contain the potency of the transition to creativity. It is in this sense that the creative nature of the task (the choice of the “creative” task) and the creative nature of the activity are the most powerful factors of human development and the self-development of the subject: the growth of his whole personality, the development and multiplication of all his “essential forces” - including his abilities and the quality, which was first investigated in detail by D. Bogoyavlenskaya and defined by it as “intellectual activity”.
If intellectual activity is understood not only as “intellectual initiative” or quantitative characteristics of the intellect (always, however, defined in specific psychometric studies with a rather large error), but a conscious installation of the subject to go beyond the immediate “given” problem itself, then one should agree with the opinion of B. Kedrov, who in the preface to the already long-lasting monograph by D. Bogoyavlenskoy wrote: “All types of creative activity unites ... intellectual activity” [ Cedar, with. H]. With such a broad understanding of intellectual activity, it is precisely in its field that the personal readiness of daring “in spite of everything” that determines the creative nature of the subject’s activities should be attributed: authorities and conventional views, and the inertia of one’s own thinking, and the belief in objective significance and The “truth” of the sociocultural experience of mankind and in the results of previous discoveries and achievements in this field of activity as an integral part of this experience (by the way, later The works of D. Epiphany speak of "supra-situational activity" as applied to creativity; daring "against all odds" is, in our opinion, such supra-situational activity). Without overcoming "shyness" before accumulated (including own) experience, as well as without unconditional, but rational piety for "common knowledge" - that is, without intellectual activity as, above all, the criticality of reason, there is no and there can be no creativity: in a developed form, “creativity is the ability of the whole not to restore, but to remove the limitations of its present forms and prerequisites”.
However, it seems to us that intellectual activity itself is not once and for all a given value and an immanent characteristic of a person, but rather a function of a psychological attitude “on creativity”, which, in turn, is determined by a complex set of subjective and objective reasons and circumstances: from socio-historical and sociocultural to subjective-personal and individual-personal - first of all, from the motivational structure of the personality, as well as from the mindsets of a specific social environment and directionally these social processes and vectors of their “spiritual component” that dominate at a specific historical time interval, in conjunction with which the “vectors” of the creative activity of the personality are built (with regard to the “provision” of such an attitude), the cognitive functional hypothesis suggested by V. Druzhinin redundancy "as a psychological" resource "of creativity).
If the “self-change” of a person is included in the field of creativity, then the degree of “change” of the subject’s personality in the process and the result of activity to a certain extent depends on intellectual activity, the level of which to a decisive degree predetermines the level of activity efficiency and its effectiveness, but intellectual activity itself appears so to speak, by the mobilization reserve of the psyche, the self-creation of the individual in the process and the result of the activity is predetermined primarily and primarily by the conscious Coy subject to the need and the opportunity to "change itself". This installation determines the measure of the creative attitude of the subject to himself directly in the process of activity, stimulating both intellectual activity and other creative “forces and means”; However, as we sought to show, such a conscious installation is not only not ubiquitous, but rather an exception or a rarity in the mass of motivational prerequisites, external and internal stimuli of creativity. At the same time, this means the inapplicability of the concept of “creativity” in relation to “human life” as a whole (other than metaphors) and “in every moment” of life without reference to specific tasks and specific activities of a given person in given conditions and at a given moment of his life.
No matter how inspired and poetic are descriptions of a person’s enthusiastic attitude to the world (“to see eternity in one moment”), the ability to “wonder” being and perceive it actively, aesthetically and intellectually experiencing reality, and even non-standardly interpreting it, is in itself only “tangential” to creativity as an activity, only an incentive to the purposeful actualization of the person's subjectivity and to the “self-creation” of the human subject.
Creativity in the activity of a human subject, directly aimed at himself, his development and self-improvement, takes place there and to the extent that, and since a person is consciously guided by active dissatisfaction with himself, a purposeful attitude towards himself as an object that “does not suit” him and which he seeks to "change" through activity.
Having accepted the method of activity as a system-forming factor of creativity, we find that creativity in all its manifestations (with the correct interpretation) is an activity consciously perceived by the subject (consciously differently and not necessarily "to the end"), characterized by the formulation of fundamentally new tasks and non-algorithmic nature of their decision, and the principal novelty can arise both in the course of the primary goal-setting and in the process of achieving the goal.
Creativity is only one of the ways of human activity and one of its specific “moments”, which are qualitatively different from other methods and “moments” by a way out of a predetermined “format” of activity “along the way” of activity and by result.
Creativity is anthropocentric and in its “substrate” - human activity, and in its very process throughout its entire length, and in its result: the transformation and improvement of man and the world of man.
Creativity is not a “gift”, but an opportunity that grows out of the objective nature of being and the subjective nature of activity, which allows a person to act (set goals and achieve goals) not only by trial and error, but excluding the subjectively unacceptable from “miscalculation of options” and returning to seemingly "objectively impossible." Certainly, creativity is one of the factors of anthropogenesis, at least in the sense that the emergence of work and play required the creative efforts of man, but creativity is also anthropogenic: the objective need to be a subject and to exercise one's subjectivity including the creativity of the person formed in the process of individual life as conscious, with varying degrees of awareness, and purposeful, with varying degrees of activity in the implementation of various individual goals. subjective motives, intentions and motives, the development of the “generic program”.
Even if we assign creativity to the “sphere of the spirit,” it is the sphere of the human spirit in its infinite wealth, in its infinite and infinite becoming, in its Absolute. And the anthropological understanding does not "uplift" and does not "humiliate" creativity as a phenomenon of Man in the Universe, but it gives the opportunity to move away from philosophical uncertainty and false significance to the area of ​​rational interpretation of this phenomenon, its role and place in the life and development of man and humanity.
TEST 20
1. What is anthropology?
? human education
? turtle science of various people
? human education
? science of man
2. What is quantitative?
? qualitative
? quantitative
? flawed
? incomprehensible
3. How can the word “cognitive” be explained?
? developmental disease
? recognition related
? associated with knowledge
? related to the past
4. What is anthropogenesis?
? Human Origins
? monkey lineage
? the origin of all living species
? medical history
5. What is epiphenomenon?
? appendage to the phenomenon
? various forms of life
? the most important phenomenon
? vulgarity
Questions for self-control on the course:
1. Why is creativity considered a phenomenon of human activity?
2. What idea does A. Bergson express the concept of “life force”?
3. Can nature do?
4. What does it mean - “creativity is an anthropological phenomenon”?
5. Can there be a culture without a person?
6. Why is creativity inseparable from freedom?
7. What do the theories of “aesthetic hedonism” express?
8. Why did Schlegel call poetry “the initial chaos of human nature”?
9. Are the ideals of beauty the same?
10. Why did Nietzsche need Apollo and Dionysus?
11. What brings art and game together?
12. Why did Schiller think that there is a deep meaning in the child’s play?
13. What is the "dehumanization of art"?
14. How can one define an irrational human experience?
15. What role does catharsis play in the psychology of creativity?
16. How is catharsis different from sublimation?
17. Who are the formalists?
18. Can knowledge be considered a creative process?
19. Is it possible to make a discovery intuitively?
20. Why is creativity a deeply individual act?
21. What is a “picture of the world”?
22. Is creativity addressed to the “collective unconscious”?
23. What is the contribution of Freud to the psychology of the unconscious?
24. What did KG Jung discover in the psychology of creativity?
25. What is an archetype?
26. Are genius and villainy compatible?
27. Why did Plato consider genius mad?
28. What is an aesthetic experience?
29. How is catharsis different from sublimation?
30. Is it always a tragic experience of the meaninglessness of being?
31. Who wrote the poem "Poetic art" (Boileau)?
32. How is classicism different from romanticism?
33. What is postmodern?
34. What are the main signs of postmodern?
35. Who called the modern world a “global village”?
36. Who introduced the concept of "deconstruction"?
37. Is creativity different from activity?
38. What is creativity?
39. What is imagination?
40. What is special about creativity?