15. CREATIVE ORIENTATION OF PURPOSE

The creative (supra-situational) or non-creative (situational) orientation of the goal, its creative or non-creative content as a model of a “due” or model of a desired result depends on the initial position of the subject himself - on how much his goal-setting is determined by “Higher” or banal, selfish or altruistic motives, “mundane” needs or the imperative of high calling. At the same time, the objective assessment of the goal as “high”, perspective, progressive, as well as highlighting the axiological dominant of potentially creative activity and evaluating the result is very problematic - both from the “creative” subject and from the observer: in this respect, the history of art knows many examples. examples of unbridled creative ambitions without real creative achievements and examples of inflated creative reputations (examples of underestimation by the author of the created by him, as well as lack of understanding of a particular creative person and onkretnogo creativity specific creator contemporary - sometimes absolute tragic fatal for the creator misunderstanding - centuries or less did not neglect). In addition, the goal and the task of the subject - even with the extreme difficulty of their implementation in these specific conditions - can be in the nature of reproduction, reproduction, reduced to obtaining again the already achieved result, already known "subject". In this case, the creative nature of the goal is incorrect or not always correct: we can talk only about the creative nature and content of the goal (note that the achievement of such a goal may include creative elements - for example, the work of the restorer may be purely “reproductive”, but may include creative search).
We want to emphasize the non-identity of the concepts “creativity” and “creative activity”. From our point of view, all creativity is activity and the result of activity. Moreover, all creativity always strives to create (including discovery) the new, and the goal of creativity has a subjectively progressive character (changing the present for the future). But not all creation of the new, even objectively (and not only subjectively) progressive (progressive both in the subjective direction and in the objective result), represents creativity. The same with the progressive nature of activity: activity can have a high social significance and be a factor in social progress and not being creative itself: conscientious, systematic, routine, even tedious everyday work creates a prosperous future for people, perhaps less effectively than creativity, but yet quite effectively, successfully and with a sufficient degree of reliability in achieving a specific life goal, while the subject of such uncreative activities may well be aware of ennoy its significance and can set themselves very high goals and approach to his work as a selfless high service, a higher calling and purpose as an exceptionally important mission. Creative activity at the goal level has only an activity that consciously aims at creating or opening an unprecedented or previously unknown, and the subjective assessment of "unprecedentedness" here is perhaps more important than objective "novelty." Thus, creativity at the goal level is the formulation of a new type of task and / or a fundamentally new plan for solving the problem, an awareness of the need and the development of a new strategy and tactics for solving. Not any goal-setting, even the most creative properties, certainly includes such characteristics.
By its essential nature, any activity is aimed at changing, transforming, re-creating its “object” - at obtaining a new (or at least subjectively qualitatively new, that is, new-for-me) subject as its result. Therefore, the process of activity itself always requires from its subject not only activity, but also personal initiative, not just copying existing samples, existing standards of activity and its final “products”, but their improvement or at least individual variations with reference to specific circumstances and specific individual “ self "of the subject of activity. Because of this, any activity is every time in one way or another a new activity. For the same reasons, she always “allows” the possibility of creativity and always “wins” from the creative relationship of the subject. A creative attitude to activities usually implies a high degree of concentration of the forces and abilities of the subject, the achievement of the peak of their capabilities, as A.A. Melik-Pashayev [1997, p. 351], the work reveals the "higher self", the purpose of which is "relevant in terms of present reality to become the one" who a person is, "and only he is in the potential depth of his being." The social and individual value of the disclosure of personal creative potential, the disclosure of a particular person seem obvious. However, is the “self-disclosure” of a person always associated with creativity itself?
Undoubtedly, the initiative and interested attitude of the subject to the activity is an objective factor of its success. But, first, not every interested, proactive attitude to activities is creative: the desire to do the job as best as possible (to solve the task) always requires a rather high and sometimes extremely high level of energy and initiative, but if it is not at the same time striving to solve a no-new task (and not necessarily a conscious subjective striving for novelty as such), the very initiative and responsible attitude will not be creative. Secondly, if the activity itself only quantitatively “improves” its product in comparison with the existing standards and samples or represents only quantitative changes in the system of action algorithms, it can be arbitrarily intensive, fruitful and even heroic and revealing “depth” (or ") The essence and essence of the subject (his" higher self ", about which not only religious thinkers so emotionally write), arbitrarily socially useful according to the result and novelty of the final" product "(which seems and real novelty: in the end, every serial product coming off the assembly line is a new product) and yet not in any way a creative activity.
We draw attention to one very significant "dividing line" between creativity and activity. The criterion of success for the subject is the maximum compliance of the goal and the result. In art, the goal and the result are in a very complex dynamic interaction, and the result is not predetermined by the goal (this thesis is shared by many researchers, and the priority in establishing the "mismatch" of the goal and result as a distinctive characteristic of creativity in the system of activity seems to be I. Ponomarev). In this case, we note that the subject of creative activity, as a rule, rather clearly defines the goal before him and seeks to achieve precisely the subjectively desired result. The result is the same - and this concerns not only artistic, but also scientific creativity - can be very different from the intended subject. The unpredictability of the result, the lack of certainty and non-rigid, very diversely manifested and not countable determinism of subjective purpose and objective circumstances - this is certainly the most attractive and intriguing aspect of creativity, both in terms of the epistemological and in its human “dimension”: as an analogue of the riddle individual fate, the predetermined finiteness of the individual human being, its absolute definiteness with objective reality and very close no predictable content of this being in its particular existential - quantitative and qualitative - characteristics. The peculiarity of the relationship between goal and result not only psychologically characterizes creative and non-creative activities from the subjective side, but also the objectivity of such distinction. At the same time, we note that non-creative activity can produce a result that is superior in its value and other qualities to the idea of ​​a “doer”. However, non-creative activity, no matter how “creative” its orientation and end result, is always an activity on algorithms (even if it can be varied and combined with each other), leading to results, let them also contain something not foreseen by the subject, but not having consequence of the emergence before the subject of "essential" and "substantially" new problems and tasks. Creative activity always requires going beyond the limits of available algorithms, requires innovation both in the approach to its task and in its solution itself, and it also always contains in its end result at least something essentially unforeseen by the goal that represents (at least in some aspect) a new, unexpected problem for the subject - a new one, at least personally for him.
At the same time, we will repeat and emphasize: even an activity that actually includes creativity, in which creativity is even present to the maximum and, so to speak, at the highest level, is never a creative activity throughout its entirety, from the beginning and to end. It is clearly not enough to recognize that in creativity, as in non-creative activities, there are productive and unproductive "moments." Otherwise, the difference between creativity and non-creativity will be only quantitative. And if we go further, then we will have to admit that “reproductive” in activity is not at all creative activity and, in principle, cannot be. Here we again return to the notion of novelty as an already self-contained “objectivity” of creativity - precisely as an objectivity-objectivity (not objectivity-realness) —but not as a criterion of the truth of creativity (cf. Losev’s understanding of the “self-sufficient objectivity” ). Formal novelty, dissimilarity, originality, uniqueness as parametric and criterion characteristics of an activity (and especially an activity that is traditionally and universally recognized as creative because of its nature and area in the field of art, science) and its result do not become a necessary factor of creativity itself in its objectively positive value aspect, but on the contrary - can only be a manifestation of voluntaristic activity or situational business activity, i.e. the fundamental lack of freedom of activity, and therefore, the fundamentally non-creative content of the activity, with all the creative intentions and claims of the subject himself. In this sense, the "gaps" in the theory of creativity has certain practical consequences.
TEST 15
1. Is it possible to consider that creativity is activity and result of activity?
? can
? can't
? It is the same
? these are completely different things
2. Can routine activity have a high social status?
? can not
? can
? it all depends on the circumstances
? the question is too vague
3. Why can we say that creativity manifests a higher "I"?
? because it is creativity
? because the creator always claims recognition
? because the creator always exposes his "I"
? because the higher self is present everywhere
4. What is “new”?
? it is also that forgotten old
? this is what is considered unprecedented
? this is what was not
? this is what requires advertising
5. Is it possible to consider reproductive activity in creativity?
? can
? both possible and impossible
? need a specific example
? can't