13. CREATIVITY AND ACTIVITIES

In what activities and under what conditions does creativity appear and appear? This question is not only abstract and philosophical in nature, but is rather closely connected with the real problems of today's life and the life of tomorrow, the role that is given to creativity by the public consciousness. If we talk about the position of creativity in the current system of values ​​(at least, in the value system of the “developed” modern world, that is, the “West” in a broad sense), then its rank is extremely high. Both the "right" and the "left", and the "progressives" and the "traditionalists" are all unanimous: just like life on Earth is impossible without the preservation of peace, the further development of humanity is impossible without the creative efforts of people, the effective mass development of creative abilities and the creation of optimal conditions for their implementation.
What is creativity after all? At the level of common sense, “creativity” all means the same thing in general: an activity that leads to the creation of something new, previously unprecedented, or the creation of a fundamentally new way of activity, and the “new” and the process of its creation are endowed with either situational value , or (more often) are understood as the immanent axiological characteristics of both the process of creativity and the “product” of this process. At the level of theory, it is difficult to find another term in the understanding of which there would be so little agreement, certainty, clarity. Some researchers, as already mentioned, consider creativity to be a universal property of matter (in extreme cases, living nature), and human creative activity is only a “specific” manifestation of this universal quality of the world (“creativity”). Others recognize creativity as a specific “generic” peculiarity of a person and consider any activity as creative, while “creativity” in the generally accepted sense is given a place for a somewhat more developed form of initiative and innovation among other forms and other activities. Others recognize the originality of creative labor among other types and forms of human activity, but they fully identify “creation” and “creativity”. The fourth see in the works "the summit" manifestation of activity. Finally, the fifth put forward the idea of ​​the qualitative difference between creativity and any other activity, and creative thinking (especially creative imagination) - from all other types and forms of human thinking, but for the most part come to the denial of the inner relationship between "creative" and "non-creative" activities . It is characteristic that representatives of very different points of view often introduce a distinction between creativity “in a wide” and “in a narrow” sense: such a split always indicates some incorrectness of terminology and the categorical apparatus. And yet, it appears that in each of the approaches mentioned, albeit in varying degrees, there is a certainty.
Our task does not include “reconciliation” or “averaging” of the existing views on creativity. It seems to us that the true in such a position is true in relation to one object of research (one “understanding”) of creativity and false in relation to another. We are convinced that the representatives of each of the above points of view mean not one and the same subject: who is the result, who is the process; who is the type of activity, who is its specific “moment”, etc. To define what creativity is and how it differs from its premises, where we meet precisely with creativity, and where it’s with “similarities” or “elements” or even imitation and profanation — such a task hardly has a solution “in general ". And although we will further try to outline some of the ways of such a solution, we deliberately shy away from the hypothetical a priori attempts at the “scientific” definition of creativity: as we see it, philosophy, being a certain form of consciousness, can generally speak about the scientific picture of the world and the scientific definition of a given phenomenon. only within the boundaries of the scientific itself - that is, logically and empirically reliable knowledge and to explicate this knowledge within the limits and methods of one’s own speculation with a certain (even very high) degree This reliability, however, is precisely within one’s own boundaries and methods that are by no means so logically flawless and empirically secure, always socio-historically limited and subjectively impartial. Modern ideas about the psychology and neurophysiology of thinking, speech, and consciousness make it possible to make very broad philosophical conclusions about the nature of creativity, but these generalizations can hardly be considered absolutely true and - all the more - exhaustive. Therefore, as a conditional model and a starting point for further reasoning, we’ll dwell on the above stated “common sense”, “vocabulary” definition (creating “new” and “valuable”; or “new” and because of this “valuable”) - we will stop that the usual understanding of creativity ipso facto does not pretend to any strict scientific character and can be “without claims” either corrected and supplemented, or rejected as untenable.
The identification of activity and creativity is fundamentally incorrect and not legitimate (on the other hand, as we see it, the concept of “creative activity” as to some extent opposing these concepts in their unity is not entirely correct and even tautological), although it is not by chance and is generated not only the aberration of the “view” of the researcher himself, the desire to axiologically elevate all types and forms of labor, as well as other human activities, not only by many other subjective reasons, but also quite objective and circumstances.
TEST 13
1. Is it possible to identify the concepts of "creativity" and "creation"?
? in a sense
? can
? can't
? should not confuse the problem
2. What is imitation?
? imitation
? profanation
? check in
? explication
3. When is rewriting a document turned out to be creative?
? never
? when it's not just a copy
? In all cases, this work
? in all cases this activity
4. The inventor of the wheel is the creator. And the worker on the conveyor, pushing the wheel on the axle?
? creator
? just an employee
? when how - the creator or worker
? example failed
5. Can creativity be considered a universal property of matter?
? Can
? How to look
? Matter has nothing to do with it
? Not
6. Is it possible to distinguish between creative and non-creative activities?
? can
? is impossible
? who needs it
? It is the same
7. What does it mean to axiologically elevate all types of labor?
? it means turning the criminal into legal
? it means belittle all kinds of labor
? it means to recognize all kinds of creative work
? it means taxing all kinds of labor