1. CREATIVITY AS A PHENOMENON OF HUMAN ACTIVITY

Not one area of ​​purposeful human activity, like, we note, human activity as a whole, has been the subject of such close study and attention as creativity. (Polityko SD. Anthropology of creativity. M., 2003, p.10). Creativity is an activity aimed at creating a new one that has never existed before, so it is distinguished by originality, originality and uniqueness. As a result of creativity, new objects and qualities, patterns of behavior and communication, new images and knowledge are created. Creativity is a multifaceted phenomenon. Therefore, different facets of creativity became the subject of research in different eras. Inside aspects of creativity, various aspects appeared - object, emotional, informational, communicative, psychological, personal.
Who is the subject of creativity? Can this question be put differently: does nature or man create? If we consider "creativity" as the ontological basis of the world, then the following answer is possible: both nature and man ... The idea of ​​"creative nature" is not new. It can be found in the myths of all nations. Pantheism as a teaching about what God is is unthinkable without this world view. In his opinion, the universe lives, grows in the process of creative consciousness and freely develops in accordance with its inherent desire for life, a vital impulse. (Bergson Henri. Collected Works. Vol. 1, M., 1992). In the same measure, the psychic individual, according to Bergson, is a fluid, unbound by reason indivisible diversity. Life can be comprehended thanks to one's own experience, intuition. “I inhale the scent of a rose, and in my memory, vague childhood memories immediately resurrect. To tell the truth, these memories were not at all caused by the smell of a rose; I inhale them with this very smell that they merge with. Others perceive this smell differently. - You will say that it is all the same smell, but associated with different views. I agree with you, but do not forget that you first excluded from the various impressions received from the rose, everything is personal. You have retained only the objective aspect, the fact that the smell of the rose belongs to the general area and, so to speak, to space. However, it was only under this condition that a special name could be given to the rose and its smell. And then, to distinguish our individual impressions, we would have to add specific properties to the general idea of ​​the smell of a rose ”(ibid., Pp.120-121).
Bergsonian “creative evolution” to a certain extent excluded the “creator”. “These are concepts of being of nature, organic life and human activity as a single creative force, asserting creativity as life, and life as creativity (PK Engelmeyer); a statement of the gift of imagination in nature, thanks to which the emergence of the New is identified with the invention (T. Ribot); the idea of ​​"self-discovery" of nature (V. Stern). If not in the “tide” of these ideas, then Teilhard de Chardin very closely identifies two types of energy in nature: tangential (interconnection energy) and radial (development energy), or, in other words, “physical” and “psychic” energy as an indivisible structural unity, thanks to which the evolution of the spirit is manifested in the complication of matter ”(Polityko SD. The Anthropology of Creativity. M., 2003. p. 12).
We are convinced that creativity is an anthropological, psychological phenomenon. “The work of nature” is really nothing more than a metaphor. The identification of the "creativity of nature" with the "creativity of man" actually impoverishes the phenomenon itself. He loses the demiurgic, human dimension. It is thanks to the emergence of consciousness, the complex and inexhaustible world of the psyche that a huge potential of creativity is born.
Being a human creation, culture seems to stand above nature, although its source, material and place of action is nature. In the organic world there are creatures active, creating something conditioned by instinct. Human activity is not given by nature entirely, although it is connected with the fact that nature gives by itself. Human activity is free in the sense that it goes beyond instinct.
Human nature, considered without this rational activity, is limited only by perceptual abilities and instincts, or is considered in its infancy and undeveloped state. But the fact of the matter is that a person is capable of such activity that is not limited to nature, within the framework of a species. He moves from one form of activity to another.
Man transforms and completes nature. Culture is the formation and creativity. Transforming the surrounding nature, man simultaneously completes himself, that is, his inner human nature. The wider his activity, the more he is transformed, improved. In this respect, the opposition of nature and man does not have an exceptional sense, since man to a certain extent is nature, although not only nature ... There was not and there is no purely natural man. From the beginnings to the end of its history, there was, is and will be only a "cultural person", that is, a "creative person".
Consequently, the mastery of external nature is not yet a culture (the beaver builds a dam), although it is one of the conditions of culture. To master nature means to master not only external, but also internal, human nature, that is, to acquire a gift that no other living being possesses. Only man is capable of it.
This thought was well expressed by the French cultural expert and psychologist Jean-Marie Benoit (born in 1942): “Culture is the specificity of human activity, what characterizes a person as a species. The search for a person before culture is in vain; his appearance in the arena of history should be viewed as a cultural phenomenon. It is deeply connected with the essence of man, is part of the definition of man as such. " Man and culture, man and creativity, as noted by J.M. Benoit, are inseparable, like the plant and the soil on which it grows.
Man made a step towards breaking with nature only in the sense that he began to build on it his own, human world, world of culture as a further stage of world evolution. Since then, development continues through the culture. At the same time, man remains the connecting link between nature and culture. Moreover, his inner belonging to both of these worlds indicates that there is a relationship between them, not contradictions, but complementarity.
Culture is the nature that a person “recreates”, claiming by means of himself as a person. The mediating link between culture as a human being and nature is an activity, that is, a versatile, free activity of a person, which gives a certain result. It is much broader than what was “recorded” in instinct. Man's mind, will and feelings are defined as the result of all human activity. (See about this in more detail: Gurevich PS Culturology, M., 2003).
TEST 1
1. Who wrote: “I smell the smell of a rose, and in my memory immediately memories of childhood arise”?
? Pushkin
? Bergson
? Goethe
? Evtushenko
2. What philosopher described the phenomenon of "creative evolution"?
? Polityko
? Plato
? Mamardashvili
? Bergson
3. How does culture and nature relate?
? culture and nature are at the watershed
? culture and nature love each other
? culture stands above nature
? nature stands above culture
4. Who is the demiurge?
? sage
? creator
? the plaintiff
? juror
5. Why does man recreate nature?
? looking for meanings
? gains benefits
? conquers nature
? madly in love with nature