Quintological approach to building a unified theory of creativity

Quintological approach to building a unified theory of creativity

The article proposes a model and method for constructing a unified theory of creativity, which is based on the universal principle of a centered penta-structure. This principle allows us to distinguish a system of mutually agreed dimensions and categories of creativity, and the classical model can be represented in the form of 4Ps / S - process (process), product (product), personality (person), environment (place), as well as generating and integrating their meaning ( ). The deployment of these central, organizing categories leads to the creation of relevant private theories that represent creativity, as a process of solving problems, productive activities, self-actualization, creative dialogue, as well as creative vision and sense-creation.

Key words: unified theory of creativity, methodological foundations, quintological approach, pentabase, model of creativity.

Formulation of the problem

The modern general theory of creativity is a cumbersome system full of many-valued terms, a shaky epistemological construction overloaded with various methodological approaches and multiple, often unrelated and incommensurable with each other, theoretical concepts. Most of its constituent theories of the average level were built primarily according to positivist standards, by inductively deriving theoretical systems from pure empirical facts.
However, due to the fact that the “pure facts” themselves reveal their theoretical load, the modern concept of creativity turns out to be fundamentally impossible to derive from experience, and its evolution is accompanied by a link in a constantly expanding set of empirical results and ideas. At the same time, the rapid accumulation of medium-level theories that are not related to each other creates a mosaic, variegated and fragmentary picture, through which unsteady, superficial and eclectic philosophical prerequisites appear. At present, the theory of creativity is in a state of postmodern chaos, and naturally emerging new general theories, in turn, require their generalization and systematization.
In addition, methodologically, the overall research situation in the field of the study of creativity is characterized by the dominance of applied research over fundamental, objective approaches over interdisciplinary and quantitative methods over qualitative ones.
The conceptual basis for each of the existing theories is the notion of creativity, which in an ideal representation must necessarily be derived from an understanding of its essence and nature. At the same time, most of the existing definitions, and therefore theories of creativity, are the result of the implementation of various worldview orientations, paradigmatic attitudes and subjective ideas of researchers, manifestations of their conventionality and corporate solidarity, the realization of their particular pragmatic goals, research objectives and individual preferences.
Today, researchers are faced with the priority task of building a unified theory of creativity, which is a holistic, self-consistent system that freely accommodates all existing concepts of creativity, including the opposite, that are considered not as contradictory, but as complementary and mutually enriching each other. This complete, dynamically developing theory should be ready for any expansion and deepening, open to not only the inclusion of all new, constantly emerging and possible theories, but also to their prediction and generation.
At the same time, today the problem of pragmatization of the theory and the creation of a universal and effective creative method, which is the core of a creative vision of reality, is becoming extremely significant. At the same time, effective, lively creative knowledge should be well organized and represented using the most capacious, compact and convenient matrices, maps, symbols, archetypical structures, including various penta-structures. Thus, the task of building the structural framework of a unified theory of creativity comes down to creating a capacious and simple matrix and determining the place of each theory in this symmetric, self-similar, fractal formation.
It is necessary to take into account that the very concept of creativity, like any complex system, inevitably goes through in its development a number of universal stages: origin, differentiation, integration, and also transformation, as a result of which, the evolutionary system itself, through natural postmodernist fragmentation, passes to centering and unification around the original, generating semantic matrix, constituted by universal fundamentals.
In this regard, today the extraordinary relevance is no longer acquired by the search for integrative principles that allow building general theories, but the definition of some absolute, self-generating principles, the consistent and immanent deployment of which lays the methodological basis and traces the conceptual framework of a unified theory of creativity.
Thus, the task of determining the structure of a theory is harmoniously complemented by a search for common, extremely common and reliable ontological and methodological foundations, from which essential central categories of theories would be derived, which, in turn, freely, with the help of semantic, non-causal connections, combined numerous schools, theories and paradigms.

Analysis of recent research and publications
Modern researchers are increasingly agreeing that a unified theory of creativity should be built on reliable methodological and theoretical foundations. Thus, A.Wythehead believed that “the true method of philosophical creativity is to develop the best (within your capabilities) scheme of general ideas and fearlessly apply it to the interpretation of experience” [9, p. 24].
According to V.S. Stepina, already in postpositivist philosophy, was realized the opposite of empirical, the way of building a theory, which is an explication of fundamental theoretical concepts and structures. At the same time, the author singled out as the most important components forming the foundations of science and systems of theoretical knowledge: 1) the scientific picture of the world, which is formed by the fundamental concepts and principles of science; 2) ideals and norms of scientific knowledge, including value orientations, methodological guidelines, research objectives and ways to achieve them; 3) the philosophical foundations of science, understood as “metaphysical models”, ontological principles and fundamental postulates [8].
Thus, the definition of metaphysical prerequisites, ontological foundations and methodological principles for creating a unified theory of creativity should be complemented by the construction of an integral picture of the world that is as close to reality as possible, based on the universal laws and mechanisms of creative evolution. In addition, due to the fact that creativity is the core, the immanent constituent center, organizing axis and ideal trajectory of development of all mental processes, properties and states, the construction of its unified theory is closely connected with the creation of an integral paradigm framework of psychological science.

Previously unresolved parts of a common problem.
Currently, researchers are faced with the task of constructing not so much a general as a unified theory of creativity. Taking into account the fact that the problems of building a unified theory of creativity, a universal psychological paradigm, an organic scientific picture of the world and the original matrix of the first essences coincide, it can be assumed that the creation of a holistic, self-consistent theory of creativity will serve as a model for solving the most pressing and global challenges in front of modern science.

Formulation of article objectives
The aim of the article is to find and build an integrating and generating matrix of mutually agreed methodological foundations for building a unified theory of creativity, through the implementation of a quintological approach to the problem.

Presentation of the main research material
Building a unified theory of creativity, unlike its general theory, should be carried out not by integrating numerous existing theories, but on the basis of the development and self-development of its central category, the initial theoretical concept, which constitutes its nuclear conceptual basis.
The theoretical concept of creativity is a form of expression of its essence, the knowledge of which, in turn, is realized by comprehending the nature of the phenomenon of creativity. It is precisely the comprehension of the nature of creativity that makes it possible to form its ontological foundation, which serves as a reliable theoretical and methodological foundation for building a unified theory of creativity.
In this regard, the definition of the essence and disclosure of the nature of creativity can be carried out only outside the theory itself by its philosophical understanding [7]. At the same time, the definition of the ontological basis of creativity is impossible without the disclosure of its inexperienced, transcendental and extreme metaphysical premises. Understanding the phenomenon and the inner nature of creativity requires maximum plowing up of semantic contexts, a radical expansion of the methodological framework for its study, the creation of extremely capacious contextual matrices that would not allow to narrow, skip, distort and distort the ever-emerging, emerging phenomena.
It is the new living metaphysics that will allow creating an extremely wide and capacious semantic context for the consideration of creativity, the main dimensions of which are super-experienced principles and transcendental beginnings, to construct universal matrices capable of containing the invisible, unthought, still unmanifested, but possible.
At the same time, the paramountly necessary empirical studies of specific life manifestations of creative activity should be accompanied by the disclosure of the fundamental bases and super-experienced beginnings of reality, which determine the necessary conditions, sources and the very possibility of the existence of creativity and creative potentialities of the personality. When considering reality from the standpoint of “universalistic empiricism (N. O. Lossky), the empirical fact itself, while retaining its authenticity and living thing, appears as a collapsed holographic matrix containing all the layers of reality behind it, from perceived and measured signs to the most extreme and concentrated universal meanings.
In addition, each phenomenon, event and empirical fact is viewed through the prism of a holographic pentamatrix, which allows to highlight all layers of multi-level connections, and most importantly, the hierarchy of their sense-generating centers and key dimensions.
The unity of the theoretical system is created within the opposing flows, simultaneously emanating from the primary, pure empirical representations and from the transcendental framework of the limit measurements of the Universe. The maximum generalization of the original universal structure and, at the same time, the utmost reliability, indestructibility and inviolability of the first essences, justify and provide, in their framework, unlimited methodological and cognitive freedom, open up unexpected possibilities for continuous development, enrichment and deepening of the theory.
One of the most important methodological problems of building a unified theory of creativity is the definition of its basic structure. In this case, the task is reduced to finding and creating some holographic multidimensional matrix in which space is prepared for each existing and emerging theory, and stable relationships between its levels and cells will make it easy and obvious to uncover new links and mutual transitions between different concepts.
This active, well-structured matrix should be able to draw, structure, and pack existing and continuously emerging empirical and theoretical knowledge. At the same time, the accumulation of identical, but individualized information in individual cells and clusters, in itself, leads to its qualitative transformations, to an emergent generation of new integrations and meanings.
One of the options for constructing dynamic, organizing and generating matrices, allowing to reduce the numerous theories of creativity into a single system and consolidate them with the help of non-causal semantic connections, can be a quintological approach to creativity.
The quintological approach to the study of complex objects is a type, specification of the system-structural approach and is a methodological orientation, a way of seeing and describing, which is based on a universal penta-structure, quincunx, formed by internally necessary self-development of some first essence. Quincus (from lat. Quinc-, quinque - five, uncia - ounce, small part) is a complete structure consisting of five staggered multidimensional rolled points or spaces, four of which are located at the corners of a large square, and the fifth at its center. At the same time, structural points can unfold in circles and then the figure will be a four-petal universal “flower of life”.
The essential difference of this structure from all other five-element penta-structures is the presence of the center, which appears as quintescence, “the fifth, and at the same time, the first essence”, the most profound, primary and pure principle, the most important and main idea, as the subtle , the substance, spirit, and the highest creative power pervading the worlds.
This structure is a “spiritualized pentagram”, the pentagon, in which the top of the figure moves to its center, some archetypical including subject, a model of the world in which four points corresponding to the cardinal points are found in the center of creative power and vision. In addition, this way of representing complex systems is the result of the implementation of the “Pythagorean approach” to the world, based on the belief that “everything is a number”, that the number itself has an ontological nature and, as some organizing primordial essence, lies at the heart of manifest and unmanifested reality, and numerical proportions and symmetries express the most profound principles and laws of the structure and development of the world.
S. Ginger and A. Ginger emphasized the extraordinary wealth of the meanings embodied in the number five, which was attributed to particular importance in almost all countries, cultures and philosophies. “The five,” the authors write, “symbolizes completeness, equilibrium union and harmony. This number is associated with the center, located strictly in the middle of the four cardinal points. ” At the same time, the Five is a capacious symbolic image expressing a multidimensional approach to a person, including a physical, affective, rational, social and spiritual dimension [2].
Penta-structure and its special form of quincuns. can be understood as an archetype, as a universal structure permeating all forms and levels of the structure and existence of the world, manifested in the form of such ways of organizing and representing systems, such as the principle of pentagram, mandala, wheel, flower, lotus and pagoda.
At the same time, the penta-structure is not only a capacious symbol, embodying the cosmic order and image of the world, but also the innate archetype of the psyche, which provides ease of perception and, accordingly, an instant, intuitive seizure of entities represented in similar way objects. In addition, the isomorphism of internal and external structures, generates a special, fractal way of communication between the subject and the object and creates the possibility of their multiple holographic interconnections.
The implementation of the quintological approach is associated with the use of a number of successive procedures and techniques, as a result of which the complex content of an object is represented as a special kind of representation or an archetypal sequencing pentastructure. This method of building objects gives the system stability and symmetry, facilitates the interaction between objects that acquire their highest form of communication through an equidistant center of coordination, control, and sense of function.
The quintological approach focuses the research on the identification of the basic components and structures of the phenomenon, on the disclosure and analysis of various types of interrelations and their integration into a single whole. It, in a certain sense, represents the embodiment of the principles of "sacred geometry" aimed at finding topological solutions to the most essential problems of the structure and development of the world.
Приоритетной направленностью и отличительной чертой квинтологического подхода является первоочередное нахождение «порождающего центра», некоторой многомерной точки, свернутой сферы, голографическую клеточки вмещающей универсум, а также в ее развертывании в несколько сущностных измерений, которые с внутренней необходимостью синтезируются в гармоничную структуру, служащую геномом универсального творчества.
Данный принцип построения объектов позволяет разрешить сущностное структурное противоречие между центробежными и центростремительными силами системных объектов, между самодавлеющей тотализацией центра и разрушительными энергиями периферий. При этом сконструированная пента-структура гармонизирует и балансирует отношения внутри системы и выступает как трансформатор, преобразующий деструктивную энергию в созидательную, направляющуюся на ритмичное пульсирование ценной информации и смыслов. В этом смысле особой эвристичностью обладает метафора живого цветка, которая позволяет представить внутреннюю динамику пентаструктуры в виде органичной, пульсирующей системы, ритмично разворачивающей лепестки содержаний и вновь свертывающих их к своему центру.
Высокий креативный потенциал квинтологического подхода проявлляется в ено первоочередной нацеленности на определение и формирование центрального ядра теории, которое спонтанно генерирует новые знания, самостоятельно раскрывает неявные и новые смыслы. Кроме этого создание емкого, голографического способа упаковки, ведет к предельному сжатию и концентрации содержания, к выстраиванию иерархии центральных категорий и соответствующих «порождающих вакуумных пространств», активных пустых мест, которые самостоятельно выбирают и притягивают изоморфные структуры и однородную информацию и одновременно генерируют новые феномены, связи и смыслов.
В то же время бесконечная, неисчерпаемая возможность выявления различных плоскостей, «срезов» и уровней анализа сложных систем позволяет подставлять в пустую матрицу любую пятёрку взаимосогласованных пентаструктурой понятий. При этом в каждом активном пустом пространстве, по принципу китайской пагоды, происходит принудительное наслоение содержаний и смыслов, их взаимонасыщение, взаимодополнение, взаимообогащение и взаимораскрытие.
Уже само помещение отдельных теорий в их «сродненное» пространство, возвращение в их подлинные миры и смысловые контексты, приводит к приросту содержания, а неожиданное объединение их в единую целостную конфигурацию ранее несвязанных теорий, эмерджентным образом раскрывает новые свойства, связи и качества. При этом представление системы знаний в виде пентаструктуры, позволяет каждой частной теории соотносится как друг с другом, так и с целым и самим организующим центром, что позволяет раскрывать ее новые, неожиданные функции, сущности цели.
Необходимо подчеркнуть, что в наиболее общем виде в основе квинтологического подхода лежит:
1. Исходная мировоззренческая позиция, методологическая ориентация, точка зрения, особый ракурс рассмотрения и способ видения сложного объекта.
2. Стратегический принцип или их система, основное положение, убеждение и руководящая идея
3. Способ описания и репрезентации содержания объекта.
4. Набор процедур и приемов, служащих формой реализации исходных принципов и способов представления объекта.
Необходимо отметить, что квинтологический подход рассматривается не как «единственно верная» методологическая ориентация, а только как один из вариантов системного описания, свободно вмещающий и даже усиливающийся от применения монистических, дуалистических, триалогических и тетралогических и других системно-структурных способов репрезентации и анализа.
In turn, a quintological analysis is a way to implement a quintological approach and is defined as a procedure for mentally dismembering an object into parts in order to determine its completeness and essence. Quintological analysis is carried out in close connection with the synthesis, manifested in the design of the resulting parts of a harmonious structure, by combining them around its generating center.
One of the most successful and detailed ways to implement the quintological approach is the one proposed by V.A. Hansen concept of system descriptions or the method of pentabases [1].
В основе данного метода лежит представление сложных систем в виде пентабазиса, состоящего из четырех рядоположенных, связанных в пары понятий и одного центрального объединяющего. При этом исчерпывающее описание любого объекта действительности достигается путем раздвоения единого основания на две дихотомические пары его сущностных критериев, то есть посредством двух последовательных дихотомических делений.
Ведущей идеей метода является соотнесение совокупности элементов исследуемого объекта с совокупностью элементов выбранного базиса в результате чего производится структурирование мно¬жества элементов и выявляются их сущностные связи и устанавливаются полнота описания.
Использование базисов позволяет сделать эти описания намного устойчивыми, помогает обнаружить общность объектов различной природы, получить значительно более крупные научные синтезы и представить научную информацию в форме, более удобной для восприятия и осмысления.
При этом важнейшим свойством пентабазиса является его согласованность с возможностями восприятия человека и с особенностями строения как первой, так и второй сигнальных систем. Объединение нескольких базисов также дает возможность увеличить аналитическую мощность метода, «В ряде случаев, - пишет В.А. Ганзен, - поиск базисов играет и эвристическую роль, он может помочь обнаружить «белые пятна», облегчить переход от изучения явления к его сущности» [1, с.41]. При этом действенность данного метода может быть существенно увеличена при объединении и наложении нескольких базисов.
Именно метод системного описания В.А. Ганзена может быть положен в основу построения матрицы предельных метафизических оснований творчества или «карты сущностей», а также выявления архитектоники феноменальных миров человека, которые послужат исходными генеративными матрицами построения единой теории творчества.
В этом смысле задача построения структуры и сущностных оснований единой концепции творчества, разворачивается в ряд последовательных этапов:
1. Нахождение центрального, порождающего и интегрирующего первопринципа, являющегося квинтэссенцией основных философских предпосылок и методологических ориентаций.
2. Развертывание данного первопринципа, путем последовательных дихотомических делений и объединение новых сущностных манифестаций в целостный пентабазис.
4. Выявление архитектоники миров Универсума, интегрирующим и порождающим ядром которой является мир культуры.
3. Упорядочивание и согласование всех имеющихся теорий творчества и сведение их в стройную взаимосогласованную систему с помощью построенных пентабазисов.
Конструирование исходной, организующей и смыслопорождающей матрицы начинается с нахождения изначального фундаментального первопринципа, который должен обладать следующими качествами: 1. Изначальностью, исходностью, первоначальностью. 2. Универсальностью и инвариантностью 3. Всеобщностью, всевмещаемостью и предельной распахнутостью. 4. Внутренним источником самодвижения и способностью к саморазвертыванию. 5. Самодостаточностью, внутренним единством самопорождающим потенциалом, самопричинностью «causa sui».
По мнению Н.О. Лосского, система возможна только при существовании сверхсистемного, трансцендентного начала, необходимо единого в самом себе и поэтому подлинно абсолютного. Способом отношения данного сверхмирового начала к миру есть творение иерархии субстанциональных деятелей, некоторых конкретно-идеальных начал охватывающих как неживую природу, так трансецндентные духовные сущности. По мнению философа, субстанциональные деятели представляют собой творческие силы, центры порождения и объединения мно¬жеств частных систем, каждая из которых подчинена какому-либо более сложному целому, вплоть дл мирового, имеющего в своей основе единую Высшую субстанцию [5].
Абсолют понимается как безусловное, неограниченное, совпадающее с самим собой, само себя движущее, непрерывно самопорождающееся и вечно новое начало, создающее, вмещающее и поддерживающее все сущее. Данное понимание абсолюта может служить наиболее общей моделью представления центральных компонентов пентаструктур, отражающих все формы существования материи на любом уровне организации. Так исходя из этой модели, онтологическое основание единой теории творчества может быть представлено как процесс непрестанного спонтанного самопорождения бытия.
At the same time, since the Absolute is the being of being and nothingness, the identity of identity and non-identity, the unity of unity and multiplicity, the first stage in the unfolding of the absolute origin is its division into being and nothingness. The second cycle of deployment of ultimate primordialities leads to their separation, according to the criterion “infinite - final”, into new dyadic complementary connectives: being ( whole-interaction ) and nothing ( possibility-freedom ) . Именно диалектические пары целое-взаимодействие и возможность-свобода раскрывают сущностные измерения творчества, как способа существования абсолюта, вычерчивают его координирующие смысловые рамки и проявляются как универсальные, качественно своеобразные нерасторжимо связанные, но не перемешивающиеся в реальности онтологические и смысловые сферы человеческого универсума.
The architectonics of these transcendental primary essences can be manifested by building their generalized topological model or “Entity Map”, whose components are central categories, the basic concepts on which universal philosophical theories of creativity are built. Thus, in the broadest sense, creativity can be defined as a way of existence, manifestation and deployment of the Absolute and as nature’s creativity, as well as the achievement and realization of freedom, the creation and realization of possibilities, the creation and realization of the whole and creative interaction (Table 1 ).

Table 1. "Map of entities" and universal theories of creativity.  

In turn, the central categories that underlie the general theories of creativity at the same time act as generative and integrating principles that streamline the expanding and contracting content spaces of particular theories, intermediate-level theories (R. Merton, 1967) [12] or “particular theoretical schemes”. ”(V.S. Stepin, 2000) [8].

This diverging structure of the tree-like model corresponds to some standard structure of humanitarian and, in particular, psychological theories. V.A. Yurevich believes that “Its most clearly emerging elements are the center and the periphery, that is, on the one hand, some basic ideas and statements that form the core of the theory, on the other, are auxiliary to it experience and cognitive constructions” [10 ].
At the same time, the unifying matrix of universal philosophical theories of creativity can be represented in the form of a consistent unfolding of primary essences, each of which is explicated into certain substantive areas of theories, the essence of which are the entities and categories of second order [6]:
1. Creativity as a deployment and mode of existence of the Absolute.
creativity of nature and the universal process of evolution
1.1. The co-creation of man with the highest creative power.
Realization of creative divine willpower living in a person (N.O. Lossky, 1906, 1927); The co-creation of Man with God (N. Berdyaev, 1935).
1.2. Co-creation by reaching higher states of consciousness. Creativity as a fruit of divine inspiration (Plato 5-4 centuries. BC); Achievement of the State of the Flow (M. Chiksentmihaii, 1975)
1.3. Creative vision of the world The vision of personality as a source of creativity and the creation of worlds of culture (G. Simmel, 1911, 1918).
2. Creativity as an Interaction. The transactional relationship between the individual and the environment (M.Stein, 1962); Creativity as harmonious interactions of the individual with his environment (H. Anderson, 1965); Creativity as a developing interaction (Ya.A. Ponomarev, 1976).
3. Creativity as the creation and realization of the Whole.
Openness to the whole, achievement of unity and harmony with the primary entities of the universe (H. Anderson, 1965); The union of fragments of knowledge stored in memory into a single whole (V. Keller, 1930, M. Wertheimer, 1945).
4. Creativity as the creation and realization of opportunities.
Creativity as the "creation of secondary worlds" and the modeling of languages ​​(J.R.R.Tolkien, 1931); Building possible worlds, playing with text (R. Barth, 1973; H. L. Borges, 1982; W. Eco, 1983); Designing as an existence. (M. Epstein, 2003)
5. Creativity as an achievement and realization of Freedom.
Freedom of will and creativity as an expression of a person’s own nature (Pico della Mirandolla, (ed. 1496), Awakening of the “Dionysian” Spirit, Insignificance and Reappraisal of Values ​​(F. Nietzsche, 1872); Creativity as an expression, statement and realization of substantial freedom (N. A. Berdyaev, 1911, 1916); Free implementation of the project and implementation of free choice (J.P. Sartre, 1946);
In turn, a unified theory of creativity should be built on the basis of universal structures and laws of the functioning and development of the psyche, which is ontological and creative in nature and naturally includes the entire spectrum of manifestations of consciousness, unconscious and transpersonal states, as well as pre-object and metasubject manifestations. So S.L. Rubinstein (1957) wrote about the “kinship” of a person to all things and his initial involvement in being, A.N. Leontiev (1983) considered the psyche as a continuous, self-developing "image of the world", interwoven into the process of evolution. In turn, V.T. Kudryavtsev argued that the psyche has an original, universal-creative nature: “The initial form of formation of any mental function of a person is a productive, creative process, which ensures that an individual builds a dynamic image of the culture world in its universality and universality ...” [4, p.117] .
Thus, the original “Entity Map”, built on the basis of limiting ontological foundations, creates organizing and explanatory spaces not only for philosophical theories of creativity but also for those based on the study of basic mental processes, in turn presented in the form of a pentabase: “memory - thinking, "intuition-imagination" and the underlying perception. (Table 1).
Continuing to set extremely broad contexts and plans of understanding, which highlight facts and phenomena that are inaccessible to direct observation and empirical research, while retaining an extremely broad view of creativity and, with the need to introduce the concept of subject into being, we get a new ontological category — the world, or rather the inseparable bond and the integrity of the "man-world" or the existence of man in the world.
Initially, the syncretic, primary human world is the world of culture, which is created by the original, holistic act of creative awareness-vision, which is some initial syncretic integrity, including the act of creating an artifact, the act of overcoming the problem, the accompanying communicative act and free emotional self-expression, generating the world and of man’s self. At the same time, the world of culture, which is born together with man, in its collapsed form contains the future autonomous phenomenal world Expressing five basic forms of life: the objective, human, symbolic, social, cultural, and creative.
The consistent self-development of the world of culture with the help of universal dichotomous divisions reveals relatively autonomous subjective and objective layers of culture, which, in turn, are divided into two complementary bundles of worlds: subject and symbolic, and internal and social, the tops of which are again integrated by the world of culture.
At the same time, a certain architectonics of the independent worlds of the Universe appears, revealing the basic symmetries and the harmony of interrelationships within the universal pentastructure. It is this pentastructure of basic human worlds that can serve as a constituent matrix, a system of semantic contexts, dimensions, and factors regulating and generating the basic psychological concepts of creativity.
Traditionally, the search and finding of certain integrating principles and ordering patterns of creativity was carried out mainly by summarizing and analyzing the whole diversity of empirical experience and available theoretical knowledge. So Mel Rhodes (1961), after analyzing 40 definitions of creativity and 16 definitions of imagination, developed and substantiated a holistic model of creativity - 4 Ps, presenting it as an interaction of 4 factors: process, product, personality, and environment (process, product, person, press) [14]. In turn, Ross Mooney (1962) also proposed to consider creativity through the prism of the model 4 Ps (process, product, person, environment) [13]. Stuart E. Golann (1963) replaced the notion of environment, the closest in meaning of the term “place” and his 4Ps theory (process, product, person, place) became the structural basis for the organization of theoretical and empirical research of creativity. At the same time, “place” in the broad sense was understood as a problem or socially organized medium [11]. Later, D. Simonton (Dean K. Simonton, 1988), identifying the concepts of leadership and creative activity, expanded the list of organizing categories and introduced the fifth P - persuasion (persuasiveness) [15]. In turn, Klaus Urban (2003) adds three new dimensions — the process, the product (product) and the person (person) to add a new one — the problem, leaving the environment category. On this basis, he derived a new formula for creativity: 4Ps-E [16].
It should be noted that these holistic models of creativity were built by analyzing and summarizing theoretical knowledge and empirical experience, in strict accordance with the positivistic criteria of science and the principles of rationality, consistency and reliability.
At the same time, the reflexive, hypothetical-deductive method of research of creativity, in which the vital world of an individual is chosen as the initial conceptual construct, or rather, the totality of the phenomenological worlds that compose it, allows one to deduce the central categories of creativity from its topological model or system of mutually supportive content spaces. The maximum possible completeness of the description of the existing and possible empirical experience is achieved by keeping it in the structure of a phenomenological pentabase uniting the objective and symbolic, inner and social worlds, as well as culture as the center of their integration and generation.
In real life, creativity is manifested as a way of human existence in the Universum, in its worlds and, first of all, in the original, generating, and at the same time, vertex, integrating phenomenal worlds, cultural space. At the same time, creativity is represented in a very broad sense as a holistic, continuous, structured by universal laws and structures, the flow of creative vision, projected into the basic, phenomenal worlds and manifesting itself with the help of elements, structures and basic laws of these worlds.
The disclosure of the ways of existence of a person in the five phenomenal worlds allows us to identify the main forms of creativity, the qualitative peculiarities of which are determined by the specifics of the structure and semantic certainty of each world. So in the world of culture, creativity manifests itself as a creative vision and sense-creation centering it, representing the highest, self-sufficient form of activity, harmoniously including and integrating all other forms of creativity.
At the same time, creative vision is presented as a single stream of perception, analysis, experience, understanding and effective, accomplished in the internal plan, transformation of the world. At the same time, the central, essential-emetzhmetny process, which penetrates all the other internal streams of creative vision, is the meaning-creation, understood as a way of scooping up and endowing with the developmental, creatological meanings of reality.
The semantic structures are the highest, nuclear, integrative-transcendental formations of the personality, and the meaning itself is equivalent to the existence of the personality in the world and in life itself. “Some called him the fourth,” wrote V.P. Zinchenko, some - the fifth dimension of being. Although it should be called first "[3].
Sense creation as the central dynamic component of the highest form of creativity of creative vision, permeates and fills all the specific forms of creative activity of the individual in five autonomous worlds, organized by the respective central categories of creativity. Thus, in the objective world, creativity manifests itself as a productive creative activity, the essential category of which is “product”, in symbolic as a creative solution of problems — organized by category — “process”, in social, as creative dialogue — defined by domain — environment, and in internal creative self-realization - generated by the central concept of "personality". Built in a deductive way, the penta-matrix of basic activities and categories has a powerful explanatory and heuristic potential and surprisingly and at the same time naturally includes the main dimensions or domains of creativity, (process, product, personality and environment), obtained by summarizing and condensing empirical experience .
In connection with the essence and originality of the process of sense creation, to uncover the deep essence of creativity, it is advisable to introduce the fifth element, the basic category, some central dimension - meaning, and the classical model should be presented as 4Ps / S - process (process), product (product) , person (person), environment (place), sense (sense). (Table 2).
Table 2. Architectonics of phenomenological worlds and psychological theories of creativity  

The constructed genetic generating and organizing pentamatrix, which underlies the integration of existing general and particular theories, can be filled with a specific content and is presented in the following form [6]:

1. Creativity as a vision, realization of a creative position, as a creative reflection and sense-creation.
1.1. Creativity as a special state of mind, creative setting, the ability to perceive the world (E. Fromm, 1959,1970); Realization of the creative position (Stance) (SJ Parnes, 1967); 1.2. Creativity as the creation of new meanings. The generation of meanings by “existential-a priori structures” (L. Binswanger, 1958; R. May, 1969); Search and finding new meanings (V. Frankl, 1959); Meaning generation (B.S. Bratus, 1994; D. Leontiev, 1999; S.V. Dmitriev, 2001), Meaning (F. E. Vasilyuk, 1984); Creative understanding of how to extract, transmit and generate new meanings (VP ​​Zinchenko, 1997).
2. Creativity as a productive activity. The creative power of man, which is realized in unceasing activity (G. Fichte, 1794); Creativity as a productive, transformative activity (S.L. Rubinstein, 1946),
3. Creativity as the detection and solution of problems. Creativity as a process of transforming a problematic situation into a resolved one (J. Dewey, 1910); Creativity as a solution to problems and problems (V. Köhler, 1925; K. Dunker, 1945; M. Wertheimer, 1945); Sensitivity to problems, determination of imperfections (E. Torrance, 1962, 1967);
4. Creativity as self-actualization and implementation. specific properties and personality traits. The principle of creative initiative: the creation of oneself in the process of creativity (S. Rubinstein, 1922), the spontaneous realization of the essential-I (E. Fromm, 1941); Creativity as self-realization (K. Rogers, 1954, 1965); Creativity as spontaneous and transcendental self-actualization (A. Maslow, 1954, 1968.1971).
5. Creative dialogue, love and empathy. Productive dialogue and maieutics (Socrates, 5th century BC); Eros, love and attraction to the truly Beautiful (Plato, 5-4 centuries BC; Plotinus, 3 century AD); Dialogue as a free, fruitful, generative activity (M. Buber, 1923), Dialogic nature of thinking, creativity and culture (V. S. Bibler, 1975, 1990); Creativity as a dialogue and mutual participation (D. Bohm, 1992, 1996) and others.
Creativity is rooted in culture, human practice, social world, textual reality and in a unique existential experience. Creativity is not only and not so much a process, an ability, a product or a specially organized environment, but a universal beginning, a multidimensional dynamic space, a self-sufficient and generating primordial essence, manifested in phenomenal worlds in the form of effective problem solving, free self-realization, productive activity and creative dialogue.

findings
Building a single theory of creativity should be carried out not so much by integrating numerous existing theories of the average level, but based on the development of some initial metaphysical models and ontological foundations that lay the foundation, generate a hierarchy of new central categories, build the framework and the general conceptual framework of the theory.
The consistent deployment and filling of the original generators and integrating pentamatrits opens up the possibility of systematization, organization, mutual agreement and mutual enrichment of various particular theories, reveals the essential relationships between them, correlates them with reality and the initial philosophical foundations, predicts and stimulates the emergence of new theories.
The quintological approach to the study of complex objects, which is based on the universal principle of representation of systems using archetypical pentastructures and pentabases, is an effective and heuristic variant of creating dynamic matrices that absorb and generate information.
At the same time, the central element of the pentastructure is the accumulator of highly valuable information and the generator of new meanings.
The essential and distinguishing feature of the quintological approach is the primary determination of the central element of the pentastructure, some collapsed generating matrix, which integrates and structures the available information and generates new meanings.
The soul and distinctive feature of the quintological approach is the primary determination of the central element of the pentastructure, some collapsed generating matrix, integrating and structuring information and generating new meanings.
The description of system objects in the form of pentastructs is one of the possible, but at the same time, optimal for super-complex systems of describing and constructing conceptual theoretical systems, since it allows to harmoniously combine such essential criteria of all concepts as the principles of completeness and simplicity.
It can be assumed that all complex systems are developing towards finding a balance between the five basic internal subsystems, to their mutual reinforcement and harmonious interaction with preservation of autonomy, in creating a symmetric configuration united around the central entity.
The universal penta-structure or quinchex is an archetypical symbol, an invariant structure permeating all levels of the world’s developmental structure and, as the initial organizing and generating matrix, can be used as the basis for constructing the structure of a unified theory of creativity, a universal psychological paradigm, an organic scientific picture of the world and a universal models of limiting entities and first meanings.

List of used sources

1. Ganzen V. А. System descriptions in psychology / V. A. Ganzen. - L .: Izd-vo Leningr. University, 1984. - 176 p.
2. Ginger S. Gestalt - contact therapy / S. Ginger, A. Ginger; per. with fr. E. V. Prosvetinoi.— SPb .: Special Literature, 1999. — 287 p.
3. Zinchenko V. P. Living metaphors of meaning [Text]: to the 110th anniversary of the birth of L. S. Vygotsky / V. P. Zinchenko // Psychological questions. - 2006. - N 5. - p. 100-112.
4. Kudryavtsev V.T. Creative nature of the human psyche / V.Т. Kudryavtsev // Questions of psychology. -1990. - № 3. - p. 113 - 121.
5. Lossky N. O. The World as an Organic Whole / N. O. Lossky. - Moscow: Direct Media, 2008. - 285 p.
6. Markov S.L. Theories of creativity. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http://www.geniusrevive.com/index.php/teorii-tvorchestva
7. Rybalkin N.N. Safety philosophy: study guide / N.N. Rybalkin. - M .: MPSI, 2006. - 296 p.
8. Stepin V.S. Theoretical knowledge: Structure, historical evolution / V.S. Stepin. - M .: Progress-Tradition, 2000. - 743s.
9. Whitehead A. Selected works on philosophy / A. Whitehead; status I.T. Kasavin: Tot. ed. and entry Art. M.A. Kisel. —M .: Progress, 1990.
10. Yurevich A.V. The structure of theories in the socio-humanities // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http: //www.history. vuzlib.net/book_o004_page_10.html
11. Golann S. Psychological study of creativity // Psychological Bulletin, 60, 1963.- P. 548-565.
12. Merton RK The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations / RK Merton; Ed. Norman W. Storer.- Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago press, 1973. - 605 p.
13. Mooney RL A Conceptual Model for Integrating Four; // A Source Book for Creative Thinking; Ed. Sidney J. Parnes and Harold F. Harding/ RL Mooney - New York: Scribner, 1962. – P. 73–84.
14. Rhodes M. An analysis of creativity/ M. Rhodes// Phi Delta Kappan, -1961. -42. - P. 305-310.
15. Simonton DK Scientific genius: A psychology of science/ DK Simonton. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
16. Urban KK Toward a Componential Model of Creativity // Creative Intelligence; Ed. D. Ambrose, LM Cohen & AJ Tannenbaum/ KK Urban -Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 2003. - P. 81-112.