Творчество как самосозидание
Харьковский Руслан Геннадиевич,
кандидат исторических наук, доцент, докторант кафедры философии культуры и культурологии Луганского университета им. Владимира Даля.
Научный руководитель – доктор философских наук, профессор, зав. кафедрой философии культуры и культурологии, декан гуманитарного факультета Луганского университета им. Владимира Даля
Лугуценко Татьяна Валентиновна.
Creativity as self-creation
Kharkovskiy Ruslan Gennadievich,
сandidate of Sciences in History, Associate Professor, Applicant at the Department of Philosophy and Cultural studies of Vladimir Dal Lugansk University.
Increased interest in creative problems in all areas of scientific knowledge is obvious. The physical picture of the world discovers the principle of creativity in the processes of self-organization and self-development of matter, society puts innovation as the main indicator of effective socio-cultural activities, human sciences solve the problems of formation and development of creative potential of the individual. Of course, these questions had previously been in the field of view of researchers. But «field of view» was limited by paradigmatic units of rationalistic ideology focused on the extensive model of creativity, the essence of which lies in the development of empirical reality through the invention of new things and technologies. In our opinion, today the installation of reductionism in studies of creative problems remains in force. Known definitions and many theories of creativity suggest that despite the breadth of the field of study of the creativity ontology problems, the human creative activity definition criteria remains open.
The ontological status of creativity is revealed in the coordinate system of «People-relations» (V.N Sagatovsky). In such relation, on the one hand, constituted the laws that define the specific place of a person in the world (basic relation between a person and the world), and, on the other hand, shows up basic values that define the specific relation of a person to the world. In existential-phenomenological tradition creativity is understood as a «scrap of being and existence» and at the same time as the embodiment of existential meanings. Today we see the opposite trend – the growing alienation of a person from himself, others, nature, society, and the universe as a whole. As a result the limitations of anthropocentric installation within the meaning of creativity «as a way of self-affirmation of existence» is revealed. Contemporary authors insist that the criteria of novelty and socio-cultural significance are fundamental, but not only for the creative activity of a person. Beyond the philosophical, spiritual context reflections on the creative activity of a person is insolvent.
The question of «true», «real» creativity occurs when there is no understanding of the true nature of a person. There is a paradoxical situation: on the background of large-scale processes of globalization in all life spheres of the human community, integration trends in the formation of a unified picture of the world based on neoclassical knowledge of the person, of the essential foundations of human nature remains fragmented and unstructured. Recognizing the fact that all global problems are the result of destructive creativity of a person, the scientific community consolidates technological efforts in eliminating mistakes which have already been made, solving strictly tactical task to ensure the necessary minimum for the survival of a human as a biological species being. The solution of strategic objective – the preservation of the spiritual potential of humanity, human civilization as a whole – involves significant changes in the consciousness of a person, in his existential position giving meaning and targets of creative activity.
The problem of creativity was initially contained in the philosophical reflection on a person and person-world relations. In this interpretation of creativity and specificity of human creativity in the history of philosophy, of course, refers to the type of worldview dominants in a particular era. In writings of ancient philosophers, the proportionality creativity criteria question of the divine (as absolute categories) and human takes place. Human creativity was associated by Plato with the aspiration to achieve the highest contemplation of being, by Aristotle – with individual expression of the richness and diversity of nature in the process of mimesis. In theological tradition the human creativity is not identified with the production of artifacts. Such activities, in fact, can only be a simulation and provide a person comfortable existence. The synergy of divine and human creation is scrape of being and existence. Because it is the will and act of faith bound man to God, a private action becomes important as a form of complicity in the creation of the world (Thomas Aquinas, in Russian religious philosophy – S.L. Frank, N.A. Berdyaev, S.N. Bulgakov, V.S. Soloviev, P.A. Florensky, N.O. Lossky, I.A Ilyin).
The tradition of creation interpretation as a process of purposeful human activity of the creation of new and the transformation of the existing emerged on the wave of anthropocentrism in the Renaissance and industrial revolution period of the New time. Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm of thinking identified methodological preferences in the study of human creativity and potential. And if in German classical philosophy creative problem naturally and evenly distributed in the system of ontological, epistemological and axiological beliefs (I. Kant, F. Schelling, Hegel), in the future and up to the present time, rationalism in the study of creativity is increasingly characterized by units of scientism and technocratism. A kind of reaction to the crisis of «rationalistic model of intelligence» (V.N. Poru) was the reorientation of researches in the field of creative problematic to the questions of the ontology of art, the appeal to the antiquity classics, existential philosophy, phenomenology. In the phenomenology of E.Husserl, creativity is primarily due to the active areas of our consciousness. The mechanisms of this activity are intentional setting of consciousness (not allows reflecting the world passively, but creatively and actively converts it) and intentional actions that reveal the fundamental possibilities of human creativity in general. The Heidegger's question about the nature of art is closely connected with the question «What is truth?». Truth is the phenomenon, unconcealment of things, and this is the truth, and «makes» the work (which is not «manufacture», but the «elimination» of Enigma as the implementation of the truth) of art.
In the existential philosophy and phenomenology, creativity is understood as the most important existential of personality, and the existentials of creative being – as constitutive meaning. A creative person in this horizon appears first of all like a creative personality, who, before changing the object world, must change his subjective world. The tradition of interpretation of creativity, as the actualization of the potentialities, inherent in Universe (Genesis, space, nature, life itself), originating in the ancient Oriental and in ancient philosophy, continued in irrationalism (A. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche, A. Bergson), in Russian cosmism (C. I. Vernadsky, N. F. Fedorov, N. T. Roerich), in vitalism and their modern versions. In these conceptions a person, as the successor of the creative intentions of the universe, of life in general, aware of his specific tasks and responsibilities for the content of their conversion activities. Identification of creativity with the processes of development and self-development in «creative ontology» (A.I.Subetto) does not promote us in explanation of the factors and mechanisms of creativity as the generation of new cultural values.
In the philosophy of the XX century, the greatest recognition and widespread received activity conception of creativity: creativity is an activity, more precisely, the subject-object activity interaction. In studies of creative problems the emphasis on any component of the activity-related schemes have changed: subject, object, purpose and means of implementation, the end result. Accordingly, the philosophy and psychology of creativity had a clearly identified range of questions. As the subject of creative activity, a personality or social community is postulated. Personality as a subject of creative activity is characterized in the works of M.Kagan, A.Karmin, S.Sklyarenko. For example, in the works of N.Omelchenko the idea of creativity as an inherent property of a person is formulated, the philosophical-anthropological justification of the creative nature of man and his status as homo creans is given.
Activity creativity manifests itself in the form of changes, transformations, or creations of various objects. In accordance with the object of creative activity (slice of objective reality) and the means of actualization of creative design (concept, image, artifact, etc.) quite an extensive typology of the kinds of creativity formed: scientific (scientific and technical), artistic, social, etc. A lot of work is devoted to the studying of certain types of creative activity: V.S.Bibler, G.Y.Bush, B.M.Kedrov and others (scientific and technical creativity); P.A.Lobanova, M.G.Yaroshevsky (socio-cultural creativity); J. Ortega-y-Gasset, V.Veidle, J.Maritan, P.Valery, E.Cassirer, U.B.Borev and others (artistic creativity).
Psychological aspects of creativity are analyzed in the works of A.Maslow, V.Frankl, J.Gilford, H.Lehmann, U.Dennis, R.May, A.N.Leontiev, S.L.Rubenstein, L.S.Vygotsky, P.K.Engelmeier, O.S.Gruzenberg, A.A.Potebnia, A.Gornofeld, P.Y.Garpelin and other authors.
The problem of the possibility of regulation and management of creative activity, the search for a single algorithm, the creative process is the direct object of attention heuristics (G.S.Altshuller, D.A.Pospelov, V.N,Pushkin). A lot of attention is paid to the question of creating optimal conditions for creative activity in the works of P.S.Dyshlevog, B.M.Kedrov, Y.A.Ponomarev, V.K.Rozov.
Due to the fact that the binary relation «subject-object» is determinative in the active paradigm, there is a tendency of rigid differentiation in the study of the creative problems: philosophical reflection was given the task of identifying the objective laws of the creative process, and subjective characteristics, patterns and conditions of formation of creative personality became the immediate subject of psycho-pedagogical research (with more applied nature). To a certain extent «to soften» the subject-object dichotomy in the theory of creativity and discover fundamentally common installations in various kinds of creative activity allowed a number of works, investigating the phenomenology of creativity (V.S.Bibler, A.F.Losev, M.K.Mamardashvili, S.L.Rubenstein, F.I.Girenuk, M.G.Yaroshevsky), dialectical aspects of creativity, its dialogical nature (G.C.Batischev, M.M.Bakhtin, M.Buber, J.Habermas, S.S.Goldentriht), character of relation between different types of creativity (V.S.Bibler, M.S.Kagan, A.K.Suhotin, S.L.Rubinstein, E.L.Feinber). In addition, arising within a systematic methodology the concept of self-organization has facilitated interdisciplinary level of generalization and interpretation of qualitative originality, mechanisms of self-development and creative processes. From the point of view of synergetics, phenomenon of creativity is analyzed in the works of V.I.Arshinov, V.S.Stepin.
At the same time at the center of the scientific community’s attention the questions about the relations between creativity with ethical and moral imperatives, about the possibility to classify the creative activity of a person by a two-digit scale: creativity «positive" and «negative» , «useful» and «harmful», «true» and «false», «for the good» and «evil», «the face of creativity» and «the wrong side of creativity» and more globally – «creativity» and «anti-creativity» (V.A.Kutyrev, A.S.Karmin, M.N.Soloduh, V.M.Leybin, N.P.Frantsuzova, L.V.Yatsenko and others) still remain.
In the traditions of Russian classical philosophy creativity is seen as a spiritual phenomenon in psychological science of the late 19-early 20 centuries; axiological aspects of the problem of creativity do not remain without attention. Contemporary authors turn to the consideration of the spiritual basis of creativity (V.S.Barulin, N.I.Ikonnikova, N.S.Katunin, N.A.Nekrasov, V.S.Ovchinnikiv, S.B.Tokarev and others).
However, the creativity criteria question and its ontological foundations again remains open. In the context of postmodernism understanding of art is significantly modified: status and functional certainty of the author, the ability to carry out purposeful activities changes; virtualizations are not only for all spheres of reality but for the image of man. Creativity appears as «reproduction» and «simulation» of reality (R.Barth, M.Foucault, J.Baudrillard, G. Deleuze, F. Guattari, A. Badiou).
Postmodernism reflects the state of mind of the late twentieth century, associated not only with changes in culture and social life of the post-industrial era, but with the advent of new scientific studies of the physical picture of the world. It seems that the development of postmodernism, made in the area of creative problems (in particular, the rejection of the idea of out positioning of object to subject), have outlook in the direction from praxiologically oriented creative activity to the values of the dialogical type of well-behaved relations, deepening our understanding of creativity in modern social and cultural situation.
Understanding of creativity as an attribute of the human existence characteristics must be considered in the text of the existential approach (as an act of transcendence and the way of self-actualization) and the philosophical interpretations of spirituality as essential characteristics of man, reflecting his life position, a certain type of world relation. The concept of «well-behaved relations» introduced into a philosophical anthropology by N.Saratovsky, allows you to modify the activity of paradigm creativity in accordance with the principles of existential-oriented consciousness.
Creativity represents the conceptual basis of human existence and the mode of actualization of the spiritual prosperity of people in the context of «well-behaved relations». In this regard: the original «cell» of human creativity phenomenon research is well-behaved relation, that allows you to reduce the risk of reductionism in the study of creative issues, to identify interdependent strategies of creative activity of man and nature of well-behaved relations; to justify the delimitation of the concepts of «creative activity» and «creative activities» taking into account the specifics of the ontological status of man and axiological content of well-behaved relations; to identify two major intentional aims of consciousness, which are modeling the character of well-behaved relations and semantic interpretation of creativity – existential-oriented and subject-oriented consciousness; to characterize the cognitive tools that allow to investigate adequately the nature of creativity in the specified models of well-behaved relations; philosophical-anthropological analysis of the essential characteristics of man and specificity of human existence allows us to identify the fundamental conditions, under which, the work becomes a way of authentic human existence and the main argument in favor of meaning, whether it is being in the world; to denote a universal criterion of creativity, applicable in all areas of transformative, cultural human activities – the level of the spiritual wealth of the individual; to formulate the fundamental characteristics of the spiritually wealthy, creative personality: existential-oriented consciousness, rootedness in life, reverence for life; integrity of perception of the world; openness, openness to the future; the actualization of the most important existential creative personality – will, love and responsibility; orientation on harmonization of well-behaved relations. In the existential concept of creativity well-behaved relations acquire the properties of a polycentric system, multidimensionality, contextually, and defining acts of worldview focus on synchronous co-evolution of man and the world, the search for adequacy of internal and external aspects of human existence. Creativity as a way of actualizing the spiritual integrity of the individual contributes to the harmonization of well-behaved relations. The introduction of the concept well-behaved relation allows to balance these extremes, to investigate the specificity of human creativity in the unity of the universal and the individual meanings of existence.
Studies on creative issues, clearly expressed two polar tendencies: creativity is identified with the natural processes of development and self-development (in the context of the idea of «global creativity») or, on the other hand, is interpreted as a kind of productive human activity (in the context of subject-activity approach) [1;2]. The principle of creativity is specified in terms of «creative work» and «creative activity». The recognition of the last one as an immanent property of being capable of self-organization and self-development, allows identifying the ontological foundations of human creative activity, organically included in the process of natural evolution. The category creativity captures a new, fundamentally different way of implementing a universal creative activity in the conversion of human activity, focused on the formation and development of well-behaved relations.
The strategy of human creative activity is determined by two dominant intentional aims. In the projection of being-oriented consciousness creativity is a universal property of being (understood as the universe, the space, nature, life) and creativity as antropologizing form of creativity. In the projection of the object-oriented consciousness is dominated by installing anthropocentric worldview.
The specific understanding of the creative perspective is determined by the general ideological attitudes of the researcher and the type of social and cultural mentality, setting the limits of the research finding or thinking. Tools of reflection in rational format, allow solving a number of important problems in creative subjects, but inevitably reduces the diversity of the phenomenon of creativity to a certain kind of creative activity of the individual. The existential interpretation of creativity is associated with the transition to another level of reflection – in «format of the mind» with appropriate methodological tools. Creative activity is in the modus of «true creativity» when it actualizes human nature. That spirituality is essential and normative characteristic of a person, the integral indicator of harmonious proportionality of internal aspects of human nature and their correlation with the laws of the universe. Creative activities of individuals may be useful by ingenuity, as a response to social needs, and may be solely a form of demonstrations of own originality, individuality. But the true creativity is dialogical. Only those results of human creative activity become the heritage of culture, which are in the unique performance, reflect universal values, significant and lasting ones.
For a spiritual person creativity is at the same time creative life and makes the attributes of human existence. Creativity as a «justification» of human existence and sense constant of being measures spiritual wealth of a person . From this position, creativity becomes deliberate and meaningful for human activity, because spirituality assumes a certain level of development of consciousness, the capacity for systematic reflection. True creativity is always constructive and creative, because the commitment to integrity and perfection is the deepest intention of spiritual activity. The principal characteristics of the spiritually wealthy personality are criteria for its creative activity. The life of man, his spiritual evolution is the way of creative self-creation. A person becomes a personality, transforming powers of the soul and consciousness, gradually accumulating potential of spirituality in the process of learning the systems of values, development of spiritual experience. In childhood creativity is realized in the still-conscious, instinctive will to live (will «be»), formed by the overall tone of attitude. A child represents directly a natural being, and initially shows creativity on the level of instinct, adaptation. The task of education is to create for a child a favorable condition for the development of a creative relation to the world, to maintain and strengthen organically inherent in childhood centeredness on the being, a sense of conviviality, the state of «miracle waiting» and joy of knowledge . On the basis of mental and social experience, in the process of reflection and self-reflection, creative activity world attitude and worldview of personality is formed, the values dominants of which determine ultimately the vision of the world (worldview) and understanding of their place in it, and the nature of well-behaved relations in general. In this regard modern priorities in the modeling of social relations – develop partnerships and a culture of co-creation.
A distorted view of human nature creates a distorted view of creativity. The problem of «creative self-creation» in the context of civilization development is a wide range of issues that are associated with understanding and rethinking of the specificity of human nature, the limits of validity of its transformation, selection criteria and evaluation of such transformative strategies. Recognition of spirituality as essential characteristic of a person is the only strong argument in the opposition to such a real threat of de-antropologisation of the person, a limiting factor for technological practice aimed at the radical transformation of human nature. Thus, spirituality is an indicator of the standards, integrity and completeness of the personal development, evidence of implementation and revelation of the essential qualities of a person, his creative potential. The level of the spiritual wealth of the individual is a universal criterion of creativity.
1. Аванесова Г.А. Трактовка духовной культуры и духовности в отечественной аналитике в прошлом и теперь / Г.А.Аванесова // Вестн. Моск. ун-та. – 1998. – № 4. – С.10. – (Сер. Философия).
2. Бондаревич И.М. Духовная целостность личности как атрибут самоопределения чеовека. – К.: 2008. – 20 с.
3. Егорычева И.Д. Самореализация как деятельность (к постановке проблемы) // Мир психологии. – 2005. – № 3 (43). – С.11 – 32.
4. Avanesova G.A Interpretation of spiritual culture and spirituality in domestics intelligence in the past and now // Bulletin of Moscow Univer. – 1998. – № 4. – P.10. – (Cer.Philosophy)
5. Bondarevich I.M. Spiritual integrity as an attribute of the same deployment of a man. – К.: 2008. – 20 p.
6. Egoricheva I.D. Self-realization as an activity (to the problem statement //World of psychology. – 2005. – № 3 (43). – P.11 – 32.
Поступила в редакцию 21.04.2015 г.