Mechanisms of Creative Dialogue with the World

0
46
Запись 2 из 9 в теме Psychology of Creativity

Sergey L. Markov. Mechanisms of Creative Dialogue with the World

Markov, S. L. (1997) Mechanisms of Creative Dialogue With the World. Paper presented at the 105th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, August 17, 1997. Chicago, IL.

Abstract. The variant of theoretical framework that helps to harmonize and simplify modern creativity theory is suggested. The given conception is based on the idea of universal nature of creativity, and the existence of definite invariant evolutionary principles and mechanisms.
The framework is built on such universal categories as Interaction, Dialogue and Game. The answer to the question is not only “Where is? “, but both “How is?” creativity is proposed . Thus a hierarchical system of mechanisms is outlined to account for the creative dialogue that may occur between personality and the objective world. It is proposed that every level of creative interaction manifests itself through opposite, mutual complement pairs. These interactions constitute the workings of the mechanisms and include:
The axiological (Idealization vs. Problematization), cognitive (Decentration vs. Simplification), emotional (Identification vs. Meditation), behavioural (Self-actualization vs. Personification).
This unified system of opposite mechanisms manifests itself as a “double helix of creativity” and allows to consider process of bringing into existence as an assembly of complement elements and constructing to the whole.
The system of connected mechanisms allows the creative vision. It is an integral part of the creative attitude toward the world. It can serve as an effective method for the finding and solving of diverse life problems and conflicts, as a method of stimulating creative activity, or as a form of creative self-training and meditation.
Key words: framework for creativity, theories of creativity, creative dialogue, creative mechanisms, double helix of creativity

Introduction

The modern theory of creativity represents a mosaic and bulky picture, sated by rich empirical and biographical material. It has reached one of the basic criteria of a complete science – saturation – and now aspires to find two other – simplicity and harmony.
At present the inductive method and the simple generalization of numerous empirical facts could not reveal the essence and basic laws of creativity. “Purely empirical system is impossible” (Wolman, 1965). And a mere collection of facts, – as noted Poincare (1908),- is no more a science than a pile of bricks is a house. It is in this connection that transcendent deductive method, which extremization is expressed by Hegel’s words “Too bad for reality”, would be the most productive and advantageous. At the same time it is absolutely necessary to simultaneously keep cognitive movement from both ends, namely to pay especial attention to generalization of the most convincing experimental data, the brightest bibliographical facts and the most effective and successive efforts in everyday creativity.
To a certain sense theory of creativity is in privileged position. Creativity manifests itself as the real essence of being. That is why its main laws and mechanisms can be concluded from the most general and universal principles of a structure and development of the world. However phenomenological wealth and variability of nature do not allow to speak about identity of things, but only about unity of continuity, unity of certain rules of changes (Wolman, 1965). Namely mechanisms of evolution and creativity reflect universal processes of transition and serve as invariant pattern of changes.
It is no wonder that the contemporary leading researchers of creativity manifest increasing interest in its philosophical, essence and global questions (Hofstadter, 1985; Floistad, 1993; Feldman, Csikszentmihalyi, Gardner, 1994; Barron, 1995; Stein, 1995; Sternberg, 1995; Simonton, 1996; Torrance, 1996; Runco, 1996). Some authors elaborate the general theory of creativity – called creatology (Isaksen, Murdock, Magyari -Beck,1993).
Some both the simplest and the most generalized principles should be laid down in a basis of organizing framework. Such universal category as interaction can be considered as a basic conception of the theory of creativity. This idea is put forward and is supported by many authors (Amabile, 1983; Csikszentimihalyi, 1988; Gardner, 1993). Moreover necessity of more steadfast study of space of creative interaction and specification of its various types is emphasized: additive, synergetic, modifying (Albert, Runco, 1990).
It is especially essential to realise that the space of creative interaction represents the completely special type of coherent, coinciding reality, having the own, specific laws. Thus the subject and object are manifested not as opposite poles, but as inseparable parts and aspects of the whole. Moreover any change in one pole lead to changing in the other. This specific space of a synergetic resonance is guided by the laws of universal order, by the definite rules or grammars of harmony and beauty. It gets new dimensions and appears as special kind of environment, saturated by new opportunities.
Besides the creative interaction has immanent recursive character. Such numerous copies and models which are produced by the definite set of generative rules still interact among themselves guided and submitted to the same base laws or “generative grammars” (Chomsky,1968 ).
In the most general sense creativity can be considered as mutual reflection and mutual enrichment of systems therefore new essences and forms are born.
At a social-psychological level it is revealed as a creative interaction of the person with the world, other people, and self. According to the development of personality and world, this interaction transforms to creative dialogue of equal, free and active subjects. Thus the dialogue of the person with the Absolute, Supreme values, Culture, Mystery, History, Virtual future and Domain has an especial significance. At the same time the universal structure of the dialogue penetrates all levels of complexity and manifests itself in polycyclic interaction of hemispheres of a brain, in mutual penetration of the conscious and subconscious, logic and intuitive, abstract and imagery, in spontaneous combination of diverse, especially opposite, ideas and images.
Interaction of the person with the world has a complex, many-level character, which reflects an invariant of three component structure which penetrates into all unified objects (see Fig.1). This universal structure is mirrored in a hierarchical creative attitude of the personality, which includes axiological, cognitive, affective and behavioral components, where the first component is not separated highest level of the structure, but its basic system-forming factor, the core and center of organization.

Recursive character of creative self-consciousness allows to reflect and to contain the opposite poles and the whole space of interaction. It presumes the persons to overcome narrow frameworks of ego, to rise over dialogue and to find the centered state, the integral vision of self, world and their relations. Thus the person occupies a position of center (Assagioli, 1965), center of pure awareness, experience and will, center of self-organizing, transformation and choice, center allowing to pronounce courageous and sacramental “Fiat”!
The answer to the question “How the creativity is possible?” can be addressed by revealing the basic mechanisms of creative activity – definite groups and links of operation, repetitive patterns of changes, rules of manipulation of internal and external stimulus.
Definition of the basic mechanisms of laws, interrelations and processes is the supreme and final aim of every science. On the one hand it allows to substantially simplify complex phenomena and to achieve the high level of understanding of their vital essence. On the other hand it makes possible to transform the system of mechanisms to the system of practical techniques and to facilitate the realization of energy of knowledge through that.
In the modern psychological literature the most general mechanisms of psychic activity (transformation, association, generation and selection) and mental, unconsciousness mechanisms of dreams, humor and self-defense are presented.
In addition there are the special, qualitative – original kinds of social-psychological mechanisms of creativity, which are formed in process of multi – level interaction between the person and environment. The same invariant mechanisms of interaction act on every level of organization and evolution. At the case of physic activity the content and specificity of these repeated patterns of changes are determined by a new conditions and tasks. According to the development of both person and the environment, these basic mechanisms are being filled of a new, complex and quality specific content. Thus mechanisms of creativity can be understood as the highest level of manifestation of the fundamental principles of nature, and as the basic patterns of changes and evolution.
So it is possible to suggest that:
– there are specific social-psychological mechanisms of creativity which are formed and manifest themselves in creative dialogue of the person with the world;
– the unified, hierarchical system of creative mechanisms reflects the integral system of universal evolutionary principles and mechanisms;
– the same system of mechanisms lays in the basis of varieties of person’s creative manifestations.

Methodology

The planetary, pithy complexity and diversity of creativity require appropriate methods of its investigation. They should be based on the following methodological principles:
1.   Normative-canonical approach directed on investigation of exemplary phenomena, ideal structures and trajectories. Heuristic potential of this approach consists in projection of ideally manifested properties on the actual reality (Simonton, 1990; Gardner, 1993).
2.    Dialectic approach allows to find in each essence, phenomenon and mechanism directly opposite, complementing and adding up to the integral bunch (Rothenberg, 1979).
3.   System-holistic (Csikszenmihalyi, 1996) and synthetic (Gardner, 1988) approaches:
– consider object as an integral system of interconnected elements;
– is a consideration of holographic nature of creativity which is based on holographic model of brain (Pribram, 1977) and Universe (Bohm, 1987; Talbout, 1991).
– searching of complex symmetry, harmony and innate order of structures, what is caused by principle of unity of truth and beauty( Poincare,1913; Heisinberg,1925).
– consideration of topological and temporal properties of the complex, many-dimensional substantial space of creativity.
4.  Dynamic  structural-resonant approach which includes:
– studying of phenomena and conditions of matching, coherence and creative synthesis in the inter and intrapersonal relationships, areas and periods of synergetic resonance (Haken, 1987), which occurs both between subsystems, and internal – external structures;
– considerations of phenomena of synchronicity – coincidence of causally unrelated events which have the same meaning (Jung, 1952; Peat, 1958);
– investigations of interaction between synchrony and asynchrony, symmetry and asymmetry, and processes of bringing a new complex forms of organization into existence.
5.  Complex, many-disciplinary approaches, allowing synthesis of the achievements of various sciences.
6.  Genetic, historiomethric (Simonton, 1990), evolving-systems (Gruber, 1988), bibliographical   approaches which investigate complete temporal structures, spiral development of creative systems.
7.  Experimental approach precluding losing the spontaneous originality of alive and always unexpected reality in chilly deductive schemes.

Theories of creativity

1. UNIVERSAL NATURE OF CREATIVITY, its understanding as universal process of Evolution and as fulfillment of the Absolute.

Creativity as fulfillment of the Nature’s Laws (Aristotle, 4 c.BC); Realization of Absolute Spirit (Hegel,19 C); Manifestation of Will (Schopehhauer,19 C); Evolution through adaptation and struggle for life (Darwin,1859); Creative evolution (Bergson,1907); Evolutionary Love (Peirse,1911); Highest manifestation of the principle of Self-expansion (Stern,1918); Emergent Evolution (Morgan,1923); Realization of Cosmic Force (Whitehead,1929); Process of development and evolution of subject (Chiselin,1952); Growth as centrated complication and planetization (Teilhard,1955); Manifestation of Life Force (Sinnot,1929; Buhler,1951; Dobzhansky,1957), Highest manifestation of the principle of Self-duplication (Gutman,1961); Creativity as Quality of Protoplasm (Anderson,1965), Creative Self-organization of Nature (Nalimov,1978); Special form of development (Feldman,1988); Recursive interaction (Anisimov,1988); Transformational imperative (Feldman, Csikszentmihalyi, Gardner,1994).

2.CREATIVITY AS INTERACTION (Unity and Polarity)

2.1 Unity
Process: Accidental combination of already existing images and parts ( Lucretius Carus,1 c. BC); Recombination of ideas (Locke,17 C); Spontaneous association of ideas (Berkeley, Hume,18 C); Theory of analogizing, recombination (dissociation- regrouping- association), ( Ribot,1906); Intersection of two ideas (Keep,1957); Complex analogy (Gordon, 1961); Metaphor ( Black,1962; Hester,1967); Bisociation of “matrices of thought” (Koestler,1964), Remote Associations (Mednic,1962); Developing interaction (Ponomariov,1976).
Substantial space: Co-creation Person with the God ( Berdyaev,1935); Result of our subjective relationship with man and environment (Lowenfeld,1957); Encounter with the world, ability to combine autocentric and allocentric perception (Schachtel,1959); Relationship between individual and materials, people, circumstances (Rogers,1962); Transactional relationships between the individual and environment (Stein,1962); Adaptation as interaction and development ( Piaget,1971; Gruber, Barret, 1974; Feldman,1980); Encounter, interrelation of person and his world (May,1975); Spontaneous and directed transformations through co-incidence, co-ordination and fittest (Feldman,1979); Interaction between person’s perception and response (Weisberg,1986); Circular model of creativity (Tylor,1988); Dialogue , mutual participation (Bohm,1992;1996); Interactions between Person, Domain, Field, Culture (Amabile,1983; Csikszentmihalyi,1988;Gardner,1993).

2.2 Polarity
Necessary condition of creative dialogue “Person-World“ is not only the unity, but also the difference and uniqueness of the subjects. The universal law of bifurcation of the systems on opposite parts and tendencies is displayed at all levels of complexity.

Process: Creativity as Problem Solving (Dunker,1945; Newell, Simon,1972; Adams,1974; Isaksen,1985; Couger,1995); Process of sensing problems, formulating and testing hypothesis (Torrance,1965); Problem Finding (Czikszentmihalyi,Getzels,1970); Janusian and homospatial thinking (Rothenberg,1979).

3. POLES OF INTERACTION  EXTREMALIZATION

The creative dialogue of the person with the world manifests itself as a free activity of independent and unique subjects. Thus creative activity has polycyclic character and consists of both absolute self-determination, self-fulfillment, and also self-renunciation, unconditional acceptation and submission to the essential  laws of the external world.

 3.1. Person
Absolute self-positing, resolving the contradiction between I and non-I (Fichte,18 C);  Stream of Consciousness, Free Will (James,1890);  Method trial and errors (Thorndlike,1911);  Self-development and self-expansion (Stern,1918);  Manipulating material and ideal objects (Watson,1928); Spontaneous realization of the self (Fromm,1941);  Free choice fulfillment (Sartr,1946 );  Overcompensation and striving to superiority (Adler,1956);  Self -realization (Rodgers,1965);  Self-actualization, Transcending self-actualization, ( Maslow, 1954,1971);  Manifestation of strong ego (Barron,1969);  Productive activity directed on creative overcome (Gruber,1981).

Personal structural components:
Method,  Attitude, Vision:    Creative activity is a realization of the right method – “New Organon” (Bacon, 1620 );  Methods of  reasoning and discovery of truth ( Descartes,17 C);  Perceiving the world in an unhabitual way (James,1890); General Problem Solver (Newell, Simon, Shaw,1958); Creative attitude (Maslow,1963; Schank1988); Creative method (Parnes,1967, von Oech,1983); Universal Traveller (Koberg, Bagnal,1972); Thinking style  (Sternberg,1988);
Motivation:   Flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975);   Intrinsic motivation (Amabile, 1976); Task-focused motivation (Simonton, 1984; Gruber, 1986).
Traits:   Creative person as constellation of traits (Taylor, 1958; Roe, 1958; MacKinnon, 1962; Barron, 1963);
Cognitive:  Multiple non-intellectual factors  of creativity (Thurstone,1952, Getzels, Jackson,1959); Three-dimensional model of intellect ( Guilford,1956,1959);  Three – facet model of creativity  (Sternberg,1988);
Emotional:  Unified emotional fulfillment of personality (Schiller 18C; Ribot,1906; Rossman,1931 );  Creativity as Love affair with the world (Greenacre,1957); Peak experience, ecstasies (Maslow,1968); Integrated fulfillment with the specific pleasure (Lowen,1970);
Subpersonal: Mystical irrational process, play and flying of fantasy (Schlegel; Novalis,18 C);  Play of Dionysian Spirit (Nitsche,19 C); Hereditary creativity (Galton,1869); Madness and deviation (Lombroso,1891); Life impulse, intuition (Bergson,1907); Activity of general  mechanisms of  unconsciousness;  Sublimation  ( Freud, 1908, 1938); “Regression in the service of the ego” (Kris,1957);  Activity of preconsciousness (Kubie,1958);  Paleologic thinking (endocepts transformations), (Arieti,1976).

 3.2.World
Process of harmonizing the way of life with the Universal Flow by Superior Person ( I  Ching  – Book of Changes, 1200 BC);   Deliberate acceptance and willing participating in the rhythms of  Sattva-Universal Life (Indian philosophy, 800 BC ); Actions guided by universal lows of Tao, following principle  nonaction  ( wu -wei ) – letting Nature to take its own course ( Lao-Tzu, 6 c. BC); Imitation (Mimesia) (Plato, 4 c. BC);   Divine Inspiration (Plato,4 c. BC);  Action in tune with the divine cosmic plan (Stoicism, 3 c. BC -2 c,AD);  Genius is Child (Matthew,1 c.AD); Union with the Absolute (Zen-Budhhizm, 5 c.AD);  Union with Cosmic Consciousness  (Bucke,1901);   Realization of universal archetypes (Jung, 1928 );  Mystical psychographic, Automatic writing (Ernst,1952);  Divine intuition (Maritain,1953); Supersensory and supraconsciousness (Sorokin,1961);  Sociogenous theory (Kreber,1944, Veber,1974);  Transpersonal experience and perception (Dreistadt, 1971);   Extrasensory perception, telepathy (Knipper, Murphy, 1973);   Channel and personal-social transformation (Hastings, 1980);  The Spectrum of creativity (Dreams – Transformative wisdom),(Harman, Rhengold, 1984);  Universal aesthetic (Frois, Eysenck, 1995).

4. CREATIVITY AS ORGANIZED COMPLEXITY

The universal form of development of all complex systems is their expansion both compression, disintegration and integration, complication and simplification, increase of a variety and it organize.
The given pulsing temporary structure underlies the self-organization of matter, which is putting in order of spontaneous activity by selection on primarily given criteria. It also lays in a basis of biological evolution, which is realized with the help of mechanisms of variability and selection (Darwin, 1859).
Initial stage of process:
Adventurous thinking (Bartlett, 1958);  Divergent thinking (Gilford, 1959),  Lateral thinking (de Bono, 1967), Generativity theory (Epstein,1985); Kaleidoscope thinking (Kanter, 1988).
Interaction:
Interaction of productive imagination and transcendental apperception (Kant,18C);  Producing random images through spontaneous variation, which the outer environment selects (James, 1890);  Generation of ideas and their creative choice; production of combinations and their selection (Poincare,1913;Hadamard, 1954);   Alternation of unconsciousness and consciousness stages (Wallas,1926);   Insight, “Aha!”- reaction (Kohler,1943; M.Gardner, 1978);  Perception and reorganization of complex stimulus through unconsciousness choice of “good” structure (Wertheimer, 1945); Division of free ideation and judgment (Osborn,1954);    Variation  selection, transmission (Cambell,1960);    Afferent synthesis and  decision-making (Anokhin, 1968 );  Interaction between Right and Left Hemisphere ( Bogen,1969;Springer,1981; Latting,1985); Generation, selection, preservation ( Perkins,1988);  Chance permutation, formation configurations, social acceptance (Simonton, 1988);  Transformation of conceptual space (Boden,1991); Creativity toward organized complexity, interaction  of complexity and simplicity, asymmetry and symmetry  (Barron,1995 );   Intention to transform the objective world, couple with the ability to decide  when this is useful  (Runco,1996).

The process of choice of the optimum combination leads to  the need for finding of the criteria of this selection. The Kant’s apriori, Jung’s archetypes, Supreme values – Good, Truth, Beauty and Use serve as mutually agreed filters for such integrated system of criteria. At the same time this system of universal criteria is a unified, active, and self-developing structure.  It is manifested as a basic generative pattern and it produces various copies at the initial stage of ideation.

Social-psychological mechanisms of creativity

The creative interaction of the person with the world has a complex, multi-level character, which reflects universal structure of all integrative objects and consists of axiological, cognitive, emotional and behavioural components. Each of them is manifested in the means of the appropriatepairs of opposed, complement mechanisms of creativity:

Idealization is understood as a quest, vision and revealing of the ideal nature of the object, as a mental constructions of its ideal image in which supreme values are harmoniously blended and the vital contradictions are resolved. It is a new opportunity for finding and fulfillment of supertask and ideal plan, generation of daring hypothesis, embodiment of aesthetic ideal, and realization of ideal final result.
Problematization is a discovery and intensification of vital contradictions of the object, problem finding and problem construction. It is a perception and search for shortcomings, blanks, discord, asymmetry and imperfections of the object. It is a splitting of the united object, finding opposite, complementary features of the phenomena, as vision of an anti-object and its dark sides and “shadows”.
Realization of bunch of mechanisms is manifested as process and ability to reveal a vital problem, which reflects the contradiction between ideal and reality, capacity to use energy of tension and asymmetry. It reveals the ability to consider a conflict and problem as a creative challenge, and to resolve them in an effective, elegant and human way guided by ideal task and plan.

Decenration is manifested in a personal ability to create different approaches to an interaction with the object, to change one’s mind and to take into account various points of view. This mechanism represents a process of mental replacement of habitual connections by different unusual ones; demolishing and deviating from traditional patterns of thinking, destruction of traditional notions, mental inertia and overcoming stereotypes. It is the process of generating various ideas and images and their mental manipulation and transformation.
Simplification is understood as a process of removing complicated inconsequential, tangled, insignificant and confusing elements, as an achievement of clarity and elegance of the form and at the same time depth and accuracy of the contents. It is an ability to concentrate upon the essence of an object, to express its complexity by the mean of simple and separate notions. It is a capacity to choose and select combination based on criteria of hidden order, harmony and beauty.
The bunch of mechanisms is a generation of multifarious ideas and the most elegant and useful choice.

Identification is realized by means of an active immersion, embodiment in the objects and their circumstances, blending with them and experiencing emotional resonance with them. By means of this mechanism personality is absorbed in the object of material and non-material nature, it transfers into them and gets to know their internal impulses, circumstances and development of logic. This striving to be similar to another objects is expressed by Sanskrit formula: “Tat twam asi” (“That you are”).
Meditation is an aloofness and feelings of isolation from the outer and inner world, maintaining necessary distance from the object of interaction, impassive and fresh perception of its nature, real relationships, its harmony, beauty and symmetry. It is vision of the world and self in a new way through defamilirization or making strange.
The bunch is manifested as a making unknown familiar and familiar strange.

Self-actualization is understood as process of the most complete and long-lasting revealing and development of one’s personal potentials, as a need in a unified self-realization of a creative possibilities. Integrated self-fulfillment involves realization of one’s own creative potential, designs, plans, and ideal models. It is spontaneous self-expression, self-unfolding, self-determination, self-assertion, self-mobilization.
Personification is an ascription of human properties to object of the outer world, attributing characteristics of the subject, activity independence to them. It is a realization of the principles non-action and non-intervention and strategy “Let it happen”. It is letting objects go, getting them right on free activity, letting them to take its own course. At the same time it is an art of waiting, releasing and activation of unconsciousness. Thus if superconsciousness is impersonated by the idea of Divine force or Muse, then the unconsciousness – by Intuitive Self or Inner Advisor. Besides, this mechanism is manifested as a creation of a self-generating and self-developing structures – a certain unified internal and external patterns, which independently move to an ideal goal.
The bunch of mechanisms is manifested as alternation of spontaneous activity and termination of optimum use of the energy and possibilities of internal and external structures.

Mechanisms of evolution, creativity, dreaming,
self-defense, wit and play, figures of speech and thought

1. Unfolding of Whole: Planetization, self-organization, regulation, optimization, feedback co-ordination, transformation, trans-substantiation, transmutation, recursion, multiplication, generation, reproduction, retranslating, regeneration, reintegration, reorganization, self-duplication, self-replication, selection.
Repetition, recurrence, amplification, alliteration, parallelism, paraphrase, anaphora, epiphora, rhythm, rhyme.
Interaction: Adaptation, co-operation, participation, combination, condensation, association, bisociation, juxtaposition, interference, agglutination, analogy, metaphor, simile.
Levels of interaction

Table 1.  The Double Helix of Creativity

 Idealization  Problematization
Striving of all unified systems to perfection;  Matthew Effect;  Complementary Principle  Laws of Dialectic;
Polarity Principle
Trancedentation, perfectification, beautification, symbolization, accumulation, hierarchization,  complementation, anticipation, incorporation in context.         Typifying, overestimating.  Dramatization, doubling, splitting of the symbol, dissociation.
Irony, paradox, ambiguity, algizm, antithesis, oxymoron.
Decentration         Simplification 
Principle of Tree – Reminification; Brownian motion law Simplicity Principle (Economy);  Ockam’s  Razor
Diversification, complication, differentiation, ideation,  shifting, manipulation, substantial rotation, extrapolation, sublimation, compensation, distortion, restitution, undoing, conversion, reversal, inversion, reaction formation.
Hyperbole, exaggeration, neologism, chiasmus, antistrophe.
Generalization, integration, abstraction, interpolation, stylisation, formalization, coagulation, schematization, condensation(economy), implication, convergence, displacement, disguise, retrospective devolution, regression, rationalization, clarification, reduction.
Synecdoche,  metonymy, allegory, allusion, meiosis, ellipsis, detail, emphasis, litotes.
Identification    Meditation
 Unity of the World Principle  Autonomy Principle,   Homeostasis Principle  
 Empathy, compathy, sympathizm, unification, internalization, imitation, introjection  Detachment, deflection, autonomization, emotional insulation, deferment, denial, repression, suppression, withdrawal, abreaction, depersonalisation, renuaction, isolation, personal invulnerable,   dispossession, defamilirization.
 Self-actualization      Personification
 Striving unified system to self-fulfilment  Nonaction Principle ( wu-wei)
 Externalization, self-expression, self-unfolding, expansion, assimilation, modification,  flight into reality.  Impersonation, projection, accommodation, tuning, devaluation, infantilization, fainting, absolution.


Conclusions

1. Understanding of  a dialogical nature of creativity allows the consideration of the development of its theory as an oscillatory movement inside the continuum: self-determination- submission to the laws of the world; rationality – irrationality; effort – spontaneity.

2. The pithy space of creative interaction has the specific characteristics and laws. Further investigation of this qualitatively original area of reality comprises new opportunities for development of the theory of creativity.

3. The unified, hierarchical system of social-psychological mechanisms of creativity reflects the main universal evolutionary principles and patterns of changes and lays in the basis of varieties of person’s creative manifestations.

4. The essential condition of creative interaction of personality with the world is the realization of a unified system of mutually connected mechanisms. Thus, the person consciously activates separate mechanisms and creates his or her  unified pattern. This definite dynamic structures match, coincide with structure of the present situation and serve as creative keys to reality.

5. Revealing of a multi-level system of creative mechanisms with necessity to arise the question of elaboration of new methods of diagnostics of creative abilities. This integrated system of creativity tests will allow to investigate both a degree of development of separate mechanisms and level of their interrelation.

6. Taking into account the laws of transformation of the system’s stages of development into its structural levels of organization, it is possible to study stages of mechanisms formation and hence ontological development of creativity and age differences of creative performances.

7. The social-psychological mechanisms of creative activity are controlled and governed elements of the consciousness, and can be made active by means of appropriate external stimulation or deliberate efforts.

8. The revealing of the unified system of creative mechanisms opens a basic opportunity of its transformation into system of techniques and algorithms and, therefore, facilitates creation of the computer programs of creativity.

9. Conscious and repeated activation of these mechanisms lead to their immersion, automatization and  consolidation  into a steady personal structures.  Therefore it becomes possible to elaborate an integral system of games, training and methods stimulating creativity which allows to make the separate mechanisms active, and through which to harmonize an integral creative potential of personality.

10. Multi-level system of mechanisms may be laid in the base revealing individual differences of creative performance. Therefore it becomes possible to increase creative potential both through directed stimulating of its complement components and through further development of the most significant.

11. Creative  interaction with  the world  is rich not  only  in  its content,  but  also  in  temporal structure, which includes series of  consecutive stages: perception  and emotional experience  of objects,  their analysis,  comprehension and  transformation. Pragmatic potential of these mutually penetrating systems consists of the creation of a universal method of the creative dialogue with the world.  This unified method of the creative vision of reality would allow solving multi-level vital problems and conflicts in a human, elegant and effective way, to fill and enrich an ordinary life with creativity, to approach both the self and the world to the ideal.

References

1. Amabile, T. M. The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1983.
2. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society,culture,and person: A systems view ofcreativity. In R.Sternberg (Ed.), The nature ofcreativity. (pp. 325-339). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
3. Csikszentmihalyi M., Creativity. Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, New York: Harper Collins 1996.
4. Barron, F. (1995). No rootless flower: Towards an ecology of creativity. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
5. Feldman, D.H., Csikszentmihalyi, M. Gardner, H., (1994) Changing the world, A Framework for the Study of Creativity, Westport: Praeger
6. Floistad, G. (1993). Creativity past, present, and future: A philosophical perspective. In S. G. Isaksen, M. C. Murdock, R. L. Firestien, & D. J. Treffinger (Eds. ). Understanding and Recognizing Creativity: The Emergence of a Discipline (pp. 202-246). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
7. Gardner H. Creativity lives and creative works: a synthetic scintific approach // R. Sternberg, T. Tardif (eds.). The nature of creativity. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 1988.
8. Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.
9. Gruber, H. E. (1988). The evolving systems approach to creative work. Creativity Research Journal, I. 27-51
10. Hofstadter, D. R. (1985b). Variations on a theme as the crux of creativity. In Metamagical Themas, pp. 232-259. New York: Basic Books.
11. Isaksen, S. G., Murdock, M. C., Firestien, R. L., & Treffinger, D. J. (Eds.) (1993a). Understanding and Recognizing Creativity: The Emergence of a Discipline. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
12. Magyari, B.I. (1993) About the necessity of complex creatology. In: Isaksen Scott G., Murdock Mary C., Firestien Roger L., Treffinger Donald J. (Eds.) Understanding and recognizing creativity: The emergence of a discipline, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation Norwood, 48
13. Rothenberg A. (1979) The Emerging Godness: The creative process in art, scince and other fields. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
14. Runco, M. A. (1996). Personal creativity: Definition and developmental issues. New Directions for Child Development, No. 72 (Summer), pp. 3–30.
15. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995): Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.
16. Simonton, D. K. (1990). Psychology, science, and history: An introduction to historiometry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17. Simonton, D. K. (1996). Individual genius within cultural configurations: The case of Japanese civilization. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 354-375
18. Torrance, E.P. (1995). Why fly? A philosophy of creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Навигация по теме<< Предыдущая записьСледующая запись >>