Psychology of creativity: these are types, theories and different approaches

Psychology of creativity: the essence of science, the subject of study

Psychologists study the products of human activity created in the fields of science, technology, and art. In addition to the products themselves, psychologists are also interested in the components of the creation process: the role of thinking, imagination, intuition, and individual personality traits.

Within the framework of psychology, the personalities of great creators are examined: they study the biography, background, and role of giftedness. According to psychologists, all people have creative abilities and they can be developed. But it is important to distinguish giftedness from genius - the highest form of manifestation of creative activity. Genius is considered a rare innate quality, which is why there are few geniuses.

Basic approaches and concepts in the psychology of creativity

The main task of the psychology of creativity is to reveal the mental mechanisms and patterns of the creative process, determine the components of creative abilities and study human creativity. Creativity is considered as the basis and mechanism for the development of the psyche (A. M. Matyushkin, Ya. A. Ponomarev, I. N. Semenov, etc.), and its study is associated with the laws of thinking (V. N. Pushkin, O. K. Tikhomirov , E. G. Yudin). However, as noted by the authors N. T. Alekseev, S. M. Bernshtein, A. N. Luk. Ya. A. Ponomarev, for the study of creativity, the search for its connection with the laws of thinking turns out to be insufficient. Thus, according to the point of view of S. Arieti, G. Davis, H. Litton, creative search and transformative activity, or creativity, not stimulated from the outside, is based on special creative abilities that have their own inclinations and can manifest themselves in any type of activity.

Based on the theoretical principles and empirical research of the authors reviewed, we will define the basic concepts of the psychology of creativity.

The psychology of creativity is a field of knowledge that studies a person’s creation of new, original things in various fields of activity, primarily in science, technology, and art (Ya. A. Ponomarev). The definition given by S. L. Rubinstein is the most common in our domestic literature: “Creativity is a human activity that creates new material and spiritual values that have social significance.”

History of the development of the industry: the formation of science, role in society

As a science, the psychology of art was formed at the beginning of the 20th century. It had not yet been defined as a separate field, since it considered only one area: biography, literary works. By analyzing the material, scientists studied the nature of the creation process and personality traits.

With the beginning of the development of experimental psychology, research methods have changed. Psychologists began to work not only with heritage, but also with contemporary authors. They used questionnaires, experimental methods, and interviews.

The scientific and technological revolution influenced the quality of the study of art and posed new challenges for psychologists. The need for employees who are able not only to complete a task, but also to offer creative ideas, take on more responsibility, and make independent decisions has increased. In this regard, a new direction has emerged that studies creativity as a component of science and technology.

Personality, talent and creativity.

And finally, in everyday consciousness, personality phenomena are firmly associated with the abilities and originality of the intellect, giftedness and talent. It is when assessing a person’s independence, firmness of decisions, and his creative potential that they say about him with respect: “What a personality!” Sometimes a sign of identity is directly placed between “personality” and “talent”. If we accept these phenomena as the only genuine and intimate manifestations of personality, then the builder of a statue of personality must first of all endow it with talent and give unlimited freedom of creativity. But here is an episode from AC Pushkin’s drama “Mozart and Salieri”:

Salieri

What did you bring me?

Mozart

No - yes; trifle <…>

(Plays.) Salieri

You came to me with this And could stop at the tavern And listen to the blind fiddler! - God!

You, Mozart, are unworthy of yourself [14].

AC Pushkin, through the mouth of Salieri, sharply separates the “talent” of a person from his “I”. Mozart as a “personality,” according to Salieri, is unworthy of such a great gift as his “talent.” Naturally, without studying the phenomena of creativity and talent, personality psychology will lose important features of the existence of the individual, and the statue of the individual will not come to life. And yet, reducing personality to creativity or talent is again an important but

“
one-dimensional
”
personality characteristic.

* * *

Thus, acquaintance with various manifestations of personality shows that on the way to creating a picture of ideas about personality from a mosaic of different phenomena, all sorts of difficulties arise. Each of these phenomena, taken by itself and attributed to an individual existing in isolation, cannot be qualified as a phenomenon related to the field of study of personality psychology.

Largely for this reason, personality psychology has been divided into the psychology of motivation, the psychology of emotions, the psychology of will, and the psychology of individual differences, which are often studied and taught independently of each other. In addition, different manifestations of personality, depending on the position of the researcher, are taken as the main material from which personality psychology is built.

Thus, drives, needs, motives and values are analyzed in most detail in such areas of psychology as psychoanalysis and humanistic psychology; the facts of external behavior are mainly studied in different versions of behaviorism; Cognitive psychology feels confident in the field of studying the knowledge and beliefs of an individual

In other words,
the position of the researcher determines the choice of facts regarded as manifestations of personality, and the choice of methods for studying these manifestations.
The recognition of whether a certain phenomenon exists as a fact or whether it is a figment of the researcher’s own imagination generally depends on the methodological attitude of the scientist.

L.S. Vygotsky notes that “psychoanalysis, behaviorism and subjective psychology operate not only with different concepts, but also with different facts. So, undoubtedly, real well-known facts like the Oedipus complex of psychoanalysts (unconscious sexual attraction of a boy to his mother and ambivalent attitude towards his father. - AA

), simply do not exist for other psychologists; for many it is the wildest fantasy.
For V. Stern... psychoanalytic interpretations, as commonplace in the school of S. Freud and as undoubted as measuring temperature in a hospital, and therefore the facts whose existence they claim, are reminiscent of palmistry and astrology of the 16th century. For Pavlov, the claim that the dog remembered the food when the bell rang is also nothing more than a fantasy. Also, for the introspectionist, there is no fact of muscle movements in the act of thinking, as the behaviorist claims" [15]. What is an indisputable fact and the object of numerous studies for some theories of personality is rejected out of hand by representatives of other approaches. That is why the listed phenomena and facts illustrate the versatility of the manifestations of personality phenomenology and force us to address the question of how to study personality in psychology.
The question is how, in what way, to study personality in psychology

,
is a question about method in the original meaning of the word, method as a path of knowledge.
The solution to this issue lies in the study of the possibilities of applying different levels of methodology to personality psychology. That is why identifying the place of any fact in the life of an individual involves considering different levels of methodology as a system of coordinates that outlines the scope of studying manifestations of personality in psychology and reveals the connection between personality psychology and other areas of social and natural sciences about man.

Functions of philosophical methodology and human science

The highest level of scientific methodology is philosophical methodology, which sets a general strategy for studying the principles of cognition and constructing a categorical apparatus in sociology, history, philosophy, ethnography, archeology, anthropology, cultural studies, semiotics, human biology - in short, in any specific field of human science, in including in psychology.

The role of philosophical methodology for studying man with the development of specific sciences does not decrease, but increases. Any specific science, depending on the tasks facing it, sees its objectively

the existing layer of manifestations of human life and from it sometimes tries to get an idea of life as a whole.
So, for example, general biology sees in man an organism
that has a number of features that bring man closer to any other manifestations of life on earth: metabolism, the presence of a genetic program transmitted from generation to generation, etc. Human biology aims to study specific characteristics
of an individual
as a representative of the species Homo sapiens, which has a number of significant differences from any other biological species.

Cybernetics - the science of systems and methods for controlling machines and living organisms - studies humans as an adaptive self-regulating system

, which has analogues in both living and inanimate nature.

Philology, which studies, in particular, man in ancient tragedy, talks about the hero

, not burdened with the burden of internal experiences and doubts, but performing actions and deeds prescribed by fate. If we imagine that specialists from various specific sciences set their common goal to find out what a person is, then despite all their efforts, a holistic, integrative image of a person will never emerge. And the point here is not only the difference in the languages of science and research procedures, the nature of the tasks facing different branches of human science. The main difficulty is that in each objectively existing subject of a specific science about man, only elements of a certain whole are used, which are sometimes taken for this whole itself: an organism, a biological individual, an ancient hero become the strongholds for constructing a single image of a person.

Meanwhile, the task of interdisciplinary synthesis of ideas about man

is invariably posed in science and is not at all of a purely abstract cognitive nature. Representatives of different branches of human science sooner or later face the need to cooperate with each other. In some cases, the need for such cooperation is obvious: general biology and cybernetics mutually enrich each other, describing the universal patterns of regulation of living systems. In other cases, the task of interdisciplinary synthesis—the synthesis of biology and art—may seem far-fetched. However, if we remember the outstanding Florentine sculptor Michelangelo, who risked his life to study the anatomy of the human body, then the search for the relationship between human biology and art ceases to seem like idle curiosity.

Integrative function

in the knowledge of man is carried out by the philosophical methodology of science, which highlights
the development of man in nature and society
as the subject of philosophical knowledge.

Realizing the integrative function of philosophical methodology, the founders of Russian psychological science - first L.S. Vygotsky and S.L. Rubinstein, and then B.G. Ananyev, P.Ya. Galperin, B.V. Zeigarnik, A.N. Leontyev, A.R. Luria, B.M. Teplov, D.N. Uznadze – warned against methodological carelessness. When posing general questions of psychology, they went beyond the scope of a specific science and rose to the level of philosophical methodology for studying personality, communication, activity, the unconscious, consciousness, and the subject of psychology as a whole. Examples include the works of L.S. Vygotsky “The Historical Meaning of the Psychological Crisis” (1926), S. L. Rubinstein “Man and the World” (1973), A.N. Leontiev “Problems of mental development” (1957), “Activity. Consciousness. Personality" (1975), etc.

In one of the latest works by B.G. Ananyeva - “On the Problems of Modern Human Science” (1977) directly states that solving the human problem requires going beyond the boundaries of psychology.

He identifies three features of the development of science that indicate the emergence of human knowledge: “The first of them is the transformation of the problem of man into a general problem of all science as a whole, all its sections, including exact and technical sciences. The second feature is the ever-increasing differentiation of individual disciplines and their fragmentation into a number of more specific teachings. Finally, the third feature of modern scientific development is characterized by a tendency to combine various sciences, aspects and methods of human research into various complex systems, and to construct synthetic characteristics of human development.

These features are associated with the emergence of new scientific disciplines and the connection through their many previously distant areas of natural science and history, the humanities and technology, medicine and pedagogy” [16].

The counter-movement in the study of human development in nature and society by representatives of philosophical methodology and concrete scientific methodology is a prerequisite for the progress of human knowledge.

However, this kind of counter-movement only becomes meaningful and productive when representatives of specific sciences rely on philosophical methodology, recognizing its function as an integrator, an architect in the construction of the subject of science and the implementation of interdisciplinary research, and philosophers do not shy away from new discoveries in specific sciences and do not replace the movement ideas by the movement of words.

In the latter case, the philosophical methodology of science slides into the sphere of formal logic

, starting, for example, to establish, when studying a person, connections between the concepts “man”, “organism”, “individual”, “
personality
”, “
individuality
” based on arbitrarily taken external characteristics of a person.
At the same time, the idea of the real relationships behind these concepts and the manifestations of human development in nature and society is partially captured. Then the concept of “man” becomes the broadest concept in scope, graphically depicted by a larger circle. The concept of “organism” is placed next to or inside the concept of “man,” expressing the biological principle in man. The concept of “individual”, depending on the addition of the epithets “biological” or “social” to it, reflects the biological or social-role characteristics of an individual indivisible representative of the human race. The concept of “personality” preserves the social characteristics of a person. The concept of “individuality” conveys the idea of the “biosocial” nature of man, which distinguishes one person from all other members of human society. Such logic [17], listing a set of external signs of a person and mechanically connecting the content of the concept “person” by adding concentric circles of different scope of concepts - “organism”, “individual”, biological plus social, etc., creates the illusion of integration between the sciences and finds himself in the grip of stereotypical thinking. Thus, it comes into conflict with the second function of philosophical methodology – the critical-constructive function ( E.T. Yudin
).

Critical-constructive function

philosophical methodology questions the achievements of science or worldview of a certain historical period accepted as axioms, initial postulates, limiting categories, which are elevated to the rank of unshakable, eternally existing truths.
These truths, which become the foundation of certain scientific teachings and worldviews, often turn into cultural stereotypes, supraconscious attitudes, and schematisms of consciousness.
They unite communities of scientists who are guided by them, ceasing to be aware of the historical and cultural origin of these stereotypes. And only when developing scientific knowledge leads to the emergence of various kinds of paradoxes, internal contradictions, and a flow of facts that do not fit into the old schemes, the postulates that hinder the development of science come into the focus of philosophical methodology.

Thus, the naturalness of Ptolemy’s system, which asserts that the Sun revolves around the Earth, led to the elevation of this system to the rank of a worldview and official ideology. The facts contradicting this system, and above all the difficulties in using it in various types of practice, prompted Copernicus to question the very foundation of the Ptolemaic system and deprive the Earth of its position as the center of the Universe.

The history of psychological science is no exception in this regard. In traditional psychology, accumulated new facts, in particular manifestations of human activity, his unconscious drives, came into conflict with the postulate of spontaneity

, according to which objective reality directly affects the psyche of the subject and unambiguously determines the manifestations of his psyche and behavior that arise after this influence.
The postulate of immediacy was introduced by D.N. Uznadze during the analysis of introspective psychology of consciousness and behaviorism. The postulate of immediacy is based on the two-term scheme of analysis of the psyche inherent in mechanistic determinism: the impact on the subject’s receptive systems - response phenomena
(
subjective or objective
)
caused by this impact.
The postulate of immediacy was expressed most clearly in the central stimulus-response scheme of
behaviorism
. The adoption of the postulate of immediacy leads to the fact that the subject’s activity either falls out of sight of psychologists of these directions, or is explained by the intervention of special subjective factors, various manifestations of the mysterious personal principle.

The postulate of immediacy was a supraconscious mindset ( M.G. Yaroshevsky

), which was characteristic of the thinking of the natural sciences, in particular of classical physics and traditional physiology. Recognition of the scheme of mechanistic determinism - the postulate of immediacy - determined that representatives of traditional psychology, focused in their research on the experiences of an individual or facts of behavior, sharply isolated the sphere of psychological reality from reality and found themselves either in a vicious circle of consciousness or in a vicious circle of behavior. In both cases, the person found himself isolated from the world. Only a revision of the initial supraconscious attitudes of the scientific thinking of psychology could eliminate the obstacles that stood in its way. Such a revision is possible only by going beyond the boundaries of empirical facts and special problems of a particular science and turning to the analysis of its methodological foundations, to the philosophical methodology of science.

The critical-constructive function of philosophical methodology played a serious role in the study of human development, destroying “methodological isolationism” in the knowledge of man and placing the development of human existence in the world at the center of human knowledge.

The third function of philosophical methodology is the ideological normative-axiological function

(
E.G. Yudin
). It consists in the ethical assessment of general scientific and specific scientific constructions and the creation of those ideals and value norms to which the image of man in the scientific picture of the world must correspond.

When the ideological function of philosophical methodology is ignored, specific sciences begin to develop their own images of a “bad” or “good” person, which are taken as natural properties of his nature. Thus, the American psychologist E. Staub, for example, precedes the study of personality by discussing assumptions about whether a person is by nature initially “good” or “bad.” He points out the diversity of opinions on this issue.

For example, Socrates believed that a person is potentially perfect and through self-knowledge can come to the good principle hidden in his nature. Some philosophers of the past believed that a person is initially altruistic, that is, he is immediately born “good.” Modern representatives of humanistic psychology A. Maslow and K. Rogers admit that a person is “good” by nature, and psychotherapy should help more fully reveal the good principle hidden in the depths of a person, the desire for love and creativity, and acceptance of other people.

Psychologists of other directions, for example the founder of psychoanalysis, S. Freud, adhered to the assumption that a person is initially aggressive and selfish, and society curbs his selfish impulses. In other words, man is “bad” by nature. Meanwhile, according to E. Staub, accepting one point of view or another does not allow an equal number of facts testifying to both manifestations of aggression and goodwill in very early childhood.

A different approach to the “bad” or “good” nature of man belongs to E. Staub, who stands on the position of the socio-behaviorist concept of exchange of the sociologist and social psychologist J. Homans. According to this concept, a person in a social group looks out for his own interest: if he is paid in kind for his deeds, in exchange for this he is “kind”; if he does not have any tangible profit, then he would rather be “bad” than “good” in such a situation. In other words, a person by nature has various potentials, which, under the influence of the environment, result in selfish or altruistic behavior.

The role of creativity in antiquity, the opinion of philosophers

Antiquity is the first period in human history marked by the accelerated development of science. Considering various manifestations of the surrounding world, philosophers have identified creativity as a separate sphere. They divided it into human and divine. Human manifestation included arts and crafts. The phenomenon of the creation of the cosmos was considered a divine manifestation.

Aristotle denied God's intervention in the creative process, calling it an act of activity - the creation of something new. Plato viewed creation as a process of contemplation—the new is born from observation.

Features of creativity in psychology

Cognitive psychology studies the characteristics of creativity and the creative process.

The main psychological conditions under which the creative process is realized include:

personality traits of a person (creativity qualities must be present);
brain activity should not excessively exceed a certain threshold;
the ability not to miss a good idea and an interesting thought;
having the ability to receive and use hints.

Finished works on a similar topic

Course work Creativity and the creative process from the point of view of psychology 490 rub.
Abstract Creativity and the creative process from the point of view of psychology 250 rub.
Test work Creativity and the creative process from the point of view of psychology 210 rub.

Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost

The creative process in a psychological sense consists of successive stages:

Preparation stage (setting a goal and initial actions to bring it to life).
Incubation stage (distraction of attention from the goal and transfer of thoughts to another object).
Stage of enlightenment (transition to the essence of the goal at the level of intuition).
Verification stage (conducting tests or implementing the result).

Theories of creativity: different approaches, concepts of perception

The phenomenon of creativity was examined by psychologists from different schools. Among them are:

Depth psychology. Freud considered two aspects: unconscious components and motivation. Creativity is the sublimation of sexual energy, which an individual realizes in a socially acceptable manner. Jung viewed it as the result of the influence of archetypes - manifestations of collective images. Creativity for analytical psychology is a means of expressing deep experiences, unity with the collective unconscious.
Gestalt psychology. Gestalt psychology is characterized by considering art as a product of the thinking of a developed personality.
Cognitive theory. According to cognitive scientists, creativity is the essence of the life process. Each individual uses accumulated experience throughout his life to create his own worldview model.
Humanistic theory. For humanists, creativity is an act of self-expression. The ability to create distinguishes a meaningful personality from animals and is innate.
Development of a creative personality. Altushler viewed the creation process as a consequence of self-improvement. To develop creative abilities, a person needs not only innate data, but also suitable conditions.

Modern science combines different approaches, studying the process of art development comprehensively.

Fragment from a psychology textbook

35.1. Creativity as a mental process

Most philosophers and psychologists distinguish between two main types of behavior: adaptive (related to the resources available to a person) and creative, defined as “creative destruction.”
In the creative process, a person creates a new reality that can be comprehended and used by other people. Attitudes towards creativity have changed dramatically in different eras. In Ancient Rome, only the material and the work of the bookbinder were valued in a book, and the author had no rights—neither plagiarism nor forgeries were prosecuted. In the Middle Ages and much later, the creator was equated with a craftsman, and if he dared to show creative independence, then it was not encouraged in any way. The creator had to earn a living in a different way: Moliere was a court upholsterer, and the great Lomonosov was valued for his utilitarian products - court odes and the creation of festive fireworks. And only in the 19th century. artists, writers, scientists and other representatives of creative professions were given the opportunity to live from the sale of their creative product.

In the 20th century the real value of any creative product was also determined not by its contribution to the treasury of world culture, but by the extent to which it can serve as material for replication (in reproductions, television films, radio broadcasts, etc.). Therefore, there are differences in income that are unpleasant for intellectuals, on the one hand, between representatives of the performing arts (ballet, musical performance, etc.), as well as dealers in mass culture and, on the other hand, creators.

Society, however, has at all times divided two spheres of human activity: otium and oficium (negotium), respectively, leisure activity and socially regulated activity. Moreover, the social significance of these areas has changed over time. In Ancient Athens, biostheoretikos - theoretical life - was considered more “prestigious” and acceptable for a free citizen than biospraktikos - practical life. In ancient Rome, vitaactiva - the active life (negotium) - was considered the duty and main occupation of every citizen and head of the family, while vitacontemplativa - the contemplative life - and leisure in general were little valued against the background of civil service. Perhaps that is why all the brilliant ideas of antiquity were born in Ancient Greece, and the Romans embodied them in articles of Roman law, engineering structures and brilliantly shaped manuscripts popularizing the works of the great Greeks (for example, Lucretius).

During the Renaissance, at least in the minds of the ideologists of humanism, the primacy of leisure dominated practical activity, which was supposed to serve only as a source of means for personal development in the time free from performing social and practical tasks. New times put Business in first place, and Leisure was narrowed to a bourgeois hobby.

Interest in creativity, the personality of the creator in the 20th century. connected, perhaps, with the global crisis, the manifestation of man’s total alienation from the world, the feeling that through purposeful activity people are not solving the problem of man’s place in the world, but are pushing its solution even further away. The main thing in creativity is not external activity, but internal activity - the act of creating an “ideal”, an image of the world, where the problem of alienation of man and environment is resolved. External activity is only an explication of the products of an internal act.

Highlighting the signs of a creative act, almost all researchers emphasized its unconsciousness, spontaneity, the impossibility of its control by the will and mind, as well as a change in the state of consciousness. You can cite characteristic statements: V. Hugo (“God dictated, and I wrote”), Augustine (“I do not think myself, but my thoughts think for me”), Michelangelo (“If my heavy hammer gives solid rocks one, then another type, then it is not set in motion by the hand that holds it, directs and controls it: it acts under the pressure of an extraneous force"), etc.

Spontaneity, suddenness, independence of the creative act from external causes is its second main feature. The need for creativity arises even when it is undesirable. The creative act is accompanied by excitement and nervous tension. All that remains for the mind is processing, giving a finished, socially acceptable form to the products of creativity, discarding the superfluous and detailing. Consciousness (the conscious subject) is passive and only perceives the creative product. The unconscious (unconscious creative subject) actively generates a creative product and presents it to consciousness.

In Russian psychology, the most holistic concept of creativity as a mental process was proposed by Ya. A. Ponomarev (1988). He developed a structural-level model of the central link of the psychological mechanism of creativity. Studying the mental development of children and problem solving by adults, Ponomarev came to the conclusion that the results of the experiments give the right to schematically depict the central link of psychological intelligence in the form of two spheres penetrating one another. The external boundaries of these spheres can be represented as abstract limits (asymptotes) of thinking. From below, this limit will be intuitive thinking (beyond it extends the sphere of strictly intuitive thinking of animals). At the top is the logical (behind it extends the sphere of strictly logical thinking of computers).

The criterion for a creative act, according to Ponomarev, is a level transition: the need for new knowledge develops at the highest structural level of the organization of creative activity; the means to satisfy this need are formed at low structural levels. These means are included in the process occurring at the highest level, which leads to the emergence of a new way of interaction between the subject and the object and the emergence of new knowledge. Thus, a creative product involves the inclusion of intuition and cannot be obtained on the basis of logical conclusion.

Ponomarev considers the creative act as included in the context of intellectual activity according to the following scheme: at the initial stage of problem formulation, consciousness is active, then, at the solution stage, the unconscious is active, and consciousness is again involved in selecting and checking the correctness of the solution (at the third stage). Naturally, if thinking is initially logical, that is, expedient, then a creative product can appear only as a by-product. But this process option is only one of the possible ones.

In general, in psychology there are at least three main approaches to the problem of creative abilities. They can be formulated as follows:

1. There are no creative abilities as such. Intellectual talent acts as a necessary, but not sufficient condition for the creative activity of an individual. The main role in determining creative behavior is played by motivation, values, and personality traits (A. Tannenbaum, A. Olokh, D. B. Bogoyavlenskaya, A. Maslow, etc.). These researchers include cognitive talent, sensitivity to problems, and independence in uncertain and difficult situations as the main traits of a creative personality.

Standing apart is the concept of D. B. Bogoyavlenskaya (1971, 1983), which introduces the concept of “creative activity of the individual,” considering this activity to be a certain mental structure inherent in the creative type of personality. Creativity, from Bogoyavlenskaya’s point of view, is a situationally unstimulated activity, manifested in the desire to go beyond a given problem. A creative personality type is inherent in all innovators, regardless of their type of activity: test pilots, artists, musicians, inventors.

2. Creative ability (creativity) is an independent factor, independent of intelligence (J. Guilford, K. Taylor, G. Gruber, Ya. A. Ponomarev). In a “softer” version, this theory states that there is a slight correlation between the level of intelligence and the level of creativity. The most developed concept is the “intellectual threshold theory” of E. P. Torrance: if IQ is below 115-120, intelligence and creativity form a single factor; with IQ above 120, creativity becomes an independent value, i.e. there are no creative individuals with low intelligence, but there are intellectuals with low creativity (Torrance E. R., 1964, 1965).

A high level of intelligence development implies a high level of creative abilities and vice versa. There is no creative process as a specific form of mental activity. This point of view was and is shared by almost all experts in the field of intelligence (D. Wexler, R. Weisberg, G. Eysenck, L. Theremin, R. Sternberg, etc.).

Ponomarev's concept: nature, features of the creative process

Ya. Ponomarev considered the process of creating art as the result of life experience. He distinguished between logical and intuitive experience:

The part of experience responsible for creativity is in the hidden part of consciousness; in order to gain access to it, you need to choose an approach.
The key to unlocking experience is action. Intuitive execution of actions leads to the desired experience.
The formation of intuitive experience does not require the participation of consciousness.

In the structure of creativity, Ponomarev identifies three approaches:

self-expression;
socially useful creation;
the solution of the problem.

Ponomarev's concept considers creativity as the result of the interaction of a subject and an object or a subject and another subject.

Chapter 1 Psychology of creative activity

What activities should be considered creative?

The essence of the creative process is seen “in the reorganization of existing experience to form new combinations on its basis” (A. Matejko), as the creation of something new in a situation where a problem-irritant causes the formation of a dominant, around which the stock of past experience necessary for the solution is concentrated ( Bekhterev V.M., 1924), as “the creation of a new product through action” (K. Rogers) or as “human activity to transform reality (both natural and social), culminating in the creation of a new original product; the process of constructive transformations of information and the creation of innovative results, subjectively and objectively significant” (“Creativity ...”, 2008, pp. 126–127).

…

The absence of strict criteria for determining the boundary between creative and non-creative human activity is now generally recognized. At the same time, it is obvious that without such criteria it is impossible to identify with sufficient certainty the subject of research itself.

The majority of modern foreign scientists involved in creativity issues admit that a lot of work has been done in the area of the problem of creativity criteria, but the desired results have not yet been obtained. For example, the authors of many studies conducted in recent decades in the United States tend to share Ghiselin's point of view, according to which the definition of the difference between creative and non-creative activities remains completely subjective.

The complexity of the structure of creativity prompts researchers to think about the need for multiple criteria. However, an empirical search for such criteria leads to insignificant results. The criteria put forward, such as “popularity”, “productivity” (Smith, Taylor, Ghiselin), “the degree of reconstruction of the understanding of the universe” (Ghiselin), “the breadth of influence of the scientist’s activities on various fields of scientific knowledge” (Lachlen), “the degree of novelty of ideas, approach, solution" (Sprecher, Stein), "social value of scientific products" (Brogden) and many others, remain unconvincing. S. M. Bernstein (1966) rightly finds this to be a consequence of a completely unsatisfactory level of development of theoretical issues in the study of creativity.

In our domestic literature, creativity is most often defined as “human activity that creates new material and spiritual values that have social significance” (TSB, vol. 42, p. 54).

With a psychological approach to the analysis of creativity, such a criterion is clearly not suitable. After all, they talk about how animals solve problems, about children’s creativity; creativity undoubtedly manifests itself when a person of any level of development independently solves all kinds of “puzzles”. But all these acts do not have direct social significance. In the history of science and technology, many facts have been recorded when the brilliant achievements of people’s creative thought did not acquire social significance for a long time. One cannot think that during the period of silence the activities of their creators were not creative, but only became so from the moment of recognition.

At the same time, the criterion of social significance in a number of cases is indeed decisive in creative acts.

Ponomarev Ya. A., 1976, p. 39–41.

This understanding of creativity persisted for a long time. However, as noted by S. V. Maksimova (2006), many of its well-known phenomena, such as “problematization of one’s own world” (G. S. Batishchev), “transcendence,” “struggle, flight to infinity,” did not fit into this interpretation of creativity. (N. A. Berdyaev), “non-adaptiveness” (A. G. Asmolov), “going beyond boundaries, overcoming” (N. Abagnano), “rebellion” (J. - P. Sartre), etc. In addition, criteria the novelty turned out to be blurred - “for whom? in what? Compared to what? (A.P. Ogurtsov).

D. B. Bogoyavlenskaya was the first to propose an understanding of creativity as going beyond what is required. However, now, Maksimova believes, the concept of creativity practically coincides with the concept of “non-adaptive activity” (V. A. Petrovsky). In this case, the category of creativity should also include the actions of a hooligan or a criminal, which are difficult to consider on the same level, for example, with a work of art.

In addition, the question remains open about the distinction between manifestations of creativity (creativity for others, “the process of objectification”) and creative potential (creativity for oneself, “the process of objectification” - Berdyaev N.A., p. 120).

Therefore, S. V. Maksimova considers creativity as the unity of its two components - non-adaptive and adaptive activities. As a result of non-adaptive activity, a field of visible but not yet realized possibilities spontaneously arises (not very successfully called by the author creative potential) [4] - the emergence of a new image, idea, problem, and as a result of adaptive activity - the realization of creative potential: achieving a goal, implementing an idea , expression of an image, etc., i.e., creation of a creative product. In art, the product is an external image that is created by artists, directors, painters, and composers. For scientists, this is most often a new idea, a thought, a new law; the designers have a new machine, mechanism; the fashion designer has a new style of clothing, etc.

…

An interesting question is how norm conformity and creative activity are correlated in the activity of an individual, in the functioning of the individual. Usually these qualities are opposed to each other. But such a contrast is true only in the sense that excessive regulation, excessively strict rationing “fetters individual activity and impoverishes human relationships” (Sokolov E.V., 1972, p. 141).

However, the point is not so much in the degree of rigidity of specific norms, but in the extent to which such rigidity is appropriate in a certain level of individual or collective activity. Depending on the functions of this link, it should primarily embody either norm conformity or creativity. When designing and managing work activity, it is important to rationally highlight its “normative” and “creative” links.

The contrast between creativity and norm-conformity should not be absolutized. A careful analysis of such types of activity, the creative nature of which is beyond doubt, shows that strict adherence to the norm is quite compatible with creativity and, moreover, often serves as its prerequisite. This is clearly manifested in performing creativity, where the musical text itself or the text of the role fixes some norm of activity that requires mandatory fulfillment... The performer must have impeccable command of the “artistic semiotic system in order to consolidate with its help the synthesis of an individually unique comprehension of the work” (Rapoport S., 1972, p. 37).

Ball G. A., 1990, p. 29.

F. D. Batyushkov (1901) distinguished creativity in scientific, poetic, musical, fine arts, creativity of administrators, commanders, etc.

M. S. Kagan and A. M. Etkind (1988) write about communication as creativity, and E. Yu. Sidorkina (2000) believes that it is necessary to talk about “creativity in communication”

by which he understands the flexibility of communication tactics, the adequacy of tactics to one’s own individuality, the design, formation and development of relationships, reflection about people and oneself in connection with communication. Creative methods and actions in communication can be any unexpected actions that cause an active counter reaction, destroying stereotypes and routine events.

This approach to creativity has a right to exist. Creativity, for example, is necessary for coaches to provide a stimulating or relaxing effect on athletes. Here are some examples of such creativity.

…

At the European Wrestling Championships, held abroad, the coach saw that the student was in a state of apathy before the final fight. To cheer up the athlete, the coach had the following conversation with him: “Anzor, do you know what Eurovision is?” - "Yes". - “Do you know that today these competitions will be broadcast throughout Europe, and how you fight will be seen in your village?” No more words were needed. Anzor won the European Championship.

In 1970, to determine the USSR football champion, an additional match was held between Dynamo Moscow and CSKA. The first half was outright won by Dynamo - 3: 1. During the break, there was deathly silence in the army locker room and an expression of complete hopelessness on the faces of the players. At this time, one of the defenders reached into his trunk for some reason and accidentally pressed the rubber devil, which made the sound of laughter. The coach noticed that a smile flashed across the players’ faces. Then he ran up to the defender and said: “Come on, push your little devil!” Continuous laughter followed from the trunk, which infected the entire team. At this time the referee's whistle sounded for the exit. The army team left the locker room, continuing to laugh, and Dynamo players walked towards them, who could not understand what their opponents had come up with that made them feel so happy. The result of the match was 4:3 in favor of CSKA.

According to E. Yu. Sidorkina, creative communication techniques are especially often used by managers, teachers (remember the head of the kindergarten in the film “Gentlemen of Fortune,” who figured out how to get kids to eat breakfast), theater and film directors, parents, and in typical situations ,

requiring the use of creative techniques are the partner’s distrust, accepting the first patient, ritualism in business relationships leading to routine, the need to stimulate the partner’s creative thinking, the need to “remove masks” and enter into a trusting relationship, the need to destroy the stereotype.

Concept, stages of the creation process: development of the creator’s thoughts

The definition of the term “creativity” is an activity as a result of which an individual translates inspired images into reality. Products of activity: scientific discoveries, books, films, any works of art.

There are 4 stages in the process of creating an object of art:

Preparation;
thinking about an idea;
development of an action plan;
final design.

The creative process belongs only to the creator, and its products belong to the culture.

Classification of creative processes

Among the various classifications of creative processes, I have chosen the following, which describes the nature of creativity, its function and result;

artistic creativity. Its function is to create new emotions, and its result is a work of art;
scientific creativity creates new knowledge, the results of which are discoveries, theories, publications;
technical creativity - the creation of new tools and objects of labor (as a result - technical improvements, inventions).
sports creativity - creating (achieving) new results - record holders.

Creative imagination and fantasy are necessary means for developing human abilities to change and transform the world and oneself. With their help, man fulfills both the inventions and plans that raised him so high above the animal.

Imagination has its own laws, different from the laws of ordinary logic of thinking. Creative imagination allows you to comprehend the general meaning of a new design and the paths leading to it through details and individual facts that are subtle or not perceptible to the ordinary eye. Creative imagination is born throughout a person’s life, assimilation of the treasures of spiritual culture he has accumulated. Art is essential for the development of creative imagination. It develops imagination and provides ample opportunities for creative ingenuity.

However, creativity can be useful for more than just developing imagination and inventiveness. Many types of creativity help develop other human skills. Therefore, creative abilities develop in a child from the very beginning of his development.

Difficulties in perceiving various types of creativity: problems of the psychology of art

The main problems of the psychology of art are determined by the relationship between subject and object:

the study of personality occurs through consideration and perception of aesthetic values;
artistic perception of art changes depending on the level of development of the individual’s personality;
art influences the behavior and motivation of an individual, changing his worldview.

The specifics of the problem depend on the types of creativity in psychology. In psychology, there are separate forms of manifestation of creative activity:

scientific - discovery of real world phenomena in order to obtain knowledge;
artistic - mastering the surrounding world through aesthetic rethinking, the desire to create;
technical - transformation of reality using imaginative thinking, development of structures and mechanisms;
co-creation - interpretation of the results of art, joint work of the creator and the viewer;
pedagogical - searching for new methods and forms of presenting material in order to improve the learning process;
The nursery is a necessary condition for the child’s thought process, which manifests itself in play and other activities.

Studying the problems of art helps to simplify the understanding of the creative process and make it more accessible to science and people.

The role of interhemispheric asymmetry

Interhemispheric asymmetry (Greek b- “without” and ummephsib “proportionality”) is one of the fundamental patterns of brain organization not only in humans, but also in animals. It manifests itself not only in the morphology of the brain, but also in the interhemispheric asymmetry of mental processes.

As part of the ongoing research, the main attention is paid to the connection between hemispheric asymmetry and mental cognitive processes and the effect of damage to individual structures and areas of the brain on the course of these processes. [4]

Two types of thinking are associated with the functions of the left and right hemispheres in humans - abstract-logical and spatial-imaginative. There are several synonyms for this type of thinking. According to V. Rotenberg:

verbal and non-verbal (since abstract-logical thinking of the left hemisphere is based on the ability to produce language, in contrast to the figurative thinking of the right hemisphere);
analytical and synthetic (since the left hemisphere of logical thinking analyzes objects and phenomena, while the right hemisphere of imaginative thinking ensures the integrity of perception);
discrete and simultaneous (since the left hemisphere uses logical thinking to perform a series of sequential operations, while the right hemisphere uses imaginative thinking to acquire the ability to perceive and evaluate an object in one moment).

The right hemisphere, which establishes a specific spatial-imagery context, has been shown to be critical for creativity. Thus, with organic lesions (for example, physical) of the left hemisphere, artists and musicians practically do not lose their artistic abilities, and sometimes even increase the level of aesthetic expression of creativity, but damage to the right hemisphere can lead to a complete loss of creativity. [4]

Of the above three characteristics of spatial-imaginative thinking, the most significant are the last two - its ability to think holistically and at one level about objects and phenomena of the real world. The prevailing views in the literature, according to which the main difference between these two types of thinking is that logical thinking works with verbal material, and figurative thinking with images, seems to be the result of a misunderstanding. In split-brain people, the right hemisphere seems to be able to understand words and simple verbal structures, while the left hemisphere is also quite capable of recognizing pictures. The main difference between these two types of thinking, in our opinion, is determined by how the contextual connection between words and pictures is organized. Left-brain thinking organizes any material used (verbal or non-verbal) in such a way as to create an unambiguous context that is understood more or less equally by different people. Without the creation of such an unambiguous context, social interaction would be impossible. The word itself, taken out of context, does not have a clear meaning at all; on the contrary, in most cases it is ambiguous, which is especially clearly reflected in dictionaries. The word "scythe" can also mean an agricultural tool, a woman's hairstyle, a piece of land extending into the sea, and finally it can have a metaphorical meaning (for example, "death's scythe"). It is the context, i.e. The relationship of a given word to others in a sentence determines the specific and unambiguous meaning of this word. The task of such a contextual organization is to isolate and record only one of the entire possible set of meanings and semantic shades of a word and to establish a linear connection between such single meanings of individual words.

There is now direct evidence of the critical role of right-hemisphere thinking for creativity, which creates a specific spatial and creative context. It turns out that with organic damage to the left hemisphere of the brain, the artistic abilities of artists and musicians are practically not affected, and sometimes the level of aesthetic expression of creativity even increases.

After complete removal of the meningioma in the right hemisphere, the poet, despite complete recovery without defects in everyday thinking and speech, lost the ability to write poetry. A mathematician with a tumor in the right parieto-occipital region lost the ability to solve original problems with complete preservation of logical thinking. In recent years, differences in the distribution of neurons and interneuronal connections between the left and right temporal lobes have also been noted, which is consistent with the described functional differences.

Signs of a creative personality: how to develop innate talents

Creative people differ from others in their worldview and approach to everyday affairs. They can be distinguished by the following characteristics:

developed imagination;
thirst for activity;
constant emergence of new ideas.

To develop innate abilities, you need to overcome internal doubts. As a child, every child engages in art for his own pleasure. He does not think about the result, enjoying the positive experiences that arise during the activity. Growing up, an individual faces criticism of the results of creativity. If he has low self-esteem, he withdraws into himself and stops trying to create.

You can get rid of external pressure by refusing to evaluate your activities through the eyes of other people. Exercises to develop creativity will help awaken creative energy: anti-stress coloring books, modeling, finger painting.

Creativity as a mental process

Attitudes towards creativity have changed dramatically in different eras. In Ancient Rome, only the material and the work of the bookbinder were valued in a book, and the author had no rights—neither plagiarism nor forgeries were prosecuted. In the Middle Ages and much later, the creator was equated with a craftsman, and if he dared to show creative independence, then it was not encouraged in any way. The creator had to earn a living in a different way: Moliere was a court upholsterer, and the great Lomonosov was valued for his utilitarian products - court odes and the creation of festive fireworks.

And only in the 19th century. artists, writers, scientists and other representatives of creative professions were given the opportunity to live from the sale of their creative product. As A. S. Pushkin wrote, “inspiration is not for sale, but you can sell a manuscript.” At the same time, the manuscript was valued only as a matrix for replication, for the production of a mass product.

Society, however, has always divided two spheres of human activity: otium

and
oficium
(
negotium
), respectively, leisure activity and socially regulated activity.
Moreover, the social significance of these areas has changed over time. In Ancient Athens, bios theoretikos
- theoretical life - was considered more “prestigious” and acceptable for a free citizen than
bios praktikos
- practical life.

In ancient Rome vita activa

- active life (
negotium
) - was considered the duty and main occupation of every citizen and head of the family, while
vita contemplativa
- contemplative life - and leisure in general were little valued against the background of civil service. Perhaps that is why all the brilliant ideas of antiquity were born in Ancient Greece, and the Romans embodied them in articles of Roman law, engineering structures and brilliantly shaped manuscripts popularizing the works of the great Greeks (for example, Lucretius).

During the Renaissance, at least in the minds of the ideologists of humanism, the primacy of leisure dominated practical activity, which was supposed to serve only as a source of means for personal development in the time free from performing social and practical tasks. Modern times put the Cause in first place (in particular, through the mouth of Goethe’s Faust), and otium

narrowed it down to a bourgeois hobby.

The main thing in creativity is not external activity, but internal activity - the act of creating an “ideal”, an image of the world, where the problem of alienation of man and environment is resolved. External activity is only an explication of the products of an internal act. The peculiarities of the creative process as a mental (spiritual) act will be the subject of further presentation and analysis.

One can cite characteristic statements by A. de Vigny (“I don’t make my book, but it is made on its own. It ripens and grows in my head like a great fruit”), V. Hugo (“God dictated, and I wrote”), Augustine ( “I do not think for myself, but my thoughts think for me”), Michelangelo (“If my heavy hammer gives solid rocks one look or another, then it is not the hand that holds it, guides and guides it that moves it: it acts under the pressure of an outside force"), etc.

A number of other features of creativity are also associated with the leading role of the unconscious, its dominance over consciousness in the process of the creative act, in particular the effect of “powerlessness of will” during inspiration. At the moment of creativity, a person is not able to control the flow of images, to arbitrarily reproduce images and experiences. The artist is powerless to fill the gaps of creative imagination. Images arise and disappear spontaneously, they fight with the artist’s primary intention (the rationally created plan of the work), more vivid and dynamic images crowd out less vivid ones from consciousness. Consciousness becomes a passive "screen" onto which the human unconscious displays itself.

The creator always experiences confusion when trying to explain the reason, the source of his fantasies. S. O. Gruzenberg (1923) identifies several options for explaining creative obsession by artists.

The most common are “divine” and “demonic” versions of attribution of the cause of creativity. Moreover, artists and writers accepted these versions depending on their worldview. If Byron believed that a “demon” possessed a person, then Michelangelo believed that God was guiding his hand: “A good picture approaches God and merges with him.”

The consequence of this is the tendency, observed among many authors, to renounce authorship. Since it was not I who wrote, but God, the devil, the spirit, the “inner voice,” the creator recognizes himself as an instrument of an outside force.

It is noteworthy that the version of the non-personal source of the creative act passes through spaces, eras and cultures. And in our time it is being revived in the thoughts of the great Joseph Brodsky: “The poet, I repeat, is the means of existence of language. The person writing the poem, however, does not write it because he expects posthumous fame, although he often hopes that the poem will outlive him, even if only for a short time. A person writing a poem writes it because his tongue tells him or simply dictates the next line.

When starting a poem, the poet, as a rule, does not know how it will end, and sometimes he is very surprised by what happens, because it often turns out better than he expected, often the thought goes further than he expected. This is the moment when the future of language interferes with the present... The writer of a poem writes it, first of all, because versification is a colossal accelerator of consciousness, thinking, and worldview. Having experienced this acceleration once, a person is no longer able to refuse to repeat this experience; he becomes dependent on this process, just as he becomes dependent on drugs and alcohol. A person who is in such a dependence on language, I believe, is called a poet” (Brodsky I., 1991, pp. 17-18).

In this state, there is no sense of personal initiative and no sense of personal merit in creating a creative product; it is as if an alien spirit is invading the person, or thoughts, images, and feelings are being instilled into him from the outside. This experience leads to an unexpected effect: the creator begins to treat his creations with indifference or, moreover, with disgust. A so-called post-creative saturation occurs. The author is alienated from his work. When performing purposeful activities, including labor, there is an opposite effect, namely, the “effect of invested activity.” The more effort a person spends on achieving a goal, producing a product, the greater the emotional significance this product acquires for him.

Since the activity of the unconscious in the creative process is associated with a special state of consciousness, the creative act is sometimes performed in a dream, in a state of intoxication and under anesthesia. In order to reproduce this state by external means, many resorted to artificial stimulation. When R. Rolland wrote Cola Breugnon, he drank wine; Schiller kept his feet in cold water; Byron took laudanum; Rousseau stood in the sun with his head uncovered; Milton and Pushkin loved to write while lying on a sofa or couch. Balzac, Bach, Schiller were coffee lovers; drug addicts - Edgar Allan Poe, John Lennon and Jim Morrison.

Spontaneity, suddenness, independence of the creative act from external causes is its second main feature. The need for creativity arises even when it is undesirable. At the same time, the author’s activity eliminates any possibility of logical thought and the ability to perceive the environment. Many authors mistake their images for reality. The creative act is accompanied by excitement and nervous tension. All that remains for the mind is processing, giving a finished, socially acceptable form to the products of creativity, discarding the superfluous and detailing.

So, the spontaneity of the creative act, the passivity of the will and the altered state of consciousness at the moment of inspiration, the activity of the unconscious, speak of a special relationship between consciousness and the unconscious. Consciousness (the conscious subject) is passive and only perceives the creative product. The unconscious (unconscious creative subject) actively generates a creative product and presents it to consciousness.

The basis for success in solving creative problems is the ability to act “in the mind,” determined by a high level of development of the internal plan of action. This ability is perhaps the structural equivalent of the concept of “general ability” or “general intelligence.”

Two personal qualities are associated with creativity, namely, the intensity of search motivation and sensitivity to side formations that arise during the thought process.

As a “mental unit” for measuring the creativity of a mental act, a “quantum” of creativity, Ponomarev proposes to consider the difference in levels that dominate when setting and solving a problem (the problem is always solved at a higher level of the structure of the psychological mechanism, in relation to the level at which the means of solving it are acquired ).

In general, in psychology there are at least three main approaches to the problem of creative abilities. They can be formulated as follows:

Standing apart is the concept of D. B. Bogoyavlenskaya (1971, 1983), which introduces the concept of “creative activity of the individual,” believing that this activity is a certain mental structure inherent in the creative type of personality. Creativity, from Bogoyavlenskaya’s point of view, is a situationally unstimulated activity, manifested in the desire to go beyond a given problem. A creative personality type is inherent in all innovators, regardless of their type of activity: test pilots, artists, musicians, inventors.

2. A high level of intelligence development implies a high level of creative abilities and vice versa. There is no creative process as a specific form of mental activity. This point of view was and is shared by almost all experts in the field of intelligence (D. Wexler, R. Weisberg, G. Eysenck, L. Theremin, R. Sternberg, etc.).

In what situations does creativity negatively affect a person?

When bringing ideas to life, a creator may encounter problems caused by the desire to do everything perfectly. The imagination creates a picture that he wants to realize, but the level of skill development or technical data does not allow this to be done. The result is unsatisfactory. If this happens constantly, a person becomes disappointed in his abilities and may completely abandon art.

The psychological impact of the torment of creation can greatly harm the individual, cause depression, and the development of destructive habits: alcoholism, drug addiction, and other types of addiction. But overcoming the crisis also has an equally strong impact. Coming out of a depressed state, he experiences an inner uplift, his view of the world changes. The highest form of unity between art and the creator—catharsis—can completely change an individual’s life and his views.

The problem of creative crisis: how to overcome fear and laziness

A creative crisis occurs when an individual loses interest in creating. He may come up with new ideas, but constantly postpone implementation. The fear of failure is paralyzing, so a person decides that it is better to do nothing than to make a weak, uninteresting product. You can get out of this state by reconsidering your attitude towards art.

The main goal of the process of implementing an idea is to have fun.

Practicing art is influenced by the general mood: if an individual is depressed or going through a difficult life situation, it is difficult for him to tune in to productive activity. Internal negativity should be channeled into a creative direction, getting rid of the influence of external and internal problems. Distraction from the world and focus on the process helps to overcome the stupor that arises as a reaction to external pressure.

Psychological methods in creativity and creative process

Control questions. This method lies in the fact that a person has the ability to reformulate emerging problems into questions, thereby activating the thinking process.

Brain attack. This method consists of two elements - brainstorming and brainstorming. The first is characterized by rethinking both one’s own ideas and those expressed by other people. Introducing amendments and suggestions is purely constructive. At the same time, it is imperative to take into account the opinions of critics and experts in this field. It requires assessment, analysis, criticism, assumptions of possible failures, positive aspects. The second will take place through communication between several people generating ideas. Everyone puts forward proposals in a limited time interval, using their subconscious abilities. Criticism, analysis and evaluation are unacceptable.

Have questions about this topic? Ask a question to the teacher and get an answer in 15 minutes! Ask a Question

Focal objects. In this case, we are talking about the ability to transfer properties belonging to randomly selected objects to an object that is subject to the process of improvement.

Morphology analysis. All options for realizing the goal that are in thoughts are subject to systematization, and their various unusual and unexpected combinations are also considered. First, you need to formulate the problem itself, approve a list of tasks, fix in your mind all the features of the object under study, then identify all possible solutions and choose the most suitable one.

Focus on properties. It is used in cases where a certain plan already exists. It is aimed at identifying certain properties, traits, features of a concept, object or person. Further, these properties are subject to change using different methods until all possible alternatives are identified and selected.

Hunting for thoughts. This is a very unusual method, since it involves stopping the creative process. Its essence is to stop your search for a while, when your strength is running out, to be distracted. It is assumed that at the moment the consciousness is distracted by other things, the subconscious continues to carry out its creative work. The negative factor is that this method can only be used if there is a large supply of time. Cases associated with a certain period require prompt activation of memory processes.

Creative thoughts. Such thoughts come to a person through a comparison of judgments, concepts, images that have not been compared with each other before. As a result of this approach, a new vision of a particular phenomenon, problem or object is formed. This ability is especially valued in the advertising field, so it is appropriate to involve advertising agency employees in undergoing training that increases their creative capabilities.

Destructive techniques. This method consists of finding vulnerable and weak elements in mental activity. In this case, tactics of doubt, misunderstanding, denial, and criticism are used. The techniques under consideration are aimed at identifying basic arguments and reasoning with the proper degree of persuasiveness and provoking a further search for new opportunities and ideas. And all this is based on the interpretation of the results over many times.

The purpose of creativity: the benefits of art for the individual and society

Art classes are useful for people, regardless of age and field of work. Creative execution of routine daily work helps to avoid a crisis. A person is constantly developing, his thinking works faster than that of other people. Art affects health by increasing the body's ability to withstand stress.

In a global sense, art is a way of transforming the world, changing the destinies of peoples and countries. With the help of books, paintings, films, millions of people change their opinions about important phenomena. In many ways, significant changes in society occur under the influence of artists. Thus, the speech of M. L. King became the reason for the overthrow of racism in America, the books of V. Lenin created the basis for the revolution in Russia, the ideas of Isaac Newton and Leonardo da Vinci changed the world of science and art.

CREATION
Personal aspect of creativity	The procedural aspect of creativity
1.	Creative skills	Insight
2.	Motives of creativity	Inspiration
3.	ZUN system	Stimulation of creativity - “brain attack”
4.	Imagination	Formation of the plan
5.	Intuition
6.	Mental activity
7.	Need for self-actualization
8.	Creative capabilities (creativity)