CC BY
9study, and, secondly, it is possible to detect the unity in the diversity of these historical objects, their qualitative homogeneity, which makes them quantitatively measurable and comparable with each other.
I. D. Kovalchenko concludes that it is necessary to apply quantitative and mathematical methods in historical science for its development and fruitful research in the following areas. First, the use of these methods is necessary to identify the quantitative measure and the boundaries of the characteristics of the studied objects during their classification and classification of their constituent elements, for example, certain layers, groups. Secondly, the formalization of the results of historical knowledge is an integral part of the process of development of existing historical theories and the creation of new ones. The wide application of quantitative and mathematical methods should contribute to the justification and identification of natural, internally determined nature of historical development in general, provided the unity in this development of objective and subjective components. The dynamics of the historical development of the object, provided sufficient information can be expressed mathematically defined functional relationship. Third, the use of quantitative and mathematical methods is mandatory in the construction of multidimensional typological classifications, without which modern historical science is unthinkable. Fourthly, as already noted, the use of these methods is necessary both to build models of historical development in general, and individual processes or phenomena. Finally, quantitative and mathematical methods are effective in solving epistemological, research problems of historical science, such as the verification of the truth of the information of individual and mass sources, as well as in the processing of this information, which are both quantitative and descriptive; when forming a representative system of facts, when the apparatus of mathematical statistics are used to determine a representative sample, etc.
Литература и источники
1. Ивлева М.И., Левченко К.Г. Концепция lifelonglearning в контексте экологии образования // Право и практика. 2017. № 4. С. 210-218.
2. Ивлева М.И., Левченко К.Г. Информационное пространство фундаментальных и прикладных наук в высшей школе// Инициативы XXI века. 2012. № 4. С. 102-104.
3. Ивлева М.И., Левченко К.Г. Полиаспектность современного образовательного процесса // Современные направления развития гуманитарных, юридических и экономических наук Сборник трудов международной научно-практической конференции. М., 2013. С. 16-20.
4. Ковальченко И. Д. Методы исторического исследования. М.: Наука, 1987.
References and Source
1. Ivleva M.I., Levchenko K.G. Koncepciya lifelonglearning v kontekste ehkologii obrazovaniya // Pravo i praktika. 2017. № 4. S. 210-218.
2. Ivleva M.I., Levchenko K.G. Informacionnoe prostranstvo fundamental'nyh i prikladnyh nauk v vysshej shkole// Iniciativy XXI veka. 2012. № 4.
5. 102-104.
3. Ivleva M.I., Levchenko K.G. Poliaspektnost' sovremennogo obrazovatel'nogo processa // Sovremennye napravleniya razvitiya gumanitarnyh, yuridicheskih i ehkonomicheskih nauk Sbornik trudov mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii. M., 2013. S. 16-20.
4. Koval'chenko I. D. Metody istoricheskogo issledovaniya. M.: Nauka, 1987.
ИВЛЕВА МАРИНА ИВАНОВНА - кандидат философских наук, доцент Российского экономического университета имени Г.В. Плеханова ([email protected])
ЛЕВЧЕНКО КИРИЛЛ ГЕННАДЬЕВИЧ - кандидат философских наук, доцент Финансового университета при Правительстве Российской Федерации ([email protected])
IVLEVA, MARINA I. - Ph.D. in Philosophy, Associate Professor, Department of history and philosophy, Plekhanov Russian University.
LEVCHENKO, KIRILL G. - Ph.D. in Philosophy, Associate Professor,
УДК 009
БУЗСКАЯ О.М.
ЭВРИСТИЧЕСКИЙ СМЫСЛ СОЦИАЛЬНОГО ПРОЕКТИРОВАНИЯ В ФОРМИРОВАНИИ КОНТИНУУМА БУДУЩЕГО
Ключевые слова: будущее, общество, глобализация, культура, континуум. социокультурное проектирование.
В статье раскрыт конструктивно-творческий потенциал проектной деятельности в условиях роста рискогенных тенденций общества в эпоху глобализации. Показана его роль в формировании нового континуума общества, по-новому связывающего будущее с настоящим. Потребность в преодолении стихийно формирующихсся тенденций формирования будущего изменяет роль субъекта социокультурного проектирования. На материале наследия М.Вебера акцентирована мысль о важности типа рационализации жизни общества и ценности избираемой модели, подобно тому, как в Европе протестантская мораль стала средством, рационализирующим процесс производства, поскольку представляла его целью самого для себя. Обосновывается идея о внутренней связи между целями и средствами в концепции рациональности М.Вебера как одно из направлений взаимодействия связи настоящего и будущего. В статье раскрываются функции пространства и времени как константы социального бытия и одновременно обосновываются их функции в детерминации проектируемых изменений, идеалов и ценностей.
BUZSKAYA, O.M.
THE HEURISTIC MEANING OF SOCIAL DESIGN IN THE FORMATION OF THE CONTINUUM OF THE FUTURE Keywords: future, society, globalization, culture, continuum. socio-cultural projection.
The article reveals the constructive and creative potential of a project activity in the conditions of growth of risky tendencies of society in the era of globalization. Its role in the formation of a new continuum of society, linking the future with the present in a new way, is shown. The need to overcome spontaneously formative trends in the formation of the future changes the role of the subject of socio-cultural design. On the material of M. Weber's heritage, the idea of the importance of the type of rationalization of society and the value of the elected model is emphasized, just as in Europe Protestant morality has become a means of rationalizing the production process, since it was its goal for itself. The author substantiates the idea of internal connection between goals and means in the concept of rationality of M. Weber as one of the directions of interaction between the present and the future. The article reveals the functions of space and time as constants of social existence and at the same time describes their functions in determining the projected changes, ideals and values.
The increase in the level of risk and uncertainty in modern society is the result of its significant complexity and the growth of dynamism. In the context of nonlinear probabilistic changes associated with polycentricity of the modern world, virtual accumulation and sudden detection of innovation centers and areas of influence, the actual problem area that requires its conceptual regulation is the ratio of the possible and the actual, expressed in changing the status and role of the future, its meaning and functions in relation to the present. "The uncertainty caused by globalization is inevitable," Prigozhin noted. But what we should not forget is the fluctuations that determine the branch that will develop after the bifurcation point. It is a call to individual action, which today is far more than ever, not necessarily doomed to remain insignificant and to sink into oblivion." [1, p. 57]
The future can no longer be spontaneously formed, since ignorance of its content and poor understanding of the trends emerging today largely makes the present largely spontaneous and irrational process, significantly increasing the "cost" and the price of errors and miscalculations arising on this basis, as well as the corresponding adjustments. Moreover, the effectiveness of the measures taken is insignificant, since the scope of their application is local, often unrelated to the more General processes, which in such a partial development of the sphere of the present contemporaries do not catch.
Since in modern ecophilosophy its main worldview principle is organic integrity as a General "image" of reality, revealing the life-saving evolutionary orientation of the future, there is a need for socio-environmental analysis of the features of the interaction of the present and the future (taking into account the trends of the past). Moreover, these relations of time modes should be understood as in their interaction, i.e. as a certain continuum in which there are potential and already identified components, trends and relations. [2] Continuum means that the content of the future, which arises here and affects the present, acquires its boundary and certainty only in connection with this present, which also enters into the existence of the future, building the process of its formation, and from the future there is some virtual form that regulates the preservation of the continuum connection of the present and the future.
[3].
This particular continuum, in which the existing space is relegated to the background, can be called an ontological model of rationality, which develops the classical understanding of rationality as a process of optimizing the interaction between means and goals: here all the intermediate links are washed away. For the first time clearly revealed by M. Weber in his classic work "the Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism" [4] Commenting on his work, A. I. Neusikhin said: "the Work is well performed its first function is to serve as a fence from earthly desires; she squeezed in the grip of ascetic debt personal consumption ... even more important was its second function, for work as an end in itself unleashed hands boundless production sake of production. Everything that contributed to personal consumption was recognized as a sinful deification of the man-made; everything that developed and pushed forward production was awarded a religious award-consciousness of election, was declared a God-pleasing deed and a sacred duty of the believer" [5, p. 619]. Protestant morality, therefore, was a means of rationalizing the production process, since it was its goal for itself.
This process of rationalization, one way or another, regulates and directs the social interaction of people, creating and maintaining social order. It is important to emphasize that the process of rationalization also links the present and the future as means and purposes: it reveals the features of the impact of the future on the present, as the special "selection" on the basis of which these goals themselves are formed as the future. This is well revealed in the concept of J. Habermas '
communicative action. Yu. Habermas writes that " in the communicative action the actors are going to internally agree on plans of their actions and pursue certain goals only if they agree on the situation and the expected consequences, which either already exists between them, or it has yet to be agreed. In both cases, the teleological structure of the action is assumed, since the actors are prescribed the ability to act purposefully and the interest in the implementation of their plans." [6. C. 200]. Thus, a joint and coordinated attitude to some common goals determines the stability of these public relations and the social order that has developed here.
However, the details that people themselves produce and change social relations, necessarily indicates the appropriate production of the image of the future, which necessarily exists in any historical era as the goal of society, the expression of its values and ideals, the desired norms. [7]. It can be argued that there is already the above-mentioned continuum in which the production and interaction of the future with the present. However, first, it turns out to be some General condition, which is not specifically allocated, and, secondly, is not considered as a special resource that needs to be investigated and mastered theoretically and practically. And such research, apparently, can be carried out as development or specification of the principle of rationality in its application to social and cultural processes.
At once we will make a reservation that this direction-one of many in which modern development of this principle is possible: economy, policy, management, jurisprudence, the theory of the organization and other spheres of public life quite reasonably open the laws on the basis of this approach.
As already noted, today an important problem is the rationalization of interaction between the socio-cultural present and its change in the future. The continuous form of such interaction - in its rational bases - ensures its integrity and continuity, which greatly facilitates the possibility of its modeling. Here, the peculiarities of the application of the principle of rationality to the formation of the future are revealed, which greatly clarifies the interaction between the future and the present.
In modern social theory and practice, a significant place is occupied by the problem of design and forecasting, the dough associated with program social management, reform, the disclosure of the mechanism of implementation in the public consciousness of various innovations, changing attitudes and values of people as one of the conditions for the development of social actors of the dynamics of society.
It can be argued that an effective tool for shaping the future in modern society is socio-cultural design, which is the management of the diversity and trends of social and cultural changes. A typical understanding of social design that prevails in the literature is the transition from the present to the future - the construction by social actors of any actions, implementations or technologies that more accurately determine a certain state (matrix) of the present when it is transferred to the future. And although some features of this future are as if predetermined, because they are revealed in the present and are displayed - albeit in a modified form - in the future, but this future can not justify its truth, since the principle of rationality is not used here, which sets some limit to the relationship between the present and the future, taking into account the time dynamics, nature and pace (in our case) of socio-cultural transformations. The principle of rationality as much as possible "clears" this connection, eliminates all unnecessary links. But there is a need for a clearer consideration of the content of the future: only a certain future can interact with the present without going beyond their common continuum.
A.P. Birzhenyuk and G.M. Markov note that socio - cultural design is "a specific technology, which is a constructive, creative activity, the essence of which is to analyze the problems and identify the causes of their occurrence, the development of goals and objectives that characterize the desired state of the object (or scope of project activities), the development of ways and means to achieve the goals." [8, p. 6]. Thus, here the future is "derived"from the present, representing a subjective image -("desired state of the object"), which does not guarantee its own stability and existence.
But what on the basis of the principle of rationality contributes to the acquisition of socio-cultural project status of objectivity? If we highlight some objective trends or characteristics of the socio-cultural sphere in the present, the problem is how to "translate" them into the future, taking into account the real changes in the social system and the regulatory status of the future as a goal [9]. Here, it seems, the future and the present can be connected as space and time: the present has the status of space
(as a set of all the original data, which is taken into account in the project), and the future has the status and function of time as a way of determining and partially denying the passage of this space.
The sociocultural present, of course, exists in time. But this time, unlike most variants of modern socio-cultural project activities, in which the emphasis is on the present, is not the main in determining the future. The problem is that without relation to the goal (which is not yet), the data of the present can not have a normative character, and therefore - to Express the normativity of the future. Moreover, these data are now constantly translates into the past, i.e. removes them. The spatial existence of the socio-cultural sphere more clearly identifies those stable forms and invariants that Express the starting point of the socio-cultural project. The translation of this stability of the spatial content of the present into the status of the future is one of the specific "technologies" of the socio - cultural project.
However, it is more difficult. First of all, the space of the present socio-cultural sphere should find its spatial form of expression in the mode of the future. But here it changes its own status: from the leading side of the continuum it turns into an auxiliary, which is now determined by the time of the future in the function of the goal. On this basis, the spatial content acquires its normativity-but not as something actual, given in the present, but as a certain ideal, value, etc.
Socio-cultural space is transformed into the content of time on the basis of the integrity and continuity of the socio-cultural continuum. This is based on its own restructuring - the complexity of its content due to the entry into it of virtual or unused (not perceived) possibilities of the present, the change in the set of determinants and leading values, changes in the interaction of the spatial center and the periphery, etc.the Function of time here is to influence the change in the content of space, revealing here the leading relations and trends.
Thus, the rationality of the socio-cultural project is the maximum preservation of its objectivity on the basis of appeal not primarily to the subjective desires and interests of developers and customers, but to the objective mechanism of communication between the present and the future, an essential form of which is the continuum of space-time socio-cultural sphere. It is this objectivity, for its part, that acts as a means of adjusting various kinds of forecasts, models, technologies and programs in the problem field of which social and cultural design is carried out.
Modern information society, despite all the statements of its theorists about information determinism, the formation on this basis of space and time (M. Castells), the creation of a network organization of society, etc., retains the fundamental social laws that Express the interaction of the structure and dynamics of the social system - its space and time. [10]. These forms of society and culture, which have a complex subjective and objective content, [11] are the conductors of the fundamental laws of society. The principle of rationality, which today retains its important methodological importance in the system of natural Sciences, therefore, works in the problems of social and humanitarian knowledge, the role of which is significantly increasing in the modern world.
Литература и источники
1. Пригожин И. Дано ли нам будущее? Синергетика. Антология / Науч. редактор Е.Н. Князева. М.-СПб.: Центр гуманитарных инициатив, 2013. С.49-58.
2. Баркова Э.В. Трансформации коммуникативных технологий в экофилософской перспективе глобализации // Вестник Орловского государственного университета. Серия: Новые гуманитарные исследования. 2014. № 3 (38). С. 132-136.
3. Баркова Э.В. Будущее культуры: от информационно-технологических к эколого-ноосферным приоритетам // Вестник Московского государственного университета леса - Лесной вестник. 2013. № 5. С. 4-9.
4. Вебер М. Протестантская этика и дух капитализма. М.: Ист-Вью, 2002. 352 с.
5. Неусыхин А.И. «Эмпирическая социология» Макса Вебера и логика исторической науки // Вебер. М. Избранное. Образ общества. М.: Юрист, 1994. 704 с.
6. Хабермас Ю. Моральное сознание и коммуникативное действие. СПб.: Наука, 2000. 380 с.
7. Баркова Э.В. Философия межкультурных коммуникаций в перспективе идеалов Возрождения-XXI // Человеческий капитал. 2014. № 10 (70). С. 30-34.
8. Марков А.П., Бирженюк Г.М. Основы социокультурного проектирования. Учебное пособие. СПб.: Издательство Санкт-Петербургского гуманитарного университета профсоюзов, 1997. 260 с.
9. См. напр.: Муллакаев М.С. Современные методы увеличения нефтедобычи: проблемы и практика применения // Современная научная мысль. 2015. №5. С.98-111.
10. Кастельс М. Информационная эпоха: экономика, общество и культура. М.: ГУ ВШЭ, 2000. 608 с.
11. Бузский М.П. Интерсубъективность как свойство культурно-символической формы // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 7: Философия. Социология и социальные технологии. 2015. № 1 (27). С. 6-14.
References and Source
1. Prigozhin I. Dano li nam budushchee? Sinergetika. Antologiya / Nauch. redaktor E.N. Knyazeva. M.-SPb.: Centr gumanitarnyh iniciativ, 2013. S.49-58.
2. Barkova EH.V. Transformacii kommunikativnyh tekhnologij v ehkofilosofskoj perspektive globalizacii // Vestnik Orlovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Novye gumanitarnye issledovaniya. 2014. № 3 (38). S. 132-136.
3. Barkova EH.V. Budushchee kul'tury: ot informacionno-tekhnologicheskih k ehkologo-noosfernym prioritetam // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta lesa - Lesnoj vestnik. 2013. №2 5. S. 4-9.
4. Veber M. Protestantskaya ehtika i duh kapitalizma. M.: Ist-V'yu, 2002. 352 s.
5. Neusyhin A.I. «EHmpiricheskaya sociologiya» Maksa Vebera i logika istoricheskoj nauki // Veber. M. Izbrannoe. Obraz obshchestva. M.: YUrist, 1994. 704 s.
6. Habermas YU. Moral'noe soznanie i kommunikativnoe dejstvie. SPb.: Nauka, 2000. 380 s.
7. Barkova EH.V. Filosofiya mezhkul'turnyh kommunikacij v perspektive idealov Vozrozhdeniya-XXI // CHelovecheskij kapital. 2014. №2 10 (70). S. 30-34.
8. Markov A.P., Birzhenyuk G.M. Osnovy sociokul'turnogo proektirovaniya. Uchebnoe posobie. SPb.: Izdatel'stvo Sankt-Peterburgskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta profsoyuzov, 1997. 260 s.
9. Sm. napr.: Mullakaev M.S. Sovremennye metody uvelicheniya neftedobychi: problemy i praktika primeneniya // Sovremennaya nauchnaya mysl'. 2015. №>5. S.98-111.
10. Kastel's M. Informacionnaya ehpoha: ehkonomika,obshchestvo i kul'tura. M.: GU VSHEH, 2000. 608 s.
11. Buzskij M.P. Intersub"ektivnost' kak svojstvo kul'turno-simvolicheskoj formy // Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 7: Filosofiya. Sociologiya i social'nye tekhnologii. 2015. №2 1 (27). S. 6-14.
БУЗСКАЯ ОЛЬГА МАРАТОВНА - кандидат философских наук, старший преподаватель, кафедра истории и философии Российского экономического университета имени Г.В. Плеханова
BUZSKAYA, OLGA M. - Ph.D. in Philosophy, Senior Teacher, Department of history and philosophy, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics ([email protected])
УДК 159.924
РАУ, ИОГАНН КРЕАТИВНОСТЬ - ОДАРЕННОСТЬ, ТАЛАНТ, ГЕНИЙ
Ключевые слова: болезнь, вкус, художественный гений, известное, интеллект, искусство, карикатура, креативность, мышление аналитическое и дивергентное, наука, новое, одаренность, одиночество, оригинальность, парадоксы, правда художественная, природа, прогресс, произведение, разум, свобода, созерцание, талант, творчество, типическое, ум.
В статье исследуется феномен креативности. Показано, что, в отличие от чисто аналитического мышления креативная личность прозревает внезапно для самой себя новые способы разрешения неразрешимой, казалось бы, проблемы. Аналитическое мышление в этом случае не исчезает полностью, но моментами замещается, дополняется дивергентным. При этом креативные функции в искусстве выполняет установка, точка зрения, позиция художника. Способствуют креативному мышлению откровенный диалог, дискуссия участников с противоположными взглядами, юмор, остроумие, фантазия и чувство непреодолимого одиночества.
RAU, IOGANNES CREATIVITY - CHARITY, TALENT, GENIUS
Keywords: illness, taste, artistic genius, known, intelligence, art, caricature, creativity, analytical and divergent thinking, science, new, giftedness, loneliness, originality, paradoxes, truth artistic, nature, progress, work, reason, freedom, contemplation, talent, creativity, typical, mind.
The article explores the phenomenon of creativity. It is shown that, unlike purely analytical thinking, the creative person suddenly sees for himself new ways of solving an unsolvable, seemingly problem. Analytical thinking in this case does not completely disappear, but it is replaced by moments, supplemented by divergent thinking. In this case, the creative function in art is performed by the installation, the point of view, the position of the artist. They promote creative thinking frank dialogue, discussion of participants with opposing views, humor, wit, fantasy and a sense of insuperable loneliness.
Судя по философским словарям, в ФРГ креативность считается философским понятием далеко не всеми специалистами. Это же касается и других схожих понятий, таких как гений, одаренность, талант, которые в одних из таких словарей есть, а в других отсутствуют [1]. Многие философы полагают, что это - понятия психологической науки. Но и в справочных источниках этой науки сведения о высокой одаренности, например о гении, сводится, к утверждению, что это одаренность главным образом в области интеллекта (что сомнительно) и сведению его к данным IQ- измерений, согласно которым гений характеризуется от 135 до 140. В процентном сотношении гении составляют от 0,5 до 1% населения (что тоже сомнительно: слишком много, по этому критерию, «гениев» среди нас бродит, т.е. каждый сотый человек). Иное дело «талантливость». Талантов в определенных и достаточно ограниченных сферах деятельности, в «специальностях» - таких талантов не счесть [2].
Слово «креативность» происходит из теологического словаря, от «creatio», творение или создание Бога, «Deus creator». Особенность творчество Бога - творение из ничего („creatio ex nihilo"), а не просто изменение уже существующего. С этим «из ничего» можно было бы согласиться, если считать, что воля Бога - это ничто! Но вряд ли теологи с этим согласятся. И слово «гений» происходит из латинского «ingenum», которое обозначает способность как к
