Modern approaches to human understanding. Biological, psychological and sociological schools in the doctrines of man. Approaches to understanding personality in psychology

The difference in approaches to understanding personality is due to the complexity and ambiguity of the very phenomenon of "personality". There are many theories of personality. Each of the theories sees and constructs personality in its own way, focusing on some of its aspects and leaving out others (or giving them a secondary role).

According to the authors of the monograph "Theories of Personality" Hjell and Ziegler, "no single outstanding theory can be fully and correctly understood" in relation to the definition of human nature, "differences between theories reflect more fundamental differences between their creators."

Hjell and Ziegler, having analyzed the most famous psychological theories of personality, cite 9 bipolar scales that express the main provisions about the nature of a person of various schools and directions:

1. Freedom - Determinism (responsibility).
2. Rationality - Irrationality.
3. Holism (integrity) - Elementalism.
4. Constitutionalism (biological) - Environmentalism (social).
5. Variability (evolutionism) - Immutability.
6. Subjectivity - Objectivity.
7. Proactivity (internal factors of development) - Reactivity (behavior - reaction to external stimuli).
8. Knowability - Unknowability.
9. Homeostasis (preservation of internal balance) - Heterostasis (personal growth and self-development).

The above scales represent the extreme poles that representatives of various psychological theories of personality adhere to. At the same time, these poles, as a rule, are opposed to each other, when some scientists rely on one of them, while others defend the predominant value of the opposite. But another interpretation of these scales is possible within the framework of the principle of stable disequilibrium.

The genesis of human development itself is due to the interaction of opposite principles. Such interaction gives rise to the complexity and inconsistency of the mental life of a person and his behavior. And this interaction is generated by a state of dynamic imbalance, in which there are two opposite principles, which determines the movement along the path of human mental development and its integrity. We can say that the state of dynamic disequilibrium is the potential for human development.

It is possible to designate possible metapositions in the interpretation of personality:

Personality as a profile of psychological traits (Kettel's factorial trait theory, Allport's dispositional personality theory, Eysenck's personality factor theory)
Personality as a person's experience (Freud's psychoanalytic theory of personality, behaviorism, partly (if we mean inner experience, personal experiences) humanistic psychology, studies of personality in the context of a life path)
Personality as temperament and age (personality theories of Eysenck and Erickson).
· personality as an internalized ensemble of social relations (~ all theories of Soviet psychology: Vygotsky, Leontiev, Rubinstein, Platonov).
3. The concept of "individual" and its characteristics
4. The essence and content of the concept of "individuality"
5. The problem of the relationship between the concepts of "personality", "individual", "individuality"

All psychological knowledge in one way or another relates to personal issues, contributes to the understanding of personality. The complexity of this phenomenon is explained by the fact that not only is there no unified theory of personality, but, as a result, there is also no single, generally accepted definition of personality.

The very word "personality", like many other psychological concepts, is widely used in everyday communication. When they want to characterize a subject, they often speak of him either as a person, or as an individual, or as an individuality. But these concepts are different, although they contain much in common.

3. An individual is a specific person, a single representative of a biological genus, an individual. Those. the concept of "individual" embraces the biological element. The natural properties of a person are divided into: age, sex, neurodynamic and constitutional.

The individual is the starting point for the formation of personality. Personality will then be the result of the development of the individual, the most complete embodiment of all human qualities. Natural prerequisites in themselves do not determine personality traits.

The importance of individual properties, but not in themselves, but reflected in the consciousness of the subject, is evidenced by reflections inspired by the rapid development of genetic engineering and its ability to design the human body in accordance with the given parameters. So, if a growing person learns about the design procedure that other people subjected him to in order to change the genetic structure, then the prospect of an artificially created creature may well displace in such a person his perception of himself as a naturally growing bodily being. The reification of human life leads to the transformation of a person into a thing, into an object for manipulation. For effective development, a person must be authentic and aware of this authenticity, have certainty in his bodily existence.

But we must also remember that an individual is not just a bunch of nerves, a system of muscles and blood circulation. Human corporeality obeys the laws of psychological life, the life of the spirit. This idea has proven its worth under extreme conditions.

The human corporality, as well as its psychological essence, has largely undergone "cultivation". Left to itself, the child's organism would remain a purely biological organism - an animal: an infant not rooted in society will never stand up and walk. The child is forced to walk straight in order (and only in order) to free his forelimbs for labor, i.e. for the functions imposed by the conditions of culture, the forms of objects created by man for man, and the need to manipulate these objects in a human way. The same is with the articulation apparatus, and with the organs of vision. From birth, they are not organs of the human personality, they can only become so in the process of their culturally programmed way of use. Culture, lifestyle, the nature of a person's relationship with other people change his physicality, his appearance.

4. Individuality is the uniqueness, uniqueness, originality of a person, realizing itself in the design and choice of one's life path, carried out on the basis of the values inherent in a given socioculture. Individuality is a person in all its originality and its physical and physiological, psychological and social qualities and properties. Individuality is the dissimilarity of a person to others, his isolation from the world of his own kind.

Humans are not the only ones with individuality. Everyone knows how different domestic animals are from each other - dogs, cats: each has not only its own appearance, but also its own "disposition". However, no one ever talks about the personality of even a very smart shepherd dog.

There is no doubt that all newborn babies look alike only at first glance. In fact, each of them is already an individual, but, of course, not yet a person. A person becomes a person, and is not born as one. As the psychologist Asmolov says, “a person is born, a person becomes, and individuality is defended.”

Asmolov's words contain another important difference between individuality and personality: individuality is formed and developed by self-determination and even isolation of a person from society, and personality - through the adoption by the individual of developed social roles, norms and rules of behavior. Personality is a personification of social relations, and individuality is a separation from these relations.

To listen to yourself, who are in a specific life situation, in order to decide, not to miss something important at this point in your life path, not to miss yourself - all this is the formation of individuality. Slobodchikov and Isaev write: “If personality is the definition of a person’s position in relations with others, then individuality is the definition of one’s own position in life, the very certainty within one’s own life. If a person arises in a person’s meeting with other people, then individuality is a meeting with oneself, with oneself as an Other, which now does not coincide with itself or with others in the main content of the former life.

Meeting with oneself allows a person to find his own way of life, irreducible to various patterns and scenarios. The common expression "to be yourself" obviously means to live in accordance with your essence, to live in the only way that suits me. The uniqueness and originality of a person's appearance, his abilities, his experiences, the uniqueness of his style of activity, communication and way of thinking - all this determines the one and only way of life. And the fate of man, which is also unique.

One may ask the question: what is the evolutionary meaning of the individuality of a person? Asmolov offers the answer: "... Behind the manifestations of individuality are the potential possibilities of endless lines of the creative evolutionary process of life." Thanks to individuals, society modernizes and develops.

Individuality implies not only uniqueness, but also a certain level of development of self-consciousness, the embodiment of spiritual and creative forces in the main business of one's life. And therefore, individuality is the authorship of one's own life, when a person can "say himself", as Buyakas put it, in order to reveal himself in all his unique fullness. However, any person, regardless of any achievements or exploits, status or education, whether he wants it or not, is different from others. And individuality, therefore, is his constant companion.

Differences in the formation of individuality and personality only emphasize their interdependence. After all, individuality includes not only the unique features of the functioning of the body, but also the unique properties of the individual. This allows the personality to be defined through individuality. “Personality,” writes Golubeva, “is a holistic individuality in its social content, quality.”

Personality is a systemic social quality acquired by an individual in objective activity and communication and characterizing the level and quality of representation of social relations in an individual.

Those. most often the word "personality" denotes individuality in its social connections and relationships. Personality arises as a result of the cultural and social development of a person, i.e. it captures everything that is supernatural in a person, acquired as a result of an individual life history among other people. Therefore, a person can be understood only when considering an individual in society, and even in a broader context - as "the being of a person in the world."

As noted by the famous philosopher Ilyenkov, “the human personality can rightfully be considered as a single embodiment of culture, i.e. universal in man." The “body” of a person is the inorganic body of culture as a way and form of human existence. Outside the context of social, cultural life, it is impossible to answer the question of what a person is. The sociocultural conditionality of the personality is manifested in the fact that not a single specifically human action occurs in the body itself, because only those functions of the human body that provide a purely biological existence, but not its social and human form, are programmed in the genes.

“The concept of “personality” is ... a social, reflected concept,” Vygotsky noted, “based on the fact that the child uses in relation to himself those methods of adaptation that he uses in relation to others. That is why it can be said that the individual is the social in us. And one more thing: “Personality ... is not innate, but arises as a result of cultural development, therefore “personality” is a historical concept. It covers the unity of behavior, which is distinguished by the sign of mastery.

“Personality existed and exists in quite real space, where all those things are located, about which and through which the body of a person is connected with the body of another person “as if in one body”, as Spinoza once said, in one “ensemble”, as Marx preferred to say, into one cultural and historical formation, as we say today, into a “body” created not by nature, but by the labor of people who transform this nature into their own “inorganic body”.

However, the essence of a specific, individual person includes only that part of the totality of social relations in which a person is included in the real process of his life. Objectively existing in a system of various social relations, a person is included in them in different ways. The uniqueness of a particular individual is precisely manifested in the choice, selection of those areas of social experience, those activities, those relationships that the individual appropriates, makes his own.

Rezvitsky: “If a human individual cannot become a person without assimilating his social essence, then a person cannot acquire his own independent being without becoming an individuality. Personality, therefore, is social in its essence, but individual in its mode of existence. It represents the unity of the social and the individual, essence and existence.

Personality presupposes a certain level of mental development, when a person has formed his own views and attitudes, principles and positions, moral requirements and assessments that make him relatively stable and independent of environmental influences alien to his own convictions, from particular situations and incentives. The personality of a person is the most generalized mental system of his life activity. A person does not receive a personality by inheritance, but becomes it as he develops, in the process of communicating with other people and enriching himself with the experience of previous generations.

A necessary characteristic of a personality is its activity. A person at this level of development is able to consciously influence the surrounding reality, change it for his own purposes, and also change himself for his own purposes, to be the cause of himself, as the ancient philosophers wrote.

A person who is a person has such a level of mental development that makes him able to control his behavior and activities, and to a certain extent, his mental development. This feature should be taken into account in order not to reduce the understanding of the individual only to the totality of the social roles he has learned. Stirlitz perfectly played the role of a German officer, a citizen of Nazi Germany, but his true personality was expressed in a different way.

Another situation is also possible: external stamps, the mask is glued to the face so firmly that he cannot get rid of it. The mask can replace the personality (not the dog wags its tail, but the tail of the dog).

A person is characterized not by the role itself, but by its attitude to this role, independence and responsibility in fulfilling its requirements, as well as by the conscious choice of a certain role from the range of available ones. Those. important is not so much the role as its carrier. In its enrichment of the role and the surrounding world as a whole lies the significance of the individual. Such an understanding of personality allows us to look at a person as a creature that overcomes the barriers of its natural and social limitations. Hence the conviction arises that it is not nature that makes people, but people make themselves, that a person is not what the environment has done to a person, but what a person has done to himself. This idea is splendidly expressed by Hegel's formula: "Circumstances or motives dominate a person only to the extent that he himself allows them to do so."

Another aspect: the personality is included in the process of creation, it is inseparable from creativity. In this sense, says Davydov, a simple worker, by virtue of the fact that he increases the treasury of social wealth, is a person. The most widespread, the most massive is creativity in the sphere of morality, since each individual each time anew and for the first time must make discoveries of a moral order, resolving the conflicts of moral life in a worthy human way.

So, each person has the opportunity to think: I am a person or still not. And clear criteria are offered: have your own convictions, do not refer to the fact that someone somehow influenced you in a wrong way and led you in the wrong direction. Influence and lead yourself, change yourself, trim yourself to the ideal. If, of course, you have it, if you are ... a person. To be a person means to make a choice, to assume the burden of responsibility for a certain social, intellectual movement. The loss of independence in life makes a person completely impersonal; with its weak manifestation, we can speak of a weak or passive personality.

“If personality is the definition of a person’s position in relations with others, then individuality is the definition of one’s own position in life, the very certainty within one’s own life. If a person arises in a person’s meeting with other people, then individuality is a meeting with oneself, with oneself as an Other, which now does not coincide with itself or with others in the main content of the former life.

That. we see that the development of a person's personality can be represented as a process of its entry into a new social environment and integration in it. Personality arises thanks to other people according to the principle "from outside - inside" (interiorization), and then it can exist and develop due to its participation in the life of society and influence on other people according to the principle "from inside - outside" (exteriorization). And if we talk about the development of personal properties, then, according to Ananiev, the main form of their development is "the life path of a person in society, his social biography."

6. Structural and system-structural approaches to the study of personality

The complexity and ambiguity of personality is most conveniently explained through the concept of "system". Therefore, the personality is the most complex formation, which is a system.

We already know well that it is impossible to put an equal sign between the concepts of "personality" and "man", "personality" and "individual". Of course, as Petrovsky and Yaroshevsky write in their work “Fundamentals of Theoretical Psychology”, “the soma of the individual, his endocrine system, the advantages and disadvantages of his physical organization affect the course of his mental processes, the formation of mental characteristics. But it does not follow from this that "a quarter" or a "third" of his personality - as a special substructure - should be given over to biology. The biological, entering the personality of a person, becomes social, passes into the social. For example, brain pathology generates in a person, in the structure of his personality, biologically determined psychological traits, but they become personality traits, specific personality traits or do not become due to social determination. Did this individual, as a person, simply remain mentally handicapped, or did he become revered "holy fool", "blissful", i.e. a kind of historical personality, to whose prophecies people listened in ancient times, depended on the historical environment in which his individual psychological traits were formed and manifested.

That is why in the history of psychology, the orientation towards a structural approach to the problem of personality is replaced by a tendency to apply a systematic approach.

But what is that special psychological systemic quality that is irreducible to the individual, natural qualities of a person? According to Leontiev, “the problem of personality forms a new psychological dimension: other than the dimension in which studies of certain mental processes, individual properties and states of a person are carried out; it is a study of his place, position in the system, which is a system of social connections, communications that open up to him; this is a study of what, for what and how a person uses what is innate to him and acquired by him ... ”Thus, the desired system-forming property is the activity mediation of interpersonal relations.

Being included in the network of social relations, being their active participant and creator, a person develops his subjectivity, self-consciousness.

The concept of "system" is defined as a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, which form a certain integrity, unity.

The following appear as general characteristics of a "system" in a wide variety of systems studies:

1. Integrity - the irreducibility of any system to the sum of its constituent parts and the non-derivation from any part of the system of its properties as a whole;
2. Structurality - the connections and relationships of the elements of the system are ordered into a certain structure, which determines the behavior of the system as a whole;
3. The relationship of the system with the environment, which can be "closed" (not changing the environment and the system) or "open" (transforming the environment and the system) character;
4. Hierarchy - each component of the system can be considered as a system that includes another system, i.e. each component of the system can simultaneously be an element (subsystem) of this system, and itself include another system;
5. Plurality of description - each system, being a complex object, in principle cannot be reduced to just one picture, one display, which implies the coexistence of many different displays for a complete description of the system.

Along with these general characteristics of any system, a number of more specific characteristics stand out, for example, the purposefulness of complex technical, living and social systems, their self-organization, i.e. the ability to change one's own structure, etc.

The inclusion of the individual in different social groups also makes it necessary to orient the goals of these groups that complement or exclude each other, to develop the self-consciousness of the individual as a functional organ that provides such an orientation.

Acting as an “element” of the system, a person is at the same time such a special “element” that, under certain historical circumstances, can contain the system and lead to its change. A paradox arises that refers to one of the paradoxes of systemic thinking: “element in the system” and “system in the element”, “personality in the system of society” and “society in the system of personality”. In the process of personality development, there occurs, as it were, the contraction of the space of social relations into the space of the individual.

Wagner discovers a regularity: the higher a particular community is developed, the greater the variability in the manifestations of individuals included in this community.

Purposeful joint activity acts as a system-forming basis that ensures the familiarization of a person with the world of culture and his self-development.

There are many different theories of personality that describe its main manifestations and structure in different ways. The structure makes it possible to see what components the personality consists of and what are the connections between them. Knowledge of the structure of personality orients a person to a better understanding of himself and the other, helps to act more subtly in his inner world, as well as in social relations.

The well-known Soviet psychologist Platonov, on the basis of the criterion of the relationship between the social and the biological, singled out its various substructures or levels in the personality structure:

1) biologically determined substructure (which includes temperament, sexual, age, sometimes pathological properties of the psyche);
2) a psychological substructure, including the individual properties of individual mental processes that have become properties of the personality (memory, emotions, sensations, thinking, perception, feelings and will);
3) the substructure of social experience (which includes the knowledge, skills, abilities and habits acquired by a person);
4) a substructure of the orientation of the personality (within which there is a special hierarchically interconnected series of substructures: inclinations, desires, interests, inclinations, ideals, an individual picture of the world and the highest form of orientation - beliefs).

In addition, two general integrative substructures (character and abilities) are identified in the personality structure, which, unlike hierarchical substructures, permeate all four levels of the hierarchy, absorbing qualities from the substructures of each selected level. Thus, personality can be represented as a structural system that has horizontal and vertical dimensions.

In psychology, there are different approaches to understanding personality.
1. A personality can be described in terms of its motives and aspirations that make up the content of its “personal world”, i.e., a unique system of personal meanings, individually unique ways of ordering external impressions and internal experiences.
2. Personality is considered as a system of traits - relatively stable, externally manifested characteristics of individuality, which are imprinted in the subject's judgments about himself, as well as in the judgments of other people about him.
3. The personality is also described as the active “I” of the subject, as a system of plans, relationships, orientation, semantic formations that regulate the exit of its behavior beyond the initial “plans.
4. Personality is also considered as a subject of personalization, i.e., the needs and abilities of an individual to cause changes in other people (199, pp. 17-18).

Personality is a social concept, it expresses everything that is supranatural, historical in a person. Personality is not innate, but arises as a result of cultural and social development (53, p. 315).

A person is a person who has his own position in life, to which he came as a result of great conscious work. Such a person is not only distinguished by the impression he makes on another; he consciously separates himself from the environment. He shows independence of thought, non-banality of feelings, some kind of composure and inner passion. The depth and richness of a person presupposes the depth and richness of her connections with the world, with other people; the rupture of these ties, self-isolation devastates her. A person is only a person who relates in a certain way to the environment, consciously establishes this attitude in such a way that it manifests itself in his entire being (216, pp. 676-679).

Personality is a specifically human formation, which is "produced" by social relations, into which the individual enters in his activity. The fact that in this case some of his features as an individual also change is not a cause, but a consequence of the formation of his personality. The formation of personality is a process that does not directly coincide with the process of intravital, naturally ongoing changes in the natural properties of an individual in the course of his adaptation to the external environment (144, pp. 176-177).

Personality is a socialized individual, considered from the side of his most significant socially significant properties. A person is such a purposeful, self-organizing particle of society, the main function of which is the implementation of an individual way of social existence.

The functions of a person's behavior regulator are performed by his worldview, orientation, character, and abilities.

A person is not only a purposeful, but also a self-organizing system. The object of her attention and activity is not only the outside world, but also herself, which manifests itself in the feeling of “I”, which includes self-image and self-esteem, self-improvement programs, habitual reactions to the manifestation of some of their qualities, the ability to self-observation, self-analysis and self-regulation (74, pp. 37-44).

What does it mean to be a person? Being a person means having an active life position, which can be said like this: I stand on that and I can’t do otherwise. Being a person means making choices that arise due to internal necessity, assessing the consequences of the decision made and holding on to them. answer to yourself and the society in which you live. Being a person means constantly building oneself and others, owning an arsenal of techniques and means with which one can master one's own behavior, subordinate it to one's power. To be a person means to have the freedom of choice and to bear its burden throughout life (24, p. 92).

In psychology, there are many attempts to identify the core of personality. The available approaches can be systematized as follows.
1. Significant separation of the concepts of “man”, “individual”, “subject of activity”, “individuality” (in the sense of the uniqueness, originality of each person) and “personality”. Therefore, it is impossible to reduce the concept of “personality” to the concepts of “man”, “individual”, “subject”, “individuality”, although, on the other hand, personality is both a person, and an individual, and a subject, and individuality, but only in to the extent, from the side that characterizes all these concepts from the point of view of the inclusion of a person in social relations.
2. It is necessary to distinguish between an “expanding” understanding of a person, when a person is identified with the concept of a person, and a “peak” understanding, when a person is considered as a special level of human social development.
3. There are different points of view on the correlation of biological and social development in the individual. Some include the biological organization of a person in the concept of personality. Others consider the biological as predetermined conditions for the development of a personality, which do not determine its psychological traits, but act only as forms and ways of their manifestation (A. N. Leontiev).
4. A person is not born, a person becomes; personality
formed relatively late in ontogeny.
5. Personality is not a passive result of external influence on the child, but it develops in the process of his own activity (180, pp. 25-27).

Personal development. A personality cannot develop within the framework of the processes of assimilation, consumption alone, its development presupposes a shift in needs to creation, which alone knows no boundaries (144, p. 226).

There are two types of patterns of age development of the individual:
1) the psychological patterns of personality development, the source of which is the contradiction between the personality's need for personalization (the need to be a personality) and the objective interest of the communities that refer to it to accept only those manifestations of individuality that correspond to the tasks, norms, values and conditions for the development of these communities;
2) the patterns of personality development both as a result of entering new groups for it, which become reference for the individual, acting as institutions of his socialization (family, kindergarten, school, work collective, etc.), and as a result of changes in his social positions within a relatively stable group.

The transition to the next age stage is not spontaneous, it is determined by the peculiarities of the development of society, which stimulates the formation of appropriate motivation in the child (198, pp. 19-26).

The development of a personality is necessarily connected with its self-determination, with the type and method of resolving contradictions with social reality, one's own life, and people around.

The initial level of organization of life and the quality of the personality is, as it were, the dissolution of the personality in the events of life. Then, at the next level, the personality begins to stand out, to self-determine in relation to events; here the variability of personality, parallel to the variability of events, already ceases. At the highest level, a person not only determines himself in relation to the course of individual events, to one or another of his own actions, desires, etc., but also in relation to the course of life as a whole. The personality begins to more and more consistently and definitely pursue its own line in life, which has its own logic, although not necessarily leading to external success or satisfaction of social expectations (4, pp. 34-36).

Pedagogical studies

MODERN SCIENTIFIC PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PEDAGOGICAL APPROACHES TO UNDERSTANDING CREATIVE PERSONALITY

O. G. Asfarov

MODERN SCIENTIFIC PSYCHOLOGICAL-PEDAGOGICAL APPROACHES TO UNDERSTANDING OF CREATIVE PERSONALITY

The article deals with the notion "creative personality" and its interpretation in up-to-date psychological-pedagogical literature. The principal idea of the article is to cast light on the modern scientific approaches to the understanding of creative personality which are developed and carried out by native and foreign scholars in the sphere of psychology and education science.

The article is devoted to the concept of "creative personality", its interpretation in modern psychological and pedagogical literature. The main idea of the article is to reveal modern scientific approaches to understanding the creative personality, developed and implemented by both domestic and foreign scientists in the field of psychology and pedagogy.

Key words: personality, creativity, creative personality, giftedness, personality development.

The modern requirements imposed by society and the state on the system of vocational education determine the objective need to pay great attention not only to the process of the actual professional training of the future specialist, but also to the process of forming certain personal qualities in him, which contribute to a more complete disclosure and improvement of professional qualities. An important task of vocational education institutions at all levels is the preparation of a competitive, competent personality of a specialist, one of the characteristics of which is the ability to create new product samples and professional actions through creativity. This makes it important to interpret the concept of "creative personality" in relation to the current level of development of psychological and pedagogical science (both domestic and foreign) and the social demands of society, determined by the specifics of the current level of its social development.

From a psychological point of view, a personality is “a phenomenon of social development, a concrete living person with consciousness and self-consciousness; it is a self-regulating dynamic functional system of properties, relations and actions continuously interacting with each other, which are formed in the process of ontogenesis” (3).

The modern pedagogical dictionary considers a person from the position of “a person as a participant in the historical and evolutionary process, acting as a bearer of social roles and having the opportunity to choose a life path, during which he transforms nature, society and himself” (1).

Social sciences consider personality as a special quality of a person acquired by him in the process of joint activity and communication. From the point of view of philosophy, personality is the main social value, the essence of which is the ability for self-realization, self-determination and productive creative activity.

The analysis of personality theories must undoubtedly begin with the conceptions of man developed by such great classics as Hippocrates, Plato and Aristotle. An adequate assessment is also impossible without taking into account the contribution made by dozens of thinkers, for example: Aquinas, Ventham, I. Kant, D. Locke, F. Nietzsche, N. Machiavelli, who lived in an intermediate era and whose ideas can be traced in modern ideas.

Later, many philosophers also investigated what constitutes the essence of a person's personality, what are the necessary and essential conditions for its formation and development, what are the characteristics of its main manifestations. Among them are M. M. Bakhtin, G. V. F. Hegel, E. V. Ilyenkov, G. Marcuse, M. K. Mamardashvili, V. V. Rozanov, A. M. Rutkevich, V. S. Solovyov , L. S. Frank, E. Fromm, M. Heidegger, M. Scheler and others.

The problem of the formation and development of personality is presented in the works of teachers (V. I. Zagvyazinsky, Yu. N. Kulyutkin, A. K. Markova, V. A. Slastenin, V. V. Serikov, and others). The worldview of the individual and its structure were considered by philosophers, psychologists, teachers (R. A. Artsishevsky, V. I. Blokhin, L. N. Bogolyubov,

A. I. Bychkov, K. E. Zuev, G. V. Klokovoy, V. A. Morozov, E. I. Monoszon,

V. V. Orlov, K. G. Rozhko, V. F. Chernovo-Lenko, etc.).

Both domestic and foreign psychologists have deeply and comprehensively studied the problem of personality and individuality, for example, A. G. Asmolov, B. G. Ananiev, V. K. Vilyunas, L. S. Vygotsky, A. N. Leontiev, A. V. Petrovsky, S. L. Rubenshtein, V. I. Slobodchikov, P. Fress, etc.).

Abroad, the tradition of clinical observation, starting with Charcot (J. Charcot) and Janet (P. Janet) and, more importantly, including Freud (S. Freud), Jung (S. G. Jung) and McDougall (W. McDougall) determined the essence of personality theory more than any other single factor. These scientists interpreted personality as an ensemble of irrational unconscious drives.

Another scientific direction is associated with the Gestalt tradition and William Stern (W. Stern). These theorists were greatly impressed by the idea of the integrity of behavior and were accordingly convinced that a partial or fragmentary study of the elements of behavior could not lead to the truth. This point of view is deeply rooted in current foreign theories of personality.

The emergence of experimental psychology as an independent direction stimulated interest in carefully controlled empirical research of personality, a better understanding of the nature of theoretical constructions and a more detailed assessment of methods of behavior modification.

At the same time, if the main ideas of personality theorists came primarily from clinical experience, then experimental psychologists drew ideas from discoveries made in the experimental laboratory. While in the forefront of early personality theorists we see Charcot, Freud, Janet, McDougall, Helmholtz, Thorndike (E. L. Thorndike), Watson (J. V. Watson) and Wundt played a corresponding role in experimental psychology (W. Wundt). Experimentalists were inspired by the natural sciences, while personality theorists remained closer to clinical data and their own creative reconstructions. One group at-

vetoed intuition and insights, with a certain amount of contempt for the blinders that science imposes with its severe limitations on the imagination and narrow technical capabilities. The other supported the demands for rigor and precision of limited research and was disgusted by the rampant use of clinical judgment and imaginative interpretation.

Behaviorism actually removed the problem of personality, which had no place in the mechanistic scheme "S-R" ("stimulus-response"). Very productive in terms of specific methodological solutions, the concepts of K. Levin, A. Maslow, G. Allport, K. Rogers reveal a certain limitation, which manifests itself: in physicalism (the transfer of the laws of mechanics to the analysis of personality manifestations, for example, in K. Levin), in indeterminism in humanistic psychology and existentialism.

A significant part of the work of domestic researchers of the twentieth century is devoted to the formation of a dialectical-materialistic, Marxist-Leninist, communist or scientific worldview by means of various educational subjects.

In Russian psychology, a person as a person is characterized by a system of relations conditioned by life in society, of which he is the subject. In the process of interaction with the world, an actively acting person acts as a whole in which the knowledge of the environment is carried out in unity with the experience. Personality is considered in the unity (but not identity) of the sensual essence of its bearer - the individual and the conditions of the social environment (B. G. Ananiev, A. N. Leontiev).

The natural properties and characteristics of the individual appear in the personality as its socially conditioned elements. So, for example, brain pathology is biologically determined, but the character traits generated by it become personality traits due to social determination. Personality is the mediating link through which external influence is connected with

its effect in the psyche of the individual (S. L. Rubinshtein).

The emergence of personality as a systemic quality is due to the fact that an individual, in joint activity with other individuals, changes the world and through this change transforms himself, becoming a personality (A. N. Leontiev).

According to domestic scientists, personality is characterized by:

Activity, that is, the desire of the subject to go beyond his own limits, expand the scope of his activities, act beyond the boundaries of the requirements of the situation and role prescriptions (achievement motivation, risk, etc.);

Orientation - a stable dominant system of motives: interests, beliefs, ideals, tastes, etc. - in which human needs manifest themselves;

Deep semantic structures (“dynamic semantic systems”, according to L. S. Vygotsky), which determine her consciousness and behavior, are relatively resistant to verbal influences and are transformed in the joint activity of groups and collectives (the principle of activity mediation);

The degree of awareness of one's attitude to reality: attitudes (according to V. N. Myasishchev), attitudes (according to D. N. Uznadze, A. S. Prangishvili, Sh. A. Nadirashvili), dispositions (according to V. A. Yadov) etc.

Personality as a subject of interpersonal relations reveals itself in three representations that form a unity (V. A. Petrovsky):

1) Personality as a relatively stable set of its intra-individual qualities: symptom complexes of mental properties that form its individuality, motives, personality orientations (L. I. Bozhovich), personality character structure, temperament, abilities (works by B. M. Teplov, V. D Fiction-na, V. S. Merlin, etc.).

2) Personality as the inclusion of an individual in the space of inter-individual relations, where relationships and interactions that arise in a group can be interpreted

as carriers of the identity of their participants. Thus, for example, a false alternative is overcome in understanding interpersonal relationships either as group phenomena or as personality phenomena: the personal acts as a group, the group - as a personal one (A.V. Petrovsky).

3) Personality as an “ideal representation” of an individual in the life of other people, including outside of their actual interaction, as a result of the semantic transformations actively carried out by a person in the intellectual and affective-need spheres of the personality of other people (V. A. Petrovsky).

Today, in the 21st century, humanity is faced with the growth of various crises - environmental, informational, cultural, demographic, national, etc. , I. Yakimanskaya and others). The solution of these problems involves a change in the human mentality, value orientations, methods of activity, behavior and lifestyle, both on an individually personal and on a universal scale (V. I. Belozertsev, A. V. Buzgalin, B. T. Grigoryan, P. S. Gurevich, R. S. Karpinskaya, I. I. Kravchenko, N. N. Moiseev, E. Fromm, W. Frankl, G. I. Schwebs, A. Schweitzer, K. G. Jung, K. Yas - Persian, Yu. V. Yakovets and others).

In this regard, there is a need to clarify the concept of "creative personality" and analyze existing ideas about the structure of a creative personality.

There are two main points of view on the creative personality. According to one, creative ability to one degree or another is characteristic of every normal person. It is as integral to a person as the ability to think, speak and feel. Moreover, the realization of creative potential, regardless of its scale, makes a person mentally normal. To deprive a person of such an opportunity means to cause him neurotic

sky states. Some psychoneurologists see the essence of psychotherapy in the cure of neuroses by awakening the creative aspirations of a person.

According to the second point of view, not every (normal) person should be considered a creative person, or a creator. This position is connected with a different understanding of the nature of creativity. Here, in addition to the unprogrammed process of creating a new one, the value of a new result is taken into account. It must be universally valid, although its scale may be different. The most important feature of the creator is a strong and stable need for creativity. A creative person cannot live without creativity, seeing in it the main goal and the main meaning of his life.

The view of creativity as a universal trait of a person's personality presupposes a certain understanding of creativity. Creativity is supposed to be a process of creating something new, and the process is not programmed, unpredictable, sudden. This does not take into account the value of the result of a creative act and its novelty for a large group of people, for society or humanity. The main thing is that the result should be new and meaningful for the “creator” himself. An independent, original solution by a student of a problem that has an answer will be a creative act, and he himself should be evaluated as a creative person.

As G. K. Selevko notes, according to modern psychological and pedagogical science, creativity is a conditional concept, it can be expressed not only in the creation of a fundamentally new one that did not exist before, but also in the discovery of a relatively new one (for a given area, a given time, in a given place , for the subject itself) (2).

Some researchers believe that creativity as a separate entity does not exist (A. Maslow, D. B. Bogoyavlenskaya, etc.).

Another point of view suggests that creativity is determined primarily by the level of development of the intellect and manifests itself at a high level of development of any abilities.

stey (S. L. Rubinshtein, A. V. Brushlinsky, R. Sternberg). At the same time, intellectual giftedness acts as a necessary but not sufficient condition for creativity. The main role in the determination of creativity is played by motives, values and personality traits.

The third point of view on the creative ability of the individual is that it is singled out as an independent factor independent of the intellect (J. Gilford, Ya. A. Ponomarev).

In accordance with this, several areas of study of creativity have developed in psychological and pedagogical science: 1) the history of studying the problem of creativity, creative abilities and creative activity, analysis of the current stage in the development of the psychology of creativity (A. Yu. Kozyrev, A. T. Shumilin, Ya. A Ponomarev, Yu. F. Barron); 2) the essence of creativity and creative activity, the components of creative thinking (A. Yu. Kozyrev, A. T. Shumilin, R. Mooney, R. Taylor, E. de Bono, N. S. Leites, A. M. Matyushkin); 3) the development of creative thinking, creative abilities, the connection between the psychology of creativity and pedagogy (L. S. Vygotsky, A. N. Luk, E. de Bono, G. Neuner, S. L. Rubinshtein).

Ya. A. Ponomarev in his research notes that in the middle of the twentieth century, the psychology and pedagogy of creativity approached a new stage in their development. Particularly dramatic shifts have taken place in the psychology of scientific creativity: its authority has increased, and its content has become deeper. She has taken a leading place in the study of creativity. The scientist believes that the conditions for a new stage in the development of the psychology of scientific creativity arose in the situation of the scientific and technological revolution, which significantly changed the type of social stimulation of scientific research. For a long time, society did not have an acute practical need for the psychology of creativity, including scientific creativity.

In other words, in science there has been a general trend in the study of creativity, which is expressed in a gradual movement from an undivided, syncretic description

of the phenomena of creativity, from attempts to directly cover all these phenomena in all their specific integrity to the development of an idea of the study of creativity as a complex problem - in moving along the line of differentiation of aspects, identifying a number of patterns that are different in nature, determining creativity.

It should be noted that creativity as a subject of scientific research has its own specifics: when you try to strictly scientific description, the very subject of research disappears - an elusive creative process; on the other hand, an attempt to approach the innermost nature of creativity may lead too far away from the accepted canons of science.

Much here depends on how the researcher outlines his subject of research - what, in fact, is understood by creativity. For example, E. Taylor, considering creativity as a solution to problems, identifies six groups of definitions of creativity: 1) definitions of the "Gestalt" type, which emphasize the creation of a new integrity; 2) definitions focused on the "final product", or "innovative" definitions, which emphasize the production of something new; 3) "aesthetic" or "expressive" definitions that emphasize self-expression; 4) "psychoanalytic" or "dynamic" definitions, in which creativity is defined in terms of the interaction of "I", "It" and "Super-I"; 5) definitions in terms of “solution-oriented thinking”, which emphasize not so much the solution as the thought process itself; 6) various definitions that do not fit into any of the above categories.

P. Torrance, having analyzed various approaches and definitions of creativity, singled out the following types of definitions of creativity: definitions based on novelty as a criterion of creativity; definitions in which creativity is opposed to conformity; definitions that include a process.

The scientist himself proposes to define creativity as a process, pointing out that having defined creativity as a process, one can raise questions about what type of person one needs to be in order to implement such a process, what environment contributes to it, and what product is obtained as a result of the successful completion of this process.

Of great importance is the revival of the original idea of mental abilities and, accordingly, of mental giftedness. As you know, the mind was traditionally considered, first of all, not actions based on imitation or a certain algorithm (which was mainly revealed with the help of intelligence tests), but independent acquisition of new knowledge, their discovery, transfer to new situations, solving new problems, i.e. creativity (creativity).

This idea is largely due to the study of the problems of productive thinking in Western European and American psychology (M. Wertheimer, D. Gilford, K. Dinker, W. Lowenfeld, W. Keller, K. Koffka, N. Mayer, L. Sekeeb, P. Torrens and others), in domestic psychology this direction is represented by the works of S. A. Rubinshtein, A. V. Brushlinsky, Z. I. Kalmykova, B. M. Kedrova, A. M. Matyushkin, O. K. Tikhomirov and others

This scientific direction closely links the concepts of "creative personality" and "gifted personality", contributing to the emergence of concepts and scientific theories that integrate them.

Among modern foreign concepts of giftedness, the most popular is the concept of giftedness by J. Renzulli. According to J. Renzulli, giftedness is a combination of 3 characteristics: intellectual abilities (above average), creativity and perseverance (task-oriented motivation). In addition, his theoretical model takes into account knowledge (erudition) and a favorable environment. This concept is very popular and is actively used to develop applied problems. On the

many modified versions have been developed on its basis.

P. Torrens in his own concept uses a similar triad: creativity, creative skills, creative motivation. The methods of diagnosing creativity developed by him on the basis of his own concept of giftedness are widely used all over the world in identifying gifted children. His model largely resembles that of J. Renzulli.

In many ways, it resembles the idea of J. Renzulli "Multifactorial model of giftedness" by F. Monks. It offers slightly different parameters: motivation, creativity and exceptional ability (the outer side of giftedness).

Another modified and additional version of the J. Renzulli model is proposed by D. Feldhusen: consisting of 3 intersecting circles (intellectual abilities, creativity and perseverance), the core should be supplemented by the "I - concept" and self-respect.

There is also a model focused on specific pedagogical tasks. According to this variant, three levels are distinguished in giftedness: genotypic, mental and phenotypic. On the border of the genotypic and mental levels, there is a triad similar to the triad in D. Renzulli's model: creativity, abilities above average, motivation. Thus, a model focused on specific pedagogical tasks emphasizes the importance and necessity of exceptional creativity as a characteristic of a creative person only at the first two, lower levels of giftedness, while at the highest level it is necessary to form the creative person itself as a multi-level integrative phenomenon.

A compatriot of P. Torrens -V. Lowenfeld was one of the first to introduce the concept of "creative intelligence" into scientific use. By this was meant a certain conglomeration of intellectual and creative abilities. This idea was confirmed and further developed in the work

max A. Osborne, D. McKinnon, K. Taylor and other researchers. These conceptual models for solving a number of applied psychological and pedagogical problems.

After the idea that creativity was inherently different from intelligence was put forward, interest in experimental research on creativity increased significantly, and the number of such studies increased significantly, starting with the work of J. Gilford, who put forward the concept of divergent thinking.

The conducted studies have one thing in common: the ability to be creative is defined as the ability to create something new, original.

From our point of view, the presence of a product or a method of solving a problem is essential in the definition of creativity. W. A. Hennessy and T. M. Amabile point out that although most authors consider creativity as a process, their definitions most often use product definitions as a hallmark of creativity. In most definitions of creativity, these characteristics of a product are novelty and adequacy. In many studies, such a "product" is the result of performing tests for creativity; or - it is an expert evaluation of products, while the authors are most concerned about the fact that "most researchers, both using tests of creativity and using subjective product evaluation, do not have clear operational definitions." Scientists note that a product or idea is creative to the extent that experts recognize it as creative.

In general, it should be noted that the problem of a creative personality has a pronounced interdisciplinary character, requiring a researcher to take a multidisciplinary, integrative approach to its consideration. Being the subject of attention of many domestic and foreign scientists in various fields of science (philosophy, psychology, pedagogy, etc.) throughout the history of the development of science, the concept of "creative personality" nevertheless has not acquired a single version of its definition. Some scientists-researchers consider it in the context of the giftedness of the individual, others - as an absolutely independent phenomenon, not related to giftedness and talent.

LITERATURE

1. Pedagogical dictionary / ed. V. I. Za-gvyazinsky, A. F. Zakirova. - M., 2008. - 352 p. - S. 233.

2. Selevko G. K. Encyclopedia of educational technologies: in 2 volumes - M., 2006. - T. 2. - P. 96.

3. Dictionary of a practical psychologist / comp. S. Yu. Golovin. - Minsk, M, 2000. - 800 p. - S. 256.

Asfarov Oleg Georgievich, State Educational Institution of Secondary Vocational Education Georgievsky Regional College "Integral", Georgievsk, Stavropol Territory, lecturer; Competitor of the Department of Theory and Practice of Education Management, Stavropol State University. The sphere of scientific interests is a creative personality, the formation and development of a creative personality, the activities of institutions of the vocational education system for the formation and development of a creative personality. [email protected]

The difference in approaches to understanding personality is due to the complexity and ambiguity of the very phenomenon of "personality". There are many theories of personality, the main ones of which we will study in other sections of this discipline. Each of the theories sees and constructs personality in its own way, focusing on some of its aspects and leaving out others (or giving them a secondary role).

According to the authors of the monograph "Theory of Personality" L. Hjell and D. Ziegler, "no outstanding theory can be fully and correctly understood" in relation to the definition of human nature, "differences between theories reflect more fundamental differences between their creators" .

L. Hjell and D. Ziegler, having analyzed the most famous psychological theories of personality, present 9 bipolar scales expressing the main provisions about the nature of a person of various schools and directions. They are:

1. Freedom - Determinism (responsibility).

2. Rationality - Irrationality.

3. Holism (integrity) - Elementalism.

4. Constitutionalism (biological) - Environmentalism (social).

5. Variability (evolutionism) - Immutability.

6. Subjectivity - Objectivity.

7. Proactivity (internal factors of development) - Reactivity (behavior - reaction to external stimuli).

8. Knowability - Unknowability.

9. Homeostasis (preservation of internal balance) - Heterostasis (personal growth and self-development).

Can be designated possible metapositions in the interpretation of personality:

personality as a profile of psychological traits(factorial theory of traits by R. Cattell, dispositional theory of personality by G. Allport, factorial theory of personality by H. Eysenck, etc.);

personality as human experience(psychoanalytic theory of personality by Z. Freud, behaviorism, partly (if we mean the inner experience, experiences of the personality) humanistic psychology, personality studies in the context of the life path) ;

personality as temperament and age(personality theories of G. Eysenck and E. Erikson) ;

personality as an internalized ensemble of social relations(practically all theories of Soviet psychology: L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontiev, S.L. Rubinshtein, K.K. Platonov) .

14.1. The concept of personality

Let me remind you that in the first lecture we talked about the fact that a person exists, as it were, in a system of three coordinates: a person is an objective world, a person is a social world, a person is his own inner world. Revealing the cognitive processes, we mainly talked about the ways of human cognition of the objective world. But personality exists primarily in systems of social relations, and it is in these relations that it manifests itself.

The problem of personality is one of the most complex and controversial in psychology. The content of the concept of "personality" from the standpoint of various theoretical concepts is extremely multifaceted. However, there are some general provisions that relate to the definition of personality:

1. Personality is always associated with individuality. with those qualities, properties that distinguish one person from another.

2. The concept of "personality" is rather a hypothetical construct, an abstraction that reflects a systematic integrated approach to a person, his diverse manifestations.

3. Personality is considered in an antisocial context in relation to the life history of the individual or the prospects for his development. Personality is characterized in the evolutionary process as a subject of influence of internal and external factors.

4. Personality is represented by those characteristics. which are "responsible" for stable forms of behavior. Personality, as such, is relatively unchanging, constant through time and changing situations. It provides a sense of continuity in time and environment.

Let's look at some of the main approaches to understanding the nature of personality.

Categories

Popular