Creativity as a Practical Manifestation of Freedom (Historical and Theoretical Context)

Abstract

The study concerns the consideration of creativity in the light of the main philosophical studies of this concept. The activity of the creative process practically proves the presence of freedom in human existence. Views on creativity reflect the attitude of a particular thinker to the question of the opposition of freedom and predestination in general. The polemical moments concerning creativity are considered and the ways of their decision are offered. In particular, two opposing views on the work of Plato and Aristotle are studied, where human talent presupposes divine inspiration (Plato) or, accordingly, only personal efforts. Nikolai Berdyaev tries to resolve the controversy between Aristotle and Plato by combining their views. He endows man with divine properties and thus indicates the source of creativity in the middle of man himself. Philip Hefner gives the individual the status of “co-creator” and puts forward the theory that man is called to improve and complete God’s creation. The study also focuses on the content and purpose of creativity. Creativity for the sake of creativity itself, which Albert Camus wrote about, was criticized by M. Berdyaev, and he offered his vision of this issue: creativity for the sake of a universal goal. Camus’ views were generally shared by A. Bergson. In connection with this last controversy, the actualization of Hryhoriy Skovoroda’s doctrine of “related work” is proposed and the expediency of this actualization is argued. Our domestic philosopher originally balances the pessimism of Camus’s work and Berdyaev’s enterprising approach. Skovoroda supports his conclusions with accurate practical examples. Reasoned conclusions about the need to update the teachings of G. Skovoroda on creativity and «related work» are given.