CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION: MEMORY VS INTERPRETATION
UDC 124.4
LIMONCHENKO Vira,
Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Professor at Drohobych Ivan Franko State Pedagogical University
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION: MEMORY VS INTERPRETATION
Background. Nowadays, the terms innovation and interpretation are used very widely, replacing the usual notions of creativity and understanding. Conceptual and verbal tools can be considered as the basis for judging the nature of time.
Analysis of recent research and publications. The analysis of concepts can not ignore the issues of genesis and etymology, therefore the works in which the words innovation and interpretation are first used are included in the source of the research. These are the works of P. Drucker and J. Schumpeter, who talk about innovation as a means of improving the efficiency of economic activity. The concept of interpretation acquires its development in connection with the questions of the methodology of the humanities (F. Schleiermacher, V. Dilthey, G.-G. Gadamer, P. Ricker), and in the classical heritage the content of the concept is adjusted with another verbal tools – interpretation, understanding.
The aim of the paper is to analyze the concepts that may reveal the motivation of the broad use of the concepts of innovation and interpretation, and the consideration of the methods of interpretation in contemporary art.
Materials and methods. The research was conducted using the methods of theoretical generalization, comparative analysis, analysis and synthesis, which made it possible to identify the significance of classical forms of thought for understanding the current situation in education.
Results. The notion of creativity has its biblical origins in its boundary sense, which firmly hold the meaning of the connection between creativity and Nothing. Because of this, creativity is meant to be non-technological – it excludes repetition and replication, thus the act of creativity remains outside the social space and can not be guaranteed.
Conclusion. The inner connection of creativity and memory is fixed by the metaphor of creativity as a gift of Mnemosina, which takes an act of creativity beyond the boundaries of the functioning of the visual system. The emphasis on innovation brings up the introduction of a new, which fully subordinates creativity to a beneficial effect.
Keywords:creativity, innovation, memory, interpretation, theater of historical memory.
FREE FULL TEXT (PDF)
LIMONCHENKO Vira,
Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Professor at Drohobych Ivan Franko State Pedagogical University
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION: MEMORY VS INTERPRETATION
Background. Nowadays, the terms innovation and interpretation are used very widely, replacing the usual notions of creativity and understanding. Conceptual and verbal tools can be considered as the basis for judging the nature of time.
Analysis of recent research and publications. The analysis of concepts can not ignore the issues of genesis and etymology, therefore the works in which the words innovation and interpretation are first used are included in the source of the research. These are the works of P. Drucker and J. Schumpeter, who talk about innovation as a means of improving the efficiency of economic activity. The concept of interpretation acquires its development in connection with the questions of the methodology of the humanities (F. Schleiermacher, V. Dilthey, G.-G. Gadamer, P. Ricker), and in the classical heritage the content of the concept is adjusted with another verbal tools – interpretation, understanding.
The aim of the paper is to analyze the concepts that may reveal the motivation of the broad use of the concepts of innovation and interpretation, and the consideration of the methods of interpretation in contemporary art.
Materials and methods. The research was conducted using the methods of theoretical generalization, comparative analysis, analysis and synthesis, which made it possible to identify the significance of classical forms of thought for understanding the current situation in education.
Results. The notion of creativity has its biblical origins in its boundary sense, which firmly hold the meaning of the connection between creativity and Nothing. Because of this, creativity is meant to be non-technological – it excludes repetition and replication, thus the act of creativity remains outside the social space and can not be guaranteed.
Conclusion. The inner connection of creativity and memory is fixed by the metaphor of creativity as a gift of Mnemosina, which takes an act of creativity beyond the boundaries of the functioning of the visual system. The emphasis on innovation brings up the introduction of a new, which fully subordinates creativity to a beneficial effect.
Keywords:creativity, innovation, memory, interpretation, theater of historical memory.
FREE FULL TEXT (PDF)