• Specialty HAC RF13.00.01
• Number of pages 322

Chapter 1

§ 1. Activation of independent productive activity of students as a psychological and pedagogical problem

§2. Cultural grounds modern education

Chapter 2

§ 1. Educational essence of inventive culture

§2. Educational functions of inventive culture

§3. Creative functions of inventive culture

§4. Didactic meaning of the used system of new pedagogical concepts

§5. Conceptual model of the student's personality as a creative active subject of creative activity

§6. Educational content of the concept of development of creative activity of students in the context of inventive culture

Chapter3. DEVELOPMENT OF INVENTION CULTURE AS A DEVELOPMENT FACTOR

CREATIVE ACTIVITIES OF STUDENTS "< * 1 , *

§ I. Educational significance of students' mastering the tool (instrumental) functions of modern methods for creating new ideas

§2. Experimental study of the process of creating new ideas by schoolchildren

§3. Implementation by schoolchildren of instrumental (instrumental) functions of modern methods of creating new ideas. Discussion of the results of experimental work

Chapter 4

§ I. Creative behavior of students in solving problems in the structure of the project method

§2. Brainstorming Strategies for Problem Solving Projects

§3. Functional cost analysis in the structure of the project method

§4. Creative content of assignments for independent work of students performed by the method of projects

§5. Didactic principles of constructing modern educational programs based on the concept of development of creative activity of students in the context of inventive culture and experimental results

Recommended list of dissertations

• The system of formation of technical invention of students in institutions of additional education: On the material of the Republic of Dagestan 2003, candidate of pedagogical sciences Abdullaev, Abdulla Babaevich

• Preparing students of secondary vocational schools for rationalization and inventive activities in production 1985, Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences Parkhomenko, Vladimir Pavlovich

• Scientific and practical foundations for mastering pedagogical culture in the educational process of secondary school 1997, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Sedova, Nellya Vladimirovna

• Organizational and Pedagogical Problems of Increasing the Educational Level of Students in the Conditions of Career Guidance 2001, candidate of pedagogical sciences Sergeev, Oleg Viktorovich

• Information and analytical support of work to improve the educational process in a secondary school 2002, candidate of pedagogical sciences Kiskaev, Islam Arslanovich

Introduction to the thesis (part of the abstract) on the topic "Creative activity of students in the context of inventive culture: Theory and practice of development"

Similar theses in the specialty "General Pedagogy, History of Pedagogy and Education", 13.00.01 VAK code

• Development of creative activity of students in the process of specialized technology education at school 2008, candidate of pedagogical sciences Amoskov, Vitaly Mikhailovich

• Formation of a system for improving the creative experience of schoolchildren in the work of a rural teacher 2010, Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences Dondokova, Tsyrenzhap Lkhasaranovna

• Didactic conditions for the development of personality in the system of school science education. 2009, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Anokhina, Galina Maksimovna

• Organizational and pedagogical conditions for the development of a culture of teaching schoolchildren in the process of natural science education 2003, candidate of pedagogical sciences Korostel, Irina Mikhailovna

• The study of the genre specifics of the Yakut folklore in the context of modern literary education of schoolchildren 2010, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Gogoleva, Marina Trofimovna

Dissertation conclusion on the topic "General Pedagogy, History of Pedagogy and Education", Bychkov, Anatoly Vasilyevich

List of references for dissertation research doctor of pedagogical sciences Bychkov, Anatoly Vasilyevich, 2002

Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for review and obtained through original dissertation text recognition (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors related to the imperfection of recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.

Creative activity is when you bring genuine goodness to people: material, technical, handy, for the body, for the soul, for the psyche, for increasing spirituality, for purifying the soul, for developing positive qualities, for expanding consciousness, and so on. That is, if you contribute to the healing or saturation of the human body without any destructive effects in this regard, that is, without harmful chemicals, without eating meat, without taking drugs, alcohol and smoking substances, you are engaged in creative activities. If you, with good intentions, help in the repair and maintenance of technical devices, their improvement and modernization, setting up, maintaining, resolving problems and malfunctions in computer and technical systems, repairing broken equipment or any household items, building houses, inventing auxiliary inventions and means, the creation and distribution of various household items necessary for use in life, which are just not intended specifically for use in terms of a negative nature, for example, hunting rifles, explosives, drugs, then this is also a manifestation of creative activity on your part, but some people may subsequently direct the assistance provided by you, the equipment, devices, household appliances repaired by you to the detriment of yourself or others, that is, in a negative way. But this will already contribute to the development of negative karma by them, and not by you, if you helped them with good intentions, and not in terms of some negative motives. If you help to increase the spirituality of people, develop positive qualities in their souls, you thus perform even more good creative activity, these can be humanitarians of various professions, preachers of spirituality, bringing people the Light of Truth of Higher Knowledge, energy-spiritual healers, providing people with all kinds of help and support, psychologists conducting yoga seminars, spiritual practitioners engaged in various types of creativity that brings positive and soul-elevating energies to the soul, awakens and expands their consciousness in a certain way, causes pure and bright feelings and emotions in them, these can be artists, singers, musicians , lyrics and others. If you contribute in a certain way to the destruction of the body and soul of people, bringing them certain physical, mental, mental or spiritual harm, then you are engaged in destructive activities. It includes the production of alcohol, tobacco, drugs, weapons, pornography, any products containing harmful chemicals, planting low morality and morality, showing films and programs that promote cruelty, violence, immoral behavior, low and rough music, such as techno, metal, rap, punk rock, the distribution of products and drugs that are harmful to health, the poisoning and pollution of nature by malignant chemical and other outpourings, air pollution in the cities themselves from industrial waste and Vehicle, violence and killing of living beings, preaching by the media of false values, preferences, aspirations, lifestyle, contributing to the hardening of people, the recruitment of dark negative energies by their souls, this is all kinds of luring people with material values, career growth, rivalry, powdering and stuffing their heads with all sorts of hard business, legal, formal laws and regulations, the struggle for survival and a place in the sun, so that everyone has only money in their eyes, so that young people are attracted to all sorts of low-moral entertainment, so that their speech is foul-mouthed, so that everyone thinks how to earn more, make more all good for oneself, all beliefs that stereotype the mind and thinking, and most of the professions that exist in the world today are destructive, and most people are now engaged in destructive rather than creative activities. For example, sellers, cooks, waiters, where people are addicted to alcohol, meat-containing food, chemically harmful products, are engaged in destructive activities, because it is both harmful to health and soul, and also generates negative karma for everyone involved in this, or cite as an example the developers of most computer games, where there are elements of cruelty, violence, immorality, greed, a detrimental effect on the psyche, here it’s just a feast of destruction processes and the corresponding consequences for both the souls of developers and avid players, in which they simply whip, seethe and filled with negative energies. In order for your activity to be creative, it must contribute to the true good for people in any respect, both materially, and physically, and mentally, and morally, and morally, and spiritually. Think about what you do by the nature of your activity, what you bring to people with this: the energies of creation or destruction. Maybe you should change your job, than you will change the balance between the creative and destructive processes taking place in the world, and also change your own polarity in terms of your professional business orientation. You should think carefully about this, because both the way of life of this world and your own formation of the soul largely depend on this.

Creative, constructive, creating Dictionary of Russian synonyms. creative see creative Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. Practical guide. M.: Russian language. Z. E. Alexandrova ... Synonym dictionary

CREATIVE, oh, oh; flax, flax (high). Creating something, creative. Creative activity. Mirny s. work. | noun creativity, and, wives. Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. 1949 1992 ... Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov

creative- oh, oh. High Associated with creation, creative. == Creative work (work). pathet. ◘ The working people of Lithuania have adorned their land with the fruits of creative labor. Owls. Lit., 6. The Soviet Union was free from economic and political ... ... Explanatory Dictionary of the Language of Soviet Deputies

App. 1. ratio with noun. creation associated with it 2. Peculiar to creation, characteristic of it. Explanatory Dictionary of Efremova. T. F. Efremova. 2000... Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language Efremova

Creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, creative, ... ... Forms of words

Destructive… Antonym Dictionary

creative- creative; briefly form of linen, linen ... Russian spelling dictionary

creative- kr.f. constructive / telna, constructive / telna, flax, flax; creative / more solid ... Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language

creative- Syn: creative... Thesaurus of Russian business vocabulary

creative- see create; oh, oh. Creative / productive work. With my strength… Dictionary of many expressions

Books

• Creative revenge, Polyakov Yuri Mikhailovich. Yuri Polyakov is not afraid to appear before the reader in development. His mistakes, delusions, throwing, seductions, disappointments do not come from the desire to adapt, cling, "fit in", but from ...
• Creative revenge, Yury Polyakov. Yuri Polyakov is not afraid to appear before the reader in development. His mistakes, delusions, throwing, seductions, disappointments do not come from the desire to adapt, cling, “fit in”, but from ...

Click to listen

The creative activity of people is an important resource for modernization. None. Since ancient times, the wording has been known: "The voice of the people is the voice of God." Sociologists are engaged in the study of public opinion of the inhabitants of any of the developed modern states. What role does the opinion of the people play in determining the internal policy of the state? How changeable are the moods of citizens and how to navigate in polyphony modern society ? The journalists of the newspaper talked about this during the next meeting of the “From the First Person” club with the Director General of the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM), Professor of the Higher School of Economics Valery Fedorov. Valery Valeryevich visited Tyumen as the main speaker of the fifth Governor's readings. We bring to the attention of readers the text of the conversation, given in abbreviation. Alexander Skorbenko: - More than two thousand years ago, Pythagoras argued that the world is ruled by numbers. Tell me, can everything nowadays be calculated, expressed in numbers so that the existing reality is completely understandable and rationalized? Valery Fedorov: - I must say that sociologists are often confused with statisticians - it is the latter who are responsible for digital calculations. It is assumed that all data determined by statisticians have absolute accuracy. No one really thinks. Only statistical departments are capable, for example, of the state population census. By the way, one can treat the results of the last all-Russian census differently, but the paradox is that no one has more accurate data. No institution has the resources and therefore the ability to conduct an alternative count. Sociological research, in turn, deals with certain errors. Unlike statisticians, we do not claim that our figures are the most accurate. They are accurate, but with some "interval". For example, the error in the data of all-Russian sociological surveys is 3.4 percent. In other words, if we say that “15 percent of voters can vote for a given politician,” this means that in reality, from 12.6 to 18.4 percent of voters can vote for him. Sociological studies do not claim to contain absolute truth. At the same time, we can say with some accuracy what people think and how they plan to act in the future. Alexander Skorbenko: - However, sociologists, with the help of research results, have the opportunity to influence public opinion ... Valery Fedorov: - There is even such a joke: "Public opinion is studied in order to tell the people what they really think." In fact, poll results are reported not by sociologists, but by journalists - we do not have our own mass media. The official website of VTsIOM is working: www.wciom.ru, where the results of the research are presented as fully, in detail and with all notes and reservations. The site is actively visited by analysts and media observers. At the same time, each newspaper, radio and TV channel has its own genre of news reporting and event analysis. Therefore, they convey to the audience those figures and data that they consider necessary and important. Sociologists are not responsible for this. Journalists like to operate with numbers from the results of sociological surveys, because the numbers give the illusion of clarity. A person, say, has some kind of opinion that is not formed into a clear thought, it cannot be confirmed by anything. Numerical data confirm this opinion, being a "reinforced concrete argument". Therefore, sociological data is sometimes seen as something that corresponds to the inner convictions of certain interpreters. In fact, the numbers are different, including "evil". But it's better than no clear data at all. That is why society and the state have a request for the activities of sociological services. It’s just that “you need to see the forest behind the trees”, and behind the numbers – the essence of the processes taking place in society. Denis Fateev: – Another problem is how sincerely people answer the questions posed by sociologists. Of course, this factor can be neutralized by a well-composed sample, but still, what determines the nature of citizens' answers in the course of a sociological survey? Valery Fedorov: - You know, a person's opinion depends on the situation. When it is bad, painful, hungry, he wants only a piece of bread for happiness. But as soon as he gets bread, it immediately becomes insufficient. And the mood may not improve, but worsen. As sociologists, we measure the mood of the population by the answers to our questions. And the mood of people is very changeable. How can it be explained? Weather, strife in the family, internal accumulated irritation. Or vice versa, spiritual uplift. The sun came out - and it seems that life is not so sad. One example: surveys were conducted in all regions of the Ural Federal District in April and June 2011. Specific questions were asked: how satisfied is the healthcare system? Estimates obtained with an interval of three months, for many indicators in different regions, have changed above the statistical error - by 5-10 percent. What could change radically in three months? Never mind! Health care and medical care is a serious system, and it will take a long time for something to change significantly in it. It's just that in June people started vacations, other worries appeared. Summing up, I will say that sociologists provide data that the authorities, the governing structures should take into account. People can also take note. A third of the respondents said that they listen to the data of sociological research, which they receive from the media. This served as the basis for the whole concept of our sociological science, which is called "Let's return public opinion to the people." That is, let's ask not for the authorities, but for the people themselves. Alexander Skorbenko: – In everyday consciousness, the opinion prevails that the whole society can be “calculated”, its thoughts, habits and aspirations can be clarified, right down to the passions of each person. From this you will hide only on a desert island. Is this idea of ​​the capabilities of sociologists and statisticians correct, in your opinion? Valery Fedorov: – The opinion that supposedly everything can be calculated does not correspond to the real state of affairs. Moreover, quantitative sociology is only a small branch of the sociology of public opinion. There are also so-called qualitative methods of sociological science. They do not operate with numbers, but they give more interesting and meaningful answers to questions that interest us. The specifics of the work of sociologists is as follows: everything they know, they know from people thanks to public opinion polls. In other words, if we don’t know something, then we go and ask, and people answer. But do people themselves know everything? that is the question! In sociological science, a paradox has long been defined, which indicates the fact that people tend to say one thing, think another, and act in a completely different way. Moreover, they do not dissemble and do not lie, this is how the human brain and personal behavior are arranged. Therefore, I am convinced that sociological data, expressed in figures, must be treated with attention, but not considered as "the ultimate truth." This is just one of the research tools. Raisa Kovdenko: – In Soviet times, there was, at least on a visible level, “popular approval” of the measures taken by the party and the government. 99.9 percent of voters always came to the elections. Are there currently mechanisms for managing public opinion? Valery Fedorov: - Sociological research was also carried out in Soviet times. Another thing is that their results were not published, since the party bodies and special services acted as customers. These polls showed that no "monolithic unity of the Soviet people" actually existed. The decomposition of Soviet society into social, professional and other strata or groups began in the mid-1960s and early 1970s. In 1967, the famous Soviet, Russian sociologist Boris Grushin published a book. By the way, by the fact of its publication, it approved both the phenomenon of public opinion in the USSR and the science for its study. Prior to this, nothing like this could have happened within the framework of the dominant Marxist-Leninist ideology in our country. The studies of Boris Grushin showed with all clarity that there was no unity in Soviet society. There is a complex society, which, moreover, has become more and more differentiated. Moreover, each social group of the population had its own interests and beliefs. So the current Russian society is maximally individualized. And if in response to a number of questions the population speaks unambiguously “for”, this does not mean that there is no pluralism of opinions in society. On the contrary, it is very large. People understand this, but I cannot say that they really like it - after all, a significant part of Russian citizens were brought up in a collectivist culture. There is nostalgia for the times when everyone was united, were together - at least outwardly. But collectivism no longer exists, and it cannot be returned. Of course, today there are various modern control techniques. A complex informational post-industrial society is unthinkable without modern management techniques. An important of them is television, which introduces collective interests and attitudes into the public consciousness. Oleg Bannykh, managing partner of the West-Siberian Project Center, Yekaterinburg: – Why then measure people’s opinion if it is the result of a certain manipulation? over the past 50 years. There are different points of view. Someone says that a person today is a robot controlled by TV, the Internet. Our sociologists put forward another theory: there is a part of people who are really amenable to manipulation, but there is a part that is informationally insensitive. That is, whatever you say to them, they have their own point of view on everything. There are a lot of such people in Russia. Take the same communist electorate. Under any conditions, they will vote for their ideas. Here is an example of the fact that manipulation does not take place always and not everywhere. Therefore, of course, it is necessary to measure public opinion. Alexander Skorbenko: – Valery Valeryevich, does the state intrude into a person's personal life and to what extent? Or vice versa: the farther, the more personal space will be won back? Valery Fedorov: - In my opinion, convergence is taking place. Twenty years ago the world was divided by an iron curtain into west and east. The West was considered the free world, where the state acted as a night watchman. In our country, there was an opinion that the state and the person are one and the same, but this is a thing of the past, now they exist separately. The state does not seek to interfere in private life; each individual person is not particularly interesting to him. Moreover, it tries to relieve itself of unnecessary responsibility. From here come social reforms, rationalization of the public sector and more. Thus, a private space is created where a person is free to do what he pleases. However, many are not accustomed to this state of affairs and are waiting for instructions, which is quite understandable: seven dozen marched in a single formation in the direction indicated by the party and the government. When there was no direction, there was a feeling of abandonment, depression, disorientation. This is the bitter price of freedom. We got it, but we often do not know how to dispose of it, because there are no techniques, strategies, a culture of disposing of freedom, resources. At the same time, Russia, in a sense, is one of the freest countries in the world, because laws do not work in it, customs, traditions have died, and new rules have practically not been developed. In the West, the trend is opposite: society is becoming more complex, new technical means are being created (the Internet, smartphones, and much more), which dramatically simplify and reduce the cost of state control over a person. At the same time, the risks of terrorists, global warming, man-made disasters, and epidemics are increasing in parallel. As a result, I repeat, we become more free, moving away from a totalitarian society, while in the West the process goes in the opposite direction - towards a more manageable system. In my opinion, we are moving forward. Question: at what point will we converge and will we converge? Konstantin Eliseev: You vividly described the atomization of Russian society. The authorities are trying to put forward some common goals, realizing that the country needs a technological, social breakthrough ... But people, apparently, overstrained themselves during previous mobilizations and are rather cool about calls. Or am I wrong? What personal interest can help a person to join, for example, in the same modernization program? Valery Fedorov: - As for personal interest, in my opinion, this is the only thing we have been living in the last two decades. Of course, everyone understands it in their own way and lives according to the principle "my hut is on the edge" or "my shirt is closer to the body." If earlier the party and the government were responsible for everyone, now the person himself must bear the responsibility. Of course, any society will not be able to exist for a long time in a state of general discord, when everyone is only for himself, so some kind of braces are needed. This is, first of all, universal respect for the law and a system of measures that supports this respect. By the way, in the West the law works much tougher than in our country. The system of measures includes the punitive apparatus, that is, the police, the prosecutor's office do not work for their own pocket, but to ensure that everyone understands that the operation of the law is inevitable. From the independence of the judiciary and the priority of law, the concept of a rule of law state just comes - a kind of "sacred cow" of modern Western societies. In Russia, however, such an internal attitude towards the law as the highest judge has not yet developed - remember the saying "the law is like a drawbar ...". Another bond is the so-called national ideology. It is known that the Constitution of the Russian Federation prohibits any national ideology, which was recorded in 1993 in order to make it impossible to return to the communist past. At the same time, it is clear that in any society, as long as it remains a society, there are unshakable establishments that are universally valid for everyone. Let's take the USA for example. Yes, there are liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats, Bush and Obama, that is, certain poles. But at the same time, there are things that, in principle, are not discussed and are the same for everyone. For example, “all Americans are patriots”: as soon as the anthem sounds, everyone gets up, sings and even cries. They have a national shrine, a shared vision that America is the best country in the world and always will be. Americans are convinced that only they know how to really live and are ready to teach others. It may not be spoken out loud, but it is present in the minds of everyone. Good or bad, but this is in fact the national ideology. Our country, having emerged from the communist period and having imposed a taboo on a single ideology, has not concluded a certain convention, has not created a common field beyond which it is impossible to go. What can be the basis of this convention? Some believe that our “religion” is the Constitution, everyone should follow it and then everything will be fine. I think this is also an option. For Americans, the basis of their "civil religion" is also the US constitution. It is known that it has existed for two hundred years, has never changed - only amendments fit into it. It is quite obvious that our attitude to the Basic Law of the country is somewhat different, so to speak, instrumental. Before the Yeltsin Constitution was Brezhnev's, until then Stalin's. Most importantly, none of them was implemented, so the attitude to the Basic Law of the country is the same as to any law. There are no general rules and values ​​that could harmonize personal wills and strategies, but only if they were present, it would not be an internally contradictory society, but synergy, a general movement forward. Of course, the problem of modernization cannot be solved unless a compromise is found - a way to link personal strategies and the strategy of the country as a whole. This is the main path to successful modernization. Otherwise, everyone who can modernize, that is, the youngest, most active, educated, with material resources, will implement plans for "personal modernization", that is, act individually. This means the following: either they will move to the West, because there is a better system for personal well-being and prosperity, there are traditions, relevant institutions work, etc., or they will physically remain in Russia, but their thoughts will be there. Alexander Skorbenko: - In your opinion, will the upcoming elections harmonize the situation in the foreseeable future? Valery Fyodorov: - The situation with the elections is rather complicated. Twenty years ago, when many parties and candidates first appeared, the population had high hopes for elections. This capital of people's hopes was enough for about four years. Elected politicians began to implement a course that led to radical changes in society. I mean price liberalization, voucher privatization and a number of other painful reforms. It turned out that most expected something else. Left a bitter aftertaste after the 90s of the XX century. The events of almost twenty years ago left, unfortunately, a significant negative experience of the electoral behavior of citizens. Since then, the attitude towards elections in society has been rather skeptical. If two decades ago they chose according to the principle of who is better, now “no matter what happens” or “the lesser of two evils”. This is also an element of atomization. Ideally, they go to elections to hire a government that will work for the people and improve life. In reality, it turns out that we are going to the elections, but we are not expecting anything good. The authorities have a completely different attitude towards elections. It is clear that in any democratic society elections are the only legitimate basis for the activities of the authorities. In particular, therefore, she is interested in approving this institution, in ensuring that the electoral process comes with a large turnout. This is a paradox: society does not believe in elections, but the authorities care about them. Margarita Shamanenko: - We are used to the fact that the interest in political life among Russians wakes up only on the eve of the elections. And how are things in this sense with the electorate of Western countries? Valery Fedorov: - In most Western countries, people look at elections as a tool. This power does not suit me - I have to go to vote and change it to another one that will suit me. And the government itself treats this as a tool. Yes, today the government, and tomorrow the opposition, that's okay. I will sit in the opposition for four to eight years, then I will come to power again. That is, there are no emotions. Elections for them are not a war, but a game, a sport. Everyone understands what they are for, and use it. In Russia, elections are more of a ritual than a rational way to solve a problem. Our elections are war. All or nothing. Therefore, the one who came to power tends to stay there forever. And anyone who takes part in the voting understands that this is more of an imitation than a real choice. Such a deformation has occurred. I think someday we'll get out of it. Timur Khakimov: – Does the authorities react to your work, to the results of your research? Valeriy Fedorov: – Of course, the authorities work very carefully with our data, precisely because they are authorities in a democratic society. There is simply no other source of legitimacy. Our government is not a monarchy. A person becomes president because people elect him, even if they do not believe in elections as an institution. He simply has nothing else to rely on, except for the people's will. Therefore, he always looks carefully: if the elections took place tomorrow, how many people would vote for me? Sometimes it even turns into paranoia. For example, in the United States, the president does not make a single decision without finding out how the Americans feel about it. Konstantin Eliseev: This is not the first year that the center has been conducting research in the Tyumen region. What advantages do you see in the region in the light of the research? Valery Fedorov: - Indeed, by order of the regional government, we quite often organize public opinion polls in the Tyumen region. Against the general background, Tyumen looks better. The strengths include the resource base and the established tradition of management: it is obvious that the last decade of the region has been lucky with leadership. The stability of the socio-economic situation serves as the basis for work for the future. There is attention to the region from the federal authorities and, which is undoubtedly important, the active work of the leadership of the Tyumen region in line with the socio-economic development of the region. According to the results of public opinion surveys, the living conditions in the region, in comparison with many other subjects of the Russian Federation, satisfy the population. This is a good factor of competitiveness among regions. There is a high activity of residents in the region - 50 percent of respondents associate the improvement of life with their own work. Every second Tyumen citizen does not rely on the state, but on himself. For Russia, this is a very high indicator. There is also a factor in the perception of the history of the development of the territory - and this history is alive in the perception of the Tyumen people today. The theme of modernization and discoveries is not alien to the inhabitants of the region - the descendants of the pioneers of Siberia. Another important factor of modernization is that a large proportion of citizens with higher education (11 percent) are employed in the fields of education, science and culture. In addition, 8 percent of the population is young students. Both together form an impressive basis for the innovative development of the region. The following indicator is also associated with this factor - satisfaction of the bulk of the population of the Tyumen region with the quality of educational services. According to VTsIOM, from 70 to 80 percent of the region's population gives high marks to the quality of education. This allows us to hope that young people will stay in the region, as well as come from other regions of the country. The quality of educational services is the first factor in the list of the possibility of modernization in the region, the Tyumen region has good potential in this sense. Vladimir Polishchuk: - At one time there were big talks about the national idea, now they somehow subsided. Are you an informed person, perhaps there is some kind of working group that continues this work? Alexander Skorbenko: – What about the regional ideas of the Urals region? Is there a corporate connection of ideas? Small ideas of a small district - region - state. Valery Fedorov: - As far as I know, there is no working group at the federal level. Searches are going on, as they say, in everyone's head. And it seems to me that in the next 15-20 years they will not succeed. Because our nation and people are now in a rather difficult phase - in the phase of realizing that the former way of development, our former behavior as a nation no longer works. Russia was an extensively developing state, expanding within its borders at a tremendous pace. It is no coincidence that they became the largest country in the world, it did not happen “by itself”. Any historian will tell you that the colonization of the same Siberia looked somewhat different than the myth of the voluntary annexation of the Chukchi and Eskimos. But the state has reached some limits. Moreover, 1991 marked a reverse movement. We began to lose territory. We lost Kazakhstan, Ukraine, in terms of population, half the country in general. Where to go next? Trying to return to the traditional, natural for Russia way of territorial expansion, expansion? In what ways? Especially in a situation where we are weak. Other powers are much more powerful. Or change this national code. Realize our boundaries and understand that we need to equip life here and now. It is necessary, in the words of Vladimir Putin, "like St. Francis of Assisi, to cultivate your garden every day, to hoe it." This, it would seem, is a simple idea, but for many Russians, unfortunately, it is still very difficult. All the time we lived for the sake of a great goal and did not notice small difficulties like the lack of improvement in residential buildings, did not pay attention to it. And now they have to deal with the arrangement of their lives, but they are not used to this yet. So for the time being it is difficult with the national idea. As for the regional idea, I think that at the regional level it is much more difficult than at the settlement level. The most lively theme is when a city or a village comes up with an idea, a brand. Tourists go to places where residents love their city. It is cherished, cultivated, decorated, improved. For something, residents should love their city, this is the brand. When the leadership of the city and its residents see that the population is declining, leaving, and the city will conditionally disappear by 2015, it becomes a shock. They start thinking about how to stop such dynamics, interesting projects appear. Everyone now knows about Veliky Ustyug - the birthplace of Father Frost. And 15 years ago there was no homeland of Santa Claus. This is a completely handmade story. In the mid-1990s, a crisis reigned. People thought about how to survive, there are no resources, there are no unique industries. They came up with this brand and began to promote it. Now in Veliky Ustyug they are trying to convert a military airfield into a civilian one, because trains and buses cannot cope with the delivery of tourists. This is an example, of course, not of a national or regional idea. But such an urban idea makes its way and really changes the quality of life, dramatically improving it. The quality of life and worldview of people has grown. There is a huge space for such ideas in Russia. Denis Fateev: - Tell us about at least one unusual study that VTsIOM plans to conduct in the near future. Valery Fedorov: - Together with the National Olympic Committee, we are developing an ambitious program of research related to sports issues. Today, sport in Russia is developing mainly at the expense of the state or some near-state sponsors. This is a very expensive toy, which, unfortunately, does not work the way it does in the West, when the sport itself makes a lot of money. With us, he only consumes them. It is necessary to find a formula how to remove this gigantic burden from the shoulders of the state, how to come up with a self-propelled mechanism for sports. Alexander Skorbenko: – Will VTsIOM surveys take place in the Tyumen region in the near future? Valery Fedorov: – We recently completed a large study on the socio-political situation in the Tyumen region, which was commissioned by the regional government. In October, we plan to conduct a district-wide study throughout the Ural Federal District, including in the Tyumen region. About 50 key parameters will be measured, including how the population evaluates the quality of public services and the effectiveness of government. ---quick survey– Do you have authorities in science? If so, who? - Russian sociologist Boris Grushin and George Gallup, founder of the scientific sociology of public opinion. - How do you like to spend your free time? - I go to Tyumen. - The most unusual gift you have ever received? - My wife gave me for the 14th wedding anniversary 14 bottles of red wine. I'm still trying to drink it. - And the most unusual gift that you made yourself? - It's still ahead. - Do you have a favorite dish and do you know how to cook it yourself? - No, and again no. - Favorite writer and poet? - Lev Tolstoy. I read "War and Peace" at school, read it for three months, it made a very deep impression on me. But there is no favorite poet. I have a hard time with poets. Only prose. - Do you like opera? - Yes. I prefer Italian, mostly Puccini. – What about your favorite performers? – There are many of them. Of the living ones - Jose Carreras. - Are you friends with sports? - Only in the category of physical exercises. - Do you like to drive? If yes, for what? - Every day I drive - I manage VTsIOM. It's been eight years now. “But you still have to drive a car?” “Of course. But I prefer walking. - Tell us about your family. - Two daughters, the youngest went to school this year. The eldest is in the eighth grade. - Do you read fairy tales to children at night? - I read the younger one, of course. - Does your family support you in work and life? – Of course, he does. – Fedorov is a well-known surname. Did you keep track of who your ancestors were? - I have such an idea. In November, there will be a presentation of a documentary about the Fedorovs at the Film Actor's House. I was invited to his presentation, I will speak for 40 minutes before the film. There are a lot of Fedorovs, and it is quite difficult to trace your own. But maybe that's a matter for the future. When I retire, I will.

Since ancient times, the wording has been known: "The voice of the people is the voice of God." Sociologists are engaged in the study of public opinion of the inhabitants of any of the developed modern states. What role does the opinion of the people play in determining the internal policy of the state? How changeable are the moods of citizens and how to navigate in the polyphony of modern society? The journalists of the newspaper talked about this during the next meeting of the “From the First Person” club with the Director General of the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM), Professor of the Higher School of Economics Valery Fedorov. Valery Valeryevich visited Tyumen as the main speaker of the fifth Governor's readings. We bring to the attention of the readers the text of the conversation, given in abbreviation.
Alexander Skorbenko:
“More than two millennia ago, Pythagoras claimed that numbers ruled the world. Tell me, can everything nowadays be calculated, expressed in numbers so that the existing reality is completely understandable and rationalized?
Valery Fedorov:

- I must say that sociologists are often confused with statisticians - it is the latter who are responsible for digital calculations. It is assumed that all data determined by statisticians have absolute accuracy. No one really thinks. Only statistical departments are capable, for example, of the state population census. By the way, one can treat the results of the last all-Russian census differently, but the paradox is that no one has more accurate data. No institution has the resources and therefore the ability to conduct an alternative count.

Sociological research, in turn, deals with certain errors. Unlike statisticians, we do not claim that our figures are the most accurate. They are accurate, but with some "interval". For example, the error in the data of all-Russian sociological surveys is 3.4 percent. In other words, if we say that “15 percent of voters can vote for a given politician,” this means that in reality, from 12.6 to 18.4 percent of voters can vote for him.

Sociological studies do not claim to contain absolute truth. At the same time, we can say with some accuracy what people think and how they plan to act in the future.

Alexander Skorbenko:
– However, sociologists, with the help of research results, have the opportunity to influence public opinion...
Valery Fedorov:

- There is even such a joke: "Public opinion is studied in order to tell the people what they really think." In fact, poll results are reported not by sociologists, but by journalists - we do not have our own mass media. The official website of VTsIOM is working: www.wciom.ru, where the results of the research are presented as fully, in detail and with all notes and reservations. The site is actively visited by analysts and media observers. At the same time, each newspaper, radio and TV channel has its own genre of news reporting and event analysis.

Therefore, they convey to the audience those figures and data that they consider necessary and important. Sociologists are not responsible for this.

Journalists like to operate with numbers from the results of sociological surveys, because the numbers give the illusion of clarity. A person, say, has some kind of opinion that is not formed into a clear thought, it cannot be confirmed by anything. Numerical data confirm this opinion, being a "reinforced concrete argument". Therefore, sociological data is sometimes seen as something that corresponds to the inner convictions of certain interpreters. In fact, the numbers are different, including "evil". But it's better than no clear data at all. That is why society and the state have a request for the activities of sociological services. It’s just that “you need to see the forest behind the trees”, and behind the numbers – the essence of the processes taking place in society.

Denis Fateev:
– Another problem is how sincerely people answer the questions posed by sociologists. Of course, this factor can be neutralized by a well-composed sample, but still, what determines the nature of citizens' answers in the course of a sociological survey?
Valery Fedorov:

– You know, a person's opinion depends on the situation. When it is bad, painful, hungry, he wants only a piece of bread for happiness. But as soon as he gets bread, it immediately becomes insufficient. And the mood may not improve, but worsen. As sociologists, we measure the mood of the population by the answers to our questions. And the mood of people is very changeable. How can it be explained? Weather, strife in the family, internal accumulated irritation. Or vice versa, spiritual uplift. The sun came out - and it seems that life is not so sad.

One example: surveys were conducted in all regions of the Ural Federal District in April and June 2011. Specific questions were asked: how satisfied is the healthcare system? Estimates obtained at intervals of three months, for many indicators in different regions, have changed above the statistical
errors - by 5-10 percent. What could change radically in three months? Never mind! Health care and medical care is a serious system, and it will take a long time for something to change significantly in it. It's just that in June people started vacations, other worries appeared.

Summing up, I will say that sociologists provide data that the authorities, the governing structures should take into account. People can also take note. A third of the respondents said that they listen to the data of sociological research, which they receive from the media. This served as the basis for the whole concept of our sociological science, which is called "Let's return public opinion to the people." That is, let's ask not for the authorities, but for the people themselves.

Alexander Skorbenko:
– In ordinary consciousness, the opinion prevails that the whole society can be “calculated”, its thoughts, habits and aspirations can be clarified, right down to the passions of each person. From this you will hide only on a desert island. Is this idea of ​​the capabilities of sociologists and statisticians correct, in your opinion?
Valery Fedorov:

– The opinion that supposedly everything can be calculated does not correspond to the real state of affairs. Moreover, quantitative sociology is only a small branch of the sociology of public opinion. There are also so-called qualitative methods of sociological science. They do not operate with numbers, but they give more interesting and meaningful answers to questions that interest us.

The specifics of the work of sociologists is as follows: everything they know, they know from people thanks to public opinion polls. In other words, if we don’t know something, then we go and ask, and people answer. But do people themselves know everything? that is the question!

In sociological science, a paradox has long been defined, which indicates the fact that people tend to say one thing, think another, and act in a completely different way. Moreover, they do not dissemble and do not lie, this is how the human brain and personal behavior are arranged. Therefore, I am convinced that sociological data, expressed in figures, must be treated with attention, but not considered as "the ultimate truth." This is just one of the research tools.

Raisa Kovdenko:
– In the days of the USSR, there was, at least on a visible level, “popular approval” of the measures of the party and government. 99.9 percent of voters always came to the elections. Are there currently mechanisms for managing public opinion?
Valery Fedorov:

– Sociological research was also carried out in Soviet times. Another thing is that their results were not published, since the party bodies and special services acted as customers. These polls showed that no "monolithic unity of the Soviet people" actually existed.

The decomposition of Soviet society into social, professional and other strata or groups began in the mid-1960s and early 1970s. In 1967, the famous Soviet, Russian sociologist Boris Grushin published a book. By the way, by the fact of its publication, it approved both the phenomenon of public opinion in the USSR and the science for its study. Prior to this, nothing like this could have happened within the framework of the dominant Marxist-Leninist ideology in our country.

The studies of Boris Grushin showed with all clarity that there was no unity in Soviet society. There is a complex society, which, moreover, has become more and more differentiated. Moreover, each social group of the population had its own interests and beliefs.

So the current Russian society is maximally individualized. And if in response to a number of questions the population speaks unambiguously “for”, this does not mean that there is no pluralism of opinions in society. On the contrary, it is very large.

People understand this, but I cannot say that they really like it - after all, a significant part of Russian citizens were brought up in a collectivist culture. There is nostalgia for the times when everyone was united, were together - at least outwardly. But collectivism no longer exists, and it cannot be returned.

Of course, today there are various modern control techniques. A complex information post-industrial society is unthinkable without
modern control techniques. An important of them is television, which introduces collective interests and attitudes into the public consciousness.

Oleg Bannykh, Managing Partner of the West Siberian Design Center, Yekaterinburg:
Why, then, measure popular opinion if it is the result of a certain manipulation?
Valery Fedorov:

- In world sociology, the topic of how man can be manipulated is one of the most popular over the past 50 years. There are different points of view. Someone says that a person today is a robot controlled by TV, the Internet. Our sociologists put forward another theory: there is a part of people who are really amenable to manipulation, but there is a part that is informationally insensitive. That is, whatever you say to them, they have their own point of view on everything. There are a lot of such people in Russia. Take the same communist electorate. Under any conditions, they will vote for their ideas. Here is an example of the fact that manipulation does not take place always and not everywhere. Therefore, of course, it is necessary to measure public opinion.

Alexander Skorbenko:
- Valery Valeryevich, does the state intrude into a person's personal life and to what extent? Or vice versa: the further, the more personal space will be won back?
Valery Fedorov:

- In my opinion, there is a convergence. Twenty years ago the world was divided by an iron curtain into west and east. The West was considered the free world, where the state acted as a night watchman. In our country, there was an opinion that the state and the person are one and the same, but this is a thing of the past, now they exist separately. The state does not seek to interfere in private life; each individual person is not particularly interesting to him. Moreover, it tries to relieve itself of unnecessary responsibility. From here come social reforms, rationalization of the public sector and more. Thus, a private space is created where a person is free to do what he pleases. However, many are not accustomed to this state of affairs and are waiting for instructions, which is quite understandable: seven dozen marched in a single formation in the direction indicated by the party and the government.

When there was no direction, there was a feeling of abandonment, depression, disorientation. This is the bitter price of freedom. We got it, but we often do not know how to dispose of it, because there are no techniques, strategies, a culture of disposing of freedom, resources. At the same time, Russia, in a sense, is one of the freest countries in the world, because laws do not work in it, customs, traditions have died, and new rules have practically not been developed.

In the West, the trend is opposite: society is becoming more complex, new technical means are being created (the Internet, smartphones, and much more), which dramatically simplify and reduce the cost of state control over a person. At the same time, the risks of terrorists, global warming, man-made disasters, and epidemics are increasing in parallel.

As a result, I repeat, we become more free, moving away from a totalitarian society, while in the West the process goes in the opposite direction - towards a more manageable system. In my opinion, we are moving forward. Question: at what point will we converge and will we converge?

Konstantin Eliseev:
– You vividly described the atomization of Russian society. The authorities are trying to put forward some common goals, realizing that the country needs a technological, social breakthrough ... But people, apparently, overstrained themselves during previous mobilizations and are rather cool about calls. Or am I wrong? What personal interest can help a person to join, for example, in the same modernization program?
Valery Fedorov:

- As for personal interest, in my opinion, this is the only thing we have been living in the last two decades. Of course, everyone understands it in their own way and lives according to the principle "my hut is on the edge" or "my shirt is closer to the body." If earlier the party and the government were responsible for everyone, now the person himself must bear the responsibility. Of course, any society will not be able to exist for a long time in a state of general discord, when everyone is only for himself, so some kind of braces are needed. This is, first of all, universal respect for the law and a system of measures that supports this respect. By the way, in the West the law works much tougher than in our country.

The system of measures includes the punitive apparatus, that is, the police, the prosecutor's office do not work for their own pocket, but to ensure that everyone understands that the operation of the law is inevitable. From the independence of the judiciary and the priority of law, the concept of a rule of law state just comes - a kind of "sacred cow" of modern Western societies. In Russia, however, such an internal attitude towards the law as the highest judge has not yet developed - remember the saying "the law is like a drawbar ...".

Another bond is the so-called national ideology. It is known that the Constitution of the Russian Federation prohibits any national ideology, which was recorded in 1993 in order to make it impossible to return to the communist past. At the same time, it is clear that in any society, as long as it remains a society, there are unshakable establishments that are universally valid for everyone. Let's take the USA for example. Yes, there are liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats, Bush and Obama, that is, certain poles. But at the same time, there are things that, in principle, are not discussed and are the same for everyone.

For example, “all Americans are patriots”: as soon as the anthem sounds, everyone gets up, sings and even cries. They have a national shrine, a shared vision that America is the best country in the world and always will be. Americans are convinced that only they know how to really live and are ready to teach others. It may not be spoken out loud, but it is present in the minds of everyone. Good or bad, but this is in fact the national ideology.

Our country, having emerged from the communist period and having imposed a taboo on a single ideology, has not concluded a certain convention, has not created a common field beyond which it is impossible to go. What can be the basis of this convention? Some believe that our “religion” is the Constitution, everyone should follow it and then everything will be fine. I think this is also an option. For Americans, the basis of their "civil religion" is also the US constitution. It is known that it has existed for two hundred years, has never changed - only amendments fit into it.

It is quite obvious that our attitude to the Basic Law of the country is somewhat different, so to speak, instrumental. Before the Yeltsin Constitution was Brezhnev's, until then Stalin's. Most importantly, none of them was implemented, so the attitude to the Basic Law of the country is the same as to any law. There are no common norms and values ​​in the state that could harmonize personal wills and strategies, and only if they were present, it would not be an internally contradictory society, but synergy, a general movement forward.

Of course, the problem of modernization cannot be solved unless a compromise is found - a way to link personal strategies and the strategy of the country as a whole. This is the main path to successful modernization. Otherwise, everyone who can modernize, that is, the youngest, most active, educated, with material resources, will implement plans for "personal modernization", that is, act individually. This means the following: either they will move to the West, because there is a better system for personal well-being and prosperity, there are traditions, relevant institutions work, etc., or they will physically remain in Russia, but their thoughts will be there.

Alexander Skorbenko:
­
- In your opinion, will the upcoming elections harmonize the situation in the foreseeable future?
Valery Fedorov:

- The situation with the elections is rather complicated. Twenty years ago, when many parties and candidates first appeared, the population had high hopes for elections. This capital of people's hopes was enough for about four years. Elected politicians began to implement a course that led to radical changes in society. I mean price liberalization, voucher privatization and a number of other painful reforms. It turned out that most expected something else. Left a bitter aftertaste after the 90s of the XX century.

The events of almost twenty years ago left, unfortunately, a significant negative experience of the electoral behavior of citizens. Since then, the attitude towards elections in society has been rather skeptical. If two decades ago they chose according to the principle of who is better, now “no matter what happens” or “the lesser of two evils”. This is also an element of atomization.

Ideally, they go to elections to hire a government that will work for the people and improve life. In reality, it turns out that we are going to the elections, but we are not expecting anything good.

The authorities have a completely different attitude towards elections. It is clear that in any democratic society elections are the only legitimate basis for the activities of the authorities. In particular, therefore, she is interested in approving this institution, in ensuring that the electoral process comes with a large turnout. This is a paradox: society does not believe in elections, but the authorities care about them.

Margarita Shamanenko:
- We are used to the fact that the Russians awaken their interest in political life only on the eve of the elections. And how are things in this sense with the electorate of Western countries?
Valery Fedorov:

– In most Western countries, people look at elections as a tool. This power does not suit me - I have to go to vote and change it to another one that will suit me. And the government itself treats this as a tool. Yes, today the government, and tomorrow the opposition, that's okay. I will sit in the opposition for four to eight years, then I will come to power again. That is, there are no emotions. Elections for them are not a war, but a game, a sport. Everyone understands what they are for, and use it.

In Russia, elections are more of a ritual than a rational way to solve a problem. Our elections are war. All or nothing. Therefore, the one who came to power tends to stay there forever. And anyone who takes part in the voting understands that this is more of an imitation than a real choice. Such a deformation has occurred. I think someday we'll get out of it.

Timur Khakimov:
- Does the government react to your work, to the results of your research?
Valery Fedorov:

– Of course, the authorities work very carefully with our data, precisely because they are authorities in a democratic society. There is simply no other source of legitimacy. Our government is not a monarchy. A person becomes president because people elect him, even if they do not believe in elections as an institution. He simply has nothing else to rely on, except for the people's will. Therefore, he always looks carefully: if the elections took place tomorrow, how many people would vote for me? Sometimes it even turns into paranoia. For example, in the United States, the president does not make a single decision without finding out how the Americans feel about it.

Konstantin Eliseev:
– This is not the first year that the center has been conducting research in the Tyumen region. What advantages do you see in the region in the light of the research?
Valery Fedorov:

– Indeed, by order of the regional government, we often organize public opinion polls in the Tyumen region. Against the general background, Tyumen looks better. The strengths include the resource base and the established tradition of management: it is obvious that the last decade of the region has been lucky with leadership. The stability of the socio-economic situation serves as the basis for work for the future. There is attention to the region from the federal authorities and, which is undoubtedly important, the active work of the leadership of the Tyumen region in line with the socio-economic development of the region.

According to the results of public opinion surveys, the living conditions in the region, in comparison with many other subjects of the Russian Federation, satisfy the population.

This is a good factor of competitiveness among regions. There is a high activity of residents in the region - 50 percent of respondents associate the improvement of life with their own work. Every second Tyumen citizen does not rely on the state, but on himself. For Russia, this is a very high figure.
There is also a factor in the perception of the history of the development of the territory - and this history is alive in the perception of the Tyumen people today. The theme of modernization and discoveries is not alien to the inhabitants of the region - the descendants of the pioneers of Siberia.

Another important factor of modernization is that a large proportion of citizens with higher education (11 percent) are employed in the fields of education, science and culture. In addition, 8 percent of the population is young students. Both together form an impressive basis for the innovative development of the region.

The following indicator is also associated with this factor - satisfaction of the bulk of the population of the Tyumen region with the quality of educational services.

According to VTsIOM, from 70 to 80 percent of the region's population gives high marks to the quality of education. This allows us to hope that young people will stay in the region, as well as come from other regions of the country. The quality of educational services is the first factor in the list of the possibility of modernization in the region, the Tyumen region has good potential in this sense.

Vladimir Polishchuk:
- At one time there were big talks about the national idea, now they somehow subsided. You are an informed person, perhaps there is some kind of working group that continues this work?
Alexander Skorbenko:
– What about the regional ideas of the Urals region? Is there a corporate connection of ideas? Small ideas of a small district - region - state.
Valery Fedorov:

- As far as I know, there is no working group at the federal level. Searches are going on, as they say, in everyone's head. And it seems to me that in the next 15-20 years they will not succeed. Because our nation and people are now in a rather difficult phase - in the phase of realizing that the former way of development, our former behavior as a nation no longer works. Russia was an extensively developing state, expanding within its borders at a tremendous pace. It is no coincidence that they became the largest country in the world, it did not happen “by itself”.

Any historian will tell you that the colonization of the same Siberia looked somewhat different than the myth of the voluntary annexation of the Chukchi and Eskimos. But the state has reached some limits.

Moreover, 1991 marked a reverse movement. We began to lose territory. We lost Kazakhstan, Ukraine, in terms of population, half the country in general. Where to go next? Trying to return to the traditional, natural for Russia way of territorial expansion, expansion? In what ways? Especially in a situation where we are weak. Other powers are much more powerful. Or change this national code. Realize our boundaries and understand that we need to equip life here and now. It is necessary, in the words of Vladimir Putin, "like St. Francis of Assisi, to cultivate your garden every day, to hoe it."

This, it would seem, is a simple idea, but for many Russians, unfortunately, it is still very difficult. All the time we lived for the sake of a great goal and did not notice small difficulties like the lack of improvement in residential buildings, did not pay attention to it. And now they have to deal with the arrangement of their lives, but they are not used to this yet. So for the time being it is difficult with the national idea.

As for the regional idea, I think that at the regional level it is much more difficult than at the settlement level. The most lively theme is when a city or a village comes up with an idea, a brand.

Tourists go to places where residents love their city. It is cherished, cultivated, decorated, improved. For something, residents should love their city, this is the brand.

When the leadership of the city and its residents see that the population is declining, leaving, and the city will conditionally disappear by 2015, it becomes a shock. They start thinking about how to stop such dynamics, interesting projects appear. Everyone now knows about Veliky Ustyug - the birthplace of Father Frost. And 15 years ago there was no homeland of Santa Claus. This is a completely handmade story.

In the mid-1990s, a crisis reigned. People thought about how to survive, there are no resources, there are no unique industries. They came up with this brand and began to promote it. Now in Veliky Ustyug they are trying to convert a military airfield into a civilian one, because trains and buses cannot cope with the delivery of tourists.

This is an example, of course, not of a national or regional idea. But such an urban idea makes its way and really changes the quality of life, dramatically improving it. The quality of life and worldview of people has grown. There is a huge space for such ideas in Russia.

Denis Fateev:
– Tell us about at least one unusual study that VTsIOM is planning to conduct in the near future.
Valery Fedorov:

“Together with the National Olympic Committee, we are developing an ambitious program of research related to sports issues. Today, sport in Russia is developing mainly at the expense of the state or some near-state sponsors. This is a very expensive toy, which, unfortunately, does not work the way it does in the West, when the sport itself makes a lot of money. With us, he only consumes them. It is necessary to find a formula how to remove this gigantic burden from the shoulders of the state, how to come up with a self-propelled mechanism for sports.

Alexander Skorbenko:
– Will VTsIOM research be carried out in the Tyumen region in the near future?
Valery Fedorov:

- We recently completed a large study on the socio-political situation in the Tyumen region, which was commissioned by the regional government. In October, we plan to conduct a district-wide study throughout the Ural Federal District, including in the Tyumen region. About 50 key parameters will be measured, including how the population evaluates the quality of public services and the effectiveness of government.

The child saves money and I give a certain amount every month

In the strict sense of the word, creation means the creation of all material or physical reality, as well as all spiritual beings besides God Himself, but it also implies further production from the created material. We see an indication of this already in the story of the book of Genesis: "Let the water bring forth ..." (Gen. 1:20) or: "Let the earth bring forth ..." (Gen. 1:24). The description of the creation of man shows that

a certain material was used - "the dust of the earth" (Gen. 2:7). Eve was created from Adam's rib (Gen. 2:21). God also formed all the animals of the field and all the birds of the air from the earth (Gen. 2:19). It is quite possible that at first God simply created matter out of nothing, and then he gave form to everything from the atoms He created. The various kinds produced later were as much God's work as the creation of the original matter. Therefore, if God is constantly at work, His creative works include the creation of genetic species that arose later, even such as modern varieties of roses, hybrid types of grain, cattle, dogs. In these last cases, man acts as a partner of God. Keep in mind, however, that man is working with what God has already created. Therefore, even the species created today are also the work of God, for everything is done on the basis of the material created by Him and the genetic laws established by Him.

Theological meaning of the doctrine

Let us now turn to the consideration of the theological meaning of the doctrine of creation. What is it that they are essentially asserting? And, for us it is no less important, what is rejected by him?

1. First of all, the doctrine of creation clearly means that everything that is not God originates from Him. In other words, the idea that there is another ultimate reality besides God is rejected. There is no place for dualism. In dualism, by definition, there are two ultimate principles. There is the Lord, the Creator, the Creator. And there is what the Creator uses, what He works on, the material with which He creates. Greek ideas were in one sense or another dualistic. A typical example is the dualism of matter and form. There is an order, a structure or a scheme to everything - Forms or Ideas. And there is something that needs to be put in order, structured or organized - matter. The process of creation, therefore, consists of someone or something connecting these two categories.

together or impresses the form on matter. But Christian teaching advocates a different approach. God was not working on something that already existed. He created the raw material, which he then used. If it were not so, God would not be infinite. It would mean the existence of something that has always been. And God's work would depend on the intrinsic properties of the material He used. According to Christian teaching, God Himself created this material and from the very beginning endowed it with the properties that He wanted.

2. The original act of divine creation is unique. It is not like the human "creative" business of processing and modeling improvised materials. When creating a work of art, the artist depends on the properties of the material used, whether it be the malleability of the metal, the characteristics of the paints, the language he uses, or the speed and clarity of the frames in the film. Moreover, the thoughts expressed by the artist depend on his previous experience. His work can either be a direct reflection personal experience, or an expression of previously experienced in some other form; genuinely new and fresh ideas are extremely rare. Even if a writer tries to create a new language to convey his ideas, he is still bound by language restrictions as such. God is not bound by any external circumstances. His only limitations relate to His own nature and the choice He has made. God does not

no materials needed. Therefore, unlike human "creations", His works cannot be frustrated by the inherent properties of the material used.

3. The doctrine of creation also means that nothing internally vicious has been created. Everything comes from God, and in the story of creation it is repeated five times: God saw that it was good (Gen. 1:10,12,18, 21, 25). Then, after completing the creation of man, God saw everything He had created and found it to be very good (Gen. 1:31). There was nothing corrupt in God's original creation.

In any variety of dualism, an internal distinction is made between high and low principles or elements. Since the higher realm is divine and the lower is not, the former is thought to be more real than the latter. Ultimately, this metaphysical difference begins to be considered as a moral one - the higher belongs to the sphere of good, and the lower to the sphere of evil. This distinction is made in the later

Platonism. Plato taught that Ideas and Forms, invisible concepts, are more real. For their part, tangible or experiential objects are but shadows cast by the Forms. In Neoplatonism, a moral distinction began to be made. The material or visible sphere is considered vicious, and the spiritual or invisible is moral. Under the influence of Neoplatonism and other varieties of dualism such as Manichaeism, some Christians also began to view the material world as inherently corrupt.

If, however, all reality owes its origin to God, and if everything God did was "good," we cannot regard matter as inherently and organically evil. Here a problem arises: Christianity, like any other worldview system, must reckon with the presence of evil in the world. Dualistic theories solve this question very simply. Since God is good, He cannot be the source of evil.

Therefore, everything that is not God, such as the matter with which He had to work, is a haven of evil. But consistent creationism cannot resort to such a trick, because it starts from the premise that nature does not have such an independent status. At the same time, according to the biblical story, God, who created everything, cannot be held responsible for the presence of evil and sin in the world. And not because He did not create the world, but because He created it good, and even very good. Therefore, evil is not the result of an imperfect creation, a marriage in work. Where does evil come from? We will return to this issue in Chapter 19.

4. The doctrine of creation places responsibility on man. He cannot justify his behavior by referring to the presence of evil in the material realm. There is no organic evil in the material world. Man's sin is a manifestation of his own freedom. He cannot escape responsibility for his deeds. Nor can he pass it on to society. The sins of a particular individual are often explained by the influence of society. The matter is presented in such a way that a person is a moral being, and an immoral society pushes him to sin. But human society is also part of God's creation, and it was very good. Therefore, the idea of ​​society as a source of sin is wrong and

erroneously. If society was originally good, we should ask ourselves: why has it become so today?

5. The doctrine of creation prevents us from underestimating the incarnation of Christ. If evil were organically inherent in the material world , it would be difficult to explain the fact that the second Person of the Trinity bound the human form, including the physical body. Indeed, there were people who proceeded from the idea of ​​the depravity of matter and, on this basis, denied the reality of the physical body of Jesus. He just "appeared" in human flesh. They were called "docetics" from the Greek word dokew ("to appear"). On the other hand, a correct understanding of the doctrine of creation - everything created by God was good - allows us to affirm the fullness of the incarnation of Jesus Christ - with the assumption of human flesh.

The doctrine of creation keeps us from asceticism. Belief in the depravity of material nature induces many, including Christians, to suppress the physical body and give up all pleasures. The spiritual realm, being more divine, appears to be the only bearer of goodness and righteousness. Such people are engaged in meditation, and the conditions of spirituality are considered a strict diet and abstinence from sexual life. But the doctrine of creation states that God created everything, and made everything good. Everything is redeemable. Salvation and spirituality are achieved not by escaping from the material world, but by sanctifying it.

6. If the whole creation is done by God, there is a similarity and connection between its various parts. I am a brother to all other people, for God created us all and takes care of all of us.

Since inanimate matter also comes from God, I am essentially one with nature, for we are members of the same family. Between us can; conflicts arise, but these are rather family quarrels, and not a fight with an external enemy. All creation belongs to God and matters to Him. We humans tend to consider ourselves the only children of God, and therefore the only objects of His paternal love. But Jesus made it clear that God loves and cares for all of His creation (Matthew 6:26-30; 10:29). Everything belongs to Him, and everything is as important to Him as we are.

7. The doctrine of creation excludes not only any form of dualism, but also a type of monism that considers the world as an emanation of God. According to the doctrine of creation, God simply creates from nothing. The various objects and beings that make up creation do not come from God. According to the supporters of the theory of emanation, we are dealing with the outpouring of God's nature, with the separation from Him of a part of His essence. This implies that emanation preserves Divinity, so such views usually lead to pantheism. According to such notions, we are talking about a change in position, and not about the beginning of a new being.

It could be assumed that such a view of the world as an emanation of God should greatly enhance the idea of ​​the status of its constituent parts, since they all come from the divine nature. In practice, the opposite often happens. The result is a belittling of the independent status of individual

objects or even the thesis about the illusory nature of independent existence. Since all objects and beings are part of God, it is important to close the distance between them and God as much as possible. Personality should be kept to a minimum. The goal is to join together. From nouns with their own status, the constituent parts of the world turn into adjectives for the ultimate reality, God.

The Christian doctrine of creation from nothing rejects all this. The constituent parts of the world are genuine creations that depend on God the Creator. They are clearly separated from Him (they are not an emanation of His nature) and are finite, dependent creations. Sin does not come from limitation and finitude, it is not an evil that must simply be separated and limited. Sin comes from man's misuse of his limited freedom, from the desire to be independent of God (and therefore equal to Him). Further, limitation does not disappear in the process of salvation. Salvation does not consist in the negation of created humanity, it is essentially the fulfillment, the restoration of created humanity.

Further, the doctrine of creation points to the limitations inherent in creation. No being or group of beings can be equal to God. He always rises above them as the Creator, they never were and never will be God. Therefore, there is no basis for idolatry - the worship of nature or man. Nature and man are lower than God, one should never forget about the distance between Him and God's creations. God is in a unique position and only He should be worshiped (Ex. 20:2-3).

We sometimes think of a huge metaphysical gap in the universe as a quantitative gap between man and the rest of creation. In fact, there is an enormous metaphysical quantitative And a qualitative gap between God and everything else517. He alone must be worshipped, praised and

obey. All other beings have only to demonstrate to Him these acts of obedience.