طرحواره‌ ذهنی، فضای شهری، خلاقیت

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار شهرسازی، دانشکده شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

2 کارشناس ارشد برنامه‌ریزی شهری و منطقه‌ای، دانشکده شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

در دهه‌های اخیر، تلاش‌های فراوانی در جهت رفع بحران‌ انگارگانی برنامه‌ریزی، در قالب گفتمان «خلاقیت» و تحت عناوینی همچون «شهر خلاق»، «طبقه‌ خلاق»، «برنامه‌ریزی فرهنگی» و غیره شده‌ است که به بحث خلاقیت به اتکاء طبقه‌ متوسط خلاق، از زاویه‌ بازآفرینی فرهنگی می‌نگرند. اما به نظر می‌رسد که عموم محققان، موضوع خلاقیت را از دریچه‌ روند شکل‌گیری خلاقیت در ارگانیسم انسان‌ها مورد مطالعه قرار نداده‌اند. درنتیجه‌، موضوع فرهنگ را به‌عنوان ابزار رشد صرفاً اقتصادی به‌کار گرفته‌اند. این پژوهش در پی پاسخ به این سؤالات است که، خلاقیت به‌عنوان محصول فرآیند آگاهی و اندیشیدن انسان، چگونه شکل می‌گیرد و چگونه در رابطه‌ با محیط، تحدید یا تقویت می‌شود و فضای شهری، چگونه بر این فرآیند اثر می‌گذارد. بنابراین هدف این مقاله، شفافیت بخشیدن به رابطه‌ میان موضوع خلاقیت و فضای شهری، به‌عنوان مهم‌ترین عرصه‌ عمومی آزادی اندیشه، بیان، اجتماع و عمل بالنده‌ آحاد جامعه بر اساس علم روان‌شناسی شناختی و جامعه‌شناسی است. فرضیه‌ تحقیق آن است که اولاً شخصیت غیرخلاق وجود ندارد و تفاوت افراد در میزان پشتکار و جستجوگری افراد است؛ ثانیاً یک فضای شهری خلاق، بستر رشد، تبلور و تجلی خلاقیت آحاد جامعه است که امکان آزادی بیان و عمل و حیات مدنی دارند و انگیزه‌ لازم برای کنش خلاق افراد هنگامی دائمی و پایدار است که شرایط متعادل اقتصادی، اجتماعی و حیات مدنی به‌گونه‌ای باشد که ارزش کار اجتماعاً تولید‌شده‌ انسان‌ها به خودشان تعلق گیرد. روش این مطالعه، تحلیل و استنتاج ترکیبی از گزاره‌های دانش روان‌شناسی شناختی است که در مرحله‌ ترکیب، فضا به مثابه عین و خلاقیت به مثابه امر ذهنی در ربط دیالکتیکی قرار می‌گیرند و روش جدلی قیاس و استقراء توأمان در گفتمان بحث حاکم است. نتایج این پژوهش، مؤید آن است که فضای شهری، عرصه‌ای عمومی و متکی به دموکراسی است که تجلی رابطه‌ روان‌شناختی اندیشه‌ورزی و کنش اجتماعی است که می‌تواند بستر خلاقیت باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Mental Schema, Urban Space, Creativity

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamid Reza Parsi 1
  • Behrad Farmahini Farahani 2
1 Associate Professor of Faculty of Urban Planning, Campus of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 M.A. in Urban and Regional Planning, School of Urban Planning, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

In recent decades, researchers have attempted to solve the ideological crisis of urban planning in the form of “Creativity” discourse under the titles of “Creative City”, “Creative Cultural Jobs”, “Cultural Planning”, “Cultural Territory”, “Cultural Industry”, etc., which have relied on cultured creative middle class( from the cultural urban regeneration point of view. On the other hand, Urban Gentrification policies that have appeared in the struggle over the culture and its meaning on spatial planning are related to this issue. But it seems that the process of a creativity action in the organism of the mankind have not been studied by researchers. Thus, they have used the culture for defining some concepts like Creative City and Creative Class, only as a tool of economic growth, not necessarily for social-economic development of the societies. Whereas the culture is arising from social-historical work of human’s mediated actions it makes everyone aware of his subject in the world. In this study, it is explained that the creativity is a product of thinking and cognition process, all the people are creative, despite of the class they belong to, how environment can restrict or encourage the creativity, and what is the interplay between creativity and urban space. Our hypothesis is that, first of all, the people are creative, and differences are in their attempt, perseverance and quest for trust. Thus we study the relationships between men and the environment, how culture and social dynamism in urban space can be formed during the attempts for solving daily problems by changing mental schemas. When a person discovers a new answer for a problem, he makes a new mental schema and will change his previous mental schema. During this interaction between objectivity and subjectivity, creativity will be arising from the process of internalizing and externalizing, when the discovered mental schema is a new one. It will be proved that a creative urban space is the base of manifestation, appearance and growth of creativity of the people who have rights of expression and action. The motivation of creative action will become permanent when the socially made value of labor of people will be achieved by themselves. With regard to the aim of this paper, our method has oriented to monism approach and dialectics of subjectivity and objectivity of creativity and urban space. Our method has three dimensions: First, system approach and structural analysis; second, linkage analysis of all relations of system and its mechanism of functions; and third, dynamism of processes of system. Thus, process of dialectics between objectivity and subjectivity of creativity and urban space is in the process of social system as a whole. Therefore our first apriority in this method is that human and environment and especially urban environments which are elements of one social system as a whole, and each of them have its own function and complexity in their relationships and have effects the processes and whole dynamism of social system. But stability of dynamism of social system is depend on regulation between functions and serves progress of system. By this approach, we can explain relationship between mankind and his environment in the stable process of “becoming” and dynamism of social system. In this regard it is obvious that our findings in this research might be divided to three issues: One, relation between mankind and process of its creativity. Two, social dynamism of society and public sphere and its effects on characterizing process manifestation of urban space. Three, relation between urban space and creativity. We suggest researchers, who wants to study and work about creative urban space and creativity, refer to social psychology and cognitive psychology papers, because understanding creative city issue depends on understanding relationship between: 1) cognition process, thought and creativity in the perspective of cognitive psychology; 2)existence of democracy, freedom of expression, and freedom of action which is related to the sociology; and 3)spatial order and public space as the most important factor of social growth, production, and development opportunities. Thus, in research and analysis public domain and urban space, not only morphology and form of urban space must be considered but also the contents and characters of social–cultural forces, that reflects historical, cultural, social and physical potentialities of cities should be studied.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • creativity
  • Vygotsky
  • culture
  • Creative City
  • System Approach
  • cognition

Aryanpour, A.H. (2014). Sociology of Art. Tehran: Gostareh Publication. (In Persian).

Bertalanffy, L.V. (1987). General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. (K. Paryani, Trans.). Tehran: Tondar Publication. (In Persian).

Bottomore, Th. B. (2013). Elits and Society. (A.R. Tayyeb, Trans.). Tehran: Pardis-e Danesh Publication. (In Persian).

Bonnewitz, P. (2011). The First Lesson Buch Bourdieu Sociology. (J. Jahangiri & H. Poursafir, Trans.). Tehran: Agah Publication. (In Persian).

Bourdieu, P. (2014). Practical Reasons: on the Theory of Action. (M. Mardiha, Trans.). Tehran: Naghsh-o Negar Publication. (In Persian). 

Burnham, J. (1941). The Managerial Revolution: What is Happening in the World. New York: John Day Co.

Cuche, D. (2010). The Notion of Culture in Social Sciences. (F. Vahida, Trans.). Tehran: Soroush Publication. (In Persian). 

Cuthbert, A.R. (2006). The Form of Cities: Political Economy and Urban Design. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

De Bono, E. (1995). Exploring Patterns of Though: Serious Creativity. Journal of Quality and Participation, 18(5), 12-18.

Dillon, P. (2006). Creativity, Integrativism and Pedagogy of Connection. Journal of Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1, 69-83. 

Fijalkow, Y. (2009). Sociology of Cities. (A.H. Nikgohar, Trans.). Tehran: Agah Publication. (In Persian). 

Florida, R. (2011). Cities and the Creative Class. (E. Ansari, Trans.). Tehran: Jame-shenasan Publication. (In Persian). 

Gardner, H. (2013). Changing Minds: the Art and Science of Changing Our Own and Other People’s Minds. (S.K. Kharrazi, Trans.). Tehran: Ney Publication. (In Persian).‬

Ghasemzadeh, H. (2006). Mental Schema, Culture and Change. Journal of Baztab-e-Danesh.1 (1). 57-68. 

Ghasemzadeh, H. (2013). Metaphor and Cognition. Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (In Persian). ‬

Gray, J.A. (1983). Pavlov. (M. Behzad, Trans.). Tehran: Kharazmi Publication. (In Persian). 

Gurvitch, G. (2012). The Current Vocation of Sociology. (F. Sarmad, Trans.). Tehran: Kand-o Kav Publication. (In Persian). ‬

Halbwachs, M. (1990). The Psychology of Social Class, (A.M. Kardan, Trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran Publication. (In Persian). 

Hall, P. (1999). Cities in Civilization: Culture, Innovation and Urban Order. Journal of the English Historical Review, 116(465), 155-156.

Harvey, D. (2014). The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism. (M. Amini, Trans.). Tehran: Kalagh Publication. (In Persian). 

Harvey, D. & Merrifield, A. (2012). The Right to the City. (Kh. Kalantari, Trans.). Tehran: Mehrvista Publication. (In Persian). 

Harvie, J. (2014). Theatre and the City. (S. Khamse-Nezhad, Trans.). Tehran: Morvarid Publication. (In Persian). 

Hegel, G.W.F. (2008). Lordship and Bondage. Interpreted by Alexandre Kojeve from “Phenomenology of Spirit”. (H. Enayat, Trans.). Tehran: Kharazmi Publication. (In Persian).

Ilyenkov, E.V. (2014). Dialectical logic Essays on its History and Theory. (B. Eslah-pazir, Trans.). Tehran: Roozamad Publication. (In Persian).

Jahangiri, B. (2014). Brain and Creativity. Journal of Baztab-e Danesh. 9(33-34), 5-14. (In Persian).

Khorasani, Sh. (2014). World and Human in Philosophy. Tehran: Shahid-Beheshti University. (In Persian). 

Kozulin, A. (2013). Vygotsky’s Psychology: a Biography of Ideas. (H. Ghasemzadeh, Trans.). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (In Persian).

Lektorsky, V.A. (1999). The Activity Theory in a New Era. in Yrjö Engeström, Reijo Miettinen, Raija-Leena Punamäki, (Eds.) Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press, 347-360.

Luria, A.R. (2001). The Making of Mind: a Personal Account of Soviet Psychology. (H. Ghasemzadeh, Trans.). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (In Persian).

Luria, A.R. (2010). The Cognitive Development: Its Cultural and Social Foundations. (H. Ghasemzadeh, Trans.). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (In Persian).

Machiavelli, N. (2015a). The Discourses‬. (M.H. Lotfi, Trans.). Tehran: Kharazmi Publication. (In Persian). 

Machiavelli, N. (2015b). The Prince. (D. Ashoori, Trans.). Tehran: Agah Publication. (In Persian)

Musto, M. (2010). Karl Marx’s Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy 150 Years Later. (H. Mortazavi, Trans.). Tehran: Nika Publication. (In Persian).

Ogburn, W.F. (2009). Sociology. (A.H. Aryanpour, Trans.). Tehran: Gostareh Publication. (In Persian).

Pareto, V. (1991). The Rise and Fall of Elites: An Application of Theoretical Sociology. New Jersey, Transaction Publishers. Originally Published in 1968 by The Bedminster Press Inc.

Plekhanov, G.V. (2002). Fundamental Problems of Marxism. (P. Babaee, Trans.). Tehran: Azadmehr Publication. (In Persian).

Rocher, G.‬ (2012). Talcott Parsons and American Sociology. (A.H. Nikgohar, Trans.). Tehran: Ney Publication. (In Persian). 

Sadeghi Mal-Amiri, M. (2007). Creativity a Systemic Approach Individual, Group, Organization. Tehran: Imam-Hossein University. (In Persian). 

Sadovskii, V. N., E. Grigorevich Udin and I. Blouberg (1982). Systems Theory: Philosophical and Methodological Problems. (K. Paryani, Trans.). Tehran: Tondar Publication. (In Persian). 

Saif, A.A. (2007). Modern Educational Psychology. Tehran: Doran Publication. (In Persian). 

Shaeeri, M.R., & Asghari-moghaddam, M.A. (2010). Creativity: Preliminary Schema of a Theoretical Model. Journal of Baztab-e Danesh. 4(15), 10-16. (In Persian).

Singer, P. (2014). Hegel. (E. Fouladvand, Trans.). Tehran: Tarh-e no Publication. (In Persian). 

Smith, P. D. (2012). Cultural Theory: an Introduction. (H. Pouyan, Trans.). Tehran: Daftar-e Pajouhesh-haye Farhangi Publication. (In Persian).

Stoetzel, J. (1992). Social Psychology. (A.M. Kardan, Trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran Publication. (In Persian). 

Tikhomirov, O.K. (1999). The Theory of Activity Changed by Information Technology. In Yrjö Engeström, Reijo Miettinen, Raija-Leena Punamäki, (Eds.) Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press, 347-360.

Tinder, G. (1995). Political Thinking. (M. Sadri, Trans.). Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi Publication. (In Persian).

Tonkiss, F. (2009). Space, the City and Social Theory: Social Relations and Urban Forms. (H.R. Parsi & A. Aflatouni, Trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran. (In Persian). 

Vygotsky, L.S. (2008). Thought and Language. (H. Ghasemzadeh, Trans.). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (In Persian).

Vygotsky, L.S. (2004). Imagination in Creativity in Childhood. Journal of Russian and East Psychology. 42(1), 7-97.

Wright Mills, C. (1956). The Power Elite. Oxford University Press.

Zhang, X. and K.M. Bartol. (2010). Linking Empowering Leadership and Employee Creativity: The Influence of Psychological Empowerment, Intrinsic Motivation and Creative Process Engagement. Journal of Academy of Management, 2010, 53(1), 107-128.