p The proposed theory of phantasy relies above all on the findings of experimental research described in the previous Chapter. However, to obtain a comprehensive evaluation and check of this theory, we found it necessary to analyze a vast body of data obtained by other researchers and facts from various spheres of creative activity.
p The analysis of this additional data suggests that the proposed theory, far from being refuted by them, provides them with a rational explanation. Indeed, the psychological features of such artistic and scientific tools as analogy, tropes, symbols, and abstraction, and of some negative phenomena in productive activities (inadequate pictures, logical fallacies, and various irrational constructions) can be seen as the result of the operation of the proposed phantasy mechanisms of anaxiomatization and hyperaxiomatization. Researchers have fairly often come across facts which could have suggested to them new theoretical views, but unduly high evaluation of traditional opinions resulted in the devaluation of the new experimental data.
182p Consideration of specific forms of creative activity has revealed the diverse manifestations of both mechanisms. Depending on its nature and direction, anaxiomatization brings about different results. Thus disregard of quantitative and qualitative variations of objects enables us to establish an analogy between them; devaluation of the prevailing differences between phenomena, devaluation of differences between the genus and the species, the part and the whole, the animate and the inanimate, the substitute and the substituent, etc. is basic to the formation of tropes and symbols; neglect of details that are, in one respect or another, secondary, leads to the creation of schematic images; rejection of routine solutions encourages original ideas and discoveries; devaluation of insignificant (accidental) features is the technique used in abstraction and concept formation; devaluation of the ordinary, habitual produces the impression of something wonderful and “fantastic” and devaluation of the expected may serve as a source of humor.
p Hyperaxiomatization also manifests itself in various ways: in the subject’s confidence in his conjectures, in the extreme stability and longevity of generalizing concepts, in a certain “repetitiveness” of metaphors, in the charm of tropes, in the artistic power of symbols, in the feeling of the miraculous in the perception of extraordinary phenomena, and in *the feeling of superiority caused by the comical effect.
p Comparing our own views and those of other authors helps more precisely formulate. our theory and make clear its distinction from other theoretical concepts.
p The differences of our theory and other similar theoretical views on the subject are summarized in the Table.
p Proposed theory
p Other theories and formulations
p 1. Anaxiomatization (devaluation) works in unity with hyperaxiomatization (overevaluation and the stabilizing function).
p 2. Anaxiomatization is regarded as a sine qua non of new ideas, discoveries, etc.
p 1. Rejection of information is not related to the stabilizing function.
p 2. Many authors regard rejection of information or past experience as an additional, auxiliary tool which is employed with other, more important techniques of mental activity.
p 3. Rejection of information is a requirement made to the thinking subject which he does not necessarily meet.
p 3. Anaxiomatization is an objective internal mechanism which invariably governs any productive activity.
183p Proposed theory
p Other theories and formulations
p 4. The stabilizing effect is the outcome of a heightened evaluation of a successful, in the subject’s view, way of performing a task, an evaluation which is generated in the course of mental activity.
p 5. Hyperaxiomatization is dynamic,
p 6. In the course of a productive activity, evaluation of information, ways of performing the task, etc. change.
p 7. Both phantasy mechanisms may cause positive, as well as negative phenomena.
p 4. The stabilizing effect is explained by past experience and multiple repetition of the activity.
p 5. The stabilizing function leads to effects invariable over a long period of time.
p 6. The information, ways of performing the task, etc. are themselves changed or rejected.
7. The tools and techniques of thinking lead either to positive or to negative phenomena alone (A. A. Ukhtomsky’s dominance principle being an exception).
Notes
