Cogat test prep grade 3 necessary to pay attention to the fact that many scientists consider the size of wages, fees for publications and the position held not as an end in itself, but indicators of public recognition, that is, material rewards are perceived as moral. In addition, it is not uncommon that financial rewards, degrees and positions open up new, broader opportunities for creative work. Among scientists, the prizes awarded by reputable scientific organizations are primarily valued. Such awards are seen as recognition of creative achievements and an indicator of professional prestige, while ordinary awards issued by the administration are perceived as ordinary salary increments.
But the above factors belong mainly to external motivation, while the internal, according to many scientists and psychologists’ research, is the attraction to truth, the opportunity to experiment creatively, the desire to solve the complex mysteries of nature, on which others have previously past tense of ride unsuccessfully fought.
An important driving force in the development of science in general and the scientific opinion of an individual scientist in particular is the contradictions whose role is emphasized by dialectics. It is believed that the larger the scale of the scientist, the more contradictions arise in him, in those tasks that life puts before him. The range of these contradictions can be considered a measure of human genius.
Taste of Creativity
The main motivation of a true scientist is the joy of the creative process and the results obtained. People of creative profession – scientists, writers, artists, musicians, artists, directors – are most satisfied with their work. In due time they do not differentiate between non-working and working. Live their creativity and see the meaning of existence in the work. In principle, any work can be made interesting and attractive, if you see in it an element of creativity or bring in this element. As a result, creativity appears in any activity, if a person does not have exact instructions, and he himself must decide how to act.
For many employees, it is important to feel the prospects in their work, in particular, the possibility of acquiring new experience, not just a promotion and salary. The motivational factor, such as the interest of a significant part of scientists in developing and publicizing their own original scientific concepts, should also be considered. In other words, a scientist should dig where he feels alive and not where he is told to.
A scientist has a head of his own.
Researchers found that among the motives that today’s scientists were guided in choosing a scientific specialty, the main are: the desire for a stable position, an attempt to “get out of people”, to feel their own strength, the desire to create something useful to society, the desire to learn. And the joy of the process of creative search and its results are considered by researchers to be a more powerful motivational factor than material remuneration.
Psychologists believe that quite a large number of scientists (as well as artists, artists) are not so much looking for material benefits as for moral rewards, in particular fame.
Is talent an inheritance?
The problem of the possibility to inherit creative abilities in general and the inclination to a certain type of activity in particular is of rather great interest. It is known, for example, that Alexander Pushkin and Leo Tolstoy were relatives. The five most prominent representatives of German culture (poets Schiller and Gelderlin, philosophers Schelling and Hegel, physicist Max Planck) were also relatives. There were 16 composers in five generations of the Bach family. Numerous members of the Bernoulli family discovered different talents in the natural sciences. Opponents of the opinion that talent should be inherited explain its development by external factors. But they are particularly opposed to the fact that, say, Newton, Gauss, Laplace, Faraday, Kant, Kepler were the children of poor peasants or artisans and grew up under circumstances that did not contribute much to the formation of talent. However, there is still a long way to go to an exhaustive study of this problem.
According to one hypothesis, there is a certain part of people (about 10% of society) who are considered “creative individuals” capable of active creative process. According to other views, each person has the ability to create in a certain industry (this second view seems more appropriate).
Thus, much is known in the field of psychology of scientific creativity, but no less problems remain for the future. As you can see, young people have here enough points of application of knowledge, energy. The main thing is to realize that there are no talented people who are not capable of science and creativity.