The main engine of progress. Everything and nothing. Robots offering beer

Laziness is the engine of progress

Who among us from childhood has not heard sayings like “water does not flow under a lying stone”, or “don’t put off until tomorrow what you can do today”, or other sayings discrediting and condemning laziness?

We are all taught from childhood that laziness is bad, that such a state should never be allowed.

But let's look at laziness from a different angle. Laziness is the engine of progress, no matter how strange it may sound. Just think, many inventions were invented to make our lives easier.

Basically, laziness is the driving force when we do not want to perform repeatedly repeated routine actions, which, due to their methodical nature, introduce a person into a state of murderous melancholy.

All interest in life disappears, because a person begins to seem like a robot to himself. It is when everything gets boring, and we simply give up in powerlessness, that the most important thing begins to work - our thought.

While we are lazy, thought works. And it moves in the direction in which you need to think once so that you never have to work again.

Or, at least minimize this need to pressing one button. It is this seemingly paradox that sets the whole world in motion, provoking the emergence of innovative developments and brilliant ideas.

And progress leaps forward at a frantic pace - after all, people are very lazy by nature!

It is thanks to the laziness of a few technical devices that a lot of programs have been written, many latest technologies. And there are many more simple examples from the lives of the most ordinary people.

For example, in 1902, a married American couple went on a road trip. During this trip they were caught in the rain, as a result of which the husband forced his wife, Mary Andersen, to keep the windows open and, sticking her head out of the window, inform him of any changes on the road.

She didn’t like it, and a quiet, modest housewife, a year later, patented one thing, without which it is now difficult to imagine anyone modern car- wipers.

One more example. One chemical engineer named Victor Mills was delighted to learn that he had become a grandfather. However, imagine his disappointment when his wife forced him to wash his grandchildren’s diapers, which did not make him happy at all.

When Mills got tired of this, he invented disposable diapers, for which parents around the world still thank him.

A few more cases:

In one editorial office of an American newspaper, a certain Betty Nesmith Gremit worked as a proofreader for articles. When she was tired of once again sending articles for revision with a thousand corrections that had to be reprinted all the time, she became thoughtful, and the result of her thoughts was the famous stationery- “proofreader”, known to everyone office workers, schoolchildren and students with its indispensability.

American Ray Tomplinson is considered the father of email, but the same laziness led him to this. His job was to carry documents and information on media around the office.

Through certain time he got tired of it, and he, knowing that all workers had computers, created email, which later began to be used everywhere.

The karaoke machine is the invention of a Japanese man named Inoue Daisuke, who worked as an accompanist in a bar. He needed to learn a lot of melodies all the time, and he created a machine that began to play for him. Although laziness failed him, he did not patent the invention.

That's why we can say that Laziness is the engine of progress, you just need to think about it and see the whole situation from both sides of the coin.

Geneticists at the American National Institute of Psychiatry have found a drug that can rid a person of the laziness gene, which is why people suffer from it. There is hope that scientists will stop their research on primates, otherwise the world will not see so many more delights of progress.

Laziness- this is the only thing that cannot be gotten rid of.
The harder you fight it, the less energy you have left for productive activities.

What follows from all this? To understand, you first need to define what laziness is.

Laziness is a protest against monotonous, monotonous and hard work. The reason for every effort of a lazy person is the desire to avoid this effort next time. Therefore, only the lazy come up with the idea of ​​how to complete the inevitable work with the least amount of effort. This means laziness is the engine of progress. Indeed, who owns all the inventions - from great inventions like the wheel to purely domestic ones (elevator in the house, meat grinder, pressure cooker)? I'm not even talking about all sorts of machines and mechanisms designed to make it easier to do that same monotonous and hard work: washing machines, dishwashers, sewing machines. To have more free time and enjoy life, you need to quickly complete unpleasant tasks with the least amount of effort.

ALL WAYS TO COMBAT LAZINESS

Probably, science will soon force people to work at full capacity by turning off the “laziness gene.” In the meantime, you have to fight a fierce battle with her to turn a slacker into a workaholic. In primates, the gene for laziness has already been found and a series of experiments have even been carried out. This discovery by researchers from the National Institute of Psychiatry in Maryland (USA) was reported in the journal Nature. It is quite possible that we also have a similar section of DNA, because there are pathologically lazy people.

But psychoneurologists think differently. They are sure: most often we ourselves turn our usual laziness (as a synonym for fatigue, decreased energy biopotential) into chronic laziness. This requires little effort: carefully groom and cherish it, justify your inaction with real and imaginary failures in life, eat more meat and fatty foods, drown your melancholy with alcohol - and the client is ready for a psychotherapist (or genetic experiments).

It is undoubtedly necessary to fight laziness, but how? The strategy is the same - war until victory. The tactics will depend on what reasons gave rise to your laziness.

HOLIDAY LAZINESS

A complete lack of desire to actively act and interrupt their “dolce vita” can occur even among hardworking individuals. More often this happens when prolonged holidays are thrown out of the usual work rut.

Your actions: outline and write a list of the most important things to do for the first days after the holidays. If they are all equally important and you don’t want to deal with any of them, use the “rule of three.” Give each one 10 minutes (15, 30, etc.) and switch from one to the other until all are completed. It is especially good to alternate in this way between activities that require mental and physical activity.

Restore the rhythm of work and rest as quickly as possible. It is individual for everyone and depends on the profession, but it must be observed. After all, all biological processes in the body are also strictly rhythmic. Don't look for excuses for rocking.

LAZY AFTER ILLNESS

If such a condition occurs after serious fatigue or illness, when long-term recovery is required, there is no need to be particularly active. But physical inaction is also contraindicated.

Your actions: switch to favorite hobby, intense leisure time. It makes sense to stimulate yourself with vitamins, tonic infusions and extracts (ginseng, eleutherococcus, Manchurian aralia). Don’t set yourself big goals, build up gradually.

15-minute energy exercises increase activity very well.

Rub your palms very hard and massage your head with them. Rub your palms again and place them over your eyes. Then pat yourself on the body and rub your ears. Massage each finger from tip to base. Rub your feet from the inside and outside. The main thing is to remember to warm up your palms by rubbing against each other before each exercise.

FORCED LAZINESS

Lost your job? Failed in personal life, disappointed, upset, everything is falling out of hand? Passivity in such a situation can do you a disservice: the threat of drifting into pathological laziness becomes especially real.

Your actions: More than ever, you need small but daily victories. They are easier to achieve by outlining several small tasks and considering completing each of them as a war with yourself and with those who will interfere. Take the first one and don't give up until you win. Tell yourself: “I am a winner.” Enjoy this feeling.

Devote several hours every day to training professional skills, reading specialized literature, and communicating with successful, optimistic people.

CREATIVE LAZINESS

This term was coined by time management experts. It is considered as a protective reaction of the body, with the help of which it tries to find time for creativity. Do not forget that it was the laziest Pithecanthropus who decided to knock down a coconut with a stick instead of climbing a tree after it. Someone else invented the wheel and the cart - he was too lazy, you see, to carry the weight on himself. There is nothing to say about the 20th century: while the hardworking are working, the lazy are inventing something new and immediately leaving their competitors behind. Creative laziness is an important topic that gives a lot of various methods. It is known that the hemispheres of the brain work with incoming information in different ways: the left - logically and analytically, the right - intuitively and holistically. In ordinary situations, analytical thinking tends to dominate. It's good for solving known and predictable problems, but it's not good enough for searching original ideas and non-trivial solutions. In this case, laziness frees up time for “right-brain” thinking.

It’s not for nothing that many “management gurus” give advice: load your brain with a problem and lie down for an hour hot bath without thinking about anything. After that, return to analyzing the problem - and the subconscious will give you the right solution.

But to know what kind of laziness has visited you - ordinary depressing laziness or productive creative laziness, pay attention to its signs. Creative laziness is used consciously. You consciously allow yourself to set aside time for such a subtle, exquisite pleasure as arbitrary laziness. Creative laziness is not accompanied by pangs of conscience, but by a joy akin to that which a person can experience when listening to silence. Creative laziness does not necessarily mean complete idleness. This could be switching to some non-work related activity that brings joy and develops imagination.

ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF LAZINESS

According to Schwartz, laziness is a quality that forces one to make great efforts to reduce overall energy expenditure. In his opinion, it is laziness that forces a person to create useful and stable systems that reduce labor costs, and also to carefully document them so that later they do not have to answer many questions. For example, lazy staff will prefer to solve the problem once and for all. Such employees are motivated to systematically study the roots of the problem, radically solve it, and document it in detail. If necessity is the mother of invention, then laziness is the mother of innovation. Of course, if the staff doesn’t want to lift a finger, this is already an extreme form of laziness. However, laziness within reasonable limits should not only be encouraged, but even rewarded. Therefore, remember: laziness of subordinates is primarily a management problem. The manager must reasonably determine the amount of work for his subordinates; this may well eliminate “doing nothing.” But truly lazy people don’t go to work: they’re lazy...

5 minutes to read.

“I adore lazy people. It is lazy people who move our lives forward, they are the ones who contribute to progress. A hardworking person will do monotonous, exhausting work day after day all his life, and only a lazy person will think about how to do the same work much faster and with great effort. it takes less effort. When the hardworking walked, the lazy invented the bicycle. When the hardworking pedaled and learned to balance, the lazy added two more wheels and an engine to the bicycle. internal combustion. When hardworking people sweated in traffic jams, turned the steering wheel and wasted their nerves, the lazy ones installed an on-board computer on the car, transferring all their worries to it. We owe our current standard of living to lazy people. It was not labor that created man from ape. Laziness did it. While the hard worker is hammering the wall with a sledgehammer, the lazy one will invent dynamite." Sergei Musanif We are all taught from childhood that laziness is bad, that such a state should never be allowed. But let's look at laziness from a different angle. Laziness is...

“I adore lazy people. It is lazy people who move our lives forward, they are the ones who contribute to progress. A hardworking person will do monotonous, exhausting work day after day all his life, and only a lazy person will think about how to do the same work much faster and with less effort. While the hardworking walked, the lazy reinvented the wheel. When the hardworking ones pedaled and learned to balance, the lazy ones added two more wheels and an internal combustion engine to the bicycle. When hardworking people sweated in traffic jams, turned the steering wheel and wasted their nerves, the lazy ones installed an on-board computer on the car, transferring all their worries to it. We owe our current standard of living to lazy people. It was not labor that created man from ape. Laziness did it. While the hard worker is hammering the wall with a sledgehammer, the lazy one will invent dynamite.”
Sergey Musanif

We are all taught from childhood that laziness is bad, that such a state should never be allowed. But let's look at laziness from a different angle.

Laziness is a protest

against monotonous, monotonous and hard work. The reason for every effort of a lazy person is the desire to avoid this effort next time. Therefore, only the lazy come up with the idea of ​​how to complete the inevitable work with the least amount of effort.

Means, laziness is the engine of progress. Indeed, who owns all the inventions, from great ones like the wheel to purely domestic ones (elevator in the house, meat grinder, pressure cooker). I'm not even talking about all sorts of machines and mechanisms designed to make it easier to do that same monotonous and hard work: washing machines, dishwashers, sewing machines, remote control, telephone and a great many other things for our comfort and minimalism of movements. To have more free time and enjoy life, you need to quickly complete unpleasant tasks with the least amount of effort.

While we are lazy, thought works

And it moves in the direction in which you need to think once so that you never have to work again.

Let me give you one example. A chemical engineer named Victor Mills was delighted to learn that he had become a grandfather. However, imagine his disappointment when his wife forced him to wash his grandchildren’s diapers, which did not make him happy at all.

When Mills got tired of this, he invented disposable diapers, for which parents around the world still thank him.

If you're too lazy to even be lazy

Just in case, if laziness has convinced you to lie, sit, stand and do nothing, then here are some tips with which you will be able to overcome your inertia and apathy.

1. Take action. Action is good way to boost your energy throughout the day.

2. Have a rest. Where can enthusiasm come from if your only thought is to get enough sleep? Therefore, make sure that everything is in order with your vacation. Remember that life is given to you to live. Not for work.

3. The hardest thing is to start. Further, as a rule, it is easier and more fun. Set a minimum work period for yourself, for example, 10 or 20 minutes. Know that this will be a difficult time for you at first. Give yourself enough time to suffer, work, and then get involved.

4. Deadline. If you have a sense of urgency, boundaries will be set for when the work needs to be completed, then the effectiveness of your actions will increase, and laziness will have to leave you during this time.

5. Focus on benefits. If you think about what you will get at the end of the work, what it will give you, then the work will be more manageable. And if you think about spending your time on this, overcoming difficulties, then, of course, laziness will remain with you for a long time, and the work will remain undone.

6. Rresults of inaction. Think about what the consequences of your inaction will be? What happens if you don't do this?

7. Achieving the goal in stages. We are often intimidated by the scale of work. Break your actions into several stages and gradually overcome them. It will be easier this way.

When I asked my colleagues at work: “How do you fight laziness? Isn’t she bothering you?”, then I heard one wonderful answer: “I prefer to negotiate with my laziness. And it looks something like this:

Post Views: 206

V.A. Mader, 2005

"ENGINES OF PROGRESS"

V.A. Mader

K.E. Tsiolkovsky (1857-1935), whose works made a significant contribution to the formation of cosmic philosophy and a new view of the Universe, called real scientists “engines of progress.” They organize humanity into one whole, invent machines, indicate ways to “improve the human race,” discover the laws of nature, are receptive to great discoveries, are able to master them and disseminate them to the masses.

Science is the collective mind of many generations of scientists, the totality of human thought, and it is deeply international. This or that field of science can develop in parallel on different continents, V different countries without any borrowing. Therefore, in scientific creativity there is common features, general laws, the understanding of which helps to penetrate into the psychology of the search for truth. And although we know that there are so-called internal laws of the development of science (internal logic of science), its laws, wrote V.I. Vernadsky (1863-1945) “do not coincide with the laws of logic (science does not move inductively or deductively), but is a complex manifestation of the human personality”1.

Science is united, and interdisciplinary boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred. Vernadsky even spoke about the need to create a “single universal science” that could cover the natural and social processes of reality. With the creation of a “scientific think tank”, work will be organized aimed at improving the “structure human society" We see here some intersection of his ideas with the tasks that were posed by the scientist and philosopher A.A. Bogdanov (1873-1928) in his work “Tectology. General organizational science" (1913). They are also in tune with the plans of the Russian cosmist N.F. Fedorov © (3828-1903) on the creation of the All-Scientific Museum

as a book of history written by the human race (“The Museum, its meaning and purpose”).

Science is an objective matter, it is dispassionate, but it is created by people who have subjective characteristics. The terms “big” and “pure” are sometimes used in relation to it. The first is associated with the creativity of a large group, with the second - the brilliant insights of individuals. Sometimes scientists talk about science “big” and “small”. And again, they are associated with those scientific forces that decide specific tasks. For example, “big” science includes research in the field of nuclear energy or space, where entire institutes work on solving problems. Relatively small teams and laboratories are classified as “small” science. A striking example the success of the latter was the discovery of the structure of DNA, which determined the development of biology for many years. It was made by two people based on analysis of data obtained in three other small laboratories.

As we see, the work of “artisans” in science is difficult to overestimate. They create the "underwater part of the iceberg" called Science. But to a large extent, the emergence of new scientific directions depends on laws unknown to us and factors in the emergence of outstanding personalities. In relation to such individuals, V.N. Vernadsky sometimes used the expressions “heretic” and “orthodox representative of scientific thought.” In scientific creativity, he wrote, “individuals must always act, in their own lives or in this moment rising among the middle level"2. And the history of the development of scientific ideas indicates that sometimes an individual scientist, with his discovery, actually changed not only the foundations of the scientific worldview of his time, but also the entire course of culture. Let's say, the creation of N.I. Lobachevsky (1792-1856) non-Euclidean geometry changed the worldview of the era and the style of mathematical thinking.

The famous French physicist, founder of wave mechanics, Louis de Broglie (1892-1987), reflected on the importance of outstanding personalities in science: “The most important factors remain the qualities of a team leader, individual initiative and the intuition of a researcher. But in the theoretical part, it seems to me that the most important thing is individual effort, often in solitude. Greatest discoveries in this field were made by brave minds in solitude. This was the case at least in the past, but it seems to me that there is every reason to think that it will be so in the future.”3

In one of the letters (1932) K.E. Tsiolkovsky (1857-1935) noted: “Don’t forget that for the success of my work I need peace and solitude.” And Einstein called himself “a horse in a lonely cart.” Belonging entirely to science, he did not devote himself entirely to his country, friends, relatives, or family.

When discussing the problem of “individual - collective”, I remember the remark of K.A. Timiryazev (1843-1920) that the “artisan” production of science is impossible, “just like the similar production of poetry.” In a company you can write vaudevilles and operettas, but not Faust or Hamlet. “They say,” he wrote, “that Gay-Lussac once invited Tenard (French chemist Louis Jacques Tenard (1777-1857), who discovered hydrogen peroxide in 1818 - V.M.) to undertake general work. “Okay,” Tenar agreed. “But how do we separate?” “Very simple: you will work, and I will chat,” answered Gay-Lussac.”4

Such a historical excursion could be continued, but what is important for us is the fact that interest in the psychological side of scientific creativity has not waned since the times of Plato and Aristotle. And in our time of computer technology it has increased even more. The components of a scientist’s personality are also interesting to us because there is a very close connection between the scientist’s work and the characteristics of his personality. Now we say that science is a matter of national importance, because without its appropriate level, the country loses the social mechanism for the production of new knowledge. And having lost science, we lose the system higher education. Hence the axiom: education should be a priority in society.

To this axiom we would like to add this one: education must be continuous.

nom. Quick change of equipment and technological processes require constant advanced training and retraining of specialists. And this process will be successful for those who have received a fundamental education, a deep and broad education. The very same education system must be constantly evolving and intelligently restructured. It relies on an innovative teacher, a creative teacher who organizes the cognitive and scientific activities of schoolchildren and students. Its preparation and professional orientation must stay ahead of today's demands. AND modern pedagogy, psychology proves that man has limitless potential abilities. The task of a teacher-scientist is to teach young man study, study continuously.

Unfortunately, the new generation has mostly lost interest in science and acquiring knowledge. It is not prepared to perceive what determines the future of Russia and every Russian. Old ideals are lost, but new ones are not defined. In this regard, we can recall the life “law” of the philosopher Aristotle: “Goodness depends on compliance with two conditions - correctly established ultimate goal and finding necessary funds leading to it."

Of course, science is the work of young people. History gives us many examples of scientists with high science quotients starting their careers very early. Statistics claim that since 1735, outstanding scientists made their first publications at the age of 25, and the very best of them - even earlier: E. Galois, B. Pascal - at 17 years old; 3. Freud - at 21; C. Darwin, D. Maxwell, K. Gauss, M. Faraday, A. Einstein, L. Euler, D. Hilbert, K. Gödel, A.N. Kolmogorov - at 22-24 years old; B. Riemann, G. Kantor, N.I. Lobachevsky, N.N. Luzin - at 28-30 years old. The period of active work of these scientists is on average 35-40 years. Darwin worked for 50 years, Einstein - 53, Freud - 55. As for academic recognitions (such as the Nobel Prize), they came to them 25-30 years after the first publication.

One can only kindly envy the hard work and talent of L. Euler (1707-1783), who at the age of 13 became a student at the University of Basel; at 16 - gave a speech in Latin, giving comparative analysis philosophies of R. Descartes and I. Newton, for which he received a degree

master of arts stump; in 19 - was awarded an honorary review from the Paris Academy of Sciences for his work submitted to the competition on the most advantageous arrangement of masts on a ship. His scientific interests covered all departments of contemporary mathematics and mechanics, the theory of elasticity, mathematical physics, optics, music theory, machine theory, ballistics, marine science, insurance, etc. But he was blind for a significant part of his life.

And yet, when we pronounce the statement “Science is the work of the young,” we must keep in mind that this is statistics with an interpolation method. There is some connection between age and scientific success, but it does not follow from the logic of scientific work. There is even such a unique one historical fact. A group of French mathematicians who published their works under the pseudonym N. Bourbaki had an unwritten rule: if you reached the age of 50, leave this scientific community, but before that, bring one or two students in your place. As for statistical data, we must keep in mind that many scientists “leave their circle” due to family circumstances, health conditions, become complacent after the first success, cannot change their thinking style, and sometimes their entire belief system after a significant discovery in science , etc. It happens that after the first such success, a scientist “gets ill” with the desire to obtain new data of the same level, but they do not come. There may be disappointments, departure to another sphere of spiritual activity, business, etc.

It seems to us that the age of a scientist is not a hindrance to science, and his old age is not a decline, but rather a growth of his intellectual powers. A scientist who loves his work is able to obtain original results even at a considerable age. What is important here is the nature of a person’s abilities and a certain psychological type of thinking. As for the scientist-philosopher, wisdom comes to him over the years, and his contribution to the treasury of culture becomes more visible. The same can be said about mathematicians. Thus, in the “Epilogue” of his book “I am a mathematician” N. Wiener wrote that last pages this autobiography coincides with his 60th birthday. “This is quite a respectable age for a mathematician. But I’m still working, and I wouldn’t like to think that all my achievements are behind me.”5

Raising the question of the components of a scientist’s personality has important psychological, pedagogical and methodological significance. And the immediate source of its understanding is penetration into the scientist’s creative laboratory, familiarization with his scientific heritage, which includes not only books, articles, but also letters to colleagues, diary entries, memories of students, followers... For students, the life and work of a scientist, his biography (or autobiography) is an example to follow. “Examples teach better than interpretations and books,” said N.I. Lobachevsky in his speech “On the most important subjects of education” on July 5, 1828 on the occasion of the first anniversary of his rectorship at Kazan University and the graduation of students.

Approaches to the typology (classification) of a scientist’s personality are very different, because the spheres themselves are also different. scientific activity. And the processes of differentiation and integration of science presuppose certain attitudes when assessing the personality of a scientist. But they themselves will help us see the components of a scientist’s personality. Thus, we find deep reflections on scientific creativity and thinking style in special works French mathematician L. Poincaré (1854-1912). A certain classification was carried out in the book “Great People” by the German chemist W. Ostwald (1853-1932). There are well-known works in this direction by the French mathematician J. Hadamard (1865-1963), the Hungarian mathematician and teacher D. Polya (1887-1985), and representatives of the Russian natural and mathematical school - V.I. Vernadsky (1863-1945), P.S. Alexandrova (1896-1982), A.N. Kolmogorov (1903-1983) and many others.

Moreover, in clarifying this issue, we must remember that every scientist is not only a representative of a specific science, but also a son of his time, his era. He enters this time, creates and constantly experiences the entire totality of material and spiritual values ​​that surround him. It is very important that the creative period in the life of a scientist, his “natural inclinations” coincide with the “preferences of society”, with the principles of social structure, with government policy and ideology, finally, with common system values.

And one more remark on the essence of the problem we are considering. Academician P.S. Alexandrov in his public lecture

on the topic “The Vocation of a Scientist” at Moscow State University, he said that the profession “scientist” does not exist. I have a profession researcher. But even such a profession did not exist at the beginning of the 20th century. People involved in science were, in most cases, teachers, associate professors, professors high school. A striking example is N.E. Zhukovsky (1847-1921), a great scientist and engineer, but by his professional position he always considered himself a professor at Moscow University and the Moscow Higher Technical School.

What components of a scientist’s personality, without pretending to be complete, can be identified?

B. Pascal (1623-1662) in his “Thoughts” wrote about a deep (“insightful”) and mathematical mind, which is characterized by simultaneous thinking, grasping an object from different sides at once.

A. Poincaré divided scientists into analytical logicians and intuitionist geometers. True, at the basis of such a classification we find in him the innate qualities of a person.

“The very nature of their mind,” he wrote, “makes them supporters of logic or intuition, and they are unable to abandon it when they approach a new subject.

And it was not their upbringing that developed in them one of these two inclinations and suppressed the other. People are born mathematicians, but they are not made, and, apparently, they will also be born geometers or born analysts.”6

Mathematicians speak and write about the “left-hemisphere” and “right-hemisphere” types of thinking of scientists. “If Leibniz,” noted I.M. Yaglom can undoubtedly be characterized as a logician (or algebraist), then Newton with no less degree of certainty can be classified as a physicist (geometer), that is, people who highest degree characterized by a picture perception of the world, stimulated by the activity of the right hemisphere of the brain.”7.

A________J____L/ TT T - ..-- /10LL

pYaGliiskii tsshZik 1.L. £>рЭ11 \ioyv-

1971), addressing the question “What makes a scientist?”, wrote that “the greatest scientists are those who give us new ways of thinking”8. He further named the category of discoverers (Oersted, Roentgen, Becquerel); designers (Wilson, Lawrence) creating new devices for completely new areas of scientific research; hunters (Faraday, Rutherford), who, as agile

great dogs sense the truth. Among the qualities that create a scientist, he primarily named enthusiasm and optimism. And if a scientist is likened to a treasure hunter, then he can turn over many stones until he finds what he needs. Faraday was once asked how to conduct research, and he replied: “Start it, continue it and finish it.” The pace of scientific research is low. "The unit of measurement of time in scientific work- five years"9.

A. Einstein, in a speech during the celebration of the 60th anniversary of M. Planck (1858-1947), said that for some, science is something like a mental sport that gives a person a joyful feeling of intense intellectual strength, for others it is a sphere for obtaining results, necessary for practice. But there is also a category of people who came to science, escaping from everyday life. And he compares the scientist’s feelings with the longing that pulls a city dweller to the mountains, “where he enjoys the calm outlines that seem destined for eternity”10.

There are scientists who are called “collectors” (they collect scientific data); there are “systematizers”; there are “sleuths” who try to find flaws in research results (very important, but very unpopular work); there are “creators”, “geniuses”. In this regard, scientists talk about freedom of thought and flight of fancy. Physiologist I.P. Pavlov (1849-1936) argued that for a successful solution scientific problem first you need to “let go of your thoughts, freely fantasize,” and the poet G. Heine (1797-1856) expressed this idea very sharply and paradoxically: “ Brilliant ideas“This is all the nonsense that gets into a person’s head.” Psychologists, for example, recommend introducing people into small scientific teams different professions, with different temperaments and levels of erudition to create non-standard situations.

Also interesting is this foreign classification of “psychological types” of scientists,

INCLUDING EIGHT GROUPS! 1) “fanaTYK” -

a person passionate about science to the point of oblivion, tireless, extremely inquisitive, very demanding, often does not get along well with the scientific community;

2) “pioneer” - an initiative type, a generator of new ideas, a good organizer and teacher;

3) “diagnostician” - a good critic, able to immediately see the strengths and weak sides V scientific research, able to

walk alternative solutions in difficult cases; 4) “erudite” - a person who is well informed in his field of knowledge, conscientious, has an exceptional memory, loves moderation and order; 5) “technician” - this scientist is aimed at the ability to process (“bring to mind”) poorly formulated, unclear ideas; he willingly shares both his time and ideas; 6) an “esthete” who prefers sophisticated intellectual problems and seeks elegant solutions; as one of the founders of the group “N. Bourbaki”, J. Dieudonne, the incentives of mathematicians of all times are curiosity and the desire for beauty; 7) “methodologist” - a scientist who is keenly interested in methodological problems, masters the mathematical apparatus and methods of mathematics, and loves to discuss his scientific ideas with others; he is tolerant of other views, but loves complexity; 8) “independent” - tries to avoid working in a team or performing any administrative functions; does not show much energy, but has a lively, keen observation and self-confidence.

As we see, this typology expresses not only psychological characteristics the personality of the scientist, but also his preferences as a member of the scientific community.

Penetrating into the creative laboratory of a scientist, we are convinced of how important the broad intellectual component of his personality is. He is an expert in the field of philosophical, natural, mathematical and social sciences. It is no coincidence that V.I. Vernadsky noted that the framework separate science cannot cover (precisely define) the area of ​​scientific thought. Therefore, researchers often specialize not in sciences, but in problems. To solve a problem, the mind requires both “deep” and “broad”. I will refer to the pride and glory of French science - P. Fermat (1601-1665), with whose name the so-called “ Great Theorem", which was proved in 1995 by the English mathematician Z. L. Fermat was not a professional mathematician. He was a lawyer and, from 1631, a councilor to the parliament in Toulouse. Mathematics, to put it modern language, was his hobby. However, even the most famous professionals can envy the mathematical talent and success of this “amateur”. Fermat anticipated almost all the great mathematical discoveries of the 17th-18th centuries. You can safely

to name among the creators of analytical geometry, differential and integral calculus, probability theory, number theory... In the field of physics, the name of Fermat is associated with the establishment of the variational principle of geometric optics.

Philosophy and psychology prove that in real mental activity, two components of thinking - the unconscious modeling of the problem conditions by the brain and a conscious decision - mutually complement each other, forming a single fabric of human intellect. And if modern means of mathematical logic make it possible to display the “algebra” of thinking, then the intuitive modeling in a person’s head of the phenomena of the real (or imaginary) world is the “geometry” of thinking. It is no coincidence that one of the creators of analytical geometry, R. Descartes, saw an analogy, on the one hand, between geometric constructions and their algebraic expression, and on the other, between direct knowledge (intuition) and logic (deductive method).

Penetrating into the creative laboratory of this or that scientist, one can discover such a phenomenon. New idea comes into conflict with established, “habitual” principles (axioms). It can offend someone’s interests and cause hostility. Its initial silence can turn into fierce criticism. And if it is not possible to discredit the idea, then the third phase of the confrontation begins: the truth of the idea is recognized, but its novelty is denied. History knows many similar situations. It is known that already in his early youth the great German mathematician, philosopher and logician G.V. Leibniz (1646-1716) originated the idea of ​​“mathematization” of logic. He believed that “it is possible to come up with a certain alphabet of human thoughts, and with the help of a combination of the letters of this alphabet and the analysis of the words made up of them, everything can be discovered and resolved”11. And then in his work “On Universal Science, or Philosophical Calculus,” he wrote: “As a result, when disputes arose, the need for a discussion between two philosophers would be no greater than between two calculators. For it would be enough for them to take pens in their hands, sit down at their counting boards and say to each other (as if in a friendly invitation): let’s count!”12

And how his contemporaries reacted to this idea of ​​Leibniz, even testify

lines by V. Bryusov (1873-1924) from the poem “To the Portrait of Leibniz”:

O Leibniz, O sage, creator of prophetic books!

You were above the world, like the ancient prophets.

Your age, marveling at you, did not comprehend the prophecies

And he mixed insane reproaches with flattery13.

Only later, in the middle of the 19th century, the English mathematician and logician J. Boole (1815-1864) realized Leibniz’s idea by creating the algebra of logic - one of the branches of mathematical logic.

N.I. also experienced something similar. Lobachevsky - one of the creators of non-Euclidean geometry. Many contemporaries did not understand his “imaginary” geometry and subjected him to sharp (even caustic!) criticism (V.Ya. Bunyakovsky, M.V. Ostrogradsky). Even N.G. Chernyshevsky did not stand aside, accusing Lobachevsky of Kantianism.

In this regard, we would like to recall a rather interesting thought by V.I. Lenin: “Not a single deep and powerful popular movement in history has managed without dirty foam - without adventurers and swindlers, boasters and loudmouths clinging to inexperienced innovators, without absurd turmoil, stupidity, wasted fussiness, without attempts by individual “leaders” to take on 20 cases. and not bring a single one to completion."14

When considering the components of a scientist’s personality, one cannot leave aside such concepts as “genius” and “talent.” We proceed from the fact that if genius is an individual phenomenon with a bright pronounced features, not inherited, then talent is determined precisely by hereditary genes. The cult of genius arose during the Renaissance and is associated with the activities of such titans as Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) and Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475-1564).

Who is considered a genius? Some researchers of this phenomenon, revealing the content of this concept, talk about the product of the scientist’s creativity; others pay attention to psychological and biological qualities; still others associate genius with hard work. There is even such a definition of a genius: a genius is a person who performs great work over a long period of time and influences other people for many years. As we can see, attention is drawn here to the productivity and creative longevity of the scientist. As a bonus

measures are indicated by al-Farabi (about 200 works), C. Darwin (over 100 publications), A. Einstein (about 250 publications), A. Poincaré (over 1000 works), V.I. Vernadsky (over 400 publications), A.N. Kolmogorov (over 520 publications), etc.

There is a point of view that genius is expressed in a person’s ability to start worrying before everyone else.

One cannot fail to mention such a component of a work of genius as durability, thanks to which it will sooner or later receive public recognition and attract supporters and followers. But it seems to us that it is logically untenable to connect genius with absolute novelty in scientific knowledge. Let's not forget the judgment of I. Newton: “If I saw further than others, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants.”

Genius does not confine itself to pure science. He is fascinated by its history, philosophy, painting, poetry, literature, music. He sees beauty and creates according to the laws of beauty. Every scientific fact causes him delight and aesthetic pleasure. The fact of the unity of science and art is an axiom that requires special consideration. But when a mathematician speaks about the beauty of this or that proof, he thereby expresses the harmony of thoughts, the harmony of the parts of the proof.

From genius comes light. He is the Enlightener. He is happy in his students, rejoices in their successes and desire to surpass the Teacher. A genius is always ready to hear something new and unexpected. He is passionate and engages others. As a teacher, he is distinguished by respect for the personality of the student. However, when we talk about the students of a talented scientist, we cannot ignore this psychological factor. The fact is that while demanding a lot from himself, he also demands this from others. And this sometimes scares away young people, because psychologically they cannot help but imitate their Teacher. But alas...

Researchers of the phenomenon of genius also discover this peculiarity: outstanding people of science had an early loss of parents and relatives. And from this fact it is concluded that the loss loved one serves as an “impetus” for creative efforts, for changing scientific interests and directions... In this regard, we can recall N.I. Lobachevsky, N.F. Fedorov, M. Curie-Sklodowska and many others

gee. A.N. The bow reproduces the original table of the English psychologist S. Silverman, which presents about 30 famous scientists who lost their parents before the age of 15. Among them are N. Copernicus, B. Pascal, G. Leibniz, D.I. Mendeleev et al.15 Silverman also poses a natural question: if the absence of parents can lead to the formation of scientific research interests, then why don’t scientists come out of orphanages? His answer is that being in a shelter is a personal trauma. An attempt to “replace parents with the state” has a negative impact on a person.

Professor L. Trachtman from Indiana University (USA) noted that in the 14th and 16th centuries England has produced a whole constellation of talented scientists in the most various areas, and the 15th (intermediate) century was poor in this regard. Among the reasons for this, he puts the lack of socio-material wealth in first place. “If people spend 100% of their efforts on satisfying the most pressing human needs, then talent will not flourish in such a society”16.

American psychologists J. Gowan and M. Olson ask the same question: why do several geniuses create simultaneously in one era, but not a single one in another? Apparently, they believe, different eras differ in their “creative climate.” In their opinion, the “creative era” comes when young people have role models, when people coexist in society various cultures and there are conditions for developing a strong philosophical worldview. This era is also characterized by the interaction of empiricism and rationalism, observation and analytical thinking. And the historian and sociologist S. Arieti even introduced a special concept - “creatogenic society”, which is characterized by nine features: 1) accessibility of cultural means, 2) openness to various kinds of cultural stimuli, 3) the desire not just to exist, but to become someone, to achieve something, 4) free, equal access to education for everyone, without any discrimination, 5) lack of privileges for some groups of the population and oppression of others, 6) diversity of cultural trends, 7) intellectual tolerance,

8) interaction and cooperation of creatively thinking people, 9) the presence of a system of rewards and incentives.

In conclusion, let’s talk about another important component of a scientist’s personality.

A true scientist rejects all violence against the individual, all moral and mental oppression. This is a man of inner purity and beauty. He is distinguished from many other people by his intelligence, high level of intellectual development, education, and culture of behavior. And it seems to us that intelligence is not so much a mental principle as a moral one. It comes not so much from the head as from the heart.

An intelligent person not only does not violate the basic rules of behavior, but he is constantly haunted by the thought: am I disturbing someone with my actions? He is tolerant of different opinions, accepts them as equal, and does not boast of his knowledge and his rightness. The formula of Socrates is close to him: “I only know that I know nothing.” He distinguishes between the concepts of “free responsibility” and “irresponsible freedom”. All vain things that are “without deity, without inspiration” are alien to him. He is guided by three “pillars” that support life - goodness, truth and beauty. An intellectual is capable of maintaining objectivity, dignity and nobility under any circumstances (joyful or bitter, significant or everyday).

In the old Russian intelligentsia we find many such people. They represented a colossal cultural force, they thought broadly and about many things.

Science and introducing young people to it are two sides of the same activity of a scientist. And let the words of M.V. sound like a kind of anthem. Lomonosov (1711-1765), addressed to both scientists, teachers and students:

O you, whom the Fatherland expects from its depths,

And he wants to see them,

Which ones are calling from foreign countries,

O blessed are your days!

Dare now, encouraged by your zeal to show,

What can the Russian land give birth to its own Platos And quick-witted Newtons 17.

NOTES

1 Vernadsky V.I. Biosphere and noosphere. M., 2002. P. 241.

2 Vernadsky V.I. Works on the history of science in Russia. M., 1988. P. 88.

3 Broglie L., de. Along the paths of science. M., 1963.

4 Timiryazev K.A. Collected works: In Utah. M., 1938. T. 5. P. 60-61.

5 Viner N. I am a mathematician. M.; Izhevsk, 2001. P. 309.

6 Poincare A. About science. M., 1983. P. 159.

7 Yaglom I. M. Why higher mathematics were discovered simultaneously by Newton and Leibniz?: (Reflections on mathematical thinking and ways of understanding the world) // Number and Thought. M., 1983. Issue. 6. P. 117.

8 Bragg L. What makes a scientist? // Science and life. 1970. No. 9. P. 82.

9 Ibid. P. 83.

10 Einstein A. Collection of scientific works in

4 volumes. M., 1967. T. 4. P. 40.

11 Leibniz G.V. Works: In 4 vols. M., 1984. T. 3. P. 414.

12 Ibid. P. 497.

13 Bryusov V. Collected works in seven volumes. M., 1973. T. 1. P. 195.

14 Lenin V.I. Full composition of writings. 5th ed. T. 36. P. 193.

15 Luk A.N. Talents top level in the history of science: (Review of foreign research) // Questions of the history of natural science and technology. 1986. No. 1.P.136.

16 Ibid. P. 138.

17 Quoted. from: Russian poetry of the 18th century M., 1972. P. 136. (Library of World Literature: In 200 volumes; T. 57).

So what is it I wanted to talk about? Oh yes. Laziness. You can talk about laziness for hours or remain silent forever. I would prefer the second, because I’m too lazy to type, and even lazier to think and put my most brilliant thoughts into words, but necessary. I need to speak up!
Here's a short educational program for starters http://lurkmore.ru/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BB%D0%B5% D0%BD%D1%8C (I hope this monster works O.o)

Laziness is a feeling, or sensation, or state, as you like, beautiful and necessary. For me personally, laziness is my second essence. If I’m not too lazy to do something, it means that hell has frozen over, the apocalypse has struck, and the bears have all died. Well, this is, of course, partly a joke (as you thought, it’s difficult to freeze hell -_-).
And if we think seriously and thoroughly, as many people like to put it, from the point of view of an adult, then laziness is scary and unforgivable (I will keep silent in the course of my presentation that laziness is one of the 7 sins). Because laziness eats away a person from the inside. Laziness gradually changes everything in a person - the attitude to life, the value system, the presence of desire and impulses, in general, everything that makes up the backbone of ours, my friends, such a rich and amazing existence. It is very difficult to fight this at the beginning and almost impossible if you get involved. I can say that laziness can, perhaps, be addictive, like a good drug with a quick addiction. It’s worth giving yourself an indulgence once, twice, three times and that’s it, you’re in... Pushing the machine under the name “I” becomes as difficult as bringing a frigid woman to orgasm. Although it will be easier with women.

I went too far, I feel the fifth point of support, with a thickening of colors around laziness. That is OK. I will also improve her reputation!
It is believed that laziness is somewhat similar to the instinct of self-preservation. Sort of That A person will do what needs to be done to save his own skin, everything else is a whim. One can both agree and argue with this. And since I have already denigrated laziness earlier, I will now rehabilitate it. So, a couple of points for laziness...
If humanity as a whole were not lazy, then most modern inventions and miracles of science, technology and thought simply would not exist as unnecessary. BUT one person became too lazy to bake bread himself, or fry toast, or ride far away on a horse, or write letters by hand... And now we get a bread machine, a toaster, a car, a typewriter...
Laziness saves. As girls like to say, “beauty will save the world, but not nerves.” They are right here. Although according to?:%ism laziness is not pure form, I will dub it “laziness to react to the situation.” Here! Everything is beautiful and I'm happy! And now I can describe all the advantages of being a don’t care and no one can tell me that I’m thinking off topic. Ha, did you eat?!
So, we must admit, and here even the most organized people must agree, that sometimes a person stupidly and irrevocably in a hurry. He rushes ahead, rushes headlong, sees nothing around him and ends up smashing himself against the wall. The lazy person who doesn't care has an advantage, because it is impossible to crash at a speed of 0 km/h (if you could, I will personally give you the Darwin Award), but there is an opportunity to slowly assess the situation calmly and, without unnecessary worries and troubles, watch how it is resolved (and if it is not resolved, then it’s still time to cut your claws, here you can, by the way, watch the hilarious transformation of a lazy, indifferent top-class person into a business superman in an hour or two, it’s funny for everyone, even the participants in the transformation).
Thus, to sum up my long discussions, I will say that no matter how lazy society condemns, I still was one, I will be and I will be! Because this is a special state of mind that carries love and peace! Well, you understand that I’m just a synonym for “love and peace”? Do you understand? It's better for you too! That's why we part ways