The purpose of this article is to analyze the interaction of such components of consciousness as activity and contemplation. First of all, it is necessary to determine the common and different between such categories as contemplation and observation. What they have in common is that both processes provide an analysis of internal and external conditions and the implementation of appropriate human adaptation. The difference is that the observation is quite formalized, it has a specific purpose, plan and criteria. Contemplation has no specific purpose. Contemplation is an open, unbiased sensory-mental perception of reality. Contemplation can be defined as an empirical, incomprehensible, irrational comprehension of reality, on the one hand, and direct comprehension of insensitive meanings, ideas, values, on the other. To a large extent, contemplation is in its essence close to Husserl's «epoch» both in the rejection of all previous knowledge and predictions about the world and about oneself, the rejection of the bodily-sensual content of consciousness and the entry into «pure consciousness». In the context of this work, the «era» can be defined as the absolute of «pure contemplation.» The difference is that Husserl defines the «epoch» as a method of philosophical cognition. We define contemplation as a means of personal knowledge of the world, the harmonization of human life and society. The first step to contemplation is to remove a person from everyday stereotypes of perception on the template algorithms of activity. Contemplation opens up something essential for a person: new perspectives, goals and means of achieving them.
Gordeeva, O. V. (1998). Consequences of the methodological orientation to-wards Marxism in the study of consciousness (based on the works of AN Leontiev. Voprosy psikhologii [Questions of psychology], 5. [In Russian].
Zinchenko, V. P. & Morgunov, E. B. (1994). Developing person. Essays on Russian Psychology. Moscow: Trivola. [In Russian].
Kalischuk, S. M. (2018). Consciousness as a «borderline concept. Problemy suchasnoyi psykholohiyi [Problems of modern psychology], 41, 102-115. [In Ukrainian].
Kudlach-Melnyk, V. I. (2011). Consciousness as a reflection and ideal creation of the world. Mulʹtyversum: filosofsʹkyy alʹmanakh [Multiversum: philosophi-cal almanac], 84-95. [In Ukrainian].
Laktionova, A. (2008). Modern philosophy of consciousness: methodological “inquiries”. Filosofsʹka dumka: ukrayinsʹkyy naukovo-teoretychnyy chasopys [Philosophical thought: Ukrainian scientific-theoretical journal], 3, 39-47. [In Ukrainian].
Leontiev, A. N. (1975). Activity. Consciousness. Personality. Moscow: Politiz-dat. [In Russian].
Matsenko, V. F. (2012). The phenomenon of consciousness in a synergetic context: origin and development. Zbirnyk nauk. pratsʹ Instytutu psykholohiyi im. H. S. Kostyuka NAPN Ukrayiny. Problemy zahalʹnoyi ta pedahohichnoyi psykholohiyi [Collection of Sciences. Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology. G. S. Kostyuk NAPS of Ukraine. Problems of general and pedagogical psychology], 24. Ch. 5, 93-102. [In Ukrainian].
Ortega y Gasset J. (1991). Man and people. In: Ortega y Gasset J. Dehumani-zation of art. Moscow: Raduga. [In Russian].
Rubinstein, S. L. (1973). Ways and achievements of Soviet psychology. On consciousness and human activity. In: Problems of general psychology. Mos-cow: Pedagogika. [In Russian].
Uznadze, D. N. (2001). Psychology of installation. St. Petersburg: Piter. [In Russian].
Schwalb, Y. M. (2003). Purposeful consciousness (psychological models and research). Kyiv: Millennium. [In Russian].
Shandor, F. F. (2011). The concept of consciousness in modern scientific dis-course. Vyshcha osvita Ukrayiny [Higher education in Ukraine], 2, 73-79. [In Ukrainian].
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.