The article offers a socio-historical approach to the problem of cre-ative personality in polemic with the article by A.M. Dorozhkin and S.V. Shibarshina. Creative activity is considered not as a psy-chological process or an expression of cognitive abilities, but as a result evaluated by the professional scientific community and even by the entire society. The distinction between the psy-chological, historical and historical-epistemological interpreta-tion of creativity is discussed. The authors argue that although the proposed approach has an explanatory potential for creativ-ity as a socio-historical phenomenon, it reduces the nature of individual personalities and their role in scientific research to a public response to a new result. The personality of an author is getting vanished in this result, becoming only a label of some social achievement. Using the terminology of J.-P. Sartre, the essence of the author as a unique individual is reduced to his social existence as a scientist. The purpose of this existence is not the fulfillment of a vocation, but the implementation of a professional mission to promote science as a public good, which consists, among other things, in creating a field of intel-lectual tension. The scientist ensures the objective increase of public awareness of the painful points of history and moder-nity; critically analyzes global risks from ecology to security; and presents images of a possible and required future. Thus, cre-ative science acts as a source for development through prob-lematization, a factor of cognitive dissonance, a troublemaker, a potential violator of social stability.
