home > Dating Psychology > Summary: Man in the world of culture. Personality and Society

Summary: Man in the world of culture. Personality and Society

The term "culture" comes from the Latin word "cultura", which means the cultivation of the soil, its cultivation, i.e. a change in a natural object under the influence of a person, his activity, in contrast to those changes that are caused by natural causes. At present, the concept of "culture" means a historically defined level of development of society, the creative forces and abilities of a person, expressed in the types and forms of organization of people's life and activities, as well as in the material and spiritual values created by them.

Since the sphere of culture includes the results human activity(certain material values, extremely diverse in their material form) and the ways, means, methods of human activity itself, which are also very diverse and have not only a material, but also a spiritual form, they distinguish between material culture and spiritual culture.

Material culture covers a very wide range of things, among which, in fact, all life flows, both for an individual and for society as a whole. Under the material culture is understood the totality of any material values ever created by mankind throughout its history and preserved to this day. Material culture includes: tools and means of production, equipment, technology; culture of work and production; the material side of life; the material side of the environment.

Spiritual culture includes the sphere of production, distribution and consumption of various spiritual values. The field of spiritual culture includes all the results of the spiritual activity of mankind: science, philosophy, art, morality, politics, law, education, religion, the sphere of leadership and management of society. Relevant institutions, organizations also belong to spiritual culture ( scientific institutes, universities, schools, theaters, museums, libraries, concert halls, etc.), which together ensure the functioning of spiritual culture.

The division of culture into spiritual and material is relative. Very often it is impossible to unambiguously attribute certain phenomena to the field of material or spiritual culture. Some of their facets belong to material culture, others to spiritual culture. So, in particular, the manufacture of tools or any objects that satisfy the material needs of people and society (and these are elements of material culture) is impossible without the participation of human thought, so this process also belongs to the sphere of spiritual culture.

Culture cannot remain in a frozen state, it is always in development. Transforming, it is transmitted, as if by relay race, from one generation to another.

Every person from childhood is under the influence of culture, or rather, the cultural environment with one or another (high or low) level of culture.

The upbringing and education of a person consists in his familiarization with culture, in the assimilation of the knowledge, skills, habits accumulated by society, as well as spiritual values and norms of behavior of the country in which he lives. The nature of upbringing and education inherent in a society at a certain stage of its development is an indicator of the level of culture of a given society. Spiritual culture also important factor social progress. Its level determines the degree of intellectual, aesthetic, artistic and moral development of society. The concept of "culture" is associated with the process of acquiring knowledge and experience in a particular field of activity, assimilation by a person of a certain system of values, choosing his own line of behavior.

Since the most important function of culture is the function of socialization and inculturation, a person from childhood acquires certain knowledge, norms and values necessary for life as a full member of society. In society, as in nature, there is a constant change of generations, people are born and die. But unlike animals, man does not have innate programs of action. He receives these programs from culture, learns to live, think and act in accordance with them.

The development of social experience by a person begins in early childhood. The patterns of behavior that parents demonstrate are consciously or unconsciously adopted by children, thereby determining their behavior for many years to come. Examples of behavior demonstrated by peers, teachers, and adults in general also have a great influence on children. Childhood is the most important period of socialization, it is in childhood that almost 70% of personality is formed. But socialization does not end there. It is a continuous process that does not stop throughout human life. This is how the social experience accumulated by the people is assimilated, the cultural tradition is preserved and passed on from generation to generation, which ensures the stability of culture.

Each person, by the will of circumstances, is immersed in a certain cultural environment, from which he absorbs, assimilates a system of knowledge, values, norms of behavior. This process of mastering the skills and knowledge necessary for life in a particular culture is called inculturation. culture human socialization inculturation

The processes of socialization and inculturation consist not only in the formation of the environment surrounding a person, they involve the active inner work of the person himself, striving to acquire the information necessary for life. Therefore, having mastered the complex of knowledge that is obligatory for a given culture, a person begins to develop his individual abilities - whether it be musical or artistic inclinations, an interest in mathematics or technology, in a word, everything that may be useful in the future - it does not matter whether it becomes a profession or leisure time activities.

From all of the above, I would like to conclude: if a person creates culture, then culture creates a person.

Bibliography

1. Cultural studies. History of world culture: Proc. Manual for universities / A.N. Markov, Krivtsov and others; Ed. Prof. A.N. Markova. - M.: Culture and sport, UNITI, 1995. - 224 p.
2. Bell D. The coming post-industrial society. - M., 1993.
3. Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of culture. - M., 1992.

1. Introduction ______________________________________ page 2

2. The role of culture in the socialization of the individual.

Inculturization and its problems __________________ page 3

3. Personality as a value and value world of personality __p. 8

4. Human corporeality and culture _______________ page 13

5. Literature ____________________________________ p. 17

1. Introduction

The relevance of the research topic is due, first of all, to the fact that modern technogenic civilization has significantly increased the crisis phenomena in the field of culture, exacerbated the historical confrontation and confrontation in this area. Many thinkers of the 20th century note that there are trends in the degradation of culture in society: the spread of anti-values, the loss of moral guidelines and ideals, the dehumanization of almost the entire spectrum of human life. The alienation of a person from traditions, ideals, norms and values, on the basis of which a cultural personality can be formed and self-formed, is becoming more and more obvious. The phenomenon that has spread throughout society has deeply affected the youth subculture, which is rapidly transforming into an anti-culture, which leads to an increase in social tension, creates prerequisites for the emergence and escalation of violence, destruction, confrontation, both among young people and between generations. This situation indicates that the process of human formation is increasingly influenced by polar phenomena in relation to humanistic values and culture.

In this regard, the relevance of the conceptual and theoretical analysis of the origins, processes, mechanisms, essence, existence of culture and anti-culture and their role in the socialization of the individual increases. The concept of "culture" in the culturological literature is given much attention: it is sufficiently detailed and deeply developed in epistemological and ontological terms.

The inconsistency of modern civilizational processes, which, on the one hand, are characterized by dehumanization, and, on the other hand, an increase in the role of the subjective potential of a person, actualizes the importance of analyzing the socialization of the individual, which currently presents a variety of concepts, approaches and models of this process.

2. The role of culture in the socialization of the individual. Inculturization and its problems.

Cultural regulation, carried out in the implementation of norms, values and meanings, occurs through their introduction into the structure of the behavior and activities of individuals, through their accustoming to social roles and normative behavior, the assimilation of positive motivations, familiarization with generally significant values. These mechanisms constitute the process of socialization, the important components of which are education, communication and self-awareness. Socialization is supported by special institutions (family, school, labor collectives, informal groups) and internal mechanisms of the personality itself.

Already at birth, an individual receives a social status arising from the status of his family, parents. The birth of a child thus has not only a biological or demographic aspect, but also a sociocultural one. That is why in all cultures, soon after birth, various kinds of rituals are performed, which mean the initiation of the child into the culture of a given team and society. The status of birth is so important that an individual remains assigned to some of its aspects all his life (ethnicity, class, caste). And, of course, the individual remains "assigned" culturally to his biological characteristics: sex, race. As he grows up, the individual is included in more and more new areas of communication. These transitions fix the most important stages of a person's life path and are accompanied by appropriate cultural "metas" and signs (birthdays, going to school, coming of age, conscription into the army, marriage). "Meta" are fixed with memorable gifts, which implies their long-term storage. For example, photography is a common form of recording socially significant roles and relationships between individuals.

However, it is impossible to reduce the socializing function of culture only to the stages of preparation for life. Culture is one of the most important factors in the structuring of society, as necessary as economic or political mechanisms. If in the economy the basis of relations is property, in politics - power, then in culture such a basis is norms, values and meanings. As the socio-cultural environment becomes more complex, the mechanism of socialization and its cultural support become more and more diverse.

Cultural norms and meanings determine both the place of each social stratum or group and the distance separating these strata. Types of activity, economic occupations, status gradations, ranks and positions have not only their own economic, social or professional content, but also symbolic, shaped through certain cultural attributes and meanings.

Significant carriers of social status can be various factors: kinship, ethnic and social origin, wealth, education, personal achievements in professional field, life experience, science, art. Status forms of culture are preserved in any society, albeit in a weakened or transformed form. Status symbols are important in the bureaucracy, where positions, ranks, etiquette are important factors in the organization.

In stable social structures, status symbols can be maintained in a stable state for a long time, making out permanent gradations between estates, ranks, steps of the bureaucratic hierarchy. In a mobile society, on the one hand, there is a gradual “leakage” of symbols of prestige from top to bottom, but on the other hand, the higher class again and again forms symbolic barriers that shape the social distance between the upper, middle and lower strata. This mechanism is purposefully used by businesses working to increase the status consciousness of consumers, forming new needs and tastes.

The process of socialization is interconnected with the process of inculturation. They are very close in their content, but you can not mix them.

Socialization means preparing a person for life in modern society. In whatever country he leaves for a while, or moves forever, he must have elementary ideas about the social structure of society, the distribution of people by class, ways of earning money and the distribution of roles in the family, the basics of a market economy and the political structure of the state, civil rights.

Enculturation denotes the process of mastering by a person the traditions and norms of behavior in a particular culture. Culture in developed countries is more specific than social structure. It is more difficult to adapt to it, fully engage and get used to it. An adult emigrant who left Russia for America learns the social laws of life quite quickly, but it is much more difficult for him to assimilate foreign cultural norms and customs. A Russian physicist, programmer or engineer, having a high qualification recognized abroad, in a short time learns the duties corresponding to his new position. After a month or two, he copes with professional duties no worse than a Native American. But sometimes he fails to get used to a foreign culture, to feel it with his own, and after many years.

Thus, adaptation to the social order of life in a foreign country is faster than inculturation - adaptation to foreign values, traditions and customs.

Adaptation also occurs during socialization and inculturation. In the first case, the individual adapts to social conditions of life, in the second - to cultural ones. With socialization, adaptation is easy and fast, with inculturation - heavy and slow.

When a person is asked: “Who are you?”, From the point of view of socialization, he must answer: “I am a professor, scientist, engineer, head of the family.” But from the point of view of inculturation, he is obliged to name his cultural and national identity: "I am Russian."

At the individual level, the process of inculturation is expressed in everyday communication with their own kind - relatives, friends, acquaintances or unfamiliar representatives of the same culture, from whom the child consciously and unconsciously learns how to behave in various life situations, how to evaluate events, meet guests, react to certain signs of attention and signals.

Enculturation or learning of a culture occurs in several ways. It can happen directly when a parent teaches a child to be grateful for a gift, or indirectly when the same child observes how people behave in similar situations. Thus, direct utterance or indirect observation are two important ways of enculturation. A person changes his behavior only when he is told how to act, and when he observes how others behave in similar situations. Often people say one thing and act differently. In these situations, the individual becomes disoriented and the process of inculturation becomes more difficult.

Even the simplest procedure that we do many times every day, namely eating, from the point of view of cultural studies, is a set of postures and gestures endowed with different meanings and meanings in different cultures. Culture teaches us what, when and how to eat.

Socialization - growing into society, the formation of a social person. The final process of socialization is personality.

Inculturation - fusion with culture, the formation of a well-educated person. The end result of inculturation is an intellectual.

You can be very socialized and completely uncultured. The "new Russians" are an example of an excellent adaptation to the social reality that changed in the 90s, people who know how to find a way out of any situation, who know all the moves in this life. This is the result of excellent socialization. However, for the most part, the “new Russians” are completely uncultured people. They don't give a damn about universal human values and Christian commandments (up to "not to kill"), about etiquette. Thus, two processes - inculturation and socialization - develop according to different laws. At the same age, there is a maximum of socialization and a minimum of inculturation, and vice versa. Inculturation reaches its maximum in old age, while socialization - in youth and maturity, and then most often decreases, less often - remains at the same level.

The processes of socialization and inculturation can go in one direction, or they can develop in opposite directions. Their phases may coincide, but may differ significantly. When both processes coincide, i.e. go in the same direction, it is possible to build a single continuum "socialization - inculturation".

The continuum shows how cultural and social potential increases or decreases in different types of people. The minimum rate of inculturation and socialization in the so-called feral people - human cubs raised among wolves and other animals. Returning to society, they are not able to adapt to it and soon die. The average values of inculturation and socialization have children brought up in orphanages and boarding schools. As adults and leaving the institution, they are ill-equipped to live fully in a large society. They do not have much of what children in ordinary families receive. Intelligent people have the highest potential. The elite of society, as a rule, consists of them. These are socially active and culturally accomplished people.

Socialization is associated with the assimilation of some mandatory cultural minimum, which includes the assimilation of basic social roles, language norms, and national character traits. The term "inculturation" implies a broader phenomenon, namely, the familiarization of the individual with the entire cultural heritage of mankind: not only to their own national culture, but also to the culture of other peoples. We are talking about mastering foreign languages, forming a broad outlook, knowledge of world history. So, inculturation means the acquisition of a broad humanitarian culture.

3. Personality as a value and value world of personality.

The most important factor determining the functioning of culture, its carrier is the personality. In her behavior and inner world, those customs, norms and values that are part of the culture work or do not work, undergo various kinds of transformation, become individualized. Personality in culture is often seen as the bearer of accepted norms and values that dominate in a given society. But this is only a basic characteristic of an individual inscribed in common system regulation. Actually, the personal beginning is formed through the mechanisms of choosing one or another type of behavior, values and meanings in this generally accepted system. For this choice, the individual is responsible, taking on the costs of risk and success in achievements.

In Russian culture, the word "personality" is used to denote either an individual person, a bearer of social characteristics, or a set of properties inherent in this person and constituting his personality.

The properties of an individual are not limited to his social or cultural affiliation. There is also the inner world of the individual, in which objective factors find different refraction. On the one hand, culture forms one or another type of personality, and on the other hand, a person introduces his requirements and interests into norms, needs and behavioral patterns. Without referring to personal factors, we will not be able to explain the real functioning of the norms and values inherent in culture and those deviations from the norms that are inevitable in real life.

Every culture and every social order they form a person in their own way, giving him the features of a generally accepted standard or diversity that is acceptable within a certain culture, the cultural environment of any community.

The degree of individualization differs greatly in different cultural environments, and not all societies have a developed idea of personality.

Sociocultural factors of individual behavior are revealed when considering the roles that are accepted for each subculture of a given community. In the role description, any social group appears in the form of certain positions: class (entrepreneur or employee), professional (worker, farmer, military, scientist), family (husband, wife, children). But each person can combine several roles, varying them depending on the cycle of activity, situation or personal inclination (lazy or diligent student). Thus, the individual appears as a fragmented and partial personality, as a carrier of different roles related to different spheres and types of culture.

In cultural terms, the problem of mastering and combining roles reveals a lot in social life, forms the character and identity of social groups, nations and individuals. It turns out to be extremely important in communication between representatives of different groups, for social mobility that changes the position of groups and individuals. In more developed cultures, it is the emergence of individuality that enhances the differentiation of life and its enrichment. However, the attitude towards it is radically different depending on the cultural-historical type.

The formation of personality in the history of culture requires two prerequisites. Firstly, some internal value orientation is needed, an orientation towards the inherent value of the “I”, its inner world, which does not coincide with the requirements of the outside world, and sometimes opposes them. This separation was fixed in culture in various ways. Even from ancient culture, the concept of fate passes into European culture as an inevitable property of every person, over which he, in the final analysis, has no power. In Christianity, the concept of the soul acquires special significance, as the essential and individual property of a person, combining in itself some divine principle and personal choice that determines the state and final prospects of individual life. But certain analogues of fate and soul can be found in every developed culture, and only a detailed comparison of cultures shows the degree of similarity and difference between them.

Secondly, this is internal separation and independence, the ability to resist the generally accepted should be restrained by the rules of behavior, role prescriptions, so as not to undermine the integrity of the socio-cultural environment. Therefore, such inner independence can be expressed in the secrecy of the individual, doublethink and hypocrisy. In the history of society for a long time there was a struggle between the generally accepted principles of morality and manifestations of personal initiative. The phenomenon of hypocrisy is increasingly manifesting itself as the right of an individual to be accountable only to himself. Only gradually did tolerance, and even indifference, to inside life of a person, however, provided that he does not clearly violate the legal code.

The European cultural tradition affirms a person as an autonomous subject of activity, emphasizes, first of all, his unity, integrity, identity of the “I” in all its manifestations. On the contrary, in Eastern cultures, role functions are largely overlapped by the self-awareness of the individual. A person is aware of himself and is perceived by others depending on the environment or sphere in which he acts at a given period of time. Here, a person is considered primarily as the focus of particular obligations and responsibilities arising from his belonging to the family, community, clan, religious community and state.

In the classical Chinese tradition, the subordination of a person to legal norms and the suppression of his "I" by him was considered the highest virtue. Confucian principles asserted the need to limit emotions, the strict control of the mind over feelings, and the ability to express one's experiences in a strictly defined, accepted form. The relation of the individual to society in the classical Indian tradition was different. In philosophical systems, the human "I" turned out to be conditioned not by any specific reasons, but by the reality of a superpersonal spirit, in relation to which the corporeal and empirical "I" is a temporary and transient phenomenon. In addition, belief in karma, as in a series of transmigration of souls, makes the existence of each individual conditional, deprives him of independent value. The individual achieves self-realization through the denial of his empirical nature by breaking all concrete ties with other people, society, the world and his deeds. Only in the European-American culture did the personal principle receive the status of unconditionality, insubordination to other regulatory principles (sacred principles, holiness of enduring values, Holy Scripture, obligatory ideology). The stability of the inner world does not depend on any external authorities, since the individual finds in himself those unconditional principles that help him to endure in any circumstances and give them meaning, relying on his own judgment, guided by a sense of responsibility in his activities and actions. A synonym for such an understanding of personality is individualism as an attitude to the self-significance of a unique human life and the highest value of the interests of an individual. In this case, the opposition "individualism-collectivism" arises and priority is given to the first principle, although limited by internal moral principles and legal norms.

In the conversation about individualism, the main emphasis is on the self-worth of the individual, on his freedom and autonomy, on his right and his real opportunity to determine his own interests and directions of his activity, on his responsibility for his own destiny and the well-being of his family, on the ability of the individual to actively exercise independence. , initiative, enterprise.

The emergence and formation of such an orientation, its transformation into a mass-recognized one, actively influencing the fate of society, is associated with a complex and multidimensional set of social processes. Thus, the formation of individualism cannot be understood apart from the process of development of free, in principle, open to all members of society, individual entrepreneurship, free market relations and the forms of competition corresponding to these relations. Also important is the relationship of the historical fate of individualism with the process of creating forms of democracy that allow the individual to some extent influence the procedures for adopting laws and social decisions, with the process of establishing basic human rights and political freedoms.

The experience of our country shows that a one-sided emphasis on collectivism, which is understood as the total domination of the view, where the individual is only an element, a function, a link in a social organization, only a participant in a collective, organized and institutionalized action, only an object of centralized control, contributes not only to a drop in efficiency and dynamism in the development of society, but also the establishment of authoritarianism and bureaucracy, the dominance of administrative-command methods. This turns into disorganization and uncontrollability of society, collective irresponsibility, selfishness, anarchism.

Modernity requires an alternative to this - a dialectical combination of collective, effective, rational and democratically organized action with the presence on a mass scale of an individual with autonomy, independence, initiative, able to determine and express their interests and influence the process of social decision-making.

4. Human corporeality and culture

In any culture, human corporality forms an important value sphere. Bodily characteristics are not only the property of anthropological research and measurements (body shape, height, physical signs). Of course, on these grounds we can distinguish between racial and ethnic determinants of individuality. However, in many respects the human body and the whole bodily culture, i.e. behavior and relationships associated with the somatic characteristics of a person form socio-cultural factors. The "cultural body" is, as it were, built on top of the anthropological and social body, correcting the mechanisms of life support. The image of the "body self" correlates with cultural orientations, ideas of dignity, strength, beauty, physical dexterity, social and cultural relevance or originality.

However, ideas about normative or ideal corporality are strikingly different from each other in different cultures. Even with a superficial acquaintance with the history of culture, one can see full of life and energy of the physicality of ancient characters. In ancient Greece, it was the human body that was the bearer of ideal beauty, physical strength and dexterity, although any external threat could deform this body. But this canon was replaced, and the crucified body of the suffering God became the central symbol of European culture. In the Renaissance, the ideal bodies of gods, goddesses, heroes, embodying various bodily virtues, are again replicated. And again the Reformation sharply divided the highly valuable spiritual being and the sinful bodily principle in a person, subject to criticism, contempt or regret. Man was divided into incorporeal spirituality, linked to the eternal salvation of the soul, and non-spiritual corporeality, which distinguishes man by its frailty. In the era of European absolutism, a person was considered beautiful, destined for idleness, although he was busy with gallant games. In the bourgeois era, a tendency is being established to combine physical virtues, intelligence and spiritual beauty. Again, in art, a man and a woman in full bloom are valued above all else. The rehabilitation of the human body in the European culture of the 20th century gave rise to various directions and schools of cultivation of the somatic principle in man. The most common form has become a sport that absorbs the attention, time and money of a huge number of people. However, it should be borne in mind that a distinctive characteristic of all sports is the division into direct participants and spectators - fans. And if the former are really included in the practice of bodily culture, then the latter join it only indirectly and far from always for the actual sporting purposes.

In the modern world, a single world sports culture has prevailed, based on international rivalry, Olympic and other competitions, in which athletes from various countries participate. Nevertheless, outside this unity, the traditional cultivation of some national sports schools (martial arts, horse riding among the peoples of nomadic cultures) remains.

The concept of "corporality" naturally correlates with the theme of eros and sex. In different cultures, this or that distance is drawn between these spheres. Sexual relations are largely influenced by social factors, the most important of which are the ever-existing division of labor between the sexes in family responsibilities, professional activity. Differences in the nature of socialization, starting from early childhood and throughout life, and the cultural distance between the sexes are a characteristic feature of all cultures. In almost all cultures of the pre-industrial period and up to a mature industrial society, a woman was assigned a subordinate position, limited both in legal terms and cultural norms and values. The mechanism for maintaining such relations included a diverse set of influences - education, moral norms and legal principles. But, of course, an important factor was the aestheticization of the corresponding signs of behavior, spiritual qualities that correlated with the ideal or model of a man or woman. The situation changes in the 20th century with the development of mass culture and the weakening of all social barriers.

Love, as one of the most powerful factors in human relationships, was a constant subject of regulation through the system moral standards, law and religion. To streamline love, to introduce it into social frameworks, to prevent the affective side of love from violating the principles of normativity - such was the important task of any sociocultural system. But at the same time, every society not only allowed, but also cultivated love relationships in certain spheres and forms, giving them an appropriate axiological form. Ideal platonic love for the Madonna or for the Beautiful Lady, not only devoid of corporeality, but also not expecting a response; romantic love in unusual conditions and for an unusual object; gallant adventures of aristocratic loafers; harem routines of Asian rulers; the love affairs of adventurers, sentimental petty-bourgeois love; a love breakdown in a realistically depicted life - all these options provided endless plots for fiction and found a place for themselves in life, giving it great variety.

Today, much is changing in the culture itself, in our attitude to gender issues. Sex as a cultural phenomenon requires dispassionate consideration. If some researchers interpret the cultivation of sex and the eroticization of modern life as evil, as evidence of the decline of Western culture, then others, on the contrary, see in these processes symbols of a new morality, free from taboos, from inhibition.

We must not forget that the sex and body of a person, along with morality, family, personality, are universals that determined the development human spirit and culture. As universals, they cannot be substantially transformed or, moreover, eliminated. Today, however, there is a dangerous tendency to experiment with these universals (genetic engineering, cloning, experiments in sex and sex, experiments with the psyche). The destruction of universals can lead (as one of the possible scenarios), for example, to the appearance of monster people or even the death of our spirituality and civilization. Probably, what is needed today is not calls for freedom in the field of sex and sexual needs, but a serious policy in the field of sexual, or rather, love culture. It is culture! And Russia has its own serious tradition. Suffice it to recall our literature and poetry (from Pushkin to Pasternak), the work of our philosophers from the beginning of the 20th century, and modern ones, who deeply and comprehensively discussed the topic of love and Russian eros. The demand of the day is the creation of a new, culturally appropriate concept of love.

5. References

1. Alekseeva V. G. Value orientations as a factor in the life and development of the individual // Psychological Journal - 1994. - V. 5. - No. 5

2. Antilogova LN Psychological mechanisms of development of the moral consciousness of the individual. - Omsk, 1999

3. Borisova L. G., Solodova G. S. Sociology of personality. Novosibirsk, 1997

4. Vygotsky L. S. Development of personality and worldview of a child // Psychology of personality. Texts / Ed. Yu. B. Gippenreiter, A. A. Puzyreya. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1982.

5. Golovakha E. I. Life perspective and value orientations of the personality // Personality psychology in the works of domestic psychologists. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000

6. Ilyin V.I. Theory of consumption. - M, 2002

7. Leontiev D. A. Inner world of personality // Psychology of personality in the works of domestic psychologists. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000

8. Platonov K. K. Structure and development of personality. M.: Nauka, 1996

9. Psychology // ed. doc. psychol. sciences Allahverdova V.M. – M.: Prospekt, 1999

10. Development of the child's personality // ed. Kolominsky Ya.L. - M .: Psychology and Pedagogy, 1997

11. Shevardin N.I. Psychodiagnostics and personality correction - M .: VLADOS, 1999

12. Yanitsky M. S. Personal value orientations as a dynamic system. - Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzizdat, 2000

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

1. The philosophical concept of culture, its essence and place in the characteristics of society and man

2. Man as a subject and object of culture

3. Typology of cultures. The culture is mass and elite. Russia in the Dialogue of Cultures

Bibliography

1. The philosophical concept of culture, its essence and placein characterthe history of society and man

culture can be defined as the totality of all types of creative activity of a person and society, as well as the results of this activity, embodied in material and spiritual values.

Since the sphere of culture includes the results of human activity (certain material values, extremely diverse in their material form) and the methods, means, methods of human activity itself, which are also very diverse and have not only a material, but also a spiritual form, they distinguish between material culture and spiritual culture.

material culture covers a very wide range of things, among which, in fact, the whole life of both each individual person and society as a whole flows. Under the material culture is understood the totality of any material values ever created by mankind throughout its history and preserved to this day. Material culture includes: tools and means of production, equipment, technology; culture of work and production; the material side of life; the material side of the environment.

TO spiritual culture includes the sphere of production, distribution and consumption of the most diverse spiritual values. The field of spiritual culture includes all the results of the spiritual activity of mankind: science, philosophy, art, morality, politics, law, education, religion, the sphere of leadership and management of society. Spiritual culture also includes relevant institutions and organizations (scientific institutes, universities, schools, theaters, museums, libraries, concert halls, etc.), which together ensure the functioning of spiritual culture.

Culture cannot remain in a frozen state, it is always in development. Transforming, it is transmitted, as if by relay race, from one generation to another. The history of culture would seem colossal absurdity if each successive generation completely swept aside the achievements of the previous one. In cultural heritage, it is necessary to carefully separate what belongs to the future from what has already passed into the past. "In the fate of separate, succeeding each other, growing next to each other, touching, pushing and suppressing each other cultures, the content of all human history is exhausted ..."

Human activity, no matter what types it may be divided into, ultimately comes down to the production of either material or spiritual values. These areas of activity are different from each other both in the way they are implemented, and in results, and in public purpose. The totality of material and spiritual values, as well as the ways of their creation, the ability to use them for the further progress of mankind, to pass on from generation to generation, constitute culture. Everything that opposes nature belongs to culture, i.e. virgin nature, as something cultivated and created by human labor. It is customary to distinguish between material and spiritual culture.

Thus, culture encompasses all the achievements of mankind in the field of both material and spiritual production. It consists not only in the content of labor, in its products, not only in knowledge, but also in skills, the mastery of which allows a person to cope with practical and theoretical problems. The initial form and primary source of the development of culture are human labor, methods of its implementation and results. The world of culture resides outside the consciousness of individual people as the realized thinking, will and feelings of previous generations of mankind.

Without culture, the life of a person and society is impossible. Each new generation begins its life not only surrounded by nature, but also in the world of material and spiritual values created by previous generations. Abilities, knowledge, human feelings, skills are not inherited by the new generation - they are formed in the course of assimilation of an already created culture. Without the transfer of the achievements of human culture from one generation to another, history is unthinkable: a child begins to think and speak, turns into an adult, in an adult way thinking person, only by joining the culture. If man creates culture, then culture creates man.

Culture is not a passive storage of material and spiritual values created by previous generations, but their active creative use by mankind to improve life. Society reproduces and improves itself only by inheriting and creatively processing the accumulated wealth of culture. Mastering the material and spiritual culture consists in mastering the methods of operating with things, words and thoughts.

Culture is not only the result of human activity, but also historically established ways of working, and recognized methods of human behavior, and manners of communication called etiquette, and ways of expressing one's feelings, and techniques, as well as the level of thinking.

2. Humanto as a subject and object of culture

Every person from childhood is under the influence of culture, or rather, the cultural environment with one or another (high or low) level of culture, objectified in the corresponding values or anti-values.

The upbringing and education of a person consists in his familiarization with culture, in the assimilation of the knowledge, skills, habits accumulated by society, as well as spiritual values and norms of behavior of the country in which he lives. The nature of upbringing and education inherent in a society at a certain stage of its development is an indicator of the level of culture of a given society. Spiritual culture is also an important factor in social progress. Its level determines the degree of intellectual, aesthetic, artistic and moral development of society. The concept of "culture" is associated with the process of acquiring knowledge and experience in a particular field of activity, assimilation by a person of a certain system of values, choosing his own line of behavior.

Without the transfer of the achievements of human culture from one generation to another, history is unthinkable: a child begins to think and speak, turns into an adult, thinking like an adult, only by joining the culture. If man creates culture, then culture creates man. Since the most important function of culture is the function of socialization and inculturation, a person from childhood acquires certain knowledge, norms and values necessary for life as a full member of society. In society, as in nature, there is a constant change of generations, people are born and die. But unlike animals, man does not have innate programs of action. He receives these programs from culture, learns to live, think and act in accordance with them.

3. Typology of cultures. The culture is mass and elite.Russia in the Dialogue of Cultures

Canadian sociologist and cultural scientist Herbert McLuhan put forward the idea that the focus of culture is the means of communication that form the consciousness of people and their way of life. Changing means and ways of communication changes a person's view of the world and forms of activity. And McLuhan offers his typology: preliterate(unwritten), written(book) and screen(information) societies and cultures.

IN preliterate society(culture), a person transmitted his life experience with the help of oral speech, which dominated the communication of people, being woven into the practical activities of the "tribal man". The perception of the world and all forms of communication here are based on hearing and other senses. A person does not yet separate himself from other members of society, his thinking is predominantly mythological, and his perception of the world is syncretic. Particular attention is paid to rituals, divination, prophecy. They are built on customs and collective experience, which act as a form of social memory. Therefore, pre-literate culture attaches great importance to natural signs that help to remember the start time of agricultural work, it is focused on material objects and things, because things help to preserve the acquired experience (the shape of things is directly related to the materials from which they are made, and hence to manufacturing technology). The most important means of communication and transmission of information here is the language, which provides not only direct communication between people, their labor activity, but also creates the prerequisites for the formation of the spiritual sphere of culture.

Written cultures formed for the first time in civilizations ancient east(Sumer, Ancient Egypt) about IV millennium BC. e. and continue to exist today. The basis of this type of culture is writing, which has a different technique, based on different languages, different cultural traditions and forms of spiritual culture. The birth of writing significantly changes culture, as it stimulates the development and dissemination of rational knowledge, the expansion of social relations, the emergence of social hierarchies and the formation of a nation state. In addition, writing is the most efficient form of collective memory.

A special stage in the development of written culture is the invention of printing, which formed A New Look on the world in the form of a "linear perspective". Not hearing and touch, but sight now began to determine the image of the world. Since that time, an increasing number of people have been able to access knowledge, the dominance of science in European culture has finally been consolidated, which has resulted in the development of technology and industrial revolutions.

Information or screen culture is born under the dominance of electronics, when modern mass media create fundamentally new forms of communication. The transition from the book to the screen as the main means of communication in a sense brought back the people of the 20th century. to the initial stage of development, where the plasticity of speech made it possible to express any, the most fantastic images. The development of screen technology has increased the importance of touch and hearing in communicating with their own kind. Electronic means again return culture to the primitive oral tradition. However, there is a fundamental difference between them - in the information culture, a global communication network has been established, which allows a person who has modern means communication, get any knowledge without leaving home. It visibly facilitates contacts between people, destroying national, state and cultural boundaries, actively forming a single world culture based on global technologies.

Another version of the modern typology of cultures is their division into traditional And modern(modernized).

traditional cultures are characterized by isolation and isolation, other cultures are perceived as hostile due to their alienness. Relations between people here are built on the basis of the principles of solidarity - nobility, honesty, justice, respect for members of their team. The interests of the individual here are subordinate to the interests of society, which gives rise to a low degree of development of the personal principle. Hence, the most important moral regulator of the behavior of a member of the tribe is a sense of shame, not guilt. The fact is that the feeling of guilt is an expression of the individual's concern for his inner rightness, and shame is a concern about how his actions will be evaluated by other people - members of his community.

Traditions are carefully preserved here as the main regulators of social life, which excludes any innovations. For this reason, both socio-cultural and economic structures and relations in the community are being conserved, which gives rise to the idea of the limitedness of the available benefits of life. Thus, one characteristic feature of traditional cultures can be named - their egalitarianism, i.e. the belief that each member of the community should receive a part of the means of subsistence necessary for life, regardless of personal labor contribution. Hence the lack of motivation to increase production.

Formation modernized culture begins in the 16th century. and characterizes the current state of European culture. Its most important feature is the rejection of traditions and an orientation towards innovations; specific cultural values are being formed. This is an orientation towards achieving success, the rivalry of capitals, statuses, and one that ultimately gives rise to another characteristic feature - an orientation towards individualism, which includes the recognition of the rights of the individual, his freedom and independence from society and the state. The main outcome of the development of a modernized culture is the building of a modern democratic society that guarantees civil, political and property rights.

Finally, another modern version of the typology is the division of cultures depending on the forms and ways of knowing the world, which determine the norms and ideals that dominate society. This methodological principle makes it possible to distinguish between two types of cultures -- Oriental And west.

Eastern type of culture characterized by an intuitive, emotional, direct perception of the world. Time in such cultures is understood as something concrete, finite, as a closed cycle, which includes both nature and history. Therefore, in the East, the concepts of the transmigration of souls and the highest good as merging with nature are popular. At the same time, the belief dominates that if an individual is born in a family, then it rises above the individual. Family relationships are transferred to society as a whole, as a result of which a hierarchy of social statuses is formed, which is crowned by the deified personality of the monarch, despot.

Western type of culture creates scientific and technological civilizations with their concepts of human equality, a society of equal opportunities, equal norms and democracy. Based on private property, Western culture has given rise to a system of democratic self-government with the right and duty of every citizen to take part in public life, a system of guarantees and protection of his interests, a set of rights and freedoms that contribute to the disclosure of the personal qualities of an individual. Its main result was the formation of a completely new type of person - active, creative, self-confident, relying only on himself and his abilities.

The question of Russia's cultural affiliation to the East or the West is always a separate issue. The median position of Russia between Europe and Asia is considered the main reason for the combination in Russian culture of the features of both Eastern and Western civilizations. The specific geographical position of Russia allows us to talk about its special historical path and special mission in the history and culture of mankind, to recognize the fact of the exclusivity of Russian culture. It is obvious that the combination of eastern and western elements of culture has become the most important property

There is another division of culture: mass and elite. Elitism is a special feature of culture, which is characterized by the fact that cultural values are created, firstly, outside the people's environment and without relying on folk culture, and, secondly, they are created for the "elite" counting on the intellectual elite of society. In practice, this means that for an adequate perception of elite culture, special training is required, the mastery of a certain stock of cultural knowledge and skills that do not come by themselves. Elitism is a historically mobile category: for example, Beethoven's music, Turgenev's novels, Picasso's painting, the doctrine of Marxism, Freud's theory, etc. were certainly elite at one time, but with the development of the general culture of the people, under the influence of propaganda, education, etc. gradually lost their elitism in many respects.

The elitism of culture has its strengths and weaknesses. The main positive property of elitism is to ensure the progressive development of culture, the creation of new cultural values, and, consequently, the expansion of the cultural range of national and world culture. Further, elitism maintains the intellectual level of culture, performing the role of a cultural leader in society. Almost no social culture can do without an intellectual elite: in the absence of such a society, a wave of mass culture will overwhelm.

Mass culture is a special state of culture in the crisis period of society, when the process of disintegration of its content levels develops. That's why Mass culture often becomes formal. While functioning, it loses its essential content, and, in particular, traditional morality. In another approach, mass culture is defined as a phenomenon that characterizes the features of the production of cultural values in modern society. It is assumed that mass culture is consumed by all people, regardless of their place and country of residence. Mass culture is also because it is massively produced daily. This is the culture of everyday life, available to the audience through the mass media.

One of the most interesting and productive should be recognized as D. Bell's approach, according to which mass culture is a kind of organization of everyday consciousness in the information society, a special sign system or a special language in which members of the information society reach mutual understanding. It acts as a link between a highly specialized post-industrial society and a person who is integrated into it only as a "partial" person. Communication between "partial" people, narrow specialists, unfortunately, is carried out, apparently, only at the level of "mass man", that is, in the average public language, which is mass culture. Now mass culture penetrates almost all spheres of society and forms its own single semiotic space.

The expansion of Russia's openness has led to an increase in its dependence on the cultural and information processes taking place in the world, primarily such as the globalization of cultural development and the cultural industry, the commercialization of the cultural sphere, and the growing dependence of culture on large financial investments; convergence of "mass" and "elite" cultures; the development of modern information technologies and global computer networks, the rapid increase in the volume of information and the speed of its transmission; reduction of national specifics in the world information and cultural exchange.

International cultural cooperation includes relations in the field of culture and art, science and education, mass media, youth exchanges, publishing, museum, library and archival affairs, sports and tourism, as well as through public groups and organizations, creative unions and individual groups of citizens .

World experience shows that the most successful strategy for achieving intercultural competence is integration - the preservation of one's own cultural identity along with mastering the culture of other peoples. The process of globalization, leading to the interdependence of cultures, peoples and civilizations, brings to life the need for a transition from a hierarchical system of relations built on the principles of domination and subordination to a system of relations based on the principles of democracy, pluralism and tolerance.

At the same time, globalization creates conditions that hinder the dialogue of cultures. These are the growing diversity and deepening social polarization in the world, the activation of religious fundamentalism and militant nationalism, the growth in the number of their adherents, the inability of existing social institutions to protect any ethnic culture in the new conditions. Therefore, there is a need for a consensus, which can be reached only by realizing that it is impossible to satisfy one's own interests without taking into account the interests of another. The problems of finding one's own place in the global cultural space, the formation of nationally oriented approaches in domestic and foreign cultural policy are currently of particular relevance for Russia.

List literationss

1. Bell D. The coming post-industrial society. - M., 1993

2. Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of culture. - M., 1992

3. Kagan M.S. Philosophy of culture. SPb., PETER, 2006

4. Kanke V.A. Philosophy. Historical and systematic course. -M, 2002. -Ch. 2.1,2.2

5. The world of philosophy. - M., 1991. - Part 2. - Sec. VII (item 1)

6. Persikova T. N. Intercultural communication and corporate culture. M., Eksmo, 2007

7. Self-consciousness of European culture of the XX century. - M., 1991

8. Modern Western historical sociology. M., 1989

9. Spirkin A. G. Philosophy: textbook / A. G. Spirkin. - 2nd ed. M.: Gardariki, 2008

10. Philosophy in questions and answers: Tutorial/ Ed. A.P. Alekseeva, L.E. Yakovleva. - M., 2003. - Ch.XXY, XXVI

11. Shaginskaya E. N. Mass culture of the XX century: an essay on theories. - M., 2000. - No. 2

12. Shishkina V.I., Purynycheva G.M. History of Russian philosophy (XI-beginning of XX centuries). - Yoshkar-Ola, 1997

13. Spengler O. Decline of Europe // Essays on world history. T. 1. - M., 1993

Similar Documents

Philosophical concept of culture, characteristics of its models. Approaches to understanding culture, its technological interpretation. The role and place of a person in the world of culture, its features social functions. Forms of spiritual culture. Man as a creator and creation of culture.

test, added 09/21/2017

Culture as a subject of philosophical analysis. The most important forms of cultural creativity: morality, art and religion. Social determination of culture. Civilization as a socio-cultural formation. Approaches to characterizing the content of values in philosophy.

term paper, added 02/16/2011

The purpose of this work is to consider the essence of philosophy, its subject, place in the culture and life of man and society. The place of philosophy in the system of social and spiritual culture. The subject of philosophy is the universal connections in the system "man - the world".

abstract, added 12/27/2008

The study of mass culture as a hierarchical system. Considering kitsch as the lowest level of mass culture, the author reveals its essence, referring to the phenomena of modern consumer culture (fashion, advertising, mythology of mass media, etc.).

monograph, added 01/11/2011

Features of the image of a person as a reflection of socio-cultural processes and phenomena of the culture of the information society. The image of a person in the information society as a projection of socio-cultural changes. The specifics of human consciousness in the information society.

The problem of culture in philosophy. The relationship between culture and man. The emergence and significance of culture. national form of culture. Human activity is an essential element of culture. The level and state of culture. Lack of culture.

abstract, added 10/19/2006

The history of the term "culture". Definition of culture in modern Russian and Western philosophy and sociology. Analysis of the views of Rousseau, Kant, Herder on the origin and essence of culture, its development, the interaction of nature and culture.

abstract, added 01/25/2011

The study of cultural philosophy - a branch of philosophy that explores the concept and meaning of culture. Analysis of the essence of culture - a complex that includes knowledge, beliefs, art, morality, customs, other abilities and skills acquired by a person as a member of society.

abstract, added 06/18/2010

Mass culture as a synthetic global product that contains the main flow of everyday life of civilization. Design as a tool for social creativity. human development in the future. Hedonistic worldview of mass culture and art.

article, added 07/23/2013

Language as the key to understanding thought and knowledge. Unity and diversity of signs. The concept of metalanguage. Philosophy of culture and ethics (ethical virtues according to Aristotle). Types of aesthetic values. Practical and theoretical relation of man to the world.

Chapter 2.3 Philosophy of the symbolic world of man. Man in the world of culture

Philosophy of language

In the previous chapter, the inner world of man was considered. The holistic attitude of man to the world acted as a certain tendency for man to go beyond his own boundaries. But such an exit was not carried out. The inner world of a person remained his purely personal affair, mysterious and unknown to others. However, a person does not exist in isolation from other people, the world. Therefore, he manifests his inner personal life, symbolizes it in phenomena suitable for this. Language, work, culture - all this forms of symbolic being person; they are accessible not only to their creators, but also to all those who understand their meaning. In the course of historical development, man significantly increased the scale of his symbolic activity, so now it is time to talk about the symbolic world of man, his second, non-natural homeland (the first is the human psyche). Our next task is philosophical analysis symbolic world of man. And we will begin this analysis with language, one of the most important components of the symbolic world of man. The philosophy of the symbolic world of man is a natural continuation of the philosophical anthropology of man.

Encyclopedias give a variety of definitions of the language, there are not even hundreds of them, but thousands. Language is considered as an expression of the inner spiritual world of a person, as a means of communication and information storage, as a system of signs, as an oral and written speech activity. The structural units of the language are words and sentences, texts made up of them. The logic of a language is formed by its syntax (grammar), the meaning of a language is its semantics, and the practical meaning of a language acts as pragmatics. We note again that language is a symbolic expression in the sound and writing of the mental life of man. A brief historical background will allow us to better understand the phenomenon of language.

Mythological consciousness does not share the words and the reality they call. Here, of course, there is a lot of scope for the magic of the word.

For philosophers of antiquity one of the most important problems was the question of the relationship between the name and the named reality. Socrates and Plato believed that the name was not established arbitrarily, "not as we please," but by nature. But what does "by nature" mean? For Plato, the name first of all imitates the essence. The Stoics believed that in language a person imitates the world around him. The Epicureans suggested that language arose from the involuntary expression of emotions in sound. Democritus considered language to be a form of social contract. ancient philosophers understood perfectly well that there is a connection between the word, the image that it expresses, and the object.

Christian theologians, believed that the ability of language was granted to man by God. IN Old Testament it is said that Adam gave a name to all living beings. Language is included in rather rigid forms of the divine universe.

In the new time, in accordance with the general attitude towards thinking as the essence of human existence, the language is subjected to clarifying its content logical analysis. Language expresses concepts, and it is itself a means of thinking. Attempts are being made to construct a universal language to which other languages could be reduced. Leibniz's efforts in this direction made it possible to outline the ways of developing mathematical logic. Now it is very rarely believed that the sound of a word should have something in common with its objective meaning. Words are considered as signs of objects or their mental images.

IN early XIX V. philosophy of language is being productively developed German philosopher and linguist W. Humboldt. Language is understood by him as a continuous spiritual creativity. "... The language of the people is its spirit, and the spirit of the people is its language." Language is a "living organism", the source and soil of spiritual activity. In relation to the subject, the language has independence. Much later, in the middle of the 20th century, the idea of the independence of language will receive a paradoxical formulation from M. Heidegter: not a person speaks, but a language speaks to a person.

For E. Cassirer, language is a symbolic form of self-unfolding of the spirit, but as such it differs from the spirit and acts as an independent being. The idea of the difference between language and the psyche will subsequently receive numerous confirmations. On an intuitive level, it is fixed by expressions like: "I know, but I cannot express." It is well known that the most eloquent orators fail to express in words all the richness of their spiritual life.

In neopositivism, language is subjected to a carefully prepared furious logical attack. According to Russell, just as the planets do not know that they move according to Kepler's laws, so many people, using words, do not know their meanings. Accuracy in a word is a practically unattainable ideal, but one must strive steadily towards it. In neopositivism, language has become the most important subject of philosophical research, which is designed to eliminate the imperfection of natural language. For this purpose logic is used. It is believed that the application of logic and other formalized means to the analysis of a natural language does not violate its vitality. But it turned out that this path is far from being as harmless as it seems.

In the program of verificationism (checking the truth of assumptions), everything seemed clear enough. The truth of the assumptions can be tested. Natural language can be thought of as a collection of sentences. Meaningless sentences are eliminated from the context of the language. There are objects and processes, they correspond to words connected in sentences.

But the coherent concept of truth introduces significant adjustments to the picture outlined. Words have meaning in the context of a system of words, i.e. in the context of the language as a whole. We will not understand the meaning of the word "necessity" without understanding the meaning of the words "cause" and "effect", but the meaning of the words "cause" and "effect" is also guided by the meaning of some other words.

The pragmatic concept of truth introduces additional features into the picture of language. Truth is revealed through practice; Accordingly, the meaning of the word is clarified in the process of its application. Wittgenstein, who thought deeply about this circumstance, believes that philosophy should protect against the misuse of words. Speaking, according to the late Wittgenstein, is a form of life, of activity. "The meaning of a word is its use in language." But the use can be very different, which means that the word "must have a whole family of meanings." Each time speaking acts as a new game of finding out new meanings of words. That a word has not one but many meanings is well known from dictionaries. Russian philosopher and mathematician V.V. Nalimov proposed to explain the meanings of language constructions by some probability functions that describe with what degree of probability this or that meaning of a word is used. Such a seemingly simple sentence allows us to explain many linguistic facts. It is known that when learning a foreign language, it is easier to speak it than to learn to understand others, and among the latter, it is easier to understand those who know no more than you. It is clear why this is happening. To speak the language, it is enough to know the main, frequently used meanings of words. To understand others, you must already know all the meanings of the words that the interlocutor uses, but this most often occurs when the interlocutor is oriented in the language no better than you. Therefore, it is by no means accidental that a student studying, for example, English, understands the students of the group in which he studies better than a teacher teaching English in a group; accordingly, often a student understands his teacher better than a native of England. The synonymy of words explains many jokes based on the ambiguous use of the same word.

It was not without difficulty that the writer of these lines was explained in his distant childhood that "the great great Stalin" was small in stature. It's funny, but even adults are surprised to learn that the growth of each of the four leaders - Napoleon, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler - did not exceed 163 cm.

The given historical overview allowed us to get acquainted with various ways of understanding the language. It allows you to move on to generalizations.

First of all, we note that the language has a denoting function, its words and sentences often designate a certain object or process. But the implementation of this function should not be simplified. The poet Mandelstam very accurately characterizes the word: “A living word does not mean an object, but freely chooses, as if for housing, one or another objective significance, materiality, a sweet body. And the word wanders around the thing freely, like the soul around an abandoned, but not forgotten body ". A person is not able to designate objects directly, with a simple cavalry swoop. The word is the result of man's complex inner life; what exactly it means, it turns out only gradually. But in the subject-procedural world, everything is intertwined, therefore, what is denoted by a word turns out to be polysemantic, and the word itself, accordingly, is polymorphic.

Language is an expression, a symbolization of the inner, spiritual life of man. This is again true, but this feature of the language should not be taken lightly. The fact is that for each person the language is already predetermined by society, and it dictates the conditions for the implementation of the act of speaking (or writing). Speaking is the transformation of possibility into activity, but under conditions that are determined by the specificity of the language used. Speaking is the subject's appeal to other subjects, and it is they who determine the conditions of speaking and writing in the accepted form. by this language community. For the subject, language is given as an a priori structure, which he is free to dispose of, but he cannot cancel it. Thus, language is a symbolization of the inner spiritual world of people in a special form - individual-social. Thanks to this form, communication between subjects is carried out.

Language has a social nature. This, strictly speaking, means one thing: each subject must be expressed in a generally valid form, which, of course, dictates some restrictions. What these restrictions are depends on the specifics of the language being used. So that these restrictions are not excessive, the norms adopted in natural languages are rather "soft", mobile. It is already clear from this that the fight against the indefiniteness of linguistic expressions, which seems so appropriate, should not be carried to the point of turning language into an unnecessarily rigid structure.

Another theme of the philosophy of language is its liveliness, vitality. It is no coincidence that Mandelstam used the expression "living word." Natural language symbolizes all aspects of a person's spiritual life, from sensory-cognitive to sensory-emotional, from mental to eidetic. The richness and diversity of language is a direct continuation of the richness of a person's psychological life. Pushkin rightly asserted: "And I aroused good feelings with my lyre." Exactly, language awakens not only thoughts, but also feelings and eidoses. By the way, pay attention to the very precise expression of Pushkin "awakened" (excited). Through language, one subject excites in another the impulses of his spiritual life. The desire of the speaker is obvious - he who has ears, let him hear. But will he hear? For example, not loving loving?

One of the most important functions of natural language is communicative. Language communication involves: establishing contact between persons, encouraging the speaker to listen to his partner, the ability to understand each other. As you know, the process of language communication is very complex. The famous poem by F.I. Tyutchev is not famous by chance - it points to the difficulties of language communication:

How can the heart express itself?

How can someone else understand you?

Will he understand how you live?

Thought spoken is a lie.

Blowing up you will disturb the keys,

Eat them - and be silent.

The linguistic construction implies, along with the translation of the spiritual life of the speaker (or writer) into the sphere of language, the perception of what was said by the listener, the reader, the entry of the narration into the psyche of the latter. The speaker "aims" at the listener, and the listener, in turn, wants (or does not want) to "catch" the thought, feeling, eidos of his interlocutor. In some cases, people understand each other perfectly, in others, understanding comes after dialogue, discussion, mutual "grinding". Linguistic understanding requires consistency between the language of the speaker and the language of the listener.

Unity and diversity of languages. Metalanguage. formalized language. Machine languages. The sign form of the language. Philosophy as language

It is known from the Bible that, angered by the insolence of people who intended to build a tower to heaven in Babylon after the Flood, God "mixed their languages" so that people no longer understood each other. Indeed, the diversity of languages complicates the mutual understanding of people. However, and this is somewhat surprising, the diversity of languages is an indispensable feature of people's lives. Even if all people agreed to speak the international languages Volapuk (created by the German Schleyer) and Esperanto (created by the Pole Zamenhof), nevertheless, the diversity of languages would not be eliminated. There would remain a distinction between natural and artificial, formalized and machine languages.

Metalanguage- this is the language on the basis of which the study of another language is carried out, the latter is called objective language. From the point of view of a person who speaks Russian and learns English, Russian is a metalanguage, and English acts as an object language. In our presentation, we constantly use the metaphilosophical language, that is, the categories of metaphilosophy. So, in the previous paragraph, the nature of natural language was considered on the basis of such categories as possibility, symbol. The branch of mathematical logic devoted to the foundations of mathematics is called metamathematics, and it functions as a metamathematical language. The relation between the metalanguage and the object language is realized in the process of translation. Translation is a kind of interpretation. It certainly does not come down to simply replacing each individual word with its correlate from the corresponding dictionary. This is very clear in the translation of the verses. First, a subscript is obtained. But this is not yet a poetic translation, because the interlinear does not reproduce the poetic image. It will take more effort, not just a translator, but a poet-translator, before an adequate translation is achieved. It has been noticed that an adequate translation is, as a rule, more voluminous than the original. In the language of the researcher, it often takes several words to translate one foreign word. Metalanguages are widely used in science, here they express, fix knowledge of the most general nature. The language of philosophy is a meta-language of maximum generality; all educated people are forced to use it.

Along with natural artificial languages created by humans to solve specific problems. These include languages of science, machine languages, jargons, Esperanto. Formalized and machine languages began to play a particularly significant role in the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution.

Formalized languages are logical or mathematical calculations. Unlike natural language, a formalized language uses logical and mathematical signs; any kind of ambiguity and absurdity are excluded as far as possible, formulas are widely used. A well-known specialist in the field of mathematical logic, A. Church, emphasized that a formalized language is needed to track the logical form. The great logician G. Frege, comparing the calculus he created with the natural language, compared the microscope with the human eye. In solving some problems, the eye has an advantage, in solving others, the microscope. Like a microscope, logical calculus is useful only in some cases, where a person is dealing with a logical form.

When evaluating the importance of formalized languages, extremes often take place: their importance is either underestimated or overestimated. Nowadays, an increasing number of scientists believe that even thinking is not represented in formalized languages in all its richness. Obviously, for the logical reproduction of thinking, many formalized languages are required. It is equally obvious that formalized languages are not very suitable for expressing the sensory-emotional and eidetic sides of the human spiritual world. The same applies to human creativity. But, on the other hand, the successful use of formalized languages shows that human activity, psychological and objective, has a much more logical and mathematical nature than it seemed before. Therefore, the use of formalized languages brings new benefits to a person, especially if this use is machined. Machine the language makes it possible to write programs of algorithms and the content of information stored in huge volumes in the memory devices of computers. If a bicycle, a motorcycle, a rocket allow a person to increase the speed of his movement, then the computer, respectively, allows a person to increase the amount of his memory and enhance his computing abilities. The computer does not have a psyche, it only models its structure, its characteristic connections. Let's summarize. The spiritual, mental life of a person is symbolized in many languages, each of which expresses a certain side, regularity, feature of this life. Languages are projected onto each other - language interpretations arise, mutual understanding of people, the Babylonian pandemonium of languages is eliminated.

Language in its sound and graphic forms is mainly represented by conventional signs of human mental activity. If the subject speaks or writes, then he translates into signs, "signifies" his spiritual world and thereby makes it accessible to other people. The one who perceives speech and writing translates the meaning of signs into the state of his psyche. Thus, language as a process at each of its stages is symbolization. From this point of view, the language of people is not limited to the system of signs. The system of signs is only an intermediate stage in the process of the functioning of the language, its temporary abode, which the interlocutors visit out of necessity and tend to leave as quickly as possible.

natural language was a brilliant invention of mankind: it turns out that it is possible to extract and process information about objects, operating directly not with them, but with their signs. Thus began a grandiose revolution, which is gaining momentum. The signs turned out to be very convenient for their use in communication, in cognitive activity, in science. Signs are generalized, they can be used by different people in different situations. The use of formalized languages allows obtaining information in a compact form and, most importantly, effectively saving time. Signs, by virtue of their material nature, are convenient for machine processing, for the development of technical communication systems. Most developed modern countries, such as Japan, the USA, Germany, are often called the information society. Here the use of sign systems is more efficient than in other countries. One of the main areas of development modern man associated with its sign-symbolic activity. This circumstance largely explains why modern philosophy is by necessity a linguistic (linguistic) philosophy.

Philosophy is often characterized as a form of consciousness. But philosophy is also a language, a form of linguistic activity. The philosopher is engaged in sign-symbolic activity no less than representatives of other sciences. The language of philosophy in relation to any language is often used as a metalanguage. The reason is clear. The language of philosophy deals with the most common features universe; it is convenient to consider the particular and the singular from the standpoint of the general. Philosophy is a metalanguage in relation to both physics and mathematics, as well as to logic and mathematics. But, on the other hand, the language of philosophy can also be subjected to research, for example, from the standpoint of the language of logic. In this case, logic plays the role of a metalanguage, and philosophy has the meaning of the studied (objective) language. In science, there is something like the law of wrapping languages: each language looks in the mirror of another. Natural languages take an active part in wrapping languages.

When the neopositivists applied logic to the analysis of natural language, they found there ... logic. Natural language remained natural language, but it was given a clearer logical form. Not without amazement, logicians and mathematicians discovered that the "exact" languages they create in the throes and anxieties of creativity are always surrounded by the inevitable "noise" of natural language. Natural language is driven out the door, and he looks out the window. Something similar happens with the philosophical language - it is irremovable.

Philosophy of culture. What is culture? Culture and civilization

The extremely complex process of symbolization by a person of his primordially human capabilities and forces is characterized by various categories, among them such the most important ones as culture, civilization, practice. The terms "culture", "civilization" are often used interchangeably. In this case, it is usually emphasized that culture as a specific human way of being differs from the being of animals. Culture is not inherited biologically, but through socialization, such as through learning. The designation of the same category by two different terms is inappropriate. We believe that there is a significant difference between the categories of culture and civilization.

Civilization and culture- Words of Latin origin. Civilized - civil, state. Cultural - educated, educated, developed, revered, cultivated. Already in the origin of the words "culture" and "civilization" one can see a certain difference, which received its formalization in the categories of culture and civilization, introduced into the everyday life of philosophical thought in the second half of the 18th century. Civilization is all of humanity in all its richness, including symbolic manifestations. Culture is the achievement of civilization, the most perfect in it, the triumph of the human.

As for language, it is a component of civilization. Only by his achievements and perfection does he reach the realm of culture. An analysis of the nature of language, which has revealed many specific and characteristic features of the symbolic, greatly facilitates our analysis of the nature of civilization and culture. Such an analysis is necessary. Events in the XX century. often they do not develop at all as we would like, sunrises are replaced by sunsets, ups and downs, and each time in these metamorphoses, culture and the internal content of civilization play an almost decisive role. A person's striving for perfection requires knowledge of the phenomena of culture and civilization. When a society is bad, its hopes are connected with culture (and what else can you hope for?).

The original definition of culture expresses its symbolic character. Culture - this is the otherness of the human spirit, represented in sound, electromagnetic and other waves, in nuclear reactors, in a word, in signs. Already here the first collisions, the origins of ups and downs, various kinds of crises arise. Culture not only connects, but also separates the inner and outer world of a person. Russian philosopher and literary critic MM. Bakhtin emphasized that culture does not have its own territory. In our context, this means that it constantly rushes between the human spirit and its signs, finding only a temporary home in one of these two regions. If E. Cassirer assessed the symbolic nature of culture as its obligatory property and, therefore, not subject to critical perception, then the intuitivist A. Bergson sharply criticized such a position. He insisted that the philosophical act consists in overcoming symbolic forms, after which only a purely intuitive comprehension of the subject and, in general, real life are possible. The symbolic nature of culture, however, cannot be canceled by anyone. Critics of Bergson point to the possibility of oblivion of man in the symbolic products of culture and civilization. This will not happen if culture is realized as a full-fledged dialogue. MM. Bakhtin did not tire of emphasizing dialogue character culture.

At the stage of its transition from the inner world of man to the outer world, civilization appears as a set of signs, culture - as a special sign, product, perfection. The noise of the orchestra is not yet culture, although it is already Civilization. We encounter culture when we listen to Tchaikovsky or Beethoven, read Pushkin, contemplate Rublev's icons, watch the world's best artists play, use modern technology. Culture is a skill, the highest qualification, in it the author-master shows himself. And in front of him is the viewer, the listener, who may not understand the meaning of the work of culture. Culture outside communication dies, it, among other things, is communication.

Culture as communication is realized only if it is generally significant, that is, it does not remain a purely personal matter of its creator. New collisions are hidden in the general significance of culture. As the most perfect achievement of civilization, culture is not equally accessible to everyone. Culture has general significance only for the circle of people who understand it, it is not universal and not universal. The higher the level of culture, the smaller the proportion of members of society who understand it.. Every civilization is proud of its culture, but it is unable to make it its true foundation, foundation. The social pyramid in its reliance on culture is extremely unstable, because its base is few compared to its upper part. This is very reminiscent of the situation with a geometric body placed on its tip: balancing, if possible, is only for a short period of time.

In fact, the very creation of culture is the source of one of the global problems of our time: the separation of culture from the broad masses of the people. Last Available Mass culture, the value of which is enormous both in a positive and negative sense. In relation to real culture, mass culture is a marginal phenomenon, that is, it is on the edge of culture.

Culture as a dialogue will take place only when the triumph of the human takes place not only on the side of the author, but also on the side of those who perceive his creations. It is well known that this triumph may not be. Culture is the triumph of not just a person, but humanity, but this is what an enlightened, educated - and only - subject is sometimes deprived of.

Culture is always creativity, activity, the value attitude of a person towards himself and others according to the laws of truth, beauty and goodness. The truth above has already been the subject of philosophical analysis, now it's the turn of beauty.

Aesthetics. beauty and beauty

The human world includes beauty, it is intuitively clear to everyone. Every person is capable of love, and for the most part they love the beautiful, the beautiful, the sublime. And accordingly, many, to put it mildly, do not like the ugly and base. However, a naive-intuitive understanding of the world of beauty is not enough for a confident orientation in it. Here, as usual in problematic situations, there is a need for good philosophy. Interestingly, until the middle of the XVIII century. philosophers did not attach due importance to the sphere of beauty. Philosophers of antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, considered independent sections of philosophy, for example, logic and ethics, but not aesthetics. Why?

The Greek word "aestheticos" means "pertaining to feelings". But feeling was considered just a moment of cognitive or practical activity. When it was found out that the world of the sensual-emotional has not only a subordinate, but also an independent meaning, then the time of aesthetics has come, within the framework of which such values as beauty and beauty receive their understanding. Founder of aesthetics Baumgarten defined beauty as the perfection of the sensual, and art as the embodiment of beauty. The category of the beautiful concretizes the category of beauty, because it is more specific, explicitly includes elements of comparison: something is not just beautiful, but very beautiful, beautiful and as far as possible from the ugly, the antipode of the beautiful. Emphasizing the originality of aesthetic perception, Kant characterized it as "expediency without purpose." Aesthetic judgment is not interested in anything else, it has an independent value. In human life, the aesthetic principle has its own special niche.

Where and how does the aesthetic exist? The simplest answer to this question is as follows: aesthetic, and this includes beauty, this is a property of an object. Such an answer from the point of view of understanding the symbolic, symbolic nature of the aesthetic is rather naive. Being included in the process of symbolization, the aesthetic unites, connects the subject with the object, the spiritual with the corporeal. Both "naturalists" who consider aesthetic properties to belong to objects, and those who reduce the aesthetic to the perceptions of the individual, are mistaken. The secret of the aesthetic lies in the amazing consistency of the "face" of the object with the inner emotional-figurative life of a person. In his aesthetic attitude to nature, to others and to himself, a person constantly checks everything for humanity, looking for proportions that would organically connect him with the external environment.

If we turn to the subjective side of the aesthetic principle, then the first thing to do is to attribute it to one of the departments of a person's mental life. What is aesthetic? Feeling, emotion, pleasure, thought, eidos, value? It turns out that none of the above can be excluded from the aesthetic phenomenon, one can only single out the dominant moments. The subjective-aesthetic is dominated by the sensuous-emotional, and not the mental, which in this case has a subordinate meaning. At the same time, the aesthetic has no place outside of a holistic and living unity, the fullness of experience, which means that it is an eidos. The aesthetic in the form of beauty, the beautiful, is the promise of happiness.

The value character of the aesthetic is especially clearly manifested in the ratio of beauty and ugliness in it, and they are far from being different. Man strives not for the ugly and base, but for the beautiful and sublime.. Deprive the world of the aesthetically positive, and you will lose much more than half of your sense perception.

In an effort to multiply and develop the world, first of all, the beautiful, the beautiful, a person turns to art. Art, as already noted, is the embodiment of beauty, which, of course, implies the creation of the latter.

The expression of beauty can be sound, light, substance, movement, rhythm, human body, word, thought, feeling. As you know, there are many types of art: architecture, sculpture, literature, theater, music, choreography, cinema, circus, applied and decorative arts. Every time the bearer of beauty is something, for example, in the case of music, the sounds that are extracted by musicians through musical instruments. The well-known line of the Russian romance reads: “Oh, if only I could express in sound all the power of my suffering…” Art is the ability to express oneself according to the signs of beauty. Danish philosopher XIX V. S. Kierkegaard gave a figurative description of the poet: his lips are arranged in such a way that even a groan turns into beautiful music. Beauty, the beautiful can be expressed not only in something purely material, but also, for example, in thought. So, in science, evidence is highly valued, that is, the beauty of thinking, thoughts. Feelings are also beautiful if they lead to positive value experiences. There are countless examples of this, from the love of Romeo and Juliet to the courage of a warrior defending his homeland.

For a designer, engineer, technician, it is very important to see the similarities and differences between, on the one hand, a work of art and, on the other hand, a technical artifact, i.e., a technical product or device. The Greek "techne" means art, craftsmanship. Both the artist and the technician are skilled craftsmen, although the goals of their work and creativity do not coincide. The purpose of a work of art is to function as a symbol of beauty, beauty; the purpose of a technical artifact is its usefulness to humans. It cannot be ruled out that in some cases a technical product is also a work of art, but this is far from always the case. At the same time, any technical artifact does not fall out of the aesthetic world. Moreover, as it turned out, the usefulness of a technical product does not oppose its aesthetic merits, but forms a unity with it that is peculiar, but desirable for a person. Awareness of this fact led to the development of design, artistic construction of objects, including technology. The word "design" is of English origin and very well captures the essence of technical aesthetics. It consists of the root stem "zain" (= sign, symbol) and the prefix "di" (= separation). The designer carries out various symbolic activities. He translates his spiritual world into technical signs relevant to technology users. For a designer, technology is not just pieces of iron, but a symbol of beauty, beauty. He, presumably, deeply understands that, although the expressive possibilities of technology do not always allow achieving the perfection of works of art, in the aesthetic sense, it is the latter that are the ideal of technology. Philosophy opens access to understanding the aesthetic merits of the world, including technology.

Philosophy of practice. What is practice?

Symbolizing himself, man acts, he is an active being. The Greek word "praktikos" means active, active. Respectively practice is human activity.

Everything that appears as human activity is practice. Language, culture and its many components are varieties of practice. Thinking, experiencing, eideting also belong to practice. But for example, eideting is a very degenerate case of practice, when the means and the result are reduced to the use of the possibilities of the subject himself. Often, practice is understood as material practice, that is, such an activity where the material objective world is the means and result. But material practice is also just one kind of practice.

IN ancient society the burden of physical labor was the lot of slaves. Even art was treated with contempt. The contemplation of the sage was considered the highest form of activity. A contemplative attitude to reality moves the problem of practice into the human mind. The doctrine of practice (praxeology) acts as ethics, the doctrine of virtue. Ethics - characteristic both ancient and ancient Indian philosophy. Through the whole world philosophy there is a tradition of ethical understanding of practice.

Christianity initially considered labor as a curse imposed by God on man. The main form of activity is associated with serving God, and this is, first of all, prayer and everything connected with it.

IN new time in the struggle against scholasticism, the practical orientation of philosophy was emphasized by English philosophers (Bacon, Hobbes, Locke). The desire to create a philosophy that has application in life is based on the power of reason. In the entire philosophy of modern times, mental activity is considered as a true form of activity.

Kant introduces gradations of reason: theoretical reason contemplates the world of things; only practical reason overcomes the boundaries of a contemplative attitude towards objects, and therefore it takes precedence over theoretical reason. Practical reason acts as a will, and practice as a morally just act. Practice is characterized by Kant in the categories of purpose, freedom, will, morality. Hegel takes a decisive step to free practice from the subjective attitude. He turns his attention to the category of remedy. The means, according to Hegel, has an advantage over the goal, namely, "the universality of existence." The subjective is singular, but the means is universal. For Hegel, labor is the self-generation of man, but it implements the logic not of man, not of the means of production, but of the absolute spirit. The absolute spirit as a whole is realized in its abstract moments in theory and practice. Practice is higher than theoretical knowledge, because it has the dignity not only of universality, but also of reality. The Hegelian priorities of the objective over the subjective, the practical over the theoretical, the means over the end, are closely related to Marxism, which Gramsci, the Italian philosopher and politician, called the philosophy of practice.

For many areas of Western philosophy of the XX century. practice is the activity of an individual, understood as a volitional (pragmatism), rational (neopositivism) being, realizing his freedom in the project and choice (Sartre). In Husserl's philosophy, practice contains all forms of human activity, from which, however, philosophical analysis singles out pure knowledge, theory. It is this knowledge that becomes the subject of analysis. For Heidegger, "being-in-the-world" of a person is a way of dealing with things. The sphere of socio-practical has an inauthentic being, in it are the sources of the crisis of mankind.

So, let's sum up the consideration of practice in various philosophical directions. (The category of practice is understood in a broad and narrow sense, either as any human activity, or as his exclusively objective activity. The author hopes that the well-known ambiguity of terms has become something self-evident for the reader. Such is the specificity of the language of philosophy.

Practice has structure; the structural elements of practice are: 1) purpose; 2) expedient activity; 3) means of practice; 4) the object of practical action; 5) the result of the action.

The goal is inherent in the subject or group of people. A goal is a subjective image of a desired future. This is what certain actions are taken for. It is not necessary to think that the ultimate goal is necessarily reduced to some specific subjects. The goal can also be an ideal, the pursuit of which is not limited by any limit. The philosophical doctrine of purpose is called teleology. Practice is the activity of a person pursuing his goals. Therefore, it is a purposeful activity.

This activity itself is a symbol of purpose. Here the subject inevitably meets with nature, which recognizes not good wishes, but strength. Man opposes nature as a force of nature. In nature, man fulfills his purpose. Anything that is used to achieve a goal is called means of practice. This is not only machines, tools, but also the knowledge and life experience of people.

Activity, as Marx put it, dies out in the product. The goal is being fulfilled. A realized goal is no longer a goal. Possibility turned into reality; practical action has exhausted itself. The relay race of practical actions forms a person's practice, his active life.

At the stage of achievement result practice, the subject has the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of his actions, all those emotional and rational moments that accompanied them. Practice becomes a criterion of truth, not always final and exhaustive, but nevertheless always making it possible to make the assessment of truth detailed and meaningful. Practice is not the only criterion of truth, but one of the main ones. In the Theses on Feuerbach, the young Marx wrote: "In practice, a person must prove the truth, that is, the reality and power, the this-worldliness of his thinking."

In the structure of practice, there are many relatively independent moments, the meaning of which is not the same. This is reflected in the specifics of philosophical teachings. When Kantians analyze practice, they proceed from the activity of the subject. Marxists shift the emphasis to the means of practice, attaching special importance to them. Meanwhile, practice is a single whole, everything is interconnected here. It is not always generally appropriate to "break" the practice into its specific moments and establish subordination between them.

Practice, like everything else in the world, exists in more or less developed forms. Practice is not only social production, but also any human activity. For example, the process of individual thinking is also a practice. Not only a worker and an engineer take part in the practice, but also a politician and a scientist, in short, every person. Non-practice is not mental or any other intellectual activity, but the absence of activity in its specific human qualities. If natural processes are not involved in the sphere of human activity, then they do not belong to the sphere of practice. It is often said that it is necessary to bridge the gap between theory and practice, it turns out that theory contradicts practice. The other point of view is that there is nothing more practical than a good theory. The urgent task is not to overcome the imaginary gap between theory and practice, but to develop practice and increase its effectiveness. A good practitioner is the subject, the society that operates effectively.

As for the forms of practice, there are quite a lot of them in accordance with the structure of human activity. There is the practice of economic, political, social, spiritual life, the practice of art and science, language practice, etc. Philosophy considers practice in a categorical way, from the standpoint of that common thing that is inherent in all forms of practice.

The theme of practice is very closely and organically connected with the problems of morality. If a person acts, then for what? Kant's famous question is: "What is the purpose of man?"

For Plato practice is a morally good and, moreover, beautiful activity. The free will of a person, the Stoics of antiquity believed, is embodied in virtue.

According to Christianity man's activity is ordained by God and permeated with his goodness. God embodies the highest good. God leads a person to good, but in order to successfully move along this path, one must overcome various kinds of temptations.

According to Bacon and the philosophy of modern times, practical activity should be aimed at alleviating the calamities of human existence and achieving good goals, especially harmony between people (Locke).

Kant goes further: he considers that the highest achievement of practical action is by no means the striving for good goals, but the realization of the basic moral law. The problem of purpose is solved in the sphere not of what is, but in the sphere of what should be. In this regard, numerous axiological (value) problems arise.

IN Marxism the historical pace of practice is understood as the realization of the dialectic of good and evil. The Marxist program for the reorganization of the world is aimed at achieving communist ideals, and they, they say, are of a social and ethical nature.

Husserl concerned that practice leads to forgetting the original realities of life, to which one must constantly return in order to avoid a comprehensive crisis. It is only in this case that practice achieves its true aims.

As we can see, there are influential traditions in philosophy regarding practice as the achievement of good ends. Most often, philosophers are not inclined to understand practice in line with narrow practicality, the desire to extract direct material benefits from everything. The interest of philosophers is clearly aimed at the realization of universal values, and this is good:. The thesis "the ends justify the means" was criticized by Kant, Hegel, and Marx. The use of unwholesome means inevitably leads to the achievement of unwholesome ends.

Good. Three ethics. Personality, problems of freedom and responsibility

There is a special section of philosophy, ethics, within which the problem of good and evil is considered in detail. The term "ethics" Aristotle formed from the Greek word "ethos", which is translated into Russian as a custom, character. Modern ethics knows many concepts, the main ones being the ethics of virtue, the ethics of duty and the ethics of values.

Key Ideas virtue ethics developed by Aristotle. Virtues are understood as such personality traits, realizing which a person does good. It is believed that, acting in accordance with their virtues, a person inevitably turns out to be moral. Evil is associated with the scarcity of virtues. According to Aristotle, the main virtues are: wisdom, prudence, courage, justice. The famous English mathematician and philosopher B. Russell offered his list of virtues: optimism, courage (the ability to defend one's convictions), intelligence. The latest authors (they call themselves neo-Aristotelians not without pride) especially often point to such virtues as rationality, tolerance (tolerance for other people's opinions), sociability, justice, love of freedom.

In contrast to virtue ethics, Kant developed ethics of duty. According to Kant, the ideal of virtue, of course, can lead to good, but it also happens to lead to evil, namely, when it is disposed of by one in whose veins "the cold blood of a villain" flows. Why does it happen this way? Because in the virtues good has found its partial and relative, not complete expression. The decisive, fundamental criterion of goodness can only be that which is good without any reservations and restrictions. Moral laws, maxims such as "Do not kill", "Do not lie", "Do not use a person as a means", "Do not steal" turn out to be the criteria for goodness. The surest guarantee against an evil deed is not virtues, but moral maxims that have a general, universal, obligatory, formal, a priori and transcendental character.

The ethics of duty still has numerous supporters in our day, however, many criticize it for a certain detachment from life and a penchant for dogmas. In this regard, it has developed ethics of values, according to which there are only relative values, relative good. And besides, values must be counted, calculated, only in this way can ethical chimeras be avoided. The most significant representatives of the ethics of values are English utilitarianism and American pragmatism.

Topic 11 Philosophy of the Greco-Roman world as the basis of Christian culture History of philosophy as the spiritual history of mankind When considering the history of philosophy, one should remember Hegel's position that the history of philosophy is an epoch expressed in thought. It will help

IV. Man in the World 1. Christianity is based in its metaphysics on the fact of the Incarnation - it is the Incarnation that reveals the special position of man in the world. Man is the sarah of infiniti and even more, the sarah of Dei, only in man could Absolute Being be united with

7. Noospheric man as a form of "humanization" of man in the XXI century. From a “human harmonist” to a harmonious spiritual and moral system The prefix “with” in the word “conscience” plays a role similar to that which is inherent in it in the word “complicity”. The person "having

CHAPTER X. MAN AND THE THREE WORLDS When different traditional triplicities are compared with one another, one can indeed correlate term with term, but being careful not to conclude from this that the corresponding terms are necessarily identical even in the case when

CHAPTER SIX. THEMATIC EXPOSITION OF THE PROBLEM OF THE WORLD THROUGH CONSIDERATION OF THE THESIS “THE MAN IS FORMING THE WORLD” § 64. The first features of the phenomenon of the world: the disclosure of the existent as the existent and “how”; relation to being as giving and not giving of being (relation-to..., self-retention, selfhood) When,

Chapter 10 MAN AND HIS BEING IN THE WORLD We have analyzed the problem of being in its essence, in the dynamics of the development of beings. It follows from the very definition of being that the highest link in the chain of developing being (at the level of the living systems of the planet) is man. It is a special phenomenon.

Chapter 10 Philosophy: The Making of a Rational Culture If you execute me, they will call me wise for real. And if you let me die in peace, I will soon be forgotten. Socrates What is philosophy? We have defined mythology as a system of two levels: figurative,

Philosophical understanding of the world and a person - in - the world "image of the world" as a way of knowing a person and the world - style of thinking as a characteristic of individual consciousness - two types of philosophizing - "classical" and "non-classical" philosophizing - "aesthetic

Chapter 5 Management of matters. Types and forms of life. Animals and the brain. Progenitor of man, man, society Let people think they are in control and they will be in control. William Peni "He who rules must see people as they are and things as they are."

Man in the world of culture : teaching aid.

The manual was compiled by: Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor Raevskaya N.Yu.; Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor Solovieva G.V.; Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor Stanislavova I.L.; Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor Ilyichev P.I., Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor Sizov S.S. Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor Mikirtichan G.L.; Candidate of Medical Sciences, Professor A.Z. Likhtshanhof

Under the editorship of Professor Mikirtichan G.L.

Reviewers: Doctor of Philological Sciences, prof. St. Petersburg State University Solonin Yu.N., Ph.D., prof. St. Petersburg State University Dudnik S.I.

Introduction………………………………………………………………………3

§ 1. Culture as a phenomenon of human existence…………………….….4

§ 2 The moral dimension of culture…………………………………….12

§ 3 Political and legal sphere of culture………….……….……………..28

§4. The essence and meaning of art………………………………………………41

Introduction.

This manual aims to give students quick guide to a philosophical consideration of the phenomenon of culture, as well as the existence of a person in its various spheres: moral, political, artistic.

1.Policy definition. The nature and essence of power relations. The term "politics" comes from the Greek word "polis", meaning city, state. Politics is the sphere of public activity associated with relations between large social groups. The core of these relations is the problem of power, its conquest, retention and use.

Power, by its most general definition, is the way some people influence others. This is a way to subordinate the will of another to your will, as well as a way to control and dispose of the actions of other people. The problem of power has always been and remains one of the urgent and acute problems. At all times, questions about who should have power, who should enjoy authority, demanded resolution; How does a situation arise in which some people dominate over others.

Following Erich Fromm, the concept of power can be divided into two meanings: rational power and irrational power. Rational power is based on competence. Such power forms a consciousness that seeks to imitate the actions of authority. Such power contributes to the growth of the person who relies on it. Irrational power is based on force and serves to exploit those who obey it. It follows that the concept of power and authority are not identical.

Authority based on authority depends on specific circumstances. The qualities of the ruling subject also depend on them. As a rule, such qualities include: life experience, wisdom, generosity, skill, as well as appearance and courage.

Personalities capable of literally “radiating” power are found in every historical era, but these are the exception rather than the rule. The main sign of authoritative power is the absence of the need to order, threaten and bribe.

From birth, a person needs authority. The first authority for him is his parents. The child readily submits to authority, but rebels against pressure and neglect. From this follows an important conclusion that two principles are laid down in a person from birth: to obey and to resist submission. The degree of manifestation of each of these principles depends on the conditions surrounding the person.

2. Theories of political philosophy.

The emergence of the state was a phenomenon that radically changed the political consciousness of the archaic society. The power of authority has given way to the authority of power. In the polis organization power relations are transformed into politics, into the art of persuading and governing the people. The word becomes one of the main management tools. Political art is reduced to the ability to persuade. Argument and discussion presuppose the existence of a public, which is addressed as an arbitrator. Therefore, the second distinguishing feature of the polis organization is the publicity of public life. All problems are brought to the square and discussed. The entire demos has access to the world of political relations. Central axiom political thought antiquity is the recognition of the inseparable connection between man and politics. The bifurcation of labor into physical and spiritual led to the stratification of society into the ruled and the managers. A slave in antiquity was perceived not as a person, but as a thing that does not act of its own free will. At the same time, the master turned out to be not a full-fledged person, since he could not do without slaves. The master had to fulfill his managerial function, to which he was destined by nature, which endowed him with special qualities. In addition to the rational substantiation of power relations, completely irrational ways of asserting domination have never disappeared. The main basis of these relations was tradition and official religion. Tradition opposed the polis power of tribal gods. Religion claimed spiritual dominance. Religious power could not be destroyed, as it was based on the indestructible faith of man in the possibility of salvation. This faith could only weaken under the influence of a favorable political situation, however, any political and social crisis again strengthened the influence of religion and its institutions.

During the Middle Ages, man turned from a political being into a religious being. The dogmas of the church became at the same time political axioms. At the same time, Christianity, as the dominant ideology, sharply divided the sphere of religious and civil authorities. However, only that power was recognized as legitimate, which received spiritual sanction to rule. It was argued that power is given from God. In modern times, the idea of the natural essence of power was opposed to religious ideology. It was a completely new turn in the interpretation of power relations. Firstly, the divine nature of power was denied, and secondly, the ancient ideal of power was also denied, as a natural difference between the best and the many. The new idea was an attempt to rationalize the irrational nature of power. Power and the desire for power begin to be associated with the "sinful" nature of man. Power is conceived as a means of curbing vicious human passions. The most famous ideologist of this period was Nicolo Machiavelli (1469-1527). First of all, Machiavelli separated real political activity from moral and religious foundations. It must be assumed, he said, that it is not morality and religion, but base motives that determine human behavior. These include: self-interest, fear, cruelty, utilitarian calculation. In order to curb spontaneous anarchist forces, for the victory of the rational principle as the goal of social development, there must be a power in society that uses any means to achieve the goal. This political doctrine is formed in conditions when the main forms of political relations were palace conspiracies and coups. In other words, when politics turned from the art of management into the art of capturing and retaining power.

The dialectic of political relations was expressed even more sharply by T. Hobbes (1588-1679). According to Hobbes, power as the natural power of a person is provided by his strength and mind. The exercise of this power is subject to "natural law." Natural law gives man the right to use his power as he sees fit. And since such a right belongs to every person by nature, it turns into a prerequisite for the social "war of all against all." In such a situation, the right denies itself, because it turns into complete lack of rights. The war of all against all threatens the existence of man, and, therefore, contradicts the "natural law". Hobbes finds a way out of this contradiction in a different way of substantiating power. The power of the state, according to Hobbes, is a consequence of the "social contract". It is a power that is alienated from the "natural man". This is not a product of natural, but of consciously human institutions. This conclusion, on the one hand, denied Aristotle's assertion that man is by nature a political being, and, on the other hand, asserted the existence of some kind of human nature that stands behind political reality and determines it. Hobbes believed that both freedom and coercion, good and evil, destruction and creation are rooted in human nature. And this meant that political life is determined by the struggle of these principles and their mutual measure.

Another way to solve this problem we find in J.-J. Rousseau (1712-1778). For Rousseau, human nature is alien to evil and injustice. Only when he falls into the grip of "unnatural" social relations does he get involved in a struggle for power contrary to his nature. This struggle changes the spirituality of a person in such a way that his main features become lust for power, cruelty, the desire to subjugate his own kind. From this followed the conclusion about the need for social reorganization in accordance with the best features of human nature.

A different point of view about the natural state of people was expressed by John Locke (1632-1704). He argued that humans could and would prefer to live in the world even in a state of nature. The state of nature presupposes the natural rights of people to life, liberty, and property. The duty of the state is to maintain and guarantee these rights, and the monopoly of power is contrary to these duties. Therefore, the power in the state should be limited and divided between different bodies and institutions. Locke's ideas had a profound effect on the American Constitution. In the Declaration of Independence there is a direct indication of natural rights, the existence of which is called self-evident in it.

It is important to pay attention to the fact that the variability of the human race is expressed in its extremely diverse social institutions. Some tribes lived peacefully, others continuously fought and fed exclusively by raids on their neighbors. And this means that there are no grounds for asserting anything about the state of nature. human society. It is only certain that people arranged their lives in different ways: some preferred war, others peace. The common goal of classical political doctrines was to develop means to limit the power of rulers over their citizens. With the development of democratic social relations, the question of power was already posed in a different plane. Beginning with late XIX century, attempts were made to find methods to prevent the threat of tyranny, but now the tyranny of the majority over the minority.

The main focus of "modern" political and philosophical theories can be reduced to the search for an answer to the question of the means and instruments for ensuring the political freedoms of citizens. As such tools, political parties gradually emerged and established themselves in all developed countries, which act simultaneously as the supporting structures of civil society and the political system.

The main task of political parties is to turn the many private interests of individual citizens and social strata into their joint political interest.

The principle of electivity is connected with the idea of party membership. officials to the authorities. The principle of representation is designed to ensure popular sovereignty, which is exercised through the electoral system and the electoral right of citizens.

3. Law as a form of regulation of people's behavior.

The institution of law is inextricably linked with the state. There can be no state without a system of laws established by it. On the other hand, there can be no law without an apparatus capable of enforcing the observance of legal norms.

Law is a set of norms and rules established and protected by the state that regulate the relations of people in society.. This is a legalized opportunity to do something and carry it out. The main categories of legal consciousness are legality and justice. formation of legal consciousness, a system of legal ideology is being developed, which is a theoretical expression of the basic ideas about legality and justice. Ideology is such a set of ideas that serves to unite people into certain social structures. This is a kind of "social glue" that makes social groups homogeneous.

4. Historical stages in the formation of legal consciousness.

Customary law was a set of traditionally established unwritten rules of conduct, sanctioned by the subject of power. At the end of the 7th century BC e. in a significant part of the Greek policies, custom is replaced by written law. The functions of punishment are transferred to state bodies. The fixation of laws limits the arbitrariness in their interpretation. The superiority of law over personal will is affirmed. The law acquires the character of an impersonal measure, an objective measure of actions.

As already mentioned, the polis democracy did not recognize the slave as a member of the community of citizens. The slave remained in the position of a prisoner of war for the rest of his life. More precisely, they treated him like a thing. True, the slave owner had the right to free the slave. And this meant that the slave state was never defined as a well-deserved and irremovable human destiny.

In the Middle Ages, law had a class character. The right of each class received religious justification. The pinnacle of religious consciousness was the recognition of the equality of all people before God. religious consciousness constantly looking for a criterion of true faith, either in personal experience, for example, in repentance, insight, in inspiration, or in genuine documents of Christianity - in biblical legends. But any attempts to form an independent idea of the world and God have always been considered by the official church as a complete syndrome of demonism. The ideal of the theological worldview was such a state of society in which everyone, from the sovereign to the serf, would perform his function as a church task. This ideal has always assumed life at someone else's disposal.

The spiritual atmosphere of Europe during the period of the birth of bourgeois relations was reflected in the already known idea of the "social contract" by T. Hobbes. According to this idea, natural enmity forces people to fight for the preservation of life. To do this, they enter into an agreement, and give all their rights in favor of one person. This person determines the duties and rights of everyone, and thereby ensures public order and peace. A direct conclusion from this provision is Hobbes' thesis about the unlimited rights of the supreme ruler (sovereign) in relation to his subjects. To perform legal functions, i.e. to tame the natural aggressiveness of citizens, the apparatus of violence is needed - the state. Citizens in relation to the state have only duties. But on the part of the monarch, arbitrariness is quite acceptable. This conclusion follows from the very title of Hobbes' treatise, he calls the state Leviathan. In biblical mythology, Leviathan is a huge sea monster resembling a giant crocodile. Even a person's own dignity becomes nothing more than his "public value". That is, the price that the state gives it. And this price is expressed in the award of various positions and titles.

Contractual theories take a different direction in the legal ideology of the 18th century. The central idea of these theories is this. In a state where law is the will of the ruler, the life and freedom of citizens are also not guaranteed, as in a state of complete anarchy. The individual in such a state is in a state of constant fear. And such a state makes impossible the moral virtues of citizens, such as: justice, truthfulness, reliability, as well as love for one's neighbor, charity. These virtues are being replaced by servility and servility, envy, vindictiveness, deceit, etc. These thoughts are elaborated in the works of the prominent Italian legal theorist Cesare Beccaria (1738 - 1794). In his treatise On Crimes and Punishments, he speaks of the most despotic manifestation of absolutism. He considers the judicial - punitive system. “Only a malicious joker,” he says, can call unlimited power a civil world. In favor of this judgment, Beccaria gives the following arguments. First, the number of crimes that private individuals can commit is much less than the number of crimes committed by the state. The sheer cruelty of such crimes, carried out in cold blood and through due process, surpasses anything a private individual is capable of, even if he is possessed by anger or hatred. Another argument refers to the unlimited repression of the state, which suppresses not so much the criminal will as free will in general. In fear of judicial reprisals, the individual begins to beware of any decisive action. He is wary of initiative and risk, as well as any eccentricity. As a result, people become secretive and withdrawn, and the highest wisdom of the individual begins to consist in the understanding that the safety of the individual depends on his insignificance. Beccaria sees a way out of this situation in the forced restriction of state power. Strict law must become this "second coercion" that limits despotic arbitrariness. Strict law must make the threat of the state limited, it must suppress only criminal will, as opposed to free will in general. This kind of reasoning conveys the general train of thought characteristic of the legal theories of the eighteenth century. Following the spirit of these theories, the French Revolution (1789) approved a system of political and legal counterbalances to centralized power. This general orientation also determined a completely new view of the theory of the "social contract". Despotism, according to Rousseau, embodies the pure element of state coercion, and that is why there is no right in it. From this follows the conclusion that equality in lack of rights must be replaced by equality in freedom in the face of the law.

I. Kant (1724 - 1804) begins his justification of law with the solution of this problem. Kant formulates the essence of the problem as follows: why does the individual, represented in the previous contractual theories, so passionately demand legality and so little is able to value it? Kant sees the root of this phenomenon in the anthropological ideas of the Enlightenment. From the point of view of the enlighteners, a person is a "reasonable egoist", as well as a prudent and prudent seeker of happiness and profit. The "natural individual" of the Enlighteners remains independent and self-confident until such time as he encounters the real norms of life. And these norms require, first of all, the volitional regulation of one's own inclinations. As soon as such an individual enters the "properly human" sphere of relations, he immediately becomes unsure of himself and begins to seek authoritative care. As long as the individual needs constant care, it is meaningless to talk about the rule of law.

According to Kant, the starting point of a legal state should be the idea of a person as a being capable of becoming "master of himself." Reason, Kant emphasizes, is not only a tool for achieving life's benefits. Reason should be our inner legislator. Only to the extent that an individual is aware of his rights and obligations, and subordinates his instincts to them, does he become a subject capable of resisting any foreign will elevated to law. Man, according to Kant, knows what his duty is, he himself has the power to fight for his rights. Therefore, he believes in the possibility of the victory of the due principle over other motives acting in it. Thus, it is not selfishness, but precisely knowledge, struggle and faith that make the individual a competent subject of law, and then of legal legality.

The "categorical imperative" as a requirement to oneself to oneself is the basic law that determines the moral side of a person's actions. It sounds like this: "Act in such a way that the maxim of your will can always be at the same time the principle of universal legislation." In another place, Kant says this: "Act in such a way that you never treat humanity, either in your own person or in the person of anyone else, only as a means, but always at the same time as an end." Thus, in seeking the rule of law, the individual requires space to fight for dominance over himself, as well as non-interference of power in what he is obliged to do of his own free will and with his own strength.

Such a position does not at all mean that Kant advocates the abolition of external coercion altogether. External coercion, he says, could be abolished only if people became saints, i.e. if they had already won a complete victory over their sensuality. In reality, this is not so. Therefore, the authorities are obliged to provide a person with a full opportunity to fight against his own will and achieve success on his own. External coercive power should not help a person either with a stick or a carrot.

The rule of law, therefore, is the social space of human morality (conscious freedom of choice), and only where it is accepted in this sense, the struggle for it and respect for it cease to depend on the situation. This is the basic meaning of Kant's justification of law.

It should be clarified that Kant's moral substantiation of law does not mean the derivation of legal norms from moral ones. In legal legality, Kant sees just a guarantee of non-interference of the state in the process of individual self-education. Through law, the respect and trust of the state in the "moral autonomy" of its subjects is expressed. This respect and trust is capable, according to Kant, of awakening in individuals a reciprocal moral participation.

The social contract, as understood by the Enlightenment, Kant compared with parental custody of children. “Paternal government, writes Kant, in which subjects, like minors, are not able to distinguish what is really useful or harmful for them ... such a government is the greatest despotism.” Kant opposes corrective and educational punishments. Even having become a criminal, an individual cannot be the object of paternal and despotic guardianship. He cannot be deprived of the right to moral independence. The purpose of punishment cannot be to intimidate. The offender should not be punished so that "others would not be."

The law must be based on the principle of justice, which means that in case of any violation of the freedom and will of citizens, the punishment must be commensurate with the crime. This means that the right should not be revenge for a crime. It should be a reward according to "merit". If the right is based on vengeance, it itself becomes a crime.

The inner freedom of man is, according to Kant, his fundamental right. This means that no authority should: firstly, impose on a person the idea of happiness, beliefs, goals and ideals. Secondly, she should not judge him because he refuses his own benefit; to judge for the fact that he does not follow the prompts of his own mind, i.e. does not do his duty to himself.

If there is no conflict between individuals, then there is no reason for external interference in their destiny. To deprive a person of the right to independently overcome his “perversity” means to deprive him of his dignity, Kant believes. It also means depriving a person of the opportunity to have merit in the face of a heavenly judge.

5. Political ideology and its role in the formation of public consciousness.

Concluding the conversation about political and legal culture, it should be noted that political and legal theories do not arise spontaneously. They are developed and introduced into the minds of people purposefully in the form of ideological doctrines that reflect the will of the subjects of power. Ideology is a system of views that is developed, put into circulation and serves to unite people within certain social structures.. Political ideology is a kind of scheme for simplifying the world. Paying attention to this function of ideology, Marx distinguished the ideological production that controls modern mass consciousness from the free spiritual creativity characteristic of the periods of formation of classical philosophy.

The fact is that ideology lies outside the question of truth or falsehood in social relations, since the ideas that unite people do not have to be true. These representations should simply be effective. Ideology is an integral element of social relations that develop spontaneously and, for this reason alone, include various illusions and delusions. In addition, some part of social relations is always outside the intelligible space, i.e. cannot appear before us in its entirety. Hence the main task of ideology, which is to form a social ideal, thanks to which spontaneous social processes acquire a logically harmonious form.

With the help of political ideology, social groups express their fundamental interests and formulate them in the form of ideas, slogans of political movements, programs and ideals of social organization. This form of consciousness is practical in nature, i. service oriented political activity of people.

Topics of reports and abstracts

1. Power and anarchy.

2. Is it possible to abolish the state?

3. State and natural state of society.

4. Political philosophy of antiquity.

5. Political philosophy of modern times.

6. Political theory of K. Marx.

7. Modern teachings about the nature of power.

8. Individual freedom and civil rights.

9. Freedom and responsibility.

Literature

1. Alekseev S.S. Philosophy of law. M., 1998.

2. Aristotle, Politics./ Aristotle . Works: In 4 vols. T. 4. - M., 1983

3. Barrier F. Civilistic legal traditions in question. M., 2007

4. Power. Essays on modern political philosophy of the West. M., 1989.

5. Power: philosophical and political aspects. M., 1989.

6. Gadzhiev K.S. Totalitarianism as a Phenomenon of the 20th Century // Questions of Philosophy. 1992. No. 2.

7. Hegel G. Philosophy of law. M., 1990.

8. Hobbes T. Leviathan // Hobbes T. Sobr. op. in 2 vols. T. 2. M., 1990.

9. Gobozov I. A. Philosophy of politics. M.2000.

10. Grebennik G.P. The problem of correlation of morality and politics / G.P. Comb. – M.: Astroprint, 2007

11. Ikonnikova G.I., Lyashenko V.P. Fundamentals of the philosophy of law. M.: INFRA, 2001.

12. History of political and legal teachings. M., 1988.

13. Canetti E., Mass and power. M., 1997.

14. Leoni B. Freedom and law. M., 2008

15. Locke J. Two treatises on government. Book two. / Locke J. Works in three volumes: T. 3.- M. 1988.

16. Makarenko V.P. Analytical political philosophy. Essays on political conceptology. M.: 2002.

17. Machiavelli N. Sovereign. M., 1990.

18. Marx K. Capital. Toward a critique of political economy. T. I; Marx K., Engels F. Op. T. 23. M., 1960

19. Neresesyants V.S. Philosophy of law. M., 1998.

20. Nozick R. Anarchy, state and utopia: M. 2008.

21. Plato, The State. SPb., 2005

22. Rousseau J.J. About the social contract. Treatises. M., 1998

23. Marcuse G. One-dimensional man: a study of the ideology of a developed industrial society. M.2002

24. Popper K. Open society and its enemies. M.1992

25. Philosophy of the era of early bourgeois revolutions. M., 1983.

26. Philosophy of Kant and modernity. M., 1974.

§ 4. The essence and meaning of art.

Lesson plan.

1) The concept of art.

2) The nature of the artistic image.

3) The specificity of the aesthetic attitude to reality.

a) aesthetic

b) beautiful and ugly

c) tragic and comic

d) high and low.

5) Models of aesthetic origin.

6) Aesthetic ideal and its transformation in the history of culture.

7) The essence of artistic creativity.

8) Art and medicine.

1) The concept of art.

Let us turn to the etymology (that is, the origin) of the word art. The nest of related formations goes back to the Old Church Slavonic language. For example, the expression " temptations to create" found in Oleg's Treaty of 912. The word "and skus" used here in the sense of "experience".

In the Russian literary language, it appeared in the second half of the 17th century. In the lexicon of Petrine time, the Latin word experientia(experience, test) is explained using the word art and defined as « knowledge gained through the frequent repetition of what action. Thus, the original meaning of the word art can be defined as skill, skill acquired through experience.

Two meanings currently coexist:

art-

1) extremely developed skill in a particular area.

2) a form of human activity in which a person's aesthetic attitude to reality is embodied in an artistic image.

In antiquity and in the Middle Ages, the concept of art corresponded to the first definition. It is characteristic that, at that time, fine arts did not stand out in the classification of the arts (that is, what we call the arts today - music, literature, painting, etc.) The arts were divided into official and free. Service, those that require physical work, their result is the creation of a material object. This includes not only painting, sculpture, architecture, but also all crafts - carpentry, blacksmithing, pottery. Free - require purely intellectual efforts, and their result is speculative constructions. The seven liberal arts are divided into "trivium" (grammar, rhetoric, logic) and "quadrium" (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music).

Since the Renaissance, a modern understanding of art has been established, corresponding to the second meaning. The main categories through which the essence of art is revealed are the artistic image and the aesthetic.

2) The nature of the artistic image.

An artistic image is an image of reality created by an artist.

An artistic image is not a reproduction of reality, but the creation of a new reality. The artist is the creator of the artistic image: the reality that he shows is refracted through his subjectivity. In the modern sense, art is a means of creating a different reality that embodies, reveals and continues the personality of the creator. Art, therefore, is a way of asserting the self-worth of the human person. In the modern sense of the word, it appears when the artist realizes and manifests himself as a free person and creator, that is, in the Renaissance. Neither in the Middle Ages, nor in antiquity, and even more so in primitive times it did not exist, and, accordingly, there was not what we now mean by art. Since ancient times, there have been pictorial, poetic and other activities, but they pursued other goals than art in the modern sense. It was an activity aimed primarily at satisfying social and religious needs - decoration, entertainment, education, learning, creating means for communication (or connection) of a person with God (or gods). The artist did not create out of a conscious desire for self-realization, but to achieve a specific practical goal. He did not seek to color the work with his subjectivity (although it involuntarily manifested itself).

In antiquity and the Middle Ages, there was only a performer, a mediator, who, in principle, was not the author. It has been noticed that most of the inscriptions under ancient sculptures that have come down to us speak on behalf of the thing. So, on the pedestal of the statue of Olympian Zeus was written "Phidias, the son of Charmides, an Athenian, created me." The inscription on the statue of Apollo (at the turn of the 8th-7th centuries BC) “Manticle dedicated me to the far-reaching, silver-armed one for a tithe (from his property or profit).”

The same features apply to medieval works - the icon painter does not act as a creator, he does not create, but reproduces, copies the divine reality, his goal is to follow the prototype as much as possible. It is characteristic that in the West they begin to sign icons only from the 11th century, in the East from the 13th century. True, the subjectivity of the master has always unwittingly manifested itself. And you can distinguish the style of Andrei Rublev, from the style of Theophan the Greek. But the expression of this subjectivity was not the conscious goal of the artist.

It is also interesting that ancient art did not have not only an author, but also a viewer. Images were not created for anyone to admire them.

For example, the statue of Olympian Zeus /sculpture of Phidias (5th century BC)/ - one of the 7 wonders of the world - was 17 m high, i.e., it is believed that only the relief on the throne could be seen.

Another example is the sculptures from the pediment of the Parthenon - the main temple of Athens (5th century BC), which are now in the British Museum. This makes it possible to see that the statues are treated with the same care from all sides, although the viewer could not see reverse side. In addition, the huge efforts to process the stone were "crossed out" by subsequent coloring, which reduced the aesthetic value of the work.

And, finally, the monuments of the funeral cult - "pictures for the dead." Was the viewer supposed to be for the frescoes inside the tombs or for the reliefs on the inner surfaces of the lids of the sarcophagi?

Obviously, all these images were created as parts of a mythological and ritual system, and not as works of art in the modern sense of the word.

Characteristics of the artistic image:

1) The artistic image is the unity of the objective and the subjective.

It reflects the essential aspects of reality, contains a large objective content. At the same time, art does not at all imply that its images are taken for reality. In this it differs from religion. The image includes not only the facts of reality, processed by the creative imagination of the artist, but also his personal attitude to the depicted, as well as all the wealth of the creator's personality. The real world and the personality of the artist - the building material of the image

2) The image is unique, fundamentally original.

Even mastering the same life material, revealing the same topic on the basis of common ideological positions, different creators create different works. The creative individuality of the artist leaves its mark on them. The author of a masterpiece can be recognized by his handwriting, by the peculiarities of his creative manner.

3) Polysemy and understatement.

If in scientific-logical thought everything is clear and unambiguous, then figurative thought is ambiguous. The artistic image is as deep and rich in its meaning and meaning as life itself. One of the aspects of the ambiguity of the image is understatement. The understatement of the image stimulates the thought of the reader, the viewer, makes him think, finish drawing. And E. Hemingway compared a work of art with an iceberg. Only a small part of it is visible on the surface, the main and essential is hidden under water. This is what makes the reader or viewer active, and the very process of perceiving the work turns it into co-creation.

4) Untranslatability into the language of logic.

If the artistic image could be fully translated into the language of logic, science could replace art. On the other hand, if it were absolutely untranslatable into the language of logic, then neither literary criticism, nor art criticism, nor art criticism would exist. The image is both translatable and untranslatable into the language of logic. It is untranslatable because the analysis leaves a "supra-semantic residue". We translate because, penetrating deeper and deeper into the essence of the work, it is possible to more fully, comprehensively reveal its inner meaning. The image corresponds to the complexity, aesthetic richness and versatility of life itself, and the relation of critical analysis to the image is a process of endless approximation and deepening.

5) Self-propulsion.

The artistic image is similar to a rocket launched into orbit and rushing in free flight along a given trajectory. It has its own logic, it develops according to its own internal laws, and these laws cannot be violated. The artist gives direction to the "flight" of the image, but having set this direction, he cannot change anything without committing violence against artistic truth. The vital material that underlies the work leads, and the artist sometimes comes to a completely different conclusion than he was striving for. It turns out that the image is not the otherness of the artist, adequate to his subjectivity, but another reality. Those. the thing here is not the artist and not the world expressed (“passed through”) through the selfhood of the creator, but a different reality, relative to both the artist and the fragment of the world imprinted on the canvas.

6) Typification-generalization through individualization.

An artistic image is an individualized generalization that reveals in the individual what is essential for a number of phenomena.

In art, the general is manifested through the individual. In art, each depicted person is a type, but at the same time a well-defined personality.

The artist grasps the characteristic, the essential in phenomena. The ability in the turbulent flow of reality from the secondary, uncharacteristic, to filter, to separate the essential, characteristic - a precious quality of the artist.

Art is capable, without breaking away from the concrete-sensual nature of phenomena, of making broad generalizations and even creating a concept of the world.

7) Heartfelt thought, meaningful feeling

The artistic image is the unity of thought and feeling, rational and emotional. The French sculptor O. Rodin noted the importance of both thoughts and feelings for artistic creation: “Art is ... the work of thought seeking understanding of the world and making this world understandable ... it is a reflection of the artist’s heart on all objects that he touches” . A work of art, reflecting the thoughts and feelings of the artist, awakens the thoughts and feelings of the perceiver.

8) The artistic image embodies the aesthetic vision of the world .

5) The specificity of the aesthetic attitude to reality.

Aesthetics - this is a branch of philosophy that studies the features of the sensory (aesthetic) perception of the world, as well as the essence of art, as one of the forms of aesthetic exploration of reality.

The sensory-aesthetic perception of the world includes the ability to experience the beautiful and the ugly, the sublime and the base, the tragic and the comic, receiving a certain pleasure, satisfaction from the contemplation of these phenomena. Aesthetic contemplation involves a special, detached view of the world. For example, a situation involving a risk to life does not cause anything other than a feeling of horror and fear if a person is really in danger; if the same situation is shown in a work of art, then the experience of these emotions is accompanied by a certain aesthetic satisfaction. We look at all this as if from the outside. A work of art makes it possible to experience certain emotions, while at the same time maintaining a distance from the object. This experience has a cathartic, purifying effect on a person, causing aesthetic satisfaction.

The aesthetic perception of the world is a manifestation of the ability for a practically uninterested, detached attitude of a person to the world, i.e. is a manifestation of existential freedom, the freedom of man in relation to the phenomena around him.

4) Main categories of aesthetics :

The fundamental category of aesthetics is the category "aesthetic". The aesthetic acts as a comprehensive generic universal concept for aesthetic science, as a "metacategory" in relation to all its other categories.

Closest to the category "aesthetic" is the category "beautiful". The beautiful is an example of a sensuously contemplated form, an ideal in accordance with which other aesthetic phenomena are considered. When considering the sublime, tragic, comic, etc., the beautiful acts as a measure. Sublime- something that exceeds this measure. tragic- something that testifies to the discrepancy between the ideal and reality, often leading to suffering, disappointment, death. comic- something that also testifies to the discrepancy between the ideal and reality, only this discrepancy is resolved by laughter. In modern aesthetic theory, along with positive categories, their antipodes are distinguished - ugly, base, terrible. This is done on the basis that highlighting the positive value of any qualities implies the existence of opposite ones. Consequently, scientific research must consider aesthetic concepts in their correlation.

a) beautiful and ugly.

The ugly in art was first theoretically comprehended by Aristotle: the work always has a beautiful form, while the object of art includes both the beautiful and the ugly. Even the disgusting depicted in a work of art gives aesthetic pleasure due to the joy of recognizing reality, which the artist skillfully conveyed in the work.

“What is unpleasant to look at, images of which we consider with pleasure, such as images of disgusting animals and corpses” / Aristotle “Poetics”. /

As Rosencrantz wrote, “The ugly exists insofar as the beautiful exists, forming its positive possibility.” Horrors, diseases, devastations, wars, etc., can be beautifully described as harmful phenomena, even depicted in a picture. The depiction of the ugly serves to affirm the beautiful. Emphasizing the ugliness of a phenomenon, art directs a person from the ugly to the beautiful.

b) tragic and comic.

Tragic reveals the death or severe suffering of a person. The main goal of the tragic in art is catharsis: the purification of the viewer's feelings through fear and compassion. The tragic also contributes to the philosophical understanding of the world and the meaning of human life.

Comic - a discrepancy between the properties of an object and the idea of it that is available in our minds ("deviation from the norm"). The comic presents reality in an unexpected light, revealing its internal contradictions and causing in the mind of the perceiver an active opposition of the subject to aesthetic ideals. The essence of the comic is contradiction. Comic is the result of contrast, discord, opposition: the ugly - the beautiful, the insignificant - the sublime, the absurd - reasonable, etc.

c) high and low.

The sublime is such an object, before the image of which our physical nature is aware of its own limitations. Sometimes this is something that excites, inspires fear, horror, but since it does not pose a real threat to a person, it causes delight and contributes to catharsis - the purification of the soul. Grandiosity, scale, monumentality are forms of reflection of the sublime in art.

The base is the extreme degree of the ugly, an extremely negative value that has a negative meaning for humanity. Unlike the sublime, this category refers to the person and human relationships. The image of the base, as well as the image of the sublime, excites, evokes horror and gives rise to a desire to overcome it.

5) Models of aesthetic origin:

1. Objectively - idealistic .

Aesthetic is the result divine creation(Christian philosophy) or the development of an absolute idea (Plato. Hegel) and objectively exists in the world.

2. Subjectively - idealistic .

Reality is aesthetically neutral. The aesthetic arises as a result of projecting the spiritual wealth of the individual onto reality.

3.Materialistic.

Aesthetic is a natural property of objects and our consciousness reflects it. O like a mirror.

4.Subjective-objective.

The aesthetic arises due to the unity of the properties of reality and the human spirit. The aesthetic is born in the soul, but on the basis of some qualities inherent in reality.

6) Aesthetic ideal and its transformation in the history of culture

Aesthetic taste and aesthetic ideal.

The primary element of aesthetic consciousness is aesthetic sense. It can be considered as the ability and emotional reaction of an individual associated with the experience of perceiving an aesthetic object. The development of an aesthetic sense leads to aesthetic need, i.e. to the need to perceive and increase the beautiful in life. Aesthetic feelings and needs are expressed in aesthetic taste- the ability to note the aesthetic value of something.

Aesthetic taste is a generalization of aesthetic experience. But this is largely subjective ability. More deeply generalizes aesthetic practice aesthetic ideal. These are ideas about what art should be, what art should strive for. The formation of an aesthetic ideal is influenced not only by the personal taste of the artist, but also by public ideas about beauty, about art, about the world as a whole, characteristic of a given culture.

The aesthetic ideal changes from era to era, i.e., ideas about what the aesthetic (beautiful) should be change.

Changing perceptions of beauty.

The concept of beauty is born in Ancient Greece. With Pythagoras (6th century), an aesthetic-mathematical vision of the world was born: beauty, understood as order, exists in the world as the realization of mathematical laws. Not without the influence of Heraclitus, the Pythagoreans come to the conclusion that harmony is the balance of opposites, symmetry, proportionality of parts. The Pythagorean concept provides a justification for symmetry, which has always been present in Greek art and has become one of the canons of beauty in the art of the classical period.

Not only in antiquity, but also in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and even the New Age, the prevailing idea was the objective existence of beauty, perceived as harmony, symmetry, proportionality. Consequently, the purpose of art was the image of the beautiful, harmonious; or the assertion of the value of the beautiful, through its antipode - ugly.

Apollonian and Dinisian beginning in culture - e These terms are introduced by F. Nietzsche in his work “The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music.” The Apollonian beginning is characterized by four sayings that were carved on the western pediment of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi (4th century BC):

"The most correct is the most beautiful"

"Keep the Limit"

"Hate insolence"

"Nothing extra".

The sense of beauty among the Greeks was based on these rules in full accordance with the vision of the world as order and harmony. This vision of the world is patronized by Apollo, the god of music and poetry. But on the opposite, eastern, pediment of the same temple, Dionysus is depicted, the god of sensual emancipation, achieved with the help of wine, dances and dramatic action, the god of chaos and the unrestrained violation of all rules.

Such coexistence of two antipodal deities is not accidental, it reflects the constantly existing and periodically realized possibility of chaos intrusion into beautiful harmony. The Apollonian and Dionysian beginnings constantly oppose in culture in general and in art in particular. Serene harmony, understood as order and measure, is expressed in what Nietzsche calls Apollonian beauty. But this beauty is at the same time a screen that seeks to fence itself off from the disconcerting Dionysian beauty. It is beauty, triumphant and dangerous, at odds with reason and often depicted as an obsession. This exciting and bewildering beauty will be hidden until modern times, to become the life-giving source of modern forms of beauty, taking revenge on classical harmony.

The same Nietzsche, at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, proclaiming that “God is dead”, expressed the idea that the world is deprived of a foundation that ensures order and harmony. The world as a whole does not have to be beautiful, and its parts do not have to balance each other. Evil, revolting, irrational (ie, Dionysian) can prevail - there can and must be asymmetry in the world.

Art in one way or another expresses its contemporary ideas about reality, this explains the disharmony and asymmetry in modern works of art. Modern art, unlike classical art, does not affirm the ideal of the beautiful and harmonious, it is not connected with morality and public benefit. Art can depict the ugly, terrible, cruel, but it can depict skillfully, beautifully, impressively, without any evaluation and moralizing. This is what is called "art for art's sake". What is important is not what is shown, but how it is shown. In the modern era, the desire for unusualness is increasing, the goal of modern art in many cases is to excite or simply surprise a person.

Thus, ideas about the aesthetic ideal, about the goals of art, change greatly in the postclassical era. The very concept of art is expanding, it includes such phenomena that do not at all coincide with the classical ideas about art.

7) C essence of artistic creativity.

What lies at the basis of art, what is the basis of its existence? What features of human nature, human existence determine the desire to create (or perceive) works of art? That is, what is the meaning of art for a person?

Art is artistic creativity, and like any creativity serves a means of self-transcendence (overcoming the limitations of human existence), the elevation of man above nature and above himself. Creativity is always the creation of something new, something that did not exist before, which means going beyond the limits of a specific human existence. Man, on the one hand, is a being subject to the laws of nature, but on the other hand, possessing freedom in relation to nature. Aware of himself not free, and striving for freedom, to overcome natural limitations. Creativity, and art in particular, is a manifestation of existential freedom, which gives rise to dissatisfaction with the finiteness of human existence and the desire for infinity.

Art, in comparison with other types of creativity (scientific, technical, arts and crafts), expands the boundaries of human existence to the greatest extent. Other types of creativity create objects that have a specific purpose and have a fixed meaning. A work of art is not just a new reality, but a reality that has the property of independent expansion and change, the ability to create new realities - in the perception of the public. What the artist has created contains more than what is perceived directly: the depicted landscape is more than just a view of a certain area.

The created thing “lives” according to its own laws, independent of the will of the artist; "lives" being inanimate; subjugates the perceivers and the author himself in the process of creating a work, when the thing leads the author.

In the phenomenon of art, existential freedom manifests itself to the greatest extent, because. a genuine work of art is created not for any particular purpose, not to satisfy a need, but for the artist's self-expression. The one who perceives a work of art is also free in relation to the object, the perception is detached, uninterested in a practical sense. In the creation and perception of works of art, a person acts as a free being in relation to the world, because artistic creativity, like perception, is not conditioned by some specific goal that lies outside of a person, not by some external need. A person engaged in art overcomes the sphere of the necessary, rises above it. The need to create and contemplate works of art lies within a person. That is, the goal of creativity is movement outside oneself, but not towards any specific object or meaning. The main goal of art is not in its result, but in the process itself, in the ascent of a person emerging from the actual reality in which he undergoes constraint.. The artist and the viewer realize in art their desire for freedom, leaving for a while the "realm of necessity".

8) Art and medicine.

Being an important part of human civilization and culture, medicine is closely connected not only with the conditions of society, culture and worldview, but also with art - literature, fine arts, music. All types of art have reflected the development of medicine over the centuries, therefore works of art are one of the sources for studying the history of medicine. It is due to the specifics of the medical profession that the profession of a doctor is often combined with various types of art. The most famous doctors are writers. Such a combination enriched both the medical activity of these people and the literary work with knowledge of life, characters and psychology of people. The French writer Andre Maurois (1885 - 1967), noting the closeness of medicine and literature, accurately noted: “Both of them, the doctor and the writer, are passionately interested in people, both of them are trying to unravel what is obscured by a deceptive appearance. Both forget about themselves and own life looking into the lives of others." One can cite many names of famous doctors deeply involved in various types of art. For example, Professor of the St. Petersburg Medical and Surgical Academy M.A. Kholodkovsky, who brilliantly translated Goethe's Faust, the famous biochemist and composer A.P. Borodin, Professor S.P. an outstanding lute-playing physician of the 18th century. G. Bourgave. The French therapist P.Poten was a connoisseur of Beethoven, L.Vakez - Wagner. The literary works of doctors F. Rabelais, M. Nostradamus, A. P. Chekhov, A. Kronin, V. I. Dahl, S. Maugham, V. V. Veresaev, M. A. Bulgakov, S. S. Yudin are widely known , N.A. Amosov, V.V. Kovanov, K. Bernard and other scientists who sought to use literature and art not only to popularize medicine and its history, but also to develop science for the immediate benefit of the patient.

In addition, art itself is one of the methods of treatment. There are special terms and techniques: music therapy, bibliotherapy, beauty treatment.

Topics of reports and abstracts

1. The history of the formation of aesthetic consciousness.

2. The nature and functions of aesthetic consciousness.

3. Art: essence and social functions.

4. Specificity of art as a form of activity.

5. Art and medicine.

6. Art and science.

7. Art and philosophy.

8. Aesthetic ideal of antiquity.

9. Art of the Middle Ages.

10. The aesthetic ideal of the Renaissance.

11. Aesthetics of the New Age.

12. Features of contemporary art.

13. Aesthetic relation of art to reality

Literature.

1. Borev Yu.B. Aesthetics. M.2002.

2. Bransky V. P. Art and Philosophy. Kaliningrad, 1997.

3. Gadamer G.-G. The relevance of beauty. M. 1991.

4. Hegel G. F. Lectures on aesthetics. Book. 1. M., 1985

5. Graham G. Philosophy of art: an introduction to aesthetics. M., 2006.

6. Davydov Yu.N. Aesthetics of nihilism. M. 1975.

7. Zaks L.A. Artistic consciousness. Sverdlovsk, 1990.

8. Western art. XX century. M. 1978.

9. History of beauty. / Under the editorship of W. Eco. M. 2006

10. Kagan M.S. Aesthetics as a philosophical science. SPb., 1997.

11. Kant I. Criticism of the ability of judgment. SPb. 2006.

12. Losev A.F. History of ancient aesthetics. Sophists. Socrates. Plato. M. 1969

13. Losev A.F. History of ancient aesthetics. Late Hellenism. M. 1980

14. Losev A.F. Hellenistic-Roman aesthetics. Moscow Univ. 1979.

15. Losev A.F. Aesthetics of rebirth. M. 1978.

16. Nietzsche F. The Birth of Tragedy, or Hellenism and Pessimism. Soch in 2 volumes. T. 1. M. 1990.

17. Ortega y Gasset H. Aesthetics. Philosophy of culture. M. 1991.

18. Poetics of ancient Greek literature. M. 1981.

19. Rappoport S.Kh. Aesthetics. T. 1. M., 2000.

20. Self-consciousness of European culture of the twentieth century. M. 1991.

21. Samokhin V.N. aesthetic perception. M., 1985.

22. Stolovich L.N. Philosophy. Aesthetics. Laughter. St. Petersburg-Tartu, 1999

23. Fink E. Basic phenomena of human existence. In book. The problem of man in Western philosophy. M. 1988.

24. Homo ludens. In the shadow of tomorrow M. 1992.

25. Chernyshevsky N.G. Aesthetic relationship of art to reality. Sobr. op. in 5 volumes. T.4. M. 1974.

26. Schlegel F. Aesthetics. Philosophy. Criticism. M. 1983.

27. Spengler O. Decline of Europe. M 1993. Ch. 4. Music and plastic.

28. Eco U. Art and beauty in medieval aesthetics. M.2003

29. Jung K.G. The phenomenon of the spirit in art and science. M. 1992.

02.10.2020

Dating Psychology

The most interesting:

Herbs for fumigation: which ones to choose and how to use them correctly

Heraclitus: philosophy, main ideas, statements

Feng Shui wealth zone: how to activate it to attract money