As long as there is a person, so many disputes continue about what constitutes human life, what it should be. According to philosophers, psychologists, culturologists, and simply not indifferent people, life is more than just eating food, going to bed on time, washing Marya Ivanovna's bones from accounting or switching to new level even in the most addictive computer game.
You can rise above everyday life, make your life active, vibrant, full of interesting events, if you understand and imagine what you live for, adhere to certain values. What exactly to focus on in life, everyone decides for himself. Life ideals different people may differ. At the same time, there are universal human values (truth, goodness, beauty, love for one's neighbor), to which everyone should be involved.
Throughout history, people have developed different ideas about what ideals are and what an ideal person should be like.
The ideal of man in culture
Ideas about the essence of man are not the same in cultures of different historical eras.
Ancient world
For the first time, people began to think about a person in time immemorial. Thus, the ancient Greek philosophers considered the concept of kalokogaty, the essence of which was self-knowledge and perfection. Aristotle drew Special attention the fact that a perfect person adheres to moral standards, does not allow himself to commit evil deeds and strives for beauty for the sake of beauty.
Middle Ages
In the Middle Ages, the ideal of man was considered in the context of serving God. It was believed that perfection is achieved through discipline, meekness, obedience, asceticism. This ideal of education was preached by the ministers of the church. However, at that time, the natural sciences also developed, education gradually acquired a secular character, and accordingly, ideas about a person and his capabilities also changed. It was believed that a person can master the secrets of nature and acquire new knowledge through experience.
Another ideal of a person in this period was a noble and valiant knight. Knights united in orders, created their own codes of honor, and organized tournaments. Each knight had his own Beautiful lady”(real or imaginary), to which victories on the lists and accomplished feats were dedicated.
Renaissance
Ideas about the omnipotence of man were developed in the Renaissance (Renaissance). At the forefront is a person from the point of view of his nature and capabilities. But people still realized that not everything depends on them, and this contributed to the emergence of ideas about freedom and necessity. Similar views existed in the era of Antiquity, but now they are being actively rethought and put into practice.
During this period, the relationship between man and God is explained differently. It is still believed that God created man, but man from birth is endowed with activity, the desire to transform the world and himself, therefore, he can and should become the master of his life. At the same time, initial ideas about the differences between people are formed.
new time
In the Age of Enlightenment, German classical philosophy contributed to the formation of ideas about the ideal of man. So, Immanuel Kant wrote that the main thing in life is to be able to use your mind. The ideal of that time was a reasonable person, arranged according to the laws of logic and capable of changing the world in accordance with reason. The people of this era still believe in God, but ideas of freethinking appear in the minds of some of them.
With the development of capitalism, a working man becomes ideal, and labor discipline, diligence, professionalism and relatively healthy competition become true values.
Ideal Soviet man- is a hero. In those years, the utopian idea of building communism was actively promoted, and one had to be “always ready” for this construction, that is, to fight, to go forward to the detriment of own desires, needs or even at the cost of their lives. A similar view of reality was demonstrated by the example of pioneer heroes, leaders in production and other individuals who were able to sacrifice themselves to achieve a common goal.
However, such ideas about the ideal person were rather official. In reality, conscience was the ideal, when it is much more important to "be" than "to have." People helped each other, shared the last piece of bread, empathized not only with relatives and friends. However, life in conditions of fear, repression, restrictions on freedoms was also a kind of heroism.
Man in the culture of different peoples
Ideas about the ideal of a person depend on the living conditions of a particular people and are reflected in the works of folklore: fairy tales, legends, traditions, epics, songs. So, a Russian girl is certainly a beauty, for the Circassians (and not only for them), the main thing in a person is his honor and dignity. The peoples of the Caucasus are famous for their hospitality, and the Chukchi for their ability to hunt. But, whatever the differences, all peoples agree on one thing: the ideal of a person is a national hero with good health, fortitude, intelligence, diligence, and responsiveness.
The ideal of man in art
Historically established ideas about the ideal of man are reflected in works of art.
Antiquity
The ideas of this period about the perfect man are embodied in the statues of gods, heroes and winners. Olympic Games. In fact, the ancient Greek gods were ideal people, and people were likened to gods. The statue of Myron "Discobolus" is widely known. The prototype of the sculpture is real person, strong, healthy and self-confident, as a true citizen of Hellas should be.
The unlimited possibilities of man were sung by Sophocles, Homer and other poets. The image of a beautiful hero, the bearer of moral ideals, was also shown in the ancient Greek theater.
Art of the Middle Ages
As mentioned above, the life of people in the Middle Ages was greatly influenced by the church. Therefore, in contrast to the ancient tradition, a person was understood as a blade of grass, a grain of sand, a small particle of the Universe, subject to the will of God. Similar views are also reflected in works of art: it is not the man himself that rises, but the spiritual power that makes him related to God. A vivid example of the ideal of man in the art of the Middle Ages is the iconographic image of Job, a sick biblical character who meekly accepts the will of God.
Somewhat later, ideas about a person became more optimistic. Gradually, in the minds of people, the image of a worker, a creator, a creator begins to form. Labor is no longer perceived as a punishment for sins, but as the main duty of a person. These views are reflected in the images of Christ the Martyr, the description of his life on Earth. Jesus Christ on the canvases of the painters of those years personifies a humiliated, suffering, but inherently divine person.
The Man in Renaissance Art
During the Renaissance, artists were no longer interested in the divine, but in the earthly essence of people. Art is gradually becoming secular, and methods for creating portraits and works of fine art of other genres are substantiated scientifically. This leads to the fact that a person on the canvases of masters becomes natural. The viewer can determine the character and mood of the hero of the picture. An example of this is the world-famous Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci.
Despite the development of the ideas of humanism, the masters of the Renaissance continued to use religious themes, but the images of Christ, the apostles and the Virgin Mary more resembled real people. Probably, this was done in order to show a person his essence through well-known plots. So, Raphael in the form of the Sistine Madonna embodied beautiful woman who loves her son and worries about him.
Man of the New Age
Realistic art continued to develop during the Age of Enlightenment. The replacement of the feudal system by the capitalist one, the development of industry contribute to the emergence of the so-called new breed of people. A person becomes more down to earth, preoccupied with his own problems, but at the same time, educated, trying to use his own mind to solve life problems. This is how it is shown in paintings and in literary works. An example is the canvases of J.B. Chardin, W. Hogarth, A. Watteau, treatises by Diderot, Rousseau, novels by J.S. Turgenev, L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, etc.
The image of a person in socialist realism
In Soviet times, shock workers, advanced collective farmers, noble milkmaids, caring mothers of families looked at people from paintings, propaganda posters and TV screens. Representatives of the authorities positioned the USSR as a country in which there is no exploitation of man by man, and people show heroism exclusively voluntarily, guided by the desire to build a brighter future as soon as possible. Therefore, in the art of socialist realism, the worker became the ideal. In addition, a Soviet person should have a prosperous family, good TRP indicators, as well as excellent combat and political training.
All of the above is reflected in the paintings of P. Smurkovich "On Skis", V. Kutilin "First Field", T. Yablonskaya "Bread", poems by V. Mayakovsky, A. Tvardovsky, K. Simonov, prose by M. Gorky, M. Sholokhov, A. Fadeev, songs to the words of V. Lebedev-Kumach, etc.
The ideal of man in religion
In addition to culture, art, the ideal of man is represented in all religions of the world. Common to religious teachings is love for one's neighbor, the victory of good over evil, truth over lies and light over darkness. These values must be professed by a person. But each religion has its own ideas about the ideal. Let's dwell on this in more detail.
Christianity
The ideal person in this religion corresponds to the image of Jesus Christ. The virtues of a Christian are kindness, meekness, humility. The one who professes the Christian faith strives for God, and therefore fulfills his will, tries to keep peace in his soul, build benevolent relations with relatives and friends, and not harm anyone.
Islam
According to the ideas of Muslims, an ideal person should drive away sinful thoughts from himself, do good deeds, strive for knowledge, be kind, modest, patient and clean. Also, a true believer does not smoke, drink alcohol or gamble.
Buddhism
Here, the Buddha is considered the ideal of a person, who was originally an ordinary person, but was able to achieve enlightenment (Nirvana). Followers of Buddhism believe that you can get closer to this state if you engage in spiritual practices and do good deeds. In Islam and Christianity, the ideal of man is unattainable.
Hinduism
The followers of this doctrine believe that the ideal being can be achieved only by being freed from karma - the cycle of events, births and deaths in which a person is. Once free, the soul reunites with one of the deities or remains on its own. Yoga helps to achieve liberation faster. Only the chosen ones are capable of true freedom. It remains for mere mortals to purify karma (prayers, good deeds) in order to be born more successfully in the next life than in this one.
The ideal of modern man
It is not possible to accurately define the ideal of modern man. Our time is quite complex and contradictory in terms of values, moral norms, permissions and prohibitions.
Today it is "not fashionable" to be highly moral, to build one's life in accordance with spiritual values and lofty ideals. Pragmatism, the thirst for consumption, the desire to have fun and not make efforts come to the fore.
Modern society makes high demands on a person. Today, it is simply necessary to look in the latest fashion, have a super-prestigious job, and succeed in business. Anyone who does not try to reach career heights causes misunderstanding.
At the same time, it is still impossible to call all those living on Earth inveterate pragmatists. A significant number of people read fiction, visit temples, do charity work, practice downshifting. It seems that the ideal of modern man has not yet been formed, but I want to believe that this will happen in the near future.
The Problem of Personality has always been at the center of cultural studies. This is natural, because culture and personality are inextricably linked. On the one hand, a certain type of personality is formed in culture. common historical background, historical memory, spatio-temporal relations, mythology, religious doctrines, generally accepted rituals, biosocial experience, a system of universally valid pattern models, features of geographical space, features of social institutions, group conscience, prevailing economic models, collective opinions and feelings, prejudices, family patterns, historical traditions , ideals and values, attitude to other people's values - this is not a complete list of those factors that influence the formation of personality in culture.
On the other hand, personality recreates, changes, discovers new things in culture. There is no culture without personality, since personality is not only the driving force and creator of culture, but also the main goal of its formation. “Man's self-realization is carried out in culture, and only in culture in the sense, of course, that culture itself takes place in history. Although history is meaningfully a personal process, nevertheless, the personal process itself is a process of culture, and history acts as a sphere of objectification of culture ”(M.B. Turovsky).
Personality in culture not only adapts to the environment, as is characteristic of all living things, but creates its own "microworld" itself. It is able to get out of its own world into someone else's disordered, penetrate into other cultures, into someone else's spiritual life and determine its attitude towards them, create a "new" on the basis of this attitude. Genuine creativity cannot fail to recognize itself as a recreation of values from the history of the past. It has great value to understand and create one's own culture, because one's own culture is built in the combination of two possibilities - the ability to distinguish oneself from another culture and the ability to open oneself in another culture.
A person is distinguished by the fact that he separates himself as a figure of cultural and historical processes from the results of their activities. He gives the products of his labor to others. Therefore, an inevitable multiplicity arises, alienation even within the framework of “one’s own” (when a writer is dissatisfied with his work, the artist rewrites the picture, and the philosopher denies his belonging to one or another direction).
The beginning of the true history of mankind was the emergence of transformative activities aimed at the future, based on continuity in traditions. Man began to create products of labor for his children, for the next generations, becoming a co-creator of history and culture. Indirect movement from one person to another through the products of culture, experience and knowledge is the basis for the formation of human culture and history. The only universal way to comprehend the integrity of the surrounding world was the way of interpersonal communication in culture.
It is important to note that the mutual influence of culture and personality is impossible without communication systems in culture. This system of communication consists of systems for the transmission, distribution and storage of information; systems of social and intercultural communication. The life of culture itself lasts in time and space, is expressed in symbols, transmitted through the mechanisms of communication, enhanced by the creation of new elements in communication. In the course of the development of culture, a variety of subject and symbolic means are created that provide indirect communication. Through information and communication media, people develop mutual language, experience, values, master social space and time. Information and communication systems are becoming the basic means of preserving and transferring collective knowledge and experience - the most important factor in the development of culture. With their help, mutual exchange became mutual enrichment. The accumulation of cultural results, fixed materially and ideally, the cultural memory of mankind is a condition for our involvement in a continuous “field of meanings and meanings” (M.K. Mamardashvili), a condition for the development of human creative activity.
Creativity is the creation of new images, knowledge, means of communication, values. Creativity is a productive activity to renew being in culture. It is in the process Creativity is the self-development and self-realization of the individual. In the history of philosophy and in the theory of culture, creativity is considered, firstly, as a deep, truly human, "divine" process that is not amenable to rational explanation; secondly, as a result of the development of society, art, science and technology, the result of an increase in requirements for the creation of a new one (starting from the Renaissance). The essence of creativity lies in co-creation, in the joint activity of people to renew life, in the understanding of responsibility to the universal, in the self-giving of the individual. B. Pasternak said that creative act- this is the maximum manifestation of oneself outside. The creative process in the culture of a certain period in history depends on: social order for innovation; the presence of certain forms of culture for the implementation of innovations; features of the social or professional group in which a creative person is born; system of education and conditions for creativity in society. In this regard, the study of questions about the sources of creativity, the interaction of the individual and the social and cultural environment, the freedom and responsibility of the individual is of particular relevance. The main theme of the future should be the theme of man's place in the world of culture, in the new world, his conscious right and responsible choice. For this, it is important the problem of inculturation. . This concept means the gradual involvement of a person in culture, the gradual development of skills, manners, norms of behavior, forms of thinking and emotional life that are characteristic of a certain type of culture, for a certain historical period.
In other words, it is a long and gradual mastery of methods, norms, practical advice in everyday life. The ancient art of practice is the basis of human self-affirmation in history. A person obeys stereotypes, procedures adopted in a group, culture. These procedures are fixed in gestural, bodily communication, oral speech, writing and reading.
Enculturation presupposes the presence of such socio-cultural elements as a language system; value-semantic guidelines; procedures for the development of creative activity; the totality of accumulated wealth in culture; traditions and forms of succession. The processes of inculturation are studied in cultural anthropology (M. Herskovitz). The concepts of inculturation and acculturation should not be confused. Acculturation is the process of acquiring properties and forms of culture by one people from another people. The first condition of inculturation is the self-affirmation of a person in time. To do this, a person needs to appropriate the acquired skills, abilities, prepare opportunities for creativity and thus gain a certain independence from natural, social conditions in constantly changing circumstances. This conquest of time by man occurs through the creation of an autonomous cultural space. The next condition for inculturation is the assignment various ways mastery of space, its "vision". To be able to see means to be able to predict, to run ahead of time and by "reading" space. But the most important thing in this process for a person is mastery of knowledge, experience, norms, skills in order to translate the uncertainties of history into the time and space of the world of culture understandable to man. It is carried out as socialization is the process of a person developing social norms and rules of social life for the development of an active, full-fledged member of society, for the formation of a cultural personality. In the process of socialization, the individual is gradually involved in the life of society, familiarizing him with history and traditions, and transferring the main forms of sociocultural experience. In a family, at school, in a higher educational institution, an individual masters the necessary skills, acquires knowledge, and joins cultural norms and traditions. Socialization is also the identification of the individual with "others". They can be parents, teachers, peers, favorite actors, behavior patterns taken from literary works, from television programs, etc. There are many interpretations of the process of socialization. G. Tarde believed that the basis of socialization is the principle of imitation. T. Parsons saw in it the process of perceiving social norms, absorbing information about significant "others". J. Smelser noted that socialization is the acquisition by people of the experience and values required to fulfill social roles. Socialization gives us the opportunity to interact with each other, and also contributes to the transfer of experience from generation to generation. In the process of socialization, the personal, or private, and social spheres are in constant interaction, mutual determination. The private sphere (the system of personal relationships) expresses public (public) opinion, entering into public dialogic relations with public institutions (J. Habermas).
It should always be remembered that the process of socialization, in the end, always becomes a process of self-determination. In each society and culture, its own character of the process of socialization of the individual is gradually formed. Features of the types of socialization depend on the historically specific structure of society and on the type of culture. IN modern world socialization and inculturation are carried out in the conditions of cultural "splits" and socio-cultural crises, the growing role of the instability of social processes, the clash and mutation of cultural paradigms. All this is exacerbated by the catastrophism of the influence of information flows on human consciousness, which increasingly complicates cultural self-identification.
Under these conditions, almost the only means of saving the individual, his survival and development is becoming familiar with the origins of his native culture, understanding the danger of losing cultural identity, and a critical attitude towards cultural globalization.
The study of cultural studies can be of great help in understanding the responsibility of an individual, especially a young person, for the fate of the Motherland and its culture.
Literature
Batkin L. M. Italian Renaissance in search of individuality. M., 1989.
Batkin L. M. Don't dream about yourself! On the Cultural-Historical Meaning of "I" in "Confession" by Bl. Augustine. M., 1993.
Gurevich P. Man as a microcosm // ONS. 1993. No. 6.
Husserl E. Articles about renewal // Questions of Philosophy. 1997. No. 4.
Zenkovsky V. The unity of personality and the problem of reincarnation // Russia XXI . 1998. No. 9-10.
Kon I. S. In search of myself. M., 1984.
Kon I. S. Opening Ya. M., 1978.
Kon I. S. The child and society. M., 1988.
Culture: theories and problems. M., 1994.
Cultural anthropology. SPb., 1996.
MudM. Culture and the world of childhood. M., 1988.
Mikhailov F. T. The mystery of the human Ya. M., 1976.
Odysseus. Man in history. M., 1995.
Odysseus. Man in history. Cultural-anthropological history today. M., 1991.
Odysseus. Picture of the world in popular and scientific consciousness. M., 1994.
Every typology is relative and approximate. This is known even to a person who is not experienced in sociology. But even if we accept any of them as very reliable and vital, it must be borne in mind that in each historical era the type of personality has a very significant originality. Let's say extrovert second half of XIX and the extrovert of the beginning of the 21st century are completely different or fundamentally different people. And the question naturally arises: “What is she like a modern person, what features are inherent in her”? Sociologists, and psychologists, and writers, and simply ordinary people. The picture is far from clear. The author of this manual has analyzed a wide range of sources. MEPhI students, under his leadership, conducted a number of studies on this topic. Based on the material received, we decided to outline two types of qualities of a modern person, and by and large two types of personality - positive and negative. Of course, extremes, the reader will say, and he will be right. But there is a typology for that. The main features of a predominantly positive personality type can be summarized as follows. - The maximum awareness of modernity, the possession of a deep consciousness and understanding of our days. - Orientation to the present and future, not to the past. - Freedom from traditional authorities. Lack of fear and discomfort from a rapidly changing world. Willingness to accept new ideas, even the most radical, unexpected ones. - A high degree of autonomy and independence in decision-making. This is the person who, in the words of I. Kant, "has the courage to use his own mind." - Deep interest in social problems - political, economic, social, spiritual. The desire to be a direct or at least indirect, but necessarily an active participant in their discussion and decision. Modern man is an active person. - Rationality in all matters, the desire for knowledge, universal and professional education. - The desire for long-term, medium-term and short-term planning of their activities, both personally and socially. - Constant striving to improve their social status, increase role functions; desire to quickly make a career. - Great interest in information, the ability to give it an objective interpretation, to identify true, true and false. This is a constantly learning person, including knowing himself. - Thorough knowledge of engineering, technology, high computer and technical literacy in general. - Significant selectivity in determining the immediate social environment, both in group and personal terms. The huge role of privacy and personal freedom. - high feeling dignity , personal authority. - Orientation to legal methods of solving one's own and social problems. - The desire for comfort, pleasure, chic lifestyle, inflated material claims. A modern person is an open and direct person who, without hiding, speaks of his claims to a woman (man), work, position, power, wealth, rest. He is less cunning, and directly declares his claims, desires, attitudes, ideals. He strives for maximum benefits, high comfort at a minimum cost. The feeling of shame, as well as the moral factor in the life of the individual as a whole, is clearly relegated to the background, and not only in relations with unfamiliar fellows in society, but also with the closest relatives, friends, work colleagues. As for the predominantly negative type of personality, there are many features in it that are also inherent in the positive type. He is the same pragmatist in all matters, only many times more. His pragmatism constantly borders on criminality or "immorality". The value system takes on the following form: "Mine and me - at any cost." He became an absolute pragmatist in family matters. Marries (gets married) not only and not so much for love, but for maximum benefit. Spiritual union replaced with a legal contract. The family budget also became negotiable and differentiated. It has become almost the norm to have mistresses (lover). Spirituality and sincerity in relationships with children are being lost more and more. Moreover, such a person is in no hurry to marry or get married. She doesn't really want to have children. With elementary simplicity and immediacy divorced. Approximately the same way, she remarries, then the third, fifth and tenth. Many do not marry at all and do not get married for the reason that the family allegedly restricts their freedom and requires additional stress. Conclude unnatural homosexual marriages. Relations with parents are transferred to a formal channel. They, the elderly, the infirm, can be “shoved” into special institutions, not to communicate for several years, not to see each other, just to forget their “ancestors”. Such a person does not really want to learn. It teaches only what makes pragmatic sense. He studies at a minimum cost (cribs, bribes for passing exams are the norm for him). Better yet, buy a diploma. Looking for money job. It would be nice to do nothing and snatch more by any means. Professional dedication is minimal. The sense of duty to relatives and to society has become dull. He does not want to sacrifice himself. Avoids physical labor. How others live does not bother him. He tries not to think about the needy and the suffering. To nature is consumer. Everything literally comes out of her. The public domain is trying to make it their own. Doesn't want to pay taxes. With life's failures, he hates everyone, including himself. It can make noise, rumble in its dwelling, not thinking about the peace of its neighbors. He easily leaves his car on the road or at the entrance, so that he can’t get out and pass. Heads of state or governors belonging to the negative type easily engage in corruption, give "public pieces" to relatives or friends, are illegible in sexual life. They are capable of wild shocking drunken antics in public places and consider it possible to participate in homosexual wedding ceremonies. The judge, and there are also many of them among negative personalities, does not find corpus delicti where it is obvious. A drug addict kills an old man in order to take some crumbs of money from him for another “recharge”. The mother sells the child to improve her financial situation. An offended student or schoolboy takes up arms and brutally cracks down on his classmates, classmates, teachers, and even the first person he meets. For nothing, for nothing, can take the lives of three dozen people. Unfortunate doctors cut out absolutely healthy people organs in order to sell them later. They ironically look at the dying man who was taken to the hospital and, referring to the fact that they did not give any "Hippocratic Oath", they do not give him necessary assistance. The son-officer "orders" the killer's mother and father in order to quickly become the owner of the apartment. The newly-minted psychic, who calls himself Christ, promises to revive children who died at the hands of terrorists for money, or, having drugged believers with the idea of the “end of the world”, drags them into isolation from the rest of society in the dungeon. Legislators take bribes to raise utility rates for their own constituents. They make laws against the people. Party leaders sell mandates to rogue entrepreneurs and criminals in order for them to receive parliamentary immunity. The university teacher has established a system of bribes and extortion from students for the most elementary test. The other, on the contrary, puts a credit to everyone in a row, not knowing who it is - a student, or just a passer-by, while squeamishly says: "I don't care about everything." Another one can come drunk to a student audience, completely unprepared for classes. Warlords sell weapons to enemies, from which then they themselves and their soldiers die. Representatives of law enforcement agencies, instead of fighting crime, themselves become part of the underworld. The customs officers turned the system of state control into a business. It seems that in an instant, although in fact, in 20 years, a generation of male “guards who don’t give a damn” has formed, which can rightfully be called a special (of course, negative) personality type. In recent years, almost the most popular profession in Russia was the protection of objects and subjects. All (with rare exceptions) who do not have a good education and profession, who were expelled from the army, the FSB and the police, reduced and dismissed, rushed to protect no matter who or what. Good earnings by Russian standards, in any case, more than that of a professor, engineer or doctor. Other security guards of famous people (no kidding!!!) consider themselves to be elite. But the worst thing is that the ranks of the guards are also the main abode of criminals, criminal gangs, gangs, groups. It seems that a new class has appeared in Russia, which will soon delegate “their own” to representative and executive bodies authorities. Of course, the above is somewhat exaggerated. However, the tendencies towards pragmatization, demoralization, and comfort of human life are quite obvious. It goes without saying that this begs the question: “Has man become a better person since the time of Buddha, Confucius, Solon, Socrates, Plato, and Christ?” Most likely no. After all, as they deceived, so they deceive, as they stole, so they steal, as they killed, so they kill. Moreover, this negative has increased many times over. The only difference is that they do all this in a more sophisticated, refined way, hiding behind law, freedom, democracy, reforms, necessity, promises of a brighter future, and much more. Yes, a person has become more educated, knows much more, acts faster, smarter. But has education added conscience, honor, kindness? The question remains open.
The formation of personality in the modern world is a complex phenomenon. Schilling argues that in a traditional society, a person involuntarily acquired a personality as a result of ritual practices that associated him with the body in order to reproduce established social traditions. but high level modernity makes self-identification deliberative(J.-F. Lyotard:) 1. The ego no longer seems to be a homogeneous, unchanging core embedded in a person (E. Shils:). Instead, the personality is formed in response to emerging questions and the continuous reorganization of self-identification, the main property of which is the connection with the body (A. Giddens:). Self-identification and the body become "reflexively organized projects”, which should be built from a complex set of choices offered by modernity, and which do not have a clear moral indication of which option should be chosen.
The question "Who the hell am I?" occupies a prominent place in our culture. The idea of being yourself, being different, being exceptional plays an incredibly large role in modern Western ideology. Previously, the individual was intricately linked to a social and symbolic frame of reference. She was given to us. The symbolic order reflected the social hierarchy, the vast majority of people received their place and function in the system even at birth. Self-identification was not a problem. Of course, people were different, but this difference became the source of the idea of choice and movement, or the opportunity to form one's personality and create one's own social and symbolic habits, and also to feel oneself as a unique being. That is why J.-F. Lyotard (1984) called personality "deliberative": you need to develop it based on a changing space of all possible symbols, ideological attitudes and social habits. We believe in individuality as an idea, but we were never taught to be individuals as the practices and social systems that satisfy our society pass us by.
The tense relationship of the individual with the public space, split between "being and nothing", considered by J.-P. Sartre, creates a source of difficulties in the actual practice of the existence of the individual 1. Where can you be yourself? At work? Houses? In a secret hideout? In fact, you are always yourself, because the ego is actually made up of many 'I's, of 'many sketches' connected together by the body in which they live. The body is the stabilizing force of the “protoego”, according to A. Damasio, it connects alternative personalities, alternative histories, alternative types of social representation into a stable image. Damasio writes:
A variety of dreams of the mind are preparing a "many sketches" of the life scenario of the organism, if we talk about this idea within the framework of the concept proposed by D. Dennett. At the same time, the reflection of a deeply biological main ego and the autobiographical one that develops under its influence constantly reduces the importance of choosing a “sketch” corresponding to a single whole ego.
The categorization of these egos is carried out in two ways: internal (by the person himself) and external (social space). We know that many external categories, such as work, class, and even name, which J.-P. Sartre (1993) calls antithetical personalities have much less power in clubs, which in itself, at the level of symbols, moves the clubs one step away from the surrounding social space.
Sometimes we can be ourselves, and, as we have already understood, clubbing allows many people to experience this feeling. The clubbing body has gone beyond the social and emotional limitations of the habitus, becoming more expressive. It has become part of a social space in which expressiveness has its own rules. Work and home egos have given way to leisure egos. P. Willis writes the following about the space of leisure:
Now the term "leisure" in many ways does not adequately reflect the meaning given to it. It simply cannot contain or support the idea of a huge symbolic shell that has recently appeared in free time, ways to explore the transitional stages of growing up, creating and assimilating new personalities.
The process of assimilation of new personalities is not exclusively symbolic, it is associated with the creation and experience of new practices through which people leave the familiar. social sphere, moreover, there is a recognizable pattern according to which the experience of clubbing of my informants was built and their sense of self changed. This template also explains the changes that have taken place over the years of the club scene. It all started with raves and all the people were just ravers. Over time, partly for commercial reasons and partly because people wanted to stand out from the crowd of clubbers, clubbing took on a myriad of different forms. (See S. Thornton for a more detailed analysis of this process.) The original belonging of people to a certain group of clubbers, based on the classification of musical, either related to sexual orientation, or fashionable or ethnic, in which class was sometimes a purely symbolic catalyst, was only the first step in personality change and had its limits. K. Wuters explains:
Generations of free people have a distinct tendency to seek self-satisfaction and self-realization within a group or social movement. In this respect, the individualistic tendencies with which a person encounters are very different from those characteristic of political or cultural liberalism. [Hence] ... the restrictions imposed by group life can, time after time, crush the imagined hopes of personal freedom
However, K. Wuters' assumption that groups are formed to create common personalities and the like reflects the structure of a cultural grouping. He does not take into account the creation of informal social groups that do not have a common symbolic focus or ideological structure, but only joint practices that provide an opportunity for individual expression and experiment. Many of my informants first visited certain types clubs, but gradually moved out of that space into smaller groups where they could be themselves. One of my informants said:
Clubs allow you to feel unity with other people, glorify him and respect him. However, this unity is reinforced by individuality.
(male, 33 years old, 20 years of club experience).
The clubbing experience is constantly evolving until the symbolic focus is replaced by empirical criteria. The party becomes more important than signs, and my informants express themselves more and more, with less and less attachment to symbolic codes. In some exceptional cases this leads to the emergence of a club scene where no one is like anyone else, so it becomes completely impossible to single out a certain style. Such parties are aimed at expressing individuality, which in any case gives people pleasure. The only thing expected of you is that you try to keep the party going. How will you express yourself? your personal The point is, the rules of conduct in the wider public space do not apply here. Such parties create a space where people can remain themselves among the crowd, always count on it, exploring their "I" and trying on new versions of it, based on other ways of presenting. The question "Who am I?" ceases to be an existential problem, turning into a social experiment based on creative practices that raise the ontological or hidden "I" to the surface of the body, where it has the opportunity to open up.
These experiences are cumulative, accumulating within the body as the person gets used to the club; how much this opportunity will be used depends only on the clubbers themselves. For some, the space of change offered by clubs is sufficiently different from everyday life to satisfy their desires. For others, the space of change becomes the starting point for breaking down the limitations of the everyday world, allowing them not only to experience a sense of freedom, but also to develop and explore the properties of a free ego, thus expanding the sensual and expressive qualities of the personality. The formation of personality turns into a non-stop creative process aimed at creating individual and social authenticity. The personalities that are created are unstable rather than permanent, as they are based on practices rather than signs. As such, they rely on experience and the emotional and sensory narrative that remains in the memory of the body. They are deposited in the body, in its system of emotional memory, its social reality and practices. Personality is gradually formed from the bottom up, and not vice versa, and the most beloved narratives permeate the essence of man and develop a system of bodily and mental knowledge that determines the position of a person in the world.
Loading...