CC BY
13
UDC: 316.752.4:159.964.2
Kozhemiakina Oksana Mikolayivna,
PhD of philosophical science, assistant professor, assistant professor of the Department of Philosophy and Political Science, Cher-kasy State Technological University, 18024, Cherkasy, Str. '30 Victory, b. 62, 213, tel.: (097) 5303724, e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0002-7196-4857
Кожем'якта Оксана Миколагвна,
кандидат фшософських наук, доцент, доцент кафедри фшософських i полтич-них наук, Черкаський державний техно-логiчний утверситет, 18024, м. Черкаси, вул. 30ротв Перемоги, б. 62, кв. 213, тел.: (097) 5303724, e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0002-7196-4857
Кожемякина Оксана Николаевна,
кандидат философских наук, доцент, доцент кафедры философских и политических наук, Черкасский государственный технологический университет, 18024, г. Черкассы, ул. 30лет Победы, д. 62, кв. 213, тел.: (097) 530 3724, e-mail: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-7196-4857
LANGUAGE OF TRUST iN RESOLVING OF SOCiAL CONFLICTS (ARCHETYPAL APPROACH)
Abstract. The article is being considered the stabilization and regulatory potential of communication strategies of trust in resolving social conflicts in the context of the value changes of the modernity, taking into account the priorities of self-realization, freedom of choice, human development. On the basis of the methodological potential of communication practical philosophy and analytical psychology, the analysis of the constructive effects of social conflicts in the search for ways of value coordination of a pluralistic society and expansion of nonviolent communication practices is carried out. The language of trust in resolving social conflicts is viewed in the aspect of problems of mutual understanding on the basis of the creation of joint meanings, the establishment of the value bases of mutual recognition, personal significance and awareness of one's own subjectivity (both individual and social).
In the sense of humanistic self-realization, trust as a positive action and value response helps to minimize the destructive potential of social conflicts, initiating
the search for semantic horizons of understanding, affirming the norms of moral goodness, mutual recognition and ethos of care based on the symbolic actualization of the prototypes of life, stately good and light.
Keywords: trust, social conflict, archetype, value, communicative strategy, responsibility, self-realization, value response, nonviolent communication.
МОВА ДОВ1РИ У ВИР1ШЕНН1 СОЦ1АЛЬНИХ КОНФЛ1КТ1В (АРХЕТИПНИЙ П1ДХ1Д)
Анотащя. У статл розглянуто стабшзацшно-регулятивний потенщал комушкативних стратегш довiри у виршенш сощальних конфлiктiв в умо-вах цшшсних змiн сучасностi з урахуванням прюритепв самовираження, свободи вибору, людського розвитку. На основi методологiчного потенщалу комушкативно1 практично! фшософи та анал^ично! психологи здiйснено аналiз конструктивних ефектiв соцiальних конфлiктiв у перспективi пошу-ку шляхiв цiннiсного узгодження плюралютичного суспiльства та розши-рення практик ненасильницького сшлкування. Мова довiри у врегулюванш соцiальних конфлiктiв розглядаеться в аспект проблем порозумiння на ос-новi витворення спiльних смислiв, утвердження цшшсних засад взаемного визнання, особиспсно! значущосп та усвiдомлення власно! суб'ектносп (як шдивщуально1, так i сусшльно!).
У сенсi гумашстично1 самореалiзацil довiра як благоорiентована дiя та щншсна вiдповiдь сприяе мiнiмiзацil руйнiвного потенщалу сощальних кон-флiктiв, iнiцiюючи пошук смислових горизонтiв порозумiння, утвердження норм морального добра, взаемного визнання та етосу турботи на основi сим-волiчноl актуалiзацil праобразiв життя, величного добра та свлла.
Ключовi слова: довiра, соцiальний конфлiкт, архетип, щншсть, комуш-кативна стратегiя, вiдповiдальнiсть, самореалiзацiя, цiннiсна вiдповiдь, не-насильницьке сшлкування.
ЯЗЫК ДОВЕРИЯ В РАЗРЕШЕНИИ СОЦИАЛЬНЫХ КОНФЛИКТОВ (АРХЕТИПНЫЙ ПОДХОД)
Аннотация. В статье рассмотрен стабилизационно-регулятивный потенциал коммуникативных стратегий доверия в разрешении социальных конфликтов в условиях ценностных изменений современности с учетом приоритетов самовыражения, свободы выбора, человеческого развития. На основе методологического потенциала коммуникативной практической философии и аналитической психологии осуществлен анализ конструктивных эффектов социальных конфликтов в перспективе поиска путей ценностного согласования плюралистического общества и расширения практик ненасильственного общения. Язык доверия в урегулировании социальных конфликтов рассматривается в аспекте проблем взаимопонимания на основе сотворчества совместных смыслов, утверждения ценностных основ взаимного признания, личностной значимости и осознания собственной субъектности (как индивидуальной, так и общественной).
В смысле гуманистической самореализации доверие как благоориенти-рованное действие и ценностный ответ способствует минимизации разрушительного потенциала социальных конфликтов, инициируя поиск смысловых горизонтов понимания, утверждения норм нравственного добра, взаимного признания и этоса заботы на основе символической актуализации прообразов жизни, величественного добра и света.
Ключевые слова: доверие, социальный конфликт, архетип, ценность, коммуникативная стратегия, ответственность, самореализация, ценностный ответ, ненасильственное общение.
Target setting. Contradictory, dynamic, and ambiguity of the modern social development in the era of globalization significantly updates the problems of harmonious coexistence in many conflict situations in diversity of human relations that somehow causes a paradigm shift from the philosophy of mind to the philosophy of communication. The communicative turn in modern scientific discourse leads to intersubjective color of the moral and ethical issues, focused on the strengthening the principles of fairness, responsibility and solidarity in order to achieve mutual understanding on the basis of universal ethics, based on universally valid moral belongings. Within the discourse of a (dialogically-argumentative) paradigm exactly the confidence plays a key role in harmonizing society, especially given the general moral crisis, growing technological power of humanity and colorful field of conflict (values, needs, interests, intentions, etc.), which generally creates new risk profiles of modern times.
Value changes of our time, accompanied by the formation of personality, strong sense of subjectivity, increasing the values of self-expression and civic
engagement, contribute to widespread perception of social conflicts as reality, which should not be avoided, instead one need to learn how to adjust and settle them by civilized means, minimizing negative effects and making it possible to apply the search strategies of optimal alternatives, and humanistic meanings which have archetypal nature. According to Ronald Inglehart, values of self-expression promote a humanistic transformation of the modernization processes, illustrating the process of human development with priority emphasis on the formation of a society in which people occupy the center stage [1, p. 13]. The new humanistic culture of the pluralistic society is dominated by the ideals of freedom of choice, confidence, tolerance, responsibility, demonstrating the importance of cultural diversity with humanistic priorities, rather than self-centeredness.
Especially important, in terms of the transformations of communication strategies of modern time, raise the questions of value-normative justification of the humanistic culture of confidence as the basis of social order in potential conflict relationships, building on the basis of the priorities of
individual and social self-realization a worthy human social environment. In addition, significant problematisation in establishment of the culture of confidence causes a situation of total crisis of confidence as a lack of confidence resources highlighted the search of universal sources of reliability and authenticity contained in the sense-making patterns of collective experience in social interaction.
Analysis of recent research and publications. Addressing the issues for changing the priorities in the interpretation perspective of confidence, its communicative role in a globalized society can be find in the works of K.-O. Apel, I. Habermap, K. Ionas, V. Hosle, D. Bioler, F. Fukuiama,
A. Selihmen, A. Giddens, N. Luman, P. Shtompka et al., where the confidence is seen as a key feature of modern times that is getting more problematic due to the growing uncontrollability and social complexity.
Current issues of confidence for potential conflict of indeterminate nature of Other, recognizing it as Own, Alien, Hostile, Third and constructing methods related to it are the subject of philosophical reflection since ancient times, but it most consistently is developed in the work of M. Stirner, Y.-H. Fichte, E. Husserl, W. Dilthey, M. Heidegger, E. Levinas, M. Merleau-Ponty, M. Buber, G. Deleuze,
B.Valdenfels, et al. Research of the archetypal principles of social interaction and specific of their manifestation in different areas of society are devoted the works of C. Jung, E. Fromm, M. Eliade, A. Augustinavichute, A. Bolshakova, P. Crimsky, E. Afonin, A. Donchenko, et al.
An important contribution to the development of theoretical and methodological foundations of modern con-flictology made G. Simmel, M. Weber, L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf, J. Lockwood, P. Sorokin, A. Giddens, A. Touraine, K. Boulding, et at., in the their works social conflict is seen in its universal and ambivalent features that are important for the social development.
However, despite a significant number of works on the said issues, there remain insufficiently highlighted questions of archetypal nature of the culture of confidence and identifying its dialogue potential in conflict environment.
The aim of this article is a conceptualization of integrative, humanist and stabilizing potential of the communication strategies of confidence in solving social conflicts, paying attention to the archetypal principles of value-normative bases of the culture of confidence.
The statement of basic materials. The contradictory globalization processes are significantly and rapidly changing the contemporary architecture, creating a large-scale opportunities and prospects, and previously unimaginable risks and hazards, erasing boundaries and expanding the range of interactions with the uncertain Other, which generally causes a decrease in confidence due to reduced controllability and predictability of social interactions. According to Ulrich Beck, the author of the theory of "Risk society", along with globalization is taking place a destruction of key principles which have been organizing the life of societies and states as geographically bounded from each other entities, at the same
time, there have been emerged new power and competitive relationships, conflicts and overlapping between national and state unities and transnational actors, new identities and social spaces [2].
Awareness of the need for interdisciplinary scientific justification of conflict issues in terms of the developing strategies in order to effectively address them, recognizing both destructive and constructive effects of various confrontations and contradictions in the pluralistic social environment requires recourse to conflict analysis as a prerequisite for the functioning of society in its diversity and development.
Axiological conceptualization of social conflict in the sense of enhancing confrontation of social actors as a result of resource deficiency and a sense of injustice about their distribution involves structural possibility of interpretations of competitive situations over scarce resources, power, prestige, and so on, in terms of presence/absence of reconciliation grounds for opposing interests [3]. Stabilizing or destabilizing effects of social conflicts depend on existing in social structures ways of harassment expression, tolerance level and the culture of confidence in society, demonstrating the ability to adapt to social norms to changed conditions of the modern society. These factors generally make it possible to form the humanistic culture of confidence, in the process of consolidation of which social actors form a coherent pluralistic society, and at the same time changing themselves.
The language of confidence in resolving social conflicts can be considered in terms of understanding the
problems based on finding common meanings, establishing value principles of mutual recognition, personal importance and awareness of own subjectivity (both individual and social).
There is an intense search for new principles of life, its value-normative justification in terms of the rapid complication of social coexistence, lack of legitimation, and numerous crises in various spheres of society. Communicative practical philosophy with its transcendental pragmatics allows redefining sources of social integration and intersubjective harmonization through the development of universal ethics of responsibility. Social theory of communicative action is aimed at identifying "the fundamental principles for determining... correctness, general importance and universality of ethical standards and values" [4, p. 14]. Communicative ethics is exploring the re-humanization possibility of the social development as ethical responsibility in terms of urgent matters of the modern times, namely — loss of meanings, orientations, values, expansion of technical intelligence in all areas of human life, which leads to the total dehuman-ization of reality [4, p. 15].
Confidence, being a cultural resource that stimulates the implementation of potential interaction, promotes the renewal of society and indicates such person orientation that is relative to the actions of other people that we act, despite the situation of uncertainty and risk. Thus, confidence is an essential value foundation of social interaction, indicating orientation not only on own interests, which leads to a correction of own behavior in accordance or with reconciling the interests of oth-
ers. Communication as semantic aspect of social interaction, aiming at understanding, is based on subject-subject relations that are possible only if the consideration and respect for Other is provided. This attitude is ensured by the confidence to Other, that is, when you know that you can normally expect from him.
Confidence appears as a form of spiritual experience, intuitive existence comprehension, and certain experiences, which sets limits to coexistence with its own entity, with other people, and with the world in general. This is an overlap of individual and social, rational and irrational, past (as experience of previous interactions, including such phenomena represented as gratitude, giving, and caring) and future (mainly implemented in the hope of a certain expectation). Confidence is a special grade moral force that realizes the potential and is based on the feeling of moral values and dignity of another person. That moral value is the criterion that regulates the spontaneity motives and uncontrolled feelings.
The inner experience of confidence is a socially coordinated field of conscious evidence that provides a general mood of openness and willingness to rely on the will of Other subject in terms of inability or lack of control over his actions when the transcendental I found his own Not-I in another I. Emphasizing the exacerbation in the modern world of conflicts, namely between value systems, Anthony Giddens distinguishes at least four means for their solution: isolationism, voluntary exile, dialogue, and use of violence [5, p. 78]. Given the dynamics of globalization processes and increasing
technological capabilities of mankind, the only possible way of peaceful coexistence is dialogue aimed at achieving understanding and value support of relationships of mutual confidence.
Correlation with another subjectivity as a phenomenon of presence-for-me-another-I provides for the constituting of Other, similar to my own intentionally modified sense of self, making possible a shift to the sense of transcendental We and the constantly meaningful universal living world.
In this context a transcendental confidence, conceptualized as an intersubjective attitude of possibility to reach agreement between the subjects of social interaction, is perceived within the context of conditions for confidence, ways to build means of understanding of valuable basis for confidence in terms of finding universal reasons of the intersubjective linking, regardless of social and cultural distinctions. Transcendental essence of confidence is based on a subjective feeling of authenticity that constitutes itself and the necessary form of social reality.
Motivational and semantic aspects of social interactions to some extent are due to the potential of irrational factors that are available, particularly in the archetypes of the collective unconscious. In Jungian tradition the archetype is understood as some old forms that form the unity of rational and irrational, external and internal experience, and are a kind of cognitive models that organize the psychic reality according to certain cultural references [6]. In represented in socio-cultural practices symbols and images as the archetype derivatives are recog-
nized value-normative regulatives of human activity, reflecting the goals of individual and social self-realization.
In the terms of this research archetypes can be conceptualized as the crystal structures of the collective unconscious, which is the central image-semantic determinants that determine and direct behavior in crisis situations. In addition, according to the Jungian understanding of the impact of suffered conflicts that is based on around the collision of opposites that have natural qualities to meet in the middle, promoting through the right of self-expression to acquire integrity, reconciliation and sense-making.
The archetype of Holy as a kind of numinous is a basal guarantee of confidence, which gives self-confidence and at the same time faith in other people that comes out form the needs in Other, his recognition that is realized through existential worries, mutual empathy, empathy and so on.
Confidence in this context is understood as an organized experience of socio-cultural space of meaningful interactions of Own and Alien (Other, Another), which stimulates the search for constructive alternatives and unifying meaning. This complementary process of personal theming Other as credible for confidence, which in turn leads him to appropriate behavior, expression of the expected virtues, forming the necessary characteristics and their realization in activity, it is very clearly revealed in the context of the concept of value answer by Dietrich von Hildebrand. The scientist proposes every embodiment of virtue and every action consider in terms of answer to moral or morally significant
value: in terms of positively affirmative this answer itself is a value, in terms of denial and destruction this answer become evil owing to denial of this value. Justified confidence, therefore, is the valuable answer to shown confidence as an act that is directed towards the future, contributing to the distribution of the benefit oriented action. Abuse of confidence, failure to meet its values is a negative significance, affecting the ontological foundation of human life, destroying the sense of reliability and security.
Specificity of confidence is also reflected in a kind of "transfer of authority": the subject of confidence is its initiator, but the result of a confidence relationship depends mainly on Other as a perfect object, on which are put our expectations specifying around intentions, honesty, competence and security. In confidence as a valuable answer the content is on the side of the subject, we are "full" of confidence, we are not empty, this content of our soul we are guiding to the object. Confidence, like joy or love, combining internal and external experience is itself a conscious reality in terms of adoption, deliberately committed reality, "quality content contains in our act, that is, on the side of the subject, not the object" [7, p. 189]. Like other valuable answers, confidence is the prerequisite for the personal importance of the object, awareness of this importance and being motivated by it. The ability to trust as a rootedness in common values is an essential condition for spiritual fellowship and understanding [8, p. 49].
Therefore, confidence is always a valuable answer, as it is not possible to trust the subject that is not consid-
ered to be endowed with certain virtues (loyalty, honesty, integrity, etc.). Valuable answer in the confidence relationship has its own moral value, confidence opens up a human to the world, revealing his inner riches as a "entrusted to human the unfathomable treasure of goodness" [7, p. 436]. Confidence arises as a conscious behavioral paradigm, and as an affective subconscious attitude, combining in different proportions rational, emotional and mental.
Thus, confidence is understood as an internal act of sense-making of the importance-in-itself, as endowed with value of benefit in mutual actualization of those features that provide the ability of Other to give something that needs the object of confidence for the full to discover his own potential, implementing ethos of care and responsibility and creating a sensation of harmony.
Actualization of communication strategies of the dialogue potential of confidence requires involvement in conflict areas the social practices of structural flexibility, inner balance, valuable depth, and synergy mechanisms, demonstrating the need of advantage of culture peace standards, nonviolent communication, priorities of the open society. Communication-in-trust is the basis of so-called "peace programs" aimed at nonviolent conflict resolution, particularly in the political, interethnic, interreligious tensions and confrontations.
As a model of coordinated communicative interaction for effectively addressing of social conflicts can be used a nonviolent communication concept, developed by Marshall Rosenberg,
showing integrative potential of confidence in implementation of the principle of reciprocity that enables empathy and effective cooperation with the needs of others. The basis of this concept is self-awareness of an individual, providing a measure of cognitive complexity, level of differentiation image of I internal integrity, stability, self-acceptance and genuine expression [9]. This reassuring communication is based on the language of confidence, acceptance, and empathy rather than on the language of condemnation, accusation, violence, humiliation, and evaluative sorting that is manifested in different stereotypes, extreme categorization, reproaches, labels, diagnoses, and so on, being a tragic expression of unmet needs.
Nonviolent communication is essentially the "language of life" that is based on an internal dialogue, empathy and readiness for creativity, active cooperation, dialogue communication, distinguish between strategies of domination and social partnership, monitoring and evaluation, demand and request, feeling and interpretation, emotional bondage and emotional freedom, powerlessness and empowerment, physical strength, and the power of self-esteem and responsibility. Language of peace and nonviolence transforms the social reality, and life in confidence appears as the ability to open yourself, have the power to be vulnerable, give a part of yourself, that is generally the key to the enrichment of life and effectively addressing conflicts by nonviolent means [10].
To illustrate the communicative manner of aggression/acceptance and visual perception of socio-cultural
guidelines in perception of Other in the form of I-statements, Marshall Rosenberg uses the metaphor of "jackal language" and "giraffe language", symbolizing the appropriate archetypal guidelines of predatory destruction and perspective creation and foresight. Jackal language is distinguished by demonstrating coercion values that in conflict situations focuses on humiliation, repression, weakening Other and exaltation of self. In giraffe language (which has a "great" heart) valuably prevail guidelines of nonviolence, creating positive relationships between people, confidence, tolerance, and support, resulting in flexibility in the choice of strategies to resolve conflicts in the prospective of personal self-realization, creating a sense of self-importance for Other in the grounds of help, care, empathy, openness and so on.
Conclusions. Thus, nonviolent strategies for resolving social conflicts have greater prospects in building effective social interactions, reducing social tensions and establishing structures of self-realization, freedom and confidence. Experience of confidence/ non-confidence as the first social experience of child is a productive result of a typical conflict between the desire to meet the needs and the possibilities of their resourcing that demonstrates constructiveness in the formation of new skills and self-confidence. This basal confidence, establishing a sense of moral goodness and strength later in life, are the cumulative implementation of archetypes of Holy, Mother, and Father, which generally provides guarantees of reliability, symbolizing the ambivalent projections as ideals of kindness, care, birth, light, strength,
unity, and ideals of fear, submission, death, darkness, immaturity, and alienation, requiring further analysis on the material of socio-cultural practices of specific country to develop optimal strategies of solving social conflicts.
The language of confidence as communicative action is a means of expressing valuable recognition of Other, determining in advance the interpretation of reality in terms of active cooperation, unlike the instrumental concepts of domination, power, manipulation, and categorization. Moral foundation of confidence culture, as benefit oriented action, is the ethics of responsibility based on jointly produced intersubjective norms that determine the motivation and orientation of mutually recognized voluntary standards of modal and mandatory in public actions, finding generalized expectations of accepted by this community commitments.
In terms of humanistic self-realization the language of confidence helps to minimize the destructive potential of social conflicts, initiating the search semantic horizons of understanding, establishing standards of moral goodness, mutual recognition and caring ethos based on symbolic actualization of life prototypes, grand goodness and light.
REFERENCES -
1. Inglhart R, Veltsel K. Modernizatsiya, kulturnyie izmeneniya i demokratiya: Posledovatelnost chelovecheskogo razvitiya [Modernization, cultural change and democracy: The sequence of human development] / R. Inglhart, K. Veltsel: [per. s angl. M. Korob-ochkina]. — M.: Novoe izdatelstvo, 2011. — 464 p.
2. Bek U. Chto takoe globalizatsiya? Oshibki globalizma — otvetyi na glo-balizatsiyu [What is globalization? The mistakes of globalism — the answers to globalization] / U. Bek; [per. s nem. A. Grigoreva, V. Sedelnika]. — M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2001. 304 p.
3. Kozer L. A. Funktsii sotsialnogo kon-flikta [Functions of social conflict]/ Per. s angl. O. A. Nazarovoy;Pod
obsch. red. L. G. Ionina. — M.: Ideya-Press, Dom intellektual. knigi, 2000. — 205 p.
4. Ermolenko A. N. Etika otvetstvennosti i sotsialnoe byitie cheloveka (sovre-mennaya nemetskaya prakticheskaya filosofiya) [Ethics of responsibility and the social being of man (modern German practical philosophy)] / A. N. Ermolenko. — K.: Naukova dum-ka, 1994. — 200 p.
