CC BY
13
DOI 10.23947/2414-1143-2019-18-2-3-9 UDC 316.35
SOCIAL-PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECT OF RESEARCH ON THE ETHNOCULTURAL INTEGRITY OF A PERSON
© Vadim N. Goncharov, Olga Y. Kolosova
Krasnodar University of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russian Federation, North-Caucasus Federal University, Stavropol, Russian Federation
science-almanac@mail.ru
The idea of the perfect person, appearing as a universal idea about harmony with nature and the need to adapt to it and transforming it, puts a person on a new level of harmony. The upbringing of a perfect person reflects the level of national self-consciousness and undergoes a constant evolution under the influence of social conditions. The people were always aware of the universal goals of upbringing, had their ideal of a perfect person and, in their upbringing practice, sought to achieve this goal. For a person as an ethnocultural integrity, it is important to be introduced to the ethnocultural heritage, inculturation. Comprehending the phenomenology of culture, mastering the ethno-cultural phenomenon, a person becomes an heir of culture, is formed as an integral ethnocultural personality - a community unit with characteristics of ethnic mentality, associated with the history of ethnos, ethnic culture, capable of ethnic reproduction of the world. Specificity of culture is determined by the peculiarities of the ethnocultural personality. The uniqueness consists, first of all, in the inimitable combination of the elements common to all ethnic groups, in the combination of the system of relations and values. As an individual, personality is identical with social norms, effective in relation to expected social roles. This is the outward correspondence of man to the ethnic ideal of the perfect man. Ethnicity is a real, structurally rich and complex connection of an individual with society, including the socioeconomic, territorial, day-to-day, socio-political, linguistic, spiritual and socio-psychological aspects and reflects a certain side of human nature, much deeper, external in relation to consciousness and psychology, by which is understood the form of higher nervous activity.
Key words: culture, ethnos, ethnic consciousness, ethnic identity, multiethnic society, social model.
[В.Н. Гончаров, О.Ю. Колосова Социально-философский аспект исследования этнокультурной целостности личности]
Идея совершенного человека, возникая как общечеловеческая идея о гармонии с природой и необходимости приспосабливания к ней и преобразовывая ее, ставит человека на новую ступень гармонии. Воспитание совершенного человека отражает уровень национального самосознания и претерпевает постоянную эволюцию под влиянием общественных условий. Народ всегда осознавал общечеловеческие цели воспитания, имел свой идеал совершенного человека и в своей практике воспитания стремился достичь этой цели. Для личности как этнокультурной целостности важно приобщение к этнокультурному наследию, инкультурация. Постигая феноменологию культуры, осваивая этнокультурный феномен, человек становится наследником культуры, формируется как целостная этнокультурная личность - единица сообщества с характеристиками этнического менталитета, связанная с историей этноса, этнокультурой, способная к этническому воспроизведению мира. Специфика культуры определяется особенностями этнокультурной личности. Своеобразие состоит, прежде всего, в неповторимом сочетании общих для всех этносов элементов, в комбинации системы отношений и ценностей. Как индивид личность идентична социальным нормам, эффективна в отношении ожидаемых социальных ролей. Это внешнее соответствие человека этническому идеалу совершенного человека. Этническая принадлежность - это реальная, структурно богатая и сложная связь личности с обществом, включающая в себя социально-экономический, территориально-бытовой, общественно-политический, языковой, духовный и социально-психологический аспекты и отражающая определенную сторону природы человека, гораздо более глубокую, внешнюю по отношению к сознанию и психологии, под которой понимается форма высшей нервной деятельности.
Ключевые слова: культура, этнос, этническое самосознание, этническая идентичность, полиэтническое общество, социальная модель.
Vadim N. Goncharov - PhD of philosophy, professor of philosophy dpt. Institute of the Humanities of North-Caucasus federal university, Stavropol, Russian Federation.
Olga Y. Kolosova - PhD of philosophy, professor, Krasnodar university of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russian Federation, Stavropol, Russian Federation.
Гончаров Вадим Николаевич - доктор философских наук, профессор кафедры философии Гуманитарного института Северо-Кавказского федерального университета, г. Ставрополь, Российская Федерация.
Колосова Ольга Юрьевна - доктор философских наук, профессор. Краснодарский университет Министерства внутренних дел Российской Федерации, г. Ставрополь, Российская Федерация.
The ethnic identity of the ethnocultural integrity of the individual is based on the community of a specific ethnic or local culture, understood as a system considered in a certain time-space continuum, regardless of its scale and the number of selected features. In the system of any ethnoculture there is a mechanism for educating its members not only respect for other cultures, but, first of all, a sense of preference for their cultural values, ensuring "... education of a positive attitude towards cultural differences" [4, p. 7-10], contributing to the "dialogue of cultures in the context of the development of modern civilization" [14, p. 145-160]. This is a function of protecting ethnic identity, considered as a condition for the integrity and self-development of the individual. Strong identity leads to integration and biculturism. Lack of identification implies marginality. Identification only with the majority culture is assessed as assimilation, whereas identification with one's own group in a multi-ethnic society is assessed as separatism. Identification is not only attributing a person to one or another ethnos, but also his ideas about his/her people, their characteristics (ethnic autostereotypes), culture, language, territory of residence, historical past. Ethnicity is necessary for the individual for self-affirmation and complete self-realization.
In many cases, ethnic groups show enormous resistance to environmental influences. Even if part of the ethnos migrates to another geographical space, implying "the need to consider ... the dispositions of social structures" [1, p. 168-177], it remains part of this ethnos, even without a native in the full sense of the word soil. The system of identification of the student-trained system in Eastern culture is based on the traditional attitude towards the teacher, the manifestation of feelings of respect, appreciation and love for his mentor. Respecting the elders is active in the culture of the eastern ethnic groups and is transformed into the formation of ethnic self-consciousness and ethnic identity. Ethnicity may grow or weaken in response to external conditions. The source of the growth of ethnic identity is often the result of interethnic relations, an adequate response to their defense, to the oppression and persecution experienced by the ethnic group. Subjective ethnic identity as a defense mechanism is not so much due to real cultural differences as it is the result of the suppression of these differences by outside forces.
Ethnic self-consciousness is the most important component of individual's identity. Through his or her personality he/she identifies him/herself with others, that is, relates him/herself, his/her ideas and values to the values of the ethnos, to the peculiarities of his/her own ethnos. Ethnic self-consciousness is a characteristic not only of the individual, but also of society, class, and social group. Ethnic self-consciousness reflects the psychological peculiarities of one or another ethnos represents the level of social consciousness, which is limited by the framework of everyday experience, enshrined in traditions and customs, and includes a direct reflection of practical activities, ethnic ideas and customs, about their ethnicity. In the structure of ethnic identity, in the opinion of Y. V. Bromley, such elements as ethnic identification, ideas about the typical features of their community, its
properties as a whole, are distinguished. Ideas about their ethnos do not just summarize certain features, while there is a value attitude towards them. Pride for their culture, desire to preserve and enhance the cultural heritage, brought up from childhood, and help to create a sense of self-awareness, which reflects the requirements for the subsequent conscious activity [3, p. 14-17]. The higher the ethnic self-consciousness, the more indifferent is its attitude towards the culture of another nation.
According to the ethnocultural concept of N. Y. Danilevsky, humankind does not represent a single, living whole, but rather resembles a living element, in which there is a development of individual cultural and historical types. Ethnos is a society that is a carrier of a certain culture. Ethnos creates its own culture; historically, an ethnos is primary in relation to a culture that satisfies its needs and influences the process of the formation of an ethnos as a subject of culture. In this sense, ethnos is the product of culture. Ethnic developed, formed for centuries and therefore continues to be the most stable type of culture, defined by "... forms of spiritual and practical development of the world" [7, p. 9-12].
Y. V. Bromley, I. S. Vyrost, P. I. Gnatenko, Sh. B. Samatov emphasize that culture is a human phenomenon in all its ethnic forms. According to E. A. Baller and Sh. B. Samatov, ethnic culture embodies the interests, goals, and real possibilities of an ethnos and personality, and contributes to the transformation of a person. For E. Durkheim, personality is a function of the ethnocultural whole, and the ethnosocial and cultural system becomes a function of personality. P. Smith believes that ethnocultural identification strengthens people in a system of meanings that ensures order and contributes to the attainment of personal dignity.
The individuals in one form or another represent their society, their ethnic groups, their era. Culture and personality are each other's goals. Culture is created by a person, but at the same time, a person is shaped by culture. They enrich and develop each other. Syncretism of personality, ethnos and culture, interdependent, fastening the community and protecting against decay, includes rational and irrational elements and consists of history, traditions, symbols, meanings, ways of collective living, joint plans for the future, and vision of the world, internally filled with values. Religious traditions, rites are often perceived as symbols of ethnic identity, culture, they attach importance to the ethnic tradition. Religious beliefs are the most important source of culture of any nation, form a religious consciousness, "emphasizing the influence on the philosopher of theological ideas ..." [8, p. 29-31], noting "the influence of Orthodoxy on the formation and formation of Russian culture" [13, p. 39-44]. Ethnic and religious consciousness is difficult to separate. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the human sensual sphere [9, p. 71]. S. Levi singles out the esoteric content of ethnic culture, a culture for internal use, hidden from outsiders. Therefore, it is natural that a person is a religious-spiritual category. Ethnoculture implies a structure that forms a certain type of personality [10, p. 15-18], and the personality brings its uniqueness to ethnic traditions.
Each ethnic culture has its own unique path of development, its own characteristics, its own logic, and, only on the basis of this logic, we can explain what is of fundamental importance for this culture and what is of secondary importance. Ethnoculture consists of its history, traditions, symbols, values, ways of collective living, and joint plans for the future, in a word, a vision of the world, internally filled with values. Without a deep understanding of the culture of an ethnos, it is impossible to understand its spiritual and moral values. According to E. Hall, it is almost impossible to convey your understanding (of keeping culture) to those who have not had the same experience.
Ethnos as a social community is characterized by specific cultural models that determine the nature of human activity in the world. It functions in accordance with special laws aimed at maintaining the unique for each society correlation of cultural models within society for a long time, including periods of major sociocultural changes involving certain ob-
5
jects of scientific research. At the same time, "requirements for information support of objects ... change in the process of scientific research" [7, p. 123-128]. Ethnos is the carrier of these models, that is, the culture.
By definition, A. Kreber and K. Klakhona, who generalized and systematized the basic theoretical foundations of the concept of cultural models, culture consists of explicit and implicit behavioral models that receive a symbolic form and reflect the characteristics of various human groups, in particular, embodied in artifacts. The essential feature of culture is the presence in it of traditional, that is, historically developed and selected ideas, and first of all the ideas developed by this people i.e. values; a cultural system can, on the one hand, be regarded as a product of an action, and on the other, as something that determines subsequent actions. Part of the culture consists of behavioral norms and standards. Its other part consists of ideological judgments and rational explanations of some forms of behavior. Each culture includes certain general principles, on the basis of which the choice of certain forms of behavior is made, their ordering, and thus a certain variation of cultural patterns is formed.
So, M. Mead distinguishes postfigurative cultures, or cultures oriented to ancestors and traditions. L. N. Gumilev names postfigurative cultures as persistents, that is, which overlived themselves [5, p. 93].
The modern ethnic communities of M. Mead are represented by cofigurative cultures that do not have indisputable traditions and a stable picture of the world, many of whose elements are eroding as economic activity is internationalized. Ethnic groups are largely divorced from traditions; the behavior of ancestors is not considered as a model. The predominant model of people's behavior in them is the behavior of their contemporaries. However, the generation gap does not occur, due to the fact that there are always layers of culture that allow one to realize one's belonging to an ethnic community: language, religion, the myth of common ancestors, historical memory, rich in heroic deeds or common sufferings. All studies of the ethnic mentality, which are based on the cofigurative paradigm, are based on two main points: firstly, all cultural elements inherent in one or another ethnos that is the object of the study are perceived as interrelated; secondly, any ethnic culture is considered to be determined by the models of child education adopted in it.
M. Mead predicted the emergence of prefigurative cultures, where not the ancestors or contemporaries, but the child him/herself determines the answers to the essential questions of being. Older people do not see their own experiences repeated in the lives of young people, the lives of parents are not a model for children, a gap of generations takes place. The fact that M. Mead's forecast is becoming a reality is an illusion, since any idea brought to completion is absurd. In this case, humanity would disappear from the face of the Earth. Humankind, despite the innovations and creativity of culture, in order to reproduce itself and self-regulate, it is necessary to preserve the continuity and connection of generations.
G. Hofstede distinguishes culture in the narrow sense, or culture one, and culture in the broad sense of the word, or culture two. The culture one includes such results of improvement of the mind, as education, art and literature. The models of family organization, parenting, which are primary social institutions, are different for different ethnic cultures and are relatively uniform within the same ethnic culture, and therefore contribute to the development of certain character traits and psychological characteristics among all members of the same ethnic group. Culture two embraces one culture and such ordinary things as greeting, food, emotions, making love or maintaining body hygiene. It deals with things that hurt. Culture two is always a collective phenomenon, it is shared by people of the same ethnocultural environment, it is a collective mind program that distinguishes members of one ethnic group from another.
Culture is the main mechanism of adaptation to the environment, a means of adaptation to the functional requirements of existence, a kind of immune system that protects a person. Each culture can be interpreted as a strategy of human adaptation, and each element of a unique social model can be interpreted as a means to get maximum energy from the environment.
Ethnoculture is a special system, the evolution of which is determined by the need to adapt to the natural conditions specific to each culture; it unites people, acts as a result and as a stimulus of social development. It includes the totality of the values of all areas of material and spiritual life: features of the landscape, flora and fauna, places of residence of the ethnic group; architecture; health care system; education and upbringing, housing, features of historical events, religion, ethnography, rituals and rituals, folk arts, folklore, music, visual arts, culture of interpersonal communication, feelings, etiquette; use of graphic, motor, color, verbal symbols.
In the context of anthropology, adaptation means the process of mutual adaptation between culture and the external environment, through which a person can productively use his environment to meet his needs, the result of establishing interaction between an ethnic group and the environment, allowing people to survive, and means that culture is a product of interaction between the external environment and the subjects of life activity, whose behavior strategy is a special technology of learning natural resource economy and social structure.
Culture, according to M. Spiro, is the most important adaptive means of man, the mediating link between the properties of the psychobiological organism of a person and his/her social and physical environment, it is the main mechanism by which human groups adapt to the environment. At the same time, acting as a specific mediator, the culture necessarily manifests itself as a variable, changing its forms in space and in time. Being a product of human symbolic abilities, culture can and should vary in different historical conditions, depending on its environmental component, on various historical circumstances, on the leader's actions, on unpredictable physical and social events. If culture is a means by which a person or a group of people adapts to the functional requirements of individual and group existence, it is not surprising to find in historical experience "... the quality of a person and the resulting ability of social subjects to interact purposefully with the environment" [11, p. 282-284], defining, in the context of the "formation of a new social reality" [12, p. 64-68], "the complex interaction of various types of social communication" [2, p. 5-10].
Литература
1. Бакланова О.А. Бакланов И.С. Современная российская социальность в контексте социального конструкционизма. Вопросы социальной теории. 2015. Т. 7. № 1-2. С. 168-177.
2. Бакланова О.А., Бакланов И.С. Контуры типологического исследования социальности современного общества. Известия Саратовского университета. Новая серия. Серия: Философия. Психология. Педагогика. 2014. Т. 14. № 2-1. С. 5-10.
3. Говердовская Е.В., Болховской А. Л. Информационная парадигма современного общества: социально-философский и педагогический обзор концепций. Гуманитарные, социально-экономические и общественные науки. 2013. № 7-1. С. 14-17.
4. Говердовская Е.В. Особенности проектирования образовательного пространства высшей школы в поликультурном регионе. Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. 2014. № 4. С. 7-10.
5. Гумилев Л.Н. Этногенез и биосфера Земли. Л.Н. Гумилев. М.: Рольф, 2001. 560 с.
6. Ерохин А.М. Научно-информационный аспект исследования социокультурного развития общества в области культуры и искусства. Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. 2015. № 2. С. 123-128.
7. Ерохин А.М. Религия и искусство в системе культуры. European Social Science Journal. 2014. № 7-2 (46). С. 9-12.
8. Камалова О. Н. «Созерцание» в философско-культурологических построениях И. Ильина. Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. 2012. № 6. С. 2931.
9. Камалова О.Н. Исследование эмоций и интуиции в современной философии и науке. Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. 2007. № 6. 70-74.
10. Лобейко Ю.А. Социально-педагогический аспект активности личности в системе общественного развития. Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. 2015. № 1. С. 15-18.
11. Лобейко Ю.А. Социальная активность личности в обществе: социально-педагогические аспекты формирования. European Social Science Journal. 2014. №7-2(46). С. 282-284.
12. Лукьянов Г.И. Трансформационные процессы в современном российском обществе как отражение динамики новой социальной реальности. Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. 2017. №4. С. 64-68.
13. Матяш Т.П., Несмеянов Е.Е. Православный тип культуры: идея и реальность. Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. 2015. № 3 (82). С. 39-44.
14. Несмеянов Е.Е. «Цивилизация молодых»: идея и реальность. Гуманитарные и социальные науки. 2013. № 6. С. 145-160.
References
1. Baklanova O.A. Baklanov I.S. Sovremennaya rossiyskaya sotsial'nost' v kontekste sotsial'nogo konstruktsionizma. Voprosy sotsial'noy teorii. [Modern Russian sociality in the context of social constructionism. Questions of social theory]. 2015. V. 7. No. pp. 1-2. 168-177(in Russian).
2. Baklanova O.A., Baklanov I.S. Kontury tipologicheskogo issledovaniya sotsial'nosti sovremennogo obshchestva. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika. [Outlines of a typological study of the sociality of modern society]. 2014. V. 14. No. 2-1. pp. 5-10 (in Russian).
3. Goverdovskaya Ye. V, Bolkhovskoy A. L. Informatsionnaya paradigma sovremennogo obshchestva: sotsial'no-filosofskiy i pedagogicheskiy obzor kontseptsiy. Gumanitarnyye, sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiye i obshchestvennyye nauki. [The information paradigm of modern society: a socio-philosophical and pedagogical review of concepts]. 2013. No. 7-1. pp. 14-17 (in Russian).
4. Goverdovskaya Ye. V. Osobennosti proyektirovaniya obrazovatel'nogo prostranstva vysshey shkoly v polikul'turnom regione. Ekonomicheskiye i gumanitarnyye issledo-vaniya regionov. [Features of designing the educational space of a higher school in a multicultural region. Economic and Humanitarian Studies of the Regions]. 2014. No. 4. pp. 7-10 (in Russian).
5. Gumilev L.N. Etnogenez i biosfera Zemli. L.N. Gumilev. [Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth]. Moscow: Rol'f, 2001. 560 p. (in Russian).
6. Yerokhin A.M. Nauchno-informatsionnyy aspekt issledovaniya sotsiokul'turnogo razvitiya obshchestva v oblasti kul'tury i iskusstva. Ekonomicheskiye i gumanitarnyye issledovaniya regionov. [Scientific and informational aspect of the study of
8
sociocultural development of society in the field of culture and art. Economic and Humanitarian Studies of the Regions]. 2015. No. 2. pp. 123-128 (in Russian).
7. Yerokhin A.M. Religiya i iskusstvo v sisteme kul'tury. [Religion and art in the system of culture. European Social Science Journal]. 2014. No. 7-2 (46). pp. 9-12 (in Russian).
8. Kamalova O.N. «Sozertsaniye» v filosofsko-kul'turologicheskikh postroyeniyakh I. Il'ina. Gumanitarnyye i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiye nauki. ["Contemplation" in the philosophical and cultural studies of I. Il'in. Humanitarian and socio-economic sciences]. 2012. No. 6. pp. 29-31 (in Russian).
9. Kamalova O.N. Issledovaniye emotsiy i intuitsii v sovremennoy filosofii i nauke. Gumanitarnyye i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiye nauki. [The study of emotions and intuitions in modern philosophy and science. Humanities and socio-economic sciences]. 2007. No. 6. pp. 70-74 (in Russian).
10. Lobeyko Yu.A. Sotsial'no-pedagogicheskiy aspekt aktivnosti lichnosti v sisteme ob-shchestvennogo razvitiya. Ekonomicheskiye i gumanitarnyye issledovaniya re-gionov. [Socio-pedagogical aspect of personality activity in the system of social development. Economic and Humanitarian Studies of the Regions]. 2015. No. 1. pp. 15-18 (in Russian).
11. Lobeyko Y.A. Sotsial'naya aktivnost' lichnosti v obshchestve: sotsial'no-pedagogicheskiye aspekty formirovaniya. European Social Science Journal. [Social activity of the individual in society: social and pedagogical aspects of the formation. European Social Science Journal]. 2014. No. 7-2(46). pp. 282-284.
12. Luk'yanov G.I. Transformatsionnyye protsessy v sovremennom rossiyskom ob-shche-stve kak otrazheniye dinamiki novoy sotsial'noy real'nosti. Ekonomicheskiye i gumanitarnyye issledovaniya regionov. [Transformational processes in modern Russian society as a reflection of the dynamics of a new social reality. Economic and Humanitarian Studies of the Regions]. 2017. No. 4. pp. 64-68 (in Russian).
13. Matyash T.P., Nesmeyanov Ye.Ye. Pravoslavnyy tip kul'tury: ideya i real'nost'. Gumanitarnyye i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiye nauki. [Orthodox type of culture: the idea and reality. Humanitarian and socio-economic sciences]. 2015. No. 3 (82). pp. 39-44 (in Russian).
14. Nesmeyanov Ye.Ye. «Tsivilizatsiya molodykh»: ideya i real'nost'. Gumanitarnyye i sotsial'nyye nauki. ["Civilization of the young": the idea and reality. Humanities and social sciences]. 2013. No. 6. pp. 145-160.
_16 May, 2019
