CC BY
32Psychology
UDC 316.6
candidate of Psychological Sciences Tuzova Olga Nikolaevna
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education «Murmansk Arctic State University» (Murmansk)
SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE FORMATION OF TRADITIONS OF FAMILY
RELATIONS IN RUSSIA
Annotation. The article considers the influence of cultural and historical context on the formation of family, parent-child relationship. There is a transformation of the family lifestyle, a change in the role of parents in raising children. The socio-psychological components of family relationships traditions are defined. The stages of the formation of the main family relationships traditions in Russia are highlighted.
Keywords: family upbringing traditions, parent-child relationships, social environment, cultural and historical concept, socio-cultural concept, family systems theory.
Аннотация. В статье рассматривается влияние культурно-исторического контекста на формирование семьи, детско-родительских отношений. Прослеживается трансформация семейного уклада, изменение роли родителей в воспитании детей. Определены социально-психологические компоненты традиций семейных отношений. Выделены этапы формирования основных традиций семейных отношений в России.
Ключевые слова: традиции семейного воспитания, детско-родительские взаимоотношения, социальная среда, культурно-историческая концепция, социокультурная концепция, теория семейных систем.
Introduction. The continued interest in the problems of family education is due to the altering historical context, which makes new demands on the approaches and methods of resolving family situations. The family as a social institution is a product of culture and exists, reproducing traditions, following certain patterns of activity. An analysis of various spheres of family livelihoods shows that family relationships are arranged in accordance with the different types of patterns that are being reproduced by each new generation; therefore, an understanding of the current state of problems is impossible without an analysis of traditions.
Studies of various aspects of family relationships and corresponding styles of relationships between parents and children were conducted by such domestic scientists as A.N. Ganicheva, V.N. Druzhinin, O.L. Zvereva, V.G. Ivanitsky, I.S. Kon, V.M. Miniyarov, R.V. Ovcharova, A.G. Selevko, G.K. Selevko, L.A. Stepashko, A.N. Sheveleva, E.G. Eidemiller, V. Justitskis and others.
Various approaches to studying the problems of upbringing and features of parent-child interaction are described in socio-psychological and psycho-pedagogical literature. The socio-psychological and psychological-pedagogical literature describes various approaches to the study of the problems of education and the characteristics of parent-child interaction. In this regard, we studied the parental roles, positions, styles and types of family education, parent-child relationships and so on.
This theoretical study attempts to analyze the peculiarities of the traditions of family relations in Russia.
The theoretical-methodological basis of the work is the cultural-historical concept of L.S. Vygotsky, A.R. Luria, A.N. Leontiev, K. Horney's socio-cultural approach, M. Bowen's theory of family systems.
Presentation of the main material of the article. It should be noted that in this study by the family relationships traditions we mean the sustainable behavioral patterns that are formed during the interaction of family members and are transmitted (consciously and unconsciously) from generation to generation. The traditions of family relations include family values, parental attitudes, upbringing style.
Family relationships and family education in Russia are rooted in the spiritual and religious traditions of the state, and scientific interest in the problems of childhood and education arose in the XIX century, during the transition of Russia to the path of capitalism. In this regard, the history of family relations can be viewed from two perspectives. First of all, traditions of family relationships developed during the pagan (pre-Christian) and Christian periods. Secondly, the coverage of the problems of family relations can be divided into pre-scientific and scientific periods.
The pre-scientific period of the formation of the traditions of family relations in Russia includes pre-Christian and partly Christian periods. The characteristics of the family structure in the pre-scientific period are presented in cultural and historical sources.
The first stage of the formation of traditions of family relations is associated with the emergence of tribes, which were formed from small Slavic clans and is dated to the 6th century. The clan union held on two pillars: on the power of the tribal elders and on the inseparability of patrimonial property. Patrimonial cult, reverence of the ancestors consecrated and fastened both these supports. Then the clan unions began to fall apart into yards or complex families with a householder, wife, children, and inseparable relatives, brothers, nephews. This decay served as a transitional stage from the ancient family to the newest simple family and corresponded to the ancient Roman family name [6]. Since different generations were represented in the structure of the pagan family, it can be said that elements of mentoring activity began to emerge among the ancient Slavic tribes. When matriarchy, children of both sexes were brought up in the mother's house, then the boys went into the house of men, where they learned practical skills. The upbringing of children was entrusted to mentors who taught worldly wisdom in the "houses of youth". Later, the close relatives (uncles) were engaged in the upbringing and education of children. In the absence of such, these functions were performed by the nearest neighbours ("nepotism"). Accordingly, in the VI - VII centuries among the Eastern Slavs, in connection with the existence of extensive family ties, the upbringing had a general family character, and the system of family relations was extended.
Since the eighth century, parents have ceased to give their children in the care of relatives. This fact marks the second stage in the formation of traditions of family relations. From this time on, we can speak about the emergence of the educational function of the family in the modern view. The main methods of national education were pies, chastushkas, riddles, fairy tales, epics, lullabies. They revealed the best features of the Slavic national character: respect for elders, kindness, fortitude, courage, hard work, mutual assistance. They reflected the rich and original history of the Slavic people, strengthening and accompanying it from the first years of life. In the studies of S.D. Babishin and B.A. Rybakov it is shown that the general culture of the Russian people was pedagogical, the upbringing of children represented a distinctive national character (S.D. Babishin, B.N. Mityurov 1985) [1].
Nevertheless, despite such an optimistic evaluation of the system of family relations and upbringing in Slavic families by our contemporaries, we cannot ignore the historical document of 1076 (XI century) called "Izbornik", in which instructions are given on "taming" a child starting from a very young age. It is unlikely that such a method can be called pedagogical and humane. Cruelty in raising children, unfortunately, was not uncommon, as evidenced by other literary documents (The Tale of Akira the Wise "XII c.) [2].
Upbringing of children of the princely family had its own characteristics. Children of a princely family were given to another family for upbringing. This form of upbringing was called the "Kormilstvo" (providing) (V.K. Gardanov 1959). Providing - a socio-pedagogical phenomenon in Russia of X-XII centuries. - characterized as mentorship and responsibility for the moral, spiritual and physical education of young princes. They received their first knowledge at the court - in the school of "book teaching", where they studied with the children of boyars and warriors. The first school of "book studies" was opened in Kiev in 988, then in Novgorod in 1030 and other cities.
A socio-historical analysis suggests that the normative pagan model of the family represented a complex structure with multiple family ties. There were both matriarchal and patriarchal relationships. Due to the multi-generational families, dominance-subordination dominated, where children were always in a subordinate position. However, the child was given greater "corporeal" freedom: the child was not torn off the maternal breast for a long time and fed when he demanded; at a later age, there was also no regulation in the diet. Children were taught to use the toilet late and tolerated the "childish sin" - the manifestation of sexuality. In pre-Christian cultures, as noted by V.N. Druzhinin, the complex socioeconomic system and household structure were an important factor, which could not but affect the upbringing and behavior of children. This influence is described by three dimensions of family relationships: domination, responsibility, closeness. Children raised in complex cultures have higher rates on the addiction-dominance scale and lower on the care-responsibility scale than children raised in simple cultures [4].
The 16th century became the boundary separating the pagan type of family from the Christian. This period can be considered the next stage in the formation of traditions of family relations. The victory of the Christian model of the family over the pagan is characterized by the manifestation of the relationship between father, mother and child as independent. However, childhood in the seventeenth century is still understood as a "period of immaturity in human life", peculiar "deviation from the norm" [8].
In the Christian period, abuse in family did not diminish. In Domostroy, a textbook of family life of the 16th century, created by the confessor of Ivan the Terrible, protopop Sylvester, a rigid hierarchization of the structure of an ideal Orthodox family is presented. In practice, the hierarchy prescribed by the Christian Orthodox faith sanctified and argued the despotism of the male parent, gave the legal basis for violence against a woman. Rape was punished only when the woman belonged to a noble family. One could get rid of an objectionable wife by sending her to a monastery. Sylvester paid no less attention to the problems of relations between fathers and children, which must be solved through physical violence and strict regulation of behavior [3].
In the folk practice of family education in Russia, the main emphasis was placed on obedience as the main element of honoring God. The logic of reasoning justified him as follows: the husband as the head of the family should worship God, and the wife should humble herself before the husband, the children should honor their parents. It was believed that the alienation of people from faith leads to the fact that the husband ceases to honor God, to live according to His will, and disobedience of the wife to the husband occurs. And as a result, two naughty people brought up a disobedient child.
Church settings were supported by secular legislation. According to the Code of 1649, children had no right to complain about their parents, killing a son or daughter was punishable with just year imprisonment, while the law prescribed to execute "without mercy" children who encroached on the lives of their parents. This inequality was eliminated only in 1716, when Peter I with his own hand attributed to the word "child" the addition of "in infancy", thereby protecting the life of newborns and infants [7].
The description of authoritarian norms in Russian folk pedagogy is presented by V.G. Holodnaya. The statements she cites, while analyzing the system of upbringing teenage boys in the Eastern Slavs, are aimed at justifying the need for corporal punishment of the son, and the role of the upbringer is given to the father: "What a dad you are, if your little one is not afraid of you at all", "Unpunished son is disgraceful to father ", "Smaller feed, more flog - a good boy will grow" [12].
The fourth stage in the formation of traditions of family relations is connected with the emergence of scientific interest in the problems of family education. An outstanding public figure A.N. Radishchev played a big role in this issue [13]. In family education, he called for the abandonment of parental authority as a principle of reward for the "life" given to children. However, such views in the XVIII century were the exception rather than the rule [11].
In the XIX century Russian family continues to be authoritarian and patriarchal. Such traditions are especially strong in peasant families. The father is the head who owns the power, the property and is assigned the leading role. Assault and brute force, based on the need for corporal punishment, flourished in families. Equally harsh were the mores of urban trade and craft and merchant families [10].
The end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century - this is the fifth stage - a new milestone of scientific interest in the problems of childhood, family education and family relations. Advanced pedagogical views on the development of children and its psychological and pedagogical foundations were expressed by K.D. Ushinsky, N.I. Pirogov and revolutionary democrats. The system of K.D. Ushinsky's views was described in his work "Man as an object of education" (1867). It is possible to successfully develop a plan for the education of a whole person, as K.D. Ushinsky asserted, only basing on a complex of human sciences, in the center of which should be psychology.
A number of works of the Russian scientist P.F. Lesgaft were devoted to the issues of educational psychology, family education, individual and typological differences between children. He pointed out that family education consists in treating a child from the first day of his birth as a person with full recognition of his personality [5].
The works of A. Bebel and K. Zetkin greatly influenced the views of the Russian intelligentsia on the issue of raising children. Since the beginning of the XX century, Russia has entered a period of revolutionary transformations. The sixth stage in the formation of traditions of family relations is associated with changes in society, which also influenced changes in the family structure. The propaganda of "free love" was intensified and the family was discredited. In defense of family values made MM. Rubinstein. In his book Public or Family Education, published for the first time in 1915, and then in 1918, he strongly urged to consciously cultivate the family spirit of our young people [9]. It is worth noting that in the early years of Soviet power, attitudes toward family and family upbringing were contradictory. Representatives of the Petrograd scientific school actively spoke against extremes in relation to the family and the ideas of directed intervention. E.I. Tiheeva presented an important report "On the tasks of
education in preschool age and the ways of their implementation" at the jubilee conference dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Froebel Society in Russia, held in Petrograd in 1921. She firmly defended the position that for a preschool child, scientific pedagogy "can recognize the only correct maternal and family education." Of all the speakers E.I. Tiheeva turned out to be the most consistent supporter of the idea of the leading role of family education. However, the main task of the conference was to confirm the line of public authorities in relation to family education. This position was clearly reflected in the speech of Z.I. Lilina, the head of the social education sector Narkompros: "The family is anti-cultural, antisocial, it is not with us, but against us ... Therefore, public education, from pre-school institutions to higher education, is the only solution to this issue" [9].
Despite the fact that the ideas about the uselessness of the family were subsequently revised, in practice the family, as an independent agent of raising children, could not fit into the existing system. For centuries, the main educational function of the father was the socialization of children. Under Soviet rule, it was sought to reduce to zero fatherly upbringing by shifting responsibility for education to society. But society was not able to fully perform the educational function and the burden of responsibility for the family and children lay on the shoulders of the mother. The definition of a typical Soviet family was given by V.N. Druzhinin, which he proposed to consider as a variant of the model of an anomalous pagan family with the rudiments of the Orthodox model. In such a family, according to V.N. Druzhinin, man and woman are fighting for domination. Victory goes to one who is stronger - not so much physically as mentally. There is confrontation between generations, the suppression of children and the struggle of children with the power of their parents. The anomaly of such a family is that the man is not responsible for the family as a whole [4]. Since under socialism, family problems were solved by the mother, therefore most of the studies in Soviet family psychology reflect the peculiarities of the mother-child relationship.
The modern stage of the formation of traditions of family relations got all the complexity and inconsistency of the previous stages. Perhaps for this reason, the family has now become very unstable. This is evidenced by the refusal to enter into marriage, the postponement of the time of marriage, the increase in the number of divorces, the rejection of raising children, the refusal to care for elderly relatives, etc.
Conclusions. Thus, a theoretical analysis of the formation of traditions of family education in Russia allows us to understand many of the patterns and identify cause-effect relationships in contemporary problems of the family. It is necessary to recognize that family relations were and remain an ambiguous and problematic sphere of psychology, which requires further reflection and the search for adequate solutions to existing issues.
The expansion of the research topic in family psychology and, in particular, the appeal of modern researchers to the problems of paternity and parent-child relationships, allows us to hope that the best traditions of family relations in Russia will be preserved and the family as a social institution will be strengthened.
References:
1. Antologiya pedagogicheskoy mysli Drevney Rusi i Russkogo gosudarstva XIV-XVII vv. / Sost. Babishin S.D., Mityurov B.N. - M. Pedagogika, 1985. - 368 s.
2. Dolgov V.V. Detstvo v kontekste drevnerusskoy kul'tury XI-XII vv.: otnosheniye k rebenku, sposoby vospitaniya i stadii vzrosleniya // Etnograficheskoye obozreniye, 2006. № 5. S. 72-85.
3. Domostroy // Pamyatniki literatury Drevney Rusi. Seredina XVI veka. M.. 1985.
4. Druzhinin V.N. Psikhologiya sem'i: 3-e izd.-SPb.: Piter, 2005. - 176 s.
5. Zvereva, O. L. Semeynaya pedagogika i domashneye vospitaniye detey rannego i doshkol'nogo vozrasta: uchebnik dlya akademicheskogo bakalavriata / O. L. Zvereva, A. N. Ganicheva. — 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. — M.: Izdatel'stvo YUrayt, 2018. — 177 s.
6. Klyuchevskiy V.O. Russkaya istoriya. - M.: Eksmo, 2008. - 912 s.
7. Kon I. Muzhchina v menyayushchemsya mire. - M.: Vremya, 2009. - 496 s.
8. Kon I.S. Rebenok i obshchestvo Ucheb. posobiye dlya stud. vyssh. ucheb. zavedeniy. — M.: Akademiya, 2003. — 336 s.
9. Litvin L.N. Obshchestvennoye doshkol'noye vospitaniye v sovetskoy Rossii: 1917-1940gg. - 3-e izd., pererabot.i dop. - M.:APKiPPRO, 2009. - 220 s.
10. Mironov B.N. Sotsial'naya istoriya Rossii perioda imperii (XVIII - nachalo XX v.). V 2 t.2-e izd.SPb.: Dmitriy Bulanin, 2000.
11. Radishchev A.N. Izbrannyye filosofskiye i obshchestvenno-politicheskiye proizvedeniya. M.: Politizdat, 1952.
12. KHolodnaya V.G. Ottsovskoye nakazaniye v vospitanii mal'chika-podrostka u vostochnykh slavyan v kontse XIX-nachale Xxvv. // Muzhskoy sbornik. Vyp.2. M.: Labirint, 2004. S. 170-177.
13. YAroshevskiy M.G. Istoriya psikhologii. 2-e pererab. izd. M., "Mysl'", 1976. - 463 s.
Психология
УДК:378.147
кандидат психологических наук, доцент Утюганов Алексей Анатольевич
Новосибирский военный институт им. генерала армии И. К. Яковлева войск национальной гвардии Российской Федерации (г. Новосибирск)
ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ ЦЕННОСТНО-СМЫСЛОВЫХ ОРИЕНТАЦИЙ У КУРСАНТОВ ВОЙСК НАЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ ГВАРДИИ РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ
Аннотация. В статье рассматриваются особенности ценностно-смысловых ориентаций у курсантов войск национальной гвардии. Дается общая характеристика профессионально-важных качеств, формируемых у курсантов военных институтов национальной гвардии. Аргументируется приоритетная значимость формирования профессиональной системы ценностно-смысловых ориентаций личности в процессе подготовки курсантов.
Ключевые слова: ценностно-смысловые ориентации, профессионально-важные качества, военно-профессиональная деятельность, национальная гвардия, военный институт.
Annotation. The article discusses the features of value-semantic orientations of the cadets of the National Guard troops. The general characteristic of the professionally important qualities formed by the cadets of the national guard
