CC BY
33
The culture and attitudes
Section 10. Psychology
Abdullayeva Shafahat, Associate Professor, Ph.Dof Philosophy on Psychology, Department of Philosophy and Social Psychology, The Academy of Public Administration under the Prezident of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Baku, Azerbaijan, [email protected]
The culture and attitudes
Abstract: There are deep relations between the human mind and the environment. The surroundings of humans refilled with influences from past generations. Therefore, humans are shaped by the character of the world. The analysis of psychological literature concludes that children become the object of culture from birth. In the process of socialization, a child learns other scenarios from their culture. The state of mind interiorized all of these cultural scenarios. This process impacts a person's perception of the external world. Such influences impact the formation of conscious perception and the emotional system.
Keywords: Attitude, Culture, Intentional World, The Conventional World, Cultural Frame of Perception.
[1; 6]. So, the culture created by humans is the important world for
Introduction
The biological existence of humans coupled with their social existence is a fact accepted by main stream science. The social existence of humans is reflected by living amongst other persons with shared communications. Should an Infant be removed from human care, in some conditions; a child may have biological existence, but their social existence will accrue in the form ofan outcast, one condemned in existence to death. Defined events described in the psychological literature of infants living among animals have proven this hypothesis. Given, the continuation oftheir biological existence, these infants remain defined as abnormal; proper character formations do not take place.
The seprocesses have been studied as per, the process of social experiences of previous generations involving infants. Children from childhood learn images, modes, schemes, samples of behaviors and scenarios from parents. Also, the child learns the elements of culture as per its impact. Children learn the differences between 'good', 'bad', 'can or cannot'. The elements of culture transfer from parents to the child are in essence learned patterns of behavior.
Analysis of the psychological literature [2; 4; 5; 6] show that, the problem was in fox since the beginning of the past century. At-titudesare learned from different aspects and the role of culture in its formation were also examined.
Investigations show that an infant from birth who is surrounded with elder people, as it was mentioned by the psychologists says, the child is affected by culture from birth.
One of the lead postulates of anthropologic psychology is that, there is a connection between people and this information which makes for possible multiple impacts. As it was notified by S. Lurie, "The seared relations between the special existing human surroundings and fundamental categories of his/her mind: The human environment is full with the material and ideal ways of the behaviors, left from the past generation." [1; 7]. When we say intentional world, it is considered the world created by the human and when we say conventional world, it is considered the world that is important for human. S. Lurie writes: "Each culture represents the "intentional" world, so "the created and build world". Then he writes: "The infinity numbers of different intentional world scould not be justified with conventional world (so, social strengthened world of importance)"
humans. The infinite numbers of cultures have social importance.
The source of culture is not a world; it is the human having specific cultural systems and consequently it is the intentional person. There is a specific culture in the basis of the state of mind of the intentional person. The culture generates intentional persons. Apparently, it is the process of having mutual impacts: humans make culture, at the same time, culture forms humans and their internal worlds. S. Lurie writes: "The intentional world is factually and realistically will be existed while the people have the knowledge redirecting their trust, wishes, targets and mental images" [1; 7].
R. Shveder is also approving it: "The intentional events and things will exist only in the intentional worlds. Anything out of our reaction and interest will not exist. The intentional things are active because, we have their images, they do not exist in any "natural" reality out of the human's mind and activities, [5, 88]. The impact of the culture on humans for it to be understood as it impacts the human perception. In the psychological literature, it calls "cultural frame of perception". The anthropologic psychologists give high value to perception and they say that, the objects of the external world passing through perception take their mental meanings. The psychological anthropologists review perception as the process forming the base structure of the culture [1].
As the results of investigations, it was found that, the paradigms formed structure and context of the culture is not perceivable, otherwise, it would not be culture, it would be just the norms accepted by the small groups of people. S. Lurie writes: "It is possible to understand these paradigms as the general culture scenarios perceived and interiorized. Such scenario can identify the character ofpercep-tion and activity" [1, 12]. The learned scenarios are realized in the mutual impact process and become significant for human. As it is defined in the psychological literature, we do not live in real world we live in the world of importance [1; 5].
The world of significances is also related to attitude itself. The culture learned by a person is a thoughtless attitude against the certain actions. In addition, the cultural scenario itself is defining by the components of attitude like, cognitive, emotional, and conative elements. Summarizing the above mentioned, we can see that the
Section 10. Psychology
scenarios are: 1) Realizing in the mutual impact process; 2) Related to the attitudes; 3) Significance; 4) Scenarios itself defining by the impact of attitude.
Indeed, initial public institutional make the basis of experiences which will be used in whole of his/her life. So, considering these facts, S. Lurie assessed the initial public institutional as a phenomenon defining their degree of excitation, character of neurosis, the ways of psychological defenses. In opinion of A. Kardiner, re-institutional is establishing by the folklore, mythology and religious. A. Kardiner gives explanation to all of them as "a projection of main structure of the person."
As it was notified by the author himself, the first level is the thoughtless area and they could be presented only by transferring the thoughtless complexes to real objects. They are transformed little; their changes, the institutes created them to be transformed. The last level is the fully mindful and cognized level. Other levels state in the middle of them [3].
The American psychologists J. Whiting and I. Child approve also above mentioned hypothesis in their investigations. "... Person locates in between two systems: Experience of childhood education, magic, religious trust and practices" [6, 227]. J. Whiting and I. Child using the stimuli and reaction paradigms, they use "black box" notion: "Behavioursof elders is respond to childhood education. Person is the black box which is remained between them, and directly evaluation is impossible" [6, 190]. In my opinion, the black box is the internal world of human, his/her attitude — dispositions and plenty of dispositions. S. Lurie is also justifying that, there are a lot ofblack boxes.
Then, arguing the mutual impacts between the individual behavior and dispositions, R. Le Vine writes: "Such observed aspects of behavior are not the basis of the person, it reflects the person, to tell the truth, and itreflects the dispositions which affect to his/her behavior. Dispositions affect behaviours of the person, as well as cultural norms, but it is from inside. The psychologist, studying the person, does not stay in the level of behavior, rather he looks at his/her unobserved side and in his suppositions, this side is psychologically organized: "We have to recognize that, the disposition is organized, the organization has the functional importance" [4, 90].
R. Shweder notes that: "The principles of intentional world are like, subject and object-human and his/her surrounding is mutually absorbed to each other and they cannot be studied like, one is dependent from other one but the second does not depend on first. Neither this nor other could be defined considering each other specifications" [5, 379]. Concussively, the socio-cultural environment cannot exist without depending on human subjectivity and human mental reality cannot exist without depending on socio-environment. R. Shweder shows that, the socio-cultural environment is the intentional world because, it reality is only
possible when there is an existence of human communities which are impacted by and directed to trusts, wishes, targets and other mental images" [5]. R. Shweder has defined the six types of relations between culture and cultural human. Initially, he divides the relations in two big groups: 1). Positive relations; 2). Negative relations.
He shows that, the positive relation is appearing when the world intentionally is increasing or supporting people intentionally. The negative relation is appearing when world intentionally negatively affects to the intentionally of the state of mind. Then, R. Shweder divides these relations in to the groups like active, reactive and passive. He shows that, active relation appears when he/she makes his/her targets with his/her own choices. Reactive relations appear when the target for a person is defined by other people or the intentional world is created for him/her. The goal of the human in passive relations to the world is to be immortal in intentional world [5]. Thus, R. Shweder has demonstrated six types of relations: positive (active, reactive, passive); negative (active, reactive and passive).
Conclusion
Thus, summarizing above mentioned, we conclude that, culture strongly affects the formation of the state of mind as well as biological and sociological process. The child becomes the object of the culture from the moment ofbirth. Received information is interior-ized by his/her state of mind. This process is highly affects the child's perception, mental and emotional system.
In addition, the investigation demonstrated that, every culture is intentional, and therefore it is a created and build world. The source of the intentional world is the intentional person. At the same time, cultural systems are dependent on the intentional person and dependent on the culturally conditioned state of mind. Humans create the culture. The culture is forming the human. Thus, the culture is the unit of intentional world and intentional person having mutual impacts with each other.
It is clear that, impact of the culture on humans has to be understood as impact to the human perception. The way of forming perception by the impact of culture is by defining the formation of the attitude. Attitudes and perceptions are closely contacted and they have impacts upon each other. Culture learned by human is conditioning; it is thoughtful or thoughtless attitudes within certain actions.
Therefore, we have to note that, information transfer during childhood education takes place in the structure of the mind and emotional systems with behavioral mechanisms of a child and all is strengthened by attitude. The state of mind of all persons is formed by the impacts of bearer culture. Given, an attitude is positively formed; such dispositional optimism supports the individual to obtain their targets.
References:
1. Lurie S. V. Psychological Anthropology: History, status and prospects. Moscow, Alma Mater, 2005, P. 624 p.
2. Shihirov PN Social Studies in the US system.\\Problems of Philosophy, 1971, N5, P. 168-175)
3. Kardiner A. Psychological Frontier of Society, New York: Columbia University Press, 1939.
4. Le Vine R. A. Culture, Behavior and Personality. An Introduction to the Comparative Study of Psychosocial Adaptation. Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company. 1974, P. 3-4.
5. Shweder R. A. Cultural psychology - What is it? NY, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
6. Whiting J. W. M., Child I. L., Children Training and Personality, New York: Wiley, 1953. P. 286 p.
