Factors for the formation of the individual in the sociocultural space: the meaning and purpose of life

Юхименко Н.Ф., к. філос. н., доцент, Переяслав-Хмельницький державний педагогічний університет імені Григорія Сковороди

Актуальність дослідження питань особистості у соціокультурному контексті в Україні зумовлена загальноцивілізаційними та національними суперечностями в контексті функціонування та становлення нових цивілізацій. У дослідженні особистість у соціокультурному просторі визначено як таку, що втілює в собі істотні риси активних людей, особисту незалежність, самоусвідомлення моральної й правової відповідальності.

У статті зазначено, що сутність людини не співпадає з її наявним буттям, вона завжди є розвитком, подоланням теперішнього і побудовою майбутнього у відповідності з метою, планами, проектами, активною діяльністю її свідомості. І що саме свідомість - це та важлива сутнісна сила людини, яка не тільки відображає, але й творить світ. Людина може бути активною і у своїй бездіяльності, але тільки творча діяльність може бути працею.

Визначено властивості, що характеризують діяльність - це насамперед завжди об'єктивовані властивості суб'єкта діяльності, перетворюючого оточуючу дійсність відповідно до своїх цілей, потреб та інтересів. Вказано, що питання про якості суб'єкта дії є актуальним для нашого сучасного суспільства: активність, цілеспрямованість, ініціативність, свідомість, організованість висуваються сьогодні на перший план характеристик особистості. Це питання найбільш важливе у галузі наукової творчості.

Становлення особистості визначено як результат соціалізації. Сутністю індивідуальності особистості можна вважати цілісність особистості, що проявляється у певному ставленні до світу.

Людська діяльність здійснюється в двох найбільш загальних формах - практичній та духовній. Їх відмінність полягає в предметі діяльності та її результатах. У процесі практичної діяльності (практики) відбувається перетворення природи і всього предметного, соціального середовища, в якому відбувається життєдіяльність людини.

Духовну діяльність визначено як процес цілеспрямованого, систематизованого відображення дійсності, результатом якої є перетворення сфери свідомості. У сучасних умовах, як правило, це професійна діяльність. У якості її найзагальніших видів виокремлено наукове пізнання, ціннісну свідомість, цілепокладання, прогнозування й програмування.

Як соціалізацію особистості запропоновано розуміти складний процес та результат засвоєння індивідом соціального досвіду і його відтворення.

Ключові слова: людина, індивід, особистість, суспільство, соціалізація, індивідуальність, діяльність, самореалізація.

Modern Ukrainian society is in need of philosophical comprehension of not only its development but also every individual's actions under the conditions of crisis and profound changes concerning Ukrainian society as well as modern civilization in general. Especially since the end of last century has become crucial for seeing society as one global civilization. Right then the important changes in economical and moral spheres of Ukrainian society have begun and now these changes should be analyzed. The essential part in such studies is the role of people in social life since personality has a great influence on the changes in society.

On the one hand, the problems of personality often become the subject of scientific studies conducted by the experts of various branches of science. On the other hand, the problem of understanding a personality as a social and cultural phenomenon, based on the reinterpretation of a personality as an integral «natural and social phenomenon» (according to V. Lartsev) (Lartcev, 2003, p. 4), is of great importance nowadays.

The issues of civilization are crucial for Ukraine in social and cultural context, because a personality of Ukrainian citizen develops under conditions of civilizational as well as national contradictions, during not only the functioning of regional and local civilizations, but also in the context of new civilizations development. The world and national cultures are also progressing and this progress is reflected in a personality and its self-fulfillment in particular society (Skotna, 2005, p. 4).

Undoubtedly, the cultural traditions, objective historical reality and the state of society development, the problems, which need to be solved immediately, determine the direction of living and development both of different social spheres and the society in general. That is why the social and cultural sides of personality have become the problem, which we intend to consider. The process of personality and society interaction, which is caused by globalization, bring special importance to social and cultural sides of personality being, since social and cultural determination of personality formation embodies the correlation between the development of society and a human being. All this leads to the changes in worldview, way of thinking and functioning of society, the stereotypes in the perception of reality and so on.

In Soviet and post-soviet science, the philosophical and psychological perspective of personality were studied by L.S. Vygotsky, E.V Iljenkov, O.M. Leontjev, V.M. Miasishchev and others. The social activity of personality was considered the most important category of psychological and philosophical anthropology. Really, can we doubt that psychological and physical human activity, determined and regulated by chosen goal, is the most important background for personality being and development?

At the same time, other national scientists, such as V.V. Davydov, V.P. Zinchenko, V.A. Petrovsky, S.L. Rubinshtein, developed different perspective in considering a personality. These scholars payed attention and thoroughly analyzed foreign works on the personality nature, so called «humanistic personology» represented by A. Adler, E. Ericson, A. Maslow, G. Allport, K. Rodgers, Z. Freud, E. Fromm and others. The cause is lack of such important components of activity as conscious emotions or feelings in «psychological activity approach».

The first steps in developing of mentioned problem in national human sciences became the works devoted to studying basic human problems, fundamental possibilities, the structure and conditions of their realization. These are the works of I.Y Bekeshina, I.V Boichenko, L.P. Buieva, A.H. Zdravo- myslov, O.H. Myslyvchenko, H.L. Smirnov, V.I. Shynkaruk and others.

While conducting this research, we will understand personality as infinite stream of material, energy and information according to S.I. Podmazin. This definition identifies personality as an entity, which «displays its inner world and gets external expression through interaction with environment». The scientists believes that a personality appears since birth (Podmazin, 2006).

It should be mentioned that the problem of personality was in the focus of philosophical studies from ancient times. Nowadays this problem is of great importance for such branches of science as philosophy, psychology and pedagogics.

In ancient Indian philosophy, a man was considered a part of soul while human life was an endless chain of re-emergence. Early classical philosophers thought a man a part of space, and one of them, namely, Plato took a human soul for a society and distinguished three principles in a soul: intelligent one, affective one and yearning one. Later Aristotle considered a man a political being. In theological philosophy of Blessed Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, the godlike nature of a man was the most important. Just in Renaissance Age, a personality not only was distinguished but also recognized as a treasure, social individual and independent active social subject.

In fact, the notion of «personality» or «personnalite» as in French, in its modern sense defines the category of independence, individuality, true social uniqueness. Since at that time a necessity of a new, deeper and more distinct term contradicting the existing term «a human being» surfaced. It was the Renaissance Age that started grand discourse in understanding the nature and basic features of personality, and it is still in progress.

The main difficulties of such social and philosophical discourse are the mixing and often even interchange of such terms as «personality», «human being», «individual» and «individuality». Frequently the philosophers use psychological or social theories of personality based on contradictory principles of philosophical definition of the phenomena of personality.

A society consists of personalities, which relate to it not just like a part to something whole. «A human being is main subject of social activity, someone who supports it. The being of any system is hierarchically related to the being of its elements. These elements reproduce on their own level as well as a system itself. At the same time, it is inclusion of this element into something whole that changes the way it can reproduce itself - the wholeness severely restricts the level of freedom of its elements. This can also be said about social existence in which the system features are the roles, the duties, the socially important goals and values» (Hrabovska, Yemets, & Mostiaiev, 2006, p. 20-21). That is why such terms as personalization, self-identification and objectivation can be used to explain interrelation between personality and society, personality and nationality.

While speaking about a personality in social and cultural space, we identify it as an essence, which fully contain all basic features of restless, bisocial active people, transcendental urge for freedom, personal independence as creative activity in different social spheres, the significance of personal contribution into the change of social realm, self-realization of moral and legal responsibility (Lartcev, 2003).

V.S. Lartsev distinguishes two basic dimensions in understanding the phenomenon of personality. The first of them - «static and dynamic structure» - consists of a combination of interrelated biological, psychological and social traits, which make this structure whole (static structure); vital and existential factors, which cause time and space related changes in natural and social traits of personality (dynamic structure).

The second dimension - «immanent and transcendental parts» - shows the immanent part of personality phenomenon through mysteriousness of its origin, the complexity of understanding the authentic ways of its existence, the difficult ways of personality awareness of its place and importance in the process of human social and cultural revolution. The transcendental part is viewed as the realization of creative skills in some social sphere, common to all humanity importance of the fact that a personality continues to live in its social and cultural innovations (Lartcev, 2003).

The process, the result of social experience learning by an individual and its reproduction is called the social adjustment of personality. Common activity and communication is the very environment where the principles of thinking, feelings, inwardness and behavior are formed. And in no other way. Neither inward, nor social or psychological development can progress outside society. For all potential, which a child inherited, is developed in direct ratio with the elements of environment that are constantly alongside the child.

Thus wise, let us explain how social adjustment works. V.P. Bekh define social adjustment as «in some way organized mutual transition of objective social relations into special inner human processes, which in reversal enable a man to become a personality in social environment». The scientist also advises to pay attention to the fact that other researchers define the described system as «the social adjustment of personality». However, he considers it a mistake. While he accepts B.V. Ilienkov's idea that «this term is not correct as it assumes the existence of personality before social adjustment», V.P. Bekh explains that in fact it is not the personality which makes social adjustment, but the body of a newborn, who will only become the personality after social adjustment. The personality has not come into existence yet (Bekh, p. 55).

Indeed, the term «social adjustment» has different definitions while various scientists developed the problem at different times. The representatives of humanistic psychology H. Allport, K. Rodgers and others the notion of social adjustment coincides with self-actualization, so-called «self-identity». They identify the social adjustment as self-actualization of personality potential, abilities and creative skills, the main task of which is the ability to cope with the negative influence of environment that are in the way of personal self-development and self-affirmation. man development overcoming consciousness create

T. Parsons and L. Merton, who developed structural and functional trend in American sociology, consider social adjustment to be certain integration of a personality into social and cultural system, which provides the adjustment of personality, the so-called «adaptation». Therefore, the social adjustment in their interpretation is a process of human annexion into the social environment and at the same time the adjustment to cultural, psychological and social factors.

As we can see, both approaches reveal the bilateral character of social adjustment. On the one hand, a personality learns social experience by delving into the system of existing social connections. On the other hand, by performing this natural activity, a personality molds its own identity. In fact, the society transforms in the same way as personality does.

If we consider an identity to be the basic feature of a personality, as the reflection of social subject in the unity of generally, specially and individually unique, then the essence of the identity of a personality lies in the integrality of a personality, that is reflected in certain attitude of a personality towards the world. The latter is reflected in the self-activity. The important features of an identity are the activity and independence of personal inner world, the selection in the attitude towards the natural and social environment, and the conscious realization of specific direction in the development of essential strength, the ability to be an independent subject of its own functioning. As an individual a personality cannot hide behind the standardization and the mechanicalness of any important social actions.

During his life, an individual holds out for a suitable, complete demonstration of acquired possibilities, self-realization of his own individuality. Human life exists in three spheres, which are watching, acting and communicating. And it is acting that became the main explanatory principle in human studies, the important fact in cultural development especially in art (as a main means of connection among people, which makes other human relations with the world dependent on it and considers them as parts).

Although human life does not only imply some activity and activity is not only establishing goals. Activity and communication are very connected. A human has the ability to create and to change the world. Human attitude towards the nature and social reality is expressed in the category of freedom. Still, the notion of freedom does not include just learning the peculiarities of creative and active attitude of a human being towards the world, since the activity of any social subject is inevitably connected to the real trends in social development and characterized by constant subject orientation. This happens due to the fact that the subject is realizing one of his randomly chosen objective possibilities. Only a human as a personality can simultaneously focus on several interests. For this a person needs to be aware of personal interests and their correlation with public interests. However, it should be also noted that the «interaction» of the interests in mind means only manipulation of different realities namely mental realities, the concepts as realized interests. Revealing of the interests and their living connections allow us to understand the sensitivity of a social subject as the process of demonstrating, developing and realization of the interests, while the activity result is the realized interest.

We can wholeheartedly agree with L.P. Bueva's idea, that the activity is a means of the life and development of a human being as well as society; this is an all-encompassing process of a human's changing of both the nature and social reality (including this particular human) in accordance with human needs, purpose and goals (Bueva, p. 87).

The essence of a human being does not coincide with the real life, it is always the development, coping with the present and building of the future in accordance with the purpose, the plans, and the projects, active work of the mind. It is the mind itself that is the important, essential human power, which not only reflects the world but also changes it. A human being can be active even while doing nothing but only creative activity can be called work.

The traits which characterize the activity are, in the first place, objectified traits of the subject of activity who changes the environment according to his goals, needs and interests. The problem of the traits of a subject of activity is urgent nowadays, and such traits as ambition, goal-seeking, leadership role, awareness, self-discipline are considered the most important these days. This problem is of great importance in the sphere of scientific work.

As we know, human activity is carried out in two general ways - practical and mental. The difference between these two ways lies in the subject of activity and its results. In the process of practical activity, the human being changes the nature and all natural and social environment in which people live.

Mental activity is a process of purposeful and classified reflection of reality, and its result is the changes in mind. Nowadays, mental activity is usually professional activity. Its most common types are scientific experience, axiological perception, establishing goals, conceptual foresight and programming.

According to V.P. Bekh, the result of establishing goals is the purpose of human life, which is a planned ideal result of human activity that consists in needs satisfaction. In other words, it is the verbal embodiment of the foresight of future results (Bekh, p. 60). It should be noted, that the process of social adjustment never ends, it takes place during all human life. Social adjustment can be both regulated and spontaneous.

O.Y. Homilko points out, that «the society is connected to human life through human activity and communication. The importance of society consists in the fact that it is the reality which connects people and without which the human individuals cannot exist. The society itself or its part - sociality - is usually interpreted as the sole factor of life which specifies human being in the essence and separates human being as unique form of life - one and only being among other beings». Actually, sociality and culture in themselves are the onto logistic alternatives to all-natural definitions and features of human life (Homilko, p. 191).

Consequently, we can say that the understanding of the category «personality» in ancient philosophy changed according to the changes in its identification with the soul (the part of soul), the part of space and later the connection with society (Plato) and defining it as a political being (Aristotle). Then, after understanding it as godlike essence during Middle Ages, the personality was not only distinguished from the mainstream, but also defined as a value, an independent active social subject.

A human being as a component is included in the entire, which defines the restrictions of the freedom in social life. The processes of personification, self-identification and objectivation are important when we want to show the hierarchy in the interrelation of a personality and society. Since the biological, psychological and social features together with vital and existential factors are closely interrelated in the personality. However, it is difficult to realize the authentic ways of living, the way of understanding your own place in common to all humanity social and cultural evolution.

This difficult process, the result of individual learning of social experience and its reproduction is a social adjustment of a personality. Neither inward, nor social or psychological development can progress outside society.

During his life, an individual holds out for a suitable, complete demonstration of acquired possibilities, self-realization of his own individuality.

The essence of a human being does not coincide with the real life, as a human being is always in development, coping with the present and purposefully building the future. The result of establishing goals is the purpose of human life.

Список використаних джерел

1. Буева Л.П. Человек: деятельность и общение. Москва: Мысль, 1978. 215 с.

2. Гомілко О. Метафізика тілесності: концепт тіла у філософському дискурсі. Київ, 2001. 340 с.

3. Ларцев В.С. Формирование личности: детерминанты, проблемы, перспективы (социально-философский анализ): дис... д-ра филос. Наук: 09.00.03 / Ин-т философии им. Г.С. Сковороды НАН Украины. Киев, 2003. 432 с.

4. Особистість у дискурсі саморозгортання інформаційної цивілізації: монографія / за наук. ред. В.П. Беха; Нац. пед. ун-т ім. М.П. Драгоманова. Запоріжжя: Дніпровський металург, 2012. 785 с.

5. Подмазін С.І. Особистісно орієнтована освіта (соціально-філософський аналіз): дис... д-ра філос. наук: 09.00.03 / Дніпропетровський національний ун-т. Дніпропетровськ, 2006. 418 с.

6. Скотна Н.В. Особа в розколотій цивілізації: світогляд, проблеми освіти і виховання: дис... д-ра філос. наук: 09.00.10 / АПН України; Інститут вищої освіти. Київ, 2005.

7. Філософія українського буття: моногр. / І.М. Грабовська, Т.М. Ємець, О.І. Мостяєв; Київ. нац. ун-т ім. Т. Шевченка. Київ: Українська Видавнича Спілка, 2006. 295 с.

References

1. Bekh, V.P. (Ed.). (2012). Osobystist u dyskursi samorozghortannia informat- siinoi tsyvilizatsii [Personality in the discourse of expression of Ukrainian civilization]. Zaporizhzhia: Dniprovskyi metalurh [in Ukrainian].

2. Bueva, L.P (1978). Chelovek: deiatelnost i obshchenie [A man: activity and communication]. Moskva: Mysl [in Russian].

3. Homilko, O. (2001). Metafizyka tilesnosti: kontsept tila u filosofskomu dyskursi [Metaphysics of physicality: the body concept in philosophical discourse]. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka [in Ukrainian].

4. Hrabovska, I.M., Yemets, T.M., & Mostiaiev, O.I. (2006). Filosofiia ukrainskoho buttia [Ukrainian philosophy of life]. Kyiv: Ukrainska Vydavnycha Spilka [in Ukrainian].

5. Lartcev, VS. (2003). Formirovanie lichnosti: determinanty, problemy, perspektivy (sotcialno-filosofskii analiz) [Formation of the personality: Determinants, problems and perspectives (social and philosophical analysis)] (Doctoral dissertation). In-t filosofii im. G.S. Skovorody NAN Ukrainy. Kiev [in Russian].

6. Podmazin, S.I. (2006). Osobystisno oriientovana osvita (sotsialno-filosofskyi analiz) [Personality-oriented education (social and philosophical analysis)] (Doctoral dissertation). Dnipropetrovskyi natsionalnyi un-t. Dnipropetrovsk [in Ukrainian].

7. Skotna, N.V (2005). Osoba v rozkolotii tsyvilizatsii: svitohliad, problemy osvity i vykhovannia [The personality in the divided civilization: outlook, the problems of education and upbringing] (Doctoral dissertation). APN Ukrainy; Instytut vyshchoi osvity. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на allbest.ru