Symbol and symbolization: similarity and difference of the interpretation in the context of the different psychological approaches

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

The symbol is the important compound of the contemporary conscious at the personal level as well as at the group levels. Symbols have been developing during the long history in the process of the human cultural development. The symbol comes from the greek verb “connect”, “push', “compare” etymologically. Reflecting the general logic of the system of the notions, before the function of the symbol was identified with subject-image compound of the psychosemantic reality, the empirical generalization appeared at its basis. The objects are alienated from them, images become the objects of the admiration (totems), the particular actions - rituals appear, connected with particularities of their use. however, gradually the development of the abstract and generalized meanings (in the result of the transition from the empirical to the theoretical generalization) and their anchoring at the level of the stable notions at the transpersonal level in the different forms of the public conscious happens - the function of the symbol greatly enlarges. The new directions of the world cognition were discovered, now they do not need the image, they exist at the level of the abstraction (alienation and generalization) of qualities from earlier created abstract meaning. The mathematic sciences were so created, the content compound in them are absolutely symbolic systems.

As the humanitarian compound of the public forms of the conscious was growing, the need of symbolization appeared in this field of the human development. The symbolization is the process of the creation of the abstract -general notions - symbols, they are not simply signs - analogs, replacing some object or phenomenon, they concentrate in the generalized form - the significance of their specific qualities as “super important” or “super realistic”. The notions - symbols have the function which is quite different from the other notion, because they aren't simply bearers of some meanings, they play the role of the indicator, they orientate the subject towards the meaning of the context which shouldn't be simply discovered but requires comprehension and definite interpretation. We shouldn't confuse the symbol and sign. The sign only denotes the well-known object, its function is auxiliary. The symbol has its own value, it is an organic element of mental and spiritual life. It is possible to suggest that symbol plays the role of concentration in the relation towards more generalized terms, becomes a kind of the epicenter, which has an impact upon the comprehension of all contents. The notions - symbols include such characteristics as the multipurpose character, deepness, evaluation level of the event as the compound of the public conscious, they differ by their importance. Using them, in oral and written narration, the speaker addresses towards the unique event or fact, underlines the scale of the object. If we speak about the National war, dictature, holocaust and etc., then even without mentioning the concrete historic examples, we can distinguish evaluative compound of this notion. This is a universal process, because every representative of the certain cultural period understands the meaning of this notion not only as the entity of the generalized qualities, but as something which contains grading as positive or negative. The universal notions-symbols, due to their particular role, which was allocated to transpersonal and personal realities, attracted the psychologist's attention in the context of the different approaches and interpretations.

The particular foreshortening for studies and symbols creation, description of their functions in the psychological knowledge were made by psychoanalysis (Z. Freud), they were concerned about the symbol and motivation of the symbol creation in the process of analysis of the individual unconscious. The presence of the primitive attractions - particular type of the sexual energy (libido), requiring immediate release not getting it, conflicting with real situations and moral claims, encourage neurotic symptoms, discomfort states, tension and fear. Blocking Self, they suppress them from this sphere and embody it in the dreams as symbols, single, disjoined or connected between themselves, symbols in the mythological plots, in the fairy -tales, in disjoined hallucinations. «So we don't know the goal of the creativity, how to save symbolically the man from internal over tension, to redirect bring down force into the other, to secure field for his soul!» [6, p. 45].With the help of the symbol it becomes possible to transfer the accent from one field to another, to smooth or avoid conflict, relieve internal human state. «The soul of the mankind was showing itself from the first centuries only in the artistic fiction -otherwise, what would you know about it! Its creative power is apprehended only in the dreams, implemented in the religion, myths and art masterpieces. The psychology is not able -it was well inspired to our age by Freud - to find truly personal in the man, if we consider only conscious and responsible actions; we have to descend deep, where the human being becomes the myth and creates the real picture of his life, in the creative stream of the unconscious»[6, p. 45].

«Summarizing Freud's works, it becomes clear that neurotic symptoms, dreams, wrong actions and etc. can be considered as original signs (texts), replacing some superseded emotions (conflict of the motives) and representing them in the conscious and behavior»[2, p. 83].

From the aforesaid, it might be assumed that Z. Freud considers two moments concerning the dreams:

1. concrete thoughts, forming the hidden contents (context beginning) and which is the internal speech, going on at the level of pre-conscious.

2. Transformation of these thoughts and clear contents into the symbols and the symbolic images (the process of visual and symbolic representation). The transformation of the symbolic images into the plot is their second recycling (second process).

Apart from transformation of the hidden thoughts into the real contents, including representations of the important ideas through auxiliary details (operations connected to pulling off the elements of the hidden contents), Z. Freud describes another version - condensation - the combination of the different elements (hidden ideas) and unique image, where the images are condensed- over determinated, they have a lot of interpretations, they are thought to be the key ones, as all agree that the multiple thinking consequences are related to them. These two operations are - derivatives from all the products of the unconscious. Such a coding of the hidden contents (concrete thoughts) can be shown at absolutely different sign material: «signs - symbols and iconic signs of dreams, signs - indexes and iconic signs of the erroneous and symptomatic actions and etc» [2, p. 83].

There is the «second» theory of the symbols, represented by the model of rebus, according to which the images of dreams are regarded as unequivocal sexual symbols, correspondingly - symbol (sign), out of the context. This theory was borrowed by Z. Freud from Wilhelm Stekel. Besides, the over-determination is reduced to the single mechanic determinism. The impact of this theory was reflected in Z. Freud's works as hypertrophied understanding of the sexuality. he distinguished symbols according to the sex. Some he identified with penis, another group with - vulva or the other part of the female body. he also thought that such a technique is auxiliary, he used it while studying typical symbols. «Freud writes, the mistakes of his predecessors were reduced to the fact that they tried to understand the meaning of the dreams from images of the clear contents, not from their connections (through superficial associations) with the hidden senses»[2, p. 84], it is against the language of the symbols. Furthermore, «the analysis (it means decondensation and reconstruction) shouldn't be directed towards «pictographic», but the word text, since «pictographic» text has the sense as the word «signifier». As the superficial associations serve as a connecting chain between the hidden thoughts and obvious contents, then «sign attitudes», which Freud mentions, are revealed with the help of the associative techniques»[2, p. 85].

If Z. Freud considered the culture as the system of the prohibitions, limiting natural attractions and treated the symbol as the instrument of the interaction, regulation of the conscious and unconscious, but his pupil C. Jung gave to the symbols quite different functions. he thought that the culture is the system of the bans oppressing man, and, exactly, as the system of symbols. he considered the human need of symbolization more persistent than any other. With the help of the symbols man creates the model of the surrounding world, builds plans of the behavior and scenarios of events development, find his way in the historical and social space using universal schemes. So far as symbols mutually complete and clarify each other, all the problems of the spiritual life in К. Jung's interpretation greatly reduced to correlation of the symbols, which can be artistic, political, mythological ones. The symbolic images are, according to Jung, connecting links between cultural heritage and the experience of the particular personality. They are used as matrixes of the cognition. Helping to form and to straighten out the impression, they create the perspective of the personality development, placing into «context niche» triumphs and misfortunes, hopes and fears, joy and pain [7].

The significant expansion of the interpretation of the symbol was made by E. Fromm - by the scientist, trying to find out the mechanism of the link between individual's psyche and social structure of the society, where the main reason of the neurosis and anxiety is the conflict, appearing in the childhood when the baby faces the hostile world, and which progresses if he suffers from the lack of the love and attention.

In a number of the works E. Fromm emphasizes, that the man has unchangeable essence, maintaining the core in all the cultures and under all historical circumstances, but this is not genetic nature, it is always «second nature», actually human world of the culture. But the human conscious is surrounded by a huge field of the unconscious, which is not passive and lies calmly in the depth, and unconsciously comes out and has a decisive impact upon human behavior, to a great extent the behavior depends on it. That's why not only the unconscious sphere, but at the level of the conscious, difficult life situations are rather often treated by people as unreal, as illusions, as myths. With the help of the symbolization, people endure easier the ups and downs of life, «parting» in the world of the daydreams and reverie, retreating from sober thought, because the person suffers from the discomfort and feel tense in disjoined, split world. he intuitively stretches towards wholeness, towards integrated outlook and context creation, involved in the myth constructing - one of the most important factors of the culture development. The myth brightens human existence, gives sense and hope. he also helps to overcome pitiless, critical orientation of the conscious and at all levels able to free himself from the world view contradictions. E. Fromm writes, that the conscious of the contemporary average man is, mainly, characterized by false conscious, consisting of inventions and illusions, the man even doesn't realize - it isn't the true reality. The aim of E. Fromm's theory is «healthy» society which is achieved through the possibilities of the psychoanalysis «social and individual therapy», and E. Fromm addresses to the myth, to treasury of the world emotional experience, theoretical and projective thinking, and creative activity, social and communicative experience.

The myth is represented as the outstanding achievement of this experience, as the precious life material, as the type of the individual human self-construction and a unique way of the existence. The myth is realized through the man's secret desires, his hallucinations and unconscious dramatic art, creatively - transforming and regulating sources. In Fromm's view, myth particularity is not his analytical knowledge, but at the close look the myth isn't chaotic. It points out to the particular logic, allowing to assimilate the huge material of unconscious and irrational accumulated by the mankind.

Taking up symbols, E. Fromm created his own classification:

1. conventional (conventional symbols) symbols - having no internal link with the signified and based upon the agreement, «concluded» between people, the most familiar and used in the everyday language (mathematical, technical symbols, words as the ways of language expression).

2. Accidental symbols - appearing in space and time contiguity (the principle of the condition reflex by I .P. Pavlov), based upon the accidental combination, having individual characteristics and having no law -governed nature. (The perfume is able to evoke certain emotional mood and associations with a particular man).

3. Universal symbols - based upon the internal link between symbol and symbolized. (Excluding accidents, which are regarded similarly by all people).

The last group of the symbols allowed introducing the motivational compound in the interpretation in the mechanism of the symbol realization at the level of the individual consciousness, distinguishing the intensive and extensive meanings of the symbols for the personality. The same interpretation will appear among national psychologists, but considerably later and in the frame of other methodological reference points.

The universal notions-symbols are more completely presented in the frame of the national psychological school, in the cultural and historical theory of L.S. Vigotskii. In the context of this theory they are considered as the cultural symbols. conscious doesn't exist out of the society. In L.S. Vygotskii's opinion, the psyche isn't developed by itself, the man's development can be encouraged by special sign systems of psycho techniques - the work with the language, myths, symbols, the techniques of the interaction (psychological instruments, mediators of the human development, intensive means of the human experience reflection). The unique human ontogenesis consists of the assimilation of the public and historical experience in the process of learning and education - elaborated by the society ways of the transmission of the human experience and cultural notions - symbols are just one of the «instruments» of man's mastering the social reality. Thus, the transition from the more simple (worldly) notions towards more abstract (deep) scientific notions discovers the mechanism, which characterizes the particularities of subject of the research we are interested in.

The introduction by L.V. Vygotskii of the category of meaning, context, symbol which later become independent scientific definitions, their further development into the independent whole scientific definitions, nourishing the layer of psychological knowledge by qualitatively new level of the interpretation of almost all conceptual apparatus, has determined, rather long prehistory (or, more exactly, parallel history, as at the temporary aspect these studies go very often almost simultaneously, however, due to the distance existed between the national psychology of the soviet period and European and American psychology, a number of works written abroad were not analyzed by the national psychologists). These are just correlations of exterior and interior in the knowledge which greatly define the specific features and distinctif interrelations between the subject and the world, showing the importance for the cognizer of these or those objects of the surrounding reality.

The views and interpretations of L.S. Vygotskii of the cultural notions-symbols found themselves in successors of the two authoritative national approaches: symbol psychosemantic individual

? psychosemantics;

? theory of the contrext and context forming.

The psycho semantic approach opens the way towards personality studies through the analysis of its individual conscious. The main bases of the psychosemantics are represented, first of all, by the works of the psychologists of MSU (Е.U. Artemieva, V .F. Petrenko, А.g. Shmelev, V.V. Stolin, А.А. Nistratov, V.I. Pohilko, О.V. Mitina). The methodological gist of the psychosemantic approach is well formulated by А.N. Leontiev: «Sensor modality does not code the reality: they contain them» [1, p. 16].

The psychosemantics start from semantics. Semantics as the part of the semiotics «consider the signs in their relation towards signified (having no symbolic nature) objects » [4, v. 3, p. 514]. «The most important subject of the consideration for the semiotics is the language, that's why it is a part of the linguistics (as the semantics of the natural language) and the logic (as the semantics of the formal languages)» [ib.]. In accordance with g. Fregai, the nature of the language sign is triple. «The sign itself (the unique object), firstly, designates another object (the meaning of the sign), secondly, the signified and the notion dosn't correspond (the symbol of the sign)» [4, v. 3, p. 514]. According to F. de Saussure, the sign is «the entity of the signified and signifier». Anyway, the language natural and formal is regarded as the mean to express the phenomena and objects existing in the reality.

Psychosemantics studies the same questions as the semantics, but if we speak about man's individual conscious, refraction of semantic structures in the subjective sphere of the personality, the three moments of the psychosemantics have the direct or mediated relation to the problem of the symbol and symbolization in the plan which is of interest for us.

? Firstly, it is showed, that the processes of the categorization which are realized in our conscious (in the larger view including functioning of the word meanings, images, communicative and ritual actions -symbols) are determined by the subjective meanings perceived by the man - «world, other people, himself» (B.F. Petrenko). «The subject classifies something, assesses, categorizes, judges about similarities and differences of the objects» (the textbook «Psychosemantics»). The meanings acquiring value in the man's conscious are classification stimulators. «Subjectively more important bases of the categorization have a greater impact upon the variety of the object assessment and corresponding factors - co-ordinate axes of the semantic space - they greatly поляризуют analyzed objects. The space as the “rubber” is spread along the axe of subjectively important factor » [5].

? Secondly, there is a more convincing version of the subjective context genesis, it reflects a kind of the interiorization of the objective meanings, «throwing off » symbolic forms, transition towards “alive” contexts. The genetic consequence of context building looks like «pre-context - traces created, fixed in the modal qualities (the layer of the world perception), contexts-traces inside the semantic layer and personal contexts - composing the world view, elements of the core structures of the subjective experience» [1, p. 30].

? Thirdly, psycho semantics attracts by its theoretical and practical significance of the context classification. After creating «the concept basis of the psychology of the subjective semantics» (E. U. Artemieva), the representatives of this direction classified contexts, creating the semantic layer of the subjective experience, in dependence with their contribution to the sense of the object. «The partial modal sense we call the trace of the interaction with the object, represented in required modality. The unique trace is formed in the semantic layer after the synthesis of the modal senses, let's call it the complete meaning» [Ib.].

Psychosemantic approach towards studying personality is realized through the paradigm of the «subjective» approach towards understanding of the other through the categorization of the symbols. context interpretation of the distinguished structures (symbols) requires to look at the world by the «eyes of the cognizer», to discover his ways of the world comprehension. Reconstructed in the frame of the subjective semantic space of the individual system of the meanings plays the roles of своеобразной ориентировочной основой of this empathetic process, gives him context supports at the stage of accepting or reconstructing the sense of “symbol” for oneself from the surrounding semantic culture.

The theory of the context and context forming starts to differentiate from the other directions in psychology in the monograph by А.N. Leontiev “Activity. conscious. Personality”. Upon integrating the researches in different spheres of the psychological studies, А.N. Leontiev gives the definition of context, pointing out his most significant attributes: «The meaning is the generalization of the reality, which is crystallized, fixed in the чувственном носителе его, as usual in the word or word combination. This is the ideal, spiritual form of the crystallization of the public experience, public practice. The circle of the representations of this society, its science, its language - this is the essential part of the system of the meanings. The meaning belongs first of all to the world of the objective and historical phenomena. But the meanings exist as the fact of the individual conscious. The man doesn't study the world as the Robinson, making the discoveries on the desert island. The man in the course of his life assimilates the experience of the previous generations, and it just happens in the form of meanings assimilation and while the process of their assimilation» [3, p. 186].

Showing that the meaning - «this is that form, where the particular man acquires the public reflected in the human experience» [ib.], А.N. Leontiev underlined that «the individual doesn't have his own language, created by himself meanings, the penetration into the reality phenomena can only happen by assimilation of the exterior “ready” meanings». The meanings have the fixed ways of the reflexion, even including skills, as the generalized mode of action and in the individual conscious «are only more or less full and perfect projections “over individual” meanings, existing in the society [ib.].

The meanings in their existence seem to be ambivalent. «They are produced by the society and have their own history of the language development, of the development of the forms of the public conscious; they reflect the evolution of the humanities and their cognitive means, and also ideological representations of the society - religious, philosophical and political ones. In this objective being they obey to the public and historical laws and together with the internal logic of their development. Their other life - functioning in the process of the activity and conscious of the particular individuals, though only with the help of these processes can exist. In their second life the meanings are individualized and “they acquire subjectivity”, but they do not loose their public and historical nature, their objectivity» [ib., p. 254].

The gist of the matter is that, the meanings, «functioning in the conscious», are independent at the same time from the survived emotions, from the subjective motivation of the people's activity, from the individual relation of the man towards the activity.

However, clarification of the senses doesn't give the possibility to distinguish the ways and mechanisms of the conscious. In this purpose we need to address towards the subject of the conscious, considering him as the bearer of the active subjectivity, but not the passive perceiver of meanings created by the society. The meaning doesn't determine the particularities of the individual's conscious. «Introspectively the meaning is away at the moment of realizing: refracting thoughts, it is not perceived and analyzed. This is a fundamental psychological fact. The meaning can be comprehended, but only in case if the object of the conscious is not the signified object, but the meaning, for instance, while learning a language» [ib.].

Defining the context through the relations, А.N. Leontiev introduces the category of the “personal context”, it doesn't express the situational choice within the semantic field, but the integrated uniqueness of the psyche. «Personal contexts are reflected by motives, generated by the real life relations » [ib.] and «express his own (subject) attitude towards the conscious objective phenomena.

The personal sense is, as a matter of fact, relation of the motive towards the goal, has the objective side and characterizes the unique subjectivity of this individual. «Personal context - is the meaning of something: “pure”, the meaning which is not connected to the object, as the substance away from the object» [ib., p. 244]. These are through the personal contexts, as the stable system of the generalizations, which are behind the words, similar for all the people, start to belong to the concrete person and express individuality. «Functioning in the system of the individual conscious, the meanings aren't realized by themselves, but they are realized through the movements of the personal contexts- for himself - the existence of a certain subject » [ib.]. «Personal sense, thus, links the meanings with the reality of the subject's life in this world with his motives. The personal context creates the bias of the human consciousness» [ib.].

Rendering concrete the question of the personal context and context -symbol (when the notion has the context, “decrystalization” generates the personal sense for cognizer), А.N. Leontiev underlined that there is so-called context distance between them. It can be significant, medium, short, depending upon the degree of correspondence of the personal context of the perceiving subject and symbol -context, which is included in the context of the perceived reality. The short context distance only appears under the condition that the context corresponds to the object world of the communicator, spheres of motives of his activity, his unique being. just under this condition the personal context can stimulate acquisition and recognition of symbolcontext, it will help to the subject to grasp the author's conception while reading a book, watching a spectacle, perception of culture masterpieces.

References

1. Artemieva E.U. The bases of the psychology of the subjective semantics. / Edited by I B. Khanina. М.: Science; Smisl, 1999. - 350 p

2. Humanitarian collection. “Unconscious”. - Novocherkassk. Agency «Sagouna», 1994. 83 р.

3. Leontiev А.N. Activity. conscious. Personality. - М., 1975.

4. New philosophical encyclopedia: in 4 v.// Philosophical institute of RAS, National, Public - scientific fund - М.: Misl, 2000..

5. Petrenko V.F. Psychosemantics of the conscious: textbook. - М.: Publishing house of MSU, 1988. - 208 p.

6. Zweig Stefan. «Zigmund Freud ». Fromm biographic trilogy «Medical treatment and psyche». Publishing house: «Forkis», М., 1990, p. 45.

7. Jung, Carl Gustav C. Introduction into psychoanalysis, ch. 5 - М., 1997.

Размещено на Allbest.ru