Ideology of Responsibility or Strategy of Forming Anti-Terrorist Ideology as a Personal Value

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Ideology of Responsibility or Strategy of Forming Anti-Terrorist Ideology as a Personal Value

Brizhak Z. I., Abakumova I. V.

The authors proceed on the assumption that responsibility is an integral personality trait which is shown in conscious, initiative, independent, and socially positive behaviour. Responsibility is important in all spheres of personal and social life as a whole. At the same time the absence of the thoroughly elaborated general theory of responsibility greatly complicates its study. A special part of the study of responsibility concerns its ideological orientation. How should responsibility be formed as a responsibility of ideological counteraction to violence? This is the matter of the article. responsibility personality behavior social

Keywords: responsibility, ideology, sense-value attitudes, sense sphere, intension, orientation of personality, convincing influence.

Responsibility is the most important component of the person's subject position, of the basis of his/her social attitude (readiness of each person to perceive something as a personal value). Responsibility is the integral property of personality which is reveled in conscious, initiative, independent, socially positive behavior. In the humancentered sciences they considerthat in many respects the development of various components of responsibility defines the success of the activity of the subject, security of the achievement of results of activity by own efforts, taking into account possible surprises and difficulties. Responsibility is a quality of many parameters; it should be studied from a position of the system approach. The content of responsibility is revealed proceeding from its structure including motivational, value and sense, emotional, cognitive, dynamic, regulatory and effective components.

Responsibility is important in all spheres of personal and social life as a whole. It is one of primary, fundamental principles of human life and morality. At the same time the absence of the elaborated general theory of responsibility greatly complicates its study. The difficulty and sensitivity of this problem are more caused by its psychological underlying message. People are extremely sensitive to that is their own debt, personal responsibility and fault without which there is no responsibility. Appeals for responsibility are often perceived as threatening owing to unavoidability of punishment that causes discomfort. At the same time responsibility is understood as socially valuable personal quality which should be developed, formed, educated etc., the quality which everyone needs not only for personal growth, but also for a simple elementary survival. One of burning question of the study of responsibility isan insufficient level of phenomenological development of this category considered together with freedom, choice or destiny. This complicates the specification of the concept of responsibility within psychological researches assuming not only purely descriptive, theoretical methods, but also psychological ones - experimental and empirical researches.

There is a problem of the psychological analysis of the inclusiveness of responsibility in a sense reality of personality. “In psychological literature there are a lot of works concerning freedom and responsibility; mainly these works are either journalistic, orskeptical, discrediting them from “the scientific point of view”. These are evidences ofthe powerlessness of science in the face of these phenomena. In our opinion it is possible tounderstand them better disclosing their connection with things traditionally studied in psychology, however avoiding thus simplification” [4]. The responsibility definition as a mechanism of sense regulation may be a starting theoretical position [5]. The sense regulation based on the logic of a free choice, is carried out at the expense of nuclear mechanisms of personality - freedom and responsibility. Mechanisms of freedom and responsibility are ways, forms of existence and self-implementation of personality which have no content, but definethe main lines of the development of the sense sphere of personality. “As a rough approximation responsibility we may defineas the person's consciousness of own ability to be a reason of changes (or counteraction to changes) in the world around and in own life, and also conscious regulation of this ability. Responsibility is a kind of regulation which is inherent in every living thing, however responsibility of the mature personality is an internal regulation mediated by value orientations” [ibid, p. 34].

However, at the present stage of the development of psychological science responsibility as the most important personal characteristic of the modern person, which is arisen and developed under the influence of the social environment,very seldom becomes an object of the theoretical analysis and empirical studying. Much more rarely we face researches directed on formation of responsibility. “The way of formation of responsibility is a transition to the interiorizationof the regulation of activity. The contradiction between spontaneous activity (freedom) and its regulation (responsibility) as a kind of the contradiction between the external and the internal is possible at early stages of development. The contradiction between freedom and responsibility in their developed mature forms is impossible.On the contrary, their integration connected with person's finding value guidelines signifies the person's transition to a new level of relations with the world - the level of self-determination” [ibid, p. 36].

In researches V. G. Sakharova [11] states the responsibility problem as a factor of personality. The author emphasizes that the person's internal readiness to answeris a sensecharge of the category of responsibility. It makes it possible to consider it as an attitude, a disposition, the person's relation to responsibility. In the structure of personality internality having an internal type of attribution in its basis is the main factor relevant to responsibility.

The internal type of attribution correlates with the recognition of the authorship of own being and the internal locus of control which is a personal factor relevant to responsibility. The internal type of attribution makes a basis of a responsible disposition of personality, readiness (attitude) to answer, convictionin the ability to control events of own life, person's choice, activity, act or its refusal [11].

The main correlates of responsibility are revealed through various properties of personality, including traits. In psychological researches they note existence of positive correlations of responsibility with a number of socially valuable qualities of personality: independence, self-sufficiency, self-realization [7, p. 92-104], altruism, social maturity [10], reliability, and tranquility. They connect responsibility with great reliability, steadiness, and sociability. They considerthat victim psychology, sensitivity, cynicism and hostility are not peculiar to responsible people; they are independent and more self-confident [6, p. 37-39].

The responsibility nature “may be understood only on the basis of the system approach, i.e. consideration of the mental in the complex of external and internal relations in which it exists as an integral system” [9, p. 88].

V. P. Pryadein considers responsibility as a system quality of personality which assumes the analysis of functional unity of its motivational, emotional, cognitive, dynamic, regulatory and productive components. The author also defines responsibility as a mechanism of the person's activity organization, which defines the success of his/ her activity [8].

A responsible action assumes a subjective choice. Thus on one end of the continuum problems are not recognized and there is no desire to change them, and on the other end there is an increasing feeling of personal responsibility for their solution.

V. P. Pryadeinrefers the following components to constituents of the responsible action:

intension;

freedom and social importance of the fulfilled;

theunderstanding of a possible punishment in case of non-fulfilment of an independentdecision;

theincompleteness of the action (the absence of a result is the absence of the realized responsibility).

Thus, intension is a characteristic feature of the responsible action which includes the subject's orientation and intentions. Intension assumes internal determination (in contrast to constraint or manipulation);it reflects moral imperatives, motives and purposes of action of the subject.

On the basis of the analysis of a wide range of researches we may define responsibility as follows: responsibility is the integrated personality trait, which is shown in conscious, initiative, independent, socially positive behavior. In many respects the development of various components of responsibility defines the success of the subject's activity, achievement of resultsby own efforts, taking into account possible surprises and difficulties.

Despite extensive theoretical researches of responsibility, in modern psychology of our country there is a certain deficiency of technologies of the directed influence on the development of responsibility inthe period of early youth. Pedagogical efforts are insufficiently directed on formation of this major personal construct. It leads to regression of attitudestowards professional and social success when the person enters into adult life; this projects theinsufficient level of the development of subject qualities of personalityamong graduates of schools, such as responsibility. It is very often reflexed by society. The most developed are technologies of formation of responsibility, connected with school age: formation of responsibility among preschoolers and junior schoolchildren (E. N. Dankova, T. F. Ivanova), formation of responsibility as an attribute of the schoolchild's political culture (I. A. Tulkova), formation of conscientious fulfilmentof educational actions (M. V. Matukhina, S. G. Yarikova), formations of volitional qualities of pupils (L. V. Layzane), didactic bases of formation of responsibility among senior pupils (S. S. Sklyar). The retrospective analysis of development of the domestic and foreign pedagogical theory and practice shows that in search of ways of overcoming of serious gaps in school education many alternate solutions, progressive ideas (cooperation, partnership in management, social integration, self-determination, self-discipline, freedom, independence, viability etc.) were offered. However owing to one-sided or extreme approaches, insufficient scientific validity, incorrect treatment of such fundamental concepts as the essence of the person and the process of his/her formation, these projects could not remove the stagnation of education in the field of the creation of the world outlook.

In crisis, transition periods in social life there are sharp contradictions between the process of the person's self-development and the system of traditional education focused on uniform standards of its formation. It is caused by various opportunities of subjects of society in realization of educational tasks and the lack of mechanisms of their use, the necessity of reproduction of whole variety of cultural values of society and the educational system politicization, the need for development of the person's creative abilities and the decrease in the general culture, the educational level in society, existence of intellectual potentialities of youth and their not demand by society, and the dynamics of the development of society and conservatism of the content, traditional forms and methods of education.

Pedagogical interpretation of the category of responsibility makes it a key concept of the theory of education and development of personality in modern social conditions. The formation of responsibility among learners is specific. Thus the content which reflects the concept of responsibility acquired by pupils or studentsdevelops gradually. From the responsibility for self, class, group a schoolchild or a student moves to the responsibility for society, era, and history. The development of the learner's understanding of responsibility as a special type of attitudes towards self, people, activity etc. is filled, enriched with the adoption of the meaning of the concept of responsibility as a category, as the generalized concept connected with other categories. This category has functions of world outlook since it orientates the person in the world of many different values.

The essence of the pedagogical problem of formation of responsibility consists in that pupils or students should not only realize theimportance of responsibility, but were able to be responsible at the level of personal sense. Young generation should realizethat each society has the system of responsible dependence relevant to its ideological and economic relations, that relations of responsible dependence are defined by a unity of the common (state) and personal interests. The criterion of compliance of a situation with its purpose - formation of responsibility - is the pupil's or the student's choice in decision-making at a sense-valuelevel when it is a question of the relation to ideology which can threaten both to the state as a whole and each person in particular, i.e. the ideology of terrorism.

If concerning the development of responsibility among school students there is a certain positive experience (they are cited above), we should state that in modern psychology and pedagogy of our country there are no works focused on research of technologies which should become real tools offormation of responsibility as a component of anti-terrorist beliefsamong student's youth studies in the modern institute of higher education.

As a positive example of the model of formation of responsibility we may give the didactic model of formation of responsibility among senior pupils and students (I. V. Abakumova, P. N. Ermakov, S. S. Sklyar, 2010), approved in a number of schools of Rostov-on-Don and SFedU. This model includes three consecutive modules:

? informative and searching (formation of orientation bases of responsible behavior). At the stage of realization of this module responsibility is formed according to a trajectory of course and functional contribution to achievement of a desired result depending on the degree of sense saturation of the educational context. If the educational process is as a factor of the initiation of sense-creation, the learner starts to feel the necessity to start cognitive activity, the “directed intensity” which initiates his/her educational orientation;

? evaluative and orientational. It is the module of the senior pupil's or the student's independent choice of certain forms of behavior concerning realization of educational activity at the level of sense-value acceptance with elements of responsible action;

? prognostic and correcting; it is the module of formation of sense-value attitudeas an evaluative and emotional trace of the sense revealed and decrystallizedearlier, establishing connection between previous and subsequent moments of sense formation in educational process.

Mutually complementary modules enable the teacher to carry out convincing influence and influence the formation of valueattitudesof senior pupils and students, including formation of anti-terrorist attitudes.

References

1. Abakumova I. V., Ermakov P. N. Tekhnologii napravlennogo vozdeistviia po profilaktike ideologii ekstremizma I terrorizma [Directed influence technologies of prevention of the ideology of extremism and terrorism]. Sbornik materialov 6-i mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii po problemam bezopasnosti I protivodeistviia terrorizmu [Proceedings of the 6^th International Scientific Conference on Problems of Safety and Counteraction to Terrorism]. (November, 11-13, 2010, Moscow State University, Moscow). Moscow, Moscow State University Publ., pp. 181-194.

2. Abakumova I. V., Kagermazova L. Ts. Smysloobrazovanie kak factor iniciacii cennostno-smyslovyh ustanovok v processe formirovanija antijekstremistskoj ideologii [Sense-creation as a factor of initiation of sense-value attitudes in the process of forming anti-extremist ideology]. Psihologija v vuze [Psychology in the Institute of Higher Education], 2011, No. 5, pp. 10-23.

3. Abakumova I. V., Fomenko V. T. Tsennostno-smyslovye ustanovki kak component formirovaniia antiterroristicheskogo myshleniia [Sense-value attitudes as a component of formig anti-terrorist thinking]. Rossiiskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal [Russian Psychological Journal], 2010, Vol. 7, No. 5-6, pp. 127-133.

4. Leontiev D. A. Ocherk psikhologii lichnosti [A sketch of personality psychology]. Moscow. 1997. 64 p.

5. Leontyev D. A., Kalashnikov M. O., Kalashnikova O. E. Faktornaia struktura testa smyslozhiznennykh orientatsii [The factorial structure of the sense-of-life orientations test]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 1993, Vol. 14, No. 1.

6. Muzdybayev K. Egoizm lichnosti [The person's egoism]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 2000, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 37-39.

7. Osnitsky A. K., Chuikova T. S. Samoaktualizatsiia aktivnosti sub”ekta v situatsii poteri raboty [Self-actualization of the subject's activity in loss of job situation]. Voprosy Psychologii [Approaches to Psychology], 1999, No. 1, pp. 92-104.

8. Pozdnyakov V. P. Psikhologicheskie otnosheniia I delovaia aktivnost' rossiiskikh predprinimatelei [Psychological relations and business activity of Russian businessmen], Moscow, Psychology Institute of the Russian Academy of Science Publ., 2001.

9. Pryadein V. P. Issledovanie otvetstvennosti kak sistemnogo kachestva lichnosti. Diss. dokt.

psikh. nauk [The study of responsibility as a system quality of personality. Thesis for a Doctor's degree in Psychology]. Moscow, ProSoft-M Publ., 2003.

10. Rean A. A., Kolominsky Ya. L. Sotsial'naia pedagogicheskaia psikhologiia [Social pedagogical psychology]. St. Petersburg, Piter Publ., 2000. 416 p.

11. Sakharova V. G. Otvetstvennost' kak lichnostnyi factor I vozmozhnosti ee diagnostiki [Responsibility as a personal factor and possibilities of its diagnostics]. Khabarovsk, 2003.

12. Sklyar S. S. Didakticheskie osnovy formirovaniya otvetstvennosti u starsheklassnikov. Diss. cand. ped. nauk [Didactic foundations of forming responsibility among senior pupils. Thesis for Candidate's degree in Pedagogics]. Rostov-on-Don, 2010. 21 p.

13. Watkins C., Hill V. On Consultation and Beginner Educational Psychologists. Educational Psychology in Practice, Vol. 16, No 1, 2000. pp. 49-51.

14. Webster D. The Appraisal of Educational Psychologists: a very private affair. Educational Psychology in Practice, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2001. pp. 110-120.

Размещено на Allbest.ru