A person, being a conscious subject, is aware not only of his environment, but also of himself in the process of relationships with others, in particular with people. Highest form manifestations of a person’s consciousness are her moral consciousness, which guides her in her personal and social activities. However, in addition to consciousness, we are also driven by unconscious impulses; along with the concept of conscious, there is also the opposite concept - unconscious.

The unconscious and its role in human life and society in the interpretation of S. Freud. The structure of the soul according to Freud.
The unconscious in the interpretation of K. Jung.
Conclusion
Bibliography

The work contains 1 file

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

FEDERAL AGENCY FOR EDUCATION

State educational institution of higher professional education

RUSSIAN STATE TRADE AND ECONOMIC CENTER

UNIVERSITY

KEMEROVSK INSTITUTE (BRANCH)

Department of Philosophy and Sociology

TEST

In the discipline "Philosophy"

Topic No. 14

Completed:

Checked:

Kemerovo 2010

Plan:

1. The unconscious and its role in human life and society in the interpretation of S. Freud. The structure of the soul according to Freud.
2. The unconscious in the interpretation of K. Jung.
3. Conclusion
4. Bibliography

1. The unconscious and its role in human life and society in the interpretation of S. Freud. The structure of the soul according to Freud.

The unconscious plays an important role in human life. A person’s habits, his skills and abilities have an unconscious basis.

A person, being a conscious subject, is aware not only of his environment, but also of himself in the process of relationships with others, in particular with people. The highest form of manifestation of a person’s consciousness is his moral consciousness, which guides him in his personal and social activities. However, in addition to consciousness, we are also driven by unconscious impulses; along with the concept of conscious, there is also the opposite concept - unconscious.

As an adjective, the term "unconscious" refers to mental content not currently available to conscious awareness, as seen in the examples of erroneous actions, dreams, incoherent thoughts and inferences. The psyche is always active, it performs many functions both during wakefulness and during sleep, but only a small part of mental activity at any given moment is conscious.

As a noun, the term “unconscious” means one of the dynamic systems described by S. Freud, the founder of the doctrine of the unconscious.

In a broad sense, the unconscious is a set of mental processes, operations and states that are not represented in the consciousness of the subject, processes over which there is no subjective control. Everything that does not become the subject of conscious actions for the individual is considered unconscious.

The unconscious forms lowest level psyche. The unconscious is a set of mental processes, acts and states caused by influences, the influence of which a person is not aware of . Being mental (since the concept of the psyche is broader than the concept of “consciousness”, “conscious”), the unconscious is a form of reflection of reality in which the completeness of orientation in time and place of action is lost, and speech regulation of behavior is disrupted. In the unconscious, unlike consciousness, purposeful control over the actions performed is impossible, and evaluation of their results is also impossible.

To understand the content of the unconscious, it is necessary to become familiar with Sigmund Freud's theory of drives. (Freud, Sigmund ( 1856 - 1939) - Viennese professor of psychiatry, famous scientist, author of a new psychological doctrine of the unconscious (psychoanalysis). Among psychologists of the 20th century, Dr. Sigmund Freud holds a special place. Freud's psychological and sociological views had a significant influence on art, sociology, ethnography, psychology and psychiatry in the first half of the twentieth century. Freud first spoke about psychoanalysis in 1896, and in 1897 he began to conduct systematic self-observations, which he recorded in diaries until the end of his life.)Attraction, according to Freud, does not mean a special movement, but an internal self-impression, in which it is impossible to escape from oneself, and insofar as this self-impression is effective, a state of heaviness and burden is inevitably created on our inner world. 1

Mental activity is set in motion by external and internal stimuli of the body. Internal irritations have a somatic (bodily) source, i.e. are born in the body. And so Freud calls the mental representations of these internal somatic stimuli drives. Freud divides all drives according to their purpose and according to their somatic source into two groups:

1. sexual desires, the purpose of which is procreation;
2. personal drives, or drives of the “I”, their goal is the self-preservation of the individual.

Sexual attraction, or, as Freud calls it, libido, is inherent in a child from the very beginning of his life; it is born along with his body and leads a continuous, only sometimes weakening, but never completely extinguishing life in the body and psyche.

The content of the unconscious can be expressed in the following summary formula: the world of the unconscious includes everything that an organism could do if it were left to the pure principle of pleasure, if it were not bound by the principle of reality and culture. This includes everything that he openly desired and vividly imagined in the early infantile period of life, when the pressure of reality and culture was still weak and when a person was freer to express his original, organic self-sufficiency.

But a little later, instead of the previous division of drives into sexual and “I” drives, a new division appeared:

1) sexual attraction, or eros;

2) death drive.

The second group - the Death instincts - underlies all manifestations of aggressiveness, cruelty, murder and suicide. True, there is an opinion that Freud created a theory about these instincts under the influence of the death of his daughter and fear for his two sons, who were at the front at that time. This is probably why this is the most and least considered issue in modern psychology.

The drive of the “I” and, above all, the instinct of self-preservation were transferred to sexual drives, the concepts of which were thus enormously expanded, covering both members of the former division. The instinct of self-preservation includes the following sub-instincts: nutrition, growth, breathing, movement, that is, those necessary vital functions that make any organism alive. Initially, these factors were very important, but due to the development of the human mind (I), these factors, as vitally important, lost their former importance. This happened because man developed adaptations for obtaining food; he began to use food not only to satisfy hunger, but also to satisfy the greed that is unique to man. Over time, food began to come to him more and more easily, and he began to spend less and less time on its production. Man began to build homes and other devices for himself and secured his life as much as possible. Thus, the instinct of self-preservation lost its significance, and the instinct of reproduction, or, as Freud calls it, libido, came first.

By eros, Freud understands the attraction to organic life, to its preservation and development, at any cost - whether in the form of procreation or the preservation of the individual. The task of the death drive is to return all living organisms to the lifeless state of inorganic, dead matter, to strive away from the anxiety of life and eros. 2

It is also characterized by a dynamic understanding of the unconscious as repressed. The repressed, consisting mainly of sexual desires, is hostile to the conscious “I”. In his book “The Ego and the Id,” Freud suggests calling this entire area of ​​the psyche that does not coincide with the “I” the “Id.” 3 “It” is a deep layer of unconscious drives, the psychic “self,” the basis of an active individual, which is guided only by the “pleasure principle,” regardless of social reality, and sometimes in spite of it.

“It” is that inner dark element of lusts and drives that a person sometimes feels so acutely and which opposes his reasonable arguments and good will.

“I” (Ego) is the sphere of consciousness, an intermediary between “It” and the external world, including natural and social institutions, measuring the activity of “It” with the “principle of reality”, expediency and external necessity. “It” is passions, “I” is reason and prudence. In “It” the principle of pleasure reigns inseparably; “I” is the bearer of the principle of reality. Finally, “It” is unconscious. 4

Until now, speaking about the unconscious, Freud dealt only with the “Id”: after all, the repressed drives belonged to it. Therefore, everything unconscious was represented as something lower, dark, immoral. Yet the highest, the moral, the rational coincided with consciousness. This view is incorrect. The unconscious is not only “It”. And in the “I”, and moreover in its highest sphere, there is a region of the unconscious. The process of repression emanating from the “I” is unconscious; the work of repression carried out in the interests of the “I” is unconscious. Thus, a significant area of ​​the “I” also turns out to be unconscious. Freud focuses his attention on this area. It turns out to be much wider, deeper and more significant than it seemed at first.

Freud calls the highest unconscious area in the “I” the “Ideal - I”. 5 “Ideal - I” (Super - Ego) - intrapersonal conscience, a kind of censorship, a critical authority that arises as a mediator between “It” and “I” due to the intractability of the conflict between them, the inability of the “I” to curb unconscious impulses and subjugate their requirements of the “reality principle”.

“The ideal – I” is, first of all, the censor whose orders are carried out by repression. Then he finds himself in a whole series of other, very important phenomena of personal and cultural life. It manifests itself in an unconscious feeling of guilt that weighs on the soul of some people. Consciousness does not recognize this guilt, it struggles with the feeling of guilt, but cannot overcome it. Further, the manifestations of the “Ideal - Self” include the so-called “sudden awakening of conscience”, cases of a person displaying extraordinary severity towards himself, self-contempt, melancholy, etc. In all these phenomena, the conscious “I” is forced to obey the force acting from the depths unconscious, but at the same time moral.

Trying to penetrate the mechanisms of the human psyche, Freud proceeds from the fact that its deep, natural layer (“It”) functions according to an arbitrarily chosen program of obtaining the greatest pleasure. But since, in satisfying his passions, the individual encounters an external reality that opposes the “It,” the “I” stands out in him, striving to curb unconscious drives and channel them into socially approved behavior. “It” gradually but powerfully dictates its terms to the “I”.

As an obedient servant of unconscious drives, the “I” tries to maintain its good agreement with the “It” and the outside world. He does not always succeed in this, so a new instance of “Ideal - Self” is formed in him, which reigns over the “I” as conscience or an unconscious feeling of guilt. “The ideal - I” is, as it were, the highest being in man, reflecting the commandments, social prohibitions, the power of parents and authorities. According to its position and functions in the human psyche, the “Ideal - I” is called upon to carry out the sublimation of unconscious drives and in this sense, as it were, stands in solidarity with the “I”. But in its content, “Ideal - I” is closer to “It” and even opposes “I”, like an attorney inner world“It”, which can lead to a conflict situation leading to disturbances in the human psyche. Thus, the Freudian “I” appears in the form of a “miserable creature”, which, like a locator, is forced to turn first in one direction or the other in order to find itself in friendly agreement with both the “It” and the “Ideal - Ego.” .

Although Freud recognized the “heredity” and “naturalness” of the unconscious, it is hardly correct to say that he absolutizes the power and power of the unconscious and proceeds entirely from the unbridled desires of man. The task of psychoanalysis, as Freud formulated it, is to transfer the unconscious material of the human psyche into the realm of consciousness and subordinate it to its goals. In this sense, Freud was an optimist, since he believed in the ability of awareness of the unconscious, which was most clearly expressed by him in the formula: “Where there was “It”, there should be “I”.” All his analytical work was aimed at ensuring that, as the nature of the unconscious was revealed, a person could master his passions and consciously manage them in real life.

1. The problem of man, personality is one of the fundamental interdisciplinary problems. Since ancient times, it has occupied the minds of representatives of various sciences. A huge amount of theoretical and empirical material has been accumulated, but even today this problem remains the most complex and most unknown. It’s not for nothing that it is said that a person contains the whole world within himself.

Each person is connected with thousands of threads, visible and invisible. external environment, with a society outside of which he cannot form as a person. This is exactly what sociology considers - the interaction between the individual and society, and the “society-person” relationship is a basic sociological relationship.

Let us turn to the concept of “personality”.

Personality, individual, man- these close, but not identical concepts are the object of various sciences: biology and philosophy, anthropology and sociology, psychology and pedagogy.

Man is considered as a species representing the highest stage of the evolution of life on Earth, as a complex system, in which the biological and social are combined, i.e. as a biosocial being. Each individual, specific person is an individual, he is unique; hence, when they talk about individuality, they emphasize precisely this originality, uniqueness.

The uniqueness of the sociological approach to man is characterized by the fact that he is studied primarily as a social being, a representative of a social community, a bearer of its characteristic social qualities. When studying the processes of interaction between humans and social environment personality is considered not only as an object of external influences, but mainly as a social subject, an active participant public life, having his own needs, interests, aspirations, as well as abilities and capabilities to exert his own influence on the social environment.

As you can see, sociologists are interested in the social aspects of human life, the patterns of his communication and interaction with other people, groups and society as a whole. However, the interests of sociologists are not limited only to the social properties of humans. In their research, they also take into account the influence of biological, psychological and other properties.

What content is included in the concept of “personality”? A number of questions immediately arise: is each individual a person, what are the criteria that give grounds to consider an individual a person, are they related to age, consciousness, moral qualities, etc. The most common definitions of personality, as a rule, include the presence of stable qualities and properties in the individual, who is seen as a responsible and conscious subject.

But this again raises questions: “Is an irresponsible or insufficiently conscious subject a person?”, “Can a two-year-old child be considered a person?”

An individual is a person when he, in interaction with society through specific social communities, groups, institutions, realizes social significant properties, social connections. Thus, the broadest “working” definition of personality can be formulated as follows: personality is an individual included in social connections and relationships.

This definition is open and flexible; it includes the measure of assimilation of social experience, the depth of social connections and relationships. A child raised in human society is already included in social connections and relationships that expand and deepen every day. At the same time, it is known that a human child raised in a pack of animals never becomes a person. Or, for example, in the case of a severe mental illness, a rupture occurs, the disintegration of social ties occurs, and the individual loses his personality qualities.

Undoubtedly recognizing everyone’s right to be an individual, at the same time they talk about an outstanding, bright personality or an ordinary and mediocre one, moral or immoral, etc.

Sociological analysis of personality involves defining it structures. There are many approaches to consider it.

Known concept 3. Freud, who identified three elements in the personality structure It (Id), I (Ego), Super-I (Super-Ego).

It - this is our subconscious, the invisible part of the iceberg, where unconscious instincts dominate. According to Freud, two needs are fundamental: libidinal and aggressive.

I - it is consciousness connected with the unconscious, which breaks into it from time to time. The ego seeks to realize the unconscious in a form acceptable to society.

Super-ego - a moral “censor”, including a set of moral norms and principles, an internal controller.

Therefore our consciousness remains in constant conflict between the unconscious instincts penetrating into him, on the one hand, and the moral prohibitions dictated Super-ego - with another. The mechanism for resolving these conflicts is sublimation (repression) It.

Freud's ideas have long been considered anti-scientific in our country. Of course, one cannot agree with him on everything; in particular, he exaggerates the role of the sexual instinct. At the same time, Freud's indisputable merit lies in the fact that he substantiated the idea of ​​a multifaceted personality structure, human behavior, where the biological and social are combined, where there is so much that is unknown and, probably, completely unknowable.

F. M. Dostoevsky expressed the idea of ​​​​the enormous depth and complexity of the human personality through the lips of his hero: “A broad man.” In essence, A. Blok wrote about the same thing.

There is too much in each of us

Unknown playing forces...

Oh, melancholy! In a thousand years

We can't measure souls

We will hear the flight of all the planets,

Thunderclaps in silence...

In the meantime, we live in the unknown

And we don’t know our strengths,

And, like children playing with fire,

We burn ourselves and others...

So, personality is the most complex object, since it, being, as it were, on the verge of two huge worlds- biological and social, absorbs all their diversity and multidimensionality. Society as social system, social groups and institutions do not have this degree of complexity, because they are purely social formations.

The proposed modern domestic authors personality structure, which includes three components: memory, culture And activity. Memory includes knowledge and operational information; culture - social norms and values; activity - the practical implementation of the needs, interests, desires of the individual.

The structure of the personality and all its levels are reflected in the structure of the personality. Let us pay special attention to the relationship between modern and traditional culture in the personality structure. In extreme crisis situations that directly affect the “highest” cultural layer (modern culture), the traditional layer, dating back to ancient times, can become sharply activated. This is observed in Russian society, when, in the conditions of the loosening and sharp breakdown of ideological and moral norms and values ​​of the Soviet period, there is not just a revival, but a rapid growth of interest not only in religion, but also in magic, superstitions, astrology, etc.

“Layer-by-layer” removal of layers of culture occurs in some mental illnesses.

Finally, when analyzing the structure of personality, one cannot ignore the question of the relationship between the individual and social principles. In this regard, personality is a “living contradiction” (N. Berdyaev). On the one hand, each personality is unique and inimitable, it is irreplaceable and priceless. As an individual, a person strives for freedom, self-realization, to defend his “I”, his “self”; individualism is immanently inherent in him. On the other hand, as a social being, personality organically includes collectivism, or universalism.

This provision has methodological significance. The debate about whether every person is an individualist or a collectivist by nature has not subsided for a long time. There are plenty of defenders of both the first and second positions. And these are not just theoretical discussions. These positions have direct access to the practice of education. For many years we have persistently cultivated collectivism as the most important quality of personality, anathematizing individualism; on the other side of the ocean, the emphasis is on individualism. What is the result? Collectivism taken to the extreme leads to leveling of personality, to leveling, but the other extreme is no better.

Obviously, the solution is to support the optimal balance of properties inherent in the personality. Development and flourishing of individuality, personal freedom, but not at the expense of others, not to the detriment of society.

2. The attitudes, needs, and interests of an individual are determined both by the conditions of the environment and by its individuality, peculiarities of worldview, and spiritual world. They are realized in social activities, where each person performs certain social functions: for a student and schoolchild this is study, for a soldier - service, for a professor - teaching, etc.

The functions of the individual, together with the necessary rights and responsibilities for their implementation, determine it social status. Each person, being included in many social connections, performs various functions and, accordingly, has several statuses. A person acquires one status by birth, it is called prescribed(status of a nobleman, Kiev resident, Dane, etc.), others - are purchased or are achieved. They're called achieved(status of a company manager, status of a teacher, status of a world swimming champion, etc.). The hierarchy of statuses accepted in society is the basis of social stratification. Each status is associated with certain expected behavior when performing the corresponding functions. In this case we are talking about social role of the individual.

In world sociological thought since antiquity, the similarity of human life with theater has been noted, since each member of society throughout his life has to perform different social roles every day. The great expert on life and theater W. Shakespeare wrote:

The whole world is a theater.

There are women, men - all actors.

They have their own exits and exits.

And everyone plays more than one role.

Thus, a social role is a set of functions, a more or less clearly defined pattern of behavior that is expected of a person occupying a certain status in society. So, a family man plays the roles of son, husband, father. At work, he can simultaneously be a process engineer, a production site foreman, a trade union member, etc.

Of course, not all social roles are equivalent for society and are equivalent for the individual. The main ones should be highlighted family, household, professional And socio-political roles. Thanks to their timely mastery and successful implementation by members of society, it is possible normal functioning social organism.

Each person has to fulfill and many situational roles. By entering the bus, we become passengers and are obliged to follow the rules of behavior in public transport. Having finished the trip, we turn into pedestrians and follow the traffic rules. We behave differently in the reading room and in the store because the role of the buyer and the role of the reader are different. Deviations from role requirements and violations of rules of behavior are fraught with unpleasant consequences for a person.

With all the differences social roles have something in common - structure, which has four components: description, prescription, assessment And sanction. Description social role includes the representation of a pattern, the type of behavior that is required of a person in a given social role. These samples, patterns of behavior can be formalized in the form job descriptions, moral codes, military regulations and other documents, or may exist in the form of ideas and stereotypes that have developed in the public consciousness about a “good mother”, “real father”, “true friend”, etc.

Prescription means the requirement to behave in accordance with the role. Depending on this it is given grade fulfillment or non-fulfillment of the role and are accepted sanctions, i.e. measures of reward and punishment. The range of social sanctions is very wide. The positive, incentive spectrum includes measures such as approval, gratitude, monetary rewards and promotions, state awards and international awards. Negative sanctions are also varied: reproach from a colleague, criticism from a manager, fine, removal from office, imprisonment, death penalty, etc.

A social role is not a rigid model of behavior, and people perceive and perform their roles differently. However, society is interested in people timely mastering, skillfully performing and enriching social roles in accordance with the requirements of life. First of all, this applies to main roles, worker, family man, citizen... In this case, the interests of society coincide with the interests of the individual. After all, social roles are forms of manifestation and development of personality, and their successful implementation is the key to human happiness. It is not difficult to notice that truly happy people have a good family, successfully cope with their professional responsibilities, and take a conscious part in the life of society and government affairs. As for friendly companies, leisure activities and hobbies, they enrich life, but are not able to compensate for failures in fulfilling basic social roles.

However, achieving harmony of social roles in human life is not at all easy. This requires great effort, time and ability, as well as the ability to resolve conflicts, arising when performing social roles. These conflicts may be intra-role, inter-role And personal-role.

TO intra-role conflicts include those in which the requirements of one role contradict and counteract each other. Mothers, for example, are instructed not only to treat their children kindly and affectionately, but also to be demanding and strict towards them. It is not easy to combine these instructions when a beloved child has done something wrong and deserves punishment. The usual way to resolve this intra-role conflict in the family is some redistribution of functions, when the father is entrusted with the responsibility of strictly assessing the behavior and punishing the children, and the mother is charged with softening the bitterness of punishment and comforting the child. This implies that the parents are unanimous that the punishment is fair.

Interrole conflicts arise when the demands of one role contradict or counteract the demands of another role. A striking illustration of such a conflict is the double employment of women. The workload of family women in social production and in everyday life often does not allow them to fully and without harm to their health perform professional duties and run a household, be a charming wife and a caring mother. Many thoughts have been expressed about ways to resolve this conflict. The most realistic options at present and in the foreseeable future seem to be a relatively even distribution of household responsibilities among family members and a reduction in women’s employment in social production (part-time work, weekly work, the introduction of a flexible schedule, the spread of home work, etc.).

Student life, contrary to popular belief, is also not without role conflicts. To master your chosen profession and obtain an education, you need to focus on academic and scientific activity. At the same time, a young person needs varied communication, free time for other activities and hobbies, without which it is impossible to form a full-fledged personality and create his own family. The situation is complicated by the fact that neither education nor varied communication can be postponed to a later date without prejudice to personality formation and professional training.

Personal-role conflicts arise in situations where the requirements of a social role contradict the properties and life aspirations of the individual. Thus, the social role of a leader requires from a person not only extensive knowledge, but also good willpower, energy, and the ability to communicate with people in various, including critical, situations. If a specialist lacks these qualities, then he cannot cope with his role. People say about this: “The hat doesn’t suit Senka.”

No less common are situations when a professional role does not allow a person to reveal and demonstrate his abilities and realize his life aspirations. The optimal relationship between personality and role seems to be one in which high but feasible demands are placed on a person at work, and complex but solvable tasks are offered to him.

The multiplicity of social roles performed by a person, the inconsistency of role requirements and expectations - this is the reality of a modern dynamic society. To successfully resolve private everyday problems and serious conflicts, it is useful to understand the relationship between social roles and personality. The two extreme positions here are wrong. The first reduces the personality to the multitude of roles it plays and completely dissolves all manifestations of personality in role behavior. According to another position, personality is something independent of social roles, something that a person represents in himself. In reality, there is an interaction between role and personality, as a result of which role behavior bears a more or less significant imprint of the personality, and the roles played influence the character of the person, the appearance of the individual.

The individuality of the individual is manifested in the choice of social roles; in the peculiar nature of the implementation of social roles; the possibility of refusing to perform an unacceptable role.

A person's activities in a certain role have a reverse effect on his personality. Thus, the work of a doctor requires from a person, in addition to other qualities, the desire and ability to instill confidence in patients in a favorable outcome of treatment, the work of an engineer requires concern for the reliability and safety of equipment. The degree of influence of a role on a person depends on what value it represents for a person and how much he identifies himself with the role. Therefore, the appearance of speech and thought cliches can be observed not only in the professional activities of a passionate teacher, but also in everyday life and at leisure. Obsession with one's profession can lead to an exaggerated development of certain qualities and some deformation of the personality. Thus, the role of a leader, which prescribes command, command, control and punish, can lead to increased self-esteem, arrogance and other negative personal characteristics.

Therefore, the signs of a mature personality are not only an independent, conscious choice of social roles, their conscientious and creative implementation, but also a certain autonomy, social distance between the role and the individual. It leaves a person the opportunity to look at his role behavior from the outside, evaluate it from the point of view of personal, group and public interests and make the necessary clarifications, and in extreme cases, refuse an unworthy role.

3. The social role, expressing the relationship between the individual and society, allows us to understand their relationship and analyze the mechanisms the impact of society on the individual and the individual on society. This problem has worried thinkers since ancient times, but humanity has not yet offered an unambiguous answer, and there probably cannot be one.

It is clear that the individual depends on society. She simply cannot exist without him. But does it have any independent features? And is there a reverse effect? If so, to what extent can it change social life?

Let's consider three different concepts presented by the classics of sociology -

E. Durkheim, M. Weber and K. Marx.

The relationship between the individual and society is one of the main problems of sociology E. Durkheim. He emphasizes that social reality is autonomous in relation to individual reality, which has a biopsychic character. Durkheim constantly relates these two types of reality. Thus, he contrasts “individual facts” with “social facts”, “individual ideas” with “collective ideas”, “individual consciousness” with “collective consciousness”, etc. This is directly related to how the sociologist sees the essence of personality. For Durkheim, it is a dual reality in which two entities coexist, interact and fight: social and individual. Moreover, the social and the individual do not complement each other, do not interpenetrate, but rather oppose each other.

All of Durkheim's sympathies are with the former. Social reality, “collective ideas”, “collective consciousness” completely dominate over all signs of the individual, over everything that is a person’s personality. Society in its interpretation acts as an independent, external and coercive force in relation to the individual. It represents a richer and greater reality than the individual, dominates him and creates him, being the source of higher values.

Durkheim recognizes that society arises as a result of the interaction of individuals, but, once it arises, it begins to live according to its own laws. And now the entire life of individuals is determined by social reality, which they cannot influence or influence very little, without changing the essence of social facts.

Durkheim thus gives preference to the power of social reality as objectively existing and personality-determining conditions.

Takes a different position on this issue M. Weber. He is among those who attach great importance to the actions (behavior) of the individual in the development of society. Weber sees only individuals in the role of subject. He does not deny the existence and need to study such social formations as “state”, “ Joint-Stock Company", etc. But from the point of view of sociology, these formations are only the essence of the process and connections specific actions individual people, since only the latter are carriers of actions that have a semantic orientation, understandable to us.

Weber does not exclude the possibility of using the concepts of “family”, “nation”, “state” in sociology, but he demands that we not forget that these forms of collectivity are not really subjects of social action. Will or thought cannot be attributed to these collective social forms. The concepts of “collective will” and “collective life” can only be used conditionally, metaphorically.

Social action can be considered, according to Weber, only meaningful behavior aimed at achieving goals clearly recognized by the individual. Weber calls this type of action goal-oriented. Meaningful, purposeful action makes an individual a subject of social action. He dissociates himself from those sociological theories that take social totalities as the initial social reality and subjects of social action: “classes”, “society”, “state”, etc. From this position he criticizes “organic sociology”, which considers society as a conditional organism , in which individuals act as biological cells. The action of an individual, according to Weber, can be understood because it is meaningful and purposeful; studying it is an activity for sociologists. The action of the cell is not, since it is devoid of the named attributes, and this is already the sphere of biology.

But it is also impossible to understand the actions of a class, a people, although it is quite possible to understand the actions of the individuals who make up the class, the people. For Weber these general concepts too abstract. He contrasts them with the requirement of sociology to consider the individual as the subject of social action and study him.

Another solution to this problem is the theory K. Marx. In his understanding, the subjects of social development are social formations of several levels: humanity, classes, nations, state, family and individual. The movement of society is carried out as a result of the actions of all these subjects. However, they are by no means equivalent, and the strength of their impact varies depending on historical conditions. In different eras, the decisive subject is the one who is the main driving force of a given historical period. In primitive society the main subject social life there was a family or formations that arose on its basis (clan, tribe). With the advent of class society, the subjects of social development, according to Marx, become classes (different in all periods), and the driving force is their struggle. The next change in the subject of social action was envisioned by Marx as a result of the establishment of communist relations. During this period, humanity moves from spontaneous development to conscious, meaningful creation public relations in all areas of life. Marx believed that it was then that the true history of mankind would begin. And the subject of social development will be a purposefully acting humanity, freed from class struggle and other spontaneous manifestations, realizing itself and the meaning of its existence.

But it is imperative to keep in mind that in Marx’s concept, all subjects of social development act in accordance with the objective laws of social development. They can neither change these laws nor repeal them. Their subjective activity either helps these laws to act freely and thereby accelerates social development, or prevents them from acting and then slows down the historical process.

How is the problem of interest to us presented in this theory: personality and society? We see that the individual here is recognized as a subject of social development, although he does not come to the fore and does not become one of the driving forces of social progress. According to Marx's concept, the individual is not only a subject, but also an object of society. It is not an abstract characteristic of an individual. In its reality, it is the totality of all social relations. The development of an individual is conditioned by the development of all other individuals with whom he is in direct or indirect communication; it cannot be divorced from the history of previous and contemporary individuals.

Thus, the life activity of an individual in Marx’s concept is comprehensively determined by society in the form of the social conditions of its existence, the heritage of the past, the objective laws of history, etc. But some space for its social action still remains. According to Marx, history is nothing more than the activity of man pursuing his goals.

How does a man, conditioned on all sides, create history? How personality influences progress historical development?

To understand this in Marxism, the category “practice” is of great importance. According to Marx, the subjectivity of man is the result of his objective practice, man’s mastery of the objective world in the process of labor and its transformation. In this sense, every individual, one way or another involved in human practice, is a subject of social development.

Having considered various concepts on the problem of the relationship between society and the individual, Let us note the contribution of each sociologist to its knowledge. At the same time, it should be noted that humanity does not have the absolute truth here.

The degree of influence of an individual on historical processes is determined not only limited space her social development. It depends on the content of a particular person, his worldview, and social position. And here the concept of the meaning of life is of decisive importance - the individual’s ideal idea of ​​the content, essence and purpose of human existence. Power and wealth, creativity and professional achievements, freedom and service to God can act as constituent elements complex idea of ​​the meaning of life. But often one of the elements is perceived by a person as the main meaning of life, the main core of existence. Let us remember the idea of ​​​​building a communist society in which future generations will live. And the slogans of the post-revolutionary period, setting the meaning and purpose of life: “We live for the happiness of future generations!” In reality, it turned out that a person must live for the sake of what turns out to be beyond the one and only human destiny. Nevertheless, this slogan was accepted, especially by the generations of the 20-40s. This is reality, and it cannot be erased from history.

The moral crisis characteristic of modern Russian reality, the origins of which are usually seen in the times of totalitarianism, is nothing more than the feeling by a huge number of people of the meaninglessness of the life they have to lead. And I would like to draw attention to this, which is not a purely Russian phenomenon. Western countries and even the African continent have long been concerned about the problem of a person’s loss of meaning in life.

Dozens, if not hundreds of philosophical concepts have grown on this issue. And now our sociological thought has also encountered it. And it’s not that we were “allowed” to think and write; It’s just that this problem has become even more aggravated. It appeared here much later than in other countries. This statement may seem strange, but it was the totalitarian regime that slowed down the offensive moral crisis and it is precisely its collapse that is now accompanied in many people by a feeling of the absurdity and meaninglessness of life, or rather, by the loss of the meaning of existence. I would like to emphasize that the reasons for the spiritual crisis of the modern personality are not as superficial as our journalism often presents.

Western society encountered a phenomenon that received many names, but had a single essence - the loss of the meaning of life, already at the beginning of the last century, and it began to be comprehended in philosophy and sociology in the middle of the 19th century. Almost all sociologists found the cause of the moral crisis of society in the victory of rationalism in the spheres of production, management and consumption, caused by the flourishing of capitalist relations. In this they saw the loss of human freedom, human values.

M. Weber expressed this idea best of all, from which many philosophical and sociological concepts that later became popular (for example, existentialism, the Frankfurt School, etc.) were based on their development.

Weber believes that his era, with its characteristic rationalization and intellectualization, the “disenchantment of the world” (note to ourselves), came to the point that the highest values ​​moved from the public sphere or into the otherworldly realm of mystical life, or into the fraternal intimacy of direct relationships between individuals. Clearly rational relations have been established in public life, and the individual is completely deprived of freedom here. The only time and place where it is still preserved is leisure. All the forces of capitalist society are aimed at ensuring the uninterrupted and rhythmic operation of the “production-scientific machine”. European science, Weber believes, the European type of organization, and finally, European religions, lifestyles and worldviews - everything works for formal rationality, turning it from a means into an end. Capitalism, according to Weber, turns production from a means into an end, and a person into a slave of rationally organized production deprived of freedom. And the individual constantly rushes between the spheres of necessity and freedom, production, social and intimate life, leisure. Hence the crisis in the “split” consciousness of man.

At the same time, Weber observed (and himself felt the same need) the desire of people for personal, informal associations.

However, he also warns against this kind of community, since on this path one cannot find the restoration of a person’s integrity, but one can only lose the remainder of personal freedom, for the individual will not be left to himself even in the most intimate and moral sphere. The fate of man is torn between two realities: serving necessity and enjoying freedom during leisure hours. When a person is at work or in public life, he does not choose, he is like everyone else. When he is at his leisure, his sacred right is to choose himself. The condition for such a choice is complete political freedom, complete democracy.

In this concept of Weber and other areas of Western sociology main reason The spiritual crisis of the modern personality is the loss of freedom and human integrity.

The question arises: what kind of freedom did a person have and when? After all, in order to lose it, you had to have it. Weber, as we have noted, calls his era the “disenchantment of the world.” So, until this time the world was “enchanted”? Obviously, by this he means pre-capitalist relations. But then the lost freedom must be sought precisely in the pre-capitalist, “enchanted” world. Is this how things really are? Of course, the class-based, traditional pre-capitalist system, full of conventions, can well be called “enchanted” in comparison with rationalistic, clean-cut capitalism, devoid of illusions. But was there personal freedom in this society? We can agree that the human personality was more integral in the Middle Ages precisely because it was not free, practically devoid of choice. At that time, there were clear rules of conduct.

Firstly, these were traditional motivations for the constant reproduction of habitual types of behavior (say, everyone goes to church). Violation of tradition was condemned by society and even punished. Human activity, within the strict framework of tradition, was focused on survival and self-preservation.

Secondly, people's behavior was defined as the fulfillment of duties, duty towards their patron, parents, and community. At the same time, difficulties, self-restraints and even suffering in the performance of duties were considered in the order of things.

Third, The behavior of the individual was supervised by both secular and ecclesiastical authorities, regulating it very carefully.

Fourthly, a person’s activity was determined by his attachment to his village, city, district, which was very difficult, and sometimes impossible, to leave or change, but which protected the property, dignity, and sometimes even the life of a person from external enemies.

It is hardly worth talking about personal freedom in these conditions.

It was precisely the development of capitalist relations that made a person relatively free, destroying most of the named motives of behavior, and significantly weakening the remaining ones (for example, the last one). A man in a capitalist society found himself alone with his fate. The class in which he was destined to remain, the traditional family profession, corporate coercion, disappeared, but there was also no corporate support (medieval workshop, guild, etc.), etc. The person was faced with a choice without guarantees and community support. In addition, many moral values ​​of the Middle Ages were questioned or completely collapsed. It was possible and necessary to choose a cultural ideal for oneself, which was previously determined by birth (peasant - work, nobleman - don’t work, but be a warrior).

Choice is a difficult thing, and choosing a cultural ideal is the hardest work of the mind and soul. Not all people turned out to be able to do this work and find their own path, and not the path destined by someone or something. Hence the desire for unification (especially among young people), which Weber noticed in his time, conformism, about which so much has been said in sociology and philosophy. It is easier to join a group and exist according to its rules and ideals than to decide, choose, and take responsibility yourself. Hence the spiritual crisis.

Obviously, it was not the loss of freedom, but its acquisition, the democratization of society, that was the true cause of the spiritual and moral crisis of a huge number of people. The individual pays such a high price for acquiring a new quality. This new quality is formed, apparently, over the course of many generations. Let’s call it conventionally “the work of the soul” or nonconformism, the ability to choose your own path and take responsibility for your choice.

4. Now let’s return to our country and our time. If we compare the above motivations of behavior in the pre-capitalist formation and in the Soviet country during the era of totalitarianism, we will find their complete coincidence. We had all four types of motivations for personal behavior, but in a slightly modified form. In addition, there was also a totalitarian state, which the Middle Ages had no idea about. It acted as the main arbiter of human destinies, in the person of the state apparatus and the party-parat it executed and pardoned. In the eyes of most people, it was like the Lord God, who is strict but fair. Such a state could do anything: provide housing or put people in prison. And most people were happy with this, as it relieved them of responsibility for their own lives.

And now that totalitarianism has collapsed, it is not surprising that many people are in a state of confusion. The values ​​with which the majority of the population of our country lived illusorily, as in an “enchanted” world, crumbled. Basically it was a crisis-free hibernation. We were even surprised: why do Western philosophers keep writing about some kind of crisis? We're fine.

Now our world has “disenchanted”. The inability to find positive meaning in life due to the destruction of old values ​​and traditions, the lack of a culture that allows one to choose one’s path in such a turbulent time, largely explains the social pathologies that are now the pain of our society - crime, alcoholism, drug addiction, suicide.

Obviously, time will pass and people will learn to live in new social conditions, to seek and find the meaning of life, but this requires the experience of freedom. She created a vacuum of existence, breaking traditions, classes, etc., and she will teach how to fill it. In the West, people are already making some progress in this direction: they have studied longer. Very interesting ideas The Austrian psychoanalyst Dr. W. Frankl speaks on this matter. He believes that it is human nature to strive for a meaningful life. If there is no meaning, this is the most difficult state of the individual. There is no common meaning in life for all people; it is unique for everyone. The meaning of life, Frankl believes, cannot be invented or invented; it needs to be found, it exists objectively outside of man. The tension that arises between a person and the external meaning is a normal, healthy state of mind. A person must find and realize this meaning.

Despite the fact that the meaning of everyone's life is unique, there are not so many ways in which a person can make his life meaningful: what we give to life (in the sense of our creative work); what we take from the world (in the sense of experiences, values); what position we take in relation to fate if we cannot change it.

In accordance with this, Frankl identifies three groups of values: creativity values, experiential values ​​and relational values. The realization of values ​​(or at least one of them) can help make sense of human life. If a person does something beyond the prescribed duties, brings something of his own to work, then this is already a meaningful life. However, meaning in life can also be given by an experience, such as love. Even one single brightest experience will make it meaningful past life. But Frankl considers the third group of values ​​to be the main discovery - attitude values. A person is forced to resort to them when he cannot change circumstances, when he finds himself in extreme situation(hopelessly ill, deprived of liberty, lost a loved one, etc.). Under any circumstances, Dr. Frankl believes, a person can take a meaningful position, because a person’s life retains its meaning until the end.

The conclusion can be drawn quite optimistic: despite the spiritual crisis among many people in the modern world, a way out of this state will still be found as people master new free forms life.

Self-test questions

1. What is the difference between the concepts “person”, “individual”, “personality”?

2. What is the personality structure?

3. What are the functions of personality? What is the “social status” and “social role” of an individual? How are these concepts related to each other?

4. Formulate the main provisions of the status-role concept of personality.

5. What are the main causes of role tension and role conflict? How are these concepts different? What is the essence of role conflict?

6. How do you understand the mechanism of influence of society on the individual and individuals on society? What are the views of E. Durkheim, M. Weber, K. Marx on this issue?

7. How do you understand the meaning of life?

8. What factors influence the socialization of the individual.

9. What is the importance of education and upbringing for the socialization of an individual? What role do schools and teachers play in this?

1. Psychoanalysis- a direction in modern philosophy that explains the role of the unconscious and other mental processes in human life and society.

The founder of psychoanalysis is considered to be an Austrian psychiatrist. Sigmund Freud(1856 - 1939). The beginning of psychoanalysis can be considered two main discoveries made by Freud:

unconscious- a special mental reality that is inherent in every person, exists along with consciousness and largely controls consciousness;

repression reaction(from consciousness to unconsciousness) negative emotions, negative experiences, everything that disrupts the balance and health of the psyche as a way of psychological protection.

Negative emotions, unfulfilled desires - everything that is repressed into the unconscious sooner or later makes itself felt in the form of “random” spontaneous actions, deeds, slips of the tongue, slips of the tongue, “oddities”.

A special form of life of the unconscious is dreams. According to Freud, dreams are the realization of a person’s hidden aspirations, of what was unrealized in reality.

2. Freud stands out two mental schemes:

topographical;

Dynamic.

At topographical approach the unconscious is presented in the form of a large hallway, where a variety of human thoughts, desires, and emotions await their time. Consciousness is a small office where visitors are periodically “summoned”: the thoughts and desires of a person. Between the hallway and the office there is a guard who allows into the consciousness only thoughts that are pleasing to the consciousness. Sometimes the guard leaves, falls asleep, and some of the “unnecessary visitors” break into the office - into consciousness. But then they are driven out again by the returning (awakened) guard into the hallway.

At dynamic scheme the psyche is presented as a combination of three layers - It, I, Super-I.

“It” is the world of the unconscious, where human thoughts and desires are contained.

“I” is a person’s consciousness, an intermediary between all components of the psyche.

“Super-ego” is a pressing external reality that influences the personality, “external censorship”: laws, prohibitions, morality, cultural traditions.

"I" tries to subjugate "It". This is rarely possible. Usually “It” subjugates “I” in hidden or open forms. Freud compares the “I” with a rider and a horse: the rider (“I”) at first glance controls the horse, gives it commands, but the horse (“It”) is stronger than the rider and actually carries the rider on himself. In some cases, the rider completely loses control over the horse and is forced to gallop along with it wherever it takes him. Also, the “Super-I” - norms and prohibitions - often subordinates the “I”.

Thus, the human “I” (according to Freud - the “unhappy human I”) experiences powerful pressure from three sides:

unconscious - "It";

The outside world;

Norms, prohibitions - “Super-I”;

and is most often suppressed by one of them.

3. According to Freud the main factors which guide and direct the human psyche are:

pleasure- the psyche, like a compass, one way or another seeks paths to pleasure;

crowding out- the psyche displaces unacceptable, forbidden desires and ideas (asocial, sexual) into the unconscious. Repressed into the unconscious, uncensored

desires, thoughts are subjected sublimation- transformation into other “permitted” types of social activity and cultural creativity.

4. That is "core" unconscious sphere? In answer to this question, Freud first puts forward the so-called “first psychoanalytic system,” which prevailed from 1905 to 1920, and after 1920, the “second psychoanalytic system.”

According to first psychological system at the heart of the unconscious lies "libido"- sexual attraction, sexual instinct. Libido seeks expression:

in sexual activities;

In other areas of life through sublimation (transformation) of sexual energy into. non-sexual.

A common reason for replacing a sexual object with a non-sexual one is social norms, traditions, and prohibitions. Sexual impulse according to Freud, maybe implemented threefold:

“released” through direct actions, both sexual and non-sexual;

Repressed into the unconscious;

Depressed, deprived of energy through reactive formations (shame, morality).

Thus, The mental activity of a person is a process of transformation of his sexual instinct. This theory caused protest in Europe.

5. In the 20s XX century Freud develops second psychological system where he takes a new look at the problem of the emergence of unconscious energy.

The central concepts of this system are Eros and Thanatos.

Eros (life instinct) underlies constructive human behavior and creation. Thanks to him, a person provides for his needs and continues his family.

Thanatos (death instinct) pushes a person to destructive activity, the destruction of everything that seems “alien” and dangerous to him.

Human life is a constant interaction of Eros and Thanatos.

6. Freud pays special attention to the problem of human relations, human masses, culture.

According to Freud, human society can only exist under the condition of mutual suppression of unconscious habits, drives, and passions, otherwise society will be destroyed from within. Happening mass sublimation repressed energy and transforming it into culture.

Society creates a substitute for suppressed energy - rituals. Ritual- the collective unconscious is a form of realization of repressed desires. There are many rituals - religion, morality, art, poetry, music, performances, public events.

As civilization develops, human passions are suppressed more and more. This results:

To mass psychoses, nationwide depression;

To the need to construct more complex, sophisticated rituals.

7. In this regard, there arises phenomenon of crowd, mass. A huge number of people with suppressed desires group into a mass, a crowd, and direct their energy towards the leader. There is a process of identification of each member of the group, the mass as a whole, with the group leader.

Each member of the group (crowd) automatically bears the features of the leader (leader), and the leader (leader) bears the features of the mass.

Uniting people into a mass and identifying with the leader contributes to the rooting in the “unconscious” of the crowd of the illusion of self-worth, strength (due to belonging to the group and the leader), and security.

The crowd is aggressive, easily excited, categorical, merciless.

The role of a crowd leader, according to Freud, can only be performed by a person with pronounced mental anomalies, capable of believing in his own exclusivity and leading the crowd behind him.

8. Based on Freud's teachings arose philosophical movement of neo-Freudianism, developed by his successors - Alfred Adler, Wilhelm Reich, Gustav Jung, Erich Fromm.

In particular, Alfred Adler(1870 - 1937) put forward the concept according to which the basis of “great” human actions, hyperactivity, super-aspirations, as well as mental illnesses lies repressed inferiority complex, which a person wants to compensate by achieving success in business, politics, science, art, and personal life.

Wilhelm Reich(1897 - 1957) is considered the founder of the so-called Freudo-Marxism.

The main idea of ​​his concept is that normal life and human activity lies sexual energy, which has a cosmic nature. Society mercilessly suppresses a person’s energy and his affects with the help of morality, culture, and etiquette. A person is forced to live in the “vice” of culture, to adapt to the norms of society, to other people, to obey superiors and authorities - this leads to the “neuroticization” of a person, the death of his true “I”, selfhood.

The only way to save a person is complete overthrow of culture(morality, prohibitions, subordination), emancipation, sexual revolution.

Carl Gustav Jung(1875 - 1961) nominated theory of archetypes.

According to Jung, a person’s vital (and not just sexual) energy, encountering insurmountable obstacles in the surrounding life, is transferred not into the individual unconscious, but into the general unconscious in the form of archetypes. Archetypes- universal images, the “code” of universal human repressed vital energy. They can be the content of dreams, myths, delusions of a mentally ill person, parapsychological effects, daydreams, hallucinations. Archetypes are the “encrypted” history of humanity, the highest truths.

The purpose of philosophy is help a person “decipher” archetypes, understand their meaning, and through them, oneself and the surrounding reality.

Erich Fromm(1900 - 1980) staged the problem of the inconsistency of human existence.

Fromm identifies the following main contradictions of human existence:

patriarchy and matriarchy;

Power and Subordination;

The desire for possession and just life;

Personal existence (life history) and historical existence (history);

“freedom from” and “freedom for” are negative and positive freedoms. The purpose of philosophy, according to Fromm, is to help a person decide

these contradictions. The main way to solve them is cultivating universal love, the desire to make the world kinder, to ensure that the “wish for life” everywhere replaces the “wish for death”, destructive truths.

One of the popular trends in neo-Freudianism in the West is Marcusianism, close in spirit to Freudo-Marxism. Its founder is G. Marcuse(1898 - 1979).

Marcuse's main work is One-Dimensional Man. Its essence is that modern “one-dimensional society” brings up a normal, but "one-dimensional person" possessing desires, interests, hobbies, but only within one direction - consumption. The consumer person gradually becomes a “cog”, depends on society, becomes smaller as a person, suppresses his natural desires, that is, himself.

Marcuse sees a way out of this situation, a “breakthrough” of one-dimensional society, in complete sexual freedom and emancipation, in the sexual revolution.

Concept of the unconscious

Along with conscious forms of reflection and activity, a person is also characterized by those that are, as it were, beyond the threshold of consciousness, and do not reach the appropriate degree of intensity or tension to attract attention to themselves. The terms “unconscious”, “subconscious”, “unconscious” are often found in scientific and fiction literature, as well as in everyday life.

The concept of the psyche is much broader than the concept of consciousness, which has gradations of levels that cannot be practically taken into account, starting from the highest level of clarity, reaching the amazing power of insight and depth of understanding of the essence of things, and ending with a semi-conscious state.

Consciousness by no means exhausts the entire psyche. There are also unconscious mental phenomena, a certain class of which is represented by the concept of the unconscious.

The set of mental phenomena, states and actions that are not represented in a person’s consciousness, that lie outside the sphere of his mind, that are unaccountable and cannot, at least at the moment, be controlled, is covered by the concept of the unconscious.

The zone of maximum clear consciousness in mental activity is relatively small. Behind it comes a stripe of simply obvious consciousness, and then - minimal consciousness, followed by the already unconscious. The latter appears either as an attitude (instinct, drive), or as a sensation (perception, representation and thinking), or as somnambulism, or as intuition, or as a hypnotic state or dream, or a state of passion or insanity.

Unconscious phenomena include imitation and creative inspiration, accompanied by a sudden “insight”, a new idea, born as if from some push from within (cases of instant solutions to problems that had long eluded conscious efforts, involuntary memories of what seemed firmly forgotten And so on).

Unconscious- not mysticism, but the reality of spiritual life. From a physical point of view, unconscious processes perform a kind of protective function: they relieve the brain from the constant tension of consciousness where it is not necessary.

To more clearly identify the place of the problem of the unconscious in the structure of knowledge, it is important to correlate the phenomena of the unconscious with such realities, which are designated by the categories “activity”, “reflection”, “communication”, “personality”, “attitude”.

An abstract scheme of the structure of activity, according to which the activity itself, actions and the operations that implement them are distinguished, can serve as one of the grounds for classifying the phenomena of a person’s unconscious mental life, highlighting the place of unconscious mental phenomena in the structure of activity. The constitutive feature of activity is motive, i.e. some object in which the need is objectified.

It is well known that a motive can be unconscious, and the mental reflection of the need state itself can also be unconscious. The main feature of action is the presence of conscious anticipation of future results, i.e. goals. However, in addition to such conscious anticipation, unconscious anticipations can also be distinguished, and these include some types of attitudes. Thus, along with conscious and unconscious motives, conscious and unconscious anticipations of future results should be distinguished, i.e. goals and installations. Operations in human activity also have a dual nature: some are the product of transformation of conscious actions and, in case of difficulties, can return to consciousness again, others are formed as an “adjustment” to the situation and never enter consciousness at all; they function as unconscious automatisms.

The existence of qualitatively heterogeneous phenomena of the unconscious excludes the possibility of extending the conclusions obtained from the study of one of the phenomena of the unconscious to the entire area of ​​the unconscious. Conscious and unconscious mental phenomena form two forms of reflection of the external world and, accordingly, two forms of control, mental regulation of activity (conscious and unconscious regulation).

When studying particular forms of mental reflection of reality, we are faced with the need to differentiate sensations of which a person is aware and sensations of which he is not aware.

A similar differentiation can be made in relation to the perception of rather complex objects.

In the field of psychology of scientific creativity, facts have long been described showing that many phenomena of creative activity are not of a conscious nature. When studying emotional processes, phenomena are highlighted when a person can state the very fact of the appearance of emotional experience, but cannot indicate the object that causes these experiences, and cases when even the very fact of experience remains hidden from the subject (affective traces, or “complexes”) and are identified only in the conditions of a specially organized experiment (for example, associative).

In the literature we find the following two fundamentally different interpretations of the term “unconscious”. They belong to G. Roracher, a famous Austrian philosopher and psychologist, and L.S. Vygotsky.

G. Roracher: “There is no unconscious mental activity as an intermediate link between brain processes and the activity of consciousness. There are only different degrees of clarity of consciousness... In the brain... excitation processes are constantly playing out, which we do not notice at all. These processes are unconscious in the exact sense of the word, but these are not unconscious mental processes (unconscious thoughts, aspirations, etc.), but unconscious processes of nervous excitation, i.e., it is necessary to clearly understand this development in order to avoid misunderstandings.”

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru

REPORT

on the topic “The role of the unconscious in human life”

The most difficult question is about the levels of consciousness (more precisely, the human psyche). Only a relatively small part of mental activity is realized (controlled) by the subject, while the rest (like the underwater part of an iceberg) remains unconscious. According to Freud, the unconscious is mental processes that manifest themselves actively, but do not reach a person’s consciousness. The unconscious is also the main and most meaningful moment in the human psyche, along with the preconscious and conscious elements. The unconscious is regulated by the principle of pleasure and includes various innate and repressed elements, drives, impulses, desires, motives, attitudes, aspirations, complexes, etc., characterized by unconsciousness, sexuality, associativity, etc. According to Freud, in the unconscious there is a constant struggle between Eros (drives and forces of life, sexuality and self-preservation) and Thanatos (drives and forces of death, destruction and aggression), using the energy of sexual desire (libido).

Along with conscious forms of reflection and activity, a person is also characterized by those that are, as it were, beyond the threshold of consciousness, and do not reach the appropriate degree of intensity or tension to attract attention to themselves. The terms “unconscious”, “subconscious”, “unconscious” are often found in scientific and fiction literature, as well as in everyday life.

The concept of the psyche is much broader than the concept of consciousness, which has gradations of levels that cannot be practically taken into account, starting from the highest level of clarity, reaching the amazing power of insight and depth of understanding of the essence of things, and ending with a semi-conscious state.

Consciousness by no means exhausts the entire psyche. There are also unconscious mental phenomena, a certain class of which is represented by the concept of the unconscious. Mental activity may be in the focus of consciousness, sometimes does not reach the level of consciousness (preconscious or preconscious state) or falls below the threshold of consciousness (subconscious).

The set of mental phenomena, states and actions that are not represented in a person’s consciousness, that lie outside the sphere of his mind, that are unaccountable and cannot, at least at the moment, be controlled, is covered by the concept of the unconscious.

The zone of maximum clear consciousness in mental activity is relatively small. Behind it comes a stripe of simply obvious consciousness, and then - minimal consciousness, followed by the already unconscious. The latter appears either as an attitude (instinct, drive), or as a sensation (perception, representation and thinking), or as somnambulism, or as intuition, or as a hypnotic state or dream, or a state of passion or insanity. Freud's unconscious measure of character

Unconscious phenomena include imitation and creative inspiration, accompanied by a sudden “insight”, a new idea, born as if from some push from within (cases of instant solutions to problems that had long eluded conscious efforts, involuntary memories of what seemed firmly forgotten And so on).

The unconscious is not mysticism, but a reality of spiritual life. From a physical point of view, unconscious processes perform a kind of protective function: they relieve the brain from the constant tension of consciousness where it is not necessary.

To more clearly identify the place of the problem of the unconscious in the structure of knowledge, it is important to correlate the phenomena of the unconscious with such realities, which are designated by the categories “activity”, “reflection”, “communication”, “personality”, “attitude”.

An abstract scheme of the structure of activity, according to which the activity itself, actions and the operations that implement them are distinguished, can serve as one of the grounds for classifying the phenomena of a person’s unconscious mental life, highlighting the place of unconscious mental phenomena in the structure of activity. The constitutive feature of activity is motive, i.e. some object in which the need is objectified.

It is well known that a motive can be unconscious, and the mental reflection of the need state itself can also be unconscious. The main feature of action is the presence of conscious anticipation of future results, i.e. goals. However, in addition to such conscious anticipation, unconscious anticipations can also be distinguished, and these include some types of attitudes. Thus, along with conscious and unconscious motives, conscious and unconscious anticipations of future results should be distinguished, i.e. goals and installations. Operations in human activity also have a dual nature: some are the product of transformation of conscious actions and, in case of difficulties, can return to consciousness again, others are formed as an “adjustment” to the situation and never enter consciousness at all; they function as unconscious automatisms.

The existence of qualitatively heterogeneous phenomena of the unconscious excludes the possibility of extending the conclusions obtained from the study of one of the phenomena of the unconscious to the entire area of ​​the unconscious. Conscious and unconscious mental phenomena form two forms of reflection of the external world and, accordingly, two forms of control, mental regulation of activity (conscious and unconscious regulation).

When studying particular forms of mental reflection of reality, we are faced with the need to differentiate sensations of which a person is aware and sensations of which he is not aware.

A similar differentiation can be made in relation to the perception of rather complex objects.

The problem of the unconscious in the works of Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud is an Austrian scientist who was the first to provide a scientific basis for the problems of the unconscious. According to Freud's definition, “the unconscious is the actions of a person that he performs without realizing it, automatically. Mental activity during sleep, hypnosis, and sleepwalking is of an unconscious nature.”

As a result of long-term observations of his patients, Freud came to conclusions that changed previous ideas about the psyche. The unconscious, in his opinion, is innate in nature. He argued that human behavior is largely influenced by subconscious forces, which he called drives. According to Freud, these drives are caused by instincts inherent in man, but above all by repressed desires, that is, desires, the satisfaction of which is “forbidden” at the level of consciousness and which are repressed into the subconscious. These desires continue to operate without the person’s knowledge, manifesting themselves in dreams, slips of the tongue, involuntary deviations from adequate behavior, and also influence the choice of profession or creativity.

The measure of the unconscious is determined by the transition from an instinctive sense of reality to conscious perception, expressed in a person’s behavior in his specific actions. There is always a certain sensor inside a person that shows the space of the unconscious. Likewise, there is always a measure within us - like a transition from one state to another. Consciously we can always evaluate it. For example, a measure of shame that manifests itself in redness of the facial skin. In a person's real life there are many moments when he thinks one thing, but actually does another. This is explained by the fact that the conscious impulse turned out to be weaker than the subconscious. The result was an impulse that came to us from the subconscious. Consequently, those actions and functions that are performed by the subject are unconscious. Hence the loss of control, inability to foresee and predict, etc. Let's consider this example. A certain subject realizes the harmfulness of smoking and decides to quit smoking. However, over time, instinct increases a person’s emotional stress. As a result, a desire is synthesized, which is expressed in the need to smoke. As a result, there is a conscious contradiction expressed in action. A chain is formed: Instinct - Emotions - Sensations - Desires. We can make sure that no matter what system we take, the final link of the decomposition will be the same chain.

If we consider that man is the same child of nature as other living beings known to us, then he is, to a certain extent, endowed with the same qualities as them. If we assume that animals are not endowed with the same intelligence as humans, then their only point of contact is their instincts. From Freud's point of view, instincts are channels through which energy passes, shaping our activity. He believed that emotions are an expression of the instinct of self-preservation or sexual instinct. He also believed that the content of the unconscious is constantly expanding, since those aspirations and desires that a person could not, for one reason or another, realize in his activities are forced out into the unconscious, filling its content.

Freud tried to explain the problems of the unconscious from the standpoint of the mechanistic-naturalistic thinking of his time. He assumed that those emotions that are not an obvious expression of the instinct of self-preservation or sexual instinct, nevertheless, are only more hidden and complex manifestations of these instinctive-biological manifestations.

Conclusion

“We do not and cannot have any idea about the form of existence of the unconscious, about what it is in itself, independent of consciousness,” S. Freud

Without exaggeration, we can say that the Austrian psychologist and psychiatrist Sigmund Freud, who dealt with the problems of the unconscious, largely influenced everything further development modern psychology, and perhaps directed it along a certain path of development.

Although not all aspects of Freud's theory have received scientific recognition, and many of his provisions today seem to belong more to history than to modern psychological science, it is impossible not to recognize that his ideas influenced the development of world culture, not only psychology, but also art, medicine, sociology. By exploring the unconscious in the human psyche and creating the theory of psychoanalysis, he also made progress in understanding the human psyche and revealing its depths.

His merit is the development of questions about the dynamic relationship between unconscious and conscious motives of people’s actions, about the presence of different levels in the psyche.

Sources and literature

1. Grigolava V.V. The unconscious and the attitude. Questions of psychology, 1984, No. 3

2. Z. Freud Interpretation of Dreams M., 1992.

3. Lukov Val. A., Lukov Vl. A. Sigmund Freud: Chronicle-reader - M.: Flinta, 1999

4. Rotonberg V.S. Different shapes relationship between consciousness and the unconscious. Questions of Philosophy, 1978

5. Petrovsky A.I., Yaroshevsky M.G. History and theory of psychology T.2. - Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1996.

6. New philosophical encyclopedia: In 4 volumes. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Similar documents

Definition of the concept and essence of the unconscious. History and modern formulation of the issue. Consideration of the general structure of the unconscious. Familiarization with the achievements of Z. Freud, K.G. Jung, M.G. Erikson in the study of this psychological phenomenon.

abstract, added 10/29/2014


Psychoanalytic theory of the Austrian psychiatrist S. Freud. The concept of the unconscious mental. The structure of personality and the dynamics of relations between consciousness and the unconscious. Defense mechanisms, their awareness and personality development. The content of criticism of Freud's theory.

abstract, added 11/25/2009


Characteristics of consciousness as a phenomenon of the human psyche. Features of the structure of consciousness, its specific properties. The concept of the unconscious, its differentiation from conscious processes. Basic psychological characteristics unconscious.

abstract, added 06/08/2013


Sigmund Freud's works on the problem of the unconscious. Chain: instinct - emotions - sensations - desires. Motivational structure of personality. The unconscious as a source of internal conflict. Neo-Freudian theories. The unconscious in modern research.

abstract, added 01/08/2009


The phenomenon of the unconscious in foreign psychology (using the example of the works of S. Freud and representatives of the neo-Freudian movement), the doctrine of the collective unconscious by C. Jung. The phenomenon of the unconscious in Russian psychology, the psychology of the attitude of D. Uznadze.

course work, added 10/23/2017


Views of foreign and domestic psychologists on the problem of the relationship between consciousness and the unconscious: this problem is in the works of Freud, Vygotsky, Jung’s view, Jaspers’ theory. The priority of mental attitude in Uznadze’s theory, research by Ukrainian scientists.

course work, added 10/16/2009


The history of the emergence of ideas about the unconscious. Views of past thinkers on the theory of the unconscious. Freud and his theory of the unconscious. Interpretation of dreams. Consciousness and the unconscious as a phenomenon. Psychoanalysis and traditional psychology.

abstract, added 11/12/2008


The concept of the meaning of unconscious motives, drives and impulses of a person according to Freud. Freud's concepts of "transfer" and the "Oedipus complex", their place in his theory of personality. Free association method and dream analysis method. Freud's attitude to symbolism.

abstract, added 01/18/2011


The problem of the relationship between consciousness and the unconscious in the understanding of S. Freud. Neo-Freudianism as a direction in psychology that developed in the 20-30s of the 20th century. Analysis of the views of K. Jung, A. Adler, E. Fromm, K. Horney, G. Sullivan on the problem of the unconscious.

abstract, added 11/29/2012


Personality structure and its actions. Determination of social actions by conscious and unconscious factors. Freud's concept of the unconscious. Interaction of the conscious, preconscious and unconscious. Free association analysis.