Personality in modern society. Problems of personality socialization

Elena Esina
Socialization of personality in the modern world.

Introduction

The lives of people in our country have changed radically. These changes have affected almost all aspects of our lives, transforming them radically for everyone. levels: from the individual living conditions of a particular person to social foundations of society. IN modern sociocultural conditions require relationship to personalities as an open, changing system. At the same time, it takes on special significance socialization of personality, during which she tries to adapt to social pressure and establish a balance between internal and external values.

One of the fundamental problems of the sciences involved in the study personalities, is the study of the process socialization, i.e., the study of a wide range of issues related to how and thanks to what a person becomes an active social subject. In conditions of increasing complexity social life, the problem of including a person in social integrity, V social structure of society. The main concept that describes this kind of inclusion is « socialization» allowing a person to become a member of society.

By choosing this topic, I strive to discover for myself an understanding individuals in society. IN modern world In order to find a specific answer to a question, you often have to answer many other questions. Same in mine topic: First you need to ask yourself the question, what is there? socialization and personality.

Socialization

It is well known that the process socialization plays a decisive role in

formation personalities. Socialization- the process of assimilation by an individual of patterns of behavior, psychological attitudes, social norms and values, knowledge, skills that allow him to function successfully in society. Unlike other living beings, whose behavior is determined biologically, man, as a being biosocial, needs a process socialization in order, to survive. According to N.D. Nikandrov and S.N. Gavrov, “ socialization involves multilateral and often multidirectional influences of life, as a result of which a person learns the “rules of the game” accepted in a given society, socially approved norms, values, behavior patterns.” Initially socialization the individual occurs in the family, and only then in society.

Socialization divided into primary and secondary. Primary socialization very important for the child, as it is the basis for the rest of the process socialization. Highest value in primary family plays socialization, from where the child draws ideas about society, its values ​​and norms. So, for example, if parents express an opinion that is discriminatory regarding any social group, then the child may perceive such an attitude as acceptable, normal, and established in society. Secondary socialization is already happening outside the home. Its basis is the school, where children have to act in accordance with new rules and in a new environment. In the process of secondary socialization the individual no longer joins a small group, but a medium one. Of course, the changes that occur during the secondary socialization, less than those that occur during the primary process.

Process socialization consists of several stages, stages:

a) Adaptation stage (birth - adolescence). At this stage, uncritical assimilation occurs social experience, the main mechanism socialization is imitation.

b) The emergence of a desire to distinguish oneself from others - the identification stage.

c) The stage of integration, introduction into the life of society, which can be either successful or unsuccessful.

d) Labor stage. At this stage reproduction occurs social experience, impact on the environment.

After labor stage (elderly age). This stage is characterized by the transfer social experience for new generations. All in all, socialization - complex, a vital process. It largely depends on him how an individual will be able to realize his inclinations, abilities, and become a personality.

After thinking about it, I noticed that socialization it is also a process of acquiring basic skills for life in social environment. Social The environment for me is my family and the people around me - friends, colleagues and others.

Personality

Personality- these are those characteristics of a person that are responsible for the coordinated manifestations of his feelings, thinking and behavior. Personality Each person is endowed only with her own inherent combination of traits and characteristics that form her individuality - a combination of psychological characteristics of a person that make up his originality, his difference from other people. There are many definitions personalities for example:

1) Kovalev A. G. defined the concept personality as complex, a multifaceted phenomenon of social life, a link in the system of social relations. 2) Asmolov A. G. considered personality from the point of view of the problem of the relationship between biological and social in man.

The Becoming of Man as personalities occurs only in specific social conditions. The demands of society determine both the behavior patterns of people and the criteria for assessing their behavior. Personality inseparable from society. Society shapes personality in the interests of preservation and development of society. Personality- creator of public wealth.

What at first glance seems to be a person’s natural qualities (for example, his character traits) is in fact fixed in personalities social requirements for her behavior.

Socialized individuals these are adapted to the conditions of their social existence, desocialized - deviant deviating from the main ones social demands and mentally abnormal personalities.

Along with social well-developed fitness the individual has personal autonomy, assertion of one's individuality. IN critical situations like this personality maintains her life strategy, remains committed to her positions and value orientations (integrity personalities) . She prevents possible mental breakdowns in extreme situations with a system of psychological defenses. (rationalization, repression, revaluation of values, etc.).

Understand personality means to understand, what life problems and in what way she solves, what initial principles for solving these problems she is armed with.

Having thought about this topic, what is personality I came to the conclusion that it is inherent in every person. Everyone in society acts as everyone has their own role, and also everyone has their own actions in certain circumstances. I think concept « personality» may be considered How: a set of habits and preferences. And I can also say that one is not born as a person, one becomes a person.

Modern world

IN socialization in the modern world occurs within certain institutions that perform the broadcast function social experience and attitudes accumulated by previous generations. In addition, the function is to maintain interaction between personalities in order to facilitate the transfer of individual experience and value orientations. All this should contribute to both personal development of the individual, and his formation as a member of a particular society. Many do not pay attention to the spiritual preconditions of labor, its valuable foundations and significance as a factor socialization. But we consider labor activity as a category of the economy; it seems to us to be very superficial and one-sided.

Any social impact, arising in the process of work activity, should contribute to the moral renewal of the individuals involved in it, their assimilation of certain ethical guidelines of society, which to a certain extent represents the ultimate goal socialization. Thus, development occurs personalities, involving her in the system social values ​​and norms. Such adaptation means the assimilation of the most important aspects of social life, and therefore a gradual socialization.

Socialization in the modern world characterized by the humanization of childhood, when the child acts as the main value of the family and society.

In order to become a full member of society, a person needs more and more time. If earlier socialization covered only the period of childhood, then modern a person needs socialize throughout your life. Also in in the modern world socialization of personality characterized by an intense change of determinants. Social uncertainty not only causes changes in inclusion individuals into communities, but also becomes a norm regulating the behavior of the subject. In this regard, in the research of psychologists and related specialists, the line of studying the value-semantic basis of risky behavior and ability (readiness) personalities to innovative behavior.

Modern the world is full of different computer technology and often, in connection with this, personality(Human) hides from society, from live communication on the Internet. I believe that without the influence of society on a person it cannot happen socialization of personality. It is also largely a contradictory, often uncontrollable process. Such inconsistency and spontaneity in the formation of basic social values ​​and behavior patterns can lead to devastating consequences for both the individual personalities, and for society as a whole.

The result of this topic is that at all stages of the development of society, processes occur in it that determine the very essence of what exists at one time or another social reality, as well as the development features of the components of a given society personalities.

Process socialization reaches a certain degree of completion upon reaching a personality of social maturity, which is characterized by the acquisition personality of integral social status. However, in the process socialization may fail, failures. Manifestation of shortcomings socialization is deflecting (deviant) behavior. Eventually socialization of personality in the modern world directly depends on the achievements of society.

At this stage, society is subject to intensive development of digital technologies, which affect adaptation and socialization of the individual in society. I gave examples and arguments socialization of personality in modern society and in my opinion, spirituality in it has been relegated to the background, making the economic direction of development a priority.

I think that would solve the problems socialization Every person must understand that gadgets cannot replace "live" communication. We need to spend more time with family and friends, communicate, share, and not be closed off. It is also useful to read books and know what is happening in the region, in the country and in world. After all, this is self-development.

Personality and society: problems of relationships.

Social status and social roles of the individual. Role conflicts.

Sociological concept of personality, its structure.

Topic 5. Sociology of personality

Self-test questions

1. What are the main forms of social change? What is their essence?

2. In what form do you think social changes are taking place in modern Russian society?

3. What is social progress? Analyze different approaches to its definition.

4. What are the criteria for social progress?

5. What are the main features and features modern world? What is its inconsistency?

6. What are the main trends and prospects for the development of modern society?

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 is 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 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 a person and the social environment, a person is considered not only as an object of external influences, but mainly as a social subject, an active participant in social life, having his own needs, interests, aspirations, as well as the ability and ability 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 to social properties person. 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 socially significant properties and 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 traits.

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 is in constant conflict between the unconscious instincts penetrating into it, on the one hand, and the moral prohibitions dictated by 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 own 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 a social system, social groups and institutions do not have such a 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 takes place at some mental illness.

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 patterns of behavior can be officially formalized in the form of job descriptions, moral codes, military regulations and other documents, or they can exist in the form of ideas and stereotypes that have developed in the public consciousness about a “good mother”, “real father”, “true friend” and so on.

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 conduct household, to be a charming wife and 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 the chosen profession and obtain an education, concentration on educational and scientific activities is required. 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 for longer. late 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 professional activity 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 give great value in the development of society to the actions (behavior) of the individual. 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 of specific actions of individual people, since only the latter are understandable to us carriers of actions that have a semantic orientation.

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 are 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 by the subjects 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 subject that is the main driving force of a given historical period is put forward as decisive. In primitive society, the main subject of social life was the family or the 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 the conscious, meaningful creation of social relations in all spheres 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 by the limited space of his 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 public sphere or into the otherworldly realm of mystical life, or into the fraternal intimacy of the direct relationships of individual 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 life is unique to everyone, 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 vivid experience will make your past life meaningful. 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 an 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 made quite optimistic: despite the spiritual crisis in many people of the modern world, a way out of this state will still be found as people master new free forms of life.

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

Good work to the site">

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/

Course work

by discipline "WITHsociology"

on the topic of:

Socialization problem

Introduction

1. Theoretical aspects of socialization

1.1 Meaning of socialization

1.2 Basic provisions of the theory of socialization

1.3 Institutions of socialization

1.4Phases of socialization

1.5 Basic approaches to the periodization of socialization1

1.6 Resocialization

2. Socialization of the individual in modern society

2.1 Mechanisms of personality socialization

2.2 Problems of personal socialization in modern society

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

An analysis of the problems and features of the socialization of the individual in modern society cannot but begin with a clarification of the concept of “personality.” In my opinion, personality is the result of human development, the most complete embodiment of human qualities. But a more specific scientific concept of “personality” should be given. So, personality is a stable system of socially significant traits that characterize an individual as a member of society or a community. The concept of “personality” is distinguished from the concepts of “individual” and “individuality”. Personality is formed under the influence of social relations, culture and is determined by biological characteristics.

It is also worth noting what socialization is. Socialization is the process of a person’s assimilation of a certain system of knowledge, norms and values ​​that allow him to function as a full member of society.

The problematic of this topic is that the emergence of new and radical changes in traditional channels of socialization of a generation in a modern transitional society have led to an increase in the number of people who lead an asocial, immoral lifestyle. By virtue of various reasons these include disabled people, alcoholics, vagrants, persons who have served sentences in correctional labor institutions, etc.

The relevance of this topic, in my opinion, is due to changes in the content of the socialization process of modern Russian society. Transformations taking place under the influence of new technologies, market relations and crisis phenomena in the economy are reflected in the structure of the socialization norm and the mechanism of “inclusion” of the individual in the social system.

Today, when Russia is entering the global information society, the problems of forming an information culture and successful socialization of the individual in a transforming sociocultural space are becoming increasingly relevant. Social contradictions are growing in society, since most of its norms and institutions were aimed at transmitting behavior algorithms in a fairly stable and predictable social environment.

Socialization as a social phenomenon is determined by the nature of society itself, its properties and needs. In conditions of a gradual transition from one sociocultural reality to another, the criteria and norms of human activity change, as well as the conditions for creative self-realization. In this regard, the study of the entire complex of changes that characterize the process of socialization of the individual, the identification of specific factors, conditions and social contradictions that determine the formation of a new type of personality - a participant in social transformations, acquires particular relevance.

A person who has successfully socialized cannot always take a rightful place in modern Russian society due to the fact that social norms are unstable and the mechanism for including the person in the social system has not been fully formed.

My interest in this issue is explained by the fact that I am one of the representatives of the current generation, experiencing modern processes of change in political, economic and social institutions, organizations in modern Russian society. Thus, this has had a contradictory impact on the position and development of the individual in modern society, so I want to study this problem in detail in order to know exactly what problems can really stand in my way of life towards socialization in modern Russian society.

1. Theorhetic aspects of socialization

1.1 The meaning of socialization

Human socialization presupposes the presence of appropriate genetic material, appropriate material and an adequate environment. Psychologists have taught chimpanzees and gorillas many different things, including the use of symbols. However, the way animals learn is completely different from the relatively natural ways in which children learn speech and many other skills. Nothing happens in the evolution of chimpanzees and gorillas that allows them to create their own symbols. Consequently, they lack the unique abilities of speech and thought found in normal human beings. It is clear that for human socialization to occur, an appropriate genetic basis is required.

This is evidenced by cases of children who grew up in conditions of extreme isolation.

In 1799, in the forests of Aveyron in the south of France, hunters found a boy who, apparently, lived there alone. He moved on all fours, ate like an animal, and bit those who approached him. His sense of smell and hearing are extremely developed, but very peculiar; at the slightest crack of a branch or the sound of a nut being chewed, he jumped, while the slamming of a door did not cause the slightest reaction in him. He was able to walk naked in the cold or pull food out of very hot water without apparently experiencing any pain. He made only inarticulate sounds, not trying to communicate with his new environment, which he viewed rather as an obstacle to satisfying his needs.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the famous psychiatrist Pinel examined the boy and declared that he was suffering from incurable dementia. The young doctor Itar, who specialized in treating deaf children, did not agree with this diagnosis. In his opinion, the behavior of the child, who was named Victor, is a consequence of very early and prolonged isolation from people. Itard was convinced that through proper training he would enable the boy to enter the fold of society and live a normal life. He decided to take it upon himself. However, after five years of effort, Itard was forced to admit that he would never be able to achieve his goal. Attempts to teach Victor to communicate were a complete failure: he was never able to learn to play or enter into any other relationships with people, and his behavior in sexual terms was even less adequate. Until his death at the age of 40, there was no noticeable improvement in his behavior.

When considering Victor's story, the question arises: why was he unable to fully adapt to human society? After all, subsequently in different parts globe Other such children were also found. Most of these "wolf children" or "gazelle children" discovered in the West Indies, as well as the five-year-old Tarzan, who flew from branch to branch in the forests of El Salvador, were rehabilitated. It seems that the younger they were at the time they were found and started working with them, the easier it was to return them to society. Apparently, in the process of development there are certain optimal periods for learning certain things that are later not learned, as in the case of Victor, who began learning only at the age of 12.

1.2 Basicse provisions of the theory of socialization

socialization society individual

Sociology has developed many theories. They reflect different scientific directions, which are built on different bases for considering and explaining social reality. Depending on the basis on which this or that theory of socialization is built, theoretical models of this process are created, proposed as a reliable and justified analogue of socialization. The most fruitful studies of socialization are within the framework of such scientific directions as structural-functional analysis, understanding sociology, psychoanalytic and psychosociological traditions, the ethical-subjective school, symbolic interactionism, and phenomenological sociology. Further development of the theory is rather not in the direction of creating a single paradigm, but in line with the search for new interpretations of socialization. New research solutions are built through the contamination of theoretical approaches, their development, rather than the elimination of conceptual diversity.

Human socialization presupposes the presence of appropriate genetic material and an adequate environment.

A serious contribution to the conceptualization of socialization phenomena was made by the American sociologist F. Gidding. In his theory, he defended the idea of ​​social coercion as the main mechanism of socialization, which he defined as the process of transforming a population into a society. He assigned a special role in this process to the influence of the group (or society as a whole) on the individual, which can be realized both through public opinion and legislative regulation of his behavior. Among the mechanisms of coercion (the scientist calls them “social forces”), F. Giddings singles out the “volitional process” and “artificial selection for conscious choice.”

There are two most pronounced views on the existence of socialization. According to one of them, it acts, first of all, as the self-development of the individual in the course of his interaction with various social groups, institutions, and organizations. According to another position, socialization is the process of forming a born human organism into a full-fledged human personality during the interaction of an individual with the social environment.

Leaning more towards the first point of view, in the most general form, socialization can be understood as the process of assimilation by an individual of patterns of behavior, norms and values ​​accepted in society. This aspect concerns its characteristics as an essential element of social interaction, which presupposes the desire of people to change their own image, to improve their presentation in the eyes of others, carrying out their activities in their interests. Consequently, socialization is associated with the fulfillment of social roles (a normatively approved, relatively stable pattern of behavior (including actions, thoughts and feelings), reproduced by an individual depending on the social status or position in society) of the individual.

This interpretation of socialization is widespread in Western sociology. It is most fully presented in a book devoted to family problems and the socialization of interaction processes. It pays special attention to the consideration of such a body of primary socialization as the family, which “includes” the individual in social structures.

Thus, we can say that socialization is a two-way process, which includes, on the one hand, the process of an individual’s active reproduction of a system of social connections through active activity; on the other hand, the individual’s assimilation of social experience, a system of social connections by entering the social environment.

It should also be said that one of the most important in the theory of personality socialization is the question of its stages and phases.

1.3 Socialization institutions

At all stages of socialization, the influence of society on the individual is carried out either directly through society or through a group. We can say that society and the group convey to the developing personality a certain system of norms and values ​​through signs. Those groups in which the individual is attached to systems of norms and values ​​are called institutions of socialization. Identification of their role in the process of socialization is based on a general sociological analysis of the role of social institutions in society.

At the labor stage of socialization, such institutions are: during the period early childhood- family and preschool children's institutions, which play an increasingly important role in modern societies. The family has traditionally been viewed as an institution of socialization in a number of concepts. It is in the family that children acquire their first interaction skills, master their first social roles, and comprehend their first norms and values. The role of the family as an institution of socialization naturally depends on the type of society, its traditions and cultural norms.

In the second period of the early stage of socialization, the main institution is the school. The school provides the student with a systematic education, which in itself is the most important element of socialization, but in addition, the school is obliged to prepare a person for life in society and in a broader sense. Compared to the family, the school is more dependent on society and the state, although this dependence is different in totalitarian and democratic societies. But, one way or another, the school sets the primary ideas for a person as a citizen about life values ​​and norms, and therefore, contributes to his entry into civil life. The school expands the child's communication capabilities. Here, in addition to communication with adults, a stable environment of communication with peers arises, which in itself acts as the most important institution of socialization.

Depending on whether the period of higher education is included in the second stage of socialization, the issue of such an institution of socialization as a university must be resolved. Although the problem of students occupies an increasingly significant place in the system of various social sciences, there are still no studies of higher educational institutions in this context.

As for the institutions of socialization at the labor stage, the most important of them is the work collective.

Naturally, each of the named institutions of socialization has a number of other functions; their activities cannot be reduced only to the function of transmitting social experience. Consideration of these institutions in the context of socialization means only a kind of “extraction” from the totality of the social tasks they perform.

1.4 Phases of Socialization

The phases have a substantive, specific nature, manifesting themselves differently at each stage of socialization. Socialization usually involves the origin of three phases.

The first phase is when people think about behaviors associated with their new role, experiment with them, and apply them to themselves. Sociologists call this phase anticipatory socialization. Children are naturally introduced to adult roles such as spouses and parents when they play family. Schools and universities, postgraduate studies, probation and rehabilitation programs are more formal institutional structures designed to serve to prepare members of society for new social roles.

The second phase is when, after individuals have acquired their new status, they find that they must constantly modify, adapt, and “rewrite” their roles in order to adapt to changing circumstances. For example, when a young couple gets married, the new spouses will have to develop new interpersonal skills because when they were children, most of the marital roles were hidden from them.

The third phase - over the course of life, individuals not only take on more and more new roles, they must also free themselves from many roles. Rituals such as graduations, marriage ceremonies, retirement banquets, and funerals are socially constructed mechanisms designed to make people more aware of the temporary nature of certain roles.

Whether we are identifying the characteristics of the socialization of a child, a schoolchild, a student, or an employee - a member of a work team, in any case we will have to analyze the adaptation phase.

The concept of adaptation, which occupies one of the central places in biology, means the adaptation of living organisms to changing living conditions as a result of changes in morphological and physiological characteristics and behavior. In sociology, adaptation is the process of interaction between an individual or a social group and the social environment; includes the assimilation of norms and values ​​of the environment, as well as changing the environment in accordance with new conditions and goals of activity.

The main function of adaptation is the development of relatively stable environmental conditions, the solution of recurring typical problems, through the use of accepted methods of social behavior and actions.

Adaptation acts as an insufficiently deep, predominantly external process of socialization, while acquiring active and passive forms.

The passive form of adaptation is manifested in the “tacit” acceptance of these norms and values ​​and unconditional submission to them. Of course, it does not necessarily mean approval of everything that needs to be adapted to.

The active form consists in the individual’s desire not only to master the norms and values ​​of the social environment, the types of activities and interactions accepted in it, but also to express his individual attitude towards them, often manifested in dissatisfaction with them and the desire to change them.

The essence of adaptation processes is the interaction of the individual - the subject of adaptation and the social environment. In the process of this interaction, adaptive activity does not always have a positive orientation. This happens in cases where an individual chooses an adaptive “niche” for himself from conservative elements of the environment, or when the influence of the adapting environment is so strong that it suppresses the possibilities of creative self-realization of the adapter and preserves them for a long time. In such a situation, a state arises from which the adaptation process depends not only on the subjective qualities and properties of the individual, the efforts made by him, but on the activity of the adapting environment.

Personality adaptation has a wide variety of species, acting as a socio-professional, socio-psychological, socio-political, socio-culture. This classification is based on the species diversity of adaptation processes. Of course, in objective reality, all directions of adaptation are not isolated from each other, but, on the contrary, are interconnected and conditioned.

The adaptation process can be successful or unsuccessful, which is expressed in sociological indicators. In the first case, this may be the high social and professional status of the individual, his satisfaction with the content of the objective activity and interaction with the social environment. In the second case, these indicators will be diametrically opposed, and the extreme form of unsuccessful adaptation will be disadaptation and its specific manifestations - staff turnover, migration, divorce, deviant behavior, etc.

In the conditions of modern Russia, which is experiencing a transitional state to a new social arrangement, the problem of personal adaptation takes on special significance of its socialization. Adaptation turns into the social and psychological ability of an individual to survive an emergency, crisis situation of transition from one social order to another.

1.5 Basic approachesodes to the periodization of socialization

Socialization of the individual begins from the first years of life and ends by the period of civil maturity of a person. But this point of view is debatable, starting with the question of whether socialization has boundaries, and ending with a discussion of the number of its stages. There are two main points of view regarding whether socialization has boundaries. Some authors believe that the process of socialization “accompanies” a person throughout his entire life and ends only with his death. Others believe that socialization, starting from early childhood, ends with the period of achieving social maturity and entering the stage of professional and labor activity.

An even greater diversity of views is associated with the question of the stages within which the socialization of the individual takes place. One of the most common points of view is that there are three main stages of socialization - pre-labor, labor, post-labor (associated with a person’s retirement). In this position, it is not difficult to detect the well-known thesis of K. Marx and his followers about the decisive role of work in human life as a criterion for identifying the stages of socialization. This approach seems quite reasonable and has every right on the existence and study of the main stages of socialization. However, its weak point is the significant, even excessive duration of each stage.

Another approach is characterized by the same vulnerability, according to which its authors consider it more appropriate to distinguish between primary and secondary socialization (or resocialization). At the same time, the stage of primary socialization includes the period from the birth of a person to the formation of a mature personality, and the stage of secondary socialization (resocialization) includes the period of its social maturity.

There are three main criteria for the stages of socialization:

1. time of physical and social maturation;

2. the nature (features) of the dominant forms (types) of activity;

3. main social institutions (agents) of socialization.

In accordance with these criteria, the following stages of socialization can be distinguished:

Infancy (from birth to approximately three years of age).

The main form of activity at this stage is communication. According to the (rather controversial) opinion of some researchers, at this stage “socialization actually does not yet convey its effects to the child.” The main agents of socialization are the family and immediate relatives.

Childhood (from 3 to 6 -7 years).

In the Middle Ages, the concept of childhood that is characteristic of our time simply did not exist. Children were looked at as little adults. Works of art and written documents from the Middle Ages depict adults and children together in the same social environment, wearing the same clothes and engaged in mostly the same activities.

At this stage, the main form of activity becomes a game, primarily role-playing. The child learns to take on various social roles - mother, father, teacher kindergarten, store clerk, etc.

Here, along with the family, a new social institution of socialization arises - a preschool educational institution.

Adolescence (from 6 - 7 to 13-14 years).

In most countries, adolescence is not considered as socially significant in an individual's life cycle. During adolescence, individuals undergo changes in growth and development that can be considered truly revolutionary. After years of being juniors and dependent on adults, they are suddenly compared to adults in physical build, height and strength. These changes are accompanied by the rapid development of the reproductive organs, which indicates sexual maturity.

Within this stage, several drastic changes occur, real turning points that characterize the features of socialization. Firstly, the main form of activity changes: instead of play (although it often continues to retain a significant place in the child’s life), study appears, which becomes the main means of understanding the world, life, and relationships. Secondly, the preschool institution is being replaced by the institution of school as the main (along with the family) factor of socialization.

Early maturity, or youth.

Recent trends in the development of the Western world - the growth of the service industry, increasing periods of education and extremely high educational qualifications in post-industrial society - have lengthened the transition of individuals to adulthood. In some respects, modern society appears to be developing a new status between adolescence and adulthood: that of adolescence - young girls and boys of school leaving age. The main form of activity continues to be educational activity.

Within the framework of this particular stage, the choice of profession, the way to achieve a career, and ways to build a future life occur, which is sometimes of decisive importance in the process of socialization. All conditions are created for ideological reflection, adequate awareness of oneself, one’s abilities and purpose.

Considering the role of socialization institutions at this stage, it is necessary to note the decreasing importance of the family, the remaining importance of educational institutions and the sharply increasing importance of the social microenvironment and friendly environment.

Middle age, or maturity (from 20-25 to 35-40 years).

Mature age lacks the specificity that is inherent in infancy, childhood and adolescence. This is an all-encompassing and rather vague category. This stage is characterized by activity in the professional sphere, because the main part adult life Both men and women spend time at work. It is also characterized by the creation of one’s own family, in connection with this the personality turns from an “object” into a “subject” of socialization. The leading forms of activity, along with professional labor, can be family, everyday, educational, socio-political, and communication activities.

Old age, or old age (from 35-40 to 55-65).

Like other periods of the life cycle, the onset of old age is defined differently in different societies.

Societies vary in how respectful they are of old age. In many agrarian societies, including imperial China, older people were especially honored and respected. Among the people of Northern Burma, long life was revered as a privilege bestowed on those who had led a righteous life in a previous incarnation. People showed respect for the elderly by trying not to step on their shadow. Old age entails separation from certain social roles. First of all, and most importantly, the elderly are waiting for retirement.

In Russia there is no successful socialization of older people. There are very few social norms that would determine the life goals of older people, and they are very vague.

IN last years the negative outlook on the lives of pensioners is being critically reconsidered. It seems that the very attitude towards work and retirement is changing. In addition, studies show that in retirement a person suffers most from a lack of money, and in the case when people have a guaranteed income that is sufficient to meet their needs, they do not mind retiring early.

Some scientists give special attention to this stage of socialization. Thus, E. Erikson believed that it was at this time that a person’s pronounced desire for either active development, creativity, or constancy, peace and stability manifests itself.

Finally, the final stage of socialization occurs in conditions of retirement age and the individual’s refusal to actively work professionally.

Awareness of impending death requires the individual to adapt to a new definition of his own essence. The concept of “dying” implies something more than just the occurrence of some biochemical processes. It entails the acceptance of a social status in which social structures not only accompany, but also shape the experience of contact with death.

At this stage, there is a comprehension of the life path passed, its analysis, which can lead to consequences of a twofold order: there is either awareness of identity, the integrity of the life lived, or dissatisfaction with it and even despair because it turned out to be worthless and did not bring any benefit to anyone.

Thus, from the above we can conclude that socialization is a lifelong process of personality development, which is carried out in the process of its interaction with diverse factors, and the more social factors are involved in the socialization process, the richer and more intense it is.

1.6 Resocialization

Resocialization is the assimilation of new values, norms, worldviews and behavior patterns. Resocialization covers many types of activities - from classes to correct reading skills to professional retraining of workers.

In its most general form, resocialization occurs whenever we learn something that does not match our previous experience. A new boss who demands to work differently resocializes us. Such resocialization is a gentle and insignificant modification of procedures already familiar to us. However, resocialization can be intense; for example, people who join Alcoholics Anonymous are bombarded with information about the destructive consequences of drinking.

When entering university after leaving school, some young people face an intense process of re-socialization, especially during the first daunting days of adaptation to a new environment. This process is even more intense in psychotherapy or joining a religious group, since in these cases people are exposed to ideas that contradict their previous worldview. If these ideas are instilled, not only the individual’s behavior, but also his perception of life changes radically.

2. Socializationpersonalities in modern society

2.1 Mechanisms of personality socialization

Socialization of a person in interaction with various factors and agents occurs through a number of, so to speak, “mechanisms.” There are different approaches to considering the “mechanisms” of socialization.

Thus, the French social psychologist Gabriel Tarde considered imitation to be the main mechanism of socialization. The American scientist Uri Bronfenbrener considers progressive mutual accommodation between an active, growing human being and the changing conditions in which he lives to be a mechanism of socialization, and A.V. Petrovsky identified a natural change in the phases of adaptation, individualization and integration in the process of personality development as a mechanism of socialization. Summarizing the available data A.V. From a pedagogical point of view, Mudrik identifies several universal mechanisms of socialization that must be taken into account and partially used in the process of educating a person at different age stages.

The mechanisms of socialization include the following.

The traditional mechanism of socialization is a person’s assimilation of norms, standards of behavior, views, stereotypes that are characteristic of his family and immediate environment. This assimilation occurs, as a rule, at an unconscious level through imprinting, uncritical perception of prevailing stereotypes. The effectiveness of the traditional mechanism appears very clearly when a person knows “how to”, “when to”, but this knowledge of his contradicts the traditions of his environment.

The institutional mechanism of socialization, as follows from the name itself, functions in the process of human interaction with the institutions of society and various organizations, both those specially created for his socialization, and those that implement socializing functions along the way, in parallel with their main functions (production, social, club and others structures, as well as mass media). In the process of interaction of a person with various institutions and organizations, there is an increasing accumulation of relevant knowledge and experience of socially approved behavior, as well as experience of imitation of socially approved behavior and conflict and conflict-free implementation of social norms.

It must be borne in mind that the media as a social institution influence the socialization of a person not only through the broadcast of certain information, but also through the presentation of behavioral patterns of characters in books, films, and television programs.

The stylized mechanism of socialization operates within a certain subculture. Subculture is understood as a complex of moral and psychological traits and behavioral manifestations typical of people of a certain age or a certain professional or cultural layer, which as a whole creates a certain style of behavior and thinking of a particular age, professional or social group.

The interpersonal mechanism of socialization functions in the process of interaction between a person and persons who are subjectively significant to him. Parents (at any age), any respected adult, a peer friend of the same or the opposite sex can be significant to him. But there are often cases when communication with significant people in groups or organizations can have an influence on a person that is not identical to that which the group or organization itself has on him.

The socialization of a person, and especially children, adolescents, and young men, occurs with the help of all the mentioned mechanisms. However, in different gender, age and socio-cultural groups, in specific people, the relationship between the role of socialization mechanisms is different, and sometimes this difference is quite significant.

An important role in the processes of socialization belongs to the mechanism of self-restraint, i.e. refusal to be active when performance results are low. Self-restraint is always associated with the emergence of cognitive dissonance in the individual’s consciousness. In the process of forming ideas about success in early adolescence, cognitive dissonance can arise in a situation of changing social stereotypes, for example, regarding the prestige of the chosen profession. The mechanism of self-restraint in the process of forming ideas about success leads to inadequate personal and professional choices.

2.2 Problems of socializationpersonalities in modern society

Today, Russian society is faced with new threats and challenges that place high demands on a person’s intellectual and adaptive abilities, as well as on institutions that promote the socialization of the individual. One of the main threats - the persistence of backwardness in Russian society - is largely due to the low information culture and ineffective processes of personal socialization.

This problem is very relevant in Russia, where there is a high unevenness in the integration of social strata into the information space; Numerous social groups of Russians today do not have the opportunity and motivation to create an information culture. Lack of interest in the knowledge and capabilities of information and communication technologies (or limiting this interest only to recreational opportunities) reduces a person’s intellectual and creative abilities and, as a consequence, his economic and social activity, limits mobility, educational opportunities and many other services. In conditions of a growing overabundance of information and mobility of all social structures, such groups cannot form adequate, successful models of behavior and become increasingly socially unprotected.

Thus, there is a contradiction between the needs of Russian society to integrate into the global information space and the lack of information-educated citizens, which gives rise to digital poverty and creates socialization problems.

Problems of socialization in modern Russian society are associated with three circumstances: 1) change (destruction) of the value system, as a result of which the older generation cannot always prepare young people for life in new conditions; 2) a radical and very rapid change in the social structure of society; the inability of many new social groups to ensure the reproduction of their ranks; 3) weakening of the system of formal and informal social control as a factor of socialization. One of the most obvious features modern socialization refers to its duration compared to previous periods.

In modern society, a paradoxical situation is created - on the one hand, our society is increasingly faced with tasks (both professional and everyday), the successful solution of which is beyond the capabilities of an individual and requires the cooperation of efforts of groups of people. Such cooperation implies possession of knowledge, skills and interpersonal skills. As a result, in the modern domestic labor market, specialists whose core activity is interaction with other people - psychologists, lawyers, managers - are becoming increasingly in demand. On the other hand, the achievements of science and technology are aimed at making a person as independent and independent as possible in all spheres of life, and sometimes even isolating him from society (for example, the spread of personal computers, personal stereo players, home theaters, etc.). Situations that previously involved dark communication with other people lose their relevance; More and more people are choosing professions such as “man-machine” or “man-sign system”.

This trend in society negatively affects the process of socialization of modern man. The assimilation of social experience does not end with the completion of the stage of purposefully instilling generally accepted rules and norms in a person at school and other educational institutions; this process spontaneously continues throughout life. Since the process of socialization is inextricably linked with the individualization of the individual, its formation and development, we can say that modern society to some extent impedes the development and, moreover, the self-development of the individual.

IN modern conditions, due to the complexity of professional guidance, which often leads to the wrong choice of profession or incorrect selection profession, we get not only an inferior specialist, but also a person dissatisfied with life, who finds it difficult to find his place in life.

It should be highlighted separately and special attention should be paid to main component socialization - the formation of a worldview. The transformation of society and the image of the World, as well as the personality types it produces, their relationships to social reality, to nature, to each other, gives rise to the need for new ideological orientations that would provide more advanced forms of social life. In the era of the scientific and technological revolution, two trends appear here: on the one hand, the formation of a worldview is facilitated, and, on the other hand, it is difficult. Worldview is the unity of two moments. One moment is knowledge, information about reality, and the other moment is a position, an attitude towards the environment, humanity, a given society, and oneself. Today, information is given easily, but forming a position is a complex process.

The problem of personal socialization, the specifics of professional development, and issues of personnel training are constantly in the focus of attention of many researchers.

Currently, the problems of the formation and development of a professional’s personality, as well as issues of professional socialization, are being actively studied by A.K. Markova, E.A. Klimov, O.G. Noskova, N.A. Perinskaya, S.V. Novikov, O.V. Romashov, V.D. Shadrikov.

The changes that have taken place in the last 10 years in all spheres of political, economic and social life of Russian society have given rise to numerous problems. One of the most relevant is a critical understanding of changes in social and spiritual life, identifying trends further development, choice of structure and content of social education as a controlled institution for the socialization of children.

Modern society requires from a person not only polytechnic knowledge, a high cultural level, deep specialization in certain fields of science and technology, solid knowledge, skills and abilities in educational activities, but also the ability to live and coexist in society. The main parameters of a child’s personal development today can be considered his orientation toward universal human values, humanism, intelligence, creativity, activity, self-esteem, and independence in judgment. It is on these skills and qualities that the success of a person and society as a whole in overcoming the contradictory conditions of social life largely depends.

Man has an innate natural desire for knowledge. Therefore, paramount importance is attached to the process of awakening and developing the cognitive activity of the individual from an early age when the mind and soul are especially receptive and energetic. Up to 25 years is the stage of professional socialization of the individual. At this time, a person designs his own future. As for the relationship between theoretical fundamental knowledge and practical experience, there is always a time lag between them throughout a person’s entire active life, in any field of activity. They constantly correct each other - either knowledge requires practical implementation, or experience needs theoretical support. Perhaps the most gratifying and encouraging phenomenon in modern Russia is a kind of boom in education. Young people are no longer limited to just higher specialized education, but quite consciously strive to supplement it with the latest knowledge and technologies. Today, intelligence, professionalism, creative and innovative potential of the individual are again in demand. This is a challenge of the time, at the same time an unconditional guarantee of worthy development of society. Sometimes the successful dynamic development of a personality is largely determined by physical health, mental stability and developed intelligence.

Throughout its history, society has changed its attitude towards people with developmental disabilities. It has evolved from hatred and aggression to tolerance, partnership and inclusion of persons with developmental disabilities.

According to N. N. Malofeev, five periods can be distinguished in the evolution of the attitude of society and the state towards persons with developmental disabilities

The first period is from aggression and intolerance to awareness of the need to take care of people with developmental disabilities. The turning point of the transition to this period in Western Europe is the first precedent of state care for the disabled - the opening of the first shelter for the blind in Bavaria in 1198. In Russia, the emergence of the first monastic shelters occurred in 1706-1715. , which is associated with the reforms of Peter I.

The second period is from the awareness of the need to provide care for persons with developmental disabilities to the awareness of the possibility of training at least some of them.

The third period is from awareness of the possibility of learning to awareness of the expediency of teaching three categories of children: with hearing impairments, vision impairments, and mentally retarded.

The fourth period is from realizing the need to educate some abnormal children to understanding the need to educate all abnormal children.

The fifth period is from isolation to integration. The integration of people with disabilities into society is the leading trend in Western Europe during this period of evolution, based on their full civil equality. The period is characterized in Western European countries by perestroika in the 80-90s. organizational foundations of special education, a reduction in the number of special schools and a sharp increase in the number of special classes in general education schools.

Social problems of a different order are associated with regional conditions with the presence or absence of special schools, special rehabilitation centers, speech pathologists in places where families live with a disabled child.

Since special educational institutions are distributed extremely unevenly throughout the country, disabled children are often forced to receive education and upbringing in special boarding schools. When children with disabilities enter such a school, they find themselves isolated from their families, from their normally developing peers, and from society as a whole. Abnormal children seem to be isolated in a special society and do not acquire the necessary social experience in time. The closeness of special educational institutions cannot but affect the development of the child’s personality and his readiness for independent life.

Although new, changed living conditions make it possible to raise the problem of disabled people obtaining modern prestigious professions; in addition, carry out vocational training in those types of work for which there is a need in a given region; if there are several special schools and a large number of graduates, organize employment centers for the disabled.

Social policy in Russia, aimed at disabled people, adults and children, is built today on the basis of the medical model of disability. Based on this model, disability is considered as an ailment, disease, pathology. Such a model, wittingly or unwittingly, weakens the social position of a child with a disability, weakens his social significance, isolating him from the normal healthy children's community, aggravates his unequal social status, dooming him to admit his inequality and lack of competitiveness in comparison with other children.

The main problem of a child with disabilities is his connection with the world, limited mobility, poor contacts with peers and adults, limited communication with nature, access to cultural values, and sometimes even basic education. This problem is not only a subjective factor, such as social, physical and mental health, but also the result of social policy and the prevailing public consciousness, which sanction the existence of an architectural environment inaccessible to a disabled person, public transport, and the lack of special social services.

Thus, the problems of socialization of disabled children sometimes have a clearly defined regional character.

The problem of socialization of the individual (and not only the developing personality, i.e. the young person) seems to be very acute because, due to a sharp drop in the birth rate, a phenomenon called “population aging” is taking place in most European countries and in particular in Russia. Every year, adults and especially older people make up an increasingly significant proportion of the population of many countries. This significantly increases the significance of the problem of socialization of adults, forces politicians, philosophers and scientists who study personality and society to take a fresh look at the place and role of older people in society, and requires new research at both the theoretical and practical levels.

Similar conditions for the formation of personality determine for many individuals common, similar views on the world and its values, common life goals and objectives, norms of behavior, tastes, habits, likes and dislikes, character traits, intellectual characteristics, etc. Of course, each of the individuals is unique and original in its own way, but at the same time it has such a combination, an ensemble of social qualities that make it possible to classify it as a very specific social type - a product of a complex interweaving of historical, cultural and socio-economic conditions of people's life. Since sociology deals not with the individual, but with the mass, it always strives to find repeating signs in diversity, to reveal in the individual what is essential, typical, and naturally arises in certain social conditions. The generalized expression of a set of recurring personality qualities is captured in the concept of “social personality type.”

For a long time, in Russian sociology, the prevailing tendency was to fix virtually one social type of personality, supposedly characteristic of the conditions of a mature socialist society and developing in the direction of an ideal communist type of personality. The entire diversity of consciousness and behavior of people, members of society, as a rule, was reduced to the degree of development of the historical type, to different conditions and manifestations of what is typical in this regard.

V.A. Yadov emphasizes the need to identify the basic type characteristic of a particular society, and the modal (real) type that prevails at one or another stage of its development. The modal personality type is not constructed arbitrarily or speculatively by the researcher. It is discovered and described only through sociological research. In addition to the modal type, sociologists also distinguish the so-called basic type, i.e. a system of social qualities that best meet objective conditions modern stage development of society. In addition, we can talk about an ideal personality type, i.e. about those traits and personality qualities that people would like to see in their contemporaries, in every person in general, but which are not feasible under given conditions.

During periods of a sharp change in social relations, radical and large-scale transformations of economic, socio-political structures and forms of social life, the problem of the discrepancy between the modal and basic types becomes extremely acute. Thus, many social qualities of people that are rooted in our society and have become ubiquitous are incompatible with the economic and political reforms being carried out in the country. A Soviet person, having adapted to life within the framework of the so-called command-administrative system, in conditions of totalitarian political relations, must go through a complex and painful process of revising many ideals and beliefs, revaluing many values, acquiring many other knowledge, skills, abilities, and social character traits.

The problem of personal socialization in general and political-economic in particular is relevant for any society and due to the change (sometimes quite often) of governments, heads of state with their doctrines, programs, and development concepts. A new group comes to power with a new course and begins to “socialize” various segments of the population in its own way, and people have to adapt to the new realities of social life.

Of course, the problem of personal socialization today is open and very relevant, but, nevertheless, in our society, although this issue is being solved, it is being solved very poorly. Modern social associations simply cannot influence the younger generation, just entering the first stage of socialization, fully, as needed. After all, not everything always goes as the “ideal model” of solving a specific issue tells us.

Conclusion

Based on the above, we can conclude that one of the most important universal aspects of generations is socialization.

The term "socialization" refers to the totality of all social processes, thanks to which the individual assimilates and reproduces a certain system of knowledge, norms and values ​​that allow him to function as a full member of society.

So, socialization is the process through which an individual becomes a member of society, assimilating its norms and values, mastering certain social roles. At the same time, the older generation passes on their knowledge to the younger ones and develops in them the skills necessary for independent living. This is how one generation replaces another, ensuring the continuity of culture, including language, values, norms, customs, and morals.

It is through systematic interaction with other people that an individual develops his own beliefs, moral standards, habits - everything that creates the uniqueness of the individual. Thus, socialization has two functions: the transmission of culture from one generation to another and the development of the “I”.

Socialization includes not only conscious, controlled, targeted influences, but also spontaneous, spontaneous processes that in one way or another influence the formation of personality.

Thus, the reform of Russian society led to a change in the standards of successful socialization of the individual, the set of rules for the transmission of social norms and cultural values ​​from generation to generation.

Similar documents

Definition of socialization as the process through which an individual acquires the basic elements of culture: symbols and values, meanings and norms. Basic processes of socialization: resocialization and desocialization. Consideration of the development of children's personality.

test, added 04/05/2015


Concept, mechanisms, institutions, features of modern socialization. Stages of personality development in the process of socialization. Problems of socialization in modern Russian society. Social and psychological influences at the level of the individual’s immediate environment.

abstract, added 02/05/2011


Studying the characteristics of church organizations as agents of personal socialization. The scale and effects of personal socialization under the influence of the Russian Orthodox Church in modern Russian society. Problems of the participation of the Church in the process of socialization of Russians.

thesis, added 12/02/2015


Socialization of personality: concept, process, scientific concepts. Objective and subjective factors of personality socialization, its functions. Values ​​in the semantic sphere of personality. Stages of personality socialization, periodization of its development. Desocialization and resocialization.

course work, added 06/28/2013


Provisions of the theory of socialization and its phases. Basic approaches to the periodization of socialization. Socialization of youth in modern society. Channels and mechanism of socialization of young people. Problems of socialization of youth in modern Russian society.

course work, added 02/04/2008


Gender socialization as a problem of global society. Modern society of Belarus and the problem of its gender socialization. Measures to implement gender policy. Content of the concept "Gender". Public trust as an indicator of individual socialization.

test, added 07/18/2013


Theory of socialization in modern social science. The role of the family in the system of institutions for the socialization of children. Features of the development of children in single-parent families, problems of their adaptation in society. Economic situation single-parent family as a factor in the socialization of children.

abstract, added 05/05/2015


The concept of the process of socialization as a complex multifaceted process of humanization of a person. Mechanisms and stages of socialization. Phases of personality socialization: adaptation, self-actualization and integration into the group. Stages of personality development according to Erikson, growing up.

test, added 01/27/2011


Human socialization: concept, process and main stages. Facilities mass media as a powerful tool for personal socialization. Problems of socialization in modern Ukrainian society. Spheres and institutions, basic mechanisms of personality socialization.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education

Kovrov State Technological Academy

them. V.A. Degtyareva

Department of Humanities

Essay on philosophy

Personality problems in modern society. The value of freedom.

executor:

student of group EB-112

Zheleznov Ilya

Supervisor:

Professor of the Department of Humanities

Zueva N.B.

Kovrov

INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

1) The concept of personality, its structure……………………………………………………………………………….4

2) Personal problems in modern society……………………………………………7

3 The value of freedom……………………………………………………………………………………………………………9

CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………13

LIST OF SOURCES USED……………………………………………………14

INTRODUCTION

Of all the problems that people have faced throughout human history, perhaps the most perplexing is the mystery of human nature. In what directions have we searched, what many different concepts have been put forward, but a clear and precise answer still eludes us. The essential difficulty is that there are so many differences between us. People differ not only in their appearance. But also by actions, often extremely complex and unpredictable. Among the people on our planet you will not find two exactly alike. These enormous differences make it difficult, if not impossible, to solve the problem of establishing what the members of the human race have in common.

Astrology, theology, philosophy, literature and social sciences are just some of the movements that attempt to understand the complexity of human behavior and the very essence of man. Some of these paths turned out to be dead ends, while other directions are on the verge of flourishing. Today the problem is acute. More than ever, since most of the serious ills of humanity are rapid population growth, global warming, environmental pollution, nuclear waste, terrorism. Drug addiction, racial prejudice, poverty are a consequence of people's behavior. It is likely that the quality of life in the future, and perhaps the very existence of civilization, will depend on how far we advance in understanding ourselves and others.

Let's look at a couple of articles:

1) Everett Sjostrom- a famous American psychologist and psychotherapist, wrote in an article about his work “The Manipulator” in 2004 that modern man, as a rule, is to some extent a manipulator, i.e. a person who, in pursuit of satisfying his desires, hides his own real feelings behind a wide variety of types of behavior. He contrasts a manipulator with a person who is actualized, self-confident and lives a full life, aimed at achieving not immediate desires, but serious life goals.

2) A modern view of the problem of personality is recorded in Vadim Zeland’s book “Transurfing of Reality” - 2006. This book talks about the difficult position of the individual in modern society, the way to preserve oneself as an individual, the way to develop personal choice and decisions on how not to become part of the crowd. A person, according to Zealand’s theory, is a sponge that absorbs all the information, which in our time is in abundance, all the opinions imposed on him by the media and other people, but a person has the right to decide for himself whether to accept this water (information) and squeeze out everything unnecessary, leave everything the most important thing for yourself, this is how your personality is formed.

3) Socialization of modern personality occurs in new sociocultural and technological conditions. Intensive and uncontrolled development modern technologies satisfying needs leads to the problem of excessively easing living conditions. Distortions and disharmonies in the socialization process, which complicate and even completely block the harmonious development of the individual, increase with the acceleration of the introduction of technical and social innovations in daily life of people. The “unbearable lightness of being” provided by modern technologies for satisfying needs is potentially fraught with negative consequences for the entire process of cultural and historical development. As psychologists A.Sh. Tkhostov and KH. Surnov note in their study, “... of course, man is the subject and protagonist of progress; its main figure and driving force. But on the other hand, a person constantly runs the risk of becoming a victim of such progress, which at the individual psychological level turns into regression. A car leads to obesity, and using a calculator too early does not give the opportunity to develop the skills of arithmetic operations.” The desire for maximum relief with the help of technical and organizational means of absolutely all aspects of life as the main goal of progress is fraught with a big psychological and social problem.

In the course of his formation and existence, a person in modern society faces a number of difficulties that prevent him from forming a stable worldview, gaining psychological comfort and the ability to engage in full-fledged social activity. These difficulties, in my opinion, are:

1. deformation of the socialization process;

1. problem of self-identity;

1. information oversaturation of society;

1. communication deficit;

1. problem of deviant behavior.

This, in turn, determines the relevance of this topic, since modern society, accelerated to the limit, requires even greater socialization of the individual, which in turn is impossible without self-identity.

The purpose of the work is to characterize the sociology of personality and the problems that arise in the process of its socialization.

The main tasks are:

1. Preparation of material;
2. Consider problems associated with personality formation;
3. Identify the sociological concept of personality and its structure.

The object of the study is the individual in modern society

The subject of the study is the factors influencing the formation and development of personality.

Chapter I. The concept of personality, its structure.

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 is not for nothing that it is said that a person contains the whole world within himself. Each person is connected by thousands of threads, visible and invisible, with the external environment, with society, outside of which he cannot form as an individual. It is this interaction between the individual and society that sociology considers, 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, first of all, as a social being, a representative of a social community, a bearer of its characteristic social qualities. When studying the processes of interaction between a person and the social environment, a person is considered not only as an object of external influences, but mainly as a social subject, an active participant in social life, having his own needs, interests, aspirations, as well as the ability and ability 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 every 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 socially significant properties and 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 entirety 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 traits. Undoubtedly, while 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 determining its structure. There are many approaches to consider it. The concept of 3. Freud is well known, who identified three elements in the personality structure: It (Id), I (Ego), Super-I (Super-Ego). It is our subconscious, the invisible part of the iceberg, where unconscious instincts dominate. According to Freud, two needs are fundamental: libidinal and aggressive. The Self is the 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. The super-ego is a moral “censor”, including a set of moral norms and principles, an internal controller. Therefore, our consciousness is in constant conflict between the unconscious instincts penetrating into it, on the one hand, and the moral prohibitions dictated by the Super-Ego, on the other. The mechanism for resolving these conflicts is sublimation (repression) of the 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.

So, personality is the most complex object, since it, being, as it were, on the edge of two huge worlds - biological and social, absorbs all their diversity and multidimensionality. Society as a social system, social groups and institutions do not have such a degree of complexity, because they are purely social formations. Of interest is the personality structure proposed by modern domestic authors, which includes three components: memory, culture and activity. Memory includes knowledge and operational information; culture social norms and values; activity 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. “Lay-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.

Chapter II. Personality problems in modern society

In the course of his formation and existence, a person in modern society faces a number of difficulties that prevent him from forming a stable worldview, gaining psychological comfort and the ability to engage in full-fledged social activity. These difficulties, in my opinion, are: deformation of the socialization process; problem of self-identity; information oversaturation of society; lack of communication, problem of deviant behavior.

The socialization of modern personality occurs in new sociocultural and technological conditions. The intensive and uncontrolled development of modern technologies for satisfying needs leads to the problem of excessively easing living conditions. Distortions and disharmonies in the socialization process, which complicate and even completely block the harmonious development of the individual, are increasing with the acceleration of the introduction of technical and social innovations into people’s everyday lives. The “unbearable lightness of being” provided by modern technologies for satisfying needs is potentially fraught with negative consequences for the entire process of cultural and historical development. As psychologists A.Sh. Tkhostov and K.G. Surnov note in their study, “... of course, man is the subject and protagonist of progress; its main figure and driving force. But on the other hand, a person constantly runs the risk of becoming a victim of such progress, which at the individual psychological level turns into regression. A car leads to obesity, and using a calculator too early does not give the opportunity to develop arithmetic skills.” The desire for maximum relief with the help of technical and organizational means of absolutely all aspects of life as the main goal of progress is fraught with great psychological and social danger. The ease with which a person satisfies his needs does not allow him to show purposeful efforts towards self-improvement, which ultimately leads to underdevelopment and degradation of the personality. Another problem of the modern personality generated by special conditions formation and being, is the problem of self-identity. The need for self-determination and self-identity has always been an important human need. E. Fromm believed that this need is rooted in human nature itself. Man is taken out of nature, endowed with reason and ideas, and because of this he must form an idea of ​​himself, must be able to say and feel: “I am I.” “A person feels the need for relatedness, rootedness and self-identity.

Modern era called the era of individualism. Indeed, in our time, more than ever, a person has the opportunity to independently choose his life path, and this choice depends less and less on traditional social institutions and ideologies, and more and more on individual goals and passions. However, individualism usually refers to an attempt to fill the void with a variety of different combinations of hobbies, “lifestyle”, individual consumption and “image”. All modern people They consider themselves individualists, having their own opinions and not wanting to be like others. However, behind this, as a rule, there are no beliefs or a clear idea of ​​​​the world around us and oneself. In the past, the entire set of signs given to the world by a person’s appearance and behavior was dictated by his true social status, profession and living conditions. Modern man is accustomed and accustomed to the idea that every detail of his appearance, first of all, says something about him to those around him, and only secondly is he really needed for something. We believe that this is due to the urban lifestyle, because it is in the street crowd that it is important to be different in order to be noticed.

The “personality” in whose interests modern man acts is the social “I”; this "personality" consists largely of the role assumed by the individual, and is in reality only a subjective disguise of his objective social function. As E. Fromm notes, “modern egoism is greed, arising from the frustration of the true personality and aimed at establishing a social personality.”

Due to false forms of self-identification in society, the concepts of “personality” and “individuality” are being replaced (being a person often means being different from others, standing out in some way, that is, having a strong personality), as well as “individuality” and “image” (individual originality a person comes down to his manner of “presenting himself,” to the style of clothing, unusual accessories, etc.). The Russian philosopher E.V. Ilyenkov wrote about this substitution of concepts: “Individuality, deprived of the opportunity to express itself in truly important, significant not only for itself, but also for another (for others, for all) actions, since the forms of such actions are predetermined assigned to it, ritualized and protected by all the power of social mechanisms, involuntarily begins to look for a way out for himself in trifles, in whims that mean nothing (to others, to everyone), in oddities.” In other words, individuality here becomes just a mask behind which hides a set of extremely general cliches, stereotypes, impersonal algorithms of behavior and speech, deeds and words. The next important problem of the social existence of a modern person is the information oversaturation of the surrounding world. Researchers of the influence of information flow on the human brain know that the resulting overloads can not only cause significant harm, but also completely disrupt the functioning of the brain. Consequently, information loads require the development of effective means of control and regulation, more stringent than during physical loads, since nature, having not yet encountered such a powerful level of information pressure, has not developed effective protection mechanisms. In this regard, the study of altered states of consciousness in Internet addicts requires special attention. As A.Sh. Tkhostov notes, “... on the Internet, a highly motivated user may find himself under the influence of a very intense flow of extremely significant (and often completely useless) information for him,” which he needs to have time to record, process, without missing out on tens and hundreds of new ones, every second emerging opportunities. The brain, overstimulated by excess stimulation, cannot cope with this task. A person becomes a translator of information processes, and his own subjectivity spirituality, the ability to choose, free self-determination and self-realization moves to the periphery of public life and turns out to be “open” in relation to the information-organized social environment. In this regard, only knowledge and properties of such instrumental subjectivity are in demand, which create new structures, directions and technological connections in this information environment. This also gives rise to a transformation of the personality itself, since subjectivity, built into the technical informatization of knowledge, is the basis for the deformation of modern man, who is losing the moral norms of self-awareness and behavior. Deprived of rootedness in real culture, these norms themselves become conditional. Rationality of the modern type acts as a method of technical-instrumental behavior of an individual who seeks to take root in an unstable world and strengthen his own position, or at least make it safe.

Another pressing problem of the modern personality is the lack of communication. According to S. Moscovici, in the conditions of industrial production, the creation of cities, the collapse and degradation of the traditional family and the traditional stratified model of society, in which a person was destined for a rightful place, there is an irreversible degradation of normal methods of communication. The emerging communication deficit is compensated by the development of the press and other modern communication technologies, which give rise to a specific phenomenon of the crowd: an unstructured public formation connected only by communication networks. However, this compensation is initially defective; its ease contains some inferiority. For example, Internet communication is much simpler than real human communication, so it does not require effort, it is more secure, it can be started and stopped at any time, it allows you to maintain anonymity and it is accessible. However, being technologically mediated, this communication is incomplete, because the interlocutors remain more abstract characters for each other than living people. The biggest disadvantage of such surrogate communication is that it does not provide a stable identity.

A society organized with the help of a communication network, according to S. Moscovici, is a crowd with a blurred identity, increased suggestibility, and loss of rationality. However, communication in real life also may not always be complete. Most modern social groups and communities are unstable and, as a rule, small formations that arise randomly and also spontaneously disintegrate. These “social ephemeris”4 are mainly created in the sphere of leisure and entertainment, as if in contrast to the formal associations that exist during work (for example, visitors to a nightclub, hotel residents, a circle of friends, etc.). At the same time, the ease with which people enter these communities, as well as the absence of formal restrictions in them, does not mean that the human personality here can be completely freed and revealed. The spontaneity of relationships and the instability of connections impose no less a limitation on purely personal, “mental” communication between people, and the entire communication process often comes down to the exchange of “standard” phrases or jokes. Within the framework of “social ephemeris,” communication, as a rule, is superficial and practically reduced to the level of reflexes, that is, more or less similar reactions to the same type of remarks from the interlocutor. In other words, only a certain outer shell participates in the conversation, but not the whole person. As a result, a person’s personality withdraws into itself and loses its “depth.” The living, direct connection between people is also lost. The destructive consequences of this kind of isolation were described by N.Ya. Berdyaev, who noted that “egocentric self-isolation and concentration on oneself, the inability to lose one’s temper is original sin" Thus, the conditions for the formation and existence of a modern personality lead to the emergence of a fragmented, closed personality, alienated from society and from itself, which is reflected in a number of postmodern concepts that proclaim the idea of ​​splitting the human “I”. In the philosophy of postmodernism, the phenomenon of “I” itself is assessed as culturally articulated, associated with a certain tradition, and therefore historically transitory.

The concepts of “man”, “subject”, “personality” are, from this position, only consequences of changes in the basic attitudes of knowledge. “If these attitudes disappear in the same way they arose, if some event (the possibility of which we can only foresee, not yet knowing its form or appearance) destroys them, as it collapsed at the end of the 17th century. the soil of classical thinking, then we can guarantee this a person will be erased, like a face drawn on the coastal sand.” As for the philosophy of postmodernism’s own version of the articulation of the subject, it is characterized by a radical decentration of both the individual and any forms of the collective “I”. The rules of the episteme, acting as a regulator in relation to the activity of consciousness, but not reflexively recognized by the latter, act as a factor in the decentration and depersonification of the subject. From the point of view of postmodernism, the very use of the term “subject” is nothing more than a tribute to the classical philosophical tradition: as Foucault writes, the so-called analysis of the subject is in fact an analysis of “the conditions under which it is possible for a certain individual to perform the function of a subject. And it would be necessary to clarify in what field the subject is a subject and a subject of what: discourse, desire, economic process, and so on. There is no absolute subject." Thus, the programmatic presumption of the “death of man”, fundamental to the philosophical paradigm of postmodernity, is formulated. The rejection of the concept of “subject” is largely due to the recognition in the philosophy of postmodernism of the randomness of the phenomenon “I”. The presumption of subordination of unconscious desires to the cultural norms of the “Super-Ego”, put forward in classical psychoanalysis, was reformulated by J. Lacan into the thesis about the predetermination of desire by the material forms of language8. The subject as a link between the “real”, “imaginary” and “symbolic” is characterized by J. Lacan as “decentred”, because his thought and existence turn out to be non-identical to each other, being mediated by the alien reality of language. The unconscious, therefore, appears as a language, and desire as a text. The rational subject of the Cartesian type, as well as the desiring subject of the Freudian type, are replaced by a “decentred” instrument for the presentation of cultural meanings (“signifiers”) of language. As a consequence, the “death of man” is postulated, dissolved in the determinative influence of language structures and discursive practices on individual consciousness.

As for the so-called social roles, which presuppose the certainty of their subject-performer, these versions of self-identification are nothing more than masks, the presence of which does not at all guarantee the presence of a hidden “I” behind them, claiming the status of identity, “since this identity, however, the rather weak one, which we try to insure and hide under a mask, is in itself only a parody: it is inhabited by plurality, countless souls argue in it; systems intersect and command each other... And in each of these souls, history will discover not a forgotten identity that is always ready to be reborn, but a complex system of elements, numerous in turn, different, over which no force of synthesis has power.”

Thus, postmodernism proclaims the “death of the subject itself,” the final “end of the autonomous ... monad, or ego, or individual,” which has undergone a fundamental “decentration.” The theories of postmodernism reflect the state of the modern personality, fragmented, subject to the influence of diverse and contradictory information flows, and therefore without a clear self-identity. Postmodernism correctly captures the state of modern society and the individual, but incorrectly declares this state to be normal, since the current state of affairs poses a danger to both the individual and society as a whole. Self-identification of a person with random “markers” causes constant discomfort, a feeling of dissatisfaction and uncertainty. This, in turn, increases the general degree of public discontent, which results in large-scale undirected aggression, shaking the institutions of the social system and throwing society back to the level of a textbook “war of all against all.” A crisis of self-identity implies the impossibility of a person acquiring “attachment” to the environment, his coordinates of existence and the subjective experience of this process as a lack of integrity and comfort of the cultural environment. In addition, this crisis was expressed in the attitude of modern man to the future and his own prospects. A person can only solve immediate problems, but not build an overall life strategy.

All this happens because the individual does not have a system of ideological coordinates, which should determine the content of the personality, give systematicity to its manifestations, determine the general strategy of behavior, and also provide filtering of incoming information and its critical assessment.

Deviant behavior, understood as a violation of social norms, has become widespread in recent years and has brought this problem into the spotlight of sociologists, social psychologists, doctors, and law enforcement officials.

There are several concepts explaining the causes of deviant behavior. So, according to the concept of disorientation proposed by the French sociologist Emile Durkheim, social crises are the breeding ground for deviations when a mismatch occurs accepted standards And life experience person and a state of anomie lack of norms occurs. American sociologist Robert Merton believed that the cause of deviation is not the absence of norms, but the inability to follow them.

Explaining the causes, conditions and factors determining this social phenomenon has become an urgent task. Its consideration involves searching for answers to a number of fundamental questions, including questions about the essence of the category “norm” (social norm) and deviations from it. In a stable functioning and steadily developing society, the answer to this question is more or less clear. Social norm it is a necessary and relatively stable element of social practice, serving as an instrument of social regulation and control. A social norm finds its embodiment (support) in laws, traditions, customs, i.e. in everything that has become a habit, firmly established in everyday life, in the way of life of the majority of the population, is supported by public opinion, plays the role of a “natural regulator” of social and interpersonal relationships. But in a reformed society, where some norms have been destroyed and others have not been created even at the theoretical level, the problem of forming, interpreting and applying norms becomes an extremely difficult matter.

So after the breakup Soviet Union in Russia there is a surge in drug addiction, crime, alcoholism, etc. Let's consider the problem of drug addiction in more detail. The causes of drug addiction are the following motives characteristic of young people: dissatisfaction with life, satisfaction of curiosity about the effects of a narcotic substance; symbolism of belonging to a certain social group; expression of one’s own independence, and sometimes hostility towards others; experiencing pleasurable, new, exciting, or dangerous experiences; achieving “clarity of thinking” or “creative inspiration”; achieving a feeling of complete relaxation; escape from something oppressive.

Studies have shown that the first direct acquaintance of most adolescents with drugs occurs before the age of 15 (and only for 37% - later); before 10 years - 19%; from 10 to 12 years old - 26%; from 13 to 14 years old - 18%. Without accurate data, we can still assume that drug addiction is getting younger every year, which is associated with the acceleration process and the acceleration of the pace of a teenager’s entry into adulthood.

As for schoolchildren’s awareness of drugs, the situation here is twofold: on the one hand, 99% of respondents answered positively to the question of whether they know what drugs are, but on the other hand, practice shows that this knowledge is not always objective and are often determined by myths existing in society about drugs and drug addiction. But it’s one thing to talk about drug addiction in general, and quite another to face it face to face. What is the possible reaction to the news that your close friend is using drugs? 63% of respondents said that they would try to somehow influence to help a person in need get out of the hole into which he himself had climbed; 25%

will not change their attitude and 12% will break off the relationship (that is, we have 37% either passive contemplatives or people who do not want to take care of their neighbor, which, in fact, is practically the same thing). Perhaps this happens because one of the many myths formed in our minds is triggered: people who become drug addicts are weak, offended by fate and unable to control their actions. It should be noted once again that drug addiction among young people, perceived today as “problem number one,” is only a consequence, a reflection of deep internal contradictions, both mental and social. Many attempts to correct the situation today come down to the fact that the fight is often directed against the drugs themselves and their use (that is, against the effect, not the cause). Naturally, widespread promotion of a healthy lifestyle, increased awareness of the objective consequences of drug use, organization and implementation of other preventive measures - all this is significant (and effective only if a person can stop taking drugs, switching to something else, no less dangerous in social terms), but somewhat similar to the behavior of the drug addict himself: a solution to the problem is expected from a one-time injection, which, indeed, creates the illusion of resolution, but only for a while. Recognizing the importance of preventive work, it should be said that it will become truly effective only when, along with the prevention of drug addiction, work is carried out to prevent psychotraumatic situations that arise mainly in the process of a child’s communication in the family - with parents, at school - with classmates and teachers. Accordingly, prevention work should be carried out not only with specific people, but also with representatives of their social environment.

Chapter III . The value of freedom

Freedom is one of the main philosophical categories that characterize the essence of man and his existence.

Freedom is considered in relation to necessity, arbitrariness and anarchy, with equality and justice.

The concept of freedom was born in Christianity as an expression of the idea of ​​equality of people before God and the possibility for a person of free choice on the path to God.

Free will is a concept that means the possibility of unhindered internal self-determination of a person in fulfilling certain goals and objectives of the individual. Will is a person’s conscious and free striving to achieve his goal, which is of a certain value to him. An act of will that expresses an obligation has the character of a spiritual phenomenon rooted in the structure of a person’s personality. Will is the opposite of impulsive aspirations and drives, the vital needs of a person. The concept of will refers to a mature personality who is fully aware of his actions and actions.

To understand the essence of the phenomenon of personal freedom, it is necessary to understand the contradictions of voluntarism and fatalism, to determine the boundaries of necessity, without which the realization of freedom is unthinkable.

Voluntarism is the recognition of the primacy of will over other manifestations of a person’s spiritual life, including thinking. The roots of voluntarism are contained in Christian dogma, the teachings of Kant, Fichte, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche. The will is considered the blind, unreasonable principle of the world, dictating its laws to man. To act in the spirit of voluntarism means not to take into account the objective conditions of existence, the laws of nature and society.

Fatalism initially predetermines the entire course of a person’s life, his actions, explaining this either by fate, or the will of God, or strict determinism (Hobbes, Spinoza, Laplace). Fatalism leaves no room for free choice and does not provide alternatives. Strict necessity and the resulting predictability of the main stages of human life are characteristic of astrology and other occult teachings, both past and present, various social utopias and dystopias.

European tradition often uses the term “freedom” as an analogue of “will” and, contrasting the concepts of necessity, violence and slavery, connects it with responsibility.

The most profound solution to the problem of freedom and responsibility can be found in the works of Russian religious thinkers F.M. Dostoevsky, N.A. Berdyaeva, M.M. Bakhtin, for whom freedom is a measure of personal dignity, and responsibility is a measure of humanity, a criterion of the highest moral principles. Considering the relationship between freedom and responsibility as the main direction of development of society, Russian philosophy does not think of them outside the ethical dimension. The ethics of free action (M.M. Bakhtin) is associated with the concepts of conscience, duty, honor, and dignity of a particular individual. Then a person is a person who acts; his way of existence is a responsible act.

ON THE. Berdyaev in his philosophy of freedom distinguishes three types of freedom:

1. existential freedom (baseless, primordial ontological. It is rooted in the existence of the world).
2. freedom is rational (conscious necessity social. It manifests itself in society).
3. mystical freedom (creativity spiritual. It manifests itself in the Spirit. Only here can a person fully realize himself).

E. Fromm expresses his own concept of freedom in his book “Escape from Freedom.”

He distinguishes two types of freedom:

"Freedom from..." He calls it negative because it is a person’s attempt to escape responsibility.

Fromm says that modern man, having received freedom, is burdened by it, since freedom entails the need for choice and responsibility for one’s actions. Therefore, a person seeks to transfer his freedom, and, along with it, responsibility, to someone else (be it a church, state power, political party, public opinion). All this leads only to loneliness and alienation of a person, and is realized in authoritarianism (sadism and masochism as an attempt to realize oneself through power over another or subordination of one’s will to another); conformism (loss of one’s own individuality) or destruction (violence, cruelty, destruction of oneself and others);

"Freedom for..." This type of freedom is positive, since through spontaneous activity (creativity, love) it leads to self-creation and self-realization of the individual.

Models of the relationship between the individual and society. Several models of the relationship between the individual and society regarding freedom and its attributes can be identified.

Most often, this is a struggle for freedom, when a person enters into an open and often irreconcilable conflict with society, achieving his goals at any cost.

This is an escape from the world, the so-called escapist behavior, when a person, unable to find freedom among people, flees to his “world” in order to have a way of free self-realization there.

This is an adaptation to the world when a person, sacrificing to some extent his desire to gain freedom, goes into voluntary submission in order to gain a new level of freedom in a modified form.

It is also possible for the interests of the individual and society to coincide in gaining freedom, which finds a certain expression in the forms of developed democracy. Thus, freedom is a most complex and deeply contradictory phenomenon of human life and society. This is the problem of correlating freedom and equality without suppression and leveling. Its solution is associated with an orientation towards one or another system of cultural values ​​and norms. The concepts of personality, freedom, and values ​​enrich the idea of ​​a person and allow us to correctly understand the structure of society as a phenomenon generated in the process of human life.

If we talk about the specifics of understanding human freedom and responsibility at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, it should be emphasized that the world is entering a period of civilizational turning point, when many traditional ways of human existence will require significant correction. Futurologists predict an increase in the phenomena of instability of many physical and biological processes, and an increase in the phenomenon of unpredictability of social and psychological phenomena. In these conditions, being an individual is an imperative for the development of man and humanity, which presupposes highest degree responsibility, which extends from a narrow circle of the person’s immediate environment to planetary and cosmic tasks.

Modern humanity, according to the conviction of J. Ortega y Gasset, is in a serious crisis, moreover, it faces a terrible danger of self-destruction. Ortega dedicated his most famous work, the essay “The Revolt of the Masses,” to understanding this tragic situation. The essay, written in 1930, was extremely popular, many of its ideas deeply penetrated the culture of the 20th century, and the problems raised remain relevant today.

A historical crisis, he argues, occurs when “the world,” or the belief system of past generations, loses its significance for new generations living within the same civilization, that is, a certain way of organizing society and cultural life. It is as if a person finds himself without peace. A similar state is typical today for the entire European civilization, which has gone far beyond the boundaries of Europe and has become synonymous with modern civilization in general. The reason for this crisis is the uprising of the masses. In our time, Ortega argues, society is dominated by the “man of the masses.” Belonging to the mass pure psychological sign. A mass person is an average, ordinary person. He does not feel any special gift or difference in himself, he is “exactly” like everyone else (without individuality), and he is not upset by this, he is content to feel the same as everyone else. He is indulgent towards himself, does not try to correct or improve himself; he is self-satisfied; lives effortlessly “floats with the flow” He is not capable of creativity and gravitates towards an inert life, which is condemned to eternal repetition, marking time. In thinking, as a rule, one is content with a set ready-made ideas This is enough for him.

This “simple” person in society is opposed by another psychological type of personality - the “person of the elite”, the chosen minority. "Chosen One" does not mean "important" who considers himself superior to others and despises them. This is, first of all, a person who is very demanding of himself, even if he is personally unable to satisfy these high demands. He is strict with himself, his life is subordinated to self-discipline and service to the highest (principle, authority), it is an intense, active life, ready for new, highest achievements. A “noble” person is characterized by dissatisfaction and uncertainty about his perfection; even if he is blinded by vanity, he needs confirmation of this in someone else's opinion. The degree of talent and originality of such people varies, but they are all capable of creativity, having accepted the “rules of the game” of their cultural system, voluntarily submitting to them.

The contradiction between a person’s desire for a free existence and the desire of society as a system to establish order is examined. The freedom of human individuals is noted by G. Spencer in his definition of social reality. Existentialists believe that human existence goes beyond the material and social world. A. Camus: “Man is the only creature who does not want to be what he is.” The equivalence of human existence to freedom is confirmed by the fact that both of these concepts can only be defined apophatically, that is, by listing what they are not. How is it possible to induce human individuals to respect social order? On the other hand, everything in a person is socially shaped by society, even his biological traits. For example, the behavior of infants varies depending on the social environment in which they live. The phenomenon of childhood itself manifests itself only in a developed society. For example, in the Middle Ages, children were treated like little adults; they were dressed in the same clothes as adults; there was no production of toys.

Georg Simmel: “The very development of society increases human freedom.” With the growing scale of society and its differentiation, a person feels more and more free from every connection with a specific social circle, simply because there are more and more such social circles with the development of society. Talcott Parsons: “Why are the roles of family, community, and religion diminishing? Because alternative associations have appeared: political, cultural, entertainment circles.” On the other hand, the person feels increasingly lonely. M. Heidegger: “Loneliness is a negative mode of sociality,” that is, isolation from society. At the same time, with increasing isolation, the longing for society grows.

Thus, if we take the philosophical aspect of the problem, then freedom is associated with necessity and possibility. What is free is not the will that chooses based solely on a person’s desires, but the will that chooses based on reason, in accordance with objective necessity. The measure of personal freedom is determined by a specific situation, the presence of a range of possibilities in it, as well as the level of personal development, level of culture, understanding of one’s goals and the extent of one’s responsibility.

Freedom is associated with the responsibility of the individual to himself, other people, the team, and society. Personal freedom forms a single complex with the rights of other members of society. It is impossible to separate political and legal rights freedom of speech, conscience, beliefs, etc. from socio-economic rights to work, rest, education, medical care etc. Human rights are usually enshrined in the State Constitution. The highest value of a person in a rule-of-law state is his rights and freedoms, and a person has the right to actively fight for them if they are violated.

Thus, the peculiarity of spiritual values ​​is that they have a non-utilitarian and non-instrumental character: they do not serve for anything else; on the contrary, everything else is subordinated and acquires meaning only in the context of higher values, in connection with their affirmation. A feature of the highest values ​​is also the fact that they form the core of the culture of a certain people, the fundamental relationships and needs of people: universal (peace, the life of mankind), communication values ​​(friendship, love, trust, family), social values ​​(freedom, justice, law , dignity, Honor, Glory, etc.), aesthetic values ​​(beautiful, sublime). The highest values ​​are realized in an infinite variety of situations of choice. The concept of values ​​is inseparable from the spiritual world of the individual. If reason and knowledge constitute the most important components of consciousness, without which purposeful human activity is impossible, then spirituality, being formed on this basis, refers to those values ​​that are associated with the meaning of a person’s life, one way or another deciding the question of choosing his life path, goals and meaning their activities and the means to achieve them.

CONCLUSION

Conclusion of the problem of personality in modern society:

So, an identity crisis, a decrease in the ability to process information and forecast, as well as the self-isolation of modern man indicate a lack of integrity of his personality, which causes disharmony in its psychological, social and cultural aspects. To summarize, we can say that objectively the modern personality has a need for integrity, however, firstly, the sociocultural environment does not contribute to its formation, and secondly, this need, as a rule, is not recognized by the individual himself. Being unconscious, it can find various distorted manifestations.

Thus, the search for integrity can occur in the form of a passion for Eastern spiritual practices, conversion to religious fundamentalism, attending various trainings and seminars on self-development, etc. However, all these methods give only a temporary and unstable effect, since a person continues to be within a fragmented and aggressive socio-cultural environment, or (in the case of religious fundamentalism) lead to opposition between the individual and society.

Conclusion of personality value:

IN different cultures Freedom receives different attention. For example, in modern Western European culture, liberalism places the concept of freedom at the forefront. And on the contrary, in many Eastern cultures there is a traditionally rational and purely practical attitude towards this concept, or even a complete lack of attention to the issue of freedom, which does not exist as an independent value. Also, freedom as an independent value is often assessed in cultures as something at least dangerous, and even downright harmful. Such an assessment may be based on the assumption that real freedom can only be achieved through individual self-sufficiency, whereas in practice all people live in communities.

The conclusion is also obvious that the more attention is paid to social benefits, the less value individual freedom has. And this point of view is often shared by the individual himself, as a bearer of culture. That is, such a restriction is non-violent in nature, but is based on the mutually beneficial coexistence of people.

Bibliography:

1.Kom I. S. Sociology of personality: Textbook / I. S. Kom M., 1994.

2. Karsavin L.P. Philosophy of history. St. Petersburg : JSC Komplekt, 1993

3. Jamieson F. Postmodernism or the logic of culture of late capitalism // Philosophy of the postmodern era. Mn. : Krasiko-Print, 1996

5. Foucault M. Words and Things: Archeology of the Humanities. M.: Progress, 2000

6. Borisova L. G., Solodova G. S. Sociology of personality: Textbook / L. G. Borisova, G. S. Solodova Novosibirsk, 1997.

7.Moskalenko V.V. Socialization of personality: Reader / V.V. Moskalenko Kyiv, 2001

8.S.A. Bykov: Drug addiction among young people as an indicator of maladjustment // Bulletin of VEGU. 2000.

9. Fromm E. To have or to be? M.: Progress, 1990 P.46

10. Karsavin L.P. Philosophy of history. St. Petersburg : JSC Komplekt, 1993 P.46

11. Berdyaev N.A. About slavery and human freedom. Experience of personalistic me-

taphysics. M.: Republic, 1995. P.120

12. Foucault M. Words and Things: Archeology of the Humanities. M.: Progress, 1977 P.398

Articles:

1. Shostrom E. Manipulator. The inner journey from manipulation to actualization. M.: April-Press, 2004.

1. Zeland V. Transurfing reality. AST, 2006.
2. Tkhostov A.Sh., Surnov K.G. The influence of modern technologies on personality development and the formation of pathological forms of adaptation: back side socialization. URL: http://vprosvet.ru/biblioteka/psysience/smi-v-razvitii-lichnosti/

1

The article proposes the author's socio-philosophical understanding of socialization as a process of dialectical interaction between the individual and the social environment, during which the development and formation of a person as an object and subject of social relations takes place. The main problems of modern socialization related to the process of informatization of society are revealed at the level of deformation of public and individual consciousness. Negative trends have been identified due to the replacement of traditional institutions of socialization with virtual communities. The main ones are related to the problems of personality transformation at three levels of its organization: activity, communication, self-awareness. It is shown that in modern conditions one of the main functions of socialization is disrupted - the transmission of culture from generation to generation, which leads to hypertrophy of the processes of formation of a person as a subject social activities and social relations.

socialization

virtual community

information processes

contradiction

1. Korneeva E.N. A look at socialization from the point of view of developmental psychology // Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin. − 1996. − No. 2. − P. 17−23.

2. Kuznetsova A.Ya. Personality as a result of the socialization process // Biological and social in the formation of a holistic personality. − Riga, 1997. − 212 p.

3. Cooley Ch. Social self; edited by IN AND. Dobrenkova. − M.: Publishing house Mosk. Univ., 1994. − 358 p.

4. Maslow A. Motivation and personality. − St. Petersburg: Eurasia, 1999. – 408 p.

5. Mead, J. Az and I / J. Mead; edited by IN AND. Dobrenkova. − M.: Publishing house Mosk. Univ., 1994. − 541 p.

6. Parsons T. Essay on the social system // On social systems. − M.: Academic Project, 2002. − 691 p.

7. Suslova T.I. The problem of socialization of youth // Social work in Russia: education and practice: collection. scientific tr.; edited by prof. ON THE. Grika. – Tomsk: Tomsk. state University of Control Systems Radioelectronics, 2009. – pp. 182−184.

8. Rostovtseva M.V., Mashanov A.A. Philosophical meaning of the concept of “social adaptation” // Bulletin of KRASGAU. − 2012. – No. 6. – P. 288−293.

9. Rostovtseva M.V., Mashanov A.A. Basic approaches to the study of personality adaptability // Bulletin of KRASGAU. − 2012. – No. 7. – P. 191−196.

The urgent task of modern social philosophy is to understand the deep content of ongoing social processes and changes, to identify the sources and mechanisms that determine the social activities of people. Socialization of the individual is one of the fundamental processes when the individual and the whole - society and man - merge into a single being, and at the same time, that unique and inimitable thing is born that moves world history forward and allows humanity to move to a new, qualitative stage of development. The process of socialization is the main issue of the reproduction of human essence, a spiritually healthy society and a specific full-fledged personality. Preserving man as a species, ensuring continuity in development, protecting cultural and historical heritage, establishing and establishing man as a full-fledged member of the society to which he belongs - this is just an incomplete list of problems that the socio-philosophical problem of socialization covers.

Socialization is the main way of personality formation, the basis for its subsequent development and improvement. This process is determined, on the one hand, by the preferences of the individual, his characteristics, and active involvement in various spheres of social life. On the other hand, the social structure itself is designed to enable a person to find his place in society, to create conditions for awareness and realization of his inner potential and internal intentions. Therefore, at all times and in any society, a specific historical analysis of socialization, its content and characteristics acquires special importance. High dynamism of social changes in Russia in the 21st century. makes this task more relevant than ever. These circumstances determined the choice of the subject of this study - a socio-philosophical analysis of the problems of modern socialization of the individual.

To understand the real complexity of the socialization process, philosophical reflection of a wide range of problems in their mutual dependence is necessary.

The term “socialization” itself began to be actively used to designate the process of formation and development of personality from the end of the 19th century (F. Giddings, E. Durkheim, G. Tarde, etc.). At this time, theories of socialization were based on approaches to considering the role of objective and subjective factors of socialization, to determining the priority of the individual or social in the formation of personality.

The first approach affirms or assumes a person’s passive position, and considers socialization itself as a process of his adaptation to society, which shapes each of its members in accordance with its inherent culture. This approach can also be called subject-objective. Its founders are considered to be the French scientist E. Durkheim and T. Parsons.

The basis of socialization, according to T. Parsons, are the functional forms of interdependence of the social system and the five main environments of its functioning: higher reality, cultural system, personality system, behavioral organism and physical-organic environment. With this emphasis one can see two main semantic meanings socialization. Firstly, socialization, practically identified with adaptation, acts as a function and a necessary condition for the emergence of the property of self-sufficiency of society. Secondly, socialization underlies T. Parsons’ analysis of the relationship between the system of society and the system of personality. Moreover, the adaptive process itself, according to the author, is the primary function of a person’s role in social system. Thus, in the first case, structural-functional analysis actually merges socialization and adaptation with the stable existence and development of society, with its constant reproduction as a system, and in the second it tries to find the organic-cultural foundations of a person’s rootedness in the social environment, correlating the social roles that he performs. with regulatory standards and public values.

The consideration of a person as a subject of socialization is based on the psychological concepts of American scientists C.H. Cooley, W.I. Thomas and F. Znaniecki, J.G. Mida. Charles Cooley, the author of the theory of the “mirror self” and the theory of small groups, believed that the individual “I” acquires a social quality in communications, in interpersonal communication within the primary group (family, peer group, neighborhood group), i.e. in the process of interaction between individual and group subjects. George Herbert Mead, developing a direction called symbolic interactionism, argued that the “social individual” is the source of movement and development of society. . The essence of socialization is interpreted differently in humanistic psychology, whose representatives are A. Allport, A. Maslow, K. Rogers, etc. Here the subject is viewed as a self-forming and self-developing system, as a product of its own self-education.

From our point of view, we note that the process of development and formation of personality in society is influenced by a whole range of different factors: both environmental and intrapersonal. Socialization is a dialectical process in which the dynamics of a person’s passive and active position take place. Passive - when he assimilates norms and is the object of social relations; active - when he reproduces this experience and acts as a subject of social relations; and the active-passive position of the individual as the achievement and development of a person’s ability to integrate subject-object relations, namely, finding that option of life activity in which a person both “accepts” everything that has been developed and is being developed in a given social environment, and actively self-realizes himself in a given society. The formation of a person as a social being and the formation of human individuality are not two different processes, but a single process of personality development.

Let us define socialization as a continuous process of dialectical interaction between the individual and the social environment, during which the development and formation of a person as an object of social relations and as an active subject of social activity takes place, through the development of socially necessary knowledge, skills and abilities to perform various social roles and functions. The main criterion for successful socialization is the establishment of a person as a full-fledged member of society to which he belongs through the self-realization of the individual, taking into account his individual characteristics, internal intentions and needs.

The modern process of personal socialization occurs under the influence of a number of interdependent factors that give rise to problems at its different levels. These steps in this work will be designated as macro level, middle level and micro level.

Macro-level factors include processes occurring in the world, taken on a global scale. They are marked by a sharp transition to a new techno-information formation, which generates competition between social ideals and identities of the previous time and the not yet fully formed identities of the new time, which negatively affects the process of socialization as a whole. Globalization, integration, informatization - these are the concepts that form the basis of the social existence of Russians. They have enveloped the inner mental world of the entire Russian society and every individual Russian and claim dominance in all spheres of people’s lives. We operate with these concepts, write about them, talk about their negative and positive effects, but most of us have a very vague idea of ​​the semantic meaning of these abstractions. This is largely due to the fact that the formation of society innovative type progresses at such a pace that the nature of the ongoing transformations makes it impossible to foresee the consequences of these innovations. Modern man simply does not have time to realize the changes that have taken place in society, and their rapid rooting does not make it possible not only to internally adopt them, i.e. to internalize, but also to see one’s place in the new social structure. As a result, many modern Russian people are in a state of existential vacuum; they are value-disoriented and lost in the modern information space. The foundations of the stability of human existence are being undermined, and the social sphere is characterized by states of “fermentation,” mass loss, uncertainty, and increased anxiety.

These circumstances cause problems at the “average” level, associated with the specifics of the functioning of modern institutions of socialization. As noted above, the basis of the socialization process is the dialectical unity of its active and passive, subjective and objective aspects. At each subsequent stage of socialization, this ratio looks different than at the previous one, but the share of the active principle, the subjective aspect of a person should constantly increase. Ideally, a successfully socialized person is a person who has clearly established the connection between his needs (what I need from society) and his abilities (what I can do myself and give to society) and has the opportunity to “distance himself” from the social environment as he becomes self-sufficient, self-founding. A mature, successfully socialized person strives to live his own life, not only giving himself to society, but also realizing himself in different forms life in an individual, specifically her own way, corresponding to her abilities and characteristics.

In this regard, the objective circumstances of modern reality contribute to this more than ever in the entire history of human existence. Modern society pushes the human personality to the top of the social pedestal. The new generation has been entrusted with the role of creator of new social, spiritual, and moral values. It is today’s youth that “fills with content” new era a special worldview, worldview, creates new archetypes of consciousness for future generations, develops original trajectories of social adaptation in a constantly changing environment, which over time will take root in society and become the leading guidelines for people’s life. Under these conditions, fertile soil has been created for the development and affirmation of one’s own individuality and uniqueness.

However, what is really happening. The “isolation” of a person from society in modern information conditions is hypertrophied, which gives rise to a dialectical contradiction. It is associated with real “isolation” and an almost hopeless loss of spiritual connection with previous generations, but on the other hand we are witnessing a process of mass “socialization.” A person strives to unite, to include himself in society, but not in society in its traditional sense, but in a community, or, more precisely, in communities that have an informational nature. We are not afraid to assert that by now traditional institutions of socialization have practically been replaced by such virtual information communities. This even applies to the institution of family. The loss of traditional moral guidelines and discreteness in social continuity, leading to a complete denial of the spiritual experience of past generations, turns traditional society into a kind of information field, the various segments of which are embodied for the individual in socializing institutions - information communities. This thesis is confirmed by statistical sociological studies that state the facts of an increase in the amount of free and working time spent (by both the adult population and children and adolescents) on the World Wide Web Internet, virtual spaces and the so-called “ in social networks", which by their nature are more mystified than real social in nature.

The logical consequence of the above is profound changes at the micro-level of socialization, representing the formation and development of a specific personality in its three main areas: activity, communication and self-awareness.

The modern unification of man into communities is reminiscent of the historical fact of the unification of ancient people into tribes, only this unification was spontaneous, unconscious in nature, dictated by the instincts of self-preservation. Primitive people passively obeyed the demands of the leader and the pack in order to survive. In modern society, in our opinion, the strategy of totalitarian adaptive behavior also prevails, based on passive, conformal acceptance of the goals and value orientations of the group, especially since there are countless numbers of these virtual groups, which provides the same countless opportunities for variation within them. The passive aspect of socialization in this regard is also manifested in the fact that a person’s adaptive behavior in communities is more reminiscent of “blind faith” than conscious conformism. Chaos, anarchy in most social spheres and traditional institutions of socialization, the lack of the ability to see the prospects of one’s own life, lower modern man to the stage of primitive existence, when people, due to the limited development of the mind, came up with explanations for the inexplicable, violating the stability of their existence. In ancient times, humanity created gods and believed in them, we believe in mythologized ideals and slogans: “A fair social order!” "Information order!" "Electronic wallets!" "Free chatting!" “Quick earnings on social networks!” and so on. Under their ephemeral influence, becoming objects of manipulation, we carry out spontaneous, sometimes unconscious behavior that bears little resemblance to active, purposeful activity aimed at inclusion in the sphere of real social relations. In this regard, the process of socialization loses one more of its functions - ensuring the formation of a person as a subject of social activity, a subject of work and communication.

The problem of increasing the share of virtual communication compared to real communication is quite widely described in the scientific literature. We would like to dwell on its next aspect.

In the process of mastering various types of activities, the individual’s contacts with other people and with society expand and multiply. It is in the process of real communication that information, experience, abilities, abilities, skills, as well as results of activity are exchanged, which is a necessary and universal condition and factor not only in the socialization and social adaptation of a person, but also in the formation and development of society and personality.

Modern communication in most cases is increasingly a coded, symbolically simplified transmission of information. Such changes in the sign system of communication entail the loss of the semiotic and semantic meaning of most traditional concepts (etiquette - netiquette; encyclopedia - Wikipedia, etc.) and give rise to countless new, often ambiguous categories (forum, moderator, “chat”, provider, emoticon and so on.). Contradictions in interpersonal communication between older generations and modern youth are intensifying: parents and children, educators and pupils, teachers and students, teachers and students actually speak different languages, and therefore the older generation is losing the socializing function of a mentor, authority, master. The ideal of personal reference points and behavior patterns often become surreal characters and virtual heroes, which most young people strive to imitate. This is facilitated by the absence of perceptual and interactive aspects in the process of virtual communication, which significantly impoverishes the transfer of experience, knowledge, and skills, which are the support of people’s social existence, and complicates the development of social roles and functions.

In addition, the contradictions between the form, means of communication and its content and depth are intensifying; between the needs of the individual to receive adaptively valuable information and a wide variety of forms of its provision, which complicates its selection and causes cognitive dissonance, disorientation in contradictory flows of information.

The described circumstances inevitably lead to disturbances at the level of self-awareness of each individual, the formation of the image of a specific “I”.

Today, most people unite in communities to satisfy the need for self-affirmation, self-realization as an individual. Information communities open up more and more opportunities for each person to realize their subjectivity, to find themselves and their place in society, but in an unreal, fantastically convenient, hypertrophied society. Most of these opportunities are various means adaptation and self-presentation of oneself as a person wants to be seen, how he will be convenient for others and accepted by them. In the world of virtual communities, we have the opportunity to satisfy our needs to a greater extent than in a real social environment, to feel our importance and need, to feel the demand from other people that is so necessary for full-fledged life. At the level of self-perception in a virtual community, a person has the opportunity to occupy his niche, find himself and illusorily satisfy most of his needs. This contributes to the fact that in the real social environment the process of inclusion of the individual as a capable subject in the system of social relations is disrupted. This fact is confirmed by the increase in unemployment, alcoholism, drug addiction, suicide and other negative phenomena that indicate extreme forms of maladjustment and desocialization of the individual.

In fact, the described circumstances represent nothing more than a deep moral problem of modern socialization and traditional society, which is losing the true roots of its spiritual development, which gradually become an atavism of our consciousness in the endless race to ensure a “high” standard of living. Under these conditions, one of the main functions of socialization is violated - ensuring continuity in development, transmission of culture from generation to generation, which affects the level of general culture and spirituality of the modern generation. In addition, in modern circumstances, the process of becoming a person as a subject of social relations, an active subject of activity, communication, and self-awareness is disrupted. That is why at present there is an urgent need to solve the problem of the formation by social institutions of effective socialization trajectories of the individual, and the process of socialization of the individual itself is turning into a special task of modern society.

Reviewers:

Neskryabina O.F., Doctor of Philosophy, Professor of the Department of Journalism, Institute of Philology and Linguistic Communication, Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk;

Kudashov V.I., Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Head. Department of Philosophy, Humanitarian Institute, Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk.

The work was received by the editor on May 16, 2013.

Bibliographic link

Rostovtseva M.V., Mashanov A.A., Khokhrina Z.V. SOCIO-PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS OF SOCIALIZATION OF PERSONALITY IN CONDITIONS OF INFORMATIZATION OF MODERN SOCIETY // Basic Research. – 2013. – No. 6-5. – P. 1282-1286;
URL: http://fundamental-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=31731 (access date: 03/31/2019). We bring to your attention magazines published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural Sciences"