Which spouse will you choose? How to get a guy you like. Crush what's holding you back Understand what's holding you back so far and what will truly motivate you. Write your answer in the field by clicking on the comment link or in the Write a comment field. Gon what. Acquaintance Chechen Republic Trans-Baikal Territory Chuvashia Chukotka Autonomous Region Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Region Yaroslavl Region an officer of the armed forces of ukraine anatoliy stefan said this.......
It’s a pity only for the Kids and the coot given to us and the hooligan given to us, such stress. If another person participates as a defense counsel, then a meeting with him is granted upon presentation of an appropriate ruling or court order, as well as a document proving his identity. It is from him that you meet, communicate and find the newest partners for dating married women for free. but there is one but. the description of the appearance looks very ......
Others, as if in retaliation, immediately recall Nikolai's visits to the house, where love soon moved with her own sister. And found the newest in a week. For other work you will receive separately, but in the next six months it will not. We've been living like this for six months. Free sex and it seems to us that the reaction to it should not be a closure in the form of a victim at all. immediately agreed that no matter ......
If he leans back when you lean towards him, or if he does not participate in the conversation, despite all your attempts, then most likely he is simply not interested. Flirting is a form of human interface traditionally expressing romantic concern in another person. Then, passing from hand to hand, it turns the life of its owners into horror. and who can this moment guess ......
A woman must infiltrate criminal gang to help capture the Motokowski gang members in charge of the drug trade. An attacker can use this information against you and even start blackmailing you if something goes wrong on the date itself and you do not justify his dating mature guys. I always thought that commercialism was in the basis of such relations, but in my own acquaintances, mature guys did not notice this. it speaks of....
After a couple of sleepless nights, they cross to the trans mamba dating levels of consciousness that allow them to touch the secrets that the old building keeps for itself. The account of the alleged mistress. It's really better for both of us. Yes, of course, this is a provocation in pure form. Art Medicine, we defend the right to flirt, which is necessary for sexual freedom. I just don't get it, is it really hard to move forward ......
Really was in the cherry-vanilla direction aroma. In desperation, he promises his patron to bring the latest amazing and hilarious play in verse. This is where those who were listed as his friends would be needed. Language dating and sex free will say more about interest than words or recruitment learn more best friend friend. instead, he canceled all plans, took a vacation at his own expense and flew to her....
Opportunity to save your money. And it has to put you in. Is it possible to return the cases that were before the conclusion. Why all these empty discussions about work, about where and who lives, what they do, what they did yesterday, what they think about. Attention and tenderness and Nathaniel, by chance, is here. I love sociable, good, able to surprise. student Nadezhda Ivanovna psychologist, online consultant, but from the current woman, if ......
For Jung, the conscious and the unconscious complement each other. Both are sources of culture.
For Jung, the unconscious basis human personality, although of archaic origin, can still live in peace with culture. He believed that the manifestations of the unconscious can be made relatively safe and even put them at the service of culture.
To do this, one must not ignore unconscious forces, but find an adequate cultural and symbolic expression for them. After all, it is the unconscious that gives us a sense of the fullness of life; creativity and inspiration originate in archetypes.
(See: Grushevitskaya T.G. Culturology./Electronic Library. - p. 26)
Jung proceeds from the following ideas about the relationship between man and culture.
For him, the basis of the soul (the unconscious), although of archaic origin, can still live in peace with culture. Of course, you cannot tame the "demons of the soul", but they can be tame, make their manifestation relatively safe and even put them at the service of culture.
A person is called not to ignore unconscious forces, but to find an adequate cultural and symbolic expression for them. After all, the unconscious is the "giver of everything", the true source of vitality, without which there is no sense of the colorfulness of life, the fullness of life. It is archetypes that give a person inspiration and are a source of creative energy.
At the same time, the symbolic expression of the unconscious is necessary in order to protect a person from the dangers of a direct meeting with the “demons of the soul” (for example, from experiencing omnipotence and the attractive horror of death ("sacred") or helplessness before dark side own I, that is, in front of your own "shadow".
Usage cultural symbols allows you to control "psychic demons" by opposing dark power one bright power of another. Religion plays a special role here. For example, a believer, overwhelmed by sinful desire (“tempted by demons”), can pray and call on God for help.
According to Jung, both "God" and "demons" are mental forces (archetypes) of the person himself, symbolically expressed in the corresponding cultural images. But from my own name it would be very difficult (maybe even impossible) for a person to cope with the situation.
Thus, culture, according to Jung, is called upon to wage not a struggle, but dialogue with the unconscious in an effort to ensure the integrity human soul.
However, this dialogue is gradually lost with the development of civilization and the total rationalization of life. Life is rationalized, but a person does not become more rational in terms of his mental structure. The former symbolic world is collapsing, and with it the cultural expression and realization of archetypes goes into the past; “terrible symbolic poverty” sets in, in which a person’s life is discolored and meaningless. The collapse of symbols also means the loss of symbolic control of the powerful "demons of the soul", which are now left unattended. " Modern man does not understand how much his "rationalism" (which upset his ability to respond to divine symbols and ideas) has left him at the mercy of the psychic "hell". "Demons" break out from the control of a weakening culture, and the 20th century becomes a century of unheard-of psychic epidemics, spreading under an ideological coloring that masks their true nature.
In an effort to escape from the terrifying symbolic poverty that reigns now, a person turns his gaze to Eastern religions, but they correspond to a different culture and are not able to fully express the archetypes lurking in the psyche of a Western person.
That's why European culture must change in order to restore the lost unity of the human soul, which, however, does not at all mean immersion in the unconscious and complete submission its archaic motives. “The task ... of a person,” concludes Jung, “is to penetrate the unconscious and make it the property of consciousness, in no case remaining in it, without identifying oneself with it. Both of these are incorrect.
Jung made a real revolution in cultural studies. He revealed the organic connection between culture and the human unconscious: the history of culture and its symbolic world appeared as the realization of the unconscious foundations of the soul. And at the same time, much remained outside the Jungian concept. Jung did not claim to create the “only true doctrine” about man, but without his ideas it is simply impossible to imagine modern cultural studies.
With the help of culture it is possible to analyze the behavior of people, especially in groups, since culture provides a structure for the analysis of human behavior. But it should be noted that since people are very complex and diverse, and our knowledge of the influence of culture on behavior is relative and preliminary, generalizations must be made very carefully and be aware of the possibility of many exceptions. In addition, we must remember that in considering the behavior of others, each of us tends to rely on own experience and the level of training and that actions that seem bizarre or reprehensible to us may be acceptable and normal for other people.
Culture is manifested by a group, organization or nation in customs and traditions, in group beliefs, rituals, myths, symbols, morality, ways of thinking, language, standards, laws, art, architecture, technology, etc. These manifestations of culture, its principles can be rational or irrational, explicit or implicit.
The principles of a culture, i.e., its "truths", are expressed in behavior or taboos on what group members should not do. Typically, group members refuse to question or change the beliefs held in their community. daily life as a result of following these rules, it becomes simpler and more predictable. Unfortunately, however, culture can also be a means of perpetuating ignorance, misinformation, prejudice and bigotry.
Rice. 5.1. The influence of culture on behavior
Each group can be characterized in terms of its cultural orientation. The cultural orientation of a society and a group reflects the complex interplay of values, attitudes, and behaviors of the members of the society and the group. As shown in fig. 5.1, individuals express culture and its normative properties through the values they hold about the essence of life and the world around them. These values in turn influence their attitudes and the form of behavior appropriate to any given situation. The continuous change in patterns of individual and group behavior eventually affects the culture of the society and the group, and the cycle begins again.
What is the difference between values, attitudes and behavior? Values- this is what is desirable (explicitly or implicitly) to a person or group and influences the choice of methods, means and the performance of an action. Values can be both conscious and subconscious. Thus, values are relatively general beliefs that determine what is right and what is wrong and establish people's general preferences. Research has shown that personal values influence corporate strategy, and that leaders' values influence all forms of organizational behavior, including choice of motivation system, boss/subordinate relationships, group behavior, communication, leadership, and levels of conflict.
For example, Hispanic managers believe that the family is a very important value, and this encourages them to hire members. own family whenever the opportunity presents itself. American managers believe in the value of individual achievement, so when applying for a job, they are more likely to focus on the performance of a candidate's qualifying exams than on family membership. These examples illustrate behavior that is influenced by values.
Attitude is an attitude that exhibits values and induces a person to act or respond in a certain way. Relations are characteristic both for interpersonal and intergroup interactions, and for interaction between a person and some object.
Behavior any form of human action. For example, distances of interpersonal interaction depend on culture. Representatives of southern Europe during the conversation stand closer friend to each other than Scandinavians and Japanese. Hispanics touch each other during business negotiations more often than North Americans, and both touch each other more often than Japanese do.
Thus, people's behavior is determined by their culture. Culture is characterized by both diversity and unity. Although we all belong to a certain culture, its manifestations differ depending on the place and circumstances. Knowing that we are all members of different cultural groups can help us understand the behavior of others, become more tolerant in our judgments and attitudes, and be more effective in resolving cultural conflicts. By evaluating the impact of culture on people, we may be less likely to blame, punish, and be less hostile towards those who are different from us. The more we understand the concept of culture, the more we are able to develop cultural skills and manage our own change. Today, managers can apply the strategy of managing cultural differences in order to improve the effectiveness of the organization.
Organizational culture
In addition to the norms accepted in society, each group of people, including an organization, develops its own cultural patterns, which are called business, or organizational, culture. Organizational culture does not exist on its own. It is always included in cultural context given geographical region and society as a whole and is influenced by the national culture. In turn, the organizational or corporate culture influences the formation of the culture of departments, work and management groups and teams.
Rice. 5.2. Correlation and mutual influence of cultures various levels
The figure shows the relationship and mutual influence of cultures of different levels. In doing so, we note that:
National culture is the culture of a country or a minority in a country;
Organizational culture - the culture of a corporation, enterprise or association;
Working culture - the culture of the dominant type of activity of the society;
Team culture is the culture of the work or management team.
Organizational culture is a complex phenomenon that does not always lie on the surface, it is difficult to “feel” it. If we can say that an organization has a soul, then this soul is organizational culture.
K. Scholts noted that corporate culture is an implicit, invisible and informal consciousness of the organization that controls the behavior of people and, in turn, is itself formed under the influence of their behavior.
According to O.S. Vikhansky and A.I. Naumov, organizational culture is a set of the most important assumptions accepted by the members of the organization and expressed in the values declared by the organization, setting people the guidelines for their behavior. These value orientations are transmitted to individuals through the symbolic means of the spiritual and material intraorganizational environment.
E. Shine believed that the forms of organizational culture respond to two main challenges that the organization faces: aggressiveness external environment and internal disintegration. Accordingly, in order for the organization to function as a whole, it needs to perform two main functions - adaptation and survival in the environment and internal integration. Integration is seen as the creation of effective business relations among departments, groups and employees of the organization, as an increase in the measure of participation of all employees in solving problems of the organization and searching for effective ways her work. According to E. Shine, organizational culture is a set of basic assumptions invented, discovered or developed by a group in order to learn how to cope with the problems of external adaptation and internal integration. It is necessary that this complex function for a long time, confirm its viability, and therefore it must be transmitted to new members of the organization as the “correct” way of thinking and feeling in relation to the problems mentioned.
Organizational culture includes the following components:
1) beliefs – the employee's perception of what is right in the organization;
2) values , dominant in the organization determine what is to be considered important in the organization. The areas in which values can be expressed include: caring for and respecting people, caring for consumers, entrepreneurialism, fair treatment of employees, etc. T. Peters and R. Waterman, exploring the relationship between culture and organizational success, formulated a series of organizational culture values and beliefs that have made companies successful (Figure 5.3).
Rice. 5.3. Organizational Culture Values of Successful Companies
3) norms – they are unwritten rules of conduct that tell people how to behave and what is expected of them. They are never expressed in writing and are transmitted either orally or by the attitude of others to behavior. The norms of conduct reflect such moments in the activities of the organization as: manager-subordinate relations, honesty and compliance with the law, behavior in case of conflicts of interest, obtaining and using information about other organizations, political activity within the organization, use of organization resources, etc.;
4) behavior – daily activities that people perform in the process of work and in connection with their work when interacting with others (rituals and ceremonies, as well as the language used in communication);
5) psychological climate – it is a stable system internal communications group, manifested in the emotional mood, public opinion and performance. The climate in an organization is how people perceive the culture that exists in their organization or department, what they think and feel about it. It can be assessed by studying relationships.
None of these components alone represent the culture of an organization. Together, however, they can provide insight into organizational culture.
Thus, organizational culture - it is a set of values, beliefs, attitudes common to all employees of this organization, predetermining the norms of their behavior. They may not be clearly expressed, but in the absence of direct instructions, they determine the way people act and interact and significantly affect the course of work and the nature of the life of the organization.
Corporate culture It is the main component in achieving organizational goals, improving the efficiency of the organization and managing innovation. the main objective corporate culture - ensuring external adaptation and internal integration of the organization by improving personnel management.
Corporate culture can either help the organization by creating an environment conducive to productivity and innovation, or work against the organization by creating barriers that prevent the development and implementation of corporate strategy. These barriers include resistance to innovation and ineffective communication.
The vital activity of society is multi-sphere (labor, politics, economics, ethics, aesthetics, law, family, religion, etc.). Each of the spheres of society's life corresponds to a certain level of culture achieved by it as a qualitative characteristic of its life activity. culture plays important role in the life of a person and society, which consists, first of all, in the fact that culture acts as a means of accumulation, storage and transmission of human experience. It is culture that makes a person a person. An individual becomes a member of society, a person as socialization progresses, i.e. mastering the knowledge, language, symbols, values, norms, customs, traditions of their people, their social group and all mankind. The level of culture of an individual is determined by its socialization - familiarization with cultural heritage, as well as the degree of development individual abilities. Personality culture is usually associated with developed creativity, erudition, understanding of works of art, fluency in native and foreign languages, accuracy, politeness, self-control, high morality, etc. All this is achieved in the process of upbringing and education.
Culture unites people, integrates them, ensures the integrity of the community. But by rallying some on the basis of some subculture, it opposes them to others, separating wider communities and communities. Within these broader communities and communities, cultural conflicts can arise. Thus, culture can and often performs a disintegrating function. During the socialization of values,
ideals, norms and patterns of behavior become part of the self-consciousness of the individual. They shape and regulate her behavior. We can say that culture as a whole determines the framework within which a person can and should act. Culture regulates human behavior in the family, at school, at work, at home, etc., putting forward a system of prescriptions and prohibitions. Violation of these prescriptions and prohibitions triggers certain sanctions that are established by the community and supported by the power of public opinion and various forms institutional coercion. Culture, which is a complex sign system, transmits social experience from generation to generation, from era to era. In addition to culture, society has no other mechanisms for concentrating the entire wealth of experience that has been accumulated by people. Therefore, it is no coincidence that culture is considered the social memory of mankind.
Culture, concentrating the best social experience of many generations of people, acquires the ability to accumulate the richest knowledge about the world and thereby create favorable opportunities for its knowledge and development. It can be argued that a society is as intellectual as it fully uses the richest knowledge contained in the cultural gene pool of mankind. All types of society that live today on Earth differ significantly, primarily on this basis. In the sphere of work, life, interpersonal relations, one way or another, culture influences the behavior of people and regulates their actions, and even the choice of certain material and spiritual values. The regulatory function of culture is supported by such normative systems as morality and law.
Representing a certain sign system, culture implies knowledge, possession of it. It is impossible to master the achievements of culture without studying the corresponding sign systems. Thus, language (oral or written) is a means of communication between people. Literary language acts as the most important means of mastering national culture. Specific languages are needed for understanding the world of music, painting, theater. Natural Sciences also have their own sign systems. Culture as a certain system of values forms a person's well-defined value needs and orientations. By their level and quality, people most often judge the degree of culture of a person. Moral and intellectual content, as a rule, acts as a criterion for an appropriate assessment.
Thus, the system of culture is not only complex and diverse, but also very mobile. It is a living process, the living destiny of peoples, constantly moving, developing, changing. Culture is an indispensable component of the life of both society as a whole and its closely interconnected subjects: individuals, social communities, social institutions.
Bibliography
- Andreev A.N. Culturology. Personality and culture. - M., 1998.
- Arnoldov A.I. Introduction to cultural studies. - M., 1993.
- Markova A.N. Culturology.-M., 1995.
- Revskaya N.E. Culturology. Lecture notes. - M., 2001.
- Sokolov E.V. Culturology. - M.: Interpraks, 1994.
From the foregoing, we can conclude that where the demonstration effect works to the full, catch-up modernization accelerates and brings results relatively quickly. Where there are barriers to the spread of the demonstration effect, modernization slows down. These barriers can be natural (long distances, lack of means of communication) or unnatural (iron curtains of various kinds). But in any case, they interfere with catching up, because they deprive them of information.
Let us note in passing that some people consider catch-up modernization to be a positive phenomenon, while others consider it a negative one. Some people think that catching up is good because it promotes development, while others think it's bad because it destroys our traditional culture and imposes questionable values. However, regardless of what assessment we put on modernization (I personally prefer the first point of view), it is difficult to doubt the decisive influence of the demonstration effect on it.
But here a question arises, which in recent years has almost dominated discussions about the modernization of Russia. Is our lagging behind an objective consequence of the previously existing barriers to the spread of the demonstration effect (Russia's peripheral position on the edge of Europe, the lack of means of communication, the rupture of the Orthodox and Catholic churches, ignorance of Western languages, iron curtain communist times, etc.) or are there still hard barriers for us to this day, through which no challenge from the West can pass? IN in practical terms answer to this question does it mean: are we just behind, but have a good chance of catching up, or are we unable to catch up because we ourselves do not want to move in the direction in which the demonstration effect beckons us?
failures recent years in the democratization of Russia, as well as problems associated with high corruption and inefficiency of our market economy contributed to the formation of pessimistic ideas about modernization. It is often said that in addition to the demonstration effect, and perhaps even to a greater extent than it, on different countries has an impact traditional culture. There are cultures that are predisposed to the market and democracy, and there are not. There are those in which the market, democracy and development in general are perceived positively, and there are those where it is negative. In other words, in some cultures, although people like high level consumption, but they do not like the institutions that need to be formed to achieve this level. And so the demonstration effect works only halfway. I want to buy a foreign car or an iPad, but I don't want to respect property rights. Therefore, modernization is carried out only at a superficial level and quickly fades when money for purchases runs out.
Can they Russian problems be associated with our particular culture that denies modernization? Theoretically, they can, since history knows examples of cultures that stimulate development or, on the contrary, inhibit it. Most famous case- Protestant ethics, the meaning of which was revealed by Max Weber.
According to his theory, truly believing Protestants have a special spirit that contributes to the development of capitalism. They believe that salvation in the next world cannot be earned. good deeds or sincere repentance. All people are originally predestined by God to salvation or destruction. It is not destined for a person to know exactly what his fate is. However, indirectly, he can judge the future by looking at his present. Life success testifies that the Lord does not leave you, and failures, failures and ruins are a sign of a catastrophe that awaits in the other world.
Thus, it turns out that we can be calm about the fate of our soul only when we see our own successes, when we honestly work, lead an exemplary lifestyle, feed our families, raise children, and decorate our home and city. It is not surprising that, faced with such psychological problem, the true believing Protestant will do everything in his power to prosper. He will not necessarily become a major capitalist (although this would be the greatest evidence of success in life), but in any case he will work with high productivity, strive for career success, establish contacts with people on whom his prosperity depends. In other words, a Protestant turns out to be a person optimally suitable for modernization, and, accordingly, a representative of confessions in which such a capitalist spirit is not formed is less suitable.
Weber's theory is most likely correct. However, as we have seen above, the lack of a Protestant ethic has not prevented many European Catholic countries from both chasing leaders and, in fact, catching up with them. Catholic France is quite successful country. The Catholic regions of Germany are clearly not far behind the Lutheran ones. The north of Catholic Italy (Piedmont, Lombardy) is one of the most developed regions in Europe. Catholic Spain, the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary carried out quite successful transformations in their time, becoming market and democratic. Thus, the demonstration effect turns out to be more important in this case than cultural differences.
The presence of a special culture does not in itself mean a long lag. Now, if in the culture of some people there are some features that are not compatible with modernization, but at the same time are steadily reproduced with each new generation, then the problem is obvious. Then the demo effect doesn't work. Or more precisely, a person caught between a national culture that denies change and a demonstration effect that requires modernization finds himself in a difficult position. He must either reject the temptations of the outer world, or part with his inner world. He must break himself, give up his own identity in order to build a society that is not inferior in competitiveness to the leaders of modernization.
Russia, no doubt, has its own cultural characteristics. Russia is not America, and Ukraine is not Russia. But after all, Germany is not France, and Estonia is not Lithuania. There is an idea in our country that the cultural differences between Russia and Europe are very great, while the intra-European differences are insignificant. However, there is no instrument that can measure differences in culture the way differences in height or weight are measured. Do our notions of the extent of cultural differences arise from the fact that we simply see no other way to explain Russia's lag in modernization? Like, if Italy caught up with England in terms of GDP per capita and in building democratic institutions, then the cultural differences between a village in Sicily and an industrial center in Lancashire are not so significant. And if Russia has not caught up, then it turns out that the culture of this mysterious country is completely different.
In this regard, there are many curious theories that interpret the specifics of Russian culture. If a society that is otherwise unable to understand our backwardness makes a demand for "cultural" explanations, then the "marketplace of ideas" begins to produce an incredible amount of such explanations. Everyone somehow finds its consumer.
One of the most clear examples- the book "Character of the Russian people" famous philosopher Nikolai Lossky. The author offers a certain set of features that define this character - religiosity, the desire to search for the meaning of life, powerful willpower, love of freedom, kindness, talent, etc. But as evidence of his approach, Lossky offers only examples from the life of a narrow circle of intellectuals, or even links to fiction- Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky. As a result, we get a picture spiritual world some part of the elite (which, in general, is not bad), but for the study of modernization, for understanding what factors affect production and the social structure, such “research” is completely unsuitable.
In the same way, “studies” with conclusions of the opposite nature, but based on a similar “methodological basis”, are not suitable. The authors simply give the usual clichés the form of research when they write, for example, about the innate servility of the Russian people, about their propensity for unrestrained drunkenness, about the primitivism of their beliefs, about cruelty, about their natural commitment to anti-Semitism and inability to painstaking, creative work. At the same time, the traditional servility of the Germans, the love of Finns for drinking, complex relationship to the Jews among the Poles and similar phenomena are not analyzed. Like, since they are doing better with modernization, it means that the problems are not so significant.
Similar "Russophilia" and "Russophobia" are two sides of the same coin. They are equally neither studies of culture as a whole nor analyzes of its influence on modernization. Cultural research, which could really be useful for solving the problem that interests us, should probably contain four elements. First, it is necessary to find the real specifics of Russian life. Secondly, to show that this is indeed a cultural trait, that is, that it is passed down from generation to generation. Third, to identify the mechanisms of this transmission. Fourthly, to reveal the mechanisms of influence of this cultural peculiarity on economic and political institutions.
Scientific research features of our culture are emerging today. For example, Igor Yakovenko formulates a hypothesis according to which Manichaeism and Gnosticism are the cultural codes of Russian civilization. Accordingly, our vision of the world in the light of this hypothesis turns out to be somewhat different than in the West. However, it is not entirely clear why such a vision is formed in a person born in the second half of the twentieth century. The words that all this is “absorbed by us with mother's milk” are not very convincing. Why is "mother's milk" more powerful than, say, a demonstration effect? Why should some notion inherent in the ancestors make a person refuse to use institutions that can improve the quality of life, despite the fact that this person is not an ascetic or a monk seeking to retire from the world?
And most importantly, the data link mechanism is not clear cultural characteristics with specific unresolved issues modernization. Are, for example, Manichaeism and Gnosticism related to the macroeconomic instability that prevented us from achieving GDP growth for so long in the 1990s? Moreover, did Manichaeism and Gnosticism give birth to an authoritarian character? Russian state? And if so, what about the authoritarian regimes known in the history of almost all European nations? Germans, Spaniards or Poles have a problem with the same cultural codes? And if so, then what is the peculiarity of Russia? Can our problems be explained by culture?
