The culture of any era has relative integrity, but in itself it is heterogeneous. The German cultural philosopher W. Windelband noted that culture is so endlessly complex, diverse and full of contradictions that a person is not able to fully perceive it. Inside specific culture According to Windelbandt, the urban environment differs from the rural one, official culture- from folk, aristocratic - from democratic, Christian - from pagan, adult - from children. Society, therefore, is in danger of breaking up into groups and atoms.
Even in ancient culture, Nietzsche discerned the opposition between Apollonian and Dionysian principles. In the cultural era of the Middle Ages, the new Christian principle did not completely take over the old, pagan worldview.
The Renaissance, which followed the Middle Ages, also turned out to be culturally multi-component. The most prominent researcher of this era, M.M. Bakhtin, noted that during the Renaissance, the vast world of laughter forms of carnival creativity opposed the official and serious culture of the church and feudal Middle Ages.
Thus, in each cultural era, multi-vector trends can be distinguished: esoteric and profane, elite and mass, official and popular, pagan and Christian, scientific and mystical.
In this sense, it is important to distinguish between the concepts of “counterculture” and “subculture”, through which the mechanisms of sociocultural dynamics can be understood.
Subcultural areas of culture are understood as a special code of rules and moral norms of behavior within a certain social group or ethnic group, which have a certain autonomy and closedness, but at the same time do not pretend to replace the dominant culture, to displace it as a given. An example of a subcultural ethnic group is the Gypsies (who do not consider it shameful to steal from strangers and consider it a crime to steal from their own), Caucasians (who have a special code of respect for an older person).
A subcultural social group consists of prisoners who speak a special jargon and are subject to the unique standards of behavior of the criminal environment. The subculture, therefore, is designed to keep its special sociocultural characteristics in a certain isolation from the official culture. The subculture does not claim the universality of their life and practical attitudes, but, on the contrary, is interested in preserving the laws of its environment in contrast to those dominant in culture.
The existence of subcultures is due to the fact that almost every specific community is internally heterogeneous, including, in addition to the main ethnic and social core, groups with specific ethnographic, class, confessional, functional and other characteristics.
The German scientist E. Fuchs, in his three-volume “Illustrated History of Morals,” cites numerous historical examples of subcultural phenomena. Describing the morals of the aristocracy of the Renaissance, the author emphasizes the uniqueness of peasant and monastic life. Characterizing the gallant age (18th century) and the morals of the era of absolutism, he at the same time contrasts it with the cultural habits and norms of the philistinism.
In our time, the specificity of subcultural characteristics can be generated by the residence of a certain group of ethnic groups isolated from the main core (for example, the peoples of the Far North), a special religion (Old Believers), special social and professional functions (Cossacks), etc.
However, in the history of culture, situations arose when local subcultural complexes of values went beyond their own cultural environment and began to claim universality. Such phenomena in culture are qualified as countercultural trends. For example, in the European cultural tradition until the Renaissance, adolescents were perceived by the dominant culture as small adults. They were sewn exactly the same caftans and put on the same shoes as their parents. This was the case in Shakespeare's time. The idea that the world of a child is radically different from the world of adults has not yet been born. Subsequently, children were, as it were, separated from mature people. This is how a unique subculture emerged, which preserved and reproduced certain cultural cycles determined by the change of generations. However, according to the German sociologist K. Mannheim, the subcultural quests of the young express a certain transitory deviation from the main path, which is inevitable due to age-related fermentation and is an episode on the path to joining the dominant culture.
In modern cultural studies, the concept of counterculture has at least two meanings. First, it is used to denote socio-cultural attitudes that are opposed to the fundamental principles dominant in a particular culture.
Secondly, counterculture is identified with the youth subculture of the 60s. twentieth century, reflecting a critical attitude towards modern culture and rejecting it, as well as the “culture of the fathers”.
The term “counterculture” belongs to the American sociologist Theodore Roszak (1960), who tried to combine various spiritual influences directed against the dominant culture into a relatively holistic phenomenon.
Confrontation with the dominant culture, the birth of new value systems should be considered as a process that constantly reproduces itself in world culture. Thus, the birth of Christianity is essentially a counter cultural phenomenon. The first disciples of Christ were simple people, belonging to the lower strata of society. The Lord Jesus himself was simply a teacher from Nazareth and did not have any influential persons in his circle. It is no coincidence that terrible dramas played out in the Roman Empire when the first clash of the young, nascent Christian Church with the great and powerful Roman Empire took place.
To the same extent, the departure from Christian culture to the subsequent secular perception of the world presupposed a long period of countercultural opposition to the traditional values of religion.
Canadian researcher E. Tiryakyan saw in countercultural phenomena powerful catalysts for cultural and historical creativity. This understanding of counterculture as the core of future cultural paradigms is now becoming generally accepted in Western cultural studies.
Lecture 7Semiotics: language and cultural symbols, cultural codes
- Specialty of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation09.00.13
- Number of pages 185
Chapter 1. Culture and anticulture as objects of scientific research p.
1.1. Genesis of ideas about culture and anticulture p.
1.2. Composition and parameters of culture and anticulture p.
Chapter 2. The process of personal socialization: a cultural approach p.
2.1. Culture and anticulture - polarities of personality socialization p.
2.2. Trends in the socialization of modern youth p.
Chapter 3. Culture and anticulture in the education system p.
3.2. Modern problems of education in the aspect of culture and anticulture p.
Introduction of the dissertation (part of the abstract) on the topic “Culture and anticulture in the process of personal socialization”
The relevance of the research topic is due primarily to the fact that modern technogenic civilization has significantly intensified crisis phenomena in the field of culture, aggravated historical confrontation and confrontation in this area. Many thinkers of the 20th century note that society is experiencing trends in the degradation of culture: the spread of anti-values, the loss of moral guidelines and ideals, the dehumanization of almost the entire spectrum of human activity. The alienation of a person from traditions, ideals, norms and values, on the basis of which a cultural personality can be formed and self-formed, is becoming more and more obvious. The phenomenon, which has spread throughout society, has deeply affected the youth subculture, which is quickly transforming into anticulture, which leads to increased social tension and creates the preconditions for the emergence and escalation of violence, destruction, and confrontation, both among young people and between generations. This situation indicates that the process of human formation is increasingly influenced by phenomena that are polar to humanistic values and culture, which, in the framework of this study, are designated as anti-values and anti-culture. Human socialization is increasingly carried out within the framework of negative social experiences. The education system is making attempts to overcome the negative aspects that exist today in society in general, and in this area in particular. Insofar as the main task of the education system is the formation and development cultured person, then the problem of cultural and anticultural processes in education deserves separate study. These circumstances force us to turn to solving the problem of philosophical analysis of the influence of culture and anticulture on the formation and development of man.
In this regard, the relevance of the conceptual and theoretical analysis of the origins, processes, mechanisms, essence, existence of culture and anticulture and their role in the socialization of the individual increases. Much attention is paid to the concept of “culture” in cultural studies literature: it is quite detailed and deeply developed in epistemological and ontological terms. Until recently, the concept of “anticulture” has received less attention in philosophical and cultural scientific literature. The relationship between cultural and anticultural processes has not been sufficiently analyzed from the point of view of their opposition. We consider it methodologically significant and relevant to present the problem from this perspective, because the sociocultural situation today is largely determined by the interaction of cultural and anticultural tendencies in society. This approach is also relevant for the philosophical analysis of such currently important problems as relativism and the metamorphosis of values.
The inconsistency of modern civilizational processes, which, on the one hand, are characterized by dehumanization, and, on the other hand, by an increase in the role of human subject potential, actualizes the importance of philosophical analysis of the socialization of the individual, where various concepts, approaches and models of this process are currently presented. However, in current situation In our opinion, the problem of confrontation between culture and anticulture within the framework of socialization has not yet been sufficiently and deeply developed; the reasons for the strengthening of one or the other of these tendencies and the forms of their manifestation at various stages of personality development have been little studied.
In this regard, in our research, we consider it important and relevant to focus on the inconsistency of the socialization process from the point of view of its cultural and anticultural content.
The significance of the problem under study is updated by the fact that education is the leading sphere where the purposeful formation of a cultural personality is carried out in our time and, accordingly, an indicator of the development of human potential. Being a channel designed to accumulate and broadcast the positively significant experience of humanity, to generate and implement precisely cultural forms of socialization, education deserves separate study from the point of view of cultural and anticultural trends and the problem of forming a personal culture. As a rule, the issues of the relationship between culture and anticulture in the field of education and the dependence of this relationship on numerous factors of the social macro- and microenvironment remain beyond the attention of researchers. In this regard, it seems necessary to us to consider in more detail the culture-forming content of education.
The relevance of the problem under study is determined by the importance of the socio-philosophical analysis of culture and anti-culture, which contains methodological opportunities for studying the problem of man and society, since it includes two contradictory tendencies of its existence: creative, positively significant humanistic creation and consumer inhumane destruction, which constitute the content of the problem of confrontation of culture and anticulture in the formation of personality.
State of research of the problem. The study was based on the theories of culture and anticulture found in the works of representatives of foreign and domestic philosophical thought of the past and present. The polyvariance of the existence of culture gives rise to a variety of approaches to its study and definition: anthropological (F. Boas, R. Benedict, M. Mead), gaming (X. Ortega y Gasset, J. Huizinga), irrational (N. A. Berdyaev, A. Camus, F. Nietzsche, J.-P. Sartre, M. Heidegger, A. Schopenhauer), historical (N. Ya. Danilevsky, B. Malinovsky, E. Tylor, A. Toynbee, O. Spengler), naturalistic (W. Wundt, A. Kroeber, 3. Freud, K. Jung), rationalist (G. W. F. Hegel, J. V. Goethe, I. Kant, K. Marx), structuralist (R. Barth, J. . Baudrillard, J. Derrida, C. Lévi-Strauss, J. F. Lyotard).
The main ideas and concepts of culture of the late 20th century and the present time are associated with the names of S. S. Averintsev, T. Adorno, L. M. Batkin, D. Dewey, B. S. Erasov, N. S. Zlobin, E. V. Ilyenkov, Yu. M. Lotman, E. S. Markaryan, G. Marcuse, V. M. Mezhuev, L. White, A. Schweitzer and others.
Culture as a complex multifactorial, multifunctional integral concept is considered in the works of Russian philosophers of our time E. V. Bogolyubova, JI. A. Zelenova, M. S. Kagan, JI. N. Kogan, V. M. Mezhuev. The problem of the versatility of culture as a philosophical category and social phenomenon was the subject of discussion at the XIII interzonal symposium “The system of personal culture and its significance for scientific and technological progress” in 1985 in Gorky, presented in the collection of symposium materials, as well as in collections of scientific papers “ Culture - traditions - education. Yearbook" (1990 Moscow), "Humanism and Culture" (1993 Tver), "Man. Culture. Education. The World of Man" (1998 Nizhny Novgorod).
We consider the concept of culture from the point of view of praxeological and axiological approaches. The idea of culture as human activity and value is reflected in foreign ideas (M. Weber, W. Windelband, E. Husserl, W. Dilthey, K. Marx, F. Nietzsche, J.-P. Sartre, O. Spengler, K. Jaspers), and domestic philosophers (N. A. Berdyaev, N. Ya. Danilevsky, N. O. Lossky, G. V. Plekhanov, V. S. Solovyov, P. A. Florensky, S. L. Frankl). Great importance Within the framework of this approach, there are works by modern authors I. V. Bestuzhev-Lada, G. P. Vyzhletsov, V. E. Davidovich, N. S. Zlobin, M. S. Kagan, L. N. Kogan, E. S. Markaryan, V. M. Mezhueva, N. Z. Chavchavadze.
The problem of the culture-forming content of the process of human socialization was addressed directly and characterized by many of its aspects: L. P. Bueva, L. A. Zelenov, M. S. Kagan, A. I. Subetto (activity-based and axiological approach to socialization), N. P. Dubinin (genetic and social inheritance programs), I. S. Kon, O. L. Kraeva, L. V. Filippova (personality: stages of its formation, the relationship of development and self-development, social determination, personality culture system), V. A. Yadov (social identity of the individual). IN scientific research Recently, the process of socialization has been viewed through the prism of new concepts: acculturation, inculturation and enculturation (A. A. Velik, R. L. Beals, B. S. Erasov, N. B. Krylova).
The search for a cultural paradigm of education is currently becoming one of the pressing problems of society in general and scientific communities in particular. Issues of cultural conformity, cultural forms and content of education, the development and appropriation of culture, the influence of subcultures on the self-development of young people, cultural models in education are presented comprehensively or in individual aspects by a number of scientific works, including the works of L. P. Bueva, I. Vitanya, B. S. Gershunsky, V. A. Gluzdov, A. M. Dorozhkin, M. S. Kagan, A. A. Kasyan, V. M. Rozin, A. I. Subetto, A. A. Terentyev, L. V. Filippova, K. A. Shvartsman, P. G. Shedrovitsky and others). Thus, an analysis of the literature on the research topic allows us to talk about a fairly well-developed categorical apparatus in relation to the problem of culture, significant achievements in the field of studying cultural processes and mechanisms in socialization, and serious attention of scientists to the development of the cultural content of the education system. At the same time, the problem of the formation of a cultural personality in the process of socialization through one of the leading institutions of this process - the education system - still remains poorly understood.
Problems of cultural crisis, its destruction, dying, decline, analysis various forms the manifestations of these processes, the identification of their causes and patterns have been and remain the subject of philosophical, psychological, ethical, aesthetic, historical, and sociological understanding. These questions are raised and resolved in the works of scientists of the past and present: T. Adorno, N. A. Berdyaev, M. Weber, G. Hegel, D. Dewey, L. A. Zelenov, M. S. Kagan, A. Camus, L. N. Kogan, V. A. Kutyreva, A. F. Losev,
Y. M. Lotman, G. Marcuse, X. Ortega y Gasset, P. Sorokin, L. N. Stolovich, A. Toynbee, V. P. Tugarinov, M. B. Turovsky, Z. Freud, E. Fromm, M. Heidegger, I. Huizinga, N. Z. Chavchavadze, A. Schweitzer, O. Spengler, K. Jung, K. Jaspers.
Analysis of human activity from the point of view of its positive or negative significance leads researchers to the need to build oppositions: culture - lack of culture, culture - lack of culture, culture - barbarism; define culture as negative, destructive, inhumane, reactionary. Defining culture as a positively significant humane activity of a person, one cannot be satisfied with such oppositions and definitions. A phenomenon opposite to culture, in this case, can be anticulture. The problem of the origin of anticulture, its essence and existence in various spheres of human life, development, parameters, properties and confrontation with culture are presented in the works of I. V. Bestuzhev-Lada, A. V. Dakhin, L. A. Zelenov, V. A. Kutyreva, T.V. Panteleeva. However, the degree of development of the problem of anticulture, its opposition to culture, in our opinion, is insufficient and can be supplemented. Crisis phenomena in the field of education are noted in many works on the philosophy of education (S.K. Buldakov, G.S. Gershunsky, N.B. Krylova, V.M. Rozin, A.I. Subetto). However, both in domestic and foreign scientific literature there are practically no theoretical studies of the opposition culture - anticulture in the process of socialization, its manifestations in the education system. Currently, there is an obvious need for a deeper integrative study, a theoretical justification for the concepts of culture and anticulture, their manifestations in society, interaction in the process of socialization, and their role in the education system. The dissertation author's attention is focused on these aspects of the problem.
The object of research in the dissertation is the essence and content of culture and anticulture as philosophical categories and social phenomena.
The subject area of the study includes analysis of the processes of formation, transmission, assimilation and change of cultural values and anti-cultural patterns in the youth environment; the relationship and opposition of culture and anticulture in the process of socialization of youth and the role of the education system, as the leading institution of socialization, in the development of a cultural personality.
Purpose and objectives of the study. The purpose of this study is to identify a certain number of cultural foundations of socialization in general and in the field of education, in particular, in the aspect of culture and anticulture.
Achieving this goal led to the formulation and solution of a number of specific research tasks:
It is necessary to conduct a philosophical analysis of the concepts of culture and anticulture as leading philosophical categories that make it possible to reveal some features of the cultural content of the socialization of the individual,
It is necessary to determine the essence, composition and parameters of culture and anticulture and on this basis to separate one class of phenomena from another,
It is necessary to explore culture and anticulture as a system of dialectical contradictions, to identify some lines of opposition between these phenomena and the main forms of manifestation of contradictions,
It is necessary to consider culture and anticulture in the social aspect, analyze them as fundamental polar phenomena of social existence, which have an active influence on the development of man,
It is necessary to study the forms of confrontation between culture and anticulture in the process of socialization and their interaction, which determines some of the leading trends in the formation of modern youth, to specify their characteristics in the composition of the individual,
It is necessary to explore various models of education and consider the culture-forming foundations of this leading system of society, which must resist the flow of anticulture.
Theoretical and methodological basis research. The theoretical basis of the dissertation work consists, first of all, of the works of classics and contemporaries of philosophical thought. On this basis, the ideas of domestic and foreign scientists are summarized, developing theories and concepts of culture and anticulture, their essence, existence and role in the process of socialization in general and in the education system in particular. The most significant in this regard are works that develop an activity approach to culture and to the analysis of the designated opposition to the socialization of the individual. Other approaches used in work, one way or another, correlate with the activity approach, as shown in the study. Methodologically significant for this study are the works of S.K. Buldakov, V.A. Gluzdov, JI. A. Zelenova, M. S. Kagan, A. A. Kasyan, O. JI. Kraevoy, V. A. Kutyreva, A. I. Subetto, A. A. Terentyeva, JL V. Filippova.
The philosophical study of culture and anticulture in the process of socialization cannot but be based on interdisciplinary data, since it combines the achievements of many specific sciences. It is quite justified that the work uses theoretical and empirical materials from history, pedagogy, sociology, social psychology, theory and cultural history.
Methodologically, the work is based on dialectical-materialistic methods of cognition, which are based on the following principles: the comparative-historical principle, which allows us to consider culture and anticulture as social phenomena in their genesis, determined by the peculiarities of value systems of different historical eras And social groups; the principle of inconsistency, on the basis of which it is possible to formulate the oppositions culture - anticulture, humanism - antihumanism, creativity - consumerism, destruction - creation, values - anti-values; the principle of comprehensiveness, facilitating the solution of the problem under study from various points of view and the integration of knowledge in related fields; the principle of consistency, which makes it possible to determine the place, role and significance of culture and anticulture in the system of socialization of the individual, including the sphere of education; the principle of ascent from the abstract to the concrete, which allows us to reveal the relationship between culture and anticulture in modern processes human formation. The study also required the use of the principles of development, interconnection, determinism, and continuity.
The empirical basis of the study consisted of data from sociological research, statistics, press, materials state documents related to cultural and educational issues.
Scientific novelty of the work. The work contains a number of new provisions, including the following:
The epistemological and social foundations of the formation of culture and anticulture are revealed;
The main criteria of analysis are determined and on this basis the composition and parameters of culture and anticulture are studied;
The dialectical polarization and interaction of culture and anticulture are shown, on the basis of which an attempt was made to construct and describe the “culture - anticulture” system;
An analysis of human socialization was carried out from the point of view of the relationship between two processes: familiarization with a positively significant social experience, that is, culture and familiarization with a negatively significant social experience, that is, anticulture;
The main trends characterizing the socialization of modern youth in terms of the relationship between cultural or anticultural processes in them are considered;
The processes of formation of personality culture in the education system and the possibility of resisting the cultural paradigm to the anticultural influence on young man;
The content, mechanisms, goals and objectives, the role and significance of subject-object and subject-subject relationships in the pedagogical process are analyzed from the point of view of their cultural intensity and cultural conformity;
The necessity of forming a culture-containing model of education is substantiated.
As a result of the research, the following provisions for defense were formulated:
The culture and anticulture of society and man are closely related to the value orientations and social attitudes of the latter;
Special role in the abstract-analytical separation of phenomena of the class of culture from the class of anticulture, such criteria as activity, axiological, aesthetic, creative, humanistic play a role;
Being a process and the result of human activity, culture and anticulture oppose each other in a number of their basic parameters: creativity - consumerism, measure - disproportionality, harmony - disharmony, humanism - anti-humanism, values - anti-values, truth - lies, good - evil, beautiful - ugly ;
Culture and anticulture form a system of dialectical contradictions and represent the fundamental polar aspects of social existence;
The confrontation between culture and anticulture has a great influence on the process of socialization, because the formation of personality is carried out through its introduction either to a positively significant, that is, cultural, or to a negatively significant, that is, anticultural, social experience, on the one hand, and through the realization of its or cultural or anticultural potential, on the other;
The process of socialization of modern youth, considered in the aspect of culture and anticulture, allows us to determine the leading polar directions of personality formation, such as: humanism - anti-humanism, integrity - relativism of values, responsibility - infantilism, activity - contemplation, creativity - consumerism, self-criticism - fanaticism, individuality - conformism;
Currently, those directions in the formation of a young person that lead to the formation of a predominantly anti-cultural personality are intensifying and taking on a tendentious character;
The education system, designed to accumulate and transmit to the socializing subject the positively significant experience of humanity, both in its content and in the methods of influencing a person and interacting with him, must be culturally inclusive, which presupposes cultural conformity and cultural intensity, productivity and creativity, multiculturalism and interculturality;
The system-forming elements of the implementation of the culture-containing model of education are the processes of enculturation, inculturation and acculturation, that is, the processes of creating an ideal example of a cultural personality necessary in this moment for a given society, influencing a person in order to achieve this pattern through certain cultural forms and the personal assimilation of these cultural forms by the person himself in the process of forming a cultural personality.
Theoretical and practical significance of the work. The theoretical significance of the work is determined by the possibility of using the results of the analysis of the essence, composition and parameters of culture and anticulture for further development conceptual cultural knowledge. Analysis of the “culture-anticulture” opposition contains significant methodological potential for research in the field of philosophy of culture and cultural studies. The socialization of personality, studied from this point of view, allows us to consider the dialectic of its culture-forming foundations and project it onto the sphere of education, which also determines the theoretical significance of the study.
The practical significance of the work is that the results obtained can be used to prepare lectures on philosophy, cultural studies, sociology and philosophy of culture. The factual material and theoretical provisions of the dissertation can be presented in the form of methodological and teaching aids, special courses on cultural issues. The results of the study may be important for predicting the directions of development of educational reforms and optimizing their implementation. The conclusions drawn in the work can contribute to the development of new approaches to the problems of standardization of curricula and plans, content and structural changes in educational courses from the point of view of the culture-forming component.
Approbation of work. The results of the study were presented at the scientific and methodological seminar “ Actual problems formation creative personality future specialist (1993 P.-Kamchatsky); at the interuniversity scientific and theoretical conference (1996 P.-Kamchatsky); at the international scientific and practical conference " Russian education: traditions and prospects" (1998 N. Novgorod); at the international scientific and practical conference “Youth of the 21st century: tolerance as a way of perceiving the world” (2001, N. Novgorod); at the XV Annual Scientific and Practical Conference of the Department of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Philosophical Understanding of the Destiny of Civilization” (2002 Moscow); at the III regional scientific conference “Russia and the problems of globalization” (2002, N. Novgorod); at the 30th academic symposium “Laws of the development of human society” (2002, N. Novgorod); at the IX Russian scientific conference “Man as a subject of life” (2002 Ryazan); at the XVI Annual Scientific and Practical Conference of the Department of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences " Modern philosophy science: state and development prospects" (2003 Moscow); at the international scientific and practical conference “Sociology of social transformations” (2003, N. Novgorod).
The research results were used by the dissertation student in the course of teaching courses and organizing various forms of educational work in higher education.
The ideas of the work are reflected in 10 publications of the author.
The dissertation was discussed at the Department of Philosophical Anthropology of UNN.
Structure of the dissertation. The structure of the work corresponds to the goals and objectives set for the dissertation author, the logic of presentation of the material and includes: an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and a bibliographic index of literature (237 titles).
Conclusion of the dissertation on the topic “Philosophy and history of religion, philosophical anthropology, philosophy of culture”, Orlova, Zinaida Nikolaevna
The results of the study are important for an in-depth understanding of the problems of personality theory, socialization theory and cultural theory. Analysis of the genesis of culture and anticulture, consideration of various models of a person’s entry into society in the aspect of confrontation between cultural and anticultural directions of socialization, study of the possibilities of a culture-containing model of education in solving the problem of cultural development can be required by a number of specific sciences for a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of certain sections of pedagogical, social- psychological, sociological, cultural knowledge.
Based on the conducted research, some practical steps can be taken to improve the socialization process towards the formation of a cultural personality in the education system. Using the materials of this work within the framework of projective pedagogy, it is possible to model a cultural personality in accordance with the principles cultural activities person. The essential elements of the personality culture system identified in the work can be useful not only in the pedagogical process of standard education, but also in working with children with disabilities. disabilities, in corrective pedagogy. Based on the mechanism of socialization in the direction of culture proposed in the work, it is possible to optimize the process of entering society and adapting to the cultural social life of children with deviant behavior prone to deviations. The materials presented in the work can be used to prepare training programs and special courses on problems of culture and socialization.
Among the promising problems that may be of interest for further research, we would first of all draw attention to expanding and deepening the analysis of the content of the composition, parameters and criteria of culture and anticulture. In the course of subsequent work, problems of the nature of cultural and anticultural reproduction may be developed, and for this purpose, further development of human potential in the cultural aspect seems very productive. The issues of socialization of the collective subject and the influence of the micro- and macroenvironment on the formation of personality remained outside the scope of the work. Further analysis of the psychological and pedagogical problems of socialization of the individual in a cultural or anticultural direction is necessary and possible. All these and a number of other issues are important for the further development of the cultural potential of society, which presupposes the comprehensive cultural development of a person.
Conclusion
One of the features of the development of the humanities at the present stage is the actualization of issues devoted to the study of the process of personality formation, its activities, assessment of the results of people’s activity, consideration of various social and natural problems through the prism of a person. This is, of course, due to the fact that at present the transformation of society, social progress, and the very existence of man and humanity depend on the formation of man, on the level of development of his culture to a greater extent than before. The current situation suggests an increase in research interest in the problems of personality formation and, consequently, in the process of socialization, as well as the role of various social institutions, including primarily the education system, in the development of the cultural potential of individuals and society. Today, in the processes and results of human activity, there is an increase in negative trends in relation to nature, society and people. In this regard, the great attention of both scientists and the public to the issues of confrontation between culture and anticulture and in public life, both in the process of socialization and in education, as a fundamental element of society, playing one of the leading roles in the formation of a cultured person. Clarification of the causes, mechanisms and results of interaction and polarization of culture and anticulture in social existence, in human life is necessary for the accumulation, development and further development of the positively significant experience of humanity. Based on the above reasons, which, of course, can be expanded and supplemented, the focus of the dissertation research is the analysis of the phenomena of culture and anticulture and their influence on a person in the process of his (the person’s) socialization within the framework of the education system at the present stage of social development.
The study undertaken in the dissertation work of the characteristics of the socialization of the individual from the point of view of the interaction of culture and anticulture, trends in the reproduction of a cultural or anticultural (predominantly) person allows us to determine a number of main directions in the process of a person’s entry into social life, characteristic of the modern situation, and to develop theoretical and practical foundations for the formation of optimal conditions for the formation of personality on the basis of a culture-containing model of the education system. The approaches formulated in the work allowed us to come to the conclusion that it is possible to create an ideal model of the process and result of personal socialization, which should be based on the principle of translation and personal assimilation by a person of positively significant, that is, cultural activity of mankind. To achieve this goal, the work undertook a theoretical analysis of the concepts of culture and anticulture and formulated some basic ideas about them. The study of this problem leads to the conclusion that culture is the process and result of motivated, socially significant, meaningful, purposeful, constructive human activity, anticulture is the process and result of unmotivated, lacking social significance, absurd, aimless, destructive human activity. The work determined that an important role in distinguishing the concepts of culture and anticulture is played by such criteria as: activity, creativity, values, morality, humanism, rationality, aestheticism. In the process of analyzing the problem, the main attention was paid to issues of creativity, humanism, ethical and aesthetic values. Based on the activity approach to defining the concepts of culture and anticulture, the following system of parameters of these social phenomena is built: creative, proportionate, harmonious, humane, value-oriented human activity, increasing truth, goodness and beauty is cultural activity; consumer, disproportionate, disharmonious, inhumane, anti-value-oriented activity that spreads the false, evil and ugly is anti-cultural activity.
To the extent that culture and anticulture are represented in all types of social and human activities, they can be considered as fundamental components of the socialization of the individual. The isomorphism of the socialization process allows us to determine that the harmonious combination of universality and individuality during the transmission and assimilation of cultural patterns is a factor contributing to the development of culture. On the contrary, the imbalance between public expectations and personal interests, reinforced by a person’s immersion in an anticultural environment, becomes an impetus for the accelerated development of anticulture. The existing empirical analysis of the problems of socialization indicates the disorientation of the modern young man in systems of values and anti-values, which leads to opposition between such directions of socialization as: humanism, integrity, responsibility, activity, creativity, self-criticism, individuality, tolerance, heroism and anti-humanism, relativism of values, infantilism , contemplation, consumerism, fanaticism, conformism, intolerance, pragmatism. A serious opportunity, although not the only one, to solve this problem lies in the education system. But for the successful implementation of the goal - the formation of a cultured person - through the educational process, a change in the educational paradigm is necessary. The culture-containing model of education, the system-forming components of which should be cultural conformity and cultural intensity, creativity and productivity, multiculturalism and interculturality, most adequately meets the tasks of personal and cultural development. The relationship between a teacher and a student (a formed personality and a developing personality, a person transmitting culture and a person perceiving culture) should be built on the subject-subject principle. The educational process, which is based on a culture-containing model, includes three key interrelated elements: enculturation, enculturation and acculturation. A given model of a cultural personality (enculturation) is formed through the teacher’s transmission of relevant cultural forms (enculturation) and the personal assimilation of these cultural forms by the student (acculturation).
List of references for dissertation research Candidate of Philosophical Sciences Orlova, Zinaida Nikolaevna, 2004
2. Averintsev S.S. Rhetoric and the origins of European literary tradition: (Sat. Art.). M.: Shk. “Languages Russian. culture", 1996. - 446 p.3. “Autobiography” of B. Franklin / Prepared. text by M. Koreneva. M.: Moscow worker, 1988. - 47 p.
3. Adorno T. Types and syndromes: Methodological approach (fragments from the work “Authoritarian Personality”) // Sociological Research, 1993. No. 3. - P.75-85.
4. Amonashvili Sh. A. Personal and humane basis of the pedagogical process. Mn.: Universitetskoe, 1990. - 560 p.
5. Andreev V.I. Pedagogy of creative self-development. Kazan: Publishing House1. Kazan, Univ., 1996. 563 p.
6. Anthroponomy (General theory of man). Nizhny Novgorod Philosophical Club. N. Novgorod: NASI, 1991. - 172 p.
7. Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretations of culture. St. Petersburg:
8. University book, 1997. 725 p.
9. Aristotle. Works: In 4 volumes. M.: Mysl, 1983.- T. 4.- 830 p.
10. Asmolov A. G. Psychology of personality. M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1990. - 367 p.
11. Bayard R. T., Bayard D. Your restless teenager. M.: Education, 1991.-224 p.
12. Balabanov S. S., Voronin G. L. Youth and corruption (Based on materials from sociological research). N. Novgorod, 1999. - 40 p.
13. Bart R. Selected works. Semiotics. Poetics. Translated from French M.: Progress, 1989.-615 p.
14. Batkin L. M. Italian Renaissance. Problems and people. M.: Publishing house "Russian State University for the Humanities", 1995. - 446 p.
15. Becker G. Modern sociological theory in its continuity and change. Per. from English M.: Publishing house foreign lit., 1961. - 895 p.
16. Velik A. A. Culturology. Anthropological theories of cultures. Educational allowance. M.: Russian state. humanist univ., 1999. - 238 p.
17. Benedict R. Psychological types in the cultures of the Southwestern United States. //Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretation of culture. / Comp. JL A. Mostova. St. Petersburg: University Book, . 997. - P.271-284.
18. Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of freedom. The meaning of creativity. M.: Mysl, 1989.- P.254-479.
19. Bestuzhev-Lada I.V. Towards the school of the 21st century: Reflections of a sociologist M.: Pedagogika, 1988.-254p.
20. Bestuzhev-Lada I.V. Prospects for the development of culture in the problems of social forecasting: Lectures. Tutorial. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State Unitary Enterprise, 1997.- 128 p.
21. Bibler V. S. From scientific teaching to the logic of culture. Two philosophical introductions to the twenty-first century. M.: Political publishing house. Literary, 1991. - 413 p.
22. Beals L. Acculturation // Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretations of culture. / Comp. L. A. Mostova. St. Petersburg: 1997. - pp. 348-371.
23. Boas F. Some problems in the methodology of social sciences. // Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretations of culture / Comp.
24. L. A. Mostova. St. Petersburg: University Book, 1997. - pp. 499-508.
25. Bogolyubova E. V. Culture and society (Questions of history and theory). M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1978. - 232 p.
26. Baudrillard J. System of things. Per. from fr. M.: Rudomino, 1995. - 168 p.
27. Bueva L. P. Social environment and personality consciousness. M.: Publishing house. Moscow State University, 1968.- 268 p.
28. Bueva L.P. Dialectics of social and individual in personality development. // Philosophy and sociology of science and technology. M.: Knowledge, 1985. -64 p.
29. Buldakov S.K. Social and philosophical foundations of education. Kostroma: Publishing house of KSU named after. N. A. Nekrasova, 2000. 290 p.
30. Buldakov S.K. Education: goals, ideas, methodology. Scientific publication.-Kostroma: Publishing House of KSU named after. N. A. Nekrasova, 2000. 180 p.
31. Buldakov S.K., Subetto A.I. Philosophy and methodology of education. -SPb.: “Asterion”, 2002. -408 p.
32. WeberM. Favorites: Image of Society. M.: Lawyer, 1994. - 704 p.
33. Windelband V. Spirit and history: Favorites. M.: Lawyer, 1995. - 687 p.
34. Vitanya I. Society, culture, sociology. M.: Progress, 1984.- 287 p.
35. Vishnevsky Yu. R., Shapko V. T. Sociology of youth. Ekaterinburg: USTU, 1977.-211p.
36. Voltaire. Philosophical writings. M.: Nauka, 1988. - 750 p.
37. Sparrow Yu. D. Dialectics of artistic creativity. M.: Publishing house Moskov. Univ., 1984. - 176 p.
38. Wundt V. The problem of the psychology of peoples. Per. with him. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.- 160 p.
39. Vygotsky JI. C. Development of higher mental functions. M.: Publishing house Acad. ped. Sciences, 1960. - 500 p.
40. Vyzhletsov G. P. Axiology of culture. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg Publishing House. Univ., 1996.-148p.
41. Galtseva R. A. Western European philosophy between myth and game / Self-awareness European culture XX century. M.: Politizdat, 1991.- pp. 8-22.
42. Hegel G. V. F. Philosophy of Law / Hegel G. V. F. Works. T.YII.-M.-JL: Sotsekgiz, 1934. 380 p.
43. Hegel G. V. F. Philosophy of history / Hegel G. V. F. Works. T. YIII. -M.-JL: State socio-economic publishing house, 1935.- 470 p.
44. Helvetius K. About Man: Op. in 2 volumes - M.: “Thought”, 1974. T.P. - 687s.
45. Herder I. Ideas for the philosophy of human history. M.: “Science”, 1977.- 703 p.
46. Gershunsky B. S. Philosophy of education for the 21st century (In search of practice-oriented educational concepts). - M.: Publishing house "Perfection", 1998. 605 p.
47. Gessen S.I. Fundamentals of pedagogy. Introduction to applied philosophy: Textbook. manual for universities. M.: School - Press, 1995. - 447 p.
48. Goethe I. V. Selected philosophical works. M.: Nauka, 1964. - 520 p.
49. Goethe I. V. Years of wanderings of Wilhelm Meister, or the Renuncier / Collection. cit.: In 10 volumes. M.: Fiction, 1979. T.8. -462s.
50. Gluzdov V. A. Philosophy of education: textbook. N. Novgorod: Nizhegorod. Humanitarian, center, 2003. 79 p.
51. Gluzdov V. A. Science and educational subject: methodological analysis of the relationship. Monograph. N. Novgorod: Nizhegorod. humanist center, 2000.- 168 p.
52. Gorelov A. A. Concepts of modern natural science. Course of lectures: Publishing house "Center", 1997. 207 p.
53. Gubman B. JI. Western philosophy culture of the 20th century. - Tver: Lean, 1997. - 279 p.
54. Humanitarian and technological factors of stability in Russia: science-education policy. Interdisciplinary textbook. - Author: Bekorev A. M., Dakhin A. V., Makarychev A. S., Pak G. S., Shchurov V. A.
55. Answer. ed. A. V. Dakhin. Moscow: RGTU, 1998. - 144 p.
56. Gurevich A. Ya. Medieval world: the culture of the silent majority. M.: Art, 1990. - 395 p.
57. Gurevich P. S. Philosophy of culture: A manual for students humanit. universities.- M.: JSC “Aspect-press”, 1995.- 314 p.
58. Husserl E. The crisis of European humanity and philosophy // Society. Culture. Philosophy. -M.: Mysl, 1983. 476 p.
59. Davidovich V. E. Theory of the Ideal. Rostov-on-Don: Rostov University Publishing House, 1983.- 184 p.
60. Davydov V.V. Theory of developmental training. M.: Pedagogy, 1986. - 239 p.
61. Danilevsky N. Ya. Russia and Europe. A look at the cultural and political relations of the Slavic world to the German-Roman world. - St. Petersburg: Glagol, St. Petersburg Publishing House. Univ., 1995. 513 p.
62. Dakhin A. V. Culture is anti-culture // The system of personality culture and its significance for scientific and technological progress. Abstracts of reports for the XIII Interzonal Symposium. - Gorky: Gorky Regional Council of NTO, 1985. - P.32-34.
63. Dakhin A.V. Phenomenology of universality in culture: Monograph.-N. Novgorod: UNN Publishing House, 1995. 145 p.
65. Derrida J. Spurs: Nietzsche’s styles // Philosophical Sciences, 1991. No. 2-3. - P.17-59.
66. Diderot D. Works: In 2 volumes. M.: Mysl, 1991.- T. 2. - 604 p.
68. Disterweg F. V. A. Guide to the education of German teachers // Reader on the history of foreign pedagogy: A textbook for student teachers. Institute / Comp. A.I. Piskunov. M.: Education, 1981. - P. 353-416.
69. Dorozhkin A. M. The role of knowledge about ignorance in education // Russian education: traditions and prospects. Materials of the international scientific and practical conference. / Edited by prof. R. G. Strongina. N. Novgorod: UNN Publishing House, 1998. - P.33-35.
70. Drozdov A. Yu. “Aggressive” television: socio-psychological analysis of the phenomenon // Sociological Research, 2001. No. 8 - P. 62-67.
71. Dubinin N.P. What is a person. M.: Mysl, 1983. - 334 p.
72. Dewey D. School and Society. // Reader on the history of foreign pedagogy. -M.: Education, 1981. P.490-500.
73. Dyachenko V. A. Man in technoscience // Man in the NTP system. Abstracts of reports for the XYII Interzonal Symposium. Gorky: Gorkovskaya regional organization SNIO USSR, 1989. - pp. 139-141.
74. Durkheim E. Sociology. Its subject, method, purpose. Per. from fr. M.: Kanon, 1995. - 352 p.
75. Erasov B. S. Social cultural studies. - M.: Aspect Press, 1997. 591 p.
76. Zdravomyslov A. G. Needs. Interests. Values. M.: Politizdat, 1986.-223 p.
77. Zelenov JI. A. Culture, personality - activity // Social progress and culture. Interuniversity collection. - Gorky: ed. GSU named after N.I. Lobachevsky, 1983. - P.15-25.
78. Zelenov L. A. System of personality culture // System of personality culture and its significance for scientific and technological progress. Abstracts of reports for the XIII Interzonal Symposium. Gorky: Gorky Regional Council of Scientific and Technical Organizations, 1985.-P.4-15.
79. Zelenov L. A. Formation of personality. Gorky: VVKI, 1989. - 168 p.
80. Zelenov L. A., Dakhin A. V., Ananyev Yu. V., Kutyrev V. A. Culturology: Textbook. N. Novgorod: Publishing House of Nizhny Novgorod State University, 1993. -93 p.
81. Zelenov L. A. Culture and anticulture (problems of methodology) // Proceedings of the first scientific session of the Nizhny Novgorod regional branch of the Petrovsky Academy of Sciences and Arts. - Nizhny Novgorod: publishing house of the Nizhny Novgorod State Agricultural Academy, 1996. -S .20-24.
82. Zlobin N. S. Culture and social progress. M.: Nauka, 1980. - 303 p.
83. Sombart V. Bourgeois. History Studies spiritual development modern economic man. M.: Nauka, 1994. - 442 p.
84. From the cultural history of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. M.: Nauka, 1976.-315 p.
85. Ilyenkov E.V. About idols and ideals. M.: Politizdat, 1968. - 319 p.
86. Ilyin I. A. About the coming Russia. Selected articles. M.: Voenizdat, 1993. - 368 p.
87. Ilyasov I. I. Structure of the learning process. Monograph: M.: Moscow University Publishing House, 1986. - 200 p.
88. History of aesthetic thought: The formation and development of aesthetics as a science /Prev. ed. count Ovsyannikov M.F. - M.: Art, 1985. T.I. - 463s. T.2.- 456 p.
89. Kagan M. S. Philosophy of culture. St. Petersburg: TK Petropolis LLP, 1996. -414 p.
90. Kagan M. S. Philosophy of culture as a theoretical discipline / Philosophy of culture. Formation and development. St. Petersburg: Lan, 1998. - P.4-14.
91. Camus A. Rebel Man: Philosophy. Policy. Art. M.: 1990.-414 p.
92. Kant I. Idea general history in world-civil terms. // Kant I. Works in 6 volumes. M.: Mysl, 1966. T.6. - P.7-23.
93. Kant I. Metaphysics of Morals: In 2 parts 1797. // Kant I., Hegel G. V. F., Schelling F. V. I. German classical philosophy. - M.: ZAO Publishing House EKSMO-Press; Kharkov: Folio Publishing House, 2000. T.I. - P. 11-300.
94. Karsavin L.P. Fundamentals of politics // Russia between Europe and Asia: Eurasian temptation: Anthology. RAS, Institute of Philosophy. M.: Nauka, 1993.-P.174-216.
95. Kasperavichyus M. M. Functions of religious and secular symbols. L.: “Knowledge”, 1990. - 32 p.
96. Kasyan A. A. Context of education: science and worldview: Monograph. N. Novgorod: NGPU Publishing House, 1996. - 184 p.
97. Kemerov V. E. Introduction to social philosophy: A textbook for humanitarian universities. - M.: Aspect Press, 1996. - 215 p.
98. Kemerov V. E. Culture // Modern philosophical dictionary / Under the general. ed. doc. Phil. Sciences Kemerova V. E. M.: “Odyssey”, 1996.- P.255-256.
99. Kertman Jl. E. Cultural history of Europe and America, 1870-1917: Textbook. manual for universities. - M.: graduate School, 1987. 304 p.
100. Kogan Jl. N. The purpose and meaning of human life. M.: Mysl, 1984. - 255 p.
101. Kozlova N. Socio-historical anthropology: Textbook. -M.: Publishing House"Key-S", 1999. - 192 p.
102. Komensky Ya. A. Great didactics // Reader on the history of foreign pedagogy: A textbook for pedagogical students. in-tov / Compiled by A. I. Piskunov. M.: Education, 1981. - P.80-163.
103. Kon I. S. In search of oneself: Personality and its self-awareness. M.: Politizdat, 1984.-335 p.
104. Kon I. S. Child and society: (Historical - ethnographic perspective). - M.: Nauka, 1988. 269 p.
105. Kon I. S. Scientific and technological revolution and problems of socialization of youth. M.: “Knowledge”, 1988.-63 p.
106. Confucius. Sayings. Book of songs and hymns. Kharkov: Publishing house "Folio", 2002.-447 p.
107. Kraeva O. L. Artistic culture of the individual // System of personal culture and its significance for scientific and technological progress. Abstracts of reports for the XIII Interzonal Symposium. - Gorky: Gorky Regional Council of Scientific and Technical Organizations, 1985. P. 114-116.
108. Kraeva O. L. Social and philosophical analysis of human potential. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. N. Novgorod, 1999. - 46 p.
109. Kraeva O. L. Dialectics of human potential: Monograph. M., N. Novgorod: Nizhny Novgorod. state agricultural Academy, 1999. - 192 p.
110. Brief explanation of Orthodox services. M.: Reprint edition of the Holy Trinity-Sergius Lavra, 1990. - 93 p.
111. Kroeber A. Configurations of cultural development // Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretation of culture / Comp. L. A. Mostova. St. Petersburg: University Book, 1997. - pp. 465-498.
112. Krylova N. B. Culturology of education. M.: Public education, 2000.-237 p.
113. Kuznetsov A. G. Value orientations modern youth. Saratov: Military School of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, 1995.-139 p.
114. Culture, traditions, education: Yearbook. Vol. 1/Ans. ed. Ph.D. T.V. Tomko. Min. Cultures of the RSFSR. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Research Institute of Culture. M.: Scientific Research Institute of Culture, 1990. - 263 p.
115. Kutyrev V. A. Natural and artificial: the struggle of the worlds. N. Novgorod: Publishing house "Nizhny Novgorod", 1994. - 199 p.
116. Kutyrev V. A. Reason against man (Philosophy of survival in the era of postmodernism). M.: “CheRo”, 1999. - 230 p.
117. Kutyrev V. A. Culture and technology: the struggle of the worlds. M.: Progress-Tradition, 2001. - 240 p.
118. Levi-Strauss K. Structural anthropology. Per. from fr. -M.: Nauka, 1985. 535 p.
119. Leontiev A. N. Selected psychological works: In 2 volumes. M.: 1983.-T.N. 423s.
120. Lyotard J.-F. The state of postmodernity. Per. from fr. M.: Institute of Experimental. sociology; St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 1998. - 159 p.
121. Logua R. A. Youth and the market: Problems of socialization. - M.: Luch, 1992. 89 p.
122. Losev A. F. Philosophy. Mythology. Culture. M.: Politizdat, 1991.- 525 p.
123. Lossky N. O. Value and being: God and the Kingdom of God as the basis of values. Kharkov: Folio; M.: LLC “Firm Publishing House ACT”, 2000.- P.7-104.
124. Lotman Yu. M. Culture and explosion. M.: Progress. Gnosis, 1992. - 270 p.
125. Makarenko A. S. Selected pedagogical works: In 2 volumes. M.: 1977.- T.I. 298s.
126. Malinovsky B. Scientific principles and methods for studying cultural change // Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretation of culture. St. Petersburg: University Book, 1997. - pp. 370-384.
127. Manetti J. Dialogue about the death of a son., Dialogue at a friendly feast // From the history of culture of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. M.: Nauka, 1976. -P.257-265.
128. Markaryan E. S. Theory of culture and modern science: (Logical-methodological analysis) M.: Mysl, 1983. - 284 p.
129. Marx K., Engels F. About youth. M.: Young Guard, 1972. - 463 p.
130. Marx K., Engels F. Works, 2nd ed. M.: State. Polit Publishing House, liters, 1955.- T.Z. - P. 3-544.
131. Marx K., Engels F. Works, 2nd ed. M.: Gospolitizdat, 1960.-T.23. -907s.
132. Marx K., Engels F. Works, 2nd ed. M.: Publishing house polit, lit-ry, 1965. - T. 42. - 4.2. - P. 21-323.
133. Marx K., Engels F. Works, 2nd ed. M.: Polit, literary publishing house, 1968. T.46. - 4.1. - P. 51-506.
134. Marx K., Engels F. Works, 2nd ed. M.: Publishing House of Polit, Literary, 1969.- T.46. 4.2. - P.5-406.
135. Marcuse G. One-dimensional man. M.: ACT, 1994. - 203 p.
136. Mezhu ev V. M. Culture and history. (The problem of culture in the philosophical and historical theory of Marxism). M.: Politizdat, 1977. - 197 p.
137. Mead M. Culture and the world of childhood. Selected works. M.: Nauka, 1998.-429 p.
138. Miliukov P. N. Essays on the history of Russian culture // Reader on cultural studies: In 2 volumes. T.2. Self-awareness of Russian culture / Ed. I. F. Kefeli and others. St. Petersburg: “Petropolis”, 2000. - P.310-313.
139. Mirandola P. d. Speeches on the dignity of man / Renaissance Aesthetics. -M.: Art, 1981.- T.I. P.249.
140. Human world. Petrovskaya Academy of Sciences and Arts. All-Russian Academy of Human Sciences. Periodical scientific works members of the academy. Issue 3. Nizhny Novgorod: NASA Publishing House, 1993.- 141 p.
141. Youth of the XXI century: tolerance as a way of perceiving the world / Ed. prof. 3. M. Saralieva. N. Novgorod: Publishing house NISOTS, 2001.- 309 p.
142. Mol A. Sociodynamics of culture. M.: Progress, 1973. - 406 p.
143. Montaigne M. Experiments. Selected works. Per. from fr. In 3 volumes. M.: Golos, 1992.-T. I.-384s.
144. Mudrik A.V. Socialization and the “Time of Troubles.” M.: Knowledge, 1991.- 78 p.
145. Nemirovsky E. A. Journey to the origins of Russian printing: A book for students. M.: Education, 1991. - 224 p.
146. Nechaev V. Ya. Sociology of education. M., 1992. - 200 p.
147. Nietzsche F. Thus spoke Zarathustra. - St. Petersburg: Azbuka Publishing House, 1996. - 332 p.
148. New values of education: ten concepts and essays: (Collected articles) Institute of Pedagogics. innovations Ros. acad. education, Proc. will educate center "Inno-vator" /Ed. N. B. Krylova, S. A. Ushakin. - M.: Innovator, 1995. - 153 p.
149. New values of education: cultural and multicultural environment of schools: (Collected articles) Institute of Pedagogics. innovations Ros. acad. education. Educational and educational Center "Innovator" /Ed. R. M. Lucier et al. - M.: Innovator, 1996.-184 p.
150. New values of education: cultural models of schools: (Collected articles) / Ed. R. M. Lucier et al. M.: Innovator, 1997. - 248 p.
151. New Testament and the Psalter. Avainsanoma en Helsinki, Finland. - 363c.
152. Social progress and culture. Interuniversity collection. Gorky: Publishing House of the State University named after. N. I. Lobachevsky, 1983. - 154 p.
153. Orlov Yu. M. Ascent to individuality. M.: Education, 1991.-287 p.
154. Orlova 3. N. Culture and education / Reports of the interuniversity scientific and theoretical conference. P. Kamchatsky: KSPI, 1996. - P.64-67.
155. Orlova 3. N. Confrontation between culture and anticulture in society philosophical understanding the fate of civilization. Abstracts of the XVth Annual Scientific and Practical Conference of the Department of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Moscow: 2002.-4.4.-P.33-35.
156. Orlova 3. N. Denial for the sake of affirmation / Man as a subject of life. Materials of the IX Russian Scientific Conference. Ryazan: GPU, 2002. P.24-25.
157. Orlova E. A. Introduction to social and cultural anthropology. M.: Publishing house MGIK, 1994. - 214 p.
158. Ortega y Gasset X. Dehumanization of art and other works. M.: 1991.-639 p.
159. Panteleeva T. V. Confrontation between culture and anticulture in artistic creativity. Abstract for the academic degree of Candidate of Philosophical Sciences. N. Novgorod: 2001. - 28 p.
160. Parsons Howard L. Man in modern world: (Collection). M.: Progress, 1985.-428 p.
161. Pedagogical search / Comp. I. N. Bazhenova. M.: Pedagogy, 1990. - 560 p.
162. Pestalozzi I. G. How Gertrude teaches her children // Reader on the history of pedagogy for higher pedagogical educational institutions/ Comp.
163. G. P. Weisberg, N. A. Zhelvakov, S. A. Frumov. M.: State educational and pedagogical publishing house of the People's Commissariat of Education of the RSFSR, 1940. - P. 172200.
164. Piaget J. Selected psychological works. M.: Education, 1969. -659 p.
165. Plekhanov G.V. Selected philosophical works: In 5 volumes. M.: Gospolitizdat, 1956.- T.1. 847s.
166. Prahova Zh. V. Integral nature of personality socialization. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of philosophical sciences.1. N. Novgorod: 2001. 133 p.
167. Problems of anthroponomy. Abstracts of reports for the XIX Interzonal Symposium. N. Novgorod: Gorky regional organization of the SNIO USSR, 1991.-141p.
168. Roerich N.K. Indestructible. Riga: Vieda, 1991. - 236 p.
169. Rozin V. M., Buldakov S. K. Philosophy of education. Tutorial. -Kostroma: KSU Publishing House, 1999. 284 p.
170. Russian education: traditions and prospects. Materials of the international scientific and practical conference. / Ed. prof. R. G. Strongina. N. Novgorod: UNN Publishing House, 1998. - 443 p.
171. Rubina JI. Ya. Professional and social well-being of teachers // Sociological Research, 1996. No. 6. - P.63-75.
172. Rubinstein S. JI. The principle of creative initiative // Questions of Philosophy, 1989. No. 4. - P.89-95.
173. Ruvinsky JI. I. Self-education of personality. M.: Knowledge, 1980. - 360 p.
174. Rousseau J. J. Pedagogical works. In 2 volumes - M.: Pedagogy, 1981.-T.1. - 653s.
175. Rousseau J. J. On the social contract: Treatises. Per. from fr. - M.: TER-RA - Book Club; CANON - press - C, 2000. - P. 50-153.
176. Rutkevich M.N., Rubina JI. I. Social needs, education system, youth. M.: Politizdat, 1988. - 222 p.
177. Ryvkina R.V. Lifestyle of the population of Russia: social consequences of the reforms of the 90s // Sociological studies, 2001. No. 4. - P.32-39.
178. Self-awareness of European culture of the 20th century. M.: Politizdat, 1991. - 366 p.
179. Sartre J.P. Being and Nothing // Philosophical Sciences, 1989. - No. 3. - P.87-100.
180. Sartre J.-P. Existentialism is humanism / Twilight of the Gods. - M.: Politizdat, 1989. - P.323-328.
181. Selivanova 3. K. Meaningful life orientations of adolescents // Sociological studies, 2001. No. 2. - P.87-92.
182. Sikevich 3. V. Youth culture: “for” and “against”. Notes from a sociologist. JL: Lenizdat, 1990. - 206 p.
183. Silverstov V.V. Philosophical justification of the theory and history of culture. M.: Ied-vo Vsesoyuz. in absentia polytechnics, institute, 1990. - 239 p.
184. Silverstov V.V. Theory and history of culture in the system educational activities// Culture. Traditions. Education. Yearbook: Vol. 1. -M.: Scientific Research Institute of Culture, 1990. P.36-48.
185. The system of personality culture and its significance for scientific and technological progress. Abstracts of reports for the XIII Interzonal Symposium. Gorky: Gorky Regional Council of Scientific and Technical Organizations, 1985.- 180 p.
186. Sozontov G. M. On contradictions in culture and anticulture // System of personality culture and its significance for scientific and technological progress. Abstracts of reports for the XIII Interzonal Symposium, Gorky: Gorky Regional Council of Scientific and Technical Organizations, 1985. P.21-22.
187. Solovyov V. S. Spiritual foundations of life., Beauty in nature / Solovyov V. S. Selected works. Rostov-on-Don: “Phoenix”, 1998. - P. 122-331.
188. Sorokin P. A. Man. Civilization. Society. M.: Politizdat, 1992.- 542 p.
189. Sociology of counterculture. Infantilism as a type of worldview and a social disease /Auth. Yu. I. Davydov, I. B. Rodnyanskaya. M.: “Science”, 1980.-259 p.
190. Stolovich Jl. N. Beauty. Good. Truth: Essay on the history of aesthetic axiology. M.: Republic, 1994. -464 p.
191. Strumilin S.G. Selected works: In 5 volumes. M.: Nauka, 1965.- T.5.- 467p.
192. Subetto A. I. Creativity, life, health and harmony (Studies of creative ontology). M.: Logos, 1992. - 204 p.
193. Subetto A.I. Public intelligence and culture // Man. Culture. Education. Human World: Issue 3. N. Novgorod: Nizhny Novgorod State. s-x. Academy, 1998. - P.53-59.
194. Subetto A.I. Quality of continuous education in the Russian Federation. St. Petersburg: Research Center for Problems of Quality of Training of Specialists, 2000. - 498 p.
195. Sulima I. I. Understanding approaches to the humanization of education: a textbook. N. Novgorod: Nizhegorod. Legal Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. - 1997. -50s.
196. Sukhomlinsky V. A. Wise power of the collective (Methods of educating the collective). M.: “Young Guard”, 1975. - 240 p.
197. Taibakov A. A. Criminal subculture // Sociological studies, 2001. No. 3. - P.90-93.
198. TylorE. Primitive culture. M.: Publishing House of Political Literature, 1989.-573 p.
199. Personality theory in Western European and American psychology. Reader on personality psychology. Samara: Publishing house. house "Bakhrakh", 1996.-478p.
200. Terentyev A. A. Russian school: formation, development, prospects (socio-philosophical problems). - N. Novgorod: Publishing House VVAGS, 1997. - 120 p.
201. Toynbee A. Civilization before the court of history: Collection. Per. from English -M.: Progress. Culture; St. Petersburg: Yuventa, 1995. 477 p.
202. Tugarinov V.P. On the values of life and culture, - JL: Leningrad University Publishing House, I960.- 156 p.
203. Turovsky M. B. Philosophical foundations of cultural studies. M.: “Russian Political Encyclopedia” (ROSSPEN), 1997. - 440 p.
204. White L. The concept of culture //Anthology of cultural studies. T.I. Interpretations of culture / Comp. L. A. Mostova. St. Petersburg: 1997. - pp. 17-49.
205. Ushinsky K. D. Selected pedagogical works: In 2 volumes - M.: Uchped giz, 1953-1954. T.l - 693 p., T.2 - 735 p.
206. Filippova L. V. Philosophical foundations of the theory and practice of social pedagogy. Abstract for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. N. Novgorod, 1992. - 31 p.
207. Philosophical encyclopedic Dictionary. M.: “Soviet Encyclopedia”, 1983. - 840 p.
208. Florensky P. A. Notes on Christianity and culture // Reader on cultural studies: In 2 volumes. T. II. Self-knowledge of Russian culture / Ed. I. F. Kefeli and others. St. Petersburg: “Petropolis”, 2000. - P.420-422.
209. Formation spiritual world person. Interuniversity collection of scientific papers. Gorky: 1 GNI im. M. Gorky, 1989. - 160 p.
210. Frank S. L. Spiritual foundations of society. M.: Republic, 1992. - 510 p.
211. Frankl V. Man in Search of Meaning: Collection. Translated from English, German. M.: Progress, 1990.-368 p.
212. French philosophy and aesthetics of the 20th century: A. Bergson, E. Mounier, M. Merleau-Ponty / Pushkin Program. Vol. I. M.: Art, 1995.-271 p.
213. Freud 3. “I” and “It”. Works of different years: In 2 books. Per. with him. Tbilisi: Merani, 1991. - Book. 1.- 396s. - Book 2. - 425 p.
214. Fromm E. To have or to be? Per. from English M.: Progress, 1990. - 330 p.
215. Heidegger M. Time and Being. M.: Republic, 1993. - 445 p.
216. Huizinga I. Homo ludens. Experience in determining the game element of culture. M.: “Progress - Academy”, 1992. - 464 p.
217. Reader on the history of foreign pedagogy: A textbook for pedagogical students. Institute / Comp. A.I. Piskunov. M.: Education, 1981.- 528 p.
218. Reader on the history of pedagogy: In 4 volumes. M.: People's Commissariat of Education of the RSFSR, 1940.-T.2.- 4.1.-687p.
219. Reader on cultural studies: In 2 volumes. Volume I. Self-awareness of world culture / Ed. I. F. Kefeli and others. St. Petersburg: “Petropolis”, 1999.- 312 p. T.P. Self-awareness of Russian culture / Ed. I. F. Kefeli and others. St. Petersburg: “Petropolis”, 2000. - 512 p.
220. Khutorskoy A.V. Heuristic learning: theory, methodology, practice.-M.: 1988.-423p.
221. Chavchavadze N. 3. Culture and values. Tbilisi: Metsniereba, 1984.- 171 p.
222. Man in the mirror of culture and education: (Collected articles) / Philosophy. Society of the USSR, Moscow. department - M., 1989. 213 p.
223. Man in the NTP system. Abstracts of reports for the XYII Interzonal Symposium. Gorky: Gorky regional organization of the SNIO USSR, 1989.-233p.
224. Man and culture: Individuality in the history of culture: (Collected articles) /AS USSR. Rep. ed. A. Ya. Gurevich. M.: Nauka, 1990. - 238 p.
225. Man and sociocultural environment. Issue 1. Specialized information on the academic program “Man, Science, Society”. Comprehensive research. M.: INION AN SSSR, 1991. - 260 p.
226. Shvartsman K. A. Philosophy and education. Critical analysis non-Marxist concept. M.: Politizdat, 1989. - 205 p.
227. Schweitzer A. Decline and revival of culture: Favorites. M.: Prometheus, 1993.-511 p.
228. Sheregi F. E., Kharcheva V. G., Serikov V. V. Sociology of education: applied aspect. M.: Yurist, 1997. - 304 p.
229. Schiller F. Letters about aesthetic education person / Collected works. In 7 volumes - M.: State Publishing House of Fiction, 1957. - T. 6.-S. 251-358.
230. Schopenhauer A. About the insignificance and sorrows of life / Schopenhauer A. Selected works. -M.: Education, 1992. P.63-80.
231. Spengler O. Decline of Europe. M.: Art, 1993. - 289 p.
232. Shchedrovitsky P. G. Essays on the philosophy of education. M.: Pedagogy, 1993.- 153 p.
233. Epstein M. Self-purification. Hypothesis of the origin of culture // Questions of Philosophy, 1997. No. 5. - P.72-79.
234. Aesthetics of the Renaissance: Anthology: In 2 volumes. M.: Art, 1981. - T.I. - 495s. T.P. - 639s.
235. Jung K. Archetype and symbol. M.: Renaissance, 1991. - 297 p.
236. Jung K. Conflicts of the child’s soul. M.: Kanon, 1995. - 333 p.
237. Yadov V. A. On various approaches to the concept of personality and the various problems associated with them in the study of mass communications / Sat. "Personality and mass communications." Issue 2. Tartu: 1969. - S.
238. Jaspers K. The meaning and purpose of history. M.: Politizdat, 1991. - 527 p.
Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for informational purposes only and were obtained through original dissertation text recognition (OCR). Therefore, they may contain errors associated with imperfect recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.
Culture is a creation of man. Man creates, “grows” culture, but at the same time, culture creates man, it separates him from the natural world, creating a special reality of human existence, an artificial reality. Culture does not impose a certain point of view, but only creates a space for human creativity, where the human creator himself creates his own opinion. Culture is devoid of aggression and violence; through culture, man creates the world; culture is creative in nature.
To deprive a person of culture is to deprive him of his freedom. Freedom that leads to the destruction of culture ultimately deprives a person of this freedom. The destruction of culture deprives a person of his individuality. Culture is being replaced by anticulture. Anticulture gives a person imaginary freedom and, in contrast to real culture, positive culture, which comes from a person and is born in society, anticulture is imposed on society through a propaganda system in order to transform public thinking and life. By destroying culture and morality, the dictator changes the value system, builds a new anti-morality, a new anti-culture, thereby managing to influence a person’s way of thinking.
Anticulture, in contrast to positive culture, creating culture, can be aggressive and destructive and always serves the interests of a separate group of people or state interests. Anticulture kills the humanity of culture, anticulture kills beauty. A person of anticulture projects his fantasies and fears not into a special artificial reality, but, having lost it, communicates with the present, actual reality. He is not capable of creating, but he is capable of destroying. Culture is humanity; it is subjective, in the sense that it puts the individual, the human creator, at the head. Anticulture is abstract and anti-human, prone to objectification, replacing the individual with the social. Anticulture erases unique features, unifies and creates something generalized and averaged, “sifting” and selecting only what serves the ideas of the state.
Mechanism of cultural processes
Mechanism of the cultural process = tradition + innovation
Cultural processes have peculiarities of their course. In this case, they talk about the features of their mechanisms. The mechanisms of cultural change include acculturation, transmission, expansion, diffusion, differentiation, etc.
Acculturation is a process of mutual influence of cultures, as a result of which the culture of one people (more developed) is fully or partially perceived by the culture of another people (less developed). It may be free borrowing or a government policy-driven process.
The spread of culture is a special form of movement, different from the migrations of societies and people and in no way reducible to these processes. In this case, culture acts as something independent. The culture that borrows is the recipient. A giving culture is a donor.
Borrowing can be carried out in the form of transfer - mechanical copying of external samples of one culture by another culture without deep mastery of the meanings of the given.
Cultural transmission is the process of transferring cultural values from previous generations to subsequent ones through education, which ensures continuity in culture (subject in universities "WWII").
Cultural expansion - expansion dominant national culture beyond the original or state limits.
Diffusion (dispersion) is the spatial spread of cultural achievements of one society to another. Having arisen in one society, this or that cultural phenomenon can be borrowed and assimilated by members of many other societies (Christianity - Madagascar). Diffusion is a special process, different from both the movement of societies and the movement of departments. people or their groups within societies or from one society to another. Culture can be transmitted from society to society without moving the societies themselves, or departments. their members.
Differentiation is the quality of changes in culture, which is associated with the isolation, division, and separation of parts from the whole.
Culture and humanism
The word "humanism" is related to the ancient Latin word homo (man). Nowadays, the concept of “humanism” has various interpretations, but all of them invariably include its main feature “humanity,” which means the attitude towards man as the highest value among all possible in the Universe.
No, and there cannot be a culture that does not assume a certain and, moreover, important place (role, purpose) for a person in its system of the universe. Already archaic cultures left decisive role to the human collective in maintaining the pre-established world order. And in the era of Antiquity, man was clearly aware of his role in fulfilling the tradition that he idolized. and the navigator, blacksmith and warrior, sometimes, as in Ancient Greece, in one person, whether a merchant or a priest, understood their activity only in alliance with the gods, that is, they understood it as an activity sanctioned by divine powers.
The culture of the Middle Ages was also a culture of the people and for the people. And yet, the principles of this era are not consistent with the concept of humanism, because the creator of the universe and man in it, the creator of all the meanings and goals that guided people in the world of medieval culture, was recognized as one exceptional subject, God, also called the Creator or Creator. For the time being, faith in God, which presupposes in him the single and only source of all creative will, seemed to absorb the mass of private human desires. Only at the late border of the Middle Ages did this belief and the reality contradicting it Everyday life reached an intolerable split. By this time, man’s willfulness had managed to clearly prove its creative power in the construction of unprecedented cities (especially in northwestern Europe and Italy), in rapid economic successes in crafts, trade and agriculture, in the discovery of the arts; and managed to terrify with its destructive power in the internecine struggle for power and possession, in intrigue, bribery, murder of rivals, in the unbridled gratification of passions.
After this, it was difficult to believe that the world is something given once and for all, and man in it is only the executor of the Creator’s plan. Experience and feelings suggested otherwise. And the Europeans began to create a cultural system in accordance with these new experiences and new feelings. The formation of modern culture" was marked by decisive changes in almost all forms of life.
Since the 15th century, a new image of states gradually took shape in Europe, a new sphere was established human existence private life, a new attitude of states and their citizens to religion and the Church (Reformation) was emerging, a new area of cognitive activity (science) arose, and art was separated from craft. The new forms of life that emerged during the New Age embodied new ideas about the world and man’s place in it, new ideals and new goal-setting, a new culture, humanistic in its essence.
Historically, “New Time” as a type of culture began to take shape in the 15th and 16th centuries (this transitional period is called the Renaissance); its classical forms are found in the 17th and 18th centuries. But already in the 19th century, this type of culture revealed a number of fatally insurmountable problems, the catastrophic consequences of which in the 20th century again forced humanity into a painful search for a cultural order that would satisfy the requirements of modernity.
13. Culture and civilization The concepts of culture and civilization are often not distinguished and are perceived as identical. They really have a lot in common, but at the same time, there are noticeable differences between them. In time, the term “civilization” arose much later than the term "culture" - only in the 18th century. The term “civilization” was coined by French Enlightenment philosophers and was used by them in two senses - broad and narrow. The first of them meant a highly developed society based on the principles of reason, justice and religious tolerance. The second meaning was closely intertwined with the concept of “culture” and meant the totality of certain human qualities - extraordinary intelligence, education, refinement of manners, politeness, etc., the possession of which opened the way to the elite Parisian salons of the 18th century. In the first case, the concepts of civilization and culture appear as synonyms, there are no significant differences between them. As an example, we can point to the concept of the authoritative English historian A. Toynbee, who considered civilization as a certain phase of culture, focusing on its spiritual aspect and considering religion to be the main and defining element. In the second case, both similarities and important differences are found between culture and civilization. A similar view, in particular, was held by the French historian F. Braudel, for whom civilization forms the basis of culture, acting as one of the elements that form the totality of primarily spiritual phenomena. Finally, supporters of the third campaign sharply contrast culture and civilization. The most striking example in this regard is the theory of the German culturologist O. Spengler, outlined in his book “The Decline of Europe” (1918 - 1922), according to which civilization is a dying, perishing and disintegrating culture. There really is a lot in common between culture and civilization; they are inextricably linked, mutually intertwined and transform into each other. The German romantics were among the first to draw attention to this, who noted that culture “grows” into civilization, and civilization turns into culture. Therefore, it is understandable that in everyday life we do not distinguish them much. Civilization necessarily presupposes the presence of a certain level of culture, which in turn includes civilization.Culture is a creation of man. Man creates, “grows” culture, but at the same time, culture creates man, it separates him from the natural world, creating a special reality of human existence, an artificial reality. Culture does not impose a certain point of view, but only creates a space for human creativity, where the human creator himself creates his own opinion. Culture is devoid of aggression and violence; through culture, man creates the world; culture is creative in nature.
To deprive a person of culture is to deprive him of his freedom. Freedom that leads to the destruction of culture ultimately deprives a person of this freedom. The destruction of culture deprives a person of his individuality. Culture is being replaced by anticulture. Anticulture gives a person imaginary freedom and, in contrast to real culture, positive culture, which comes from a person and is born in society, anticulture is imposed on society through a propaganda system in order to transform public thinking and life. By destroying culture and morality, the dictator changes the value system, builds a new anti-morality, a new anti-culture, thereby managing to influence a person’s way of thinking.
Anticulture, in contrast to positive culture, creating culture, can be aggressive and destructive and always serves the interests of a separate group of people or state interests. Anticulture kills the humanity of culture, anticulture kills beauty. A person of anticulture projects his fantasies and fears not into a special artificial reality, but, having lost it, communicates with the present, actual reality. He is not capable of creating, but he is capable of destroying. Culture is humanity; it is subjective, in the sense that it puts the individual, the human creator, at the head. Anticulture is abstract and anti-human, prone to objectification, replacing the individual with the social. Anticulture erases unique features, unifies and creates something generalized and averaged, “sifting” and selecting only what serves the ideas of the state.
12. The mechanism of cultural processes
Mechanism of the cultural process = tradition + innovation
Cultural processes have peculiarities of their course. In this case, they talk about the features of their mechanisms. The mechanisms of cultural change include acculturation, transmission, expansion, diffusion, differentiation, etc.
Acculturation is a process of mutual influence of cultures, as a result of which the culture of one people (more developed) is fully or partially perceived by the culture of another people (less developed). It may be free borrowing or a government policy-driven process.
The spread of culture is a special form of movement, different from the migrations of societies and people and in no way reducible to these processes. In this case, culture acts as something independent. The culture that borrows is the recipient. A giving culture is a donor.
Borrowing can be carried out in the form of transfer - mechanical copying of external samples of one culture by another culture without deep mastery of the meanings of the given.
Cultural transmission is the process of transferring cultural values from previous generations to subsequent ones through education, which ensures continuity in culture (subject in universities "WWII").
Cultural expansion is the expansion of the dominant national culture beyond the original or state boundaries.
Diffusion (dispersion) is the spatial spread of cultural achievements of one society to another. Having arisen in one society, this or that cultural phenomenon can be borrowed and adopted by members of many other societies (Christianity - Madagascar). Diffusion is a special process, different from both the movement of societies and the movement of departments. people or their groups within societies or from one society to another. Culture can be transmitted from society to society without moving the societies themselves, or departments. their members.
Differentiation is the quality of changes in culture, which is associated with the isolation, division, and separation of parts from the whole.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Similar documents
Fandom and the emergence of youth subcultures. Examples of subcultures: music and art subcultures. Internet community and Internet cultures. Industrial and sports subcultures. Countercultures, relationships between subcultures. Punks, emo, hippies, rivethead.
course work, added 12/20/2010
Modern approaches to understanding youth subculture. The concept of "subculture" as a set of symbols, beliefs, values, norms of behavior that distinguish communities. Informal youth movements. Hippies, punks, metalheads, extreme sports fans, skinheads and fans.
abstract, added 04/17/2009
Modern approaches to understanding youth subculture. A specific system of norms and values of each sociocultural community. Culture of classes and modern social groups. Definition and essence of marginal culture, subculture, counterculture.
abstract, added 03/29/2011
Characteristics youth subculture"Punks". Vulgar behavior on stage. Links between the punk movement and the previous generation of beatniks. Punk look. Related subcultures and subcultures that emerged from punk.
presentation, added 03/15/2015
Characteristic features and subject of “subculture”, its types (ethnic, corporate, religious, age). The concept of counterculture as a set of socio-cultural attitudes opposing the values of the dominant culture. Its main elements.
test, added 11/06/2013
The culture of a certain younger generation. The relationship between modern youth culture, subculture and music. Bikers, goths, metalheads, rockers, punks, rastafarians, role-players, ravers, rappers, skinheads, hippies and alternatives. Football fans.
abstract, added 03/08/2009
Different definitions of culture. Fandom (fandom) and the emergence of subcultures. History and characteristics of the term. Widespread and large subcultures. The emergence and principle of formation of counterculture. Relationships and genetic connections of subcultures.
abstract, added 01/13/2012
History of origin popular culture. Classification of spheres of manifestation of mass culture, proposed by A.Ya. Flier. Approaches to defining mass culture. Types of culture based on the principle of intracultural hierarchy. Types of culture and signs of subculture.