The article attempts to reveal the mechanisms of contact and mutual influence of various components of the modern cultural field, both patriarchal and traditional, and those that arose in the era of modernity and postmodernity. The author proceeds from an analysis of the essence of such concepts as tradition (traditional culture, ethnoculture) and innovation to the context of the intersections of phenomena that are deeply rooted and innovative in nature, exploring different points of view on this subject.
Among the possible concepts and interpretations of this problem, the author dwells on the possibility of choosing whether tradition corresponds to roots or new technologies, information culture, noting that modern stage The development of culture is marked by the desire for symbiosis and synthesis of everything that came before it, and fundamentally new possibilities of technology.
The article is an attempt to uncover the mechanism of connections and influence of different parts of the culture both patriarchal, traditional and the ones appeared in the epoch of "modern" and "postmodern". Author, observing different opinions and theories, goes from the analysis of basic ideas as traditional culture, ethnic culture and innovation to the conception of interaction phenomena which are rooted deeply and the same time are novelties by there nature.
Amidst many conceptions and interpretations of this subject author selected the one that considers the choice of conformity either to the traditions and roots or to the modern technology and information culture. Author notes that the latest stage of cultural development is characterized by aspiration to the synthesis of traditional staff and absolutely newest technical possibilities.
To the question “what is tradition?” Many famous authors tried to answer, among whom were the philosophers W. Windelband and E. Husserl,
Ogorodova Alena Vladimirovna- Associate Professor of the Department of Pop Orchestra and Ensemble of the Belgorod State Institute of Culture and Arts (Belgorod).
historians L. Febvre and M. Blok, anthropologists R. Redfield and B. Malinovsky, sociologists F. Tennis, M. Weber and E. Durkheim. And yet, the theory of tradition was never created. What we have today are only certain approaches to theory, sometimes outlined only in the most general terms. They were most often created separately from each other and related different facts, which led to a significant difference in points of view and filling the term “tradition” with a wide variety of meanings.
However, the term is very widely used today. Clear signs of emotional approval or disapproval of “tradition” are easily traced in a variety of scientific discussions of the 20th century, when opponents advocate either “modernity” or tradition, without bothering to explain what, in fact, is hidden under these conventional names. They directly appeal to the emotions that famous words tend to evoke in our culture. Some set themselves the task of freeing people from the “yoke of the past”, others - to explain to people that connection with the past is the only source of life. Both see in tradition not so much a fact as a value.
So, for example, if the term “tradition” is understood in its literal meaning, then, as the Encyclopedia social sciences“-“all elements of social life will be traditional, with the exception of those relatively few innovations that each century creates for itself, and those direct borrowings from other societies that can be observed when the process of diffusion takes place.” But with this understanding, the concept of “tradition” becomes almost synonymous with the term “culture”.
The “Philosophical Dictionary” defines the concept of “tradition” as follows: “Tradition (Latin Traditio - transmission, tradition) - historically established customs, rituals, social institutions, ideas and values, norms of behavior, etc., passed on from generation to generation. ; elements of socio-cultural heritage that are preserved in society or in certain social groups for a long time.” In other words, the concept of “tradition” in this source is identified with spiritual culture. The dictionary also adds an evaluative, emotional and tasteful side to this, distinguishing between progressive and reactionary traditions.
The Dictionary of Cultural Studies gives a broader definition: “Tradition is a social and cultural heritage transmitted from generation to generation and reproduced in certain societies and social groups for a long time. Traditions include: objects of sociocultural heritage (material and spiritual values)
ti); processes of sociocultural inheritance; methods of this inheritance. Tradition is defined as certain cultural patterns, institutions, norms, values, ideas, customs, rituals, styles, etc.” . In other words, according to this definition, tradition is both spiritual and material culture, as well as the processes and methods of inheriting culture.
It becomes obvious that the word “tradition” is most often used to designate one of hundreds of modern definitions of the concept “culture”. Consequently, “traditional culture” is a certain stable part of culture that remains minus its “variable” part - the one that changes from generation to generation.
There is an opinion that the closest thing to the term “traditional culture” is the concept of “folk culture”, because it is the people who are the main creator and custodian of traditions.
The concept of “folk” also has many interpretations - “relating to the people,” “closely connected with the people, corresponding to the spirit of the people, their culture, worldview.” However, V. Zhidkov and K. Sokolov note the ambiguity of the key concept of “people”: it is defined as “the population of a country, state” or “a cultural and historical community of people connected by the same origin and language.”
At the same time, the cultural dictionary provides two important clarifications related to the definition of the concept of “folk culture”. Firstly, this is her general feature– non-professional status.” Secondly, an indication that it is a picture of the world. It turns out that its “invariant content” consists of “ideas about nature, space, man’s place in the world, religious and mythological concepts about man’s relationship with supernatural higher powers, ideas about the ideals of wisdom, the power of heroism, beauty, goodness, and the forms of “correct” and "wrong" social behavior and the order of life, about serving people, the homeland, etc.” .
Folk (traditional) culture can be characterized by ethnic characteristics, i.e. in the depths of which ethnic group is it formed, acquires its ethnic characteristics and characteristics. In this case, the adjective “ethnic” is added to the concept of “folk culture” and is read as one concept “folk ethnic culture”.
N. Gorelik emphasizes vitality ethnic cultures, which in modern conditions retain “...their language, traditional features of life in cities, or the way of life in them. In modified
In its new form, the ethnic group also retains customs, myths, religious faith, moral and artistic values ( folk art)". For example, deeply traditional oriental cultures successfully “fit” into the modernization process: they “... while modernizing, ignore the root paradigms of this process, hiding archetypes in the depths of the psyche.” M. Kuzmin, with some challenge, contrasts progressivism with his fundamental conservatism, reliance on the church, historically defined, defining rituals and even everyday life, on private life: “doing your job, living at home and family, decorating and illuminating every step with custom , - that’s what is needed solely and exclusively.” The religious and philosophical basis of any traditional culture is also noted by A. Khvylya-Olinter.
Along with this, there is an opinion that tradition is necessarily something conservative, inert, and must be overcome; What this category rather refers to the ordinary, everyday. K. Chistov rightly notes in this regard that “...in every state of culture and in every tradition there are elements of different times in origin, and not always the oldest of them have the least relevance.” The same idea is developed and given practical confirmation by the director of the Belarusian ensemble “Stary Olsy”, which performs medieval music, D. Sosnovsky: “Tradition is not a bone formation. Tradition improves over time; those. any living tradition is not destroyed, it absorbs the influences of other cultures and digests it within itself.”
It is also important to analyze the degree of interaction between traditional and innovative elements in various philosophical, cultural and logical aspects.
The term “innovation” (lat. Innovatio) is: 1) innovation, novelty; 2) a set of measures aimed at introducing new equipment, technologies, inventions, etc. into the economy; modernization; 3) a linguistically new phenomenon in the language (for example, a lexical idiom).
At this stage, the term “innovation” has acquired a general social meaning. This is due to the role that innovation has begun to play in today’s world, having transformed into a sociocultural phenomenon. Based on this, it is hardly possible to dwell on the definition given in the study by S. Kryuchkova, which describes the innovation process as a movement from fundamental scientific ideas to applied use and consumption.
At this stage of development of this sociocultural phenomenon, at least two ways of generating innovation have been identified. One of them
is associated with the so-called “internal functional conflict”, i.e. mismatch values and interests of various social groups, as a result of which certain social contradictions. As a result of compromise, new ways of interaction between people and the social structure as a whole are developed, which often leads to a rather radical reorganization of the entire social organization of society, without destroying it as a cultural integrity.
Another way to generate innovation is usually defined as creativity. Among the various motivations for creativity, the following stand out: social order, intuitive insight of a professional; personal dissatisfaction with the course of events, the state of things in society; human ambitions and aspirations, as well as certain complexes of physical limitations or individual inferiority, mental deviations that initiate a non-trivial view of problems, etc. In connection with a certain scientific uncertainty about the nature of the emergence of, for example, intuitive insight, we note that modern synergetic approaches allow us to look at this process from a new point of view. Since creative thinking of an individual is a process of self-organization of internal (neuro- and psychophysiological) and external (sociocultural) factors, the synergetic foundations of neural networks make it possible to understand the underlying mechanisms of the emergence of new ideas that are difficult to study using traditional methods. On the other hand, this process is greatly influenced by interpersonal communication, as well as information from the surrounding sociocultural environment. Thus, the synergetic approach allows us to avoid a one-sided interpretation of the generation of innovations as exclusively the result of a certain social order.
Analyzed scientific approaches allow us to consider the specifics of the relationship between traditional and innovative, tradition and modernity. The technology of this process includes several stages. At the first stage, the destruction of previous cultural institutions occurs, the emergence and accumulation of contradictions and tensions between old forms that have lost their relevance and new vital interests and needs. As a result, the state of chaos, which is always present from the point of view of synergetics in a sociocultural system along with the processes of ordering, significantly intensifies, expands and deepens, capturing almost all of its areas. In this case, the destructive beginning of chaos as a state of natural spontaneity can prevail and, through bifurcation, shocks, lead either to collapse
cultural system as the apotheosis of the destructive side of chaos, or to sociocultural anomie - a “value-normative vacuum”, “inconsistency of the value world” according to R. Merton, which eliminated the “function of stabilizing society” according to T. Parsons.
Thus, anomie seems to many thinkers to be one of the most dangerous results of the development of destructive processes in the sociocultural system and is one of the regularities of the initial stage of the transitional type of culture. This pattern finds its manifestation in the “situation of rupture” (according to B. Erasov), a violation of continuity, which to one degree or another is inherent in the initial stage of any transitional type of culture. In such conditions, the rate of innovation generation increases significantly. However, they are not yet filled with meaning; their cognitive content is absent. This leads to a total substitution of value guidelines, which is replaced by cultural omnivorousness. It is then that the danger of losing reliance on tradition and the loss of the originality of national culture increases. Obviously, due to self-protective tendencies, as well as the desire to restore a holistic picture of the world at the personal and social-group level, interest in mythology and myth-making is being renewed and updated.
The renaissance of cultural myth-making is especially noticeable at the initial stage of the transitional type of culture, because, as researchers believe, myth turns out to be a connecting link between ancient and modern times, not only because “poetically minded people yearned for it, but also because the very structure of the myth reflected similarity of cultural situations of different eras." Thus, the mythologization of consciousness within the framework of a transitional type of culture is a consistent stage in the development of cultural dynamics.
The next pattern is related to the semiotic sphere of culture. In the functioning of culture as a sign system, meaning-genetic processes always occur that create certain dissystemic elements that significantly contribute to the generation of innovative fields. At the same time, initially, culture simply does not notice dis-systemic new formations, since it does not yet have the semantic tools to comprehend and describe them. Subsequently, elements of the dissystemic sphere gradually begin to be comprehended in improper, substituted forms as something syncretically fused with system blocks already known in culture. And only after dissystemic elements are naturally organized into own system, alternative to the original one, - there are more or
less adequate and rather specialized forms of description and understanding of these elements. From this moment the interaction between the system and the countersystem begins.
Thus, in conditions of chaos and “cultural omnivorousness,” tradition has unconditional priority, preserving culture as a self-developing system from collapse. Innovations, despite their abundance and diversity, play a subordinate role. We can say that, in general, traditionalization prevails, which is understood as “the constitutionalization of traditions and other elements of culture and social structure, which ensure the priority of prescribed norms and rules of behavior of subjects (traditional actions) in comparison with the possibilities of their innovative actions.”
However, traditionalization is not the only possible and optimal strategy for social existence. In cultural dynamics, as a result of the development of reflection, the ability to assimilate, but not reject innovations, changes are observed that lead to a smoothing out of the contradictions that have arisen between tradition and innovation, and the beginning of their dialogue. As a result, a new relationship between traditions and innovations arises, which constitutes the essential feature of the next, second stage of dynamic changes in the transitional type of culture. An important pattern of the new stage is the awareness at the mass level of the discrepancy between the desired (innovation) and reality (traditions), triggering a universal mechanism of self-organization.
The internal impulse that initiates the processes of self-development and self-organization of culture, according to N. Gorelik, is utilitarianism, understood as a value-semantic paradigm of human activity. Utilitarianism can be qualified as one of the entropy mechanisms of the dynamics of a transitional type of culture. If the core of traditionalism is based on the authority of tradition, then utilitarianism, based on the principle of benefit, demonstrates its “value omnivorousness”, i.e. not only forms some of its specific values, but also uses others - the values of traditionalism and liberalism. “The actualization of utilitarianism against the background of traditionalism,” notes E. Yarkova, “means, in essence, the birth of a new image of what should be, which, not excluding the old, traditional one, exists as a second voice, an echo in the polyphonic score of culture. In philosophical categories, this can be conceptualized as a phenomenon of bifurcation of the vector of culture: one part of it is still directed towards traditional, absolute, transcendental meanings, and
the other turns to utilitarian, relative, immanent meanings.”
The further dynamics of the relationship between traditions and innovations constitute the essence of the next, third stage of development of the transitional type of culture. It is characterized, first of all, by the emergence of a conflict between two images of what should be, due to the subordinate position of tradition. It is here, at this critical point, that the fate of the transitional type of culture is decided. An adequate solution to this contradiction leads to the birth of a new phenomenon, which represents the beginning of the future, a new type of culture. Thus, we can say that a new type of culture assimilates utilitarian values, overcoming their limitations, and makes utilitarianism one of the elements of self-organization of culture.
An original interpretation of the relationship between traditional and innovative elements is offered by A. Dugin: “Simple inertial conservatism is always paired with modernism, and modernism certainly wins - it is ahead, at least in the current era... Modernists - they are closer to the abyss, they know that there is no further way and we need to take off. But a conservative is always sure that there is still solid ground, and does not want to go to the abyss. But the modernist always drags the conservative towards the abyss, and he resists... Therefore, the work of creating the art of “new empires” is the work of modernist artists who, in fact, authentically experienced the dramatic experience of the abyss. It is very important here that the Japanese, Russians, Arabs are now involved in the process of modernity, i.e. ethnic groups that organically belong to traditional society. Nihilism must wash away all conservative prejudices to reveal a global, totalitarian fundamentalism. We will build “ecstatic empires” - after all, only ecstaticism can resist the technocratic and bureaucratic “Empire”. “New empires” will arise only from a sharp impulse forward, but not from attempts to defend something out of inertia.” However, about the simultaneously operating two principles in culture - conservative, turned to the past and maintaining a continuous connection with it, and creative, aimed at the future creating new values - stated even earlier by H.A. Berdyaev, emphasizing that in culture “... a revolutionary, destructive principle cannot operate. The revolutionary principle is essentially hostile to culture, anti-cultural. Culture is unthinkable without hierarchical continuity, without qualitative inequality. The revolutionary principle is hostile to any hierarchism and is aimed at the destruction of qualities.”
Thinking about modern culture and art precisely in the context of the intersections of traditional and innovative elements, I. Zemtsovsky considered the same paradoxical phenomena. One of them is that “... art, willingly and unwillingly, strives to be “today” (chronologically, in its themes and trends), and at the same time, like any creativity, it cannot help but rush into the future.” Tradition is “...this is also a functioning, an expression of the qualitative certainty of time, outside of which it cannot exist and dies.” Traditions are capable of changing beyond recognition, until they become their opposite, but it is impossible to avoid their presence altogether; In this regard, let us cite as an example the words of K. Marx: “The traditions of all dead generations weigh like a nightmare over the minds of the living.”
Another pattern of modern culture, according to I. Zemtsovsky, is the continuous change in perception and assessments of the past, present and future, as a result of which the same phenomena can appear in different light, and different phenomena can be integrated by our perception or radically (but also not forever) to be overestimated.
The specificity of the relationship between tradition and modernity also worries D. Sosnovsky: “Every culture has always looked back, and in every culture there were people who believed that this was a decline. I am sure that modern culture is a full-fledged normal culture with its own characteristics. Therefore, it is another period, a separate period in the development of culture. Moreover, modern culture, for the first time in history, is trying to synthesize all previous periods taken together; because it is a strange symbiosis of everything that came before it and at the same time, something created absolutely from scratch, based on fundamentally new technical capabilities, on completely new technologies. I like to live in this time when there is both old and completely new. Moreover, this is combined in the same people, in the same events, cultural and artistic phenomena. Our modern culture gives us the opportunity to choose in art: to be more consistent with tradition and roots and, to a lesser extent, to be consistent with this new technological, information culture. Or vice versa, to be more modern and less attached to antiquity. The absolutely natural desire of any new generation and any new period is to create their own.”
Thus, we state that the interaction of traditional and innovative elements in various spheres of human activity (sociocultural, ethnic, geopolitical) at the present stage is one of the most current problems culture.
LITERATURE
1. Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of freedom. The meaning of creativity. M., 1989.
2. Bulyko A.N. Modern dictionary of foreign words. M., 2005.
3. Gurevich P. Music and the struggle of ideas in modern world. M., 1984.
4. Dal V.I. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language: 2nd ed. SPb. ; M., 1881. T. 2.
5. Dugi" A. Pop culture and signs of the times. St. Petersburg, 2005.
6. Zhidkov V.S., Sokolov K.B. Art and picture of the world. St. Petersburg, 2003.
7. Zemtsovsky I.I. Folk music and modernity (On the problem of defining folklore) // Modernity and folklore: Articles and materials / Comp. V.E. Gusev, A.A. Gorkovenko / Rep. ed. V.E. Gusev. M., 1977.
8. Kryuchkova SE. Innovation: philosophical and methodological analysis: Author's abstract. diss... Doctor of Philosophy M., 2001.
9. Kudryavtsev P. Stara Olsy // Jazz-square. 2005. No. 5 (59).
10. Kuzmin M.A. Poems and prose / Comp., author. entry articles and notes. E.V. Ermilova. M., 1989.
11. Cultural studies. XX century: Dictionary. M, 1997.
12. Lapin N.I. The problem of sociocultural transformation // Questions of philosophy. 2000. No. 6.
13. Marx K., Engels F. Op. T. 8. M., 1967.
14. Moiseev N.N. To be or not to be... for humanity? M., 1999.
15. PidalR. Selected works: Trans. from Spanish M., 1961.
16. Pokrovsky N.E. Loneliness and anomia (philosophical and theoretical-sociological aspects): Author's abstract. diss... Doctor of Sociology M., 1996.
17. Dictionary of the Russian language: In 4 volumes. M., 1958.
18. Philosophical Dictionary. M., 1991.
19. Khvylya-Olinter A. A look at spirituality, morality and progress // Missionary Review. 2003. No. 4.
20. Chistov K.V. Folk traditions and folklore: Essays on theory. L., 1986.
21. Shevchenko N.I. In the knowledge of pure origins folk culture– the future of Russia! // Sociocultural dynamics of the region: Collection of materials from the scientific and practical conference. Issue III / Under general. ed. prof. SI. Kurgansky, A.N. Berdnik, E.V. Shvareva. Belgorod, 2003.
22. Shchukin V.G. In the world of wonderful simplifications (towards the phenomenology of myth) // Questions of Philosophy. 1999. No. 11.
23. Yarkova E.H. Utilitarianism as a stimulus for self-organization of culture and society // Social sciences and modernity. 2002. No. 2.
©PERSONALITY. CULTURE. SOCIETY.2007. Vol. 4(39)
INTRODUCTION 3
1 Mnemonic processes 5
1.1 The essence and types of memory 5
1.2 The concept of mnemonic processes and their composition 7
2 Traditions and innovations in education 14
2.1 Traditional education 14
2.2 Innovations in education 17
2.3 Criteria for pedagogical innovations 23
2.4 Distance learning as an innovation 25
CONCLUSION 29
REFERENCES 31
INTRODUCTION
In the course of his life and activity, solving practical problems that confront us and more or less deeply experiencing what is happening, a person, without specifically setting such a goal or task, remembers a lot, a lot is involuntarily imprinted on him. As human activity in which it is carried out becomes more complex, we have to, rather than rely on the random luck of involuntary memorization, set ourselves a special memorization task.
If we talk about memory not only as a collective term for a certain set of processes, but as a single function, then we can only talk about some very general and elementary ability to capture and - under appropriate conditions - restore sensitivity data, that is, about the fact that can be called a mnemonic function. Memorization, recollection, reproduction, recognition, which are included in memory, are built on this basis, but are in no way reduced to it. These are specific processes in which thinking is very significantly included in a more or less complex and sometimes contradictory unity with speech and all aspects of the human psyche.
The study of mnemonic processes as the main components of cognitive activity in psychology has been determined problem test work. The relevance of this problem is caused by the need to study memory as the ability of nervous systems to perceive the surrounding reality, store perceived information in the form of impressions, and, as necessary, reproduce what is needed exactly or in one’s own words.
The problem and its relevance made it possible to formulate a topic in psychology “Mnemonic processes (memory: memorization, preservation, forgetting, recognition, reproduction).”
The purpose of the test is to study mnemonic processes. The following tasks follow from this goal: 1) consider the essence and types of memory, 2) study the concept of mnemonic processes and their composition.
Nowadays there is a lot of talk about the innovative development of education and the priorities of innovation. It is difficult to argue against this, and one should not. It is appropriate not to lose good, effective traditions.
Traditions in education should be understood as established elements of the content, means and technologies of training and education, which are passed on from one generation of educators to another.
Innovations are new phenomena in education that arose in the most modern (late) period of its development.
There are such conclusions when stability in education acts as a synonym for traditions, and, therefore, stability is a negative phenomenon in education. The incorrectness of such reasoning is obvious.
Thus, the study of traditions as established elements and innovations as new phenomena in pedagogy determined the problem of testing.
The relevance of this problem is the need to create a broad concept of education and upbringing that would appeal to a living person, where the requirements to teach, develop mental abilities, cultivate and refine a person’s moral sense would merge together.
The problem and relevance made it possible to formulate a topic on pedagogy: “Traditions and innovations in education.”
The purpose of the test is to study traditions and innovations in education.
The following tasks follow from this goal: 1) characterize traditional education; 2) identify the essence of innovative education; 3) determine the criteria for pedagogical innovations; 4) consider distance education as an innovation.
1 MNEMIC PROCESSES
1.1 Essence and types of memory
Along with other cognitive processes, perceptual and intellectual, mnemonic processes are distinguished (from the Greek “mnema” - memory). Mnemonic processes act as components of human cognitive activity and are inextricably linked with his intellectual activity and perceptual processes.
Memory - the process of preserving past experience, making it possible to reuse it in activity and return to the sphere of consciousness. Memory connects a subject’s past with his present and future and is the most important cognitive function underlying development and learning. (10, p.115)
The essence of memory, its enormous importance in human life and activity, as well as the scope of phenomena included in this concept, are quite obvious. In general psychology, memory is defined as a person’s reflection of experience through memorization, storage and subsequent reproduction. From this definition it follows that memory includes a whole system of processes - the processes of memorization, storage, reproduction and, which also needs to be taken into account, the process of forgetting. They are different in their focus, functional role and basic patterns.
Like any other mental phenomenon, memory is divided into a number of main types. Firstly, share voluntary and involuntary memory. They differ, respectively, in the presence or absence of a special - conscious goal to remember something. If there is such a goal and it is realized by a person, then there is random memory; if it is not there and memorization occurs in addition to awareness, along with solving any other problems and performing other actions, then memory acquires involuntary(mechanical, “automatic”) character. Secondly, memory is divided into motor, emotional, figurative, verbal-logical. Motor memory- this is the memorization, preservation and reproduction of various movements and their systems. Emotional memory- memory for feelings, emotions, evaluative attitudes towards reality. Figurative memory- this is a memory for holistic visual representations, for images and pictures of the external world. A special type and highest manifestation of figurative memory is eidetic memory. At the same time, a person not only remembers an image, but also seems to see it in all the smallest details. Verbal-logical memory what's her name most important species- this is memory for verbal, semantic, symbolic information. Third, memory is divided according to the analyzer that provides information for memorization, and visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, gustatory, kinesthetic memory. IN- fourth, according to the time of storing information, memory is divided into long-term and short-term. Unlike long-term memory, which is characterized by long-term retention of information after repeated repetition, short-term memory is characterized by a very short retention time after a single and very short presentation, as well as immediate reproduction.
A specific type of memory, which has features of both short-term and long-term memory, is RAM. This is a system of mnemonic processes that ensure memorization, preservation and reproduction of information that comes in the course of performing actions and which is necessary only to achieve the goal of this particular action. Finally, depending on individual differences in mnemonic processes, there is a division into types of memory - visual-figurative, verbal-logical and combined (intermediate) types. The first of them is characterized by the best development of visual-figurative memory. It is more common in people of the so-called artistic type(more emotional, impressionable, prone to direct and concrete perception of reality). The second is characterized by better development of verbal-logical memory. It is more common in people of the “thinking” type (prone to a rational, objective and generalized perception of the world). The combined type includes elements of the first two, and both of them are quite strongly expressed, and is therefore optimal.
Thus, all these and many other general psychological patterns are studied in a special section of psychology - the psychology of memory, which is currently one of the most developed areas of psychology. All of them, of course, are significant for any professional, including management activity. (1, p.465)
1.2 The concept of mnemonic processes and their composition
Mnemonic processes act as components of human cognitive activity and are inextricably linked with perceptual and intellectual processes. Memory images are called representations.
Memory– the process of consolidation, preservation, subsequent recognition and reproduction of past experience, making it possible to reuse it in activity or return to the sphere of consciousness. Memory as a basis mental activity occupies a special place among mental cognitive processes, ensuring their continuity and uniting them into a single whole. It connects the subject's past with his present and future. Lack of memory – amnesia. (8, p.37)
Basic memory processes: memorization (imprinting), storage, reproduction, recognition, forgetting.
Memorization- a generalized name for processes that ensure retention of material in memory. There are two types of memorization: voluntary and involuntary. (8, p.37)
In the case of involuntary memorization, a person does not set himself the task of remembering this or that material. Memory-bound processes perform operations here that serve other activities. As a result, memorization is relatively spontaneous in nature and is carried out without special volitional efforts, preliminary selection of material and the conscious use of any mnemonic techniques. At the same time, the dependence of memorization on the purpose and motives of activity remains in this case.
Periods of crisis are inevitable for any culture and can play not only a negative, but also a positive role in sociocultural dynamics. An important function in dynamic processes is performed by periods of cultural growth. During this constructive phase, various elements of new cultural experience are born, recorded and spread. A huge role in this is played by cultural borrowings - the introduction of objects, norms of activity, values, tested by the life of other cultures; and innovation-search activity - a conscious departure from established norms and the use of new patterns of activity. It must be emphasized that in real practice, two types of processes (ascension processes and crisis processes) are often closely intertwined with each other so that dominant tendencies do not appear. The process of the withering away of old norms and the process of introducing new ones are carried out in parallel, sometimes rapidly, sometimes gradually, and therefore imperceptibly.
Thus, the phenomenon of culture in its historical development there is an expansion of spheres and areas of human experience, which is reflected and comprehended, becoming entrenched in tradition. However, despite the importance of traditions, which ensure stability, the authority of culture and cultural norms, it is impossible to imagine the development of culture without updating cultural experience, without innovation. They manifest themselves in the changes that the entire lifestyle undergoes. Changes in culture occur as a result of the accumulation of cultural experience; they cannot be sudden. To become an asset and value of human existence, they require a certain time,
Unfolding over time, culture not only renews itself, but also preserves itself, thanks to the action through certain sociocultural institutions of succession mechanisms that transmit to each new generation the cultural heritage of previous eras (family, traditions, general education system, mass media, cultural institutions). During the translation process, some part is lost, some is rejected, but something new is added. At the same time, some losses turn out to be irreparable, and some, as needed, are partially restored. These processes are largely unpredictable and spontaneous.
Innovation is a mechanism for the formation of new technologies and new models of behavior that create the preconditions for sociocultural imputations. Society’s ability to adapt, which makes it possible to resolve immediate and pressing problems for society and people, is historically developed in the course of rituals, games and other activities that do not constitute an urgent need, but nevertheless require formation in human culture difficulties to reflect reality, transform actions and introduce an element of novelty. Innovation depends on the human capacity for creativity and the ability of a community to adopt or adapt the results of that creativity.
Some cultures have a tradition of public support for innovation. New ideas that arise in the individual mind spread throughout society, creating the opportunity for sociocultural change. The processes of dissemination, acceptance or rejection, modification, institutionalization are themselves creative innovative processes. The relationship between tradition and innovation depends on the historical conditions that determine the development of the adaptive strategy of human communities.
Every culture combines traditions and innovations. Depending on the relationship between traditions and innovations, traditional and innovative types of culture can be distinguished.
In an innovative culture, innovation dominates over traditionality. She is distinguished the following features:
– erosion of the scale of life values. Various deviations of behavior do not meet with much indignation in society. The weakening of morals, the decline of morals;
– weakening of the normativity of culture. The collectivist principle gives way to individualism. Increased personal autonomy, the ability to independently determine life goals, ideals, forms and means of activity. Personal freedom is one of the most important values;
– creating favorable conditions for the development of creativity, social recognition of its results. Intensive development of art, science, technology, high prestige of knowledge and education. Criticality and independent thinking. Belief in the power of the human mind.
An innovative culture stimulates the development of production and consumption. Conditions are created for the technical and socio-economic progress of society.
The general trend in human history is the movement from traditional culture to innovative culture.
Archaic culture primitive societies was traditional. It could not be otherwise: the arsenal of means of struggle for existence was still too small, and precious grains of the experience of our ancestors, which gave people the opportunity to withstand this struggle, had to be carefully preserved and used in order to survive. Archaic tribal cultures existed in an almost unchanged state for thousands of years. The cultures that arose in the states were also traditional Ancient world– Egypt, China, India, Asia Minor. In the countries of the East and a number of Muslim states, they largely continue to remain so until the present day. Traits of traditional culture can be found today among peoples who, for one reason or another, have not accepted the achievements of modern civilization.
Culture medieval Europe(including Russia) was also traditional in nature. Since the Renaissance, in Western countries and an innovative culture is being formed. In modern times, religion loses its former power over the minds of people. Free-thinking emerges, and society’s attitude towards creative activity changes. The flow of new ideas captures philosophy, art, science, and technology. This leads to significant changes in all areas of public life.
However, there is a significant problem of connecting innovations with the sociocultural environment. Any innovation is doomed to oblivion, rejection, or only temporary local implementation, if it does not meet with understanding from the host society, if there is no social demand, determined both by the state of society and which layer is most interested in the development of a new type of activity.
Explaining the origin of this or that cultural phenomenon is not a simple problem for the public consciousness. It is not without reason that in mythology, as we have seen, great place occupied by the “cultural hero” who gave people fire, crafts, and writing. But even later, mythical stories that were supposed to explain great discoveries by chance acquired considerable explanatory significance: “Archimedes’ bath,” “Newton’s apple,” “Watt’s teapot,” etc. Similar “accidents” or “miracles” explain the revelations of the ancient prophets who announced new religions. In fact, all spiritual or scientific innovations mature in a corresponding and very complex social and other environment.
It is social determination that determines the fate of discoveries and inventions, whether the creative act will receive recognition or will be doomed to oblivion. Case in point gives the history of book printing in Western Europe. I. Gutenberg began printing books in the middle of the 15th century. But cultural environment was already so ready to perceive this fact that already in 1500, almost 1,100 printing houses were founded in 26 European cities, which produced about 40 thousand editions of books with a total circulation of 10 - 12 million copies. Although in Russia there was the first book; published by Ivan Fedorov with a slight delay (1564), this fact did not lead to a breakthrough in this country. The printer himself was persecuted, and widespread book printing was delayed for a century and a half.
Another typical example is provided by the story of the discovery of Copernicus. His discovery of the heliocentric system was published in 1543. Over the next 350 years, 2,330 books on astronomy were published, of which only 180 can be attributed to the Copernican direction. And in 1600, Giordano Bruno was burned for similar views. The British scientist M. Polanyi, citing this example in his book “Personal Knowledge,” emphasizes the need for appropriate readiness of the environment, implicit consent, “mutual attraction of brothers in mind” in order for an intellectual discovery to be accepted.
History knows many examples of how discoveries and innovations were rejected and consigned to oblivion if they did not correspond to the sociocultural environment. And on the contrary, the “social order” gave rise to a stream of proposals that received public recognition. Thus, a steam engine was first built by the Russian inventor Ivan Polzunov in 1766 at one of the factories in Altai. After working for several months, the machine was stopped and, due to the death of its creator, it could not be repaired. James Watt's steam engine was built in England in 1776, and within a few years several dozen of them were produced. Throughout his long life, Watt continued to improve the machine and contributed to the development of steam technology both in his own country and in other countries. He died in 1819 in honor and glory. The “spirit of capitalism” made technical discovery a social fact; technological innovations turned out to be the most attractive, since the system of bourgeois entrepreneurship flourished to a large extent depending on the use of the latest technical means.
Russian culture, as we see, again and again generating incentives for individual innovations, for the manifestation of nuggets, did not have a broad need for new knowledge, did not have an established socio-cultural environment ready to support innovations.
Appeal to cultural heritage, which should be understood as the sum of all cultural achievements of a given society, its historical experience, preserved in the arsenal of public memory, including the reassessed past. Such a heritage has timeless value for society, since it includes achievements of various vintages that retain the ability to pass on to new generations in new eras.
The fundamental property of tradition is to ensure the preservation of past patterns through the elimination and limitation of innovations as deviations. In every culture there is a certain dynamic relationship between traditionality, through which stability is maintained, and innovation or borrowing, through which society changes. Both coexist as different aspects of a cultural organism, which has its own originality (identity).
Identity is a significant and constant manifestation of those components of the cultural heritage of a given society that turn out to be functionally necessary at new stages of its existence. IN different situations arising due to the dynamics inherent in the society itself, or due to external influences, the principles of sociocultural regulation inherent in a given society are manifested. The dialectics of the cultural process consists of a constant transition from the past to the present and the future. The accumulated experience of the past is opposed by everyday practice, which requires constant deciphering of previous experience, its adaptation, selection, interpretation and enrichment. In this field between the past and the present there can be both attachment to familiar rituals that constantly revive the past, as well as immersion in everyday life with its practical concerns, or an orientation towards future achievements.
Many religious, but often secular cultural figures believe it is necessary to ensure the maintenance of the customary meanings, norms and values that have developed for a given generation, to instill in this generation the veneration of the indisputable values of the past. Both religious and secular subjects and symbols are transformed into a canon and an academic model, in comparison with which everything else receives a secondary or inferior status.
Revivalism (fundamentalism) as the restoration of earlier examples of religious faith, not affected by the corrupting influence of its later opponents and perverters, is another, extreme direction in defending cultural heritage. This direction plays a very important role in those modernization processes that entail the weakening and collapse of the usual traditional values and forms of social regulation. The most famous manifestations of this kind of movement were the Gandhism movement in India and the process of revitalization of Islam in Iran, the spiritual leader of which was Ayatollah Khomeini.
In the course of the ideological struggle, there is a selection of certain options for cultural heritage that meet the interests of certain social strata and movements, and, accordingly, criticism and elimination of opposing options. During this struggle they are used as various shapes theoretical polemics and organized cultural and political movements.
Often, during the revolutionary breakdown of previous social structures, ideological, theoretical and political movements arise that assert the uselessness of the former cultural heritage for the new society. Neither their own national culture, nor religion, nor the culture of Western countries is considered a necessary component of the new social and spiritual order. If Western (“bourgeois”) culture is hostile due to its connection with the oppressive regime, then our own also does not deserve to be preserved, since it has doomed the people to backwardness and dependence. In the course of the revolutionary and armed struggle, a new culture will be born.
So, turning to the cultural heritage appears as a constant dilemma for public consciousness due to the deep contradictions of the past itself, which invariably reflects the rivalry of various tendencies that are not eliminated in the classical model of development of a given civilization. Another source of this inconsistency is the presence of alternatives in the development of society, the choice of which requires coordination with the established foundations.
An important function of cultural heritage is to maintain stability and constancy of social regulation. Those elements of cultural and social heritage that are passed down from generation to generation and preserved for a long time are identified as part of identity. Identity includes not only such traditional mechanisms as custom and ritual, but also more differentiated and mobile elements: values, norms, social institutions. As already mentioned, in the mechanism of traditional regulation, innovations are assessed as harmful deviations and are eliminated. However, traditions can serve as the main form of regulation only in relatively simple and isolated groups, where the practical and spiritual spheres are almost not separated from each other and reference to the behests of ancestors serves as a sufficient justification for behavior. More developed societies cannot limit themselves to tradition, and its functions are reduced to maintaining folklore and classical heritage. The ideological struggle reflects different attitudes towards traditions. Social groups have different attitudes toward past norms and ideas, perceiving some as positive, “their own,” and others as negative, “strangers.”
Special meaning acquires an appeal to tradition in popular movements that assimilate activating orientations in their usual forms of consciousness. Religious or revolutionary movements turned to ideas revived from the distant past in order to introduce into the consciousness of the masses ideas that were close and understandable to them.
If tradition is the transmission of culture through generations and time, then borrowing is its spread in social or geographic space, the development of certain cultural elements from one society as a source to another as a recipient. In social anthropology, this process is mostly considered as acculturation experienced by individuals, social groups, areas, nations or countries. It can be direct (through the influence of the intelligentsia or immigrants on the social environment that accepted them) or indirect (through the influence of mass communications, consumed goods, universities, research centers, etc.). In more developed cultures, borrowing is a complex structural process.
As is known, the overload of borrowings has given rise to Russian society XIX century strong reaction for asserting their original culture. A period of intensive borrowing can be replaced by restrictions on alien novelty, its expulsion so that society returns to its originality. However, such a rollback can again stall sociocultural dynamics and lead to stagnation and archaization of society, weakening its connections with the outside world.
As a separate source of dynamics, synthesis should be highlighted as the interaction and connection of dissimilar elements, in which cultural phenomenon, a trend, style or model of a sociocultural structure that differs from both components and has its own qualitative specific content or form.
Synthesis becomes a meaningful shift in social life and is thus fundamentally different from the symbiosis that arises during the interaction of cultures, in which own and borrowed elements and movements remain quite separate, maintaining a distance in relation to each other, which is often accompanied by mutual distrust and conflicts.
Synthesis takes place if the sociocultural system masters the achievements of other societies in those areas that are insufficiently developed in itself.
How a partial synthesis of Judeo-Christian and ancient traditions was formed over the centuries European culture, although in a number of respects the heterogeneity of these traditions has been preserved to the present day. In the VII-IX centuries. Islamic civilization is emerging on the basis of the synthesis of its own religious heritage and the development of some spiritual achievements of ancient civilization and the political culture of Persian civilization. Yes, based on the long-term interaction of the heritage of Indian peoples and Spanish-Portuguese (Iberian) culture, a symbiotic-synthetic civilization is emerging Latin America.
In modern conditions, synthesis is becoming an important source of transformation sociocultural system many developing countries. Japan and a number of other small countries in East and Southeast Asia are usually cited as the most convenient example of a fruitful combination of their own national and modernizing components: South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc. Similar trends occur, as we will see, in many other countries in Asia and Latin America, although they are not dominant everywhere.
100 RUR bonus for first order
Select job type Graduate work Coursework Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test Monograph Problem Solving Business Plan Answers to Questions Creative work Essay Drawing Essays Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Master's thesis Laboratory work Online help
Find out the price
Culture, like any dialectically developing process,
There are sustainable and developing (innovative) sides.
The sustainable side of culture is cultural tradition, thanks to
which accumulates and transmits human experience in history, and
each new generation of people can update this experience, relying on
their activities on what was created by previous generations.
In the so-called traditional societies, people adopting culture
They reproduce its samples, and if they make any changes, then
within the framework of tradition. On its basis, culture functions.
Tradition prevails over creativity. Creativity in this case manifests itself
is that a person forms himself as a subject of culture, which acts
as a certain set of ready-made, stereotypical programs (customs, rituals, etc.)
activities with material and ideal objects. Changes in themselves
programs occur extremely slowly. This is basically the culture
primitive society and later traditional culture.
Such a stable cultural tradition in certain conditions
necessary for the survival of human groups. But if one or another
societies abandon hypertrophied traditionalism and develop
more dynamic types of culture, this does not mean that they can refuse
from cultural traditions at all. Culture cannot exist without traditions
Cultural traditions like historical memory- an indispensable condition is not
only the existence, but also the development of culture, even in the case of creative
qualities of the new culture, dialectically denying, includes
continuity, assimilation of the positive results of the previous
activity is a general law of development that also applies to the sphere of culture
of particular importance. How important is this question in practice?
The experience of our country also shows this. After October revolution and in
circumstances of the general revolutionary situation in artistic society
culture, a movement arose whose leaders wanted to build a new one,
progressive culture based on complete denial and destruction
previous culture. And this has led in many cases to losses in
cultural sphere and the destruction of its material monuments.
Since culture reflects differences in worldviews in the system
values in ideological attitudes, therefore it is legitimate to talk about reactionary and
progressive trends in culture. But it does not follow from this that it is possible
discard the previous culture - create a new one from scratch
high culture is impossible.
The question of traditions in culture and attitudes towards cultural heritage
concerns not only the preservation, but also the development of culture, i.e. creation
new, an increase in cultural wealth in the process of creativity. Although
the creative process has objective prerequisites both in reality itself and in
cultural heritage, it is directly carried out by the subject of creative
activities. It should be noted right away that not every innovation is
creativity of culture. Creating something new becomes creativity at the same time
cultural values when it does not contain universal content,
acquiring general significance, it receives echoes from other people.
In the creativity of culture, the universal organic is fused with uniqueness:
Each cultural value is unique, whether we are talking about artistic
work, invention, etc. Replication in one form or another has already
known, already created earlier - this is distribution, not creation
culture. But it is also necessary because it involves wide circle people in
the process of functioning of culture in society. And the creativity of culture
necessarily involves the inclusion of something new in the process of historical development
culture-creating human activity, therefore, is
source of innovation. But just as not every innovation is a phenomenon
culture, not everything new that is included in the cultural process is
advanced, progressive, corresponding to the humanistic intentions of culture. IN
culture has both progressive and reactionary tendencies. Development
culture is a contradictory process that reflects a wide spectrum
sometimes opposite and opposing social class,
national interests of this historical era. For approval of advanced
and the progressive in culture must be fought. This is the concept of culture
developed in Soviet philosophical literature.
The concepts of tradition and innovation can be correlated with different layers human culture, human history. The tradition arose and developed in primitive culture, where a certain set of symbols and knowledge was passed on from generation to generation and mastered by all members of the primitive community. While the birth of civilizations as centers in the midst of the primitive periphery required something more, namely the emergence of cultural innovations. Civilization is formed on the basis of a Neolithic village, whose community was united by tradition. Collective cohesion had the character of conservation, holding in one place. Despite this, the Neolithic community had rich cultural potential; the needs of community members gradually increased, which led to an increase in cultural variability and individuality. Creative forces begin to concentrate and localize in the midst of the primitive periphery, which gives rise to the process of the formation of civilizations as large cultural new formations.
For civilization to grow, it was necessary to have a constant innovation process. But in order to establish a constant process of growth, it was necessary to have a core base on which the innovation process could rely. It is tradition that has become the cultural core on which civilization is based. Because the first civilizations arise as a result of creativity that goes beyond tradition. But the process of growth of civilizations itself could not occur on its own. Despite the fact that civilization arises spontaneously and spontaneously, civilizational processes are the result of human thinking and human activity. Civilization can be defined as a cultural unity, a way of survival of representatives different cultures on the same landscape. For the further cultural process, constant innovative growth, a mechanism was needed that would overcome the conservation of tradition, but at the same time would not destroy the very foundations of traditional ideas.
Patriarchal society became such a mechanism in civilization, where the cruel dictate of the older generation contributed to the birth of protest in the souls of the younger generation, which, as a rule, led to innovation processes in society. The younger generation sought to separate itself from the older generation, acquire new values, and localize a new family, in which the next younger generation would follow a similar path of disassociation from the older generation.
It should be noted that the patriarchal family begins to form in the Neolithic village, which was characterized by a sedentary, measured way of life. The head of a patriarchal family becomes the oldest man in the clan, who with his power unites several generations of closest relatives. In principle, a Neolithic village could become home to one or more patriarchal families. The development of agriculture, cattle breeding, and crafts required the involvement of male physical strength, while the woman was assigned the function of homemaker.
In a patriarchal society, religious systems take shape, where at the head of the pantheon of gods is the supreme god - the creator, whose formidable power extended over gods and people. In religious systems, patriarchs and forefathers stand apart - people who continue to create peace at the level of human history. The patriarchs were called upon to convey sacred knowledge about the creator, the beginnings of ethics and the necessary knowledge about life and society. In religious systems, a special place is occupied by the image of the house as a microcosm in the macrocosm, and the principle of human activity as the arrangement of primitive, primordial chaos, transforming it into an ordered cosmos.
Patriarchy presupposes patrilineal relationships, where kinship is counted through the paternal line and the wife goes to live with her husband’s family. Property is transferred either according to the principle of primogeniture, or is distributed only among sons. Later, property could be distributed unevenly between sons and daughters in favor of the sons.
Productivity in a civilization differs sharply even from productivity in a Neolithic community. Civilization, whose integral feature is the social pyramid, is a complex interweaving of traditions and innovations. Those members of society who were the direct producers of innovations belonged to the lower classes, the keepers of traditions. And the social elite, who were consumers of innovations, most often acted as innovators in politics and art. Reform activities have long been the province of representatives of the ruling minority, who sometimes called for a return to traditional values.
In civilization, the patriarchal form of the family has become entrenched, acquiring more prominent features. The relationships between members of society in civilization take the form of a social pyramid, with belonging to a social stratum or social group coming to the fore. The formation of social and state institutions, the emergence of the figure of the ruler leads to the projection of patrician relations onto members of society. The image of the state and the ruler is interpreted as a father figure. The main requirement for social and state institutions is a fatherly attitude, fatherly care for members of society. Relationships between social strata and groups represent the interweaving of tradition and innovation.
It should be noted that the patriarchal family performs a number of functions:
- The patriarchal family becomes the basic social unit in civilization, patriarchal relations are the prototype and basis of religious, economic, political, social and cultural relations in society.
- Patrisamily relations contribute to the preservation and maintenance of traditions, as well as the constant innovation process in civilization. At the same time, the innovation process in civilization is associated with the destruction of old traditions and the creation of new traditions.
As civilization develops, patrician relationships are transformed and modified. It should be added that civilization consists of many centers and peripheries. The intracivilizational periphery is based on a fossilized Neolithic village in which a patriarchal family arose. The intracivilizational periphery is the cultural core on which the individuality of each civilization is based. And innovative processes are associated with civilizational centers, where large influxes of population from the periphery are concentrated. Centers are cities, authorities and institutions that contribute to innovation processes in society. Social processes in society are characterized by a temporal experience of what is happening. Therefore, the rhythm of social life in the center is subject to quantitative and qualitative changes. Civilization processes in the centers are modified and innovative.
At the very beginning of civilization, patrician relationships were concentrated in cities. But as civilization develops, as a result of constant growth of innovations urban environment weakened rigid patrician family relations and made a person socially freer from family. On the contrary, in the villages and provinces the patriarchal form of the family flourished, ossified, and turned into a completely stable unit of the rural community. In cities, patriarchy has transformed from an intrafamily connection into one of the forms social relations. In the cultural space of civilization, patriarchy is associated with the problem of “fathers” and “children”. In connection with the theme of the center and the periphery, it can be summarized that the periphery is the center of patriarchal life, the keeper of traditions, and the center, in terms of patrician relations, acts as a formidable father-creator and ruler who makes changes in the life of society.
In modern society, despite the rejection of traditional values, patriarchal relations in a modified form are preserved in the family and society and remain the main form of the civilizational way of life.
Conclusion: tradition is the cultural core of a civilization on which its individuality rests, but innovation is necessary for the development of civilization itself. Cultural innovations set the necessary dynamics for all spheres of human activity within civilization.