Personality and society are the main characteristics of the individual. Part-time study

Personality and society

1 . Personality and society

1 .1 Personality as a social projection of a person

1 .2 Historical personality types

1 .3 Ways of human existence

List of sources used

1. Personality and society

1.1. Personality as a social projection of a person

IN primitive society due to the lack of differentiation of social functions, an individual could not become a full-fledged personality. The further development of society led to the fact that man increasingly stood out from the direct fusion with the clan and with nature, carried out diverse social functions and thereby developed personal civic qualities.

Social history appears as a phase transition with fluctuations of varying amplitudes of impact on local aspects of social life. In this transition, the process of personality formation is:

a) the moment of universality of forms of movement;

b) manifestation of the unfolding of the phenomenon of a living being, the ability of reflection at the level of consciousness;

c) expression of the quality of the object-subject of the social form of movement of matter, which includes spirituality.

So, personality is considered in the system of interaction of natural and social forms of movement of matter, formed under the influence of the social environment, as well as a person’s own efforts.

Each society forms its own type of personality, which operates in certain socio-economic, socio-cultural and psychological situations. In the primitive unstructured system, people lived from the extraction of their livelihood, were merged with nature and absorbed into the community. However, even then there was not complete homogeneity: leaders, elders, etc. stood out. In antagonistic societies, a gap arises between natural conditions, production conditions and the existence of people, and the isolation of the individual from nature and from other people increases. The formation of private interests and private property, at the same time, gave rise to a complexly structured society and contributed to the formation of a full-fledged personality. P. Golbach, N.A. Berdyaev, I.A. Ilyin saw the connection between private property and human nature, with the principle of personality. In addition to its positive role in the life of society, especially in the formation of personality, private property leads to a coarsening of incentives for activity when morality is identified with pragmatism.

Personal development was also facilitated by the formation of civil society. English and French materialists of the 18th century. in civil society they saw a set of social relations, an environment in which the activities of individuals take place, possessing natural rights, sovereignty, inviolable private life and realizing their interests. Currently under civil society usually means a society of its free members in the form of voluntary associations of citizens, with a high level of economic, social, spiritual and moral indicators, which, together with the state, implement developed legal relations.

The influence of typical reasons that determine the role of the individual is designated by the term “situation factor.”

By K. Jaspers, a situation means events that define the historical uniqueness of a certain human destiny, shaping its joys and hopes, as well as pain points. The situation characterizes not so much a natural law, but to a greater extent semantic reality, which brings benefit or harm to the empirical existence of a particular individual, opens up opportunities or poses obstacles. The philosopher identified universal, typical situations and historically specific, one-time situations. In a broader sense of the word, the “situation factor” consists of the characteristics of the environment in which a person operates (ecological situation, social system, the nature of traditions, characteristics of civilizational-formational time, etc.), the state in which society is at a certain moment (stable, unstable, ascending, descending, etc.). Of course, the characteristics of the individual functioning in a certain situation matter. After all, each person lives in the world of his own mental reality, relatively independent of the environment. In a situation, a person realizes his greatness and at the same time his limitations, recognizes the presence of other selves and the need for dialogue with them.

Various variations appear in human behavior.

In the weathervane-adaptive scenario, a person thinks and acts unprincipled, voluntarily submitting to circumstances and social fashion. When the situation and power change, the opportunist is potentially ready to change his views and serve a new “idol-god”, a different doctrine.

In the conservative-traditionalist version, an individual with insufficient creative potential is not able to respond flexibly to changing circumstances and is captive of old dogmas, stubbornly clinging to outdated “principles.”

This position cannot be identified with personally independent behavior (third option). I. Kant grasped the advantages of autonomous human behavior, free from addictions and temporary circumstances, but at the same time underestimated the objective conditionality of human actions.

When analyzing the fourth option, we proceed from the fact that in the process of anthroposociogenesis, stability (expressed through the ideological “core”, beliefs) and flexibility (the ability to respond to new things, adjust one’s beliefs within a certain range) are formed in a person. At the same time, a person maintains integrity in the most important ideological issues, without betraying his inner self, and at the same time creatively responds to the realities of life.

The relationship between the individual and the social environment ideally fits into the formula: search (of the individual) - proposals (of society) - choice (of the individual from what is offered by society). The autonomy and responsibility of an individual are manifested both in the process of comprehending proposals (“social orders”), conditions, requirements imposed by society (each person understands these requests and requirements subjectively, selectively, in accordance with his ideas about what is proper, valuable, good), and and in the course of fulfilling her social roles. In general, personality is an individual projection of society, and the adaptation of the personality to the environment and its active influence on the environment act as a moment of self-realization of the individual.

Personality is a concept that reflects the social nature of a person, considering him as a bearer of an individual principle (interests, abilities, aspirations, self-knowledge, etc.), self-revealing in social relations, communication and objective activity. Human acquisition social traits(during socialization, the performance of socially significant functions under the influence of the social environment) occurs on the basis of his biopsychological inclinations. Therefore, heredity plays a certain role in the formation of personality.

A person is not born an individual, but becomes one in the process of socialization. Socialization means: a) a person’s mastery of a system of social norms and values, social needs; b) the real inclusion of the individual in public life, the process of endowing people with social properties. “Socialization,” according to K. Marx, “is not the mechanical imposition of a ready-made social form on the individual. The individual, acting as an object of socialization, is at the same time a subject of social activity, a creator social forms" Socialization of a person is, first of all, internal self-deepening, a dialogue between a person and himself (“I - I”), which forms self-awareness. The relationships “I - you”, “I - we”, “I - humanity”, “I am nature”, “I am second nature”, “I am the universe” form moral feelings (love, friendship, hatred, etc. .), various value systems, ideas of national, class, state pride, group solidarity, social justice, socio-philosophical, historical, environmental, futurological and other reflections, atheistic and religious reasoning about the meaning of life and death, ideas about a responsible attitude towards oneself and everything around us, in general, is determined by the norms of behavior and activity of people.

Socialization occurs not only in the context of communication (in the form of imitation, learning, etc.), but also indirectly, through elements of culture (language, myth, art, religion, etc.). It acts as the most important mechanism for the reproduction of the subject of the socio-historical process, ensures continuity in the development of culture and civilization, supports the relatively conflict-free existence of society through the adaptation of the individual to the environment and the introduction of generally valid norms of legitimate behavior into the content of his consciousness.

The most important forms of socialization are: customs, traditions, state legal norms, language. Through these forms, human upbringing, training and activities are carried out. Personality is manifested through properties: ability to work, consciousness and language, freedom and responsibility, direction and uniqueness, character and temperament.

Individual personality development is not infinite, it is ascending and descending. Biological development is measured by the state of metabolism and body functions. Social age is determined by the level social development, depends on the individual’s mastery of a set of social roles, on the individual’s subjective internal representation of the degree of his development. Mental development is determined by the level of mental, emotional, etc. personality development (for example, A. Schopenhauer believed that intelligence, having reached its culmination point, declines). A person is not only capable of acquiring personality traits, but also of losing them.

Abstract on sociology

Completed by: student of group 22FB-61 Kutueva Katerina Arifovna

International Banking Institute

The problem of personality, the relationship between the individual and society belongs to the most interesting and important topics in sociology. Personality comes from the word mask - mask. Man always and everywhere plays some role. We get to know each other in these roles; in them we recognize ourselves. In the sense that the mask is the picture we create of ourselves, the roles we play are also masks of our true self - the self we desire to have. Playing a role becomes second nature and an integral part of our personality.

The individual is continuously connected with society. The sociological interpretation of personality reflects the measure of the social in a person, the measure of his involvement in social relations. Personality is a social being. This concept allows us to highlight and emphasize the extra-natural, supra-natural essence of man, and to draw scientific attention to his social origin and essence. Personality is the result of the development of an individual, the full embodiment of a person’s social qualities. “They are born a person, but they become a person.” What kind of personalities certain people become depends on the nature of the society in which they live, the education and upbringing system operating in it.

All social processes- economic, political, spiritual and others - consist of the activities of people, representing certain individuals. Questions arise about the driving forces of their activity, its content and social orientation, its practical results and their significance for the life and development of society.

Sociology is a science that studies man as a social type, as a personality type endowed with typical traits acquired in the process of functioning of social communities. At the same time, her field of view also includes real-life personalities, whose formation is determined by the specifics of “current” socio-cultural conditions. But it is not their individual characteristics that are being studied, but... socially typical in a person, his functions and roles, as well as socially significant activities. The social in man is the initial, the main thing in sociological analysis personality.

IN humanities The concepts of “person”, “individuality”, “individual”, “personality” are widely used. Each of them carries a specific load.

The concept of “man” reflects the features characteristic of the human race; man appears as a biological and social being. “Individual” is a separate person, a unit of the human race, a specific bearer of all the social and psychological traits of humanity, reason, will, needs, interests, values, etc. The concept of “individual” reflects the characteristics and attributes of a person as a whole at the level of an individual person; it is a kind of atom, the first brick of the human race, indivisible and finite. The concept of “individuality” captures what is special, original, and distinguishes one individual from another. These may be physiological, psychological, cultural and other characteristics.

The sociological interpretation of personality reflects the measure of the social in a person, the measure of his involvement in social relations. Personality is a social being. This is the result of the development of an individual, the full embodiment of a person’s social qualities.

Many modern researchers extend the concept of personality to a class of social objects broader in scope than the human individual (tribe, group, state), define “social personality” as an integral unique doctrinal-constitutional complex inherent in a certain social object of an arbitrary level of community (integrated life superprogram, hierarchized system to varying degrees, realized ideals, values, theoretical views, laws and applied models of organizing the existence, reproduction and development of a given social object).

Essence and concrete social content of this or that personality become clear when its social status, that is, what social groups she belongs to, what her profession and activities are, her worldview, value orientations, etc.

A person constantly receives new information, new knowledge. This knowledge turns into beliefs. IN specific situations the individual, based on knowledge and beliefs, develops views and opinions. Knowledge and beliefs are the most stable qualities of a person, and views and opinions are its traits. Qualities and traits determine the nature of a person’s actions, his goals and ideals. Social structure personality is constantly changing

The most important elements of the internal structure of the personality, fixed by the life experience of the individual and regulating his behavior, are value orientations. The set of established value orientations ensures the stability of the individual, the continuity of a certain type of behavior, expressed in the direction of needs and interests.

Process of assimilation personal qualities on different stages the physical existence of a person is defined in sociology by the term “socialization”.

Socialization is complex process inclusion of an individual in social relations, during which he learns patterns of behavior, social norms and values necessary for successful functioning in a given society.

Primary socialization is the socialization into which an individual becomes involved in childhood. Secondary socialization (resocialization) is the subsequent process of assimilation of new roles, values, knowledge at each stage of life.

In sociogenesis, a certain social program of its formation is implemented and further development, embedded in social reality itself and, above all, in the objective world of material and spiritual culture; language, different sign systems, embodying the spiritual experience of humanity; existing education and training systems; such forms of social life as work in the field material production, political, cognitive and other activities, moral, aesthetic and religious relations, which in turn manifest themselves in the system of family and interethnic relations, as well as in relationships between representatives of different generations of people. A person is involved in many of these relationships literally from the cradle and acts within their framework throughout his entire life.

People and institutions through which the socialization of an individual is carried out are called agents of socialization. Agents of primary socialization are parents, brothers and sisters, grandparents, all other relatives, family friends, peers, teachers, doctors, coaches, etc. - all people connected with an individual by close personal relationships. Secondary socialization is carried out by people connected by formal business relations and therefore agents of secondary socialization are, for example, representatives of the administration of a school, university, enterprise, army, employees of funds mass media, parties, courts, etc.

The individual develops appropriate abilities that allow her not only to adapt to the conditions of the external environment of her life and activities, but also to actively assert herself in this environment, show creativity and change the conditions of her life in her own interests. All this becomes possible only with the constant increase by one or another person of his knowledge and the comprehensive development of his abilities, skills and abilities for various types of activities. The decisive role in this is played by the obtained good education V high school and university and subsequent professional and other activities.

Each personality appears simultaneously as a product of the contemporary era and as a result of the world-wide historical development humanity, whose experience, embodied in the content of accumulated knowledge, existing species activities and works of art, she learns while living in a particular country as part of a certain people.

Any personality appears as quite complex and open system its dynamically manifested social properties - production-economic, political, family and everyday life, moral, aesthetic, religious and others. The open nature of the system of personal properties is manifested primarily in the interaction of individuals themselves, whether they act on their own or as part of certain social groups, and ultimately in the interaction of individuals with their entire external environment. social life, in the exchange of information, knowledge, experience, activities with other entities.

It must be said that the system of social properties of an individual functions and develops under direct and indirect influence the entire content of social life and is always manifested in specific socio-historical parameters. It includes the system of her social relations and interpersonal communication, her existing types of activities, the system of her spiritual world. All of them function and develop as the main subsystems of the holistic personality system - the system of all its social properties.

Social connections a particular individual and his social relations with other subjects should be included in his system. Yes, because she, as a person, exists only in the system of these connections and relationships. Outside of them there is no personality. Social connections and relationships into which a person enters are not just the external conditions of his life, but his integral attributes. She acts as the bearer of these connections and relationships and therefore she is a person. The disintegration of these connections and relationships means the disintegration of the personality itself, its social degradation.

An integral part The philosophical problem of man is the problem of the individual and its relationship with society. This is explained by the fact that the problem of man cannot be considered in isolation from the socio-political, economic, cultural and informational conditions of his existence. After all, without harmonizing relations in the “person - society - state” system, it is difficult to talk about the possibility of survival not only of an individual, but also of society as a whole. Moreover, when considering a person in connection with the social environment, one should not only focus on the essence of a person as such, but also proceed from the mutual influence of society on the individual and the individual on society. An important problem is also the dialectic of freedom and responsibility of the individual in social development, their mutual conditionality. This way of posing the question will allow us to reveal human nature from another angle.

THE CONCEPTS OF “HUMAN”, “INDIVIDUALS”, “INDIVIDUALS”, “PERSONALITY” AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP

To determine a person's place in modern world, as well as to clarify the relationship in the “person - society” system, it is necessary to dwell on some general definitions and characteristics that show a person with different sides.

Man, as already noted, has a bio-socio-spiritual nature. On the one hand, this is a living being with its characteristic general features inherent in the human race. On the other hand, in the ontological aspect, man is a social being, revealing his essential features precisely in the team, in the process of communication. Through purposeful activity (work), communication (speech), an assessment system (criticism) and self-esteem (self-criticism), a person becomes a “social animal”, a unique representative of the biosphere, who, according to V. Vernadsky, created his own habitat - the noosphere. Thus, a person is a living being who has certain needs, satisfies them in the production process thanks to communication and the ability to consciously, purposefully transform the world and himself.

However, having clarified the multidimensionality of human nature, it is impossible to answer the question of why people belonging to the same ethnic community are different from each other, why some people are known throughout the country, while only a limited circle knows about the existence of others. In other words, various qualitative characteristics are used to reflect all aspects of a multifaceted human personality. These are concepts such as “person”, “individual”, “individuality”, “personality” (Diagram 13.1).

Let's look at these concepts in more detail. The semantic bridge from the biological (human) to the social (personality, individuality) is the concept individual(from lat. individual- indivisible). This concept is usually understood as specific person. Along with the general features inherent in the entire human race, the individual has his own special qualities, thanks to which he differs from others. Here are physical data (height, color of eyes, skin, hair, structural features of the body), and natural inclinations, and characteristics of his thinking and psyche (properties of memory, imagination, temperament, character), as well as specific needs and interests. In this sense, we are talking about human individuality. So, an individual is a single representative of the human race with unique individual qualities inherent in it.

Scheme 13.1. The relationship between the content of the concepts “person”, “individual”, “individuality”, “personality”

The concept of “individual” is closely related to the concept "individuality". It is usually means a set of properties, abilities, characteristics and experiences of a person that distinguish a given individual from many others. This uniqueness stems from the totality of relationships of a particular person with the natural world, society, and other people and depends on his life position, the nature of his activity and the level of originality. A person’s conscious activity, in particular, his judgments, actions, and cultural needs, has individual shades.

And although they are not very different from those inherent in other people - representatives of the same social group, individuality has something of its own, peculiar only to it. For example, one person perceives the news of a certain event in society calmly, another with a smile, and a third with cynicism. Thus, unlike the individual, who is characterized by singularity, individuality is characterized by its particularity.

The next, higher level of characterization of a person’s social properties is the concept of “personality”. Personality - highest degree spiritual development a person, which is a stable set of socially significant qualities that characterize the individual as a unique subjectivity capable of mastering and changing the world. In other words, every person is a person, but not every person is a person. One is born as a human individual, but one becomes a person. There is nothing offensive to people in this statement, and it is used only to briefly reveal the degree of social difference between a person and an individual. Unlike the individual and individuality, the essence of which is formed primarily on the basis of the biological nature of a person, the essence of personality is based mainly on its social qualities. The concept of “personality” contains the totality of all social roles this person, all social relations, the most important of which is the attitude to public duty, as well as to the establishment of public morality.

Personality, therefore, is a systemic quality. An individual acquires it in his practical activities, in particular, in work and communication with other people. An individual only becomes a person if he is involved in social relations and communication with people. Therefore, the concept of “personality” should be revealed through practical activities, since it is precisely this that represents the basis for the formation and development of personality. The more fully we study communication between people, interpersonal relationships, the more deeply we understand the essence and structure of anyone who enters into these relationships. Consequently, the basis of personality is a stable system of socially significant traits, which are manifested in active participation in the socio-economic and cultural life of society and in the possibility of a certain influence on events occurring in society, and sometimes in the world.

This understanding of personality speaks of complex internal structure this phenomenon, including physical, social and spiritual components (diagram 13.2).

Scheme 13.2. Personality structure

Physical component of personality- the body, or the bodily organization of a person, is the most stable component of personality, based on bodily properties and self-perceptions. The physical component of a person often includes clothing and home, which are an important characteristic of the essence of personality. It is not for nothing that the proverb says that a person is greeted by his clothes. The components of a physical personality include everything that is created by her hands, as well as by her intellect - household decorations, collections, manuscripts, letters, etc.

Social structure of personality is formed in the process of communication between people, starting with the primary forms of communication between mother and child. Essentially, it represents a system of social roles of a person in different groups of which he is a part. There is a theory of social roles by an American sociologist Talcott Parsons. In accordance with this theory, each person in the system of relationships plays a certain role: father, leader, subordinate, son, husband, etc. All forms of self-affirmation in professional and social activities, friendship, love, competition form the social structure of the individual.

Spiritual component of personality represents that invisible core, the core of our “I”, on which the entire structure of a person’s personality is based. These are internal, spiritual states that reflect the individual’s aspirations towards certain values and ideals. Human spirituality is not something external, it cannot be acquired through education or imitation best examples spirituality. History knows many examples of how intense spiritual life (of sages, scientists, literary and artistic figures) was the key to not only physical survival, but also active longevity.

The named components of personality form an integral system, and each of them acquires dominant significance at different stages of a person’s life.

A person is not born a personality, but becomes one in the course of his individual development by assimilating the experience and value orientations of the society in which he lives, and this formation and development is the most important problem for him.

The process of personality formation is determined both by the biological characteristics of a person and by the social environment. According to some scientists, mental abilities human beings are 70-80% determined biological characteristics of a person, i.e. genetically. Thus, in the Bach family there were 16 composers and 29 professional musicians, and Alexander Pushkin and Leo Tolstoy were relatives. Researchers have established that great-grandmother A.S. Pushkin and great-great-grandmother L.N. Tolstoy were sisters. There are many such examples of the influence of genetic predisposition on the formation of personality. At the same time, upbringing, the example of parents, as well as one’s own persistence in the development of natural inclinations play an important role in the process of socialization. At the same time, not the last condition for a person to realize his abilities and personality traits is his demand by society. Unfortunately, in history there is often an effect of lack of demand, when the level of personal development significantly exceeds the level of development of society as a whole.

Another important factor that significantly influences the formation of personality is the social environment. Social environment is a set of economic, political, spiritual, informational conditions in which human life takes place. This is not only society itself, its social structure, but also family, groups, communication groups (neighbors, friends), influencing the development of the individual and shaping the uniqueness of his spiritual world.

An important component of the social environment is the type political system society in which personality is formed. It is known that an open, democratic society, in which relations between the individual and society are built on the principles of social partnership and mutual respect, is more preferable for the development of the individual and the disclosure of all his abilities than a closed, totalitarian (authoritarian), in which relations in the “personality - society" are deformed. If, for example, in the USA they rely on enterprising people and practice a model of interest in the relationship between power and personality, then in the USSR, performing qualities and obedience were valued above all, and a model of coercion was developed at the “power-personality” level. Therefore, it is not surprising that in the competition of these two opposing social systems, the democratic model of the United States turned out to be more viable. Thus, personality is formed under the influence of the environment on the basis of its individual biological inclinations.

Important for understanding the problem of personality is the question of personality typologies. There are a number of typologies that take as a basis a certain criterion, including: the individual’s disposition to social roles, social factors, psychoenergetic qualities of the individual, civilizational characteristics of society, etc. (Diagram 13.3).

Scheme 13.3. Typology of personalities

German philosopher, psychologist Eduard Spranger(1882-1963) depending on personality's disposition to social-role relationships identified several personality types that can be traced throughout the historical path of human development: political, aesthetic, social, economic (pragmatic), religious, theoretical.

Political type personality symbolizes the desire for dominance, the distribution of social roles, carried out through the direct imposition of one’s normative field or opinion on other individuals.

Aesthetic type personality gravitates towards non-role activities. Communication for him is a means of self-expression. However, the individualism of an aesthetic personality can sometimes lead to the consolidation of one’s own worldview in a sign-role form.

Social type personality is based on the attitude that communication is a form of self-giving, dissolving oneself in another. Love is the basic form of life social person. This type does not recognize the normative framework of his own activity, however, depending on the object of love (an individual, family, group, humanity), he may be inclined towards patriarchal-role or anarchic behavior, since getting used to the object of love for a social personality means unconditional acceptance all forms of his life activity.

Basis for highlighting economic type personality is its pragmatic orientation, since role behavior for an economic personality is a necessary condition for achieving benefit.

For religious type The main thing for a person is communication with the Absolute, God, in which two types of personal activity, two types of communication merge. The role turns into a vocation.

Theoretical type personality embodies an all-consuming passion for knowledge; conventional role-playing activity is unusual for him. This type of personality is far from entering and transcending, characteristic of the existential form of personal activity. The theoretical personality can only turn both methods into an object of study.

According to a Russian researcher Leonida Zharova, Several large social personality types can be distinguished: activists, thinkers, people of feelings and emotions, humanists and ascetics.

To the first social type of personality - figures it includes: hunters and fishermen, warriors and artisans, workers and engineers, teachers and doctors, managers, etc. For such individuals, the main thing is active action, changing the world and oneself along with it.

The second social personality type includes thinkers.

Thinkers are people who, according to Pythagoras, come into the world not to compete and trade, but to watch and reflect. The image of a sage, a thinker who embodies the traditions of the family and its historical memory, has always enjoyed authority among the people.

The third social type of personality includes people of feelings and emotions. These are, first of all, literary and artistic figures, whose brilliant insights often outstrip the most daring forecasts and prophecies of the sages.

The fourth social type according to this classification is humanists and ascetics, characterized by a heightened sense of compassion, they are able to alleviate the mental and physical suffering of other people. Their strength lies in faith in their destiny, in love for people and for all living things, in the active creation of good.

Typology of personalities is also carried out according to such criteria as psychoenergetic component. According to this typology proposed Peter Gannushkin(1875-1933), the following personal psychotypes are distinguished.

1. High energy (aggressive):
- epileptoid (dominated by the desire for order);
- paranoid (extreme sense of purpose);
- hyperthymic (prevail high mood, sociability);
- hysterical (has a clearly defined demonstrative behavior).
2. Low energy:
- schizoid (immersed in one's own inner world, unsociability);
- psychostenoid (clearly expressed lack of self-confidence);
- hypothymic (low mood predominates);
- sensitive (characterized by increased sensitivity).
3. Non-permanent types:
- cycloid (characterized by periodic mood changes);
- conformal (dependence on the social environment and the desire to adapt to it dominate).

The above classification takes as a basis certain mental constructs, energy potential a person, actively influencing the behavior of the individual, his mood and the characteristics of the spiritual world.

When considering personality types, one cannot help but take into account the mental characteristics of a “Western” and “Eastern” person, which in turn can become the basis for a personality typology. IN European (Western) model the personality in various situations retains its “core”, since it is a certain integrity. For eastern model personalities key concepts are duty and respect for tradition. The European is endowed with a tendency to stand out and conquer the world around him, and oriental man strives to merge with nature, recognizes himself as an integral part of it.

To summarize the above, it should be noted that in real life the concepts of “individual”, “individuality” and “personality” are interconnected and internally unified. Therefore, when we talk about personality, we mean personality-individuality, i.e. such a structure of behavior of an individual participant, which is simultaneously characterized by independence and originality, responsibility and talent, consciousness and versatility.

At the present stage, Russia is making a transition to a democratic society. According to the Constitution of our state, a person is the highest value and goal of the development of society. Therefore, there is a need to understand and analyze the types of relationships in the “person - society” system.

Introduction

Chapter 1. Personality and society

Conclusion

Introduction

An integral part of the philosophical problem of man is the problem of personality and its relationship with society. This is explained by the fact that the problem of man cannot be considered in isolation from the socio-political, economic, cultural and informational conditions of his existence. After all, without harmonizing relations in the “person - society - state” system, it is difficult to talk about the possibility of survival not only of an individual, but also of society as a whole. Moreover, when considering a person in connection with the social environment, one should not only focus on the essence of a person as such, but also proceed from the mutual influence of society on the individual and the individual on society. An important problem is also the dialectic of freedom and responsibility of the individual in social development, their mutual conditionality. This way of posing the question will allow us to reveal human nature from another angle.

Among the many philosophical problems, the question of the nature, essence and existence of man, his place and purpose in the world has always occupied one of the most important places.

So, XX century. was rightly called the century of aggravation of human problems, and imperfect knowledge about man had a negative impact directly in practical spheres. Man becomes the starting point for thinking about ecology and the prospects of civilization, about medicine and international conflicts, about economics and politics. The key to solving numerous problems lies in understanding the essence of man.

Many problems are the result of a person’s lack of awareness of the purpose and meaning of his existence, ill-conceived value orientation. Substitutions true needs false. An adequate understanding of the essence of man can make a certain contribution to their decision.

Thus, the purpose of this work is to consider and study the individual and society.

For the most detailed and complete study of this topic, it is necessary, first of all, to consider the following tasks:

consider approaches to the essence of man in philosophy;

study the concepts: person, individual, personality;

reveal the spiritual motivation of human activity;

reveal the functions of feeling and reason in human life;

study the debate between sensualists and rationalists;

consider and reveal the problem of conscience.

philosophy personality person society

Chapter 1. Personality and society

1.1 Approaches to the essence of man in philosophy: anthropological, existential, class, religious

Modern philosophical thought is based on the recognition of three main forms of existence: material, ideal and human. The last one is the most difficult: in fact, there is not a single science that, in one way or another, does not deal with the problem of man.

However, philosophy has its own, special approach to this problem. In solving it, philosophers try to answer the question of man’s place in the world, his relationship with other forms of existence, and to identify the features and uniqueness of human existence.

It should be noted that philosophers did not immediately consider this problem. Initially, philosophical thought did not distinguish man from the natural world, the cosmos. Ancient philosophy was par excellence cosmocentric, and only starting with Socrates it began to gradually turn towards anthropocentrism, to the study of man as a unique being, separated from nature. A long process of anthropologization began philosophical knowledge.

Therefore, in order to understand current state philosophical anthropology, it is advisable to familiarize yourself with the main stages of its historical development.

For classical philosophy, starting from antiquity and up to the 19th century, man and nature were presented as a single whole. Man is an organic part of the world, the cosmos. It represents a kind of microcosm, merged with nature, is a copy of the cosmos.

True, this idea, dominant in classical philosophy, was understood differently by different philosophers.

So, for materialist philosophers, starting with Democritus and ending with Feuerbach, this unity of the world and man consisted in its materiality. For them, man and nature are united by their common basis in the form of atoms, material substance, which, one way or another, determine not only the physical, but also the spiritual qualities of a person.

Materialism, therefore, is an attempt to overcome the complexity, multidimensionality of human essence, reducing it to a single material basis.

For idealistic philosophers, who also recognized the organic unity of man with the surrounding world, this unity looked completely different. For philosophers of the idealist movement from Plato to Hegel, man is related to his world eternal soul, one way or another communicating with the ideal world, the absolute idea. It is this closeness, the kinship of the human soul with ideal existence that helps a person to understand the world around him, to penetrate into its deepest secrets.

In modern times the first signs of crisis appeared classical concept unity of man and nature, but, nevertheless, many thinkers continued to support it. Thus, G. Leibniz believed that the whole world basically consists of ideal entities, monads; Man is also made of them; The difference between human monads and all others is only that they reflect the world around them more deeply and clearly than others.

G. Hegel adhered to the same concept, for whom the world and man were only manifestations, forms of otherness of the absolute idea.

So, the essence of the classical understanding of man, which dominated philosophy until the 19th century, was the recognition of his unity, harmony with nature, and the rootedness of man in the Universe.

However, already from the 17th century. individual thinkers began to express ideas opposite to this concept, which indicated its crisis and emergence new paradigm in philosophical anthropology.

Since the 17th century. Some philosophers began to express the idea that although man is connected with nature, his relationship with it is far from harmony, since he is isolated from it, alone in the endless Universe.

These new sentiments reflected the influence of science on philosophical anthropology. The discoveries of Copernicus revealed that the Earth does not play the role of the center of the Universe, which was attributed to it by Christian theology, and, therefore, it is difficult to recognize a special cosmic significance for man.

One of the first to express this new view was the French scientist and philosopher B. Pascal: “Man is just a reed, the weakest of nature’s creations... to destroy him, a breath of wind or a drop of water is enough.” In the endless spaces and endless time of the Universe, we are nothing, he added.

These attitudes of Pascal echo the views of his great contemporary and compatriot R. Descartes, the founder of philosophical rationalism, expressed in his famous motto: “I think, therefore I exist.”

But these hopes for preservation highly appreciated man in connection with the recognition of the exceptional capabilities of his mind were significantly undermined by the German philosopher I. Kant. The meaning of his theory of knowledge was reduced to substantiating the idea of the limited capabilities of the human mind. Therefore, according to Kant, the world will forever remain for a person a kind of “thing in itself,” never fully comprehended as an absolute. The possibilities of human knowledge are by no means limitless.

A major contribution of Russian philosophy to the treasury of world philosophical thought is the doctrine of the tragedy of human existence.

The merit of developing the problem of the tragedy of human existence belongs to a number of Russian philosophers of the second half of the 19th century V. These were Nikolai Nikolaevich Strakhov (1828 - 1896), Lev Mikhailovich Lopatin (1855 - 1920), Viktor Ivanovich Nesmelov ( 1863 - 1920) etc.

The main provisions of the anthropological concept can be reduced to the following.

The main topic of philosophical research should be the problem of human existence, and in this problem the main attention should be focused on the inner world of man, his spirit, with which the uniqueness of man is connected. It is here, according to Russian philosophers, that the main source of philosophical truth is located. Only this understanding of the tasks of philosophy corresponds, according to P.E. Astafiev, the mental makeup of the Russian person, “immersed in his best and deepest aspirations in his inner world.”

The priority of self-knowledge, “knowledge of the inner man,” according to Russian philosophers, should underlie the entire system of philosophical knowledge. The first moment of consciousness is the person himself, and the first science in the system of philosophy is the science of self-knowledge. It is self-knowledge that opens the way to strengthening and developing people’s relationships with each other, to improving social relationships; on this basis, the spirituality of the whole world, of all reality as a whole, becomes clear.

Of course, there is no doubt that this dominant sounded before in world and European philosophy. However, the merit of Russian philosophers is that they were able to interpret this principle in a deeply original way, in their own way.

First of all, Russian philosophers emphasized that it is precisely in its main focus on solving problems of self-consciousness that philosophy differs from science and religion:

Scienceis called upon, first of all, to explore nature, this is its main goal; philosophy explores nature only as a means of achieving its main goal, which is the knowledge of man, his soul. If philosophy deals primarily with problems of nature, then it will inevitably find itself at the tail end of science and will constantly compete with it.

Religionprimarily concerned with the study of God's problems. Therefore, this topic cannot be the main one for philosophy, since main task Philosophy is the knowledge of the human spirit, not God. If philosophy solves mainly the problems of God, then it will inevitably trail behind theology and conflict with it.

Of course, philosophy, to one degree or another, deals with the problem of both nature and God. But neither nature nor God are the main themes for her. She deals with them only in order to better resolve her main problem: the problem of man, his spiritual world.

At the same time, there is no doubt that both religion and science also deal with the problem of man. However, they do this differently from philosophy.

These principles of Russian philosophy opposed the concept of the founder positive philosophy O. Comte, who tried to identify philosophy and science and their methods.

Religionalso does not ignore the topic of man: however, she explores this topic with through faith, revelation, insight, enlightenment, etc.

This attitude of Russian philosophy opposed the concept of so-called “religious philosophy” Friedrich Schelling (1775 - 1854), who tried to identify philosophy and religion and their methods.

True philosophy, according to Russian philosophers, explores the problem of man on the basis rational methodsproviding the most accurate and in-depth knowledge. Only with the help of logic, reason, rational method true philosophy finds the deepest truth about the essence of man, his inner world. Russian philosophers often called this method speculation, thereby emphasizing the close connection in the philosophical study of rational and empirical methods of human cognition.

Russian classical philosophy was sharply distinguished both by its focus on the tasks of human self-improvement and by its spirit of tolerance towards religion. Thanks to these qualities, Russian philosophical classics today reveal their high vitality. Apparently, it is with these philosophical classics that the future of Russian philosophical thought is connected. Russian philosophy will remain forever alive only as a philosophy about the essence of man.

Another direction modern philosophy- existentialism. Its starting point is the recognition that human existence is a special, specific form of existence, existing along with material and perfect shape.

Each of these forms has its own attributes, inherent properties. Thus, material existence is characterized by such properties as space, time, movement, information content, etc.; ideal - immateriality, autonomy from material existence, activity, etc.

Their specific features human existence also has - the most complex of all forms of existence. The content of the concept of human existence in modern philosophy can be reduced to the following basic provisions.

Human existence is the unity of material and spiritual existence, “being between,” “a hole into being.” In this synthetic, integrative nature of human existence lies its most important structural feature.

The temporal and spatial characteristics of human existence are specific. Human life fleeting, it is limited in time, flowing between birth and death. Such characteristics of ideal and material existence as eternity, infinity, etc. are not applicable to it. From the point of view of temporal characteristics, this is “here-being”, “being now”; from a spatial position - human existence takes place in a limited, narrow space.

Of course, natural, social, and corporate living conditions are of significant importance for humans. But still, the main thing for him is the specific conditions of his work, life, his own, individual psychophysiological characteristics.

Although human existence is an interweaving of the material and the ideal, the spiritual, psychological aspects. Moreover, the psychological components of human existence are understood not only and not so much as the highest forms of the psyche, the mind, but rather the subconscious, instincts, and vague drives.

Therefore, modern philosophy, according to existentialists, must revise its categorical apparatus in a concrete way. Its main categories should not be the basic concepts of classical philosophy - large-scale, rationalized, but completely different ones, designed to describe human existence limited in time and space, an intermediate existence, in many ways still far from rational, not comprehended, not understood and therefore mysterious. These should be categories that describe the individual nature of a person’s existence, the features of his multifaceted psyche. Among such categories, existentialists include feelings of anxiety, abandonment, loneliness, fear of death, the absurdity of human existence, and a person’s desire for unlimited power over his own kind.

Thus, modern philosophy sees the essence of man in the unity of the natural and the social. In his life, not only natural, but also socially developed qualities, such as the ability to work, the ability to comply with norms, are of great importance social behavior, possessing a sense of beauty, an ear for music. In other words, the entire human existence is very peculiar, unique.

1.2 Concepts: person, individual, personality

In order to determine the place of a person in the modern world, as well as to clarify the relationships in the “individual-society” system, it is necessary to dwell on some general definitions and characteristics that show a person from different sides.

Man has a bio-social-spiritual nature. On the one hand, it is a living being with its characteristic common features inherent in the human race. On the other hand, in the ontological aspect, man is a social being, revealing his essential features precisely in the team, in the process of communication. Through purposeful activity (work), communication (speech), an assessment system (criticism) and self-esteem (self-criticism), a person becomes a “social animal”, a unique representative of the biosphere, who, according to V. Vernadsky, created his own habitat - the noosphere. Thus, Human - a living being that has certain needs, satisfies them in the process of production through communication and the ability to consciously, purposefully transform the world and itself.

Various qualitative characteristics are used to reflect all aspects of a multifaceted human personality. These are concepts such as “person”, “individual”, “personality”. Let's look at these concepts in more detail.

The semantic bridge from the biological (human) to the social (personality, individuality) is the concept of individual. This concept usually refers to a specific person. Along with the general features inherent in the entire human race, the individual has his own special qualities, thanks to which he differs from others. Here are physical data (height, color of eyes, skin, hair, structural features of the body), and natural inclinations, and characteristics of his thinking and psyche (properties of memory, imagination, temperament, character), as well as specific needs and interests. In this sense, we are talking about human individuality. So, individual- an individual representative of the human race with unique individual qualities inherent in it.

The concept of “individual” is closely related to the concept of “individuality”. It, as a rule, means a set of properties, abilities, characteristics and experiences of a person that distinguish a given individual from many others. This uniqueness stems from the totality of a particular person’s relationship with the natural world. Society, other people and depends on his life position, the nature of his activities and the level of originality. A person’s conscious activity, in particular, his judgments, actions, and cultural needs, has individual shades.

The next, higher level of characterization of a person’s social properties is the concept of “personality”. Personality is the highest degree of spiritual development of a person, which is a stable set of socially significant qualities that characterize the individual as a unique subjectivity capable of mastering and changing the world. In other words, every person is a person, but not every person is a person. One is born as a human individual, but one becomes a person. There is nothing offensive to people in this statement, and it is used only to briefly reveal the degree of social difference between a person and an individual. Unlike the individual and individuality, the essence of which is formed primarily on the basis of the biological nature of a person, the essence of personality is based mainly on its social qualities. The concept of “personality” contains the totality of all the social roles of a given person, all social relations, the most important of which is the attitude to public duty, as well as to the establishment of public morality.

Personality, therefore, is a systemic quality. An individual acquires it in his practical activities, in particular, in work and communication with other people. An individual only becomes a person if he is involved in social relations and communication with people. Therefore, the concept of “personality” should be revealed through practical activity, since it is precisely this that represents the basis for the formation and development of personality. The more fully we study communication between people, interpersonal relationships, the more deeply we understand the essence and structure of anyone who enters into these relationships. Consequently, the basis of personality is a stable system of socially significant traits, which are manifested in active participation in the socio-economic and cultural life of society and in the possibility of a certain influence on events occurring in society, and sometimes in the world.

At the present stage, Russia is making a transition to a democratic society. According to the Constitution of our state, a person is the highest value and goal of development of society. Therefore, there is a need to understand and analyze the types of relationships in the “person - society” system.

1.3 Spiritual motivation of human activity

An important aspect of the functioning and development of society is its spiritual life. The spiritual life of society is very complex. It is not limited to various manifestations of people’s consciousness, their thoughts and feelings. The main elements of the spiritual life of society include the spiritual needs of people aimed at the creation and consumption of corresponding spiritual values, as well as the spiritual values themselves, as well as spiritual activities for their creation and spiritual production in general. Elements of spiritual life should also include spiritual consumption as the consumption of spiritual values and spiritual relationships between people, as well as manifestations of their interpersonal spiritual communication.

The basis of the spiritual life of society is spiritual activity. It can be considered as an activity of consciousness, during which certain thoughts and feelings of people, their images and ideas about natural and social phenomena arise. The result of this activity is certain views of people on the world, scientific ideas and theories, moral, aesthetic and religious views. They are embodied in moral principles and norms of behavior, works of folk and professional art, religious rites, rituals, etc.

All this takes on the form and meaning of corresponding spiritual values, which can be various views of people, scientific ideas, hypotheses and theories, works of art, moral and religious consciousness, and finally, the very spiritual communication of people and the resulting moral and psychological climate, say, in the family, production and other teams, in interethnic communication and in society as a whole.

A special kind spiritual activity is the dissemination of spiritual values with the aim of their assimilation by as many people as possible. It has crucial to improve their literacy and spiritual culture. An important role in this is played by activities related to the functioning of many scientific and cultural institutions, with education and upbringing, whether it is carried out in the family, school, institute or in a production team, etc. The result of such activity is the formation of the spiritual world of many people, and therefore the enrichment of the spiritual life of society.

The main motivating forces of spiritual activity are spiritual needs. The latter appear as a person’s internal motivations for spiritual creativity, for the creation of spiritual values and for their consumption, for spiritual communication. Spiritual needs are objective in content. They are determined by the totality of the circumstances of people’s lives and express the objective need for their spiritual mastery of the natural and natural environment around them. social world. At the same time, spiritual needs are subjective in form, because they appear as manifestations of the inner world of people, their social and individual consciousness and self-awareness.

Of course, spiritual needs have one social orientation or another. The latter is determined by the nature of existing social relations, including moral, aesthetic, religious and others, the level of spiritual culture of people, their social ideals, and their understanding of the meaning of their own lives. Multiplied by the will of people, spiritual needs act as powerful motivating forces for their social activity in all spheres of society.

An essential aspect of the spiritual life of society is spiritual consumption. It's about about the consumption of spiritual goods, i.e. those spiritual values mentioned above. Their consumption is aimed at satisfying the spiritual needs of people. Objects of spiritual consumption, be they works of art, moral, religious values, form the corresponding needs. Thus, the wealth of objects and phenomena of the spiritual culture of society acts as an important prerequisite for the formation of various spiritual needs of a person.

1.4 Functions of feeling and reason in human life. The eternal debate between sensualists and rationalists

When studying the history of epistemological teachings, a seemingly insoluble contradiction is discovered between the sensory and logical knowledge. Representatives of all philosophical movements considered the subject to be an individual who somehow cognizes the world. However, with regard to the object, the situation was different. It is known that the material world includes infinite set single sensory perceived things. And knowledge deals with general ideas, concepts and laws that characterize entire classes of things and the relationships between them. In other words, the goal of human cognition is to display the world of individual things in the forms of universal concepts and categories. A single thing with its properties and qualities is directly perceived by the senses. The universal is not represented in sensation in any way, but is a factor of consciousness. Thus the question of knowledge of the universal arises. Does it appear on the basis of sensory perception of individual things, or is the mind capable of independently comprehending the universal? If knowledge about the universal is derived from the sensory perception of individual objects, then the actual object of knowledge is these objects themselves. If knowledge about the universal arises exclusively through reason, regardless of the senses, then the real object of knowledge is not individual things, but general ideas that exist independently of things.

Depending on the answer to this question, philosophers can be divided into two schools. Those who believe that the basis of all knowledge is sensory perception belong to a movement called sensationalism (from the Latin “sense” - feeling). Those who believe that the mind is capable of knowledge independently of the senses belong to another branch, called “rationalism” (from the Latin “ration” - reason).

Sensationalism seems to the ordinary mind the most natural way of human cognition. The world appears to us in all its richness of diverse properties precisely through sensations. And since sensations act as a very effective means of obtaining information about the world, many philosophers saw them as the only source of knowledge. It is not for nothing that sensualists believed that a person is born with an empty consciousness, like a blank slate, the first signs on which leave sensations. This position was expressed in extremely categorical form by the English philosopher J. Locke: “There is nothing in the mind that has not previously been in the senses.” But how, from the point of view of Locke and other sensualists, do general concepts, which are not directly given in sensations? The conclusion is this: only through observation and its subsequent processing can we gain true knowledge about nature. Only after the accumulation of facts does the activity of the systematizing and generalizing mind begin. If the mind begins to act independently, without relying on the evidence of the senses, then it is unable to give anything but empty lifeless abstractions, divorced from the real world. On the contrary, if the mind is guided by feelings, then it can gradually, through generalizations, reveal in the sensory material certain connections and rules that are of a general nature. From the point of view of sensationalism, knowledge is a kind of pyramid, at the base of which lie numerous experimental observations, from which ideas of various ever-increasing degrees of generality are formed. As they move away from the foundation, these ideas become more and more abstract and poor in content.

Another form of understanding the process of cognition was rationalism.Rationalists did not deny the existence of sensory knowledge, but did not consider it sufficiently accurate and reliable. They believed that sensory knowledge is possible for serving everyday actions, but is not acceptable in science, whose task is to penetrate into the essence of things. Indeed, examples of deception of the senses in the difference in perception of the same objects by different people forced people not to trust their feelings.

Rationalists reject certainty sensory knowledge, since the latter is subjective in nature, because even the same object is perceived by people differently. The goal of cognition of rationalism is to find an irrespective truth - one that would be true always and everywhere, regardless of one or another point of view of the knowing subject. R. Descartes believes that everything accessible to knowledge is interconnected and, therefore, can be logically isolated from correctly understood starting points. Thus, the problem of knowledge is reduced by rationalists to the problem of identifying the initial premises, since all other knowledge can be deduced from them. Indeed, if the initial principles of human cognition do not arise in the process of activity, and no activity is possible without them, then it remains to be assumed that the entire complex of fundamental principles is initially inherent in man. This is the essence of the so-called theory of “innate ideas”, first developed by Descartes and characteristic in one form or another for all rationalistic systems.

Trying to overcome the limitations of extreme sensationalism, rationalism goes to the other extreme. If, from the point of view of sensualists, the human mind only slavishly copies nature, remaining passive, then from the point of view of rationalists, all knowledge is derived by the mind exclusively from itself. Here nature already submits to reason, reproducing the movement of logical categories.

Thus, neither sensationalism nor rationalism revealed the laws of the cognitive process.

1.5 Contradictions between human reason and feelings. Problem of conscience

Human behavior is formed and develops under the influence of various factors. One of these factors is moral values, which help a person navigate the world around him. These values are accepted not because it is beneficial or pleasant for a person to take them into account. Moral values function in such a way that they influence the will of a person. One of these values is conscience. Conscience is a person's need to take responsibility for his actions. Conscience is considered as the ability to independently formulate one’s own moral duties and exercise moral self-control, as well as the ability to demand from oneself their fulfillment and to make a self-assessment of the actions performed.

Philosophers on different historical stages development of humanity offer their own view of conscience. In our opinion, the problem of conscience becomes more relevant precisely in the 19th - 20th centuries, when such a concept as freedom of conscience appears, reflecting the entire democracy of human moral values. Thus, in the views of the 19th century German philosopher F. Nietzsche, conscience is associated with a feeling of guilt. Conscience is a consciousness of guilt and at the same time a kind of internal “tribunal” that constantly forces a person to be subordinate to society. Conscience is a social duty, an instinct that has become an internal conviction and motive for human behavior. Conscience condemns an action because it for a long time condemned in society. Rejecting Christian morality, the main concept of which is the concept of guilt, F. Nietzsche cannot reject conscience as the consciousness of guilt. For a philosopher, conscience appears as a negative phenomenon, and therefore calls for the “amputation” of conscience, which is only the consciousness of guilt, responsibility, and some kind of judgment. As a result of his thoughts, F. Nietzsche introduces the doctrine of double conscience, distinguishing between the morality of masters and the morality of slaves. However, double morality leads to the denial of morality in general.

The 20th century German philosopher E. Fromm distinguishes two types of conscience: authoritarian and humanistic. Authoritarian conscience is expressed in subordination to external authority. With an authoritarian conscience, people uncritically assimilate and carry out attitudes outside world because they are afraid. Submitting to an authoritarian conscience out of fear of punishment, a person follows commands that are contrary to his own interests. If a person deviates from the orders of the authorities, he feels guilty before it and suffers, fearing punishment. However, once people realize that power is no longer powerful and cannot harm them in any way, they lose their authoritarian conscience and no longer submit to what or who they previously feared.

Humanistic conscience is expressed in the ability to correctly assess the facts and one’s own role in a particular action, as well as the ability to correlate this action with the universal and individual understanding of good and evil. Humanistic conscience is the voice of the person himself, that best, good beginning in him, capable of self-development. Humanistic conscience does not allow people to be slaves, to meekly submit to other people's interests, or to spend their lives serving the interests and needs of other people. This conscience calls for self-realization, for realizing one’s strengths and capabilities, and also calls for building one’s life in harmony with other people and oneself.

Considering the views of the French philosopher J. - P. Sartre on conscience, we can say that, unlike E. Fromm and F. Nietzsche, he excludes the connection between conscience and guilt, but puts forward a hypothesis about conscience, an integral part of which is freedom. J. - P. Sartre does not establish criteria for good and evil, that is, he does not build a system of moral philosophy, to the extent that he defines conscience as a call to choose oneself authentically, to find oneself. Conscience is not a call to be good and avoid evil. It is a call to be yourself, and not “other.” According to J. - P. Sartre, not free man is in “bad faith”, he has a bad conscience, since he shifts responsibility for his actions to natural or socio-historical laws.

Thus, conscience is not covered by general moral laws, but coordinates internal moral principles with the internal positions of a person. Conscience is a special moral and psychological mechanism that operates from within a person, checking whether duty is being fulfilled. Main function conscience - self-control, as it is one of the expressions moral self-awareness person. Conscience also manifests itself in the form of rational awareness of the moral significance of the actions performed, and in the form emotional experiences, so-called remorse. As a rule, conscience is realized through a feeling of internal discomfort when moral rules are violated.

Conclusion

One of the most important trends in the development of modern philosophy is increasing attention to man, to the problems of his existence in the world and to his inner world. And this, obviously, is not accidental, because, in the end, the general task of philosophy should be precisely to help connect man with the world in a rational and practical way, to make man a real representative and subject of the world, and the world truly human.

Thus, we have examined the most general and basic issues of modern philosophical anthropology.

Problems of personality, personality and society have always touched the minds of outstanding scientists of different eras, who tried to determine the place of the individual in human society and consider the human personality as a separate individual outside of society, since each personality represents a separate spiritual world.

In the process of considering these issues in this work, the interests of the individual and society were always compared. Conclusion: society is a single and huge mechanism consisting of tiny elements - human individuals. And the further society developed, the more pressing the problem of the individual and society became.

List of sources used

1.Antushin S.S. Fundamentals of philosophy: Tutorial- M.: IC RIOR et al., 2010. - 411 p.

2.Belskaya E.Yu., Volkova N.P. History and philosophy of science (Philosophy of science): Textbook - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Alfa-M: INFRA-M, 2011. - 416 p.

.Danilyan O.G., Taranenko V.M Philosophy: Textbook - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: NIC INFRA-M, 2014. - 432 p.

.History of philosophy [ Electronic resource]: textbook / Ch.S. Kirvel [and others]; edited by Ch.S. Kirvelya. - Minsk: Vysh. school, 2012. - 998 p.

.Leshkevich T.G. Philosophy and theory of knowledge: Textbook. - M.: INFRA-M, 2011. - 408 p.

.Naletov I.Z. Philosophy: Textbook. - M.: INFRA-M, 2007. - 400 p.

.Nizhnikov S.A. The problem of spirituality in Western and oriental culture and philosophy: Monograph. - M.: NIC Infra-M, 2012. - 168 p.

.Ostrovsky E. In Philosophy: Textbook. - M.: University textbook, 2009. - 313 p.

.Tuman-Nikiforov, A.A. Comprehension of the nature and essence of man: from philosophical anthropology to humanology [Electronic resource]: monograph / A.A. Tuman-Nikiforov, I.O. Tuman-Nikiforova. - Krasnoyarsk: Sib. federal univ., 2013. - 226 p.

.Philosophy [Electronic resource]: textbook. allowance / Ch.S. Kirvel [and others]; edited by Ch.S. Kirvelya. - Minsk: Higher School. - 2013. - 528 p.

.Yaskevich, Ya.S. Fundamentals of Philosophy [Electronic resource]: textbook / Ya.S. Yaskevich, V.S. Vyazovkin, Kh.S. Gafarov. - Minsk: Vysh. school, 2011. - 301 p.

The concept of personality. Personality and society

Problems of personality, personality and society have always touched the minds
outstanding scientists of different eras who tried to determine the place of personality in
human society and consider the human personality as separate
individuality is outside of society, since each individual represents
separate spiritual world.

Personality is a human individual in the aspect of his social
qualities formed in the process of historical specific types
activities and social relations. The essence of the “special personality”
is not her beard, not her blood, not her abstract nature, but her
social quality. The human individual is a single representative
of the human race, an individual person, regardless of his real
anthropological and social characteristics. A born child is an individual,
but he is not yet human individuality, since human
individuality is a unique, original way of being a specific
personality as a subject of independent activity, this
custom uniform human social life.

An individual becomes an individual to the extent that how he ceases to be a “unit” of the human race and acquires relative independence of his existence in society, becomes a person. Personality is social in its essence and individual
by the way of its existence, individuality expresses its own world
individual, his special life path, which in its content
determined social conditions, and by origin, structure and form
is of an individual nature. The essence of individuality is revealed in
independence of a particular individual, his originality, ability to be
by oneself within the social system.

The important role of natural inclinations, innate characteristics in
the development of an individual is mediated by social factors. Way of existence
individual life is there a manifestation more specific or more general,
human ancestral life. Individuality is the unity of unique and
universal human properties, complete system, formed in the process
dynamic interaction of its qualities, general, typical -
universal, natural and social characteristics, special - specifically -
historical and individual - unique physical and spiritual-ethical
characteristics. With the historical development of human activity, everything
the individualization of himself and his relationships in various
areas of life.

The development of individuality plays an important role in history
humanity as one of necessary conditions his progress.
Individualization and personal improvement are inextricably linked with
transformation of society, with the elimination of alienation, with the fight against
individualism and the creation of conditions for cooperation and mutual assistance in
society. Although the natural basis of personality, its biological characteristics
are determined by development factors, its essential basis is not its
natural qualities, and socially significant qualities - views, abilities,
needs, interests, moral beliefs.

Personality is a dynamic, relatively stable holistic
system of intellectual, cultural, moral and volitional qualities of a person,
expressed in the individual abilities of his consciousness and activity.

Personality is a dialectical unity of the general social
ethical, special class, national and separate
individual. In specific historical circumstances, personality
acts as an integrity that is given by a certain social system.

Personality is the reality of an individual, as social phenomenon And
a subject realizing himself in various types of social communication.
Social qualities of a person are manifested in his actions, actions,
relationships between people. From these actions one can to a certain extent judge
about the inner world of man, his spiritual and moral qualities How
positive as well as negative.

Knowledge of the structure of personality is possible both in general history
plan, and in terms of research of certain aspects of this structure
individual sciences - biology, psychology, sociology, pedagogy.
The determining influence of social and natural factors on the formation and
Personal development occurs through its subjectivity. Internal content
personality, its subjective world is not the result of mechanical implementation, in
her consciousness of diverse external influences, and the result of that internal work
the personality itself, in the process of which the external, having passed through subjectivity
personality, processed, mastered and applied in practical
activities.

Depending on the nature of social relations, the level
knowledge and willpower, the individual gains the opportunity to provide more or
less influence on the factors of its development. The concept of “personality” characterizes
a person as an active subject of social relations. At the same time the person
- is not only a subject, but also an object of activity, set of functions,
which he performs due to the established division of labor, belonging to
this or that class or social group with their ideology and psychology.
One of the most important qualities, the core of personality, is character
worldview of the individual, which largely determines
the direction and specificity of all its socially significant decisions and
misconduct. The social structure of personality is formed in production
activities and in non-productive relations. Degree of personality development
directly depends on the wealth of real social relations in which it
included. This pattern underlies the development of personality typology.

The individual and society are in a dialectical relationship,
they cannot be opposed, for the individual is a social being and
every manifestation of his life, even if it does not appear in
direct form of its collective manifestation, possessing generic
signs, can also act as an original individuality.

In modern conditions and conditions of accelerated development
civilization, the role of the individual in society is becoming increasingly significant, due to
this increasingly raises the problem of individual freedom and responsibility to
society.

The first attempt to substantiate the point of view of explaining the relationship
freedom and the need for its recognition of their organic relationship
belongs to Spinoza, who defined freedom as conscious
necessity.

An expanded concept of the dialectical unity of freedom and
necessity from an idealistic position was given by Hegel. Scientific,
dialectical-materialistic solution to the problem of freedom and necessity
comes from the recognition of objective necessity as primary, and will and
human consciousness - as a secondary derivative.

In society, individual freedom is limited by the interests of society.
Each person is an individual, his desires and interests do not always coincide with
interests of society. In this case, the individual is under the influence of social
laws must be acted in individual cases so as not to violate
interests of society, otherwise he faces punishment on behalf of
society.

In modern conditions, in the era of development of democracy, the problem
personal freedom is becoming more global. It is decided at the level
international organizations in the form of legislative acts on rights and freedoms
personalities who are currently becoming the basis of any policy and
are carefully guarded.

However, not all problems of personal freedom have been solved in Russia and in
all over the world, as this is one of the most difficult tasks. Personalities in society
at the moment number in the billions and collide every minute on earth
their interests, rights and freedoms.

Such concepts as freedom and responsibility are inseparable, so
as freedom is not permissiveness, for violating other people's rights and freedoms the individual
bears responsibility to society according to the law adopted by society.
Responsibility is a category of ethics and law that reflects
special social and moral-legal attitude of the individual to society,
to humanity as a whole. Building a modern society, implementation
conscious beginning in social life, inclusion masses To
independent management of society and historical creation sharply
increases the measure of personal freedom and at the same time social and moral
everyone's responsibility.

In law civil, administrative and criminal
responsibility is established not formally by clarifying the composition
crime, but also taking into account the upbringing of the offender, his life and
activities, the degree of consciousness of guilt and the possibility of correction in the future.
This brings legal responsibility closer to moral, that is, awareness
individual interests of society as a whole and ultimately understanding of laws
progressive development of history.

Respect for individual rights and freedoms and responsibility to
by law crime committed- is one of the signs of legal
states. The rule of law presupposes the consolidation of interests
individuals in the first place, eliminates the inequality of nations, puts on one
line between man and woman, creates all the conditions for the absolute equality of all
members of society before the law, regardless of origin, position in
society. The Russian Constitution puts the interests of the individual first.
The primary task for law enforcement agencies is the protection of personal,
state and public property, established personality status,
guarantees of rights and freedoms. This emphasizes the increasing role of the individual in
modern conditions for its development in society.

Perhaps each philosopher understands personality in his own way, but they all agree on one thing. A personality is a formed person who has his own life, his own beliefs, his own views, his own individual character, his own principles, etc.

I would like to give several examples of statements by various philosophers about personality.

Bishop Augustine the Blessed (354 – 430), who paid strong attention to medieval philosophy, solves two major problems: the dynamics of personality and the dynamics universal human history. His work “Confession” is a study of a person’s self-awareness and psychological states. It describes the inner world of a person from infancy to the establishment of a person as a Christian. He is disgusted by any violence against the individual: from violence against a child at school to state violence. Augustine puts forward the problem of personal freedom. He believed that subjectively a person acts freely, but everything he does is done by God through him. And the existence of God can be deduced from human self-consciousness, from the self-reliability of human thinking. Augustine showed the role of self-awareness for the individual. After all, I am a closed, intimate being that is separated from the outside world and even “closed” from it.

The socio-philosophical views of Thomas Aquinas, who is considered the creator of Catholic theology and the systematizer of scholasticism, deserve attention. He argued that personality is “the noblest phenomenon in all rational nature.” It is characterized by intellect, feeling and will. The intellect has superiority over the will. However, he places knowledge of God lower than love for him, i.e. feelings can surpass reason if they relate not to ordinary things, but to God.

An important part of the work of A.I. Herzen - the theme of personality. The value of any personality lies in a reasonable and morally free “action” in which a person achieves his real existence. But personality is not only the crown of nature, but also “the pinnacle of the historical world.” There is an interaction between the individual and the social environment: the individual is created by the environment and events, but the consequences bear its imprint.

At the center of Mikhailovsky’s social and philosophical concept is the idea of personality, the development and integrity of which is the measure, goal and ideal of historical progress. For him, personality is “the measure of all things,” therefore the alienation of personality, which turns it into an appendage of society, must necessarily be overcome.

Leontyev K. N. Advocates for a bright personality type. For him, extremes are more important than the middle and grayness. On homogeneous soil, on equality, on simplification, he writes, geniuses and original thinkers are not born.

In addition to these statements, there is many others, because every philosopher tries to explain any question that arises in a person. And all people, not even philosophers, try to explain for themselves everything that can be explained in one way or another.

There are many disputes and disagreements about this, but not a single philosopher gives what he believes.