The initial, generic for all psychology, and for differential psychology in particular, is the concept of "man". At the same time, a person is considered, first of all, as a biological being belonging to the class of mammals of the homo sapiens species. From other human biological species, they differ:
Knowledge of the nature of human individuality
organism- the corporal factor of individuality.
The biological coordinate of a person defines him as a living bodily being. The closest to this definition is the concept of "organism", which in a broad sense can include anatomical and morphological structure, physiological and nervous processes, and finally, higher nervous activity along with the mechanisms of the sense organs. In modern differential psychophysiology and personality psychology, the concept of "organism" is closely related to such features as "the specifics of bodily organization", "biochemical individual characteristics"and the neurophysiological foundations of individuality". The concept of "organism" is more suitable for research by biologists and physiologists than by psychologists.
Individual- a precondition for personality.
The concept of "individual" is the root word for the central construct in differential psychology "individuality". The term "individual" means, on the one hand, "a single inseparable being (from Lat, individuum - indivisible)," acting as a single whole, and, on the other hand, an individual representative of the human community.
Theory of development of individuality Ananyeva B.G.
The human psyche includes such structures as the individual, personality and subject of activity. Individual properties of a person consist of age-sex and individually typical properties. Age-related properties are consistently deployed in the process of formation, growth of the individual, and exist in the form of sexual demorphism, the intensity of which changes with age. Individual-typical properties form constitutional features (physique and biochemical individuality), neurodynamic properties of the brain, features of the functional geometry of the cerebral hemispheres (symmetry-asymmetry of the functioning of paired receptors and effectors). The primacy of individual properties lies in the fact that they exist at all levels, including cellular and molecular. The interaction of primary individual properties includes the dynamics of psychophysiological functions (sensory, mnemonic, verbal-logical, etc.) and the structure organic abilities. These derivatives of primary properties are called secondary. Actually mental integration of individual properties is represented in temperament and inclinations. The main form of development of individual properties is ontogenesis, which is carried out according to a specific phylogenetic, species program, but is constantly modified under the influence of social factors. Therefore, as the ontogenetic stages themselves unfold, the factor of individual variability increases, which is associated with the active influence of the social properties of the personality on the structural and dynamic features of the individual.
Personality- the psychological carrier of social properties.
In "the concept of "personality" those signs are fixed that are determined by the individual's belonging to society (social quality)."
Starting point properties personalities(according to Ananiev B.G.) is its status in society (economic, political, legal, ideological, etc. position in society), as well as the status of the community in which the this person. On the basis of status and in constant relationship with it, systems of social functions-roles, as well as goals and value orientations, are built. Status, roles and value orientations form primary personal properties that determine secondary properties - features of behavior motivation and structure public behavior. The integrative effect of the interaction of primary and secondary personal properties, the result of this interaction is the character of a person and his inclinations. The main form of development of a person’s personal properties is his life path in society, his social biography, in which “the moments of start and finish of the main activity in society, the stages of the creative evolution of the individual, periods of rise and fall, the main events are highlighted. personal life and activities closely intertwined with major events era and community development countries".
Man as a subject of activity predominantly considered as a subject of labor, knowledge and communication. The structure of a person as a subject of activity is formed from certain properties of the individual and personality, corresponding to the subject and means of activity. The initial characteristics of a person as a subject are consciousness (as a reflection of objective reality) and activity (as a transformation of reality). Man "as a subject of practical activity is characterized not only by his own properties, but also by those technical means labor, which act as a kind of amplifiers, accelerators and converters of its functions. As a subject of theoretical activity, it is equally characterized by knowledge and skills associated with operating specific sign systems.
Individuality is an integral biopsychosocial characteristic of a person
Man like individuality is understood by Ananyev as "the unity and interconnection of his properties as a personality and a subject of activity, in the structure of which the natural properties of a person as an individual function." The beginning of individuality is determined by the individual with his complex natural properties. In particular, motivational formations were initially included in the structure of mental processes of perception. Motivation “is a factor in individual development in four directions: organic, gnostic, ethical and aesthetic. The organic direction is associated with the maintenance of the main unconditioned reflexes to maintain the constancy of matter and the internal environment, defensive-protective, reproduction and parental functions, reflexes to environmental stimuli, etc. Due to the historical development of knowledge (in the unity of its sensual and logical sides), the need for knowledge and the methods by which it is formed , is one of the basic spiritual needs of the individual: this gnostic motivation affects the various levels of a person's life and his perceptual properties. Ethical motivation expresses a person's need for people and social connections. Aesthetic motivation is probably built on the basis of the interaction of gnostic and ethical motives and is the most complex type of perception as enjoyment of the aesthetic properties of objective reality.
Individuality is something special in an individual, a set of features inherent only to him (in particular, personality traits), which makes a person and his personality a single embodiment of the typical and universal. Individuality can neither be identified with personality, which is often done, nor separated from it. A person is always unique and, therefore, individual. But the individuality of a person is manifested not only in his personality, but also in his body (K. K. Platonov).
Individuality characterizes, first of all, the characteristics of a person as a person. Individuality - a person characterized by his socially significant differences from other people; the originality of the psyche and personality of the individual, its uniqueness. S. L. Rubinshtein in his fundamental work “Fundamentals general psychology He devoted only a few lines to individuality, but emphasized an important way of its formation - an individual life path.
The problem of personality in being and in the Russian psychological science of the 20th century was deeply hypertrophied. Among the circumstances that determined the interruption and lag in the development of Marxist social psychology in our country, a significant factor was the atmosphere of administration and decreeing that prevailed in social science, which fettered creative initiative, gave rise to dogmatism and fear of dealing with complex, acute issues, which included problems of social psychology.
The main reason was the underestimation of the role of the subjective (human) factor. The point of view about the social determinism of the processes, properties and states of a person was dominant. Therefore, they did not consider it necessary to study specifically socio-psychological phenomena, including personality. The absence of social psychology as a special scientific discipline hampered the development of personal problems as well. But in pedagogical science these problems became more and more important. However, the development of the methodology and theory of general psychology gradually prepared the theoretical foundation for the development of social psychology. Of particular importance were the ideas about the socio-historical determination of mental phenomena, the development of the principles of the unity of consciousness and activity, determinism and the principle of development.
Ideologization manifested itself especially visibly and even defiantly in the study of needs. It turned out that an individual can only be called a person if he expresses the needs of the progressive class and humanity as a whole. The sphere of needs was rigidly hierarchized and more and more “alienated” from a living concrete person towards a generalized and abstract social humanity.
The distance gradually erected between the real person and the ideologically assembled model of the Soviet personality was insurmountable. There was an unequivocal feeling that to be a person means in no case to belong to oneself, not to express one’s interests, needs, one’s “I”, i.e. its subjectivity. The priority of socially significant moral values and moral needs of a higher order was declared: moral, aesthetic, moral.
The interpretation of personality within the framework of the psychology of relationships persisted for a very long time, although it was one of the initial stages in the study of personality in Russia. It took a search for the reality behind the concept of "public relations". They have been found, named and identified.
After a surge of interest in the problem of character in the psychology of the 1950s and 1960s, this problem was undeservedly forgotten and little attracted the attention of not only theorists, but also practitioners. However, the experience of personality research, accumulated in the study of the psychology of relationships, psychological attitude, problems of character and abilities, explicated the desire to create a general psychological theory of personality, which was especially visibly manifested in the discussion on the problem of attitude, held in July 1955. Perhaps for the first time in the course of this discussion, the question of personality theory received such publicity and acquired the status of the most urgent and urgent task of psychology of that period.
The discussion was attended by the most prominent representatives psychological science: P.K. Anokhin, B.G. Ananiev, B.M. Teplov, I.T. Bzhalava, A.S. Prangishvili, R.G. Notadze, A.N. Leontiev, Z.I. Khudzhava, A.N. Sokolov, P.A. Rudik, D.B. Elkonin, V.N. Myasishchev, V.N. Kolbanovsky, M.N. Mazmanyan and many others.
B.G. Ananiev, who spoke in this discussion, said that the field of personality psychology in its state of the art represents a very vague formation in the structure of our science. His speech sounded like a statement of program tasks relating to the psychology of personality. He pointed out that such a situation with the development of a theory of personality could not be tolerated any longer, since it primarily affected the theory and practice of education, which could not rely on a serious and rigorous psychological theory of personality. Therefore, B.G. Ananiev proposed to recognize that the discussion on issues of attitude is only the beginning of a discussion on the problem of personality.
In this regard, he considered it necessary to draw a conclusion about a change in the existing situation, when one or another concept universalizes a certain phenomenon, instead of contributing to the creation of systems of new knowledge in the psychology of personality. And then he put forward a proposal to develop a broader scientific discussion, but not on the problem of attitude psychology, but on personality psychology as a whole, without excluding a single concept of modern psychological theory.
It follows from the materials of the discussion that the concept of attitude was put forward and defended, first of all, as a general principle for explaining the structure of personality and human activity. This was evidenced by numerous definitions of attitude as a "dynamic state of readiness for activity", which determines "the orientation of the personality and the orientation of activity", "preparedness of the subject for a certain activity". Thus, in the psychology of the mid-60s, the idea of attitude was put forward as a universal general psychological principle, which should be the basis for explaining all mental phenomena observed in a person, including personality. However, this position was not fully accepted and the concept of attitude did not receive the rank of the central fundamental concept of psychology.
Paradoxically, when analyzing the works on personality psychology of that time, one has to state that the research positions of such authors as V.M. Bekhterev, P.P. Blonsky, A.I. Nechaev, A.F. Lazursky, who successfully developed the theory of personality and applied experiment and observation in its study in the early 1920s, were not only not continued by subsequent generations of scientists, but were completely forgotten. There was a feeling of a lack of traditions and experience in the study of a person as a person, although the personal problem itself gradually moved to the front flank, crowding out cognitive processes, the physiology of higher nervous activity and developmental problems of the psyche.
The research materials of B.G. Ananyeva, L.I. Bozovic, K.K. Platonova, D.B. Elkonina, T.V. Dragunova.
So, for example, in the works of B.G. Ananiev, the question of the dynamic nature of personality relations was raised, a provision was developed on the dynamism of the structure and its components. It was he who deployed the static model of personality in the dynamics of the life path. He made a radical transition from the question of the structuring of mental elements in the personality to the question of the organization by the personality of its systemic relations with the world. However, an attempt to implement systems approach in the study of personality came into conflict with the static, structural way of analyzing life fragments in the social psychology of those years.
The laws of social, historical-class development were considered as the driving force of the formation and development of the personality in the works of B.G. Ananiev. “Of these laws,” writes B.G. Ananiev, - and not from the inner life of the personality itself, the sources of the formation of personal properties, its originality, should be derived. And then we read that “the activity of the individual, the entire process of his life, including the spiritual one, has a social, historical, class character. Human consciousness reflects this concrete, social, historical-class existence of people. Thus, in the typical circumstances of a particular class-historical environment, the typical characters of the era are formed. He stated that a person is formed under the directed influence of society, that "this is a social individual and, therefore, the subject of labor, communication and knowledge."
The mental development of a person was considered by him in the context of his development as an individual, as a person and as a subject of activity. Its main idea is a comprehensive, generalized study of a person, synthesizing knowledge obtained in psychology, physiology, pedagogy, biophysics, cybernetics, that is, in psychological and pedagogical, natural and technical sciences. The idea of integrating knowledge about a person permeated his main works: “Man as an object of knowledge” (1968), “On the problems of modern human knowledge” (1977), “On a person as an object and subject of education” (1965). B.G. Ananiev represented himself in psychology precisely as the author of versatile ideas of human knowledge, their comprehensive solution, integration and synthesis.
He saw the task of pedagogical anthropology in solving the problems of the formation of a person as an individual, personality and individuality. He believed that the integrity or fragmentation of the human personality is determined by class ideology, its significance for the historical process. Following V.N. Myasishchev, B.G. Ananiev argues that each character trait represents a certain relationship of the individual to the surrounding reality, to the living conditions of its development. He believed that not every attitude becomes a character trait, but only an essential, rooted one. He was inclined to assert that “in the process of personality development, the real relationship of a person to reality is always interconnected and interdependent. This interrelation of the real, practical relations of a person to society, work, other people, to himself is reflected in the correlation of character traits with each other.
Directions of research on character problems in B.G. Ananiev and V.N. Myasishchev match. Both of them singled out from the totality of personality relations those forms of relations that are character-forming. These included: attitudes towards society, ideology, work, other people, and oneself. Apparently, they both identified character traits with personality traits. Just like V.N. Myasishchev, in the concept of personality B.G. Ananiev there is no clear distinction between personality and character.
In the concept of B.G. Ananiev, the role of one of the main factors was given to human activity. Considering that the individual mental development of a person is socially determined, he at the same time emphasized that a person becomes a subject through his own activity. And therefore these two concepts "subject" and "activity" he considered inseparable from each other.
From this it is clear why such fundamental importance was attached to those types of activity in which the properties of a person as a subject are formed. A classification of the main activities was developed. The game, learning and work were given the status of leading ones and they began to be considered as fundamental conditions. mental development person. B. G. Ananiev considered the individual consciousness of a person to be the result of cognition, communication and labor and their various convergences.
An analysis of the historical paths and patterns of formation of the systems of human sciences allowed B. G. Ananiev to determine the position of psychology in this system. Assessing the importance of B.G. Anan'eva, A.A. Bodalev, B.F. Lomov and others pointed out that he "created a general picture of a person in all his manifestations." The historical mission of psychology as an integrator of all spheres of human knowledge and as the main means of building general theory, reflected in final works B.G. Ananiev "Man as an object of knowledge", "On the problems of modern human knowledge", who proposed a classification of problems related to the study of man. These are the problems of anthropogenesis, racial genesis, racial science, historical phylogeny and somatic organization of man.
In the works of B.G. Ananiev, a detailed description of the concepts of "individual", "personality", "subject of activity" is given. He referred to the individual properties of a person as age-sex (stages of ontogenetic evolution and sexual dimorphism) and individual-typical properties (constitutional features, neurodynamic properties of the brain, features of the functional geometry of the cerebral hemispheres). The highest integration of these properties is represented in temperament and character.
B.G. Ananiev stated that in a number of studies “it has been established that in any of the factors that determine the structure of personality, correlation pleiades are found, complex branching chains of connections between relationships and personality traits, intellectual and other mental functions, somatic and neurodynamic characteristics of a person .. The defining and leading principle in this structure, the dominant structural units of the personality are social qualities formed on the basis of status, social functions and experience of a person's actual activity.
He introduced status, roles and value orientations into the characterization of personality. According to B.G. Ananiev, these personal characteristics determine the characteristics of behavior motivation. They are characterized in his classification as secondary personality traits. Integrates personality traits character. Conclusion B.G. Ananyeva: personality traits develop throughout the life of a person in society, creating his biography.
Starting with the works of B.G. Ananiev, the characterization of a person as a subject of activity becomes fundamental. The integrity of individual development is ensured by the formation of individuality - the highest synthesis of various properties. This problem goes through all stages of his scientific work, making up the specifics of that scientific direction, which is called the "school" of B.G. Ananiev.
He showed the structure, multifactorial development, heterochrony (unevenness) of the phases of development, considered the manifestations and internal contradictions of ontogenetic evolution. The most valuable was that B.G. Ananiev revealed heterochrony not only on the example of individual properties, but extended this principle to the study of personality formation. He emphasized that the internal inconsistency of the development of the personality, manifested in the heterochrony of the change in its social functions, roles and states, is a factor that enhances the inconsistency of ontogenetic evolution.
B.G. Ananiev believed that the individual variability of the properties of a person as a person is determined by the interaction of the main components of the status (economic, legal, family, school, etc.), the change of roles and systems of relations in teams (macro- and microgroups), in the general social development of a person. According to the nature of this interaction, the development of individual personality traits occurs unevenly and at each individual moment - heterochronously. The fundamental foundations of modern human knowledge were synthesized by B.G. Ananiev from two giant constellations scientific disciplines: the science of Homo sapiens and the sciences of humanity.
School B.G. Ananyeva also faced another difficulty. The analysis of the life path of a person was based on the understanding of it as an individual history. However, the periodization of life, the typology of life structures and forms of activity (communication, cognition, activity), undertaken in real study, led in fact to the idea of a typical history, a typical life path, a periodization of the life of any, any personality. B.G. Ananiev failed to realize his idea of individualization in the theory of the life path because the personality was not considered by him as a subject of life activity, that is, the periodization of life was not associated with the activity of the personality itself, which creates its own life syntheses, forms its own life line. At the same time, it was recognized that the concept of B.G. Ananiev was a necessary prerequisite for the subsequent solution of the issue of typical and individual.
Later, the question of the typical and the individual in the personality became even more acute, expressed in the formulation of the problem of understanding the relationship of the personality with the objective characteristics of life activity. Establishing a factor correspondence of certain stages, events or circumstances of life with certain features or personality traits no longer satisfied personality researchers. The need to disclose causation. The personality began to be considered not only as dependent on the totality of external circumstances, but also as actively transforming them, as forming, within certain limits, the position and line of its life.
Gradually, the activity of the individual began to be determined by the ability to transform the totality of circumstances, direct the course of life, and form a life position. By the nature of the activity, they began to draw conclusions about the ability of the individual to transform events in the right direction. It was already a dynamic approach to personality. According to this approach, the system of personal relations determines the system of internal tendencies aimed at transforming or changing the effect of external conditions of life, which should be considered not statically, but as objectively affecting or hindering the activity of the individual.
The introduction of the category of the subject of activity turned out to be very productive: it helped to reveal the way a person organizes life. This meant that simultaneously with the structuring of life, its periodization, which is typical for all people (way of life, etc.), the way of organizing (managing, directing, predicting, etc.) life by the personality itself began to be taken into account. True, it was taken into account and stipulated that the organization of life by a person occurs simultaneously with the regulation both on the part of society and on the basis of self-regulation. Consequently, the following were taken into account: regulation of the individual by society, self-regulation by the individual of his life, regulation of society by the individual.
Further, the task of constructing a general psychological typology of personality was formulated unambiguously and definitely. It became obvious that the category of subjectivity reveals the personality not only individually, but also typologically. Levels of personality activity, i.e. measure of subjectivity were chosen as typological criteria. Activity was given the status of typology.
The typology of personalities turned out to be derived from those models of life organization that they chose. The construction of a typology through the category of the subject of life activity revealed an area of study where the interests of general and social psychology directly intersected. The social and general psychology of the individual has set the task of jointly explaining how the individual reflects and expresses and implements social trends in personal and social life. The nature of the coincidence of external and internal tendencies (harmonious, contradictory, torn, disunited) revealed the real driving forces of the life of the individual.
Concepts of personality B.G. Ananiev, V.N. Myasishchev and V.S. Merlin has long been recognized as the leader. The same can be said about the significance of the studies conducted in the schools of B.M. Teplova, V.D. Nebylitsyna, V.S. Merlin, who collected a large amount of experimental material, which is the basis for understanding the individual typological characteristics of the personality.
To date, the number of personality definitions has noticeably increased, having their own specific shades, introduced by each new researcher. As a result, it became clear that the personality was considered by different authors from positions that often contradict each other, i.e. Personality as a psychological phenomenon was studied on the basis of various assumptions that provided unequal opportunities to predict, understand and develop it.
A comparison of the theoretical and empirical materials discussed in this article makes it possible to conclude that none of the definitions and none of the concepts of this period gave an exhaustive idea of the personality and its essential characteristics, since each of the authors covered only its particular features. However, the variety of definitions and approaches to personality that has appeared has nevertheless made it possible to expand and deepen its understanding. Clearly define the philosophical-sociological, natural-science, experimental, socio-psychological and general psychological approaches to the study of personality.
Bibliography:
Abulkhanova-Slavskaya K.A. Dialectics human life.- M., 1977.
Abulkhanova-Slavskaya KL. About the subject mental activity.- M., 1980.
Abulkhanova-Slavskaya KL. Activity and psychology of personality. - M., 1980.
Abulkhanova-Slavskaya K.A. On the ways of constructing a typology of personality // Psychological journal. 1983. V.4. No. 1. P.14-29.
Ananiev B.G. Selected psychological works: In 2 volumes. M .: Pedagogy, 1980.V.1 - 230 s; T.2.
Ananiev B.G. Man as an object of knowledge. L.: Publishing House of Leningrad State University, 1968.
Ananiev B.G. Scientist, teacher, organizer of science // Questions of psychology. 1967. No. 6. S. 171-174.
Kotova I.B., Nedbaeva S.V., Nedbaev N.M., Nedbaev D.N. The idea of personality development in Russian psychology // Education, society, law: collection of articles of the international scientific conference. Russia, Moscow, January 28-29, 2016. - Kirov: MTsNIP, 2016. - P. 72-84.
Parygin B.D. Social Psychology like science. L.: Lenizdat, 1967.
Psychological practices in Russian education: teaching, technology, audit: collective monograph / ed. S.V. Nedbayeva. – Armavir: RIO AGPA, 2011.
Psychological practices in Russian education: personality development technologies: Proceedings of the 2nd International Scientific and Practical Conference / ed. S.V. Nedbayeva. – Armavir, 2010.
Radzikhovsky L.A., Fan Min Hak. Significance of the works of L.S. Vygotsky for the development of Soviet psychology // Vestn. Moscow State University. Ser. Psychology. 1977. No. 3.
Roshchin S.K. Political psychology // Psychological journal. 1980. Vol.1. No. 1. C 141-156.
The specificity of Ananiev's approach to personality consisted, as already noted, in its inclusion in a broad anthropological context, the context of human knowledge. Therefore, his merit is associated primarily with the courage to include psychology in the system of human sciences, with the return of psychology to a whole complex of connections that were not taken into account before in the analysis of personality. It can be said that if Ananiev notes as Rubinstein's merit the definition of the integrative essence of personality developed by him, then Ananiev's merit was the inclusion of personality in the integral system of human knowledge. Here, in unity, are the anthropological, historical, ontogenetic, age, and biographical aspects of the consideration of the problem of personality. He turns his critical pathos, quite rightly, against the tendency of Russian psychologists, characteristic of the 1950s and 1960s, to focus (and confine themselves) around the problems of personality structure, “abstracted from the real temporal flow of its life cycle.” At the same time, it should be noted that with unusual scrupulousness he analyzed almost all the views of domestic psychologists on the structure of personality. He, being one of the initiators of the most important symposium on the problem of personality, accepted Active participation in the discussion about its structure. Thus, the historical, biographical and other dimensions in his concept appear as a temporary dimension of personality. There is no doubt that the priority of introducing the problem of the life path into domestic theory Personality belongs to Rubinshtein (1935), but Ananiev’s detailed development of the problems of the “life cycle of a person”, its various periodizations, develops into a generalized formulation of the problem of time in the psychology of personality. Ananiev made a detailed critical analysis of the concept of the life path of S. Buhler and, on this basis, showed that life corresponds to the hierarchical principle. Wanting to emphasize this circumstance, Ananiev develops an understanding of individuality precisely as the achievement by a person of a higher level of development of his essence and his whole life. However, unlike Rubinstein, Ananiev associates the concept of the subject not with way of life but with activity, communication, knowledge.
Unlike most domestic psychologists, Ananiev considers the social determination of personality not in the abstract (social relations were interpreted in this way by both Rubinstein and Leontiev), but from the sociological positions that had already been formed by that time. That is why, like many others, he defines a person as a social individual, concretizes this definition through the social situations of its development, status, lifestyle, socio-psychological and other conditions, up to demographic problems. He rightly notes that in this perspective, the individual acts as an object of social development. In this case, the quality of the subject coincides with the actual psychological definition of personality as a system of relationships, attitudes, motives, values, etc. But, in turn, for psychological science, personality is also an object (subject) of knowledge. In addition, after conducting a proper sociological analysis of the contradictions capitalist society, Ananiev comes to the conclusion that they lead to a certain “separation” of the personality from the properties of the subject, i.e., the expansion of the human structure (let us add in a generalized way, due to the action of alienation). But this is already a different basis for determining the essence of the subject, associated with the possibility-impossibility of realizing one's creative essence in certain events, situations, in concrete historical (truly capitalist) relations. Thus, Ananiev lacks an understanding of the subject as the subject of the life path, which was proposed by Rubinstein almost in the same fifties. This understanding involves the disclosure of the dependence of the life path on the personality itself. In this case, we are not talking about a biographical approach, which includes individual differences in the life path (as variations) in a single periodization of life, but about the subjective approach itself, in which essential characteristics way of life of the individual.
However, Ananiev, having proposed not a traditionally dynamic, but a historical, biographical understanding of the time of life, revealed the most important characteristics from the point of view of personality development - the start, the climax of the highest achievements in the chosen activity and the finish, showed the dependence of the culmination on the moment of start, and the start on the history of education personality. Thus, the main idea of S. Buhler, who sought to show life as not an accidental, unique fate of a person, but a natural history, was concretized. But at the same time, he connected these phases, mainly, with the subject of activity (and not the life path as a whole), believing that “it is possible to determine the main moments of the formation, stabilization and finish of a personality only by comparing shifts in many parameters. social development of a person: civil status, economic status, marital status, combination, consolidation or separation of social functions (roles, the nature of values and their reassessment in certain historical circumstances), a change in the development and communication environment, conflict situations and solving life problems, the implementation or failure of a life plan , success or failure - triumph or defeat in the struggle. As noted, in our opinion, Ananiev’s desire to concretize the concept of the human life cycle in the categories of sociology as the most progressive trend at that time, and thereby overcome the abstractness of the principle of social determination of the personality, express this determination in categories close to the personality, especially affects here. He supplements the typification inherent in the sociological approach with individualization. However, by individualization in this case, he means. ontogenetic evolution: “a very important direction of the influence of a person’s life path (biography) on his ontogenetic evolution is the ever-increasing individualization of this evolution.” Thus, in our opinion, in Ananiev's concept, the relationship between the life path 1) as a biography, that is, the actual individual history, life path (or cycle) 2) as a socially typical process that includes stages common to all people, and 3) the ontogenetic process of human evolution.
Very significant, as noted, is the role of Ananiev in the discussion on the problem of personality structure, which turned out to be the main one by the end of the sixties and became the main subject of discussion at the 1969 symposium on personality. When presenting the views on the personality of representatives of the Georgian school, we did not specifically dwell on the position of V.T. Norakidze, since it was Ananiev who noted his contribution to the problem of personality structure on the basis of empirical studies of the role of a fixed attitude in character formation. Ananiev compares the views on the problem of personality structure of A.G. Kovalev, V.N. Myasishchev, K.K. Platonov and S.L. Rubinshtein, revealing their differences, contradictions and commonality. "Conflicting views reflect the objective complexity of mutual transitions between the integration and differentiation of the phenomena of personality development."
Based on Rubinstein’s idea that the principle of integration is the main one for the development of a personality, Ananiev comes to the conclusion that “development really is an integration that grows in scale and levels - the formation of large “blocks”, systems or structures, the synthesis of which at a certain moment of a person’s life acts as the most general structure of his personality” (ibid.). But at the same time, in his opinion, the development of the personality is also “an ever-increasing differentiation of its psycho-physiological functions, processes, states and personal properties, commensurate with progressive integration” (ibid.), that is, there are convergent and divergent relationships between differentiation and integration.
It is essential that Ananiev imperceptibly moves from the question of the structure of the personality (even if, according to Platonov, functional) to the question of the development of the personality and thereby goes into a completely different plane. We believe that the discussion on the structure of the personality was not fruitful precisely because in all points of view (except for Myasishchev, as we will see below), the structure itself was considered as an abstraction of the intra-individual organization of the personality. Without emphasizing the problem of the relationship between intra- and inter-individual, Ananiev, nevertheless, actually takes the discussion beyond the framework of the question of the structure of the intra-individual. The exclusivity and advantage of Myasishchev's concept also consisted in the fact that the concept of "relationship", on the basis of which he defined personality, was an inextricable link between intra- and interindividual. In Myasishchev's concept, a person is immediately defined as a system, and not just a structure, moreover, carrying not only integrating and differentiating tendencies, which Ananiev drew attention to, but integrating and disintegrating (i.e., contradictory) tendencies.
A.G. Kovalev also drew attention to the presence of internal contradictions, linking them with the uneven development of individual personality structures - between claims and objective possibilities, between sensory and logical in the process of reflection (feeling and reason), between natural data and acquired personality traits. The limitations of Ananiev's understanding of the personality manifested itself, in our opinion, in the fact that he did not pay attention to this aspect of the concepts of Kovalev and Myasishchev, who sought to identify contradictions in the personality organization (although he noted the importance of analyzing the phenomena of panic, stress, frustration, life conflicts). Having undertaken grandiose empirical studies of the relationship between different mental properties and neoplasms, he basically found himself within the framework of the correlation principle. (Although he himself theoretically noted that the structure of the personality is built according to two subordination (or hierarchical) and coordination principles).
Summarizing, we can say that the concept of Ananyev's personality, due to his complex approach to science, as a whole turned out to be the most multifaceted, multifaceted, which made it possible to combine many private or incomparable concepts. He worked out the conceptual aspect of the personality problem in the continuum of the concepts “subject”, “personality”, “individual”, “individuality”. The personality appeared both as included in society, and as developing in the ontogenetic cycle and life path, and as a contemporary of its era, etc. Thanks to this, Ananiev's concept of personality has not lost its heuristic value to this day.
The method of introducing B.G. Ananiev into the psychology of the category "man". His positions are analyzed in comparison with the theories of domestic and foreign scientists - L.S. Vygotsky, S.L. Rubinstein, E.A. Klimov, A. Adler, S. Buhler, K. Jung. E. Fromm, E. Erickson, X. Tome. It is shown how Ananyev overcomes the ideological limitations and patterns of his time. The problem of stages of development of individuality is posed. A hypothesis is put forward that the study of man on the scale of all mankind and the universe indicates the existence of his "summit" hypostasis - "universality" or "transcendence".
ABOUT scientific creativity B.G. Ananiev wrote a lot of works. Therefore, when analyzing his views, repetitions are inevitable. But considering them from non-traditional positions allows us to give them a slightly different interpretation.
B.G. Ananiev - the creator of a special direction in domestic psychology, which corresponds to the trends in the development of world psychological thought. The further development of this direction presupposes a clear definition of its main idea and, at the same time, the identification of the problematic and debatable nature of a number of provisions.
An analysis of the scientist's work convinces us that his concept turned out to be incomplete in its very significant part. Incompleteness is a characteristic feature of most psychological theories, but Ananiev has only begun to build some of the upper floors of his theoretical construction. It is not for nothing that he writes "about the approaches to the theory of individuality" and begins to go beyond studies of a concrete historical life path into wider and more open spaces of human life. But here the scientist's creative thought ends tragically. Of course, one cannot fail to note the fact that the socio-historical conditions in which the scientific activity Ananiev, imposed certain restrictions on his decision of certain issues. He managed to overcome some of the limitations.
The originality of Ananiev's concept comes out more clearly when compared with the personological systems that exist in world psychological science. However, these lines of analysis are not the main ones. Our main task is to explicate the fundamental contribution that Ananiev made to Russian psychology, namely: for the first time in our science he created a theoretical and experimental psychological doctrine about a human. He introduced the category "man" into the system of psychological concepts, included man in the subject of psychology. The articles written about him present and develop important aspects of the problems of the psychophysiological functions of the individual, mental processes, personality, subject of activity, the life path of a person and his development. But all these studies are subordinated to one thing - the study of a person in all his integrity, formed by a variety of ways of being - somatic-organic, neurodynamic, psycho-physiological, psychological, subject-activity, personal, uniquely individual. These ways of being are studied in dynamics, in development, in vital connections with each other.
In most foreign psychological concepts, which we call "theories of personality", the category of personality is not often encountered, the term "person" is mainly used. And this is understandable, since these theories are built on the basis of psychotherapeutic practice. A person comes to a psychotherapist in the fullness of his life manifestations, with impaired psychomotor, neurovegetative symptoms, etc. But he complains about broken relationships with loved ones, difficult life problems. For a psychotherapist, violations of vegetative and psychophysiological processes are only symptoms of neurosis. His task is to eliminate the cause of the symptoms; he is not interested in the psychophysical foundations of a healthy person.
In our country, psychotherapy has not received proper development. And the traditions of a comprehensive study of a person, not only in pathology, but also in the norm, were laid back in the 20s at the Leningrad Psychoneurological Institute. There V.M. Bekhterev and N.M. Shchelovanov organized a clinic - a laboratory of early childhood. It developed and applied, as Ananiev writes, a comprehensive method of long-term study of the same children throughout the entire period of early childhood. As early as 1928, the results of research were published. In the same year, N.N. Rybnikov first expressed ideas about the need to create developmental psychology- a period of maturity or adulthood. He proposed to call the new discipline "acmeology".
The theoretical and experimental development of Ananiev's fundamental position on the impact of the socio-historical process not only on the personal characteristics of a person, but also on his individual-organismal characteristics was influenced by the works of P.F. Lesgaft, who, as Ananiev emphasizes, discovered a significant dependence of changes in the structure and dynamics of the human body on economic conditions and the labor process. Summarizing the positions of Lesgaft, he writes that a person always acts as an integral organism and a social individual at the same time. The origins of Ananiev's teachings about the life path of a person and the successive emergence of various character traits in the process of life were studies conducted by a group of scientists from Leningrad in 1932-1936. Unfortunately, the manuscripts in which the results of such unique studies were presented, according to Boris Gerasimovich, perished during the blockade of Leningrad. Only two books by Ananiev "Psychology pedagogical assessment" (1935) and "Character education of the schoolboy" (1941).
Analyzing the state of world psychological science, Ananiev expresses dissatisfaction with the fact that new trends emerging in the 20th century are not guided by the principle of human integrity and explore its different levels without their connection with each other. Thus, ontogenetics of a person, which studies him as an individual, conducts research in parallel with personalistics, which analyzes a person as a person. At the same time, theories appear in foreign psychology, the creators of which seek to study the dynamics and unity of different "systems" of a person. At the Vienna Psychological Institute, S. Buhler, having first begun to develop the problem of the intellectual development of children, then proceeded to fulfill a grandiose plan - to study the development of a person throughout his life. In 1933, her well-known book The Course of Human Life as a Psychological Problem was published. In it, Buhler identifies three aspects of the study of the human life cycle - biological and biographical; history of experiences and changes inner world; the history of creativity as the objectification of consciousness. However, she considers the evolution of a multifaceted human life in isolation from the transformation of socio-historical conditions and does not reveal the relationship between the phases of different directions of human development, which Ananiev notes.
At the turn of the 1930s, P. Janet's lectures on various stages of personality development began to be published in Paris. His analysis begins with the "bodily personality", on the basis of which the personality is gradually formed as a socio-historical phenomenon. Janet's historical and evolutionary approach to the personality, which includes the stages of the psychophysiological order in the process of its formation, impresses Ananiev. Defining the 30s as a period of self-determination of Soviet psychology, he draws attention to the concept of L.S. Vygotsky and relies on his position on the existence of two series of human development - "natural" and "cultural". For Ananiev, the natural series is the process of maturation, the growth of a person as an individual (a whole organism). At the same time, in the natural series, he distinguishes two of its components, which differ from each other according to the criterion of different susceptibility to social influences. Thus, the development of intellectual processes is always mediated by specific environmental conditions and upbringing. And only elementary mental functions (natural rhythm, personal tempo, direct imprinting, etc.) are genetically determined. However, the rapid interweaving of these components allows us to speak, according to Ananyev, of the multifactorial conditioning of ontogenetic human evolution.
In the scientific context indicated above, Ananiev begins to introduce into the subject of human psychology in all its integrity. However, it should be said right away that Ananiev's characteristic way of including the category "man" in the system of psychological concepts has significant limitations. This method is necessary, but not sufficient for the full disclosure of the scale of human existence in the world. The methodological foundations of a broader approach will be indicated in the conclusion as prospects for the development of the category "man" in psychology.
So, in Ananiev's theory, a person is studied as a polysystemic entity in which the scientist identifies different hypostases. The first of these is defined as an individual or a holistic organism. The individual properties of a person appear in the form of a complex set of different - primary and secondary properties. The primary ones include somatic, neurodynamic, constitutional, and sexual characteristics. The connections that arise between them in the course of life lead to the appearance of secondary individual properties - sensorimotor organization, temperament, the structure of organic needs, as well as inclinations. Tracing their further integration, Ananiev comes to the conclusion that the temperament and structure of organic needs form the natural foundations of the nature and motivation of human behavior. There are, however, reasons to doubt that simple organic needs can become a source of higher spiritual, moral, aesthetic needs and motives of the individual. Isn't it more logical to believe that in the "natural series" of a person there are protoforms of his highest aspirations, which manifest themselves in a person entering life as his attraction to affection, tenderness, love. Meanwhile, our domestic psychology (including children's) paid the main attention to the cognitive sphere of man. Only in the latest works of A.V. Zaporozhets and Ya.3. Neverovich the problem of emotions in children has received a certain development. The mental life of a person is intellectualized to this day. It is not surprising that the predominant attention to intellectual processes also characterizes the theoretical and empirical studies of Ananiev's school. The study of the ways of development of emotions, affects, feelings of a person makes it possible to identify new correlations in the structure of individual properties and reveal their influence on the formation of other forms of human existence.
Highlighting the level of his existence as an individual in the integrity of a person, Ananiev calls the line of his development ontogenetic evolution. In psychology, ontogeny is often understood as only the early period of a person's life. Ananiev abandoned this tradition: the line of ontogenesis permeates the entire life of a person. The researcher must study both early and late ontogenesis, as well as the connections between them. Ontogenesis is associated with the age and sexual evolution of a person.
Already at the level of individual-ontogenetic evolution, the main patterns of all paths of human life are manifested: phasicity, stadiality, cyclicity, periodicity, heterochrony, different times of the appearance of certain processes ("decalage", according to Piaget), the unity of evolution and involution, etc. All these patterns characterize the movement of a person in a new plane of his being - as a person. According to Ananiev, public relations play a decisive role in the formation and development of the individual: economic, political, legal, national, racial, class, professional, etc. The totality of these relations acts for the individual as a system of social expectations, requirements, prescriptions, restrictions, but also as field of possibilities and alternatives.
Consideration of personality as a derivative of the system social relations brings to the fore the fundamental problem of "personality and society", including the question of whether the person represents the main and initial element of society, its independent unit, or is it absorbed by others social formations. Ananiev's solution to this problem reflects the ideology widespread in the past, which downplays the role of the individual in the social system. He writes: "... a personality as a social individual is not a separate (self-regulating) system, is not a single element of society, from the totality of which society is built and with the help of which society functions. Such a structural unit, an "element" of society is not a separate human individual with its relationship to society, and the group, whose mutually responsible ties within it and between other groups, with society as a whole create a collective. It can be assumed that Ananiev's position is explained by the widespread idea that social relations are sharply separated from interpersonal relations. Therefore, Ananiev claims: "It is the communities, and not individuals, that are the subjects of social relations." Of course, social relations have a high degree of generalization. They are crystallized in social institutions, in the laws and regulations of society. But they are implemented interpersonal relationships, in the actions of individuals, subjectivizing social ties and imprinting their unique personality in them. It is in the "social individual", in the self-regulating personality, that the origins of new social relations, radical transformations of society are created. Of course, the implementation of new ideas depends on how deeply they are appropriated by certain communities and become motives for their behavior.
One of the main trends in the development of domestic psychology, clearly expressed in a number of serious theoretical developments, is the emphasis on the importance of increasing individualization for the further evolution of society, the variability of the main elements public system- individual, person. Developing an evolutionary-historical approach to personality, A.G. Asmolov very reasonably proves that it is "manifestations of personality's individuality that mainly reflect the evolution of the system to change and, being pre-adaptive in their evolutionary meaning, provide potential opportunities for new options for the further evolution of this social system" . The statement of the unique place of the individual in society is also contained in the concept that postulates the existence of two ways of the existence of the social - in the form of society and in the form of individual being, a specific person [I]. The specific sociality of the individual in the broad sense of the word is indeed an inexhaustible source of innovation, radical transformation of society. This by no means underestimates the importance of communities and various social groups. In conditions joint activities and communication there is a meeting of people with a unique life experience and an original combination of personality traits. These meetings enhance the uniqueness of each, but, of course, contribute to the accumulation of a common fund of values.
Speaking about the debatability of Ananiev’s provisions, which downplay the importance of an individual autonomous person, an individual form of social being in the life of society, we note that these provisions diverge from the scientist’s conclusions about the important role of personality activity in the transformation of social relations, with his definition of personality as a subject (and object) of historical process. It is from these positions that Ananiev develops the problem of the structure and social functioning of the individual. But first, let's turn to the scientist's ideas about personality development, which also require discussion.
According to Ananiev, the personality begins to develop later than the individual - at the turn of 3 years of age. At this point, his views diverge from the position of E. Erickson, who refers to the period of infancy, ending with the first year of a child's life, the formation of the most fundamental, initial personality neoplasm of a person - his trusting or distrustful attitude to the social world and to himself. Erickson's position is confirmed by empirical research and substantiated by theorists working independently of him (see 6). Grounds for confirming an earlier onset of personality can be found in the works of M. I. Lisina, who discovered the phenomenon of self-consciousness - a clearly personal characteristic - in children as early as the first year of life. Ananiev connects the development of the personality, first of all, with the change of its statuses and roles, i.e. social functions... The rights and obligations defined by them, inclusion in social relations determine the formation of various social qualities in a developing person, integrating the diversity of mental processes and contributing to st personality structure. Ananiev's ideas about the structure of personality are built on the basis of two main provisions: 1) the structure of the personality is gradually formed in the process of its social development and in its fully developed form is the product of a person's entire life path; 2) the intra-individual structure of the personality is closely connected with the inter-individual structure of the social whole to which the person belongs. In accordance with the principle of transition "inter" and "intra" Ananiev repeatedly emphasizes the concrete historical essence of the personality. She is a product of her era and the life of the country. Proceeding from this provision, Ananiev considers the statuses (or position in society), the way of life determined by them, as well as the roles played, to be the fundamental elements of its structure. In addition, in the personal organization, the scientist singles out the subjective, conscious relationship of the individual to society, to the world and to himself, interpenetrating meanings and meanings, motives, moral attitudes. From our point of view, there is reason to believe that the diverse "formative" personality refers to its different structures and even to different levels of human development. Statuses and roles are components of its sociological organization, and in psychological terms they form those levels or parts of the personality that P. Janet called "character", and K. Jung - "persona", i.e. that side of the personality that a person demonstrates to society.
If a person perceives himself only within the narrow framework of status and roles and leads life only within their boundaries, then he impoverishes the possibilities of his development. The loss of position in society, the loss of familiar roles often leads to depersonalization of a person, to the loss of a sense of self-identity. A person must be ready to change his place in society, to master new roles. Fortunately, many people have a need to at least temporarily immerse themselves in such life situations in which their social position loses all meaning. Let us recall the behavior of a number of characters from the film "Peculiarities of the National Hunt", the way of life in groups of climbers, and so on. The structure of consciousness, self-esteem changes in the participants of such groups, the personality appears as new facets. The space of life is expanding. At the same time, one should not underestimate the importance of social requirements for the development of self-determination in an individual, the assignment of certain statuses and roles to himself. In the process of social orientation, a person tries out his abilities, measures tendencies and potencies, and looks for an answer to the question "Who am I?". Developing the doctrine of the identity crisis in the era of youth, E. Erikson shows what difficulties a person faces on the eve of independent life. Overcoming the diffuseness of roles - essential condition transition of the individual to a new stage of development. Ananiev significantly complements the characterization of the period of orientation of the young generation in the public world. The point is that this orientation does not reduce To choice of public functions. As Ananiev writes, the social environment by no means sets many components of the status: they are produced by the person himself in the process of activity(See ; italics mine. - L.A.). Personality, therefore, is not rigidly determined by the structure of society. With her activity, she communicates a special movement to the system of social ties, and in this creation, the contours of her inner world, certain positions begin to be outlined, characterological properties take their origins.
And, further, having outlined the ways of personality development, Ananiev, on a new round of his thoughts, returns to the problem of human development as a whole. In the process of its formation, the personality communicates a specific movement to the individual properties of a person, transforms them, contributing to their connections, which are repeatedly mediated by the social qualities of the personality. As a result, the organization of the personality also includes the structure of the individual in the form of the most general and relevant complexes of organic properties for life and behavior. In turn, individual changes - age and gender - act as factors influencing the fate of the individual. Individual properties determine the originality of the communicative, intellectual, volitional, emotional, reflexive properties that are consistently formed in a person. In their formation, the most important role belongs to another hypostasis of a person - the subject of activity. It is impossible not to point out the difficulties that arise when trying to separate the concepts of "subject" and "personality".
Ananiev believes that the subject is always a person, and a person is a subject, but still the content of these concepts never completely coincides, "Personality" is relevant to social relations, and "subject" - to activity. Within the framework of this concept, there are indeed some grounds for breeding these concepts. So, a person as a person is determined by his belonging to a particular race, nationality, confession. IN labor activity these circumstances are insignificant. And yet, the involvement of a person in a particular religion or nation presupposes his participation in ritual, cult activities. These difficulties were expressed in Ananiev's paradoxical thesis, which emphasizes the most important role of the individual in society: he precedes his concept of man as a subject of activity with the following proposition - the individual is the object and subject of the historical process, the object and subject of social relations, the subject and object of communication, the subject of social behavior - bearer of moral consciousness.
And yet, despite some diffuseness of the concept of the subject, the thorough development of this problem by Ananiev in the 50-60s. XX century was a significant contribution to domestic psychology. In the structure of its methodology, theory, and experimental part, a gap was formed that has not been filled even today: in the categorical system of psychology, for several decades, the concept of activity occupied a central place. But at the same time, activity, as Ananiev emphasizes, joining the positions of V.N. Myasishchev, was studied in isolation from the figure. Meanwhile, the foundations of the subjective approach were laid in Russian psychology by the works of S.L. Rubinstein dating back to the 1940s, but it took almost a quarter of a century before this approach was promoted in the studies of some of his students. These studies organically flow into the movement of world psychological thought. Major psychotherapists and personologists define a person, first of all, as a subject - an initiating, creative principle in interaction with society, life, the world, and oneself.
Adler in individual psychology widely uses the concept of the subject, the subject of life. He even considered his patients as subjects of a positive restructuring of their personalities. The psychotherapist only brings a person to the realization of the need for self-change. Erickson shows how a person gradually creates himself through his choices and begins to enrich, change society and even set a new direction for its historical development. The subjective quality of a person is figuratively expressed by Fromm, defining personality as the unity of marble and sculptor. But these teachings, for the most part, do not ascend from an abstract consideration of a person-subject to his concrete definiteness.
Ananiev, on the other hand, is trying to fill the concept of the subject with psychological content. First of all, he identifies many forms of a person's active attitude to the world - such as play, learning, work, combat and sports activities, knowledge, communication, managing people, amateur performance. The concepts corresponding to them are included in the broadest category - social behavior. The dynamic structure of its subject also corresponds to the dynamics of activity. It distinguishes: the formation of an idea, setting goals, developing programs of behavior and action plans, choosing strategies and tactics, designing a future product of activity, comparing the result obtained with the anticipated one. Necessary conditions for productive activity are intellect, will and abilities. These components connect the structure of the subject with the structure of the personality. Having begun to develop the problem of the subject of activity, Ananiev set many very interesting tasks for psychology. Here are just a few of them. We have to find out the identity psychological structure subjects of different forms of activity. Research in this area will help enrich the understanding of the psychological functioning of the subject of activity. Even more urgent is the problem of human development as a subject and personality in situations of "assistance", practical relationships with other people. Recall the concept of D.B. Elkonin, according to which the changing structure of the active communication of a growing person with the social environment is the general line of his development as a person. A. Bandura drew attention to the high importance for the socio-psychological development of a person of the people around him. Among the most important forms of activity, he included imitative activity and created the concept of learning by observing the actions and results of the actions of other people. Indeed, observation and imitation are the most important forms of human activity throughout his life. The relevance of the problem of imitation as a factor in the formation of a human creator was repeatedly emphasized by B.F. Lomov in professional conversations with psychologists of the IP RAS.
Completing the analysis of the phenomenon of "subject", Ananiev again refers to the principle of human integrity. The life line of a person as a subject significantly affects his ontogenetic evolution, the development of psychophysiological functions (recall the fact of their two-phase development), the improvement of psychomotor skills, the formation of new connections between different properties of the body. In turn, the features of ontogeny affect the fate of the subject of activity.
The principle of integrity reaches its climax when Ananiev singles out the most integrated hypostasis of a person - his individuality.
But individuality is a rather late result of a person's life path. Therefore, it is advisable to first discuss Ananiev's solution to the problem of a person's movement along the "roads" of his life. Features of the approach to this problem of our domestic scientist come out more clearly when comparing his positions with the concepts of foreign psychologists. The concepts of the life path, the leading line of life, life goals and plans occupy an important place in Adler's works. But he leaves aside issues that are the focus of Ananiev's attention. They concern the division of the life path, its event content, and the determination of turning points. The problem of "the course (or movement) of human life" was thoroughly developed in Buhler's works. The question of stadiality was one of the central ones in her theory. She considered the whole life of a person as a sequence of different forms of realization of the individual's inherent desire for self-fulfillment. Buhler associated the beginning of a person's own life path with the moment of his self-realization through productive activity. In her concept, the movement of a person's life appears as determined by the possibilities inherent in it, dynamic tendencies, and abilities. Ananiev highly appreciated Buhler's multidimensional approach to the psychological evolution of personality. He was especially attracted by the study of the biological and biographical aspect of the life path. In her concept, however, the principle of the socio-historical conditionality of the life of the individual was not implemented.
Ananiev, on the other hand, emphasized that a person, while fulfilling his life path, fundamentally enters himself into the socio-historical space of his era, the life of the country. For him, historical time is "a factor of paramount importance for the individual development of a person. All events of this development (biographical dates) are located relative to the measurement system of historical time" . Nowadays, such provisions are formulated by many representatives of world psychological thought as conclusions from large-scale empirical studies and form the basis of their theories. Ananiev's thesis that only the latest psychology reveals a deep penetration of historical time into internal mechanisms individual psychological development, forms one of the important trends in the progressive movement of modern psychological theory. The determination of the emergence of new personality structures, changes in its organization as a result of a person entering new "social waters", is empirically shown in genetic theory Erickson's personality. But this scientist investigated the influence of changes only in the most general conditions of human existence on the sequence of personality neoplasms.
In contrast to him, the modern German psychologist H. Thomé, who combined the longitudinal and psychobiographical methods, showed on a vast empirical basis how concrete historical changes in the life of society are refracted in the experiences and behavior of people. Extremely filled with personal events, indelible impressions turned out to be the life of people in critical periods of crisis - during the first and second world wars, during the years when the Nazis came to power, during economic crisis and the "economic miracle". In the latest research, carried out under the guidance of H. Thome and W. Lehr, and concerning the representation of the fact of the unification of Germany in the mentality of the inhabitants of the GDR, Ananiev's conclusion about the ambiguous influence of historical events on people's consciousness receives an interesting concretization. It turned out that many citizens of the GDR had an idea of the inhabitants of the FRG as people with a sense of superiority, communication with whom would be difficult. For some groups of representatives of the eastern regions, the social "turn" (Wende) gave rise to new "themes" of being, i.e. a new direction of life, other value orientations; others have changed the structure of "themes". There were also those for whom the "turn" was not included in the number of significant events. Studies of the consciousness of people in our crisis society are also beginning to be carried out by domestic psychologists.
Ananiev", analyzing the life path, highlights in it periods of preparation, start, stabilization, first climax (or "peak"), temporary decline, second climax (or rise), followed by intensification of involutionary processes and finish. The scientist warns that the problem stages of the life path is very difficult due to the multidimensionality of human life, and that the stages he singled out are more characteristic of the fate of the subject of activity.But at the same time, changes in statuses and roles, the emergence of new value orientations, the acquisition of new ideals by a person, the rethinking of subjective attitudes towards the world, etc. Ananiev’s words are well known that it is possible to determine the moments of a change in stages only by comparing shifts in many parameters of a person’s social development - civil status, economic status, marital status, consistency or disunity of social functions, the implementation or failure of life plans etc. But tr The psychological deciphering of each of the stages, especially the "preparatory" one, also turns out to be useful. As Ananiev points out, the function of preparation is performed by the institutions of education and upbringing. They determine the goals of forming in a person valuable properties for society and the individual, helping him to become the subject of social behavior and professional activity. From these positions, Ananiev fully subscribes to the teachings of A.S. Makarenko on the need for social design of personality. Since the personality, as Ananiev writes, is always concretely historical and acts as a product of its era and the life of the country, then "designing" should be limited to the framework of a specific period in the life of society. However, Ananiev's thought managed to rise above the patterns of pedagogy and ideology of that time. The position put forward by him is very relevant for our days. It says that it is necessary to prepare people of the future who would have a very plastic organization, who would be ready for changes in the world, for an active creative transformation of reality. This provision, however, is not sufficient to determine the main content of the early period of a person's life. Preparation for an independent life, which is carried out by the institutions of education and upbringing, is only a part of those unusual life worlds in which children and adolescents acquire their unique experience.
Many psychologists rightly emphasize that there are no adequate concepts in science to designate personality neoplasms in the early stages of life, so they resort to terms borrowed from the psychology of adulthood. But it's not so much about personality traits or character. The challenge is to identify peculiar structure of the life worlds of growing people. In their "universe" the smallest facets of the environment are filled with equally high significance. Therefore, the amazing detail of perception does not interfere with seeing the world physiognomically, holistically. How does the image of the world change in a person at different stages of life? This problem is essentially indicated by Ananiev. Describing the inner world of a person, he singles out "plots", "portraits", "landscapes", etc. in it. In their content, the surrounding reality is presented as it is experienced by the subject. The composition of the image of the world also includes a "subjective picture of the life path." Nowadays, domestic psychologists are beginning to develop the problem of the "image of the world" in a very meaningful way. It is part of the larger problematic of the "life worlds" of people who are on different levels their personal development, in different phases of the life cycle. Very interesting are the works that reveal the originality of the images of the world among representatives of different professions (E.A. Klimov).
Describing the path of life, Ananiev seeks to highlight some of its integral qualities, determined by the stable properties of the subject of individual history. Such properties include talent - the unity of abilities and will. Therefore, there is reason to talk about the measure of talent in the life path (see also). Of course, it remains to single out the criteria for the talent of life, to determine the relationship of talent with the degree of satisfaction with it. It remains to be seen how the ideas about the talent of life correlate with Fromm's teaching on the art of living. The contribution to the problem of identifying the integral qualities of life was made by K.A. Abulkhanova. As the most important characteristic of a life strategy, she highlights the measure of her ethics.
Ananiev with his employees reveals not only general patterns psychological development of a person throughout life. Among the few domestic psychologists, he carried out a study of the periods of adulthood and old age. Despite the fact that many studies related to the dynamics cognitive processes, are associated with a certain age, Ananyev's adulthood appears rather as a period of a person's socio-psychological maturity. At this stage, "history is not only a background and canvas for biography patterns, but also the main partner in a person's life drama" . The "sense of history" emerging in a person determines how much the events of social life change the inner world and social behavior of a person. The stage of adulthood is the time of the most intensive development moral and aesthetic feelings. High activity and productive activity distinguishing this period resist involutionary changes. Ananiev's school has become a center of study final stage life path. In gerontopsychological studies B.G. Ananiev. M.D. Alexandrova and their students identified the phases of gerontogenesis, revealed the dynamics of creative productivity in later years, and carried out an individual approach to the aging process. Psychologists substantiate an optimistic view of the later period of life. Even having reached the finish line, a person, according to Ananiev, by no means exhausts his capabilities. This position coincides with the provisions of Fromm, who, emphasizing the limitlessness of the potentialities of personality development, writes: "A person dies before he has time to be fully born." Fromm sees in this fact the tragedy of human existence. But wouldn't it be more tragic for a person to realize his complete exhaustion? Incompleteness is rather a happy fate of the individual, a condition for its continuation in the next generations.
According to Ananiev, the safety of the individual in later years depends on the level of her social activity. If a person has not lost a living connection with modernity, continues to perform some social functions, then his personality does not deform. In our time, Ananyev's position is of particular importance that even in the conditions of social cataclysms, a person in his later years is the subject of his relations with the world and can find new ways to be included in the life of society. As modern gerontopsychological studies show, the content of the life of old people depends largely on their activity as subjects of communication, seeking to expand the scope of their ties with other people. Currently, gerontopsychological issues are being continued in research conducted at the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University, at the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences and other research centers.
In all its integrity, the life path of a person acts as a special form of existence of the socio-historical process. In this capacity, it has the strongest influence on the ontogenetic evolution of a person, his individual properties. Social conditions play, according to Ananiev, the role of stimulants, stressors, depressors and catalysts in the functioning of physicochemical, physiological, psychophysiological processes. The life path can even mask the neurodynamic type of a person due to his character and creative activity. As a result, the process of ontogenesis is becoming more and more individualized and contributes to the emergence of a new incarnation of a person - his individuality. The emergence of the phenomenon of individuality in the process of human development is postulated in the concepts of a number of Western psychologists. Thus, Jung distinguishes two major periods in the forward movement of the personality. The first of them is characterized by the predominance of socialization processes. It ends, as a rule, with a severe crisis, which Jung observed in his patients and experienced himself at the age of 38. He emerged from a painful critical state with a clear consciousness of his future path. After a long break, his original works began to appear rapidly, the nightmares disappeared. The second period of life began, which Jung called individuation and described as the process of acquiring the personality of Itself, its uniqueness. Jung called the "mechanism" of individuation the "transcendental" function. According to the psychologist, a person with its help penetrates into the depths of the personal and collective unconscious, the content of which is extracted to the surface of mental life and integrated with conscious experience. Individuation thus takes place wholly in the inner world of man.
In Ananiev's concept, integrativity also acts as the most important property individuality: there is a synthesis and harmonization of the characteristics of a person as an individual, personality and subject of activity. However, the integration process itself "can hardly be a sufficient condition for the emergence of individuality. Multiple neoplasms are necessary in the space of the personality and the subject of activity. A person must extract experience from his life path, reject certain positions and views imposed on him as alien. As a result, his former organization mental life is destroyed. But by this time, he has already formed reflexive characterological properties, with the help of which he begins to build his individuality. In the process of reflection, the ideas and capabilities of a person, his potentials and tendencies are harmonized. The individuality that has arisen in this way has, according to Ananiev , a special organization. Its central area is occupied by the inner world, which includes the "I" of a person, his worldview, value orientations, etc. Its closed circuit regulates all the properties of a person and acts as a psychological barrier that determines, according to Ananiev, the hut irrational attitude of the subject to various influences. The closed system is "embedded", as Ananiev puts it, in open system constant human interaction with the environment. Leading in the interaction is the constructive, creative activity, which realizes all the great possibilities of the historical nature of man. In other words, for Ananiev, the “transcendental function” is not the immersion of the personality in the unconscious, but its exit beyond itself through creation. Individuality, as Ananiev emphasizes, lies in the products creative activity, changing the surrounding reality .
Does creative activity, however, exclude the need for the subject to penetrate into the unconscious layer of his mental life? Modern studies of intuition, implicit theories of the environment show what an important role unconscious processes play in building a person's entire life. An analysis of Ananiev's solution to the problems of individuality requires the discussion of some additional issues.
Individuality, from the scientist's point of view, is a fairly late education in a person's life. Does this fact mean that a person, a subject of activity, up to a certain point, is deprived of the quality of uniqueness? If a growing person is ordinary, "averaged", he, in his unique life path, will perceive only the generally accepted, stereotyped. Ananiev rejects this position. He is convinced that every person has individuality to a certain extent from the very beginning, Individuality, but to Ananiev, this is a condition for training and education, but also a product of pedagogical influences.
In this case, what stages, preceding the moment when a person generates a unique contribution to society, can be identified in the formation of individuality? Another question acts as a continuation of the first. In what direction does human development continue after acquiring the quality of an integrated and creative individuality? Ananiev did not have time to outline a solution to these problems. To some extent, the fate of "individuality" can be judged by the results of its productive activity or - dash - by the features of generativity that generates activity. But, as S.L. Rubinstein, a person who completely exhausts himself in what he creates, is not interesting as a person. The movement of the inner world of the subject is ahead of that created by him. The problem of individuality remains one of the most significant for child and general psychology, for the science of personality.
So, we have discussed (at least partially) the original psychological concept of a person developed by B.G. Ananiev. The person in it acts as a system-forming basis of the subject of psychology. The article outlines the main way Ananyev introduces a person into psychological science. The scientist filled with scientific content figurative expressions of this type common in psychology:
"character traits (or, say, beliefs) literally grow into the flesh and blood of a person." Ananiev turned such metaphors into a psychological reality. In the integrity of man, he singled out a system of his individual properties - from biochemical to psychophysiological. Their age and gender transformations in the life cycle are called "ontogenetic evolution".
The scientist singled out other forms of human being - as a person, a subject of activity and individuality. Based on many years of large-scale theoretical and empirical research, he, together with his colleagues and students, substantiated the fact of interpenetration and mutual influence of individual and personal-subjective, ontogenetic evolution and the life path of a person. Ananiev first placed the main coordinate system for studying a person in specific socio-historical conditions, in the space of a certain society, in the life of a given country.
Ananiev managed to show how this concrete historical reality, being repeatedly mediated, determines the life of a person up to the level of his ontogenetic evolution. But the foundations of the new methodology began to be outlined by him when he approached the creation of a theory of human individuality: not only as an integrated unity of different "hypostases", but as the creator of a unique contribution to the development of other people, to the progressive movement of society. This contribution may be very small, but without it there will be an unfinished basis for large creations. Indeed, significant contributions to public life are always significant for all mankind. The potential proportionality of man and the world becomes the reality of his being. The determination of people's lives includes events taking place in the space of all mankind. It is in this "universal" coordinate system that "the great possibilities of the historical nature of man" are revealed. It can be assumed that life in the coordinates of the world determines the formation of a new incarnation in a person, more ambitious than the system of "individuality". It is experienced by a separate individual as a sense of community with the life of all people on earth, as a responsibility for their destinies. It is difficult to find a designation for such an education, integrating people's lives with the past and future of mankind. Perhaps the terms "universality" and "transcendence" will become adequate here.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Abulkhanova K.A. Life strategy. M., Nauka, 1991.
- Aleksandrova M.D. Problems of social and psychological gerontology. L., Publishing house of Leningrad State University. 1974.
- Ananiev B.G. Selected psychological works. T. I. M., Pedagogy, 1980.
- Ananiev B.G. On the problems of modern human knowledge. M., Science. 1977.
- Ananiev B.G. Man as an object of knowledge. L., Publishing House of Leningrad State University, 1969.
- Antsyferova L.I., Mamchur E.A. Review of the book by K.V. Wilks // Philosopher. Sciences. 1991. No. 5. pp. 183-186.
- Antsyferova L.I. New stages of late life: warm autumn or harsh winter? // Psych. magazine 1994. No. 3. S. 99-105.
- Antsyferova L.I. Late period of human life: types of aging and the possibility of progressive development of personality. magazine 1996. No. 6. S. 60-71.
- Asmolov A.G. Historical-evolutionary approach in personality psychology. Diss. ... doc. psychol. Sciences. M., 1995.
- Bekhterev V.M., Shchelovanov N.M. To the substantiation of genetic reflexology / New in reflexology and physiology nervous system. T. 1. GIZ. 1928.
- Borozdina L.V., Molchanova O.I. Self-esteem at the age of second maturity / Bulletin of Moscow. university Series 14. Psychology. 1996. No. 4.
- Znakov V.V. Psychological picture participant in the war in Afghanistan mass consciousness// Psych. magazine 1991. No. 6. S. 26-39.
- Klimov E.A. The image of the world in different types of professions. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1995.
- Krasnova O.V. Adaptation of older people to the modern social situation. Dis. cand. psychol. Sciences. M.. 1996.
- Loginova N.A. Life path of a person as a problem of psychology // Vopr. psychology. 1985. No. I.
- Loginova N.A. The development of personality and its life path / The principle of development in psychology. M.: Science. 1978.
- Psychology of personality in conditions of social changes. M., IP RAS. 1993.
- Russian mentality (psychology of personality, consciousness, ideas), M., IP RAS. 1996.
- Rybalko E.F. Problems of individual human development in the works of B.G. Anan'eva // Vopr. psychology. 1977. No. 6.
- Rybalko E.F., Kuleshova L.N., Prokhorenko T.V., Balikshini Zh.A. Intellectual potential in different periods of human life / Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Series 6. 1996. Issue. 2.
- Fromm E. Man for himself. Study of the psychological problems of ethics. Minsk, Collegium. 1992.
- Bandura A. Social Foundations of thought and action. A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 1986.
- Buhler Ch. Der menschliche Lebenslauf als psychologisches problem. Leipzig. 1933.
- Thornae H. Das Individuum und seine Welt. 3., erweiterte und verbesserte Auilage. Hogrefe. Verlag fur psychology. Gottingen. Bern. Toronto, Seattle, 1996.
Subject. The concept of personality in domestic psychology.
Plan. 1. Definitions of personality. 2. The problem of personality in modern psychology.
Personality is a set of social relations that are realized in diverse activities (Leontiev). Personality is a set of internal conditions through which all external influences are refracted (Rubinshtein).
Personality is a social individual, an object and subject of social relations and the historical process, manifesting itself in communication, in activity, in behavior (Hanzen).
I.S. Kon: the concept of personality means human individual as a member of society, generalizes the socially significant features integrated in it.
B.G. Ananiev: personality is the subject of social behavior and communication.
A.V. Petrovsky: personality - a person as a social individual, the subject of cognition and objective transformation of the world, sentient being able to speak and work.
K.K. Platonov: personality - a person as a carrier of consciousness.
Personality is a “conscious individual” (B.G. Ananiev).
2. The problem of personality in modern psychology. For several decades, Russian psychology has stood on the principles of an activity approach. An exact and clear answer to the question of the authorship of this approach has not yet been received. It is believed, for example, that this principle was first put forward by S.L. Rubinstein in the article of 1922 "The principle of creative amateur performance". There is another opinion that the works of L.S. Vygotsky, written in the 20-30s of the last century. The essence of this approach was outlined by the famous Russian psychologist P.Ya. Galperin. He wrote that the activity principle means the requirement to study mental activity not in itself, but as part of the external, objective activity of the subject; to study mental activity according to its role in this external activity, which determines the very necessity of the psyche, and determines the need - to study its specific content and its structure; consider mental activity like an impersonal process, but as the activity of the subject in terms of mental reflection of the problem situation.
In domestic psychology, personality is studied from two points of view:
From the perspective of an introduction to methodology and theory psychology personal principle . It means that all mental processes - attention, memory, thinking - are active, selective, i.e. depend on the characteristics of the individual (motivation, interests, goals, character). And from the point of view of studying the personality itself - its structure, features of formation and development, self-awareness and self-esteem.
Domestic psychological schools were formed around leading scientists. These are the schools of L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontiev, S.L. Rubinstein, B.G. Ananiev, V.N. Myasishcheva, D.N. Uznadze, V.S. Merlin. Hypotheses that have been formulated within various scientific paradigms continue to be theoretically and empirically explored. Let us define the general context and specific phenomena that were singled out in these schools in connection with the study of the problem of personality.
The approach of Boris Gerasimovich Ananiev.
B.G. Ananiev(1907-1972) - the most prominent Russian psychologist, author of such works as "Man as an object of knowledge", "On the problems of complex human knowledge". He developed the concept of age as the main unit of periodization of a person's life path. He set the task of investigating the relationship between biological characteristics and social achievements of the individual. A feature of Ananiev's concept is the inclusion of a person in a context wider than activity - in the context of human knowledge.
As in the works of other domestic psychologists, the idea of social determination of personality occupies one of the central places in Ananiev's concept. The social factor is considered by him indirectly, through the concepts of social status, social situation, lifestyle, and so on. He most thoroughly investigated the problem of individual human development. In this complex problem, he singled out the concepts of the individual, personality, subject, person.
That is, Ananiev considers a person in the unity of four sides: 1) as species; 2) in ontogenesis, the process of the life path of a person as an individual; 3) as a person; 4) as part of humanity.
Ananiev considered the ontogenetic natural development of a person as an individual as "a successive change of stages or phases: conception, birth, maturation, maturity, aging, old age are the main points of the integrity of the human body."
The history of the formation and development of personality is the life path of a person. “The beginning of the personality comes much later than the beginning of the individual”, and “is associated with the formation of a permanent complex of social ties, regulated by norms and rules, the development of means of communication ..., objective activity ... Just as the beginning of an individual is a long and multi-phase process embryogenesis, and the beginning of personality - a long multi-phase process of early socialization of the individual, which proceeds most intensively in the second or third years of a person's life.
In the personality, Ananiev distinguished between the interindividual, the structure as the social whole to which the individual belongs with its social connections and relationships in activity, and the intraindividual. a structure that includes five hierarchically connected substructures (mental processes; states; personality traits; sensory and mnemonic functions; motivation with needs and attitudes) as an internal mental formation of the personality itself.
Personality is a “conscious individual” (B.G. Ananiev), i.e. a person capable of conscious organization and self-regulation of his activity on the basis of mastering social norms morality and legal behavior.
B.G. Ananiev suggested anthropological approach to the study of man, which was implemented through systematic and long-term genetic research. In these studies, he shows that individual development is an internally contradictory process that depends on many determinants. Development, according to Ananiev, is an increasing integration, a synthesis of psychophysiological functions. This integration is provided by various mechanisms. The structure of the personality, for example, is organized according to two principles - subordination, or hierarchical, in which complex social properties subdue more elementary, psychophysiological ones, and coordination, in which the interaction of properties is built on an equal footing. The problem of integration allowed Ananiev to include mental development in a broader context - onto-, socio- and personogenesis.
The approach of Xenia Alexandrovna Abulkhanova. Represents the personality as the subject of the life path and the subject of activity. He believes that the basis of its development is the development of such qualities as activity (initiative, responsibility), the ability to organize time, and social thinking.
The approach of Alexei Nikolaevich. Leontiev and Artur Vladirovich. Petrovsky. When explaining any mental phenomena, a person acts as an integral system of internal conditions through which all external influences are refracted, due to which it is possible to single out components of a different measure of generality and stability in it.
Personality is a set of social relations that are realized in diverse activities (Leontiev). Personality, according to Leontiev, is an internal moment of activity. The child becomes a personality only as a subject of social relations. The concept of personality is usually compared with the concept of the individual. "The concept of "individual" expresses the indivisibility, integrity and peculiarity of a particular subject, which arise already at the early stages of the development of life. An individual is a product of phylogenetic and ontogenetic development. Personality is a relatively late product of the socio-historical and ontogenetic development of a person; it is "produced", created by social relations into which the individual enters in his activity "(Tikhomirov OK, 1983.).
The unit of personality analysis is personal meaning as a reflection in the mind of a person of the relationship of motive to goal. Personal meaning is usually correlated with the concept of meaning. A.N. Leontiev gives an example of how personal meaning changes when the motive of activity changes. For example, reading scientific literature by a student acts as a conscious goal for him. The motive can be the desire to prepare yourself for a future profession, and the desire to formally pass the exam. Knowing that the personal meaning is determined by the relation of the motive to the goal, in these two cases we will interpret the semantic content of the student's activity in different ways.
Thus, according to A.N. Leontiev, personality is the social essence of a person, and therefore the temperament, character, abilities and knowledge of a person are not part of the personality as its substructures, they are only the conditions for the formation of this formation, social in nature. Orientation and will belong to the personality, because a volitional act cannot be considered outside the hierarchy of motives, so direction is a direct expression of motivational structures, i.e., the core of the personality.
The approach of Vladimir Myasishchev. Considers the core of the personality as a system of its relations to the outside world and to itself, which is formed under the influence of reflection by the human consciousness of the environment. reality, being one of the forms of this reflection.
Personality structure. Personality as a whole, according to S.L. Rubinstein, is expressed through the trinity: what a person wants (needs, attitudes), what he can (abilities, talents), what he himself is (needs and motives fixed in character). If earlier in the 30s-40s the concept of personality was used to implement the principle of the unity of consciousness and activity ("Affirmation of the unity of consciousness and activity meant that it was necessary to understand consciousness, the psyche, not as something only passive, contemplative, receptive, but as a process, as the activity of the subject, the real individual, and in the human activity, in human behavior to reveal its psychological composition and thus make the very activity of a person the subject of psychological research "(Rubinshtein S.L. Principles and ways of development of psychology. M., 1959. S.). Rubinshtein specifically notes that not only activity affects personality, but personality, having the right to choose, takes an active and proactive position.), then in the 50s in the works "Being and Consciousness", "Principles and Ways of Development of Psychology" it was correlated with the concept of determinism. The essence of determinism is defined by Rubinstein through the dialectic of external and internal. Personality was considered as the highest level of organization of matter, as a regulator of consciousness in relation to activity. Personality and its mental properties are both the result and the prerequisite of activity.
V.N. Myasishchev (1893-1973) - psychologist, psychiatrist, psychotherapist, developed the psychology of relationships. He emphasized that the system of social relations forms the subjective relationship of a person to all aspects of reality. Attitude is one of the forms of human reflection of the surrounding reality. "The psychological relations of a person in a developed form represent an integral system of individual, selective, conscious connections of a person with various aspects of objective reality" (Myasishchev V.N., 1995. P. 16) (see Reader. 7.4).
The relationship of the individual - her needs, interests, inclinations are the product of human interaction with a particular environment. Among the types of relationships, he names the emotional attitude, interest and evaluative attitude. "Attitude is a force, a potential that determines the degree of interest, the degree of expression of emotion, the degree of tension of desire or need. Relationships are therefore the driving force of the personality" (Myasishchev V.N., 1995. P. 49).
He was especially interested in the problem of character. He defines it as a system of relations to different aspects of reality that is stable in each person, manifested in the ways of expressing these relations typical for the person in her everyday behavior. In the structure of personality, he singled out several plans. The first is the dominant attitudes of the personality, the second is the mental level, or the level of desires and achievements, the third level is the dynamics of reactions (or temperament).
An important point in the study of personality, according to Rubinstein, is the features of its inclusion in a wider context - not only in activity, but also in life. "The essence of the human personality," says Rubinstein, "finds its final expression in the fact that it has its own history" (Rubinstein S.L. Fundamentals of general psychology. 2nd ed. M., 1946., p. 682).
This feature is expressed in the concept of "subject of life". This is a "personality on a higher plane." "A person in the emphatically specific sense of the word is a person who has his own position, his own pronounced conscious attitude to life, a worldview, to which he came as a result of great conscious work" .
Personality as a subject of life has three levels of organization:
1) mental warehouse - individual characteristics of the course of mental processes;
2) personal warehouse - qualities of character and ability;
3) life style - morality, intelligence, the ability to set life tasks, worldview, activity, life experience.
A special place in his concept is occupied by the problem of consciousness and self-consciousness. Rubinstein opposes his understanding of self-consciousness to the idealistic one, where it is closed on itself. This understanding of self-consciousness includes an attitude towards oneself, towards the world, but not direct, but mediated by the life manifestations of the subject, the whole life of the individual. It is not consciousness that grows out of self-consciousness, but, on the contrary, self-consciousness manifests itself through the activity of the subject in relation to the world.
The approach of Konstantin Konstantinovich Platonov. K.K. has a different idea of the level of integration in the personality structure. Platonov. He emphasizes the need for a more precise definition of this concept, speaking of the dynamic functional structure of the personality and pointing to the possibility of a more detailed and more general characterization.
"The most general structure of a personality is the assignment of all its features and traits to one of the four groups that form the four main aspects of the personality ..." (Platonov K.K., 1965). These groups are as follows: 1) socially determined features (orientation, moral qualities); 2) biologically determined features (temperament, inclinations, instincts, simple needs); 3) experience (volume and quality of existing knowledge, skills, abilities and habits); 4) individual characteristics of various mental processes. The relationship between these groups of features, with the leading role of the so-called socially conditioned properties, forms the structure of the personality, which is thus, according to K.K. Platonov, most high level integration in the sphere of personality phenomena.
Conclusion: personality according to Platonov has a dynamic functional structure, the elements of which are; orientation, social experience, features of mental processes and its biopsychological properties.
The approach of military psychologists. Personality is a specific person who is representatives a certain society, a certain social group, engaged in a specific type of activity, aware of his attitude to the environment and endowed with certain individual psychological characteristics.
Dmitry Nikolaevich's approach Uznadze. Considers the personality as a holistic and spiritual entity, the motives and actions of which can also be of an unconscious nature. Uznadze is the founder of the theory of attitude as a general psychological concept; revealing the patterns of development and functioning of the psyche of the individual in the process of its purposeful activity.
D.N. Uznadze (1886-1950)- Creator of the Georgian school of Soviet psychological science. Known for such works as "Experimental Pedagogy", "Fundamentals of Experimental Psychology", "Psychology of the Child", " Psychological research". The subject of the study by D.N. Uznadze was the installation as a developing on the basis of experience a stable predisposition of an individual to a certain form of response, prompting him to orient his activity in a certain direction and act consistently in relation to all objects and situations with which it is associated. With the help of the installation, Uznadze tried to explain the own activity of a living organism and overcome the "postulate of immediacy".
For the installation to occur, the simultaneous presence of needs And situations. Installation - the unity of subjective (need) and objective (situation) factors, it is associated with the reconfiguration of psychophysiological forces and the willingness to act in a certain way to meet a specific need in the appropriate conditions of the situation. The installation is considered as a certain moment of the functioning of the need.
Uznadze distinguishes between a diffuse attitude that arose during the initial impact and is characterized by uncertainty, unable to direct activity in a certain direction, and a differentiated, fixed attitude. He singled out not only the quality of the fixity of the attitude, but also its generalization, i.e. extension to other, similar situations. In addition to generalization, the property of the installation is irradiation - the repetition of the installation on different modalities.
D.N. Uznadze gave the attitude the status of a general psychological category, which explains the indirect influence of the environment on mental phenomena, which gives human behavior an initially active, strong-willed and purposeful character.
The theory of installation D.N. Uznadze gave rise to many discussions, which were reflected both in specific scientific works and in scientific discussions on the methodological and theoretical problems of psychology.
The approach of David Iosifovich Feldstein. According to him, in ontogeny, a person develops on a level-by-level basis, passing through various stages of social maturity. At the same time, the leading factor in its formation is socially useful activity.
Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky:(1896-1934) - one of the methodologists of psychology, who devoted a lot of time to developing a program and techniques empirical research child's psyche. For ten years of intensive scientific work in the field of psychology, he wrote over 180 works, among them such as "Psychology of Art", "Thinking and Speech", "Pedagogical Psychology", "The Historical Meaning of the Psychological Crisis".
The central category, to which Vygotsky gave paramount attention, was the category consciousness. L.S. Vygotsky was looking for a new way to explain mental phenomena, largely relying on the ideas of Marxism. In order to understand the internal mental processes, it was necessary to go beyond the limits of the organism and look for their explanation in the social relations of man with the environment.
His concept was called cultural-historical, because the interpretation of consciousness and mental processes could only be derived from their development and formation. main idea Vygotsky was to approve the position about the development of higher mental functions. They are formed in a child in the process of ontogenetic development in communication with an adult. Development, according to Vygotsky, is associated with the assimilation of cultural signs, the most perfect of which is the word. In connection with the problem of higher mental functions, the phenomenon of natural mental functions, which are innate and immediate, is discussed. Development, according to Vygotsky, proceeds along two lines. Both types of mental development are represented (not repeated) in the development of the child, which we find in an isolated form in phylogeny: biological and historical, or natural and cultural, development of behavior. In ontogenesis, both processes have their analogues (not parallels). This is the main and central fact, the starting point of our study: the distinction between two lines of mental development of the child, corresponding to two lines of phylogenetic development of behavior "(Vygotsky L.S. History of the development of higher mental functions. Collected works in 6 volumes. V. 3. M .: Pedagogy, 1983.) "Both plans of development - natural and cultural - coincide and merge with one another. Both series of changes interpenetrate one another and form, in essence, a single series of socio-biological formation of the child's personality. "Natural functions - mechanical memory, involuntary attention, reproducing the imagination, creative thinking are phenomena of organic development that takes place in a cultural environment and turns into a historically conditioned biological process. "At the same time, cultural development acquires a completely unique and incomparable character, since it takes place simultaneously and merged with organic maturation, since its carrier is the growing, changing, maturing organism of the child." The highest mental functions include - logical memory, voluntary attention, creative imagination, thinking in concepts. The first - natural - develop according to the stimulus-response principle, the second are mediated by a sign.
L.S. Vygotsky formulates two hypotheses: 1) about the mediation of higher mental functions, and 2) about the origin of internal activity from external through internalization.
Experiments carried out on different functions have shown that at first the mastery of behavior occurs on the external (social) plane, in cooperation with an adult, and then the signs and the functions themselves gradually become internal. This law is called general genetic law of cultural development - "... Every function in the child's cultural development appears on the scene twice, on two planes, first social, then psychological, first between people, as an interpsychic category, then within the child, as an intrapsychic category. This applies equally to arbitrary attention, to logical memory, to the formation of concepts, to the development of the will" (Ibid., p. 145).
Personality formation, according to Vygotsky, is a process of cultural development. He wrote that it is possible to put an equal sign between the personality of the child and his cultural development. Personality is formed as a result of such historical development, and is historical in itself. An indicator of personality is the ratio of natural and higher mental functions. The more cultural is represented in a person, the more pronounced the process of mastering the world and one's own behavior, the more significant the personality.
Thus, personality, according to Vygotsky, is a social concept, and it encompasses the supranatural, historical in man. It is not born, but arises in the process of cultural development. The personality develops as a whole only when the personality masters a certain form of behavior. The newborn has no "I" and no personality. The decisive moment in the development of a child's personality is the awareness of his "I" (name and only then a personal pronoun). The child's concept of self develops from the concept of others. That. the concept of personality is socially reflected. Only at school age does a stable form of personality appear for the first time, thanks to the formation of inner speech. In a teenager, the discovery of I is observed.
Wolf Solomonovich Merlin (1898-1982) developed an integral theory of individuality, in which he singled out the following levels: biochemical, somatic, neurodynamic, psychodynamic (temperament level), personality traits, social roles. Between these levels there are not single-valued, but multi-valued relationships, i.e. a property of one level can be associated with several properties of another level.
In the structure of temperament, he distinguishes:
extraversion - the dependence of mental activity on the actual objective situation;
anxiety - a predisposition to an avoidance reaction in anticipation of a threatening situation;
reactivity - the intensity of the reaction in response to a stimulus; impulsiveness - the speed with which emotion becomes the motivating force of action;
emotional stability - the ability to control emotions;
emotional excitability - the intensity of emotional experiences; activity as behavior aimed at specific goals;
rigidity - the inability to adjust the program of activities in accordance with the requirements of the situation.
Introducing the concept of an individual style of activity, he meant that it is a kind of system of psychological means that a person consciously or spontaneously resorts to in order to best balance his (typologically determined) individuality with the objective conditions of activity. Temperament, according to V.S. Merlin, cannot be changed, because it is genetically determined, but it can nevertheless be compensated for. His most famous works are "Essay on the Theory of Temperament", " experimental psychology Personality", "Essay on the integral study of individuality".
Literature
Main literature:
Asmolov A.G. Psychology of Personality. - M., 2001.
Gippenreiter Yu.B. Introduction to general psychology. - M., 1996.
Ilyin E.P. Psychology of individual differences. - St. Petersburg, 2004.
Leontiev D.A. Essay on personality psychology. - M., 1997.
Maklakov A.G. General psychology. - St. Petersburg, 2004.
Nurkova V.V., Berezanskaya N.B. Psychology. - M., 2004.
Psychology of personality: Collection of articles / Comp. A.B. Orlov. M .: OOO "Questions of Psychology", 2003.
Psychology of Personality. Texts./Ed. Yu.B. Gippenreiter. - M., 1992.
Additional literature:
Ananiev B.G. On the problems of modern human knowledge. - SPb., 2001.
Ananiev B.G. Man as an object of knowledge. - St. Petersburg, 2003.
Bozhovich L.I. Personality and its formation in childhood. - M., 1968.
Bratus B.S. personality anomalies. - M., 1988.
Kovalev V.I. Motives of behavior and activity. - M., 1998.
Leontiev A.N. Activity, consciousness, personality. - M., 1997.
Leontiev D.A. Test of meaningful life orientations. - M., 1992.
Merlin V.S. Features temperament. // Psychology of individual differences. Texts. - M., 1982.
Merlin V.S. Psychology of individuality. - Moscow-Voronezh. 1996.
Rubinshtein S.L. Fundamentals of General Psychology. - M., 1989.
Simonov P.V. Motivated brain. - M., 1987.
Simonov P.V., Ershov P.M., Temperament, character, personality. - M., 1984.
Teplov B.M. Typological properties of the nervous system and their significance for psychology // Psychology of individual differences. Texts. - M., 1982.
