paradox of absolute morality
Psychologists most often define emotions and feelings as "a special form of a person's relationship to the phenomena of reality, conditioned by their compliance or non-compliance with a person." Since any human activity is aimed at satisfying one or another of his needs, then emotional processes, reflection of the correspondence or inconsistency of the phenomena of reality with the needs of a person, inevitably accompany and induce any activity.
The main difference between rational thinking and feeling is that, in their essence, feelings are intended to reflect only what affects the needs of a given person, while rational thinking reflects what has not yet become a person's need, does not personally affect him.
A person often has to deal with a discrepancy or even a conflict of mind and feelings. This conflict poses with particular urgency the problem of the relationship between emotions and reason in morality.
Situations of conflict of mind and feelings in reality are resolved in different ways. It is possible with sufficient evidence to fix attitudes towards the emotional or the rational as a means of making moral decisions, a means of orientation in moral practice. There are no absolutely unemotional people, however, for some people, emotions are enough to make decisions and make assessments, while others try to check the correctness of their feelings with the help of rational analysis. Both of them resort to their own way of making decisions and evaluations unconsciously. But often there is also a conscious orientation towards an emotional or rational way of making decisions. One person may be convinced that “feelings will not be deceived,” while another tries to make decisions with clear and rational reasons.
Activity is impossible without feelings and emotions. Only being emotionally colored, this or that information can become an impetus for action. It is no coincidence that the theory and practice of moral education persistently puts forward the problem of education of feelings, since only knowledge of moral norms does not lead to appropriate behavior. Based on this position, the conclusion is often made about the decisive role of feelings in morality. Feelings reflect the deepest characteristics of a person: her needs. But this is mainly at the same time a disadvantage: they are too subjective to be a reliable means for finding an objectively correct solution, an objectively correct line of behavior. The mind is more objective. Rational procedures are precisely aimed at obtaining an objective one that does not depend on a person's emotions. Thinking, prompted by certain emotions, tries not to let itself be carried away by them, in order to get an undistorted, true meaning. This understanding of the relationship between reason and feeling is characteristic of most of the teachings of the past. It also corresponds to the definition most widespread in modern psychology.
However, a person's mind does not insure him against mistakes, which can be caused both by the objective complexity of situations and by the content of already formed feelings. The latter is especially important for understanding the limitations of reason in morality, the definitions of its dependence on needs, and therefore on feelings. Feelings guide the train of thought, and often determine their content. Sometimes the mind of a person becomes only a means of justifying his feelings.
A sophisticated intellect can come up with dozens of arguments to justify essentially immoral behavior. However, the weakness of his logical premises and constructions is usually not visible only to the owner of this intellect and to those whose living conditions have formed similar needs. Such efforts of the intellect, aimed only at justifying feelings, in fact, are not much different from the implementation of the "emotional attitude", because the mind here is entirely in the power of the feelings and is only called upon to serve them, thereby distracting from its main purpose: the search for truth, and representing intelligence only in form, i.e. on the means used, not on the merits. The rational attitude presupposes objective, impartial control over one's feelings, their critical analysis.
Control over your feelings, the ability to manage them is a necessary condition for correct moral behavior and an indicator of the level of moral culture.
The power of reason over feelings, of course, should not be presented as a complete suppression and repression of feelings. Of course, immoral feelings must be suppressed, but this suppression itself occurs through the conscious formation of the opposite feeling. In the case of morally neutral emotions, the role of reason is reduced to, firstly, to restrain them at the border beyond which they begin to interfere with the normal functioning of the mind, and secondly, to determine their place in the valuable hierarchy of the personality and, activating in the necessary cases of higher feelings, do not allow them to manifest themselves in immoral acts. Finally, the consistent and correct implementation of the rational attitude leads to actions that evoke in the individual a specifically moral sense of satisfaction from their commission. Consequently, the realization of a rational attitude does not result in the repression of feelings by reason, but their harmonious combination.
.Classification of emotional states . Positive, negative , sensually neutral emotional states . Internal and external conditioning of emotions . Focus: towards yourself and others . Social feelings. Aesthetic feelings . Three levels of emotional experiences: the level of pointless emotional-affective sensitivity; object feelings; generalized feelings. Affects , emotions , the senses , passion andmoods .
The opposition of consciousness and feelings, logical and emotional, mind and heart, rational and irrational has come into use for a long time and firmly. We all have to choose from time to time between the "voice of the heart" and the "voice of reason." Often these two "voices" tell us different decisions, different choices. A person of modern Western civilization is characterized by the dominance of the rational sphere over the world of feelings, the solution of this dispute in favor of reason. With the help of reason, we plan our careers, solve financial issues, assess chances, stock up on knowledge, judge something. We repeat after Descartes "I think, therefore I am." Reason, logic, intelligence are needed for success in the modern technocratic, computerized world. And, adapting to this world, striving for success in it, we develop logic, intellect, and often care little about the development of the emotional-sensual sphere, impoverishing our inner world, for the wealth of inner life is largely determined by the quality and depth of experiences. A person's perception of their life as happy or unhappy is a reflection of their emotional state. But the perception of one's life as successful or not depends on the quality of consciousness as an instrument and the degree of mastery of it.
The juxtaposition of emotions to intelligence is not always justified. Back in the 13th century, Roger Bacon noted that there are two types of knowledge, one is obtained through arguments, the other through experience (2, p. 129).
“No emotion is reducible to pure, abstract emotionality. Any emotion includes the unity of experience and cognition, intellectual and affective "- wrote S.L. Rubinstein (1, p. 156) ..
“Man as a subject who cognizes and changes the world ... experiences what happens to him and what happens to him; he relates in a certain way to what surrounds him. The experience of this relationship of a person to the environment is the sphere of feelings or emotions. A person's feeling is his attitude to the world, to what he experiences and does in the form of direct experience "(S.L. Rubinshtein, 1, p. 152).
The word emotion comes from latin "emovere" - excite, excite.
The German philosopher and psychologist F. Krueger in his work "The essence of emotional experience" (1, p. 108) wrote:
“What pleases a person, what interests him, plunges him into despondency, worries, seems to him funny, most of all characterizes his“ essence ”, his character and personality ... To a certain extent, the“ emotional ”gives us knowledge about the structure of the mental,“ inner world generally".
Emotion classification.
Manifestations of the human emotional world are extremely diverse. These include things as varied as pain and irony, beauty and confidence, touch and justice. Emotions differ in quality, intensity, duration, depth, awareness, complexity, conditions of occurrence, functions performed, impact on the body, needs, objective content and orientation (towards oneself or others), towards the past or future, by the peculiarities of their expression, and so on. ... Any of these measurements can form the basis for classification.
We can evaluate the experienced feelings, emotions as deep, serious or as superficial, frivolous, as strong or weak, complex or simple, hidden or pronounced.
The most commonly used is the division of emotions into positive and negative.
But not all emotional manifestations can be attributed to one of these groups. There are also sensually neutral emotional states: surprise, curiosity, indifference, excitement, thoughtfulness, a sense of responsibility.
The division of emotions into positive and negative reflects primarily subjective assessment experienced sensations. Externally, both positive and negative emotions can lead to both positive and negative consequences. So, although the anger or fear experienced often have negative consequences for the body and even for society, in some cases they can carry a positive function of protection, survival. Positive emotional manifestations such as joy and optimism can in some cases turn into "militant enthusiasm", which can lead to negative consequences. Thus, depending on the specific situation, one and the same emotion can serve as adaptation or maladjustment, lead to destruction or facilitate constructive behavior (2).
Another characteristic of emotions has to do with their conditioning: internal or external... It is known that emotions usually arise when something significant happens to a person. They can be associated both with the reflection of external, situational impact (this is the so-called external conditioning), and with the actualization of needs - while emotions signal to the subject about a change in internal factors (internal conditioning).
Emotions, feelings can be directed to myself(remorse, complacency) and on another(gratitude, envy).
Separate groups of emotional phenomena are distinguished social feelings(feelings of honor, duty, responsibility, justice, patriotism) and aesthetic feelings(feelings of the beautiful, sublime, comic, tragic).
According to S.L. Rubinstein (1, pp. 158-159), there are three levels of emotional experiences:
level pointless emotional-affective sensitivity, associated mainly with organic needs: a sense of pleasure - displeasure, pointless melancholy. At this level, the connection between the feeling and the object is not realized.
object feelings associated with objective perception, objective action - so, for example, fear is experienced in front of something. At this level, feeling is an expression in a conscious experience of a person's relationship to the world. Object feelings are differentiated depending on the sphere - aesthetic, moral, intellectual.
generalized feelings towering over the subject - a sense of humor, irony, sublime, tragic. They express the ideological attitudes of the individual.
Affect is called a rapidly and violently proceeding emotional process of an explosive nature, accompanied by organic changes and actions, often not subject to conscious volitional control. In a state of passion, a person seems to "lose his head."
The regulating function of affects is the formation of a specific experience - affective traces that determine the selectivity of subsequent behavior in relation to situations and their elements that previously caused affect (1, p. 169).
Emotional tension of affects often leads to subsequent
feelings of fatigue, depression.
Actually emotions- these are more prolonged states in comparison with affects, sometimes only weakly manifested in external behavior. Emotions have a distinctly situational character. They express the evaluative attitude of a person to emerging or possible situations, to his activity and to his manifestations in it. Emotions reflect the relationship that develops between motives and direct activity for the implementation of these motives (the regulating role of emotions is described in the lecture "Functions of emotions").
The senses have a clearly expressed objective character, they are associated with the idea of some object - concrete (love for a person) or generalized (love for the motherland).
The objects of feelings can be images and concepts that form the content of the moral consciousness of a person (N.A. Leont'ev, 1, p. 170-171). Higher senses refer to spiritual values and ideals. They play an important role in personality formation. Feelings regulate human behavior, can motivate his actions.
Emotions and feelings may not coincide - so, you can be angry with the person you love.
Passion- strong, persistent, long-lasting feeling. Passion is expressed in concentration, concentration of thoughts and forces aimed at a common goal. A strong-willed moment is clearly expressed in passion. Passion means an impulse, enthusiasm, orientation of all aspirations and forces of the individual in a single direction, their concentration on a single goal.
Mood is called the general emotional state of the individual. The mood is not substantive, not timed to any event. This is an unconscious emotional assessment by a person of how circumstances are currently developing for her.
L.I. Petrazhitsky (1, p. 20) compared emotions, affects, moods, passions with the following series of images: “1) just water; 2) sudden and strong pressure of water; 3) weak and calm water flow; 4) a strong and constant flow of water along one deep channel ”.
Ten fundamental emotions : interest , joy , astonishment , sorrow , anger , disgust , contempt , fear , shame , guilt .
K. Izard in his monograph "Human Emotions" (2) identifies ten emotions that he considers fundamental - these are emotions of interest, joy, surprise, grief, suffering, anger, disgust, contempt, fear, shame and guilt. Each of these emotions affects the processes of perception and behavior of people in a specific way.
More complex emotional formations are formed from various combinations of fundamental emotions. If such complexes of emotions are experienced by a person relatively stable and often, then they are defined as emotional trait... Its development is determined both by a person's genetic predisposition and by the characteristics of his life.
Let's take a quick look at each of the fundamental emotions.
Interest Is the most common positive emotion. Interest ensures that a certain level of activation of the organism is maintained. The opposite of interest is boredom.
The main reasons for interest are novelty, complexity, difference from the usual. They can be connected both with what is happening outside, and with what is happening in the inner world of a person - in his thinking, imagination. Interest focuses attention, controls perception and thinking. Thinking is always determined by some interest.
Interest is the dominant motivational state in the daily activities of a normal person, it is the only motivation that can support daily work in a normal way. Interest determines exploratory behavior, creativity and the acquisition of skills and abilities in the absence of external incentives for this, it plays an important role in the development of artistic and aesthetic forms of activity.
Exploring the process of creativity, Maslow (2, p. 209) speaks of its 2 phases: the first phase is characterized by improvisation and inspiration. The second — developing or developing primary ideas — requires discipline and hard work, and here the motivational power of interest is critical to overcoming obstacles.
The manifestation (strength and frequency of occurrence) of an emotion of interest in a particular person depends on factors such as socio-economic conditions, the amount and variety of information received in the immediate environment, from the family's attitude to activities, hobbies and other forms of activity of its members. Curious, adventurous parents are more capable of fostering interest-based cognitive orientations in their children than parents who choose to live by established beliefs and dogmas. The aspiration of a person's interest to certain objects, to certain types of activity is largely determined by his system of values.
Joy- the main positive emotion of a person. However, this experience cannot be caused by a person by voluntary effort. Joy can follow an individual's achievement or creative success, but they alone do not guarantee joy.
Most scholars agree that joy is a by-product of efforts towards other goals.
Joy can also arise when recognizing something familiar, especially after a long absence or isolation from a familiar person or object. Unlike interest, which keeps a person in constant excitement, joy can be soothing.
Joy gives a person a sense of being able to cope with difficulties and enjoy life, makes everyday life easier, helps to cope with pain, to achieve difficult goals. Happier people are more confident, more optimistic and more successful in life, and have closer and mutually enriching contacts with others. Their work is more consistent, focused and effective. They have a sense of their own worth, possess the skills and achievements necessary to achieve their goals, receive great satisfaction from the very process of this achievement. Happy people seem to have often experienced the joy of success in childhood, which formed a sense of competence (Wessman and Ricks, 2, pp. 234-235).
Expressive expressions of joy, including laughter, increase the strength of the subjective experience of this feeling.
When people experience joy, people are more likely to enjoy the object than to critically analyze it. They perceive the object as it is, rather than trying to change it. They feel close to the object rather than the desire to distance themselves and objectively examine it. Joy allows one to feel that there are various connections between man and the world, a keen sense of triumph or involvement with the objects of joy and with the world as a whole. Often, joy is accompanied by a feeling of strength and energetic upsurge, a feeling of freedom, that a person is more than he is in a normal state. A joyful person is more inclined to see beauty and goodness to nature and in human life (Meadows, 2, p. 238).
The feeling of joy is associated with the realization by a person of his capabilities. Joy is a normal state of life for a healthy person.
Obstacles to Self-Realization at the same time they are also obstacles to the emergence of joy. These include:
Some features of a person's social life, when rules and regulations suppress creativity, establish pervasive control, or prescribe mediocrity and mediocrity.
Impersonal and too strictly hierarchical relationships between people.
Dogmatism regarding parenting, sex and religion, which make it difficult for a person to know himself, love and trust himself, which makes it difficult to experience joy.
Uncertainty of female and male roles.
Too great importance is attached in our society to material success and achievements. (Schutz, by 2, pp. 238-239).
The external cause of surprise is usually a sudden and unexpected event, which is judged to be less pleasant than those that lead to joy. Surprise is characterized by a high level of impulsivity and disposition towards the object. Surprise is a passing feeling. It performs the function of adapting to sudden changes in the external world, encouraging change, switching attention. Surprise suspends the current activity, often at the moment of surprise a person's thinking "turns off".
Depending on the circumstances, the emotion of surprise can be assessed by a person as pleasant or unpleasant, although surprise itself simply slows down the current activity, switches attention to the changes that have occurred.
If a person often experiences surprise, which he estimates as unpleasant, and at the same time he cannot satisfactorily cope with the situation that has arisen, then the person may develop fearfulness and inefficiency in the presence of the new and unusual, even if it is not unexpected. If a person often experiences pleasant surprise, then he usually evaluates it as a positive emotion.
Grief- usually a reaction to loss, loss - temporary or permanent, real or imagined, physical or psychological (this can be the loss of any attractive qualities in oneself, positive attitudes towards oneself). The loss of a source of affection (person, object, idea) means the loss of something valuable and loved, a source of joy and excitement, love, confidence, a sense of well-being.
The inner work that the experience of grief does helps a person pay tribute to the lost, adapt to the loss, and restore personal autonomy.
Like other emotions, grief is contagious, arouses empathy in those around you, and helps to strengthen group cohesion.
Suffering occurs as a result of prolonged exposure to excessive levels of stimulation - pain, noise, cold, heat, failure, disappointment, loss. Failure, real or imagined, can also be the cause of suffering.
Suffering is the most common negative emotion that dominates grief and depression. It motivates vigorous activity aimed at avoiding or reducing suffering.
A suffering person feels despondency, discouragement, self-disappointment, inadequacy, loneliness, rejection, and the latter can be both real and fictional. It often seems to a suffering person that the whole life is bad.
Suffering is often accompanied by crying, especially in childhood.
Suffering has several functions.
It informs that a person is bad.
Encourages a person to take certain actions to reduce suffering, eliminate its cause, or change the attitude towards the object that caused the suffering.
Suffering provides a moderate "negative motivation," an avoidance strategy.
Avoiding separation pain helps to bring people closer together.
The reason anger usually there is a feeling of physical or psychological obstacle to something that the person is very eager to do. It can also be rules, laws, or your own inability to do what you want. Other causes of anger can be personal insult, interruption of situations of interest or joy, or being forced to do something against one's own will.
An angry person experiences great tension, his muscles tense, his blood "boils". Sometimes an angry person may feel that he will explode if he does not manifest his anger outside. The emotion of anger is characterized by impulsive expression and a high level of self-confidence. The state of anger interferes with clear thinking.
The evolutionary function of anger was to mobilize the individual's energy for active self-defense. With the development of civilization, this function of anger has almost disappeared, in many ways it has turned into a hindrance - most cases of expressing anger are a violation of legal or ethical codes.
When a person experiences disgust, he seeks to eliminate the object that caused this feeling or to distance himself from him. The object of disgust captures a person's attention less than the object of anger. Anger evokes the desire to attack, and disgust is the desire to get rid of the object that caused the emotion.
Disgust promotes a shift in attention. Like anger, disgust can be self-directed, causing self-judgment and low self-esteem.
Contempt- a sense of superiority over any person, group of people or object. The despised person feels stronger, smarter, better in some way than the despised person, looks at him “from top to bottom”, creates a barrier between himself and the other.
Contempt is often associated with situations of jealousy, greed, and rivalry. It can manifest itself as sarcasm, hatred. cruelty to others. Contempt feeds all kinds of human prejudice.
Situations that provoke contempt are less likely to result in aggression than situations that provoke anger and disgust. Contempt is considered the coldest emotion of the hostility triad.
Perhaps, evolutionarily contempt arose as a form of preparation for a meeting with an enemy, as a demonstration of one's strength and invincibility, a desire to inspire oneself and frighten an opponent.
Fear is the most dangerous of all emotions. Feelings of fear range from unpleasant foreboding to horror. Intense fear can even cause death.
Fear is usually caused by events, conditions or situations that signal danger, and the threat can be both physical and psychological. Fear can be caused by the presence of something threatening or the absence of something that provides security.
Natural stimuli for fear are loneliness, unfamiliarity, sudden change in stimulus, pain, etc. Fear stimuli derived from natural ones include darkness, animals, unfamiliar objects, and strangers. The reasons for fear can be culturally conditioned, be the result of learning: fear arising from the sound of an air raid siren, fear of ghosts, thieves, etc.
Fear is experienced as insecurity, insecurity, a sense of danger and impending misfortune, as a threat to one's existence, to one's psychological "I". Uncertainty can be experienced as to the true nature of the hazard and how to deal with the hazard.
Fear reduces the number of degrees of freedom in behavior, limits perception, a person's thinking slows down, becomes narrower in volume and rigid in shape.
Bowlby (2, p. 317) describes the external manifestation of fear in this way - "careful gazing, suppression of movements, frightened facial expression, which may be accompanied by trembling and tears, cringing, running away, seeking contact with someone", the most common feature of fear experiences is tension, "freezing" of the body.
The evolutionary biological function of fear is to strengthen social ties, in "flight for help."
Fear serves as a warning signal and changes the direction of a person's thought and behavior. It occupies an intermediate position between surprise and subsequent adaptive human behavior.
Individual differences in the manifestation of the emotion of fear in a particular person depend both on biological prerequisites and on his individual experience, on the general socio-cultural context. There are ways to reduce and control feelings of fear.
Shame and guilt sometimes considered aspects of the same emotion, sometimes viewed as completely different emotions that are not related to each other. Darwin believed that shame belongs to a large group of related emotions, which includes shame, shyness, guilt, jealousy, envy, greed, vindictiveness, deceit, suspicion, arrogance, vanity, ambition, pride, humiliation.
When a person feels shame, he, as a rule, looks away, turns his face to the side, lowers his head. By moving both body and head, he tries to appear as small as possible. The eyes go down or run from side to side. Sometimes people raise their heads high, thus replacing a bashful look with a contemptuous one. Shame can be accompanied by reddening of exposed parts of the body, in particular the face.
With shame, a person's entire consciousness is filled by himself. He is conscious only of himself or only those features that now seem to him inadequate, indecent. As if something that he was hiding from prying eyes suddenly appeared on display. At the same time, there is a feeling of general failure, incompetence. People forget words, make wrong movements. There is a feeling of helplessness, inadequacy and even stopping of the stream of consciousness. An adult feels like a child whose weakness is on display. The “other” appears to be a powerful being, healthy and capable. Shame is often accompanied by a sense of failure, defeat.
Shame and shyness are closely related to self-awareness, the integrity of the "I" image. Shame indicates to a person that his “I” is too naked and open. In some cases, shame plays a protective role, forcing the subject to hide and mask some traits in front of a more serious danger, causing the emotion of fear.
As with other emotions, situations that cause shame are different for different people. What causes shame in one person can cause excitement in another, while a third person in the same situation begins to get angry, becoming aggressive.
Shame makes a person sensitive to the feelings and assessments of others, to criticism. Avoiding shame is a powerful incentive for behavior. Its strength is determined by how highly a person values his dignity and honor. Shame plays an important role in the formation of moral and ethical qualities of a person. As B. Shaw said: "There is no courage - there is shame." The threat of shame forced many young people to go to pain and death in wars, even in such, the meaning of which they did not understand and did not feel.
Shame is a very painful emotion, difficult to bear, difficult to disguise or hide. Efforts to rebuild and strengthen your self after experiencing shame sometimes last for several weeks.
The emotion of shame has the following psychosocial functions :
Shame focuses attention on certain aspects of the personality, makes them an object of assessment.
Shame promotes mental replay of difficult situations.
Shame increases the permeability of the boundaries of "I" - a person can feel shame for another.
Shame guarantees sensitivity to the feelings of significant (close) others.
Shame strengthens self-criticism, contributes to the formation of a more adequate self-concept.
Successfully countering the experience of shame can help develop personal autonomy.
Guilt usually arises from wrong actions. Guilty behavior violates moral, ethical, or religious codes. Usually, people feel guilty when they realize they have broken a rule or overstepped the boundaries of their own beliefs. They may also feel guilty about refusing to take responsibility. Some people may feel guilty when they do not work hard enough compared to their own standards, to those of their parents or their reference group (a social group whose values they share).
If a person feels ashamed by violating the norms, then, most likely, because it became known to others. Feelings of shame are associated with the expectation of a negative assessment of our actions by others or with the expectation of punishment for our actions. Guilt is connected, first of all, with the condemnation of his deed by the person himself, regardless of how others reacted to it or may feel. Guilt arises in situations in which a person feels personally responsible.
Like shame, guilt makes a person lower his head, avert his eyes.
Guilt stimulates many thoughts that speak of a person's preoccupation with making a mistake. The situation that caused the feeling of guilt can be repeated over and over again in memory and imagination, a person is looking for a way to atone for his guilt.
The emotion of guilt usually develops in the context of an emotional relationship. Mager (2, p. 383) describes guilt as a special case of anxiety arising from the expectation of a decrease in love due to one's behavior.
Guilt has a particular impact on the development of personal and social responsibility.
All over the world, Americans have a solid reputation for being pragmatists. “The pounding of an ax is the natural philosophy of America,” writes E. Rosenstock-Hussi. “Not spiritualized writers, but cunning politicians, not geniuses, but“ people who made themselves ”—that's what is needed” (Rosenstock-Huessy; cited in Pigalev. 1997 :). Americans tend to feel uncomfortable with anything intangible. "We do not trust that which cannot be combined," writes K. Storti (1990: 65). Hence comes a logical, rational approach to emotional problems and situations.
American researchers quite often point to anti-intellectualism as a typical feature of Americans. For a long time, Americans have viewed culture with suspicion and condescension. They have always demanded that culture serve some useful purpose. "They wanted poetry that could be recited, music that could be sung, education that prepared for life. Nowhere in the world did colleges proliferate and flourish. And nowhere in the world were intellectuals so despised or reduced to such a low status" (Commager: 10).
In Russia, on the other hand, the word pragmatist has a negative connotation, since pragmatism is perceived as the opposite of spirituality. Russians are emotional by nature and tend to go to extremes. "The traditional structure of the Russian character<...>developed individuals prone to sudden mood swings from delight to depression "(Mead; cited in: Stephen, Abalakina-Paap 1996: 368). A. Luri discusses the cult of sincerity and spontaneity characteristic of Russian culture. He believes that Russians have a richer emotional palette than Americans and have the ability to convey more subtle shades of emotion (Lourie, Mikhalev 1989: 38).
The analytical mind of the Americans seems to the Russians cold and devoid of personality. Americans are characterized by measured moderation, which stems from a rational mindset. Emotions do not drive Americans' actions as much as Russians do. "They believe that words alone are the vehicle of meaning (sense) and ignore the more subtle role of language in communication," writes K. Storti. The Russian penchant for self-sacrifice, love for suffering (according to Dostoevsky) attracts and lures Americans as something exotic and difficult to understand. The Americans themselves tend to base their actions on facts and considerations of expediency, while for Russians the stimulus is feelings and personal relationships. Often, Russians and Americans speak different languages: the voice of reason and the voice of emotion do not always merge together. Russians consider Americans to be overly businesslike and lacking in heart. Americans, for their part, perceive Russian behavior as illogical and irrational.
Russian emotionality is manifested in the language at all its levels (nuance of lexical meanings, abundance of emotional vocabulary; syntactic possibilities of the language, including free word order, which allows expressing the subtlest nuances of feelings, etc.), a high degree of explicitness of expressed emotions, as well as in the choice linguistic and paralinguistic means in the process of communication. S.G. Ter-Minasova notes Russian emotionality, realized through the possibility of choosing between pronouns you and you, the presence of a large number of diminutive-affectionate suffixes, the personification of the surrounding world through the category of the genus. She also indicates a more frequent use of the exclamation mark than in English (Ter-Minasova, 2000: 151-159).
American pragmatism manifests itself in the size and nature of speech messages, which tend to be concise and specific (both in oral and written messages, which, in particular, are facilitated by such new forms of communication as e-mail, where minimalism is taken to an extreme), businesslike even in personal situations (for example, when making appointments or planning events), some dry style in business discourse, as well as in energetic and assertive communication strategies.
As noted by J. Richmond, in negotiations, American businessmen prefer a phased discussion of one item after another and systematic progress towards a final agreement, the Russians are leaning towards a more general conceptual approach without specifics. On the other hand, the emotionality of Russians demonstrates their interest in negotiating and establishing personal contacts, which are considered an important component of any communicative interaction (Richmond 1997: 152).
Cooperative spirit and competitiveness
A manifestation of psychological identity is also the way of interaction of YL with other people. Crops differ in their specific gravity cooperation(joint activities to achieve the goal) and competitions(competition in the process of achieving the same goal) as two forms of human interaction.
American individualism has traditionally been associated with a competitive attitude. In American culture, it is customary to move forward and up the corporate ladder more through competition than through cooperation with others. According to S. Armitage, "life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness" (a phrase from the US Constitution) is defined more as a personal interest than a desire for the common good (Armitage). The principle by which Americans are brought up is the so-called. success ethic: work, move forward, succeed ( work hard, get ahead, be successful) Is alien to Russians who believe that it is immoral to achieve success at the expense of others (Richmond 1997: 33). The American idol is a man who made himself. Apart from the token already given above self-made man, has no equivalent in Russian achiever... In American culture, both of these concepts are key.
It would be unfair to argue that Russian culture is not at all inherent in the desire for competition - a clear confirmation of the opposite is the long-term competition between the two superpowers - Russia and America. However, we believe that the share of competitiveness in the American communication system is greater than in the Russian one, where cooperativity is the predominant form of communicative interaction. In the United States, there are a number of reasons that stimulate a competitive attitude in communication: 1) competition as a result of a long-term development of market relations in the economy; 2) multiculturalism; 3) the wide scope of the movement of women, ethnic and sexual minorities for their rights; 4) blurring the lines in social relations between age groups, 5) peculiarities of the national character and the historical development of discourse.
If, in connection with the above, analyze the words team(team) and collective then we will observe a big difference between these concepts. Team- something constant and homogeneous, united for long-term cooperation by the unity of spirit and aspirations. Team- a group of individuals united to achieve a specific goal. The position of group ethics deeply rooted in the minds of Russians, embodied in the Soviet formula: "do not break away from the team", alien to the Americans. Teamwork as a form of collaboration in America is based on a purely pragmatic approach.
Since intercultural communication is by definition a form of human interaction, the mood for cooperation or competition can play a key role in how the relationship between communicants - representatives of different linguistic cultures, will develop. A clear example of intercultural divergence between Russians and Americans on this parameter is the nature of the relationship between students in the academic environment. Here is the opinion of an American researcher: "<…>Russian students work very effectively in a group. They try to prepare for classes based on their personal skills and interests, and thus contribute to the success of the whole group. "In situations where Russians prompt each other or share cheat sheets with each other, American students prefer to remain silent." impolite, probably because it is assumed that everyone should be able to cope on their own. "According to the American system of values, honesty in learning is about everyone doing their job independently." American students place great importance on fairness, or rather the principle equality. Everyone should be sure that they are doing no less and no more than others "(Baldwin, 2000).
Russians, for their part, disapprove of the behavior of American students who sit at a distance from others and cover the notebook with their hand. Although Russian excellent students, without much enthusiasm, allow lazy people to write off what they got as a result of considerable efforts, they, as a rule, cannot refuse - it will be "not comradely", and those around them will condemn them. Therefore, when Russian schoolchildren or students come to the attention of an American teacher, a conflict arises between value systems and attitudes towards cooperativity or competition.
Participants and witnesses of business negotiations between Russians and Americans note that the nature of the interaction between them is largely determined by different attitudes towards the concept. success, which is formed on the basis of the above-described attitudes. Americans perceive success as the achievement of specific short-term goals (successful deal, project, profit from investment), while the Russian understanding of success presupposes beneficial long-term cooperation - a process, not an event. For Russians, successful deals are natural ingredients or even by-products of this kind of relationship. Americans trust the system, and Russians trust people, so for Russians, personal trust is a prerequisite for success. As a result, Americans strive for success more purposefully, and the communicative behavior of Russians seems to them non-business and unprofessional. Russians, on the other hand, often perceive American behavior as arrogant and short-sighted (Jones).
Forms of manifestation of competitiveness in communication are also considered to be witty responses to the remarks of the interlocutors, which are more like a dive than an exchange of opinions; the desire to oppose the statement of the interlocutor with his own statement, comparable to him in the volume and amount of information; an attempt to retain the last word, etc.
Optimism and pessimism
The traditional parameters of the opposition of Americans and Russians are also optimism / pessimism... Americans are considered "incorrigible optimists," they believe in the ability of individuals to "forge their own destiny," they try their best to be happy, and they view happiness as an imperative. In this connection, K. Storti quotes the poet who said: "We are the masters of our destiny and the captains of our souls" (Storti 1994: 80). He also makes an interesting observation: in American society it is considered the norm to be happy, while for Russians, a happy mood is the norm no more than sadness and depression, for both are an integral part of life (op. Cit .: 35). In the United States, it is unnatural, abnormal and indecent to be unhappy - under any circumstances one must preserve the semblance of success and well-being and smile. For Russians, sadness is a normal state. It gives us pleasure. They sing songs and write poems about this.
N. A. Berdyaev explained the tendency of Russians to depression and melancholy in the following way: “Huge spaces were easily given to the Russian people, but it was not easy for them to organize these spaces into the world's greatest state<…>All the external activities of the Russian person went to the service of the state. And this left a bleak stamp on the life of a Russian person. Russians hardly know how to rejoice. The Russian people do not have the creative play of strength. The Russian soul is suppressed by the immense Russian fields and the immense Russian snows<…>"(Berdyaev 1990b: 65).
Americans, unlike Russians, are not inclined to complain about fate and discuss their own and other people's problems in their free time. It is well known that the question: "How are you?" Americans answer under any circumstances: "Fine" or "OK". As T. Rogozhnikova rightly asserts, “distance from other people's problems and revelations is a kind of self-defense and protection of one's own living space.<...>You just have to answer with a smile that everything is OK with you. It is indecent if you have problems: solve them yourself, do not burden anyone, otherwise you are simply a failure ”(Rogozhnikova: 315).
From the Russians to the question: "How are you?" most likely to hear: "Normal" or "Slowly." Here Russian superstition is manifested, the habit of belittling one's successes ("so as not to jinx it") and a dislike for self-glorification. American optimism seems insincere and suspicious to Russians.
Confidence in the future is another important feature of the psychological portrait of Americans. As a result, they are not afraid to make plans even for the distant future. Russians, on the other hand, are accustomed to living in a state of uncertainty, which has reasons in the historical development of Russia, as well as in the events of recent years. “What are we?<...>We have our own strong point ", which" runs through unplowed unsteady fields, where there are no plans, but there is a quick reaction and flexibility of the psyche "(Sokolova, Professionals for cooperation 1997: 323). Russian phraseology reflects a tendency towards fatalism and uncertainty about the future: maybe yes, I suppose; grandmother said in two; God knows; how God will put it on your soul; what God will send; it's still written with a pitchfork on the water.Americans prefer to act on the principle: Where there’s a will there’s a way and God helps those who help themselves.
Western businessmen who come to collaborate with Russians or teach business seminars complain that they find it most difficult to convince Russians to plan their activities. Russians claim that they are used to living and working in difficult situations and are ready to quickly adapt to changed conditions. As a result, communication does not work out, deals fail. It is also difficult to collaborate in situations where long-term planning is required. The Russians send invitations to important events at the last moment, while the Americans have other things planned for these dates six months ago. Cooperation on grants and projects is not easy. Russian teachers cannot get used to the fact that the timetable for classes in American colleges and universities is drawn up six months before the start of the semester.
These psychological characteristics are also manifested in the choice of communication strategies. Americans lack Russian superstition, so their statements about the future are confident, as opposed to Russian caution and modality. A good illustration of this situation is the following excerpt from the correspondence between an American and his Russian acquaintance (congratulations on the eve of buying a car):
American: Congratulations on your imminent car purchase!
Russian: I think by now, after having known us so long, you are expected to know how superstitious we, Russians, are. Never, never congratulate us in advance. So please, take your congratulations back!
American: I take my congratulations back, but this superstition is another thing I cannot understand about you. For an expecting mother, understandable. But a car?
This difference is one of the most noticeable and vividly manifested in MK.In terms of communication, it lies in the fact that Russians are less preoccupied than Americans with the desire to avoid the unknown (the American term uncertainty avoidance is one of the important concepts of MK theory in the United States).
Tolerance and patience
Two key concepts directly related to communication are - patience and tolerance- are often mixed in Russian linguistic culture due to the fact that they are assigned to the same root words. In English, the corresponding concepts are largely delineated at the level of the signifier: patience and tolerance... Word tolerance is used in the Russian language to convey a foreign cultural phenomenon rather than a concept that is organically inherent in Russian linguistic culture.
Patience is traditionally perceived as one of the most striking features of the Russian national character and manifests itself in the ability to resignedly endure the difficulties that fall on the lot of the Russian people. Americans, on the other hand, are considered more tolerant. The origins of this phenomenon lie in the peculiarities of the historical development of the United States and the polyphyny of American cultural life. Large numbers of immigrants, with their own cultural patterns, traditions, habits, religious beliefs, etc., required a certain level of tolerance for the people in the United States to live in peace and harmony.
However, the degree of American tolerance should not be exaggerated. In this sense, H. S. Commager is right, who notes that American tolerance in matters of religion and morality (especially in the twentieth century) is explained not so much by openness to the perception of new ideas as by indifference. This is conformism rather than tolerance (Commager: 413 - 414).
Manifestations of patience and tolerance in MK are relative. Americans do not understand why Russians endure disorder in everyday life, violation of their rights as consumers, non-observance of laws by officials, vandalism, cheating, violation of human rights. Russians, in turn, wonder why Americans, who show a high degree of tolerance towards sexual minorities or some manifestations of religious hatred, do not allow an alternative point of view in connection with such issues as women's rights, politics (for example, Chechnya), the role of the United States in the world, etc.
A different level of tolerance is manifested in the fact that the Americans in the negotiation process are much more striving than the Russians for compromise and smoothing over contradictions, while the Russians are prone to emotions and extremes. On the other hand, as more impatient, Americans expect quick decisions and actions, while Russians tend to wait, testing the reliability of their partners and establishing closer, trusting relationships with them. There are many known cases when the Americans, without waiting for quick results of negotiations with the Russians, abandoned the planned deal. When discussing painful issues at school and university, the American audience is more explosive than the Russian.
Many authors also emphasize that one should not confuse totalitarianism and authoritarianism of the political system of Russia at certain periods of its history with intolerance as a property of the Russian national character. “Russians respect the authorities, but are not afraid of them” - this is the conclusion of J. Richmond (Richmond 1997: 35).
This conclusion, however, should not be absolutized. Because the relationship between a boss and a subordinate in the United States is more democratic, there tends to be a greater degree of tolerance between colleagues. Coming to teach in Russian schools, American teachers cannot accept an authoritarian tone in the relationship between the school principal and teachers and the teacher with students, which sometimes becomes the cause of intercultural conflicts.
Degree of openness
Speaking about openness, it should be emphasized that American and Russian openness are phenomena of different orders.
American openness, most likely, should be viewed as a communication strategy, and in this sense, Americans are more direct, explicit in expressing information and categoricality than Russians. This trait of Americans is expressed by the adjective outspoken that does not have a Russian equivalent.
For Russians, openness in communication means a willingness to reveal their personal world to the interlocutor. "Russians are the most sociable people in the world, writes N. A. Berdyaev. Russians have no conventions, no distance, there is a need to often see people with whom they do not even have particularly close relationships, to twist their souls, to plunge into someone else's life<...>, lead endless quarrels about ideological issues.<...>Every truly Russian person is interested in the question of the meaning of life and seeks communication with others in the search for meaning "(Berdyaev 1990b: 471).
A. Hart makes an interesting observation: “In some respects, Russians are freer and more open [than Americans]. At first, my friends and I thought that Russians were quarreling and swearing; but suddenly, to our surprise, they began to smile. Later we realized that the postures and the tone that we thought was aggressive was actually expressive "(Hart 1998). Americans are more open in expressing their own opinions, Russians - in their emotions.
American openness in communication is often perceived by Russians as tactless and categorical. When conducting feedback surveys after seminars and other training courses, Americans focus on shortcomings and provide critical comments. Such a reaction for Russian teachers is often a shock, since the Russian approach is, first of all, a desire to express gratitude to the teacher. Russians often limit themselves to oral criticism, and record positive reactions or, in extreme cases, cautious recommendations in writing.
3.1.2 Social identity of a linguistic personality
A man has as many social selves as there are individuals who recognize him and carry an image of him in their mind.
It is almost impossible to completely separate these two elements, because in the psyche, they usually work together.
However, people differ in that some use predominantly rational thinking, while others use emotional, sensual.
Here we will look at how these two types of thinking affect our lives.
1. Rational- here we include all the elements of the psyche that operate with logical information. Thoughts, ideas, inferences, judgments. This implies logical or rational thinking.
Rational thinking is based on the logic of things. Rational - it has no time, describes objects (physical and spiritual), uses them for thinking, but does not have these "objects-images", because they are not saturated with the energy component, emotions.
Logical thinking can solve any problem in the future or the past. It always thinks about another time, not about the present, because, from the point of view of logic, there is no point in thinking about the present moment. Emotions do not need this, emotion is always concentrated in the "here and now". Rationality, in turn, kind of pulls us out of the present moment. And if a person prefers "rationality" to emotions, then he is rarely in the present, he cannot feel the reality of life. And emotion is a way of returning to one really existing time - the present.
Logical information always slides over the surface of reality and cannot penetrate into the essence of things. It is the feelings that reflect the truth of things and phenomena. Because feelings are a more serious and deeper instrument of understanding, awareness and orientation in this reality. The more a person is sensually developed, the better he understands reality. But also certain, not "garbage", feelings of a high hierarchical level (presence in the present, measure, balance, fullness of life, mysticism of life, infinity, etc.) are also significant.
If the algorithms of logic, when we experience sadness, will delay or intensify it, then the sadness will remain with us, it will turn into depression or intensify to melancholy. If the same algorithms decrease it, it will decrease. But, if you do not completely involve rational thinking in the emotional process, then emotion through its expression will go away completely.
The more rational thinking is devoid of feelings, the more freedom of thought it has. It can go in any direction, both for us and against us. Formal logic doesn't care which way to work. It does not take into account our uniqueness, individuality. Only certain laws of logic, the clarity of the thought process are important to her. Only when we connect feelings to thinking, then a system of thinking appears regarding our model of the world, our individuality, and subjectivity. Intuitive feelings help us to correctly process information about us, our capabilities, the capabilities of the environment. And logic is like a program that, depending on its purpose, will either help, or destroy, or remain neutral. For example, algorithms for neurotic perception will worsen the quality of life. And the algorithms of perception concerning harmony, improve it.
Rational thinking is much more flexible than emotions and feelings. This property is based on the independence of logic from our model of the world, subjective perception, and is limited only by the capabilities of our thinking, memory, knowledge about nature. One and the same fact can be interpreted both in a good and in a bad way, both in your defense and in your accusation. Logic is more free in its movement than feelings. This has certain advantages: the ability to look objectively, from the outside, not being limited by the framework of your perception and creative thinking. However, there are also disadvantages: you can easily move away from the main direction of thinking, get confused, get stuck on something, harm yourself due to the lack of a system of relativity of our I.
Rational thinking is like a mercenary; it doesn't matter who to work for. Whoever gives him more feelings, it works for that. For example, if we are charged with anxiety, then the rational will diligently seek new images of anxiety that do not even really exist, plunging us into a disturbing world. If we supplant anxiety with anger, then logic will work for anger and prove to us that we need to destroy all images of anxiety, and that they are not really scary at all, etc.
"Rational" always works for a specific goal, and not for quality. What you order, it will give you back. It follows a narrow path, unlike the senses. Razio cannot capture a large amount of information at the same time. When you achieve the results of thinking, there is a conviction that you are right due to the presence of logical evidence of the inference made. It is like a trap of logic that does not take into account our inner subjective reality, the sensory part of our personality.
One of the properties of rationality is the fear of loss, uncertainty, uncertainty, incompleteness, uncontrollability. These types of fears are more common in rational people than in intuitive ones. in the world of "rationality" everything should be clear, understandable, logical, and controlled.
Practice: If you let go of your mind, you can see the depth of what is happening now and what will happen next.
To fight the rational component means to try to pay attention to the factors of the sensory sphere and emotions, to slow down abstract thinking in view of its inferiority.
2. Emotions and feelings- these are the elements that emotional thinking and / or intuition operates with.
We define ourselves as intelligent people, but in reality this is not entirely true. Emotions and feelings, invisible to our consciousness, strongly interfere with the processes of perception and behavior. They distort perception depending on the emotion we are experiencing at the moment.
Emotions and feelings are based on informal and subjective logic. They belong to the present more than to the future or the past. Feelings allow us to become a full-fledged owner of the object, the image about which they arise.
In other words, if an object is not saturated with feelings inside my psyche, then it has no meaning for me. The more the image or object in the psyche is saturated with emotions and feelings, the more important it is for me. For example, if the correct values and algorithms of human behavior are not supported by the corresponding emotions and feelings, then they will never be realized. A person can talk about them, teach others, but in his life he will not be able to fulfill them. Only emotions and feelings perform a complex motivational role in the psyche.
Some emotions, such as anxiety, carry us into the future, make us think about the future; emotions of resentment, sadness, shame, guilt, contempt make us think about the past. But their meaning is to shape our attitude and behavior in the present to the future or to the past.
Interaction of logic and feelings.
All the main conflicts of people lie in the wrong work of feelings and logic. A logic taken separately, even if it is contradictory, will not create a meaningful conflict in the psyche if it is devoid of emotional and sensory content.
Suffering, like joy, is a matter of feelings and emotions. We cannot experience experiences from any thoughts until emotions are connected to them. Therefore, thoughts in themselves are like inanimate material in the psyche, devoid of vital energy, without emotions and feelings.
The joint work of logic and emotions can be clearly seen in the example of one of the mechanisms of psychological defense - rationalization. A person himself does not understand how he automatically modifies facts in the direction he needs, justifies himself, using formal logic, but taking into account his own subjective interests at the moment. For example, to justify to others because of feelings of guilt, to evade responsibility, to show selfishness. Rationalization is at the heart of a double standard where we believe we can break a set of rules and others cannot.
There is no unique recipe for how you need to be a person - sensual or rational. Both of these types of perception of reality are necessary for a person in a full life and a more objective perception of it. Each situation requires its own approach. Therefore, the proportions of sense-logic can vary depending on a particular situation. You cannot rely only on intuition, since it can be wrong, especially if you have not been specifically engaged in the development of sensory thinking.
The best solution is one that takes into account both the rational and the emotional together, but also takes into account the real state of affairs.
I have a book "100 Tips from Wise Men and Great People" this is so true advice that I sometimes read them and want to write the first 25 for you, in the future I will describe the rest. What is interesting, everything is true if you think about it.
1. Never throw mud: you can miss the target, but your hands will remain dirty. (Theodore Parker)
2. It is dangerous to deceive people because in the end you begin to deceive yourself. (E. Duse)
3. We create rules for others, exceptions for ourselves. (S. Lemel)
4. We are fair when we are not interested. (Constants)
5. All anger comes from powerlessness. (Russo).
6. Violence feeds on obedience like fire on straw. (V.G. Korolenko)
7. Abuse is achieved only one third, love and concessions - everything. (Jean Paul)
8. He who cannot take caress will not take even with severity. (A.P. Chekhov)
9. Pride and aggression in a person stem from a false sense of superiority. (D. Thurber)
10. Don't start anything in anger! Foolish who boards a ship during a storm. (I. Gaug)
11. The only truly serious conviction is that there is nothing in the world that should be taken seriously. (Samuel Butler)
12. Increased accuracy is a property of ordinary natures. (S. Dovlatov)
13. It is not the place that we occupy that matters, but the direction in which we are moving. (Holms)
14. I would not talk so much about myself if there was one more person in the world whom I would know just as well. (G. Thoreau)
15. Rationality is impossible without emotionality. you cannot learn to think if nothing can stir you up. (G. Belle)
16. Our emotions are inversely proportional to our knowledge: the less we know the more inflamed. (B. Russell)
17. Emotions usually pass after a while. But what they did remains. (V. Schwebel)
18. Emotions help to master the problem, and the mind helps to cope with it. (V. Schwebel)
19. Do not discern malice in something that can be explained by stupidity. (Denis Diderot)
20. Forgive your enemies. You may still need to work together. (Folk wisdom)
21. It's nice to be remembered about you, but often it's cheaper to be forgotten. (Frank Hubbard)
22. You cannot make a friend out of an enemy as a joke, but you can make an enemy out of a friend. (B. Franklin)
23. People first act, then think, and in their spare time they regret their actions. (Anne McCaffrey)
24. Each person should think in his own way, for, going his own way, he finds an assistant in life - the truth or at least similar truths. But he has no right to give himself free rein and must test himself: it is not proper for a person to live by naked instinct. (I. Goethe)
25. Everyone is arranged in their own way, and there is no person who would be a complete villain. There is also no one who would combine all the stupidity: beauty, restraint, intelligence, taste and fidelity. Each is good in its own way, and it's hard to say who is really better. (M. Sikibu)
