Abstract
In the article the culture is considered from the perspective of the priority of its communicative dimension. Social communication emerges as the basis for the creation and reproduction of culture as one of the important means and to some extent the ultimate goal of cultural development. The grounded thesis is that satisfactory consideration of the functioning of culture in a society is impossible without taking into account communicative mechanisms of its provision. It reveals the leading role of values in determining the communication as a functional basis of culture: the values of culture, acquiring functional social purpose (in particular, in the form of social roles), ensure the participation of society members in both social life in general and in its development by means of culture. The communicative criterion makes possible to define as culture only that things made by a person, which promote social communication, that is, that ensure the reproduction and development of society. In addition, social communication is not only a means and a criterion for the development of culture, but also should be considered as a goal of its development – both in the obvious case of communicative culture and in the broader sense of the culture of any communication. In the first, narrow sense we are talking about is close in importance to etiquette. In the second, broad sense which sets the value-semantic horizon for understanding the culture in general, the latter appears as a communication – actual and potential. To determine the systemic dimensions of the culture functioning one should determine the levels of implementation of social communication in society. After all, culture is the product of human communication, and it is also the cause and the foundation - even when it comes to personal culture (since everything done by a person needs to be checked and reinforced or denied by others). In general, it is worth to think about building acommunicative concept of culture, which would proceed from the idea of an intersubjective essence of a human as a social being. The following levels should be distinguished, from the lowest to the highest: direct interaction, interaction within organizations and communities, cooperation within countries as complex territorial associations of communities, interaction within the framework of a global society as a super-"community". At each of these levels, there are varieties of values that attract individuals to engage in communication at the appropriate level. In turn, these values determine certain social roles and functional queries that are distributed or grouped around these social roles. The fulfillment of social roles forms the basis of the culture of social communication, that is more or less developed. Performing roles is concentrated in the personal culture of communication only at first glance - both skill and persuasiveness and successful performance. In addition to the personal culture of communication participation, the collective communication culture should be distinguished, most of which consists in those unwritten rules of conduct that, without special arrangements and even without articulation, are implicit, but certainly perceived by the communicative community as the basis for a successful social life. The higher the level of social communication, the greater the success of social interaction depends on the reinforcement of unwritten rules of conduct rationalized norms. Universalist norms represent the means of guaranteeing mutual understanding at the highest levels of social communication. In order to treat culture as a certain ideal and as the embodiment of higher values, which we can and should endlessly seek and approach, we must first (in the mode of pre-understanding) comprehend culture as the external side of our experience, as that which in general enables any our act and aspiration. Such an interconnection of the beginning and end, goals and means can be gained through the study of social communication – and at each of the aforementioned level, this connection is specific. However, each time it is a connection between certain values that define the goals, and certain functions that determine the means of communication. We should strive to establish the definition of the concept of values interconnected with the definition of the culture notion. Valuable analysis of this is, at the same time, an analysis of values as a subject of research, and an analysis from the standpoint of values, that is, values should serve as the basis of our methodology. Since it is a question of human knowledge of human activity, there is no contradiction here, but there is a performative statement of the methodology of the study, its formation under the influence of an even deeper immersion in the subject of knowledge. This means that the methodology should come from our way of life, and not be reaffirmed by the backwards of some forced indents and compromises with our way of life.
Highlights
Коли Талкот Парсонс розрізняє систему культури та соціальну систему, він звертається до функціонального критерію і надає культурі лише функцію відтворення зразка, а соціальній системі – інтеграції
Втім, остаточно себе ще не вичерпав і має окремі доволі продуктивні варіації розвитку, тому не дивно, що спраглі ширшого методологічного простору та свіжого сприйняття свого предмета дослідники нині жваво обговорюють і в цілому легко й активно сприймають у якості нової парадигми соціогуманітарного пізнання комунікативну філософію
Вітчизняні дослідження звернені як до окремих персоналій, так і до київської духовно-академічної традиції філософування в цілому
Summary
У статті розглянуто культуру під кутом зору пріоритетності її комунікативного виміру. Соціальна комунікація постає не лише як засіб та критерій розвитку культури, але і як мета її розвитку – як у очевидному випадку комунікативної культури, так і у більш широкому значенні як культури будь-якої комунікації. У цьому сенсі соціальна філософія є найбільш послідовною та точною рефлексією щодо творення людиною культури – власне культура і є таким культивуванням передусім самого себе, а далі – вже усього свого комунікативного оточення та навколишнього соціального світу в цілому. На наше переконання, завданням освіти є підготовка людини до наступального, активноперетворювального впливу на соціальну дійсність – сама людина має робити виклики суспільству, створювати нові смисли, продукувати ідеї, конструювати образи, які привертатимуть увагу оточуючих, викликатимуть їхні відповіді – можливо, не завжди і не в усьому схвальні, можливо, навіть доволі критичні, але у будь-якому разі такі відповіді будуть адаптацією соціального оточення до особистості, а не навпаки. Смысл и назначение истории. – М.: Республика, 1991. – С. 420‒508
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.