Communication characteristics and features. Types of business communication

“Every person has three characters: the one that is attributed to him, the one that he attributes to himself, and finally the one that is in reality!” ©Victor Hugo

The behavior of a person in the process of communication is influenced by his character.

Translated from ancient Greek, the word "character" means "chasing", "seal". In fact, on the one hand, life mints, molds the character of a person, and on the other hand, character leaves a seal on all actions, thoughts and feelings of a person.

What is a character? Conditions for the formation of character

Character is a set of stable individual characteristics of a person, which develops and manifests itself in activity and communication, causing typical behaviors for an individual.

Character is determined and formed throughout a person's life.
Character is formed on the basis of the natural, biological properties of a person and as a result of the influence environment. Therefore, an important role in the formation of character is played by social conditions and specific life circumstances in which life path person.

The nature of a person determines his significant actions, and not random reactions to certain stimuli or circumstances. Therefore, not all features of a person can be considered characteristic, but only essential and stable ones. If a person, for example, is not polite enough in a stressful situation, then this does not mean that rudeness and incontinence are the main properties of his character.

In the article, we will first of all consider the question of the meaning and influence of a person's character on his communication. Let's even be bolder and put the question like this: "What character traits make communication special?"

Features of character in communication. Traits and properties of character

Character traits are features that are distinguished in human behavior, called character traits. Any character trait is a certain stable stereotype of behavior - a stable form of behavior in connection with specific, typical situations for this behavior.

The character of a person has both general and particular features and properties. Global properties of character have an effect on a wide range of behavioral manifestations and human activities.

General traits of a person's character:

1) self-confidence - uncertainty;

2) consent, friendliness - hostility;

3) consciousness - impulsiveness;

4) emotional stability - anxiety;

5) intellectual flexibility - rigidity.

Private traits and character traits:

sociability - isolation, leadership traits, and vice versa, subordination, as well as optimism - pessimism, conscientiousness - lack of conscience, courage - caution, impressionability - "thick-skinned", gullibility - suspicion, daydreaming - practicality, vulnerability - serenity, delicacy - rudeness, self-control - impulsiveness, peacefulness - aggressiveness, active activity - passivity, demonstrativeness - modesty, ambition - unpretentiousness, originality - stereotyping

.

In addition, in the character of a person there are:

• intellectual(smartness, observation, etc.)
• emotional character traits that manifest themselves in a person’s attitude to the world (excitability, rationality, etc.)
• strong-willed character traits that determine the ability and willingness of a person to consciously regulate their activities associated with overcoming difficulties (decisiveness, purposefulness).

Character traits in communication: the meaning of temperament

In communicating with people, the character of a person is manifested in the manner of behavior, in the ways of responding to the actions and deeds of people. The manner of communication can be tactful or unceremonious, polite or rude.

And do not forget about the significance of the properties of temperament on the features of communication of a particular person. The properties of a person's temperament are extraversion and introversion, or in ordinary words, sociability and isolation.

Extraversion and introversion as character traits are manifested in communication and express the openness or isolation of a person in relation to the world, to other people. An extrovert is a sociable person who shows a special interest in what is happening around.

Faced with the choice of going to a party with friends or sitting at home watching TV, an extrovert is more likely to choose the former, unlike an introvert.

An introvert directs all attention to himself. He is the center of his own interests, puts himself and the individual inner world above what is happening around.

Psychologists argue that the nature of communication is significantly influenced by a person’s temperament and its properties more than character traits, because, unlike temperament, a person’s character is determined not so much by the properties of the nervous system as by a person’s culture and upbringing.

Character traits in communication: What can you learn about a person by the manner of his communication?

In any communication, you can identify character traits that indicate a person’s attitude towards:
1) to other people (sociability, isolation, indifference, sensitivity, etc.)
2) own business (industriousness, laziness, responsibility, initiative, negligence, etc.)
3) to oneself (modesty, vanity, self-criticism)
4) things (accuracy, frugality).

And also in communication you can get acquainted with the interests and beliefs of a person, which makes up the structure of his character.

Conviction provides a long-term direction of human behavior, striving to achieve goals, confidence in the importance of one's business.
The interests of a person can also be indicative of understanding character. The superficiality and instability of interests are often associated with great imitation, with a lack of independence and integrity of a person's personality. And, conversely, the depth and content of interests testify to the purposefulness and perseverance of the individual.

The character of a person is manifested through the way a person acts. People can go to achieve the same goals in completely different ways, use their own special techniques and methods. This dissimilarity determines the specific character of the individual.

Do not be afraid to study people around, communicate and learn the character of a person, because through communication with other people we get to know ourselves!

Communication is characterized by: content, function, manner and style.

1. transmission (from person to person) of information;
2. perception of each other;
3. mutual evaluation by partners of each other;
4. mutual influence of partners;
5. interaction of partners;
6. management of group or mass activities, etc.

Functions communication are allocated in accordance with the content of communication. There are four main functions of communication (combining, they give specific specifics to communication processes):

• instrumental (communication in the light of this function acts as a social mechanism for managing and transmitting information necessary to perform a certain action);
• syndicative (communication is a means of bringing people together);
• self-expression (communication acts as a form of mutual understanding, psychological context);
• translational (transmission of specific methods of activity, assessments, etc.).

Of course, the content of communication is not exhausted by these four functions. Other communication features include:

• expressive (mutual understanding of experiences and emotional states);
• social control (regulation of behavior and activities); socialization (formation of interaction skills in society in accordance with accepted norms and rules), etc.

Parties of communication. Developed full-fledged communication combines two interrelated, but different sides: external, behavioral, operational-technical, and internal, deep, affecting lignostone-semantic layers.

The external side, actually formed in the behavior of those who communicate, is expressed in communicative actions. The external side of communication is fixed by a number of specific indicators. These are indicators of communicative interaction. These include:

• communicative activity in a communication group;
• intensity of actions in communication;
• initiative in communication;
• technical and communicative skills of communication, etc.

The inner side of communication reflects the subjective perception of the situation of interaction, reactions to real or expected contact, motives and goals with which a person enters into communication.

Manner communication is determined by:

• tone of communication (calm, domineering, insinuating, etc.);
• behavior in communication (restraint, anxiety, uncertainty, stiffness, etc.);
• distance in communication (intimate, personal, social, public, etc.).

The distance in communication determines the nature of the relationship of partners. Intimate and personal distances indicate that those communicating are close people or friends. Social distance indicates the official, and public - the intellectual and demonstrative nature of communication.

Lots of ways to communicate. Communication can be respectful or dismissive, playful or serious, embittered or benevolent.

Style communication are individual-typological features of interaction between people.

In the style of communication find expression:

• features of human communication capabilities;
• the established nature of relations with specific people or groups;
• psychological or social individuality of a person; characteristics of a communication partner.

The foundation of a personality's communication style is its moral and ethical attitudes and assessments of the social and ethical attitudes of society.

The most common communication styles are:

• creative and productive
• friendly,
• remote,
• overwhelming,
• populist,
• flirting,
• demanding,
• business,
• positional.

Communication style directly affects the emotional atmosphere of interaction and the choice of its means.

Facilities communications are divided into five main groups:

1. linguistic (speech);
2. opto-kinetic (gestures, facial expressions, pantomime);
3. paralinguistic (voice quality, its range, tonality);
4. extralinguistic (pauses, laughter, crying, speech rate);
5. spatio-temporal (distance, time, place, situation of communication).

Speech means of communication form a logical and semantic line that determines its content. It is appropriate to call this line "verbal action".

The leading stylistic feature of modern public communication is colloquiality, that is, the simplicity and liveliness of constructing a phrase, the use of colloquial vocabulary and phraseology.

The stylistic originality of verbal action is manifested in the features of the syntactic structure, i.e., in the construction of phrases and phrases. But along with this, the originality of the conversational style of verbal action is created by a number of psychotechnical techniques:

• imaginary dialogization (the syntactic structure of verbal action imitates the imaginary environment of the dialogue);
• question-answer course (the subject of communication asks himself a question and gives an answer to it himself);
• a rhetorical question (which, as you know, contains an affirmation or denial, excites thoughts, emotions of communication partners);
• emotional exclamations (which allows you to increase attention to the topic of communication, stimulates conversational communication);
• inversion (i.e., deliberate violation of word order).

The quality and effectiveness of verbal action, its communicative effectiveness depend on how much the subject owns the psychotechnics of speech (namely, psychotechnics, and not technology, as some authors believe).

Psychotechnics of speech is a system of individual psychological control of voice, diction, intonation, logic in accordance with the socio-psychological conditions of communication.

Verbal action, as can be seen from its characteristics, accumulates paralinguistic and extralinguistic means of communication. In this sense, the psychotechnics of speech is a section of the psychotechnics of communication that reveals the methods of effective use of linguistic, paralinguistic and extralinguistic means of human interaction.

If linguistic means determine the content of a verbal action, then paralinguistic and extralinguistic means determine its expressiveness.

Intonation and tonality affect not only consciousness, but also the sphere of feelings, give emotional coloring to words and phrases.

The pace of verbal action is the speed of its implementation. A fast pace makes it difficult to focus on the logic and content of a verbal action, a slow pace is tiring. Most best option tempo organization of verbal action - psychologically expedient management. Pauses, when used correctly, allow you to better convey the meaning of a word, phrase, emphasize or reinforce the most important places.

Diction, i.e., a clear, distinct pronunciation of sounds, facilitates the process of penetration into the content of a verbal action.

Optical-kinetic means organize dynamic psychophysical actions.

Gesture- this is a movement that conveys the mental state of a person speaking or thinking to himself.

facial expressions- This is a dynamic facial expression at a particular moment of communication.

Pantomime- this is the dynamic state of the posture at a particular moment of communication.

The fusion of verbal and opto-kinetic actions forms the process of the influence of one subject of communication on another and vice versa. But this influence is effective only if the mechanisms of mutual understanding are included in its fabric.

Essence of communication is most fully expressed in the fact that it is the most important aspect of human activity, which consists in the subject-subject relationship -relation of one person to another on the basis of mutual recognition of "self" and self-worth.

The main features and properties of communication:

it appears as activity, which emphasizes its active procedural nature;

it is established that this activity is respect one person to another;

it is noted that these relationships should be subject-subject character, in other words, they include equal subjects, "I" and "You" are here target for each other and never - a means (at least, it should be);

communication establishes not only information, but also personal-existential, subjective connection between people while maintaining the individuality of the communicating parties: each recognizes for the other his uniqueness and originality, his right to be himself and expects the same from him;

expected manifestation creative and improvisational nature of communication, revealing the deep qualities of the subject - his free activity, the ability to generate new meanings, to overcome stereotypes of behavior.

communication symmetrically for it presupposes the functional equality of the persons participating in it as subjects of a single joint activity;

the most important hallmark communication favors it dialogue.

Thus, communication- This interaction based on needs man in man. This is not only (and not so much) luxury (A. de Saint-Exupery), but necessity, the primary condition for the existence of a person as a person and his inclusion in society and culture. Communication is done through dialogue, whose purpose is to establish understanding between people.

The value of interpersonal communication determined by his polyfunctionality And global significance in human life and society. Can be distinguished a number of "role" functions of communication.

Communication is a condition for the formation and existence of man. The phylogenesis of humanity and the ontogenesis of each person individually confirm that the formation of a person is impossible without communication, which is a “unique condition for human existence” (K. Jaspers).

Communication is a way of self-expression human "I": human essence is manifested only in communication, which enables a person to reveal all the facets of his personality, make them meaningful to others, and assert himself in his own value. "Deficiency" of communication gives rise to various complexes, doubts, makes life inferior.

Communication is key means of communication, what appears in informative the nature of communication, thanks to which the accumulated knowledge is transferred in the process of communication and thereby social inheritance. At the same time, the communicative nature of communication is also manifested in the generation of new ideas, which reveals its creative character, and the exchange of ideas, which causes praxeological the value of communication.

Communication is the main means of managing people. Currently, this function is used purposefully - as a means of manipulation consciousness and actions of people, both in a negative and positive way, which is clearly seen both in public spheres - in economics and politics, and in the sphere of personal relationships.

Communication is a vital need and a condition for human happiness. This function is most significant for the individual's sense of self, because it reveals intimate nature communication, which is an internal, often unconscious need of each person, a hidden motive for his actions and deeds. At the same time, such features of communication as selectivity And orientation to a specific object Availability feedback, reciprocity of choice and understanding. This need is most fully realized in such higher forms of human communication as friendship And Love.

The revealed role functions of communication allow us to consider it value in at least two aspects:

How utilitarian-pragmatic focused on achieving socially significant results;

How intrinsic value- communication for the sake of communication, the meaning of which is self-expression and spiritual conjugation of people who join the partner's spiritual values ​​and thereby multiply their own.

This gives grounds to highlight levels significance communication:

for myself - I am significant,

for another - You are the significance,

for a group or society as a whole - We are the significance.

The problem of communication culture.

The most important in solving the main tasks communication - establishing mutual understanding speaks culture of communication a system of norms, principles and rules, as well as technologies for their implementation, developed by the human community in order to optimize and effectively communicate. Communication culture suggests knowledge, understanding and compliance the basic norms of interpersonal communication, including the combined actions of many factors: moral, psychological, socio-cultural, "technological". But most closely the level of culture of communication is associated with moral attitudes, values, communicative ideals and stereotypes - with what constitutes the conceptmoral culture. Distinctive features moral culture of a particular society or individual are:

respect for partner restraint, politeness, careful handling of a word that can deeply hurt a person;

clarity of communication goals, willingness to understand, evaluate and accept the opinions of the interlocutor;

constant self-improvement, preparing yourself for communication;

observance of the principle of tolerance, generating mutual trust and helping to prevent and overcome conflict situations;

culture of dialogue manifested under the following conditions:

fundamental equality, autonomy of partners;

recognition by partners of the uniqueness, "otherness" of each other, the impossibility of predicting in advance the position of a dialogue partner;

difference and originality of points of view, readiness to hear from a partner something that is not included in our ideas or plans;

focus of each on understanding and correct interpretation of his point of view by a partner;

expectation of an answer and its anticipation in one's own statement, the complementarity of the participants' positions;

the ability to perceive the other as a person of equal level.

The higher the level of moral culture of the individual, the higher the culture of communication, and vice versa: a low level of moral culture, moral "protoculture" generates communication defects, painfully affecting the well-being of the individual and the atmosphere in society.

Moral protoculture can be traced on a number "defective" levels of communication .

Moral vacuum - a person either does not know the norms and principles of behavior necessary for communication (ethical and psychological "protoculture"), or gets into a situation where his knowledge loses its meaning and does not "work" in new conditions.

Lack of moral initiative - a person takes a wait-and-see attitude, expects care and attention from another, and only then responds to them. This state of alert waiting and moral bargaining according to the principle "you - to me, I - to you".

Moral camouflage - Desire to make a good impression disguise the absence of a genuine moral culture. Forms of manifestation of moral camouflage can be different, but, as a rule, they are always accompanied by moral demagogy, ranting about the decline of morals, and calls for observance of cultural norms.

Moral anachronism - a person is guided by obsolete norms of communication that do not meet the expectations of others and the requirements of modern morality.

Moral Regression - simplification and simplification of morals, loss of the achieved level in communication, accompanied by disrespect for traditions, disregard for experience and well-deserved authorities, unwillingness to evaluate one's own actions, to notice that they affect the interests of other people. Moral regression is also characterized by rationalism and pragmatism, rigidity, sometimes “anticipatory aggressiveness”.

moral deafness – lack of orientation to the other, inability and unwillingness to hear him. This is a kind of manifestation of “deafness to hail” (K. Jaspers), but not the original, selfish, but arising as a result of the loss (due to life circumstances) of the moral qualities previously inherent in the individual.

Moral primitivism – a shamelessly open deal with one's own conscience in the name of self-interest. Moral primitivism is manifested in the justification of one's own shortcomings, arrogance, arrogance of past merits, asserting the rights to one's own exclusivity and privileges.

Moral intolerance characteristic of authoritarian one-dimensional thinking, recognizing the only ("own") truth and correctness. Accompanied by suspicion, hostility towards dissent: political, ideological, cultural, religious. Intolerance is a manifestation anticultures in communication , moreover, it is the basis anti-communication , because it hinders communication, makes it impossible. It is extremely unproductive: hostility makes it difficult to hear the other, even when he offers something rational and useful.

Moral and psychological "barriers" of communication - another manifestation of the "protoculture" of the individual, acting as an obstacle to full communication. Psychological communication barriers, associated with a particular mental state of the individual, her attitudes and expectations, can be classified as follows.

Barrier of suffering, mountains I - It manifests itself in various forms: this is the desire to be alone (“leave me alone”), and selfishness (pity yourself), and envy of someone else's joy, and even aggressiveness. Perhaps the best way out of this situation is to really “leave the person alone.”

barrier of anger - arises from resentment, dissatisfaction, injustice, rudeness. In this situation, a person often “fixes” on the root cause of his anger, cannot and does not want to talk about anything else; communication is difficult: it is difficult to “get through” to a person.

Barrier of fear can be caused by various reasons: the child's fear of punishment, which deprives him of the gift of speech and does not give him the opportunity to explain himself and justify himself; the fear of a conscientious employee of failure to complete the assigned task; the conservative's fear of change, the lazy man's fear of work, and so on. Given that fear binds not only communication, but any productive activity, it is recommended that you try not to inspire fear in another in the process of communication - even with good intentions.

Barrier of shame and guilt - is formed with a negative self-assessment of one's actions in relation to another or with "wrong" criticism from the other. Shame - this "kind of anger turned inward" makes a person withdraw into himself, "self-reproach" or "self-justify". But in any case, communication is difficult.

In addition, "wrong" criticism - unfair in content, public and humiliating in form - is unproductive: a person's energy is directed not to finding the optimal solution, but to self-justification ("everyone does it", "I wanted the best", "others do worse" ), withdrawal into oneself (a person stops listening to words that are unpleasant for him, “turns off”) or anger and resentment towards the critic.

installation barrier - a negative perception of someone or something based on prior knowledge or prejudice. Negative setting becomes an obstacle to an unbiased benevolent attitude towards another. Therefore, it is impossible to immediately and unconditionally perceive compromising information about someone: perhaps you are deliberately forming a negative attitude towards this person. The culture of communication implies, in this regard, the presence counter installations- do not take on faith any statements about a person, demand their evidence.

6. barrier of contempt - as a rule, this is the result of upbringing or ideological attitudes associated with the values ​​​​and ideals prevailing in society. It often arises on the basis of prejudices that exist in society: professional, racial, national prejudices (“all sellers are thieves”, “persons of Caucasian nationality are bandits”).

7. Barrier of disgust, disgust - associated with the psychophysiological characteristics of people's behavior: unpleasant manners, repulsive habits, violation of the rules of personal hygiene, non-compliance with the "distance in communication". In order not to cause such a barrier in relation to oneself, a person must carefully monitor his manners, cleanliness, habits and, at the same time, be more tolerant towards others.

Mood Barrier - may include all the previous ones, be of varying severity (from just “getting up on the wrong foot” to deep depression), have various causes: interpersonal conflicts, quarrels, unwillingness to meet the other, resentment against each other, unfulfilled expectations, deceived hopes, denial of something that was counted on. Considering that the mood in communication with others plays special role- it is very contagious and has a "boomerang effect", i.e. returns to us - we must be extremely attentive to the manifestations of our own mood and learn to master it.

speech barrier – a double barrier: it is both a “speaking” barrier and a “listening” barrier. The first one is manifested in our linguistic lack of culture: insufficient vocabulary; slurred, monotonous speech; diction defects; repulsive (arrogant, ambitious) tone; lack of sense of humor; ignorance of speech etiquette The second barrier would be more correct to call the "barrier of non-hearing", because the obstacle to communication here is precisely the inability to listen and hear the other.

The inability to listen is manifested in the fact that, listening to the interlocutor, a person

hurries to refute him, not delving into the meaning of his speech and motives;

not able to restrain the desire to express his own opinion;

interrupts the interlocutor without waiting for the end of the argument;

is distracted by the insignificant, external, missing the essence of speech;

believes that his knowledge is sufficient to defend his position;

pre-configured to disagree with the opponent.

WITH sociocultural « barriers” and marginality in communication. Some of the most serious are sociocultural barriers among which a relatively new phenomenon occupies a special place - marginality in communication.

Marginality - this is the boundary position of the individual in relation to any social group, leaving a certain imprint on her psyche, behavior, lifestyle. The so-called “cultural hybrids” find themselves in a situation of marginality, balancing between the dominant group in society with its cultural and moral values, and the “maternal” group from which they emerged (the situation of unadapted migrants). Of course, such a situation leaves its mark on the culture of communication, giving rise to certain, sometimes tragic, barriers in communication.

Marginality in communication is based on hermeneutical misunderstanding – the inability to come to a common point of view and mutual understanding due to the fact that partners belong either to different cultures or to different types, levels and traditions of the same culture. And although they communicate in the same natural language, they sometimes cannot agree, which is explained by the differences in the categorical systems of their thinking, when the meaning invested in what was said by one person causes inadequate associations in another (due to differences in culture and value systems). Moreover, such a misunderstanding does not necessarily arise when the parties are hostile to each other or when one turns out to be “right”, the other “wrong”. It's just that the signals about the good intentions of one side, due to cultural differences, are not caught, not recognized by the other.

Marginality is most characteristic of transitional type of culture or For the transition of a person from one type of culture to another. Marginality can be spatial, temporal, cultural.Spatial marginality associated with a change of residence: emigration to another country, migration from a village to a city, etc. As a result of such forced or voluntary displacement, a person loses contact with his cultural roots(sometimes voluntarily renouncing it - say, from their village origin, traditions, national language), but he has not yet mastered the culture of his new position, has not “fitted” into it: after all, adaptation to a new way of life requires a lot of time, sometimes a change of several generations.

Temporal marginality is associated with changes of a different kind - when it is not a person who changes the environment, but the environment itself, or rather, the era; when habitual values ​​and ideals break down; when the old norms of communication cease to operate or lose their value, and the new ones have not yet been formed or, even if they exist, cannot - due to beliefs, delusions or simply laziness of people's thoughts - become a "guide to action". And again, a person “falls” into a state of marginality, in which he is “not guilty”, but which somehow makes him an “intermediate” person.

essence "cultural" marginality - in underestimation or rejection of one's own culture, the desire to become "above it". This type of marginality today is typical, in our opinion, for those Belarusians who show disdain for their language, culture, and national customs.

Marginality in communication manifests itself in a number of ways.

1. She is characterized narrowness of thought and from here - "clan", division into "us" and "them". And if a person develops complete mutual understanding with “his own” (relatives, fellow countrymen, like-minded people), then in relation to “strangers” (or those who have become “strangers” due to a divergence of views or life circumstances), he shows the same “ non-understanding", which has already been mentioned.

2. The marginal mentality is distinguished by a number of features:

one-dimensional thinking(thinking like "either-or"), inability to combine different points of view and find a common coordinate system;

monopoly on truth: only my point of view is correct, others have no right to exist;

inability and unwillingness to listen and hear partner: a person with this type of thinking is seized by psychological deafness, and any arguments are powerless here - he does not perceive them;

intolerance To dissent when anyone who disagrees with me is perceived as hostile and causes irritation and a desire to fight back.

3. The marginal approaches the other with a purely utilitarian positions (often without realizing it). The style of his relations with others (“strangers”) is a “vampire style”: he uses a person (in a variety of senses, not only in the primitive material, but sometimes in the spiritual), and then acts according to the “material” principle “ used - thrown away.

4. Marginality in communication is, as a rule, militant character. The marginal is distinguished by confidence in his own rightness and the right to reject another, pride in himself and his principles. Marginality crosses out any possibility of compromise and mutual understanding, putting forward "struggle" as the main value and program of action. This focus on confrontation can manifest itself in public life, professional activities or personal relationships, but in any case, it is not only unproductive, but also introduces great moral evil into the system of interpersonal relations and communication.

Thus, if we take as a basis that the culture of communication involves treating the Other as an equal subject to me, for whom I am ready to recognize the right to self, "otherness" and to which I am ready to treat with tolerance and respect, then marginality is anticulture in communication.

The phenomenon of violence in communication – another manifestation anticulture of communication, and very close to marginality both in form and in essence. Violence in communication appears in the rejection of the partner's right to autonomy, independence, self; in turning to power techniques and methods of pressure; in the use of fear and coercion. Violence as a principle of communication has certain roots: social, psychological, moral.

Social roots of violence in communication should be sought in the features of the twentieth century. Revolutions, wars, dictatorial and totalitarian regimes and repressions against individuals and nations - all this gradually depreciated human life, made it a bargaining chip in the political games of "fighters for power", and people were taught to "communicate" through the front sight.

Psi the psychological basis of violence in communication convincingly revealed Freudianism, showing that violence gives feeling of power over the other, acting as a kind of way of self-realization (see E. Fromm's "Escape from Freedom" about this). Moreover, the level and scope of such "self-affirmation" can be very different - from Hitler's totalitarianism to family tyranny.

Moral causes of violence in communication First of all, the "protoculture" and "barriers" of communication, which were mentioned above, come forward. In addition, it condones violence and anonymity moral life associated with urbanization, which hides from the human court the lawlessness perpetrated by other citizens.

Concerning areas of violence then, unfortunately, it knows no boundaries, penetrating into a variety of areas of communication– in interpersonal and family, group and intergroup, business and political, professional and other relations.

Forms of violence can be different - psychological pressure, moral submission, physical coercion, sexual harassment. Aggressive, intolerant behavior in a quarrel, in conflict, insisting on one's own at any cost is also a form of violence.

The saddest thing is that often violence is perceived as norm, does not cause any protest and is not regarded as anticulture in communication, which can only be counteracted by a fundamentally different approach – principle of non-violence .

The culture of communication, the need and features of which were discussed above, does not exist, so to speak, in an abstraction, in a “pure form”. It is realized and manifested in various spheres of human activity, in specific situations life. A large place in the general range of situational problems is occupied by problems that are purely personal for each of us, intimate nature, problems that make up the content ethics of intimate relationships.

Who is an authoritarian person? Do you think this is a headstrong despot who is guided only by his own opinion and never thinks about others? Don't confuse authoritarians with tyrants. The first personality is not distinguished by despotism, it is characterized by a businesslike approach to any undertaking and good planning of each of its actions.

Definition

The authoritarian personality theory, developed by E. Fromm, says that an authoritarian person is an adherent of a conservative view of the world and a hater existing system board. Leadership weighs on a person, and he considers it his duty to change the ruling elite. This does not mean that the person will run for president and change the way of the whole country. This means that a person will make small revolutions in his social circle. For example, a person will be able to head the factory where she worked long years as a manager. An authoritarian person experiences disappointment in life and thinks that such a state is familiar to everyone around. That is why she seeks power to fill the void with work. The person believes that the feeling of loneliness arises from the presence of a large amount of free time, which most people do not know how to manage.

stereotypes

• A person who strives for power is unfamiliar with any moral values. Such a person is low in itself, and if she wants to lead, then she seeks to elevate her ego and become a despot.
• Such people are credited with a limited mind. But if you look at historical examples, it becomes clear that people with an authoritarian temperament are not only smart, but also perspicacious. And it is not their own frivolity that destroys them, but unsatisfied ambitions.
• Such a person always demands too much from others. This is partly true. But it should be borne in mind that, first of all, a person requires good performance from himself. A person works tirelessly and it is quite logical that the same person will demand from others.
• Discipline. An authoritative person loves when everything goes according to his plan and no circumstances interfere with the achievement of goals. Discipline helps you achieve your goals faster, as people will focus on the result, and not scatter energy on unimportant actions.

What makes a person authoritarian?

The formation of any person occurs in childhood. It is quite logical that an authoritarian personality is the product of a wrong upbringing. What can cause a change in consciousness and the acquisition of false values ​​in a child?

Anxiety. A person who will be afraid of everything in the world will strive always and everywhere to take control of the situation. Most often, such feelings in a child are engendered by mothers who take care of their child too much. Mom does not allow the child to do anything without asking and always intimidates the baby. Anxiety is imprinted on the subconscious of the child and therefore he unconsciously seeks to take control of any situation.

Lack of independence. This character trait is also the result of overprotection. If parents do not force the child to work from childhood and make all decisions themselves, then the baby will grow up too arrogant and self-satisfied. A person will disguise his inability to make decisions as confidence. The person will begin to exploit others to achieve their own interests.

The habit of submission. If in childhood the father forced the baby to obey any of his demands, then growing up, the child can hold a grudge and pour it out at an older age on others. A person will make others dance to his tune.

Character traits

To make it easier to identify such a person among your acquaintances, you should understand who, what character traits a person has, what her preferences and value system are:

• Conservatism. A person does not like something new, and he will make his small revolutions on the basis of long-proven methods. Innovation scares a person, as new technologies seem unreliable and untested. Confidence in technique and in methods of action is very important for such a person.
• Servility. Another feature of authoritarianism is the desire of the leader to enslave the consciousness of his subordinates. For his "subjects" an authoritarian person wants to be almost a god, well, at least an idol.
• The cult of power. Man believes that everything in the world can be achieved through coercion. But this does not mean that he will use his fists to achieve his goals. The man will stop at nothing to make his desires come true.
• Cynicism. A person who is an authoritarian person will be contemptuous of everyone around him. And since contempt on the face is not the best mask, the person will disguise his true emotions under cynicism and sarcasm.

Family

An authoritarian person is a person who has received a wrong upbringing. Parents overlooked the child and therefore he began to develop various phobias and strange preferences that are contrary to normal social principles. What families contribute to the development of an authoritarian personality? A family with one parent, a family in which the father drinks and a family that is overprotective of the child. It is the extremes that form the unhealthy child. A person should grow up in an atmosphere of love and tenderness from childhood. If he receives less attention from his parents, he will grow up embittered and will hate everyone. If the mother shook too much over the child, she will be able to raise a selfish creature who will manipulate others without a twinge of conscience. Therefore, it is the responsibility of parents to properly develop their child. There is no need to blame your mistakes on bad teachers or the bad influence of the street. Good family will never bring up an antisocial type.

A difficult situation

What does authoritarian mean? This is a person who will put the desire for power as his main goal. The person will crave to dominate everywhere: in the family, at work, among friends. What influences a person's desire to lead others? The complex political or economic situation in which the consciousness of a child is formed leaves an imprint on the life of an adult. If a kid understood from childhood that leaders are not coping with their tasks, then he began to set himself up for the fact that his task is to normalize the situation in the country and achieve a better life for each. Despite all his desire to lead, a person always has good intentions. He does not want power for the sake of power. He wants to benefit the world and help all who suffer.

Education

The authoritarian type of person protests against some rules and standards. He does not mind learning, but he is only interested in those knowledge and skills that can be useful in the future. Most often, such individuals are chosen by technical, and not humanitarian professions. An authoritarian person tries to improve his vision of the world, but he is limited by the ability to see from only one point of view. He cannot enter into the position of other people. Therefore, the exact sciences are given to a person better. Such a person receives knowledge with pleasure and never refuses to take any courses. A person continues his education even after graduation. educational institution. After all, in order to be a good and competent specialist in any field, you need to constantly improve yourself.

Profession

Profession, like education, leaves its mark on a person. A person who works in law enforcement agencies is more inclined towards authoritarianism. But a person who is engaged in philosophical activity, art or other creative activity unlikely to develop plans to take over the world. Those who, thanks to their profession, have power over others, can use their powers for completely non-noble purposes. For example, an officer has much more chances and opportunities to show his authoritarian nature compared to an ordinary soldier. And a person who has served under a contract all his life in submission will grovel not only at work, but also in the family. The habit of obedience, like the habit of command, extends throughout a person's life.

Communication

• The person will talk to you as if you owe him something. He will deliberately belittle your dignity and morally put pressure on you in order to elevate his status. If you do not succumb to such manipulations, then the person will turn to active aggression.
• Such a person will always give orders. A person will not ask the opinion of the interlocutor. He himself will decide what the opponent needs and will be sure that he is right even when the interlocutor tries to say the opposite.
• A person will stick to his opinion, even if he realizes that it is fundamentally wrong. He is unlikely to be able to admit that he was wrong and accept his defeat.

Good or bad

Authoritarian behavior can only be condemned when the person has bad intentions. He will strive for his main goal, which will be to improve this world. The followers of a smart authoritarian person will be freedom-loving and adequate people. They will not blindly obey their idol. Their obedience will be justified. The leader will help his followers to become better, and also show the way to go in order not to step on the pitfalls.

But the situation changes when an authoritarian person with psychological problems comes to power. In this case, the dictator will do what he wants. Such a person will not give an account to someone of his actions. But the individual will demand blind and instant submission from his subordinates.

Reputation of a person

How authoritarian type Are individuals perceived by others? People are afraid of tyrants. Subservience and respect are more like fear. Such a situation suits an authoritarian personality quite well. She has no close friends, and therefore a person enjoys the respect that comes from his retinue. In wide circles, a person is always known. She has a reputation a good specialist and a good leader. Nothing bad can be said about a person. But sometimes it is simply impossible to work with him. The personality tries to remake all subordinates to his standards, which from the outside may seem wild.

Test

Are you interested in socionics? The Personality Type Test is for you. By answering the questions, you can understand how your worldview is similar or at odds with authoritarian people. You have to answer yes or no. Below is a selection of questions from the F-scale test:

• Should children be taught respect and obedience before everything else?
• Can a person without good manners normally exist in a decent society?
• A person will only succeed when he works hard?
• Are industrialists, managers and salespeople more important than artists and writers?
• Our universe is unknowable, and man will never be able to comprehend all its secrets.
• Man - a toy in the hands of a supernatural force?
• Will a liberal person become a conservative with age?
• Laws are not as important to the state as a smart leader who will show people the way to happiness?

Do you believe in socionics? A personality type test should show you how developed authoritarianism is in your soul. If you answered yes to most of the questions, then this means that you are a born dictator at heart.

Ethnoetiquette as a system of stereotypes of consciousness that reflects traditional standards of behavior 1 cannot be studied in any detail without referring to the ethnopsychological side of communication. In this regard, let us turn to some historical sources that characterize the ethnopsychology of the Bashkirs quite objectively.

At the end of the 19th century, the ethnographer-researcher L. Von-Berkhholz wrote about the Bashkirs: “They are rather quick-tempered, but not evil ...” The Bashkir, according to Berkhholz, “loves to be paid attention to, they would praise him or his horse, his prowess, dexterity. The Bashkir is extremely proud, touchy due to inattention to him, and even more so due to disrespect...” 2 . It should be noted that Berchholtz correctly captured the characteristic psychological features of the Bashkirs, some of which still exist today. At the same time, certain changes have taken place in this area - this is an increased tolerance for the actions of others, condescension, a significant overcoming of straightforwardness and ingenuity.

Lack of cunning and gullibility still continue to be the psychological quality of many Bashkirs, and from here qualities such as fast

1 Baiburin A. K. Some issues of ethnographic study
behavior. Ethnic stereotypes of behavior. L., 1985. S. 7-21.

2 Von-Berkhholz L. Mountain Bashkirs-Katai // Ethnographic
review. 1893. No. 3. S. 79.

suggestibility and excitability, straightforwardness. It is unlikely that all these psychological qualities can be assessed unambiguously: either only as positive, or, conversely, only as negative. In some cases, the above features of the psyche play a positive role, and in others - a negative one. Without taking into account what has been said, it is hardly possible to correctly understand the ethnic characteristics of the communication of the Bashkirs.

In the ethnopsychology of the Bashkirs, an important place is occupied by the concept of sincerity, which expresses the state of openness of a person's inner world, its accessibility. They say about such a person: “ikhlas”, “alsak” (responsive, sincere). It is probably no coincidence that the prominent Bashkir literary critic K. A. Akhmetyanov tried to put into circulation new category"sincerity", which we have already written about. Supporting this idea, we consider the category of sincerity to be a joint between ethics, aesthetics and psychology.

The antipode of sincerity is duplicity. The nominal assessment of a two-faced person sounds like this: “Ul ike yezle” (“He has two faces”). Another assessment is also applied: “Bitzes” (“Without a face”).

Something similar is found in the customary law of the Nogais, who have the principle of "bit". "Bit yugaltu" - "to lose face, conscience" - meant "to lose public respect" 1 .

Another concept of the ethnopsychology of the Bashkirs is “mots”, the content of which cannot be translated into Russian in one word, but approximately it will mean inner charm, inspiration. “Mots” is such a harmonious state when everything in a person is presented in moderation: he is restrained, but not passive either. "Motz" is kindness visible from the outside; attractiveness, thoughtfulness, inner concentration. In short, the concept of "mots" is universal in content, has a rich semantic load and many shades (moral, aesthetic and psychological).

When they say “motzlo keshe” about a person, this can mean the state of a person who is not indifferent to the environment, who is able to understand another person; “motzlo keshe” is a creative and initiative person. But sometimes this term conveys a state of slight sadness in a person, his thoughtfulness.

1 Viktorin V. M. social organization and customary law of the Nogais of the Lower Volga region (XVIII - early XX century): Abstract of the thesis. dis.... cand. ist. Sciences. L.: Izd-VolGU, 1985. S. 15.

A person who does not have these qualities is characterized by the expression “motspos keshe”, which means indifference, inability to understand another person, lack of a valuable vision of the world, and also lack of interest in oneself (self-esteem).

Sometimes the term "mots" is used in a narrow sense as a characteristic of the melody of a musical work, or this word characterizes the talent of performers of musical works. And, finally, it is necessary to know that the universality of the concept of “mots”, the multidimensional nature of the content brings it closer to the concept of the ancient Greeks “kolokagatia”, which expressed the syncretic unity of “good” and “beauty”.

Ethnic psychology of the Bashkirs, when assessing human behavior, often refers to the concept of "dert", translated as "enthusiasm, energy" (intensity of desires, needs, interests, feelings); "Dert" is a belief in one's own strength, it is also a sense of one's own dignity. A person with this feeling will not come to servility, will not begin to please. But this concept cannot be reduced to any of the moral concepts (honor, dignity, conscience). There is a strong psychological moment in the concept of “dirty”, it is also a measure of temperament. The main thing in the concept of "dert" is the strength of a spiritual impulse, a high moral feeling. More or less approximately, the concept of "dert" could be translated as "inspired passion, inner pathos." The Bashkirs have a proverb “Dertpez keshe - mondoz keshe” (“A passionless person cannot be charming”), and another proverb says: “Dertpezge daua kzh>> (“Healing will not help a person deprived of dert”).

One of the basic concepts of the Bashkir ethnoetiquette, expressing the moral and psychological creed of communication, is "tyina" kly "k", which simultaneously serves as a requirement for communication and a measure of its evaluation. The word "tyina" kly "k" is akin to the Russian word "politeness". Let us recall in this connection the dictum of Seneca: "Nothing is valued so highly and nothing is given so cheaply as politeness." However, "tyina" kly "k" is not translated in just one word and has a whole range of meanings: modesty, restraint, and thoughtful behavior. Tyina "kly" k is the neatness and accuracy of clothes, it is not too expensive and a bright thing that catches the eye; this and an appropriate gait (not too fast and not too slow); this is the timbre

And the volume of the voice; this is the posture when a person is sitting or lying in bed; this and the ability to eat at the table without attracting the attention of others; it is also contempt for luxury and arrogance, for acquisitiveness and materialism. Tyinaklyk: - this is modesty in everyday life, in consumption, the ability to forgive mistakes and mistakes of a person.

In its universality and moral and ethical content, the concept of "tyynaklyk" is close to the basic concept of the Abkhazian ethnoetiquette "alamys" 1 , which is the core moment of communication between the Abkhazians.

Forms and means of communication

General requirements Bashkirs have wishes for communication - calls that are usually uttered by representatives of the older generation: “Dan bulaigk” (“Let's be kind and glorious”), “Yamanatly bulmaiyk” (“Let's not leave a bad name behind us”), “Heter kaldyrmayik” (“ Let's not leave a bad memory of ourselves).

Ethnic etiquette is manifested in the forms of address, in greetings, in the ways of eating, in the rules of hospitality, in the ways of performing labor operations, in hygiene standards.

The peculiarity of the Bashkir etiquette, like other Turkic peoples, is that the age factor is strictly taken into account. When addressing, for example, any older man, it is customary to call him “agai” (literally, older brother). In the event that the person addressed is older than the parents, he is respectfully called "babai" or "byuai" (lit. uncle).

An older woman is addressed as "apai" (literally, older sister). If she is older than her parents, she is called "ebey" (aunt).

It is customary to address the younger ones accordingly: to males - “bushes”, “enem” (lit., younger brother); to females - “Endem”, “py-lyuym” (literally, younger sister).

The shown differentiation of forms of communication has a certain moral meaning, since it expresses

1 Chesnov Ya. V. Moral values ​​in traditional Abkhaz behavior // Field research of the Institute of Ethnography (1980-1981). M., 1984. S. PO.

A value approach to communication, the essence of which is respect for the age of a person, his life experience, and the function is to ensure the continuity of moral development. Etiquette also includes norms governing the relationship of peers and people close in age. It has its own characteristic terms of communication. People of the same age usually call each other "yashtesh", and among the Bashkirs of certain districts of the Kurgan and Chelyabinsk regions - "kushaga".

The existence of the above terms indicates that belonging to the same age has served and continues to serve as a factor of socialization, a means of introducing individuals to a certain community (to its interests, concerns, needs, etc.). There is also a moral element here.

Bashkirs, in the recent past, addressed each other only as “you”, but now, under the influence of communication with representatives of other peoples, an appeal to “you” has also appeared. At present, the appeal to "you" is possible only to the closest people: father, mother, children, spouse, friends, colleagues of the same age, acquaintances. The appeal to "You" is typical for communication with strangers, with older colleagues, with representatives of official institutions and organizations.

The greeting forms of the Bashkirs are: "Laumypygyz!" ("Hello!"); "Salem Birzek" ("Hello Helmet"); "Salam!" ("Hello"). Then questions begin, sometimes dragging on for a long time - this is, so to speak, preparation for the transition to a more serious part of the conversation.

The order in which the glad tidings are communicated is regulated by the ritualized custom of "Beyense". For the message of joyful news, a gift is due. To the one who reported, they say: “For your good news, I give you this and that.” The amount of remuneration can be any.

If one person came to another and found him at work, the following is added to the greeting: “Eshegez yetsel bulpyn” (“Let the work not be a burden”), if the guest found the host at the meal, the greeting is usually added: “Agyaryztemle bulpyn” ( "Bon appetit"). If you come to a new house or apartment, the greeting is supplemented with wishes: “Eyegez tsotlo bulpyn” (“Let there be happiness in the house”).

Forms of socialization of the Bashkir youth 20-30 years ago in the villages were "aulats her" - at home,

whose owners went on a visit or went away somewhere for a day or several days. Young people gathered in these houses, sang songs, danced. Lovers, brides and grooms met here, young people made acquaintances here. Currently, this form of leisure is gradually disappearing.

An important factor in ensuring the stability of relationships between individuals are the forms of conflict resolution. The means of resolving the contradictions of communication is folk wisdom, embodied in a normative-imperative form in sayings and proverbs. The proverb: “Iser ate:“ Endem ”, - type, akyllyeite:“ Kuyzym ”, - type ”(" The fool will say: "I'm right," the smart one will say: "I yield") regulates the orientation of a person in conflict situation recommending one of the parties to end the dispute.

In some cases, folk wisdom calls: “Yau menen kilgende ash menen-kgu” - (“Meet the one who goes with the war with bread and salt”). That is, it is not always necessary to respond to a hostile or unfriendly gesture in the same way. Here you can clearly feel the influence of the idea that comes from the depths of centuries that good is stronger than evil.

In the ethnic etiquette of the Bashkirs there are many norms regulating family and marriage relations. Here you can find norms expressing the relationship folk wisdom to loneliness, to the number of children in the family, to the relationship between parents and children, husband and wife, etc.

So, if a person is not in a hurry to start a family, the elderly Bashkirs say: “Yatsgyzly k yauga kilespen” (“A lonely person is suitable for war”), and if there is one child in the family, then they say: “Yatsgyz bala yauzan gkaty” (“One a child is worse than a battle.") In all this, one cannot but see the orientation of the people's consciousness towards the creation of a strong family.

The relationship between seniors and juniors, according to Bashkir etiquette, is subordinated to the task of gaining respect for the elders. But the people never absolutized this demand, did not dogmatize it. As a warning against the absolute, i.e. the same in all cases, understanding of respect for elders, the proverb sounds (it is also the norm of etiquette): “Kup yeshegen ni bela, kupte kurgan kup bela” (“Not the one who has lived a lot knows a lot, but he who has seen much).

Of no small importance in the etiquette of different peoples are the norms of hospitality. The Bashkirs have long been known as hospitable people. There is a lot of pi-

Sali are Russian scientists and writers who visited the Bashkirs in the 18th-19th centuries. Along with the traditional hospitality inherited from the past, there are new elements in the hospitality of modern Bashkirs associated with changes in their way of life and culture.

It is considered a traditional element of hospitality when the owner meets guests not at home, but before entering the house; seeing off guests also takes place outside the house.

The guests are told: “Turge utegez” (“Go to the place of honor”). When treating guests, they use the rule: “Kunatstarzyts aldyna ash kui; auyzyn-kulyn bush-kuy” (“Put food in front of the guests, but do not forget that their mouth and hands are free”). Here lies the hidden meaning, which consists in the requirement, when eating, not to engage the guests too much in conversations.

If someone comes during the meal, it is customary to seat him at the table and treat him. If the visitor refuses, he is reminded of the rules of etiquette: "Ashtan olo bulyp bulmay" ("You cannot be higher than food").

IN modern etiquette hospitality of the Bashkirs there are also undesirable elements that are currently rejected by life itself. It's about about the form of leisure that has become a tradition - a drunken feast, which, unfortunately, managed to penetrate even into individual works of art. So, for example, in the musical comedy Kodasa, old man Yappar performs merry verses, walking around the stage in an embrace with an oversized bottle. Probably, here, if you wish, you can find elements of humor. But humor is different for humor. In this case, the episode with the bottle, invented by the directors of the comedy, clearly misses the mark, because the audience has a kind of condescending attitude towards an elderly man who, having drunk, decided to have some fun.

The fight against drunkenness involves turning to certain undeservedly forgotten or half-forgotten folk forms of leisure. These are various national holidays, traditional games and forms of communication. These include the rogue's holiday - "Babantuy" - spring sports holiday, widespread among the Tatars and Bashkirs: "T\.az emeye" - an autumn rural holiday dedicated to slaughtering geese (the villagers take turns collectively slaughtering geese, plucking feathers and preparing goose meat for the winter), ending with mutual invitations

niyami to visit; "KarFa butkapy" - "crow porridge" - a spring women's holiday (the women of the village go out into the forest, cook various dishes, have fun and sing), historically dating back to the times of the cult of animals, when festivities were held in their honor. During these holidays, a person becomes liberated, becomes a direct participant in certain actions. At the same time, a living thread is being stretched between generations, and traditional forms of communication are being revived.

Each of these holidays has a ritual and normative design: it proceeds in a certain sequence, obeys certain rules. Ritualization of communication in modern life necessary and valuable because it overcomes the shortcomings of verbal and verbal means of moral education. The artistic and visual form of rituals makes it possible to overcome moralizing and bare edification, which is the “sin” of today's ethical enlightenment and moral education. Rituals enrich the world of human communication, enhance its value content.

Ritualization is necessary, firstly, because deeply thought-out and scientifically based rituals in educational process have a greater effect than abstract moralizing (moralizing). Secondly, ritualization acts as a means of removing from the personality the alienation instilled by previous failures in moral education, that is, it serves as a means of re-education through communication.

CONCLUSION

The approach to ethics implemented in this book allows us to consider morality as the potential of culture in the broadest sense of the word. This, firstly, is due to the fact that morality is the most important essential force of a person, which is related to a special sphere of human activity. Human society cannot be imagined without morality. Secondly, ethical thinking sets through its paradigms the necessary form of existence, normativity for all social institutions. Thirdly, the ethical models of behavior that we have described characterize morality as a kind of universe. Based on this, we can confidently declare the primacy of morality in the whole culture. Only by being in such a position, it is possible to overcome the global moral crisis of human existence, which in our time embraces more and more people on the planet.

To overcome the moral crisis, and on its basis, the global ecological crisis, as well as the impending crisis in other areas - economics, politics, law and art - it is necessary that the community of people on planet Earth become true humanity. Unfortunately, our planet is not such today, because there is still a lot of evil in it, the proof of which is the ongoing process of the emergence of an infinite amount of alienated behavior (wars, crime, suicide ...) associated with violence, deceit and treachery. On this occasion, Yu. M. Fedorov correctly noted in his interesting book“Universum of morality”: “Genuine communities are such collections of individuals, which are based on inalienable forms of communication. If genuine communities are total in the manifestation of their true human nature, then non-genuine communities (false communities) are totalitarian” 1 . It was not our task to define such communities. This requires a carefully developed methodology that would meet all the criteria of strict scientific character and the natural course of development of things, in accordance with common sense and humanism.

Fedorov Yu. M. Universum of morality. Tyumen: Sib. otd. RAN, 1992, p. 241.

References

1. Abdulatipov R. G., Boltenkova L. F., Yarov Yu. F. Federalism in
history of Russia. Book. 1.M., 1992.

2. Aitmatov Ch. Scaffold // New world. 1986. № 6.
Z. Aitmatov Ch. Price and life / Lit. gas. 1986. 13 Aug.

4. Alekseev S. S. Theory of Law. M., 1974.

5. Anisimov S. F. Moral and behavior. M., 1979.

6. Anthology of world philosophy. T. 1.4. 1. M., 1969.

7. Antoshkin VN Moral culture of a rural dweller: Avtoref. dis. ... cand. philosophy Sciences. Ufa: BSU Publishing House, 1990.

8. Argyle M. Psychology of happiness. Moscow: Progress, 1990.

9. Arkhangelsky L. M. Lectures on Marxist ethics. Part 1. Sverdlovsk: Publishing House of the Ural State University, 1969.

10. Arkhangelsky L. M. On the question of the essence and classification of ethical categories / Problems of categories of Marxist-Leninist ethics. Symposium materials. Novosibirsk, 1969.

11. Arkhangelsky L. M. The nature of moral norms and the dialectics of their development // Questions of Philosophy. 1978. No. 3.

12. Arkhangelsky L. M. A course of lectures on Marxist-Leninist ethics. M., 1974.

13. Atanova L. Khalik Zaimov. Ufa, 1967

14. Akhmetyanov K. A. Beautiful and heroic in poetry. Ufa, 1982. Bashk.

15. Baiburin AK Some issues of ethnographic study of behavior / Ethnic stereotypes of behavior. L., 1985.

16. Bakshtanovskiy V.I. Modern ethical thinking:
experience of "Samotlor workshop" // Morality and ethics. Moral in co
socialist society. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1989.

17. Bandzeladze G. D. Ethics. Tbilisi, 1970.

18. Bgazhnokov B. X. Adyghe etiquette. Nalchik, 1978.

19. Bible. ML, 1968.

20. Bikbaev R. Singing rocks. M., 1978.

21. Bongard-Levin G. M., Ilyin G. F. India in Antiquity. M., 1985.

22. Burlatsky F. M. New thinking. M., 1988.

23. Valeev D. Zh. Origin of morality. Saratov: Sarat Publishing House. un-ta, 1981.

24. Valeev D. Zh. Moral culture of the Bashkir people: past and present. Ufa: Bashk. book. publishing house, 1989.

25. Valeev D. Zh. The potential of morality. Ufa: Publishing house of VEGU, 1999.

26. Valeeva 3. R. Place of ethics in the mechanism of moral regulation of communication: Abstract of the thesis. dis. ...cand. philosophy Sciences. Ufa: BSU Publishing House, 2000.

27. Weber M. Favorites. M.: Lawyer, 1994.

28. Victorin V. M. Social organization and customary law of the Nogais of the Lower Volga region (XVIII - early XX centuries): Abstract of the thesis. dis. ... cand. ist. Sciences. L .: Publishing house of Leningrad State University, 1985.

29. Vichev V. Moral and social psyche. M., 1978.

30. Vitz B. B. Democritus. M.: Thought, 1979.

31. Vorontsov BN On the emergence of a developed personality in history / Philosophical sciences. 1972. No. 3.

32. Gamzatov R. My Dagestan. M., 1972.

33. Ganapolsky M. G. Morality of the region and ethical regionalism I/ Collection of expert surveys "Samotlor Workshop - 2". M.; Tyumen, 1988.

34. Ganzhin VG Ethics and the formation of morality. M., 1982.

35. Ganzhin V. G., Aleksin T. A., Petyashev N. I. Global (Country Studies) Ethics // Vestnik Mosk. university Series 7. Philosophy. 1989. No. 4.

36. Hegel. Philosophy of law. Op. T. VII. M.; L., 1934.

37. Gromova L. A. Ethical models of economic behavior. autref. dis.... cand. philosophy Sciences. SPb., 1995.

38. Gulua VL Dialectics of emotional and rational in morality. Tbilisi, 1982.

39. Gumnitsky G. N. On the concept of morality / Moral, traditions, education. Ufa: BSU Publishing House, 1987.

40. Guseinov A. A., Apresyan R. G. Ethics. M., 1998.

41. Guseynov A. A. The golden rule of morality. M., 1982.

42. Huseynov A. A. Great moralists. M.: Respublika, 1995.

43. Guseynov A. A. The social nature of morality. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1974.

44. Galbraith D. Capitalism and socialism: from confrontation to convergence / Moscow News. 1987. 13 Sept. (No. 37).

45. Reripov R. Amanat. Efe, 1970.

46. ​​Bilezhev X. Kelamdashter. © fv, 1984.

47 Drobnitsky O. G. The concept of morality. Moscow: Nauka, 1974.

48. Drobnitsky O. G. Discussion on the problems of ethics / Questions of philosophy. 1971. No. 4.

49. Egides P. M. The main issue of ethics as a philosophical science and the problem of moral alienation / Actual problems Marxist ethics. Tbilisi, 1967.

50. De Juvenel B. Ethics of redistribution. M.: Institute of national economic model, 1995.

51. Zhyamaitis V. Yu. On the issue of the essence of tolerance / Morality, traditions, education. Ufa: BSU Publishing House, 1987

52. Zybkovets VF Origin of morality. Moscow: Nauka, 1974.

53. Ivanov VG, Rybakova NV Essays on Marxist-Leninist ethics. M: Publishing House of Leningrad State University, 1963.

54. Ivin A. A. Logic of norms. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1973.

55. IzardK. Human emotions. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1980.

56. Itkulova L. A. Moral choice in folk tale: Autoref. dis. ... cand. philosophy Sciences. Ufa: BSU Publishing House, 1996.

57. Kant I. Fundamentals of metaphysics of morality. Op. T. 4. Part 1.

59. Cassidy F. X. Socrates. M., 1976.

60. Koblyakov V. P. Ethical consciousness. L., 1979.

61. Kogan LN Purpose and meaning of life. M, 1984.

62. Kon I. S. Sociology of personality. M., 1967

63. Kon I. S. Opening "I". M., 1979.

64. Konovalova L. V. Moral and knowledge. M., 1975.

65. Konrad N. I. West and East. M., 1972.

66. Kosven M. O. Essays on the history of primitive culture. M., 1957

67. Kryazhev P. E. Society and personality. M., 1961.

68. Leontiev A. N. Activity, consciousness, personality. M., 1977.

69. Ludwig von Mises. Bureaucracy, planned chaos. Anti-capitalist mentality. M.: Delo, 1993.

70. Malinauskas K. National aspect of the moral culture of society and personality / Questions of moral culture. Vilnius, 1981. I,

71. Mamardashvili M. K. About Philosophy / Questions of Philosophy. I 1991. No. 5.

72. Marx K. From early works. M., 1956.

73. Marx K., Engels F. Op. T. 21.

74. Moiseev N. N. Algorithms of development. M., 1987.

75. Moiseev N. N. With thoughts about the future of Russia. M., 1997.

76. Muhammad Ali al-Hashimi. Muslim personality. 3rd ed. M., 2000.

77. Science and humanity. M., 1976.

78. Ovchinnikov V. Sakura and oak. M., 1983.

79. Okladnikov O. P. Morning of Art. M., 1967.

80. Ortega y Gasset X. What is philosophy? M., 1991.

81. Orwell D. 1984. Animal Farm. T. 1. Perm: Kapik, 1992.

82. Orwell D. Essays, articles, reviews. T. II. Perm, 1992.

83. Palievskiy P. Faulkner and Camus / Foreign literature. 1970. №9.

84. Parsons G. Man in modern world. M.: Progress, 1985. »

85. Pershits A. I., Mongait A. L., Alekseev V. P. History of primitive society. M., 1982.

86. Peccei A. Human qualities. Moscow: Progress, 1977.

87. Popov B. N. Ethics. Lecture course. M., 1999.

88. PopovS. Politics, economics, morality. M., 1989.

90. Subject and system of ethics. M.; Sofia, 1973.

91. Russell B. Dictionary of Mind, Matter and Morality /J Per. from English. K.: Port-Royal, 1996.

92. Roginsky Ya. Ya. Modern problems of anthropogenesis. M., 1969.

93. Rawls J. Theory of justice. Novosibirsk: Publishing house Novo-Sib. un-ta, 1995.

94. Sartre J. - P. Primary attitude to another: love, language, masochism / The problem of man in Western philosophy. Moscow: Progress, 1988.

95. Sakharov AD World, progress, human rights. L.: Owls. writer, 1990.

96. Sen A. On ethics and economics. M.: Nauka, 1996.

97. Semenov Yu. I. How mankind arose. M., 1966.

98. Semenov Yu. I. On the periodization of primitive history / Soviet ethnography. 1965. No. 5.

99. Smolentsev Yu. M., Porokhovskaya T. I. Features of moral alienation / Bulletin of Moscow State University. Ser. 7. Philosophy. 1995. No. 1.

100. Sokolov E. V. Culture and personality. L., 1972.

101. Sokolova N. P. Personality as an object of ethical research J/ Typology of social phenomena. Sverdlovsk, 1982.

102. Tylor E. B. Primitive culture. M., 1989.

103. Tatarkevich V. On the happiness and perfection of man. Moscow: Progress, 1980.

104. Tiittanen T. E. Language forms as a worldview reflection of being public consciousness: Abstract. dis. ... cand. philosophy Sciences. Sverdlovsk: Publishing House of the Ural State University, 1985.

105. Titarenko AI Structures of moral consciousness. M., 1974.

106. Titov V. A. Cognitive aspect of morality /I The structure of morality and personality. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1976.

107. Topilina G. D. Problems of the biological foundations of moral consciousness I/ Philosophy of border problems. Perm, 1975. Issue. 7.

108. Tugarinov V.P. Personality and society. M.: Thought, 1965.

109. Tukhvatullin MN Ethical thinking as a philosophical problem: Avtoref. dis.... cand. philosophy Sciences. Ufa: BSU Publishing House, 1996.

110. Federalism of power and the power of federalism. M.: LLP Intel Teh, 1997.

111. Fedorov Yu. M. Universe of morality. Tyumen: Sib. otd. RAN, 1992.

112. Von-Berkhholz L. Mountain Bashkirs-Katai // Ethnographic review. 1893. No. 3.

113. Frankl V. Man in search of meaning. Moscow: Progress, 1990.

114. Fromm E. Escape from freedom. M., 1990.

115. Fromm E. Psychoanalysis and ethics. M.: Respublika, 1993.

116. Hubbard L. Ron. Introduction to Scientology Ethics. M., 1998.

117. Habermas Y. Democracy, reason, morality. Moscow: Nauka, 1992.

118. Hayek F. The origin and action of our morality / ECO. 1991. No. 12.

119. Hayek F. Road to slavery / Questions of philosophy. 1990. No. 10, 11, 12.

120. Khayyam O. Rubaiyat. M: Nauka, 1972.

121. Hilal as-Sabi. Establishments and customs of the court of the Caliphs.
M, 1983.

122. Cherdantsev A. F. The specifics of legal reflection / Jurisprudence. 1973. No. 2.

123. Chesnov Ya. V. Moral values ​​in traditional Abkhaz behavior // Field research of the Institute of Ethnography. (1980-1981). M, 1984.

125. Chistov KV Folk traditions and folklore. L., 1986.

126. Shvartsman K. A., Guseinov A. A. Historical images of morality. M: Progress, 1987.

127. Shcherbak FN Moral as a spiritual and practical attitude. L .: Publishing house of Leningrad State University, 1986.

128. Efroimson V.P. Pedigree of Altruism / New World. 1971. No. 10. S. 213.

129. Hume D. Op. T. 1. M: Nauka, 1965.

130. Yarkho VN Did the ancient Greeks have a conscience? / Antiquity and modernity. M., 1972.

131. Jaspers K. Speech in memory of Max Weber / Weber Max. Favorites. M.: Lawyer, 1994.

Foreword ................................................................ ................................................. ... 13

Chapter I On the Status of Ethics as a Philosophical Science.................................................... 15

Chapter III. Morality is the essential strength of a person .............................................. 33

Chapter LGSpecificity of morality .............................................. ............................... 40

§ 1. Signs of morality ............................................... ......................................... 40

§ 2. The structure of morality ............................................... ............................................... 43

§ 3. Functions of morality ............................................... ................................................. 48

Chapter¥Genesis of morality .............................................. ...................................... 60

Chapter VI. On the problems of modern moral development .... 79

Chapter VII. Morality and culture of behavior ............................................................... ......... 89

§ 1. Paradigms of ethical thinking .............................................. .............. 89

§ 2. Models ethical behavior V various fields
human activity .............................................................. ............................... 96

Chapter VIII. Religious Morality .................................................................. ................... 114

§ 1. Morality of Judaism .............................................. ...................................... 117

§ 2. Moral culture of Buddhism .............................................. .............. 121

§ 3. Christian morality .............................................. ................................ 124

§ 4. Morality of Islam .............................................. ............................... 129

Chapter IX. National-regional component of education and
study of ethics (on the example of the Republic of Bashkortostan).................................................. 135

§ 1. On the ethical features of morality .............................................. ............ 136

§ 2. About moral culture modern Bashkortostan.... 138
§ 3. Ethnoetiquette and communication culture of the Bashkirs .................................................. ..... 151

Conclusion................................................. ................................................. .. 161

References................................................ ........................... 162

Popular science edition

VALEEV Damir Zhavatovich

THE PATH TO TRUTH

Editor L. O. Khairova

Artist I. M. Sayfutdinov

Artistic editor A. R. Mukhtarullin

Technical editor 3. G. Chingizova

Correctors L. R. Bikbaeva, G. N. Gutova

Handed over to the set 02.11.07. Signed for publication on 22.11.07. Format 84x108 Uzg.

Offset paper. Baltika headset. Conv. oven l. 8.82. Condition-cr. ott. 9.24. Uch-ed. l. 10.19.

Circulation 2000 copies. Order No. 1.0161.07.

"Bashkir publishing house "Kitap"".

450001, Ufa, st. Levchenko, 4a.

State unitary enterprise Republic of Bashkortostan

"Ufa polygraph factory".

450001, Ufa, Oktyabrya Ave., 2.