It has already been mentioned earlier that the self-concept is the social attitude of a person in relation to himself. This means, in essence, that self-awareness, like any other attitude, affects our behavior. Through the self-concept, we strive to behave in a way that matches our self-consciousness. This happens even in cases where such behavior can negatively affect ourselves. So, let's say, a person who is self-consciously courageous is likely to be fearless, although this may threaten his well-being. A person who is aware of himself as truthful will tell the truth, despite the fact that telling the truth is always dangerous and unprofitable.

Or let's take another example: who are we friends with? With whom do we enjoy being and maintaining relationships? Probably with those people who confirm our self-concept and self-esteem, in other words, with those who sympathize with us, appreciate us, respect us, or at least pretend to admire our achievements, that is, flatter us. Conversely, we dislike those who threaten our self-concept and self-esteem.

Let's make a clarification: although our self-consciousness is always with us, the degree of focus on ourselves, on our behavior at different times is different for us. We do not, for example, require self-awareness in fully learned, automatic behavior. Here we behave "thoughtlessly", do not look at ourselves from the outside, do not evaluate our actions.

Deindividuation and behavior

It can be assumed that the last statement is not entirely indisputable and is true only for those people whose self-concept has either not yet developed, or it is weakly expressed, or generally indefinite. But it must be borne in mind that quite a lot of people do not tend to comprehend themselves and their behavior at all, and, thus, their personality traits are in their infancy. We will have occasion to talk about individual differences in self-awareness later. Now let's turn to two studies by Arthur Beaman, Bonnel Klentz and Edward Diner, which show how the anonymity factor can influence the behavior of children, that is, those people whose self-concept is still in the formative stage (Beaman A., Klentz B. & Diener A., ​​1979).

The research was carried out in the form of a game, all the children were dressed in masquerade costumes and masks, that is, they remained anonymous. During the game, the researchers offered children to treat themselves to sweets. Moreover, in some cases, a large mirror was placed in front of a glass ball filled with goodies so that the children could see themselves while taking sweets from the ball. In other cases, the mirror was missing. (The mirror in which the subjects see themselves is a classic technique used in the laboratory to activate self-attention and self-understanding.)

The female explorer, who played with the children, sometimes invited them to help themselves without embarrassment, and sometimes allowed them to take only one candy. But she herself, when the children took sweets, turned away and pointedly looked in the other direction. Some children she asked for names, others did not, so they remained anonymous.

The results of the study clearly showed the effect of self-attention on children's behavior. If there was a mirror in front of the children in which they saw themselves, and at the same time they were allowed to take only one candy, then disobedience rarely happened. If there was no mirror, then the children disobeyed much more often. But even without a mirror, the children were embarrassed to take more than allowed when they were forced to give their names. Moreover, when children were allowed to take as many sweets as they liked, but at the same time they saw themselves in the mirror, they rarely took more than one. If there was no mirror, the children behaved differently. Probably, the mirror, when the children saw themselves in it, forced them to correlate their behavior with accepted norms that prevent the manifestation of greed.

It is clear that an adult with an established and stable self-concept does not need to look in the mirror or call himself by name in order to behave with dignity and not commit reprehensible acts - not to be greedy, deceitful, mean, dodgy.

Personal responsibility

But even in the case of an unformed, or childish, self-concept, the situation is not as simple as it might seem after getting acquainted with the studies of A. Beemen and his colleagues. R. Cialdini describes a series of studies by Jonathan Friedman, who also worked with children (Cialdini R., 1999).

Friedman wanted to see if he could stop boys between the ages of seven and nine from playing with an interesting toy, having said six weeks earlier that it was wrong to do so. The main task, according to the researcher, was to convince the boys themselves that it was not good to play with a forbidden toy. But how do you get them to refuse to play with an expensive, battery-powered robot at that age?

Firstly, this can be achieved by the threat of punishment, that is, with the help of external pressure. Another thing is how effective and how long will the threat operate? She acted only as long as the boys believed that they could be caught and punished. This is exactly what Friedman foresaw. Already after six weeks, when his assistant worked with the children instead of Friedman himself, who did not threaten punishment, 77% of the boys wanted to play with the robot, which had previously been a "forbidden fruit" for them.

Having recruited another group of boys, Friedman changed the tactics of suggestion. This time, he did not intimidate them, but simply told them that it was not good to play with the robot. This was enough for the boys not to approach the robot immediately after the conversation. But that was enough after six weeks. An amazing thing happened: despite being allowed to play with any toy, most of the boys avoided the robot, although it was the most attractive toy. Only 33% of them chose to play a robot. The prohibition in this case began to act as a social norm that predetermined the behavior of children.

Friedman explains this phenomenon of effective prohibition without threats by the fact that instead of external pressure (threats), the boys had a kind of "internal pressure" that prevented the violation of the prohibition. It turned out to be more reliable and effective than threats, because it "worked" even in the absence of the one who forbade playing with the robot. In other words, the children took personal responsibility for their decision not to touch the attractive toy. They decided that they themselves do not want this, and not someone from outside forces them to do so. Consequently, their behavior was influenced by self-awareness, and not by external coercion.

Let's make an important clarification. The fact is that self-consciousness, along with the standards of behavior, also includes an assessment of one's abilities to build behavior in accordance with these standards. Research has shown that independent, non-conformist behavior is the standard for American students. Many of them, in accordance with their self-concept, can resist the pressure of the group. Some, unsure of their ability to resist group pressure, show conformity, although ideally they want to be independent. And if a person is not sure that he is able to achieve conformity with the ideal Self or the supposed Self, then, as we already know, he experiences anxiety, anxiety, even depression. Therefore, people who are aware of their inability to follow the standard or ideal, as a rule, prefer to avoid awareness of themselves and their behavior altogether. Moreover, they even tend to avoid situations that can activate their self-awareness.

Stigmatization

However, there are other examples of how the self-concept can influence people's behavior. Jennifer Crocker and Brenda Mayor, reviewing many studies, have shown that people who are disfigured, have noticeable deformities, scars, skin pathologies (stigmas), that is, those to whom other people usually treat with squeamish pity and fear, can specifically exhibit their deformities and ulcers for show, to emphasize them, as if flaunting their mutilation. Researchers believe that this is done for self-affirmation, since in stigmatized people, the central aspect of the self-concept can be just the awareness of one's stigma (Crocker

J. & Major B., 1989).

Note that a stigmatized self-consciousness can form not only in outwardly disfigured people, but also in those who generally differ in some way from those around them. Thus, according to Albert Mehrabyan, in the United States, where whites make up the majority of the population, blacks and

Hispanics also have a stigmatized identity as the white majority communicates their prejudices to them through non-verbal communication channels. Thus, a stigmatized self-awareness is formed among national and racial minorities from childhood. People belonging to gender and age minority groups in any social community may also experience discrimination and prejudice from the majority of those around them. As a result, they also develop a stigmatized self-consciousness (E. Pines, K. Maslach, 2000). In addition, individuals with pronounced personality flaws may also have a kind of stigmatized self-awareness and flaunt their mental deformities. We can say that in this case a person, not seeing any advantages in himself, is forced to be proud of his own shortcomings.

The behavior of people is determined not only by the content of their self-concept, but also

the degree of representation and development of certain functions of self-consciousness. It has already been said before that people have a need and, accordingly, the ability to realize themselves to varying degrees. Some do it all the time, others - from time to time, others - in exceptional cases, the fourth, maybe never at all. And if this is so, then it is clear that behavior is not always and not for all people determined by their self-consciousness. As we remember from the first section, from the point of view of the psychology of the masses, human behavior generally depends little on consciousness, since it is almost entirely determined by the unconscious. And although today this view is being challenged, it must still be recognized that it is true for at least a certain category of people.

me and others

Self-consciousness usually operates on two fronts, as it were. On the one hand, a person is aware of "himself for himself": this function provides the individual with the awareness that he needs, so to speak, for "internal use". On the other hand, a person is aware of "himself for others": this function gives him knowledge of how he looks in the eyes of others, how they perceive him. Moreover, thanks to this function, he is able to determine how other people would like to see him, what social image is expected of him.

J. G. Mead drew attention to this possible multidirectionality of self-consciousness in his theory of personality, highlighting such personality components as I (I) and Me (me). The first, i.e. I, means: "as I am aware of myself", Me - "I am aware of how others perceive me."

In different people, the degree of development of these functions is not the same. Some are more able to realize "themselves for themselves", others - "themselves for others." To determine the development of these functions in American social psychology, special tables have been developed, which consist of a number of affirmative statements. As an example, consider one of them, developed by Allan Fenigstein and his colleagues (Fenigstein A., 1975).

The level of self-consciousness "oneself for oneself" is determined in the table by the following statements:

1. I always strive to understand what I am.

2. I think about myself a lot.

3. I am always attentive to my inner state. Self-consciousness "oneself for others" is defined through statements:

1. I am concerned about what others think of me.

2. I worry about how I look from the outside, in the eyes of others.

3. I am concerned about how my behavior is perceived by other people. People who are little concerned about how they are perceived by others are not very interested in

external assessments of his personality. People who are very concerned about how they are perceived by others are very partial to other people's assessments, they are more sensitive to social reflection.

How self-awareness of "oneself for others" can influence behavior can be judged from the results of a study by K. von Bayer, D. Sherk and M. Zanna (Baeuer K., Sherk D. & Zaiina M., 1981). The essence of it was that women applying for jobs who were to be interviewed before being hired were told that a man would be interviewing them. Moreover, he was introduced to some applicants in advance as a person adhering to a traditionalist, patriarchal view of the role of women in society. To other women, he was described as a supporter of gender equality, sympathetic to independent, enterprising, career-oriented women. The researchers were not only interested in

what and how women will say to the interlocutor during the interview, but also what external image they will create - how they will be dressed, how they will behave, what features they will try to emphasize, demonstrate to the male personnel officer.

It turned out that women created one or another image, depending on what they thought the interlocutor was holding. Those applicants who expected to meet a traditionalist personnel officer tried to look more feminine. This was manifested in their conversation, and in makeup, and in jewelry, and in their demeanor. These women also gave traditional "feminine" answers regarding marriage, children, and household chores.

A completely different image was demonstrated by the applicants, who were counting on a meeting with an interlocutor who sympathized with business women. Both in behavior, and in appearance, and in conversation, they in every possible way emphasized their efficiency and purposefulness, that is, a departure from the traditionally female stereotype.

Of course, this behavior is not unique to women. Similar studies have found that men have the same, and no lesser extent than women, the ability to create an image that would correspond to the supposed expectations of other people.

Self-monitoring

This ability of a person to demonstrate an image that would be pleasing to others, Mark Snyder called self-monitoring(1987). The function of self-monitoring, or the ability to be a social chameleon, is not equally developed in all people (Myers D., 1997). For some, such acting is a way of being and, at the same time, a way of succeeding in life. For others, it is an occasional ability that activates in exceptional situations. But there are also people who do not have this function at all.

To determine the level of self-monitoring, a scale consisting of affirmative judgments has also been developed. People with high levels of self-monitoring agree with the following statements:

1. I behave like different people in different situations and with different people.

2. I am not always the person I appear to be.

3. I can mislead another person, I can pretend to be friendly with someone I don't really like.

People with low self-monitoring agree with other statements:

1. I have a hard time changing my behavior to suit different situations and people.

2. I can only accept ideas that are in line with my beliefs.

3. I do not change my way of thinking in order to please people or win their favor.

Individuals with a high level of self-monitoring adapt well to any situations and people, are able to control their emotions and behavior in order to use this skill to effectively create the right impression, demonstrating to others an image suitable for the occasion. How do they achieve this? Researchers believe that this ability is achieved by borrowing patterns of someone else's behavior. At the same time, considerable efforts are made to "read" and copy the behavior of other people. This activity can be compared to how professional artists "get into the role." Only if the artists, getting used to the image, do it on purpose and consciously, then people with high self-monitoring do it involuntarily, mostly unconsciously. As already mentioned, for them social mimicry is a way of being.

And, on the contrary, people with low self-monitoring do not seek to take into account, control, or somehow specially organize the impression that they make on others. They can see, realize how they are perceived, what impression they make and at the same time not try to adjust it, adapt. And although they are able to control the impression they make, they do not do this for one reason or another.

It is easy to find some commonalities between self-monitoring and awareness of "oneself for others." True, the similarity here is partial: a person with a developed function of awareness of "oneself for others" can be aware of the impression he makes, but not use this knowledge in any way. A person with high self-monitoring, on the contrary, will use this knowledge to the maximum in order to create the impression he needs. As we can see, the awareness of "oneself for others" acts

necessary prerequisite for high self-monitoring. But this function alone is not enough to resort to social mimicry and specially organize the desired impression.

Research by Mark Snyder and Thomas Monson experimentally confirmed significant differences in the behavior of people with high and low self-monitoring (Snyder & Monson, 1975). The study was conducted with two groups of participants, one of which consisted of people who are independent and not prone to conformism, the other - on the contrary, prone to conformism. People with high self-monitoring showed both tendencies. They were conformists in the conformist group, where conformity was considered the preferred form of interpersonal interaction, and nonconformists, when independence and resistance to social pressure were the norm of the reference group.

People with low self-monitoring were found to be less sensitive to differences in social conditions and situations.

In a similar study, individuals with high self-monitoring showed a willingness to cooperate when they expected that in the future they would have to interact with this person again (he seemed to them "useful"). And, conversely, they did not show interest in cooperation when interaction was not expected in the future (then the person seemed to them "useless").

People with low self-monitoring did not change their behavior with a partner, regardless of whether future interactions were expected or not.

Conflict of interpretations. How to treat self-monitoring?

According to David Caldwell and Charles O "Reilly, self-monitoring cannot be assessed unambiguously (Caldwell D. & O" Reilly C, 1982). After conducting relevant research, they came to the conclusion that people with a high level of self-monitoring can use their abilities not only to successfully deceive others, but also to be useful to society. Some work activities and certain positions require a person to develop the ability to self-monitor. Basically, this is an activity where a person has to constantly interact with many people and organizations, perform various functions at the same time, and find himself in various situations. This can be work in educational institutions, mass media, the service sector, etc. People with high self-monitoring, able to grasp everything on the fly and instantly change their behavior in accordance with the situation, able to adapt to any views, opinions, tastes and requests , fit here better than others.

Erwin Goffman is of the same opinion, emphasizing that people can be guided by both good and bad intentions, presenting themselves to other people and thus creating one or another image (Goffman E., 1984). On the other hand, the study of Edward Jones, Kenneth Brenner, and John Knight (1990) raises questions about the relationship between self-monitoring, morality, and self-esteem. The authors of the study argue that people with a high level of self-monitoring experience satisfaction even if they successfully played a role that requires unsightly behavior. And vice versa, if a person with a low level of self-monitoring is asked to play the role of such an individual, whatever he would not like to be in life, then his self-esteem in case of a successfully played role will decrease, and in case of failure it will increase. In other words, a successful performance of the role of a scoundrel will upset him, and an unsuccessful one will please him.

The study involved 38 male students. Everyone rated themselves on a self-monitoring scale and filled out a self-assessment questionnaire. The participants had to play the role of a greedy, by all means striving for their own benefit, unprincipled person. To do this, they needed to deal with moral dilemmas appropriately. For example, such: can you use secret commercial information received from a friend for your own purposes? Is it possible to hide breakdowns that require serious repairs when selling a car? etc.

Participants were told that after they had played their part, their true identity would be assessed in a workshop on interpersonal perception by other students. Answers to questions - dilemmas - were recorded on a tape recorder.

After a week, the participants were told how the students in the workshop reacted to their answers. The results were presented in the form of scorecards ostensibly completed by the students at the seminar, and in the form of a short tape recording of the discussion. To portray the successful performance of the role of a participant in the "discussion" was described as a very cynical, unstoppable person (for example, "I felt that this guy is a trickster, he is capable of

anything just to get ahead...") For the portrayal of the unsuccessfully played role, the contestant was described as a "benefactor of mankind" with his head in the clouds, who is unlikely to succeed in the business world (for example, "it feels like this guy will not harm people, will not go over their heads"). After reading the results, the participants again filled out the self-assessment questionnaire.

As the researchers expected, successfully playing a dubious, unseemly role brought joy and satisfaction to people with a high level of self-monitoring. Conversely, people with low self-monitoring experienced satisfaction if their game was recognized as unsuccessful. Hence the title of the article, in which the authors report the results of their research - "When failure leads to increased self-esteem" (E. Pines, K. Maslach, 2000).

Thus, we focused on how the self-concept, being a person’s attitude towards himself, largely determines his behavior, affects his well-being, attitude towards other people, the world around him. But it must be borne in mind that there is also a feedback, namely: behavior affects the content and structure of a person's self-consciousness. How these processes proceed is described in the theory of cognitive dissonance by L. Festinger and the theory of self-understanding by D. Bem (a more detailed discussion of these concepts will be given in the "Social Attitude" section).

Now, briefly summarizing what has been said, we note that the self-concept is both the result of our social interactions and a factor influencing these interactions, and more broadly, human behavior as a whole. This is quite clearly manifested in the case of a sense of personal control.

Behavior- a set of actions of a person committed by him in a relatively long period in constant or changing conditions.

Two people may be engaged in the same activity, but their behavior may be different. If activity consists of actions, then behavior consists of actions.

To refer to human behavior in society, the concept of "social behavior" is used.

social behavior- the behavior of a person in society, designed to exert a certain influence on the surrounding people and society as a whole.

There are many types of so-called social behavior, the most important of which are: mass; group; prosocial; antisocial; helping; competitive; deviant (deviating); illegal.

Examples:

antisocial:
1) A student of 11th grade sits on the last desk all the time, without communicating with any of the students.
2) A fight between 11th grade students.
competitive:competitions were held among 11th grade students, the behavior of students is competitive.
helping:a student of grade 11a, not understanding the topic of physics, asked her friend, also a student of grade 11a, to explain the material to her. this girlfriend's behavior is helpful.
deviant: 11th grade student Vasya Pupkin, without looking up from the computer all day, plays CS, this addiction is calledGambling (gambling addiction) is a form of deviant behavior.

Bulk Behavior – activity of the masses, which does not have a specific goal and organization e.g. fashion, panic, social and political movements etc.

group behavior- joint actions of people in a certain social group, which is the result of the processes taking place in it.

prosocial behavior- human behavior, which is based on pro-social motives, i.e., the motives for providing people with kindness, help and support.

Example:

Creation of charitable foundations.

The man sitting on the couch saw the advertisement. It said that you need to send an SMS, and the money received from the SMS will go to help children.

AT last years The following types of behavior have acquired special significance for the state of society, the position of a person and his fate:

- associated with the manifestation of good and evil, friendship and enmity between people;

- associated with the desire to achieve success and power;

associated with self-confidence or self-doubt.

The types of social behavior are based on patterns accepted in society, which include mores and customs.

Mores and customs, being unwritten rules, nevertheless determine the conditions of social behavior.

Job Sample

A1. Choose the correct answer. Are the following statements about social behavior correct?

A. Social behavior is manifested in purposeful activity in relation to other people.

B. Social behavior is based on socially accepted patterns, which include mores and customs.

1) only A is true

2) only B is true

3) both statements are correct

4) both judgments are wrong

Answer: 3.

Deviant behavior

Deviant behavior- this is behavior that deviates from the generally accepted, socially approved, most common and established norms in certain communities at a certain period of their development.

Deviant- an individual who differs in his personal characteristics and behavioral manifestations from generally accepted norms: social, psychological, ethnic, pedagogical, age, professional and others.

Classification of deviant behavior

Definition of "Deviant Behavior" according to different sciences:

Social sciences: social phenomena that pose a real threat to the physical and social survival of a person in a given social environment, the immediate environment, a team of social and moral norms and cultural values, a violation of the process of assimilation and reproduction of norms and values, as well as self-development and self-realization in that society, to which the person belongs.

Medical approach: deviation from the norms of interpersonal interaction accepted in a given society: actions, deeds, statements made both within the framework of mental health and in various forms of neuropsychiatric pathology, especially at the borderline level.

Psychological approach: Deviation from socio-psychological and moral norms, presented either as an erroneous anti-social model of conflict resolution, manifested in violation of socially accepted norms, or in damage to public well-being, others and oneself.

V. N. Ivanov identifies two levels of deviant behavior:

1. Pre-criminogenic: petty misconduct, violation of moral standards, rules of conduct in in public places, evasion from socially useful activities, the use of alcoholic, narcotic, toxic drugs that destroy the psyche, and other forms of behavior that do not pose a danger.

2. Criminogenic: actions and deeds expressed in criminal criminal acts.

The "core" of deviant behavior in the classification of F. Pataki are:

- "pre-deviant syndrome" - a complex of certain symptoms that lead a person to persistent forms of deviant behavior. Namely:

• affective type of behavior;
• family conflicts;
• aggressive type of behavior;
• early antisocial behaviors;
• negative attitude towards learning;
• low level of intelligence.

The classification of V.V. Kovalev is built on three different bases:

1) socio-psychological:

Anti-disciplinary behavior;

asocial;

Illegal;

Autoaggressive.

2) clinical and psychopathological:

Pathological;

Non-pathological deviations.

3) personal-dynamic.

In the famous formula of R. Descartes “I think, therefore I exist”, the fact of having thinking serves as proof of the existence of a person.

I. Kant gave the understanding of "I" a value-personal dimension. He introduced into scientific circulation the division of consciousness and self-consciousness of a person. “The fact that a person can have an idea of ​​\u200b\u200bhis own Self elevates him infinitely above all other creatures living on Earth. Because of this, he is a person...” Self-consciousness, according to Kant, is a necessary prerequisite for morality and moral responsibility.

The complexity of the problem lies in the fact that in this case the object and subject of cognition coincide, which makes it difficult to establish the degree of reliability of a person's knowledge about himself.

Usually under self-awareness understand a person's definition of himself as a person , able to make independent decisions enter into certain relationships with other people and nature. One of the important signs self-awareness is the willingness of a person to be responsible for his decisions and actions.

self-knowledge- the study by a person of his own mental and physical characteristics (the ability to correct himself and improve himself, unlike alive; understanding himself: who am I? what am I? what do I want? what can I do?).

Types of self-knowledge:

§ Indirect (performed by analyzing one's own activities)

§ Direct (acts in the form of self-observation)

Self-knowledge goes on throughout life, even if we are not aware of this, from 3-8 months. infancy (self-recognition) and often ends with the last breath.

In communication, people get to know and appreciate each other. These assessments affect the self-esteem of the individual. Self-esteem- an emotional attitude to one's own image, it is always subjective, although it is based not only on one's own judgments, but also on the opinions of others about a given person.

Psychologists name three motives for turning to self-esteem:

1. Understanding yourself (search for accurate knowledge about yourself).

2. Increasing one's own importance (search for favorable knowledge about oneself).

3. Self-examination (correlation of one's own knowledge about oneself with assessments of one's importance by others).

The level of self-esteem is associated with the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of a person with himself, his activities. Types self-assessment:

ü Realistic (adequate) (corresponds to the real possibilities of H)

ü Unrealistic (inadequate) (problems in communication)

§ overestimated (overestimates himself)

§ underestimated (underestimates himself).

In the formation of self-esteem, an important role is played by the comparison of the image of the real "I" with the image of the ideal that we would like to be. Self-esteem can be expressed as follows:

You can increase self-esteem either by achieving something, such as success, or by lowering the level.

"I-concept"- a relatively stable, more or less conscious and verbally fixed representation of a person about himself. This is the totality of all the individual's ideas about himself and includes assessments, beliefs, behavioral tendencies. In other words, the self-concept is a set of attitudes characteristic of each individual, aimed at himself. The descriptive component of the self-concept is called image of me or picture of me.

The image of "I" does not remain unchanged throughout life. Not only the appearance is changing, but also the attitude towards it, self-esteem becomes more justified, measures are being taken to improve it.

As a result of the development of self-consciousness, a person develops I-concept, which is a combination of all his ideas about the various aspects of his personality and body.

The process of self-knowledge has no boundaries, since the object itself is constantly changing.

Self-realization I - the process of the most complete identification and implementation by the individual of his capabilities, the achievement of the intended goals in solving personally significant problems, which allows the fullest possible realization of the creative potential of the individual. Self-realization can be attributed to the highest human needs, the meaning of life is manifested in self-realization. It is carried out by purposeful influence of the personality on itself.

Self-realization is connected with self-development. Self-development- conscious human activity aimed at the fullest possible realization of oneself as a person

The main ways of self-knowledge:

Analysis of one's own activities and behavior based on comparison with other people;

self-observation;

Self-confession (an internal report to oneself, for example, a personal diary).

Self-knowledge is associated with reflection(from lat. reflexio - reversal), reflecting the process of thinking of an individual about what is happening in his mind, which includes in and his surroundings.

According to psychologists, the central place in understanding the process of one's own development is occupied by the concept identity.

Each person throughout his life goes through identification with different social groups (social identity) and identification with people who have certain personal characteristics (personal identification), as a result of which knowledge about himself is born. First, the child learns what gender he belongs to, then what nationality. A little later, he begins to identify himself with the social stratum to which his parents belong, with the city and country where he lives. A mature person identifies himself with representatives of his profession, party, religion, social stratum, etc.

The concept of “behavior” is associated with the concept of personality. From the outside, we are judged by it.

Behavior- an external manifestation of a person's activity, his relationship to society, other people; - a set of human actions performed by him in a relatively long period in constant or changing conditions (characteristic of all living beings, as activity). Manifested in actions, a feature of which is the consciousness of actions

Action- a process aimed at achieving the goal .

deed- an action considered from the point of view of the unity of motive and consequences, intentions and deeds, goals, means.

social behavior- the behavior of a person in society, designed to exert a certain influence on the surrounding people and society as a whole.

Mass- the activity of the masses, which does not have a specific goal and organization, for example, fashion, panic, political movements, etc.

deviant- does not meet the norms accepted in society.

At the core types of social behavior lie the patterns accepted in society, which include mores and customs (unwritten rules).

manners- typical reactions repeated by many people to certain events: they are transformed as people's consciousness changes. ← habit.

customs- the form of human behavior in a certain situation; customs are steadily followed, without thinking about where they came from and why it should be so.

Our behavior is guided by innate instincts(for example, the instinct of self-preservation).

In addition to instincts, a person has emotions (positive and negative experiences of the meaning of life situations and phenomena due to needs), feelings (love, fear, anger).

Emotions- subjective experiences about situations and phenomena of reality (surprise, joy, suffering, anger, fear, etc.).

The senses – emotional states, which are longer than emotions and have a clearly expressed objective character (moral: friendship, love, patriotism; aesthetic: disgust, delight, longing; intellectual: curiosity, doubt, curiosity).

Human behavior is manifested in its relationship with other people. Altruism- a moral principle, which consists in selfless service to people, readiness to sacrifice oneself for the sake of others. Egocentrism- the opposite. Proper Behavior is to balance one's own interests and respect the interests of others.

What is the source and what is the nature of awareness of one's own position, its uniqueness? Where does the inner consciousness of "I" come from?

If a person is a question of questions of philosophy, then the central point in the problem of a person is the question of the nature of a unique personal being. Philosophers explain consciousness, the spiritual principle in a person in different ways. According to Plato, consciousness is the memory of the eternal world of ideas, in which the soul dwelt before being born into the world. It is easy to see that such an understanding actually goes back to the mythological views on the transmigration of souls. According to the British philosopher D. Locke, consciousness is the essence of developed and complicated systems of sensory perceptions. According to rationalist philosophers (who give priority to reason over feelings) such as R. Descartes, B. Spinoza, W. Leibniz, ideas are primordial and exist parallel to the material world and independently of it. According to such philosophers as the German M. Buber, the Frenchman E. Levinas, the Russian thinker M. Bakhtin, the Spirit originally inherent in man, in contact with other spiritual beings, is, as it were, embodied by them into a specific Soul.

The reason for such discrepancies is related to the fact that the human consciousness, "I", although it seems to be quite obviously given to everyone, is not comprehensible, since other objects are comprehended: a table, a chair, chemicals, planets, works of art, political events etc. cognizable objectively, i.e. as some objects that exist outside the subject that knows them. The consciousness of one's own "I" is comprehensible not through objectification, but in some other, deeper way. "I" is not a fact, not an act, not an idea, it is both ideal and real. Moreover, the “I” always, as it were, stands outside of space and time: it is always, at any moment in time, recognized as the “I-unchanging”, as the “I, which is precisely I”, and in its entirety.

The meaning of the problem of self-consciousness lies in the fact that the subject of self-consciousness is the bearer of freedom. And the problem of self-consciousness, thus, turns out to be at the center of any comprehension by a person of reality and himself, the possibility of knowing the dynamics of culture in general. The main problem is the extra-spatial, timeless beginning of self-consciousness, which lies outside the cognizable world, perhaps even preceding it. And then we are talking about freedom, the bearer of which is the subject of self-consciousness.

Since self-consciousness is difficult to bring under rational categories, a tradition has developed in philosophy of the rational indefinability of self-consciousness and the philosophical ideas of freedom or existence associated with it. Given outside of time and space, our "I" appears as something that does not belong to the outside world familiar to us, therefore the problem of self-knowledge reveals itself ultimately as a problem of the non-existent beginning of being, as a religious problem. The "I" is given in itself, but it cannot be its own foundation and needs some kind of foundation that lies outside the sensuously perceived world. Therefore, true self-knowledge is achieved only through correlation with a certain "absolute" beginning of all manifestations of reality, something free from this reality.

The problem of individual freedom

What is freedom? And is there freedom? After all, there are many authoritative worldview concepts - materialistic and religious - denying freedom. According to materialism, everything in the world is the result of cause-and-effect interactions. According to the religion of Protestantism, complete Divine predestination reigns in the world. Both the outstanding German philosopher F. Nietzsche and the supporters of behaviorism (from the English. behavior- behavior), according to which human behavior is completely determined by external influences.

But freedom is not so much a physical concept as "superphysical". Freedom is always something still unrealized; it is not yet being, but a certain possibility of being. It precedes being, it is that which "wants" to be embodied in being. In this sense, freedom acts as a kind of "groundless basis of being." Therefore, it is always so difficult to talk about freedom - it does not have specific characteristics, representing something indescribable and inexpressible. According to the Russian religious philosopher N. A. Berdyaev, even God the Creator, who is all-powerful over being, is not all-powerful over uncreated freedom.

Freedom appears only when human consciousness appears. The spiritual is thus directly related to freedom. Therefore, freedom appears as the only condition for adequate perception and comprehension of reality. The human essence is freedom, eternally waiting beyond the threshold of the human certainty of the world. The self-consciousness of the subject is the self-consciousness of freedom.

Human self-awareness is a complex mental phenomenon that consists of emotions and instincts, thoughts and interests, personality type, cultural and social environment in which the individual resides. In his inner world, a person may feel like an artist, entertainer, political or social leader, an outstanding athlete, entrepreneur, or anyone else. Such self-perceptions of the individual may or may not correspond to the real resources, abilities and talents of the person. Mismatch of the dominants of self-consciousness with the achieved results, with the attitude of others, can lead to psychological conflicts, which is reflected in social behavior.

Every person from a very early age voluntarily or involuntarily evaluates his personality, behavior and abilities, comparing himself with other members of society. Positive assessments add self-esteem to the individual, negative ones lead to annoyance, an underestimated level of claims, psychological breakdowns, aggression, deviant (deviant) behavior.

A person's self-consciousness is formed gradually, over the years absorbing the values ​​of the surrounding world, forming models for imitation or rejection of any actions. At different countries and peoples, this period of the formation of self-consciousness is usually estimated by a different time period - in some cultures it is 16-18 years, in others 21 years. Before this age, which is also called coming of age, it is believed that the individual cannot be fully aware of his actions, that is, he incompetent in whole or in part. AT in practical terms this means that a person with an unstable self-consciousness cannot elect and be elected to state and municipal positions, cannot bear full responsibility for the offenses and crimes committed, have a permit to carry weapons, buy and consume alcohol and tobacco.

The formation of self-consciousness and thinking are processes hidden from superficial observation; people around cannot say with certainty that this or that individual has reached the proper level of self-consciousness. Of course, you can conduct tests and qualifying exams that reveal the level of knowledge, skills, abilities or physical fitness of a particular person. But the degree of development of self-awareness cannot be directly measured, although this can be very important in order to prevent betrayal in law enforcement agencies, corruption in government agencies, and theft of intellectual property in the corporate sector.

Representatives behaviorism and a number of other scientific areas rightly believe that self-consciousness and the unconscious are unobservable, the brain and mind are a “black box”, but behavior can be studied and through it to obtain information about thought processes and behavioral constants embedded in the human genetic memory. In this case, science is a good help. ethology, studying the behavior of animals, and partly of people. The study of social hierarchy in packs, mutual assistance in family relationships, cooperation in joint hunting, mating games and collisions - all this provides useful information for a better understanding of human behavior in society.

Crime remains a big problem for humanity, which in itself represents some kind of antisocial behavior. Robbery and murder, hooliganism and theft, kidnapping and terrorism - all this is the result of antisocial (delinquent) behavior. Similarly, illegal political actions can be considered - various Maidans, unrest, "rose revolutions". Some individuals violate the law because of selfish motives and greed, the other because of violated (as it seems to them) justice.

For the executive and legislature, it is very important prediction of social behavior citizens who approve or disapprove of certain political, economic and social solutions. Indicators such as the growth of crime, strikes, protests, hidden discontent are widely used by sociologists who present the results of their surveys to government agencies and the public. According to protest sentiment charts and popularity ratings political leaders it is possible to accurately predict future social behavior.