National character and culture. What is national character, and is it inherent in most of us? "Unknown" report by E.A. Bagramova

... National character is a system of relations of a specific ethnic community to various aspects of the surrounding reality, manifested in stable stereotypes of their thinking, emotional reactions and behavior in general

National character is a combination of physical and spiritual traits that distinguish one nation from another (O. Bauer)

Each nation has its own specific culture, system of signs, symbols, customs, etc. In everyday consciousness, psychological differences between peoples are noticeable. Thus, punctuality is a valuable quality for the Germans and the Dutch, but the Spaniards do not attach much importance to this quality. Psychological stereotypes and culture different nations, which are widespread in everyday consciousness, always have a value, evaluative character and consciously and unconsciously correlate with individual ideas about the specifics of their people and their culture (according to IS. KonomKon).

Each person has two types of consciousness that are directly related to its national character:

The first contains states that are characteristic of an individual;

The second contains conditions that are characteristic of a group of individuals

These states connect the individual with society, forming the so-called "society within us", which exists in the form of reactions of the same type for representatives of one ethnic community to ordinary situations in the form of feelings, and constitutes national character... National character is an important component of personality (E. Durkheim E. Durkheim).

Traits of national character are unevenly distributed among representatives of the nation - from the presence of all these traits to their complete absence. In this regard, the quality of the national character must be studied by analyzing national traditions, customs, beliefs, history and natural living conditions.

Character differs from temperament in content: character has common features among ethnic groups, and temperament is an individual feature of each person (GF. Hegel)

The classification of peoples according to mental functions (thinking, emotions, sensation and intuition) was carried out by the KG. Jung. By these functions, the scientist was able to identify the corresponding psychological types: mental, emotional, sensory and intuitive types. Each of the identified types can be introverted or ex-traversed, which is due to the behavior of the individual relative to an object. The classification of mental types correlates with ethnic communities, since the psychology of an ethnic group consists of the psychology of its representatives. The specificity of the psychology of the ethnos and its members is caused by the dominance of one of the listed mental functions. For example, residents. The East is an introverted race that is directed towards its own inner light.

Helvetius connected the national character with the system of government in the country, noting that the ruler who usurps power in the country becomes a despot, and despotism is a terrible enemy of the public good, which ultimately leads to changes in the character of the entire nation.

Defining the concept of "national character, in his work" On Man "the scientist pointed out that" any nation has its own special way of seeing and feeling, which forms its character. In all peoples, the character changes gradually or instantly. The factor of these changes is imperceptible instant changes in the forms of government and in public education "is, the character has dynamic properties, or the ability to change under the course of certain factors, in particular, as a result of a change in the form of government as a result of changes in the forms of government.

D. Hume in his work "On the National Character" also noted that the character of a people can, to a certain extent, change under the influence of the system of government and from mixing with other peoples. The philosopher pointed out that people do not owe this or that trait of their character to either the air or the climate. National character is formed as a collective concept based on the personal character of their characters.

MI. Pyrene defined national character as a set of traits that historically have developed among representatives of a particular nation, which determine the usual manner of their behavior, a typical way of action, which manifests itself in relation to the everyday sphere, the world around, labor, attitude towards their own and others together.

National character has the following properties:

It fixes typical traits, formed to varying degrees and are present in various combinations in most representatives of the ethnos, it is by no means a simple sum of the qualities of individual people.

It is not the traits or their sum that are unique, but the structure of character; therefore, it is unacceptable to consider any qualities as inherent in a separate ethnic community

relation to national character and their properties. GM. Andreeva put it this way: "It is not so much about a" set "of features, but about the degree of manifestation of this or that trait in this set, about the experts and the nature of this manifestation."

For example, hard work is one of the most important traits of both Japanese and German national character. However, the Germans work "economically", they have everything foreseen and calculated. The Japanese, on the other hand, devote themselves to labor selflessly, with pleasure, they have a sense of beauty, which they also show in the process of work.

In order to understand character traits, it is necessary to compare them with the general system of values, depending on the lifestyle, socio-economic and geographical conditions of the people. For example, the goal of being a universal human quality is that in each culture, jubism acquires a kind of value essence.

Life and landscape are important factors in the formation of specific character traits in a particular ethnic group. The sources of the formation of a national character are: family, parental home, clan, natural environment

National character develops slowly over the centuries and therefore can change quickly. National psychological qualities are distinguished by conservatism, stability and insignificant changeability.

Traits of national character are passed on from generation to generation, forming a strong and stable structure, which can be compared with a huge and heavy chain mesh firmly holds each of its links - - the individual as a representative of a certain ethnic group.

According to modern theories of inheritance of national character traits, these traits can be transmitted in the following ways:

Genetic - in this case we are talking about the inheritance of memory relative to the historical experience of their people, that is, about the collective unconscious; genetic memory contains the imprints of the historical experience of the nation, chis cream, prehistoric human existence

Socio-psychological - in the usual or traditional way. Traditions are synthesized, subordinated to the national ideal of belief, ways of thinking, feeling, striving, suffering, norms of behavior of previous generations. As a result of changes in ideals and value orientations, traditions change and the previous traditions are destroyed. The functioning of traditions is ensured by the action of such mechanisms: us leadership, suggestions, convictions and emotionality. Tradition is the main mechanism for integrating people into a single whole. For example, an American is a slave to standards, an Englishman is a slave to his traditions.

Based on research results. D. Chizhevsky ("Essays on the History of Philosophy in Ukraine") the main positive and negative features Ukrainian national character are:

National character cannot be limited to only one dominant trait. It is necessary to avoid accentuation and absolutization of negative traits.

Consequently, a national character is a set of traits that have developed historically among representatives of a particular nation, which determine the usual manner of their behavior, a typical way of action, which are manifested in the everyday life, the world around them, work, attitude towards their own and others.

In general, the term "national character" belongs to the category of the most difficult social phenomena and the concepts of several modern sciences at once: cultural studies, psychology, ethnology and the related science of ethnopolitical science.

1. National character. Definition of the concept

This definition describes various enduring characteristics that are characteristic of most members of a particular ethnic or national community, and includes:

• spiritual values;
• ideas;
• interests;
• religion;
• morality;
• motives;
• mental warehouse;
• socio-psychological defense mechanisms;
• aspirations;
• the senses.

All of the above can be confidently attributed to a nation or ethnos.

Very often one hears a question regarding the differences between national and folk character. Is there a difference? Having studied the mass of specialized literature, I came to the conclusion, taking the side of most specialists, that these two definitions are completely identical, since both reflect and express the features and specifics of the generally accepted views, values ​​and sensations in a particular ethnic group.

2. National character in the modern world

However, some modern researchers, in turn, adhere to a slightly different point of view. They believe that the concepts of folk and national character should be distinguished, since the latter should be understood as a more complex and historically developed phenomenon.

Why? This is primarily due to the fact that in some countries, some active representatives of an ethnic group or nation consciously take part in the most important spheres of life, namely in the legal and political. They deliberately reflect on the history of their region, honor it and want to preserve it for future generations. Those. all this happens quite consciously.

In this case, attention is focused on the problems of the nation as a whole, which means that they are associated not only with the development of each individual, but also with the ratio of public and personal interests.

Scientists believe that these problems are not considered, or hardly considered, in popular communities, but that they are mainly dealt with by national organizations, communities, groups.

3. National character of the peoples of the world: Swedes and Russians

The main feature of the Swedes is, perhaps, their hard work. In addition, everyone who has visited this country will note that, unlike us Russians, the inhabitants of this state are rather reluctant to express their point of view, do not show their emotions, feelings and experiences.

That is why, apparently, they enjoy the fame of boring and uncommunicative people. You rarely find a Swede bragging about his or her successes or accomplishments. Representatives of this culture generally prefer not to talk about themselves or their family members. Moreover, this is not at all snobbery, as many believe, this is the norm of their behavior. For a Swede, unlike an ordinary Russian, it is completely impossible to know neighbors at the entrance, not to visit on holidays, not to bring gifts from vacations or business trips.

Although there is a certain paradox here: if by some miracle you manage to get the Swede to talk, then it will be simply impossible to silence him. He is more willing to make contact with a foreigner, more openly shares with him episodes about his personal life, the nuances of business and the achievements of children. Just do not hope to find grateful listeners, they not only do not know how to listen, but do not feel such a need at all.

The Russian national character also provides for completely different relations between representatives of the opposite sex. Unlike us, Swedes have a completely different attitude to the fair sex. They will never pay for their companion in a cafe, cinema or tram. And this is not at all from greed. The men of this country sincerely believe that by doing so, they humiliate the dignity of a working woman, who, in turn, will not take it as a gesture of politeness, but rather as a handout.

). At the same time, modern researchers recognize that, in contrast to the folk (ethnic), national character, as a phenomenon of the life of a community that is more developed in its historical phase, appears to be a more complex phenomenon. This is due to the fact that representatives of the nation consciously participate in the political and legal spheres, think about the meaning of their own history, about the future of their country. The focus of the nation's attention is on the problems associated with the development of each person, with the ratio of personal and public interests, etc. All these sides and problems are absent (or almost nonexistent) in the people's (ethnic) communities.

A separate detailed analysis is required to clarify the generality / specificity / correlation of the concepts of mentality, mentality and national (folk) character. In modern media, these concepts are often used as identical.

There remains a debatable issue regarding the variability (stability) of the national character in the process of historical socio-cultural macrodynamics.

Attempts to define

The word "character" came to the Russian language through Polish charakter- "character, dignity"; in turn, the Latin character comes from the Greek haravyu, which meant a sign, an imprint, a sign, a distinctive feature.

Domestic and Western researchers - who recognize the existence of a national character, its scientific, cognitive and practical value - include reactions to the outside world, some emotional signs; historically forming, traditional, peculiar mass psychological properties; habits and behavior, emotional and psychological reaction to the phenomena of a familiar and unusual environment, value orientations, needs and tastes; a system of psychological stereotypes.

At the origins of the study of the nature of peoples in Western Europe there were such thinkers of the Enlightenment as Charles Montesquieu, David Hume, I.G. Herder, J. de Maistre, and later - representatives of German classical philosophy.

Montesquieu used the concept of "different characters of peoples" (divers caracteres des nations), linking these national differences with different climatic and geographical conditions. A similar idea was also expressed by Voltaire. Rousseau believed that every nation must have, or at least must have its own national character.

Later Herder introduced the concept of "folk spirit". Considering the people as a "corporate personality", he believed that its basis is formed by the national spirit, which inspires the culture of the people and finds expression in its language, customs, traditions and values. According to Herder, the national spirit, representing "the innate or independently developed character of peoples", is one of the driving forces historical development nations. The idea of ​​the "people's spirit", introduced into the philosophy of history by I. Herder, was of great importance for the development of Hegel's system.

By the end of the twentieth century in American anthropology, there is a noticeable transition in studies of national character through the problem of holistic research and interpretation of culture. In the context of research of a national character, the topics of study are non-verbal communication in ethnocultural communities, cross-cultural analysis of emotional and mental states, etc.

Study of national character in Russia

Comprehension of the people and their character (in the terminology of that period - "soul", "spirit", "national spirit") in the national humanitarian thought begins in the second half of the 18th century. The large-scale Europeanization of Russia, the break with the spiritual and cultural attitudes of the life of Muscovite Russia could not but intensify the desire to understand national identity, to find out who we are and how we differ from other peoples.

The tradition of studying the national character in Russia is based on the ideas and reflections of prominent Russian philosophers, scientists, and writers. Many Russian thinkers, similarly to Western ones, described the peculiarities of the psychology of the Russian people through the category of “soul”. Interest in national consciousness in a philosophical context was due to the need to reflect on the "Russian ideal" and "Russian idea" at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries and to comprehend the ways of development of Russian society in conditions of civilizational and cultural choice.

Among the Russian thinkers of the 19th - first half of the 20th centuries, who in one way or another in their works touched upon problems of a national character (including Russian), it is necessary to note P.Ya. Chaadaeva, A.S. Khomyakova, I. V. Kireevsky, Yu.F. Samarin, the Aksakov brothers, N. Ya. Danilevsky, F.M. Dostoevsky, N.G. Chernyshevsky, A.I. Herzen, K. D. Kavelin, father and son - Solovievs (historian and philosopher), V.O. Klyuchevsky, V.V. Rozanova, K.N. Leontyeva, N.A. Berdyaeva, P.N. Milyukova, S.N. Bulgakov, S.L. Frank, I.A. Ilyina, N.O. Lossky, B.P. Vysheslavtseva, G.P. Fedotova, G.G. Shpet, V.I. Ivanov, F.A. Stepun, I.L. Solonevich, N.S. Trubetskoy, L.P. Karsavina and others. It should be noted that Russian philosophy until 1917 and the philosophers of the Russian diaspora carried out the study of ethno-national character in the widest range of methodological positions.

It is interesting that V.I. Lenin passed over in silence the problem of national character; moreover, in a private conversation he expressed doubt about its existence.

The contribution of I.S. Kona

In the late 60s - early 70s of the XX century, the philosopher and sociologist Igor Kon appeared in print with significant and resonant articles for that time on this issue: National character - myth or reality? // Foreign literature. 1968. No. 9. S. 215-229; On the problem of national character // History and psychology. Ed. B.F. Porshnev and L.I. Antsyferova M., 1971.S. 122-158.

To the question "What is national character - myth or reality?" I. Kon replied: “... both. ethnic groups and the invisible determinant of their social behavior is, from a scientific point of view, a myth. But, like any socio-psychological myth, it reflects a certain historical reality: the community of psychological traits and methods of action developed and assimilated in the course of joint historical development, enshrined in group self-awareness. " was expressed as negative, Cohn raised a number of acute and fundamental questions, introduced into circulation and made available the conclusions and judgments of foreign researchers of a national character.

"Unknown" report by E.A. Bagramova

One of the reports of the Soviet delegation, presented in September 1973 at the 9th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnographic Sciences in the United States, was entitled "On the scientific content of the concept of" national character. "The author of the report was a well-known specialist on the problems of national relations Eduard Bagramov (at that time - deputy editor-in-chief of the magazine "Communist").

The meaning and pathos of the report, written from Marxist positions and methodology, was that for the Soviet Marxist social science there are no taboo topics and problems, which in the USSR, according to Western analysts, included the concept of "national character." Unfortunately, this report, published in the form of a brochure in a small print run, did not gain popularity in the USSR and remained unknown to specialists.

Discussion about the national character at the turn of the 60-70s. XX century

Since the end of the 60s. XX century in Soviet science, a discussion of the concept of "nation" developed, which acquired a generally positive direction for understanding the phenomenon of national character. As a result of the discussion, many significant concepts were clarified, primarily "Russian national character" and "mental makeup of the nation." Among the publications of this period, the following can be noted:

• Rogachev P.M., Sverdlin M.A. On the concept of "nation" // Questions of history. 1966. No. 1;
• Kaltakhchyan S.T. On the question of the concept of "nation" // Questions of history. 1966. No. 6;
• Kaltakhchyan S.T. Leninism and the essence of the nation and the ways of forming an international community of people. M., 1969;
• Burmistrova T.Yu. Some questions of the theory of the nation // Questions of history. 1966. No. 12;
• A.I. Goryacheva Is the mental makeup of a nation? // Questions of history. 1967. No. 8;
• Dzhandildin N.D. Nature national psychology... Alma-Ata, 1971;
• Nations and national relations. Frunze, 1966;
• Vorobyova N. National character and folk history// National and international in culture, folklore and language. Chisinau, 1971;
• History and psychology. Ed. B.F. Porshnev and L.I. Antsyferova. M., 1971.

Sun. Ovchinnikov on the national character of the British and Japanese

A definite contribution to the study of national character (at the empirical level) was the publications of Soviet journalists who worked abroad. For example, the books by Vsevolod Ovchinnikov, a correspondent for the newspaper Pravda, about England (The Roots of the Oak) and Japan (The Sakura Branch), published in the late 70s. last century, can serve as a kind of valuable "aid" in comprehending, understanding the character of the British and Japanese. These works of his were highly appreciated both in the USSR and abroad. In them, the author showed himself not only as a talented journalist, but also as an attentive scientist - ethnologist, culturologist - who has no doubts about the existence of a national character. Ovchinnikov's books anticipated and ahead of the appearance in our days of numerous works (Russian and foreign) about the characterological traits and characteristics of the peoples of the world, about their way of life, morals, behavior, etc.

Research by K. Kasyanova

In this work, the author tried to move away from Marxist attitudes and take a fresh look at the problems of a national character. She considers culture to be the determining factor for national character. K. Kasyanova's research was based on empirical data obtained by comparing the average characteristics of Russians and Americans on the scales of the so-called "Minnesota test". On the basis of their study, she put forward the assumption that the Russian person is an epileptoid, which is characterized by slowness and viscosity of thinking. Russians, in her opinion, combine patience and explosiveness, which makes them unpredictable and not always understandable in behavior. The research of K. Kasyanova occupies an important place in the research of the Russian national character.

In the 70s of the last century, a campaign to promote the so-called new historical community of people - the "Soviet people", where there was no longer a place for such a concept as "national character", began to gain momentum in the USSR.

Nevertheless, speaking about the Soviet period in the study of national character, it should be noted that, firstly, at a certain stage in the development of the Soviet public thought the very question of the existence of a national character began to be debated, which was already enough important point... Secondly, the judgments and points of view of foreign researchers on problems of a national character were introduced into scientific circulation. And, finally, thirdly, those who recognized the essence and significance of the national character, the need to analyze it, pointed out that this should be done in a broad context. national culture, everyday life, etc.

The modern stage of the study of national character

At the turn of the 80s - 90s of the XX century, the attitude towards research of a national character changed dramatically - the Marxist-Leninist attitudes in the consideration of the problems of society and man became a thing of the past.

A certain landmark in the study of the character of the people was the article by Academician D.S. Likhachev in the journal Voprosy filosofii in 1990, in which he called for understanding and studying the traits of the Russian character.

Over the past two decades, Russian humanities has been intensively mastering everything related to the analysis of an ethnos, a nation, and the characterological characteristics of a people. Social and humanitarian sciences in Russia and abroad today show special and close attention to problems of a national character - both to the theoretical and methodological side of the issue, and to the nature of specific peoples, which is reflected in a huge volume of publications on this topic, which is difficult to give in. accounting.

In the discussion about the ethno-national arrangement in the late 80s - the first half of the 90s of the last century, the interest of domestic researchers focused mainly on the problems of the formation and development of ethnic groups and nations, ethnic identity and national consciousness. These questions became the subject of scientific discussion in the works of R.G. Abdulatipova, S.A. Arutyunova, G.G. Diligensky, V.M. Mezhueva, A.S. Panarin, I.K. Pantina, V.A. Tishkova, Zh.T. Toshchenko, I. G. Yakovenko, P.I. Gnatenko, M.P. Buzsky and others.

Interest in the problem of a national character in Russia increased sharply in the second half of the 90s. This is due to various reasons, among which it is possible to single out, apparently, such as disappointment with liberal reforms in Russia in the first half of the 90s, against the background of which the topic of the search for a Russian national idea, the problem of national pride, a special national path, etc. .NS. On the other hand, the contact of domestic humanitarians with foreign colleagues has become broader and more constructive, and acquaintance with foreign concepts of national character and nationalism has expanded. Special mention should be made of the influence and role of modern media in the process of comprehending national behavioral characteristics. At this time, the works of such researchers as I.V. Komadorova, V.G. Nikolaev, M.O. Mnatsakanyan, G.G. Sillaste, Yu.V. Arutyunyan, L.M. Drobizheva, A.A. Susokolova, Z.V. Sikevich, E.S. Troitsky, V.G. Fedotova and others.

In modern science, a spectrum of directions is presented, in some of which the problem of national character is analyzed in the context of the study of culture, the Russian idea, issues of identity, consciousness and self-awareness, the problem of Russian history, as well as in line with reflections on the Russian mentality and specific features of the Russian national character. Within the framework of these studies, a significant contribution was made by G.S. Avanesov, V.A. Achkasov, A.S. Akhiezer, B.C. Barulin, B.N. Bessonov, E.M. Andreev, E.F. Solopov, G. D. Gachev, K.Kh. Delokarov, V.N. Sagatovsky, O.A. Sergeeva, K. Trofimov, N.A. Narochnitskaya, A.I. Vdovin, V.N. Romanov, V.V. Babashkin, I. E. Koznova, V.E. Baghdasaryan, V.A. Tishkov, Yu.V. Harutyunyan, A.O. Boronoev, P.I. Smirnov, Z.B. Kandaurova, F.Yu. Albakova, S.V. Lurie, A.A. Belik, S.S. Horuzhy, G.F. Sunyagin, E.R. Yarskaya, E.V. Barkova, O.A. Astafieva, I.V. Kondakov, I. G. Yakovenko, T.F. Ermolenko, O. V. Belova, Zh.V. Chetvertakova, N.M. Lebedeva, A.N. Leontiev, T.I. Stefanenko, L.G. Pochebut, I.A. Beskova, V.G. Yaprintsev, A. Ya. Flier, A.N. Kochergin, I.A. Birich, B.S. Gershunsky, A.S. Zapesotsky, V.A. Nikitin, V.A. Slastenin, E.A. Yamburg and many others.

When studying the problem of a national character, modern works use a combination of various methodological approaches. For example, such approaches can be distinguished in the works recent years: 1) an interdisciplinary synthesis of the historical-philosophical and socio-philosophical approach (A.M. Chernysh); 2) integration of an interdisciplinary approach and systems analysis (V.E. Kashaev); 3) a combination of historical and logical (Z.B. Prytkova); 4) methodological pluralism (IV Khramov); 5) sociocultural (E.V. Yuldashev); 6) systemic-holistic approach (N.A.Moiseeva) and others.

Today, the concept of "national character" in the domestic humanities appears as a kind of synthesizing unity of the spiritual, cultural characteristics people, their value orientations, which are manifested in the historical, social, economic conditions of life and bind people into a single people.

Notes (edit)

Bibliography

• V.V. Aksyuchits Russian character. M., 2011.
• Aleksandrov V.A., Tishkov V.A. Russians. M., 1999.
• American character. Essays on the culture of the United States. M., 1995.
• Bagramov E. A. On the question of the scientific content of the concept of "national character". M., 1973.
• Barulin V.S. Russian people in the twentieth century: Losing and finding oneself. SPb., 2000.
• Bazhenova M. A., Bazhenov A. A. Russians and Germans. What are we and what are they? Research methods of a national character. Sarov, 2009.
• Bessonov B. N The fate of Russia: the view of Russian thinkers. M., 1993.
• Boldin S.V. Russian tragedy (On the peculiarities of the Russian national character and power in Russia). M., 2007. ISBN 5-9788-5824176-8
• Boronoev A.O., Smirnov P.I. Russia and Russians. The character of the people and the fate of the country. SPb., 1992.
• Vyunov Yu.A. Russian cultural archetype. M., 2005.
• Gadzhiev K.S. American nation. M., 1990.
• Gubanov V. M. Russian national character in the context of the political life of Russia. SPb., 1999.
• Dzhandildin ND The nature of national psychology. Alma-Ata, 1971.
• Kandaurova Z.B. Russian national character in conditions modern society... Stavropol, 2005.
• Kasyanova K. About Russian national character. M.- Yekaterinburg, 2003. ISBN 5-8291-0203-X, ISBN 5-88687-139-X.
• Kashaev V.E. National character: the experience of philosophical research. Ivanovo, 2000.
• Kon, I.S., To the problem of national character // History and psychology. M., 1971 http://scepsis.ru/library/id_903.html
• S.V. Kortunov National identity: comprehending the meaning. M., 2009.
• Kustova L. S. Mystery of the national character. M., 2003. ISBN 5-7974-0069-3
• Likhachev D.S.On the national character of Russians // Problems of Philosophy. 1990. No. 4. S. 3-7.
• Lurie S.B. Historical ethnology. M., 2004.
• Malyshev V.N. Space of thought and national character. SPb., 2009.
• Moiseeva N.A. National character as a vector of being of society. M., 2012.
• Olshansky D. Fundamentals of Political Psychology. Yekaterinburg: Business Book, 2001. ISBN 5-88687-098-9
• Pavlovskaya A. V. Russian world: character, life and customs. M., 2009.
• A.M. Peskov "Russian idea" and "Russian soul". M., 2007. ISBN 5-94282-387-1
• Platonov Yu. P. Psychology of national character. M., 2007. ISBN 978-5-7695-3882-7
• Pronnikov V.A., Ladanov I.D. The Japanese (ethnopsychological essays). Ed. 2nd, isp. and add. M., 1985.http: //historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000006/index.shtml
• Reflection on Russia and Russians. Strokes for the history of the Russian national character. M., 1994
• Sivokon P.E. Russian character: the origins of popular optimism. M., 1995.
• Sikevich Z.V. Russians: "the image of the people." Sociological essays. SPb., 1996.
• A.M. Chernysh Enter into the soul of the people. Domestic thought of the XIX-XX centuries about the character of the Russian people. M., 2011.
• Shumeiko V.F. Russia: what kind of people - such power. M., 2010.

Foreign research

• Mead M. Culture and the world of childhood. M., 1988
• Mandelbaum D. On the Study of National Character, 1953
• Mead M. And Keep Your Powder Dry. N.Y., 1943
• Mead M. Soviet Attitudes toward Authority. N.Y., 1951
• Mead M. National Character and the Science of Anthropology // Culture and Social Character. Glencoe, 1961.
• Benedict R. Patterns of Culture. Boston; N.Y., 1934
• Benedict R. The Chrysanthemum and the Sword. Boston, 1946
• Davis A., Dollard J. Children of Bondage. Wash., 1940
• Bateson G., Mead M. Balinese Character, a Photographic Analysis. N.Y., 1942
• Du Bois C.A. The People of Alor. Minneapolis, 1944
• Kardiner A. The Psychological Frontiers of Society. N.Y .; L., 1945
• Kardiner A., ​​Ovesey L. The Mark of Oppression. N.Y., 1951
• Linton R. The Cultural Background of Personality. N.Y .; L, 1945
• Gorer G. The American People, a Study in National Character. N.Y., 1948
• Haring D.G. Personal Character and Cultural Milieu. Syracuse; N.Y., 1948
• Erikson E.H. Childhood and Society. N.Y., 1950
• Duijker H. C. J., Frijda N. H. National Character and National Stereotypes. Amsterdam, 1960 (Russian translation in the collection: Modern foreign ethnopsychology., M., 1979).

• Askochensky D.M.The problem of national character and politics (according to foreign studies) // Socio-psychological problems of ideology and politics. M., 1991.S. 10-24.

Ukrainian studies

• Gnatenko P.I. Ukrainian national character. Kiev, 1997.
• Gnatenko P.I. National psychology. Dnipropetrovsk, 2000
• Buzsky M.P. National psychology and being of society. Dnepropetrovsk, 2002.
• Vishnevsky Omelyan. Ukrainian vikhovny ideal and national character. Drogobich, 2010.

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010. The Encyclopedia of Sociology is a hypothesis according to which the personal characteristics of the average representative of the national population differ from those of the average representatives of other nationalities. Almost all studies indicate that the observed differences are not ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary in psychology and pedagogy

National character is a set of the most stable for a given national community features of emotional and sensory perception of the surrounding world and forms of reactions to it. Expressed in emotions, feelings, moods, the national character is manifested in the national temperament, largely determining the ways of emotional and sensory assimilation of political reality, the speed and intensity of the reaction of political subjects to current political events, the forms and methods of their presentation of their political interests, the ways of fighting for them. implementation.

Elements of a national character were laid in the early, pre-class stages of the development of society. They served as the most important way of spontaneous, empirical, everyday reflection of the surrounding reality. At subsequent stages of historical development, the political system of society influences the national character, but its value-semantic core remains constant, although it is corrected political life, mode, system as a whole. In crisis situations, in periods of exacerbation of national problems and contradictions, certain features of the national character can come to the fore, determining the political behavior of people.

It is generally accepted that national character - constituent element and at the same time the basis of the psychological makeup of the nation and national psychology as a whole. However, it is the interconnected and interdependent set of both emotional and rational elements that constitutes the psychological makeup of a nation or national character, which manifests itself and is refracted in the national culture, the way of thinking and actions, and stereotypes of behavior, causing the specificity of each nation, its difference from others. I.L. Solonevich emphasized that the psychology, the "spirit" of the people are the decisive factor determining the originality of its state structure. At the same time, the components that “form a nation and its special national warehouse of character, we utterly unknown. But fact existence national characteristics cannot be subject to anyone ... doubt. " The influence of the "spirit" of the people on certain phenomena and processes is not always clearly traced, it is expressed in the form of adequate concepts and clear mental structures, but it is nevertheless present, indirectly manifesting itself in traditions, morals, beliefs, feelings, moods, relationship. E. Durkheim gave one of the most detailed characteristics of the "spirit" of the people as a set of beliefs and feelings common to all members of society. In his opinion, the "spirit" of the people is constant in the north and south of the country, large and small cities, it is independent of professional training, gender and age characteristics of individuals. It does not change with each generation, but, on the contrary, connects them together. Manifesting in the activities of individuals, he, nevertheless, "is something completely different from private consciousness", for "expresses the psychological type of society."

The general social experience, the deep national spirit is manifested even in such seemingly abstract things as mathematics. N. Ya. Danilevsky pointed to known fact: The Greeks used the so-called geometric method in their mathematical research, while the scientists of new Europe used the analytical method. This difference in research methods, according to N.Ya. Danilevsky, it is no coincidence. It is explained by the psychological characteristics of the peoples of the Hellenic and Germanic-Roman types.

Noting the presence of national originality, a specific mentality and behavior, it should be emphasized that the study of "national individuality" is fraught with great difficulties. As N. Berdyaev justly pointed out, in the definition of the national type "it is impossible to give a strictly scientific definition." There is always something "incomprehensible to the end, to the last depth."

The concept of national character is not theoretical and analytical, but evaluative and descriptive. For the first time, travelers began to use it, followed by geographers, ethnographers to indicate the specific features of the behavior and way of life of peoples. At the same time, different authors put different content into this concept. Some meant by the national character the properties of temperament, the emotional reactions of the people, others focused on social attitudes, value orientations, although the social and psychological nature of these phenomena is different. Due to the fact that penetration into the essence of the national character is carried out, according to S.L. Frank, "only through a certain initial intuition", it has "too subjective coloring to pretend to full scientific objectivity", which inevitably turns into schematism.

The enumeration and characteristics of certain features of the people, the accentuation of its merits and demerits are largely subjective, often vague, often arbitrary, due to the research interest of the author. Great difficulty is also associated with determining the priority of biogenetic or socio-historical foundations in the formation of a national character, the ways of its transmission from generation to generation.

The identification of specifying national features that affect the perception of political ideas, values, the attitude of citizens to political institutions, the authorities to citizens, the forms of political interaction, the nature of participation and activity of political actors, in addition to subjectivity in the selection and interpretation of historical material, has objective difficulties. They are connected with the fact that discrete periods of historical development have a significant impact on the national character. Thus, the 1917 revolution in Russia interrupted the traditional methods, mechanisms for the transmission of experience and traditions. According to the figurative expression of I.A. Ilyin, the revolution "broke the moral and state backbone" of the Russian people, "deliberately wrong and ugly healed fractures." Indeed, after the revolution there was a rejection of national traditions, the conditions and mechanisms of their succession changed qualitatively. But something else is also true. The national character, together with other factors, has an opposite effect on the revolution, causing a specific "Russian revolutionary style", making it "more terrible and more extreme" than revolutions in Western Europe.

Issues of a national character have long been the subject of multifaceted scientific research... The first serious attempts were presented within the framework of the prevailing mid XIX century in Germany, the school of the psychology of peoples (W. Wundt, M. Laparus, H. Steinthal and others). Representatives of this scientific direction believed that the driving force of the historical process is the people, or "the spirit of the whole", which expresses itself in religion, languages, art, myths, customs, etc.

Representatives of the American ethnopsychological school in the middle of the 20th century (R.F. Benedict, A. Cardiner, R. Linton, R. Merton, M. Mead, etc.) focused their attention on building a model of the "average personality" of a particular national-ethnic groups, highlighting in each nation a "basic personality" that combines national personality traits common to its representatives and characteristic features of national culture.

At present, it is impossible to single out any holistic direction in the study of national character. His research is carried out in different contexts and from different conceptual and theoretical positions. Enough complete classification points of view on the national character are given by the Dutch scientists H. Duijker and N. Frijd.

• 1. National character is understood as a manifestation of certain psychological traits characteristic of all members of a given nation and only for them. This is a widespread, but already rare in science concept of national character.
• 2. National character is defined as a "modal personality", ie, as the relative frequency of manifestation among adult members of a nation of a particular type of personality.
• 3. National character can be understood as "the basic structure of personality", that is, as a certain sample of personality, dominating in the culture of a given nation.
• 4. National character can be understood as a system of positions, values ​​and beliefs shared by a significant part of a given nation.
• 5. National character can be defined as the result of the analysis of the psychological aspects of culture, considered in a certain, special sense.
• 6. National character is considered as intelligence, expressed in the products of culture, that is, in literature, philosophy, art, etc.

In Russian literature, there are attempts to identify the essence of the national character by highlighting the values ​​shared by the Russian people over the centuries. This approach is fruitful. Ethnosocial archetypes reproduce from generation to generation mental stereotypes, stable styles of behavior, features of the social attitude, social temperament of the people, the specifics of its adaptation, orientation in the political sphere. Their presence is due to the long existence of the leading forms of community, stable mechanisms of public recognition, dominant forms of participation in public and political life, the typical nature of interaction between states and citizens. At the same time, ethnosocial archetypes, reproducing stereotyped mental and political attitudes, affect the functioning of political institutions, political and cultural environment. In a given historical period, foreign cultural formations are inevitably introduced into the national character, innovative elements can become widespread, often quite wide. However, the components of the semantic core of the national character are highly stable, although they are relaxed by temporary and other factors.

Thus, in Western and domestic science there is no single point of view on the problems of the formation of a national character. Some give priority to geographic factors, others to social ones. In some theories, the concept of national character is defined through the features of the general psychological traits inherent in a given national community. In other concepts, the main emphasis is on the analysis of the socio-cultural environment as a determining component in the formation of the characteristics of the nation's psyche (A. Inkels, J. Levison). It is believed that the character of a nation is determined by the character of the elite. It is the latter that expresses the national character, its essence. Some researchers came to the conclusion that there is no need for a special definition, since all theories ultimately come down to a psychologized interpretation of national culture (Lerner, Hardy). nation ethnopsychological society

The complexity of the scientific analysis of problems of a national character is largely due to the fact that empirical data and theoretical conclusions are often used in politics by various nationalist or even racist trends, movements, unions, forces to achieve their selfish, narrowly nationalist goals, incite hostility and mistrust. peoples.

Despite the existing modifications, three main groups of scientists can be conventionally distinguished in studies of a national character. Some authors, focusing attention on the specificity, uniqueness of each nation, structure peoples into rigidly fixed and opposing ethnic groups. Another group of researchers is inclined to believe that the very concept of "national character" is a fiction, a groundless hypothesis, devoid of a real objective basis, a purely ideological and therefore unscientific category, fundamentally unverifiable, suitable only for speculative inferences.

The third group of scientists occupies an intermediate position between the two extreme points of view. They believe that the concept of "national character" has a theoretical-methodological and practical-political value, albeit limited due to the great methodological difficulties of its empirical study and verification of the results obtained. At the same time, in any nation there are certain dominants, which allow us to speak about the national character as an objective phenomenon of the people's life. F.M. was right. Dostoevsky, when he argued that “you can not be aware of a lot, but only feel. You can know a lot unconsciously. "

The noted difficulties in the study of the national character do not at all exclude the fact that the national “spirit” does not exist as something abstract, but as a “real concrete spiritual essence”, as “something completely concrete and truly integral” exists, and therefore lends itself to “understanding and .. . comprehension of his internal tendencies and originality ".

National character - it is a set of the most stable, characteristic of a given national community, features of the perception of the surrounding world and the forms of reactions to it. National character is, first of all, a certain set of emotional and sensory manifestations, expressed primarily in emotions, feelings and moods - in preconscious, in many respects irrational ways of emotional and sensory mastering of the world, as well as in the speed and intensity of reactions to ongoing events.

The national character is most clearly manifested in the national temperament - for example, distinguishing the Scandinavian peoples from, for example, Latin American ones. The fieryness of Brazilian carnivals can never be confused with the leisurely pace of northern life: the differences are obvious in the rate of speech, the dynamics of movements and gestures, and all mental manifestations.

At first, the concept of national character was not theoretical and analytical in origin. Initially, it was primarily descriptive. For the first time, travelers began to use it, and after them geographers and ethnographers to designate the specific features of the image of life and behavior of different nations and peoples. At the same time, different authors in their descriptions often had in mind completely different and sometimes simply incomparable things. Therefore, a synthetic, generalized interpretation of a national character is impossible - it is deliberately combinatorial and therefore not holistic enough. Within the framework of political psychology, the most adequate is still an analytical interpretation.

In an analytical context, it is generally accepted that national character- a constituent element and, at the same time, the basis ("platform", "base level") of the mental makeup of the nation as a whole, and national psychology as such. A complex, interconnected and interdependent set of mostly emotional (national character) and more rational (national consciousness) elements is precisely the “mental makeup of the nation” - the very “spiritual and behavioral specificity” that makes the representatives of one national-ethnic group unlike representatives of other such groups. The mental make-up of a nation is the basis of all national-ethnic psychology, already as an aggregate of this “make-up” and the behavior it defines.

In the origins national character lies primarily in the stable psychophysiological and biological characteristics of the functioning of human organisms, including as the main factors such as the reactivity of the central nervous system and the speed of the course of nervous processes. In turn, these factors are associated, by their origin, with the physical (primarily climatic) conditions of the environment of a particular national-ethnic group. A common, unified national character is a consequence, a psychological reflection of that community of physical territory, with all its features, on which it lives this group... Accordingly, for example, a hot equatorial climate gives rise to completely different psychophysiological and biological characteristics, and after them national characters, than a cold northern climate.

Of course shaping modern national characters is the result of a complex historical and psychological process that has been going on for many centuries. Living in different natural conditions, people gradually adapted to them over time, developing certain generally accepted forms of perception and response to these conditions. It played an adaptive role, contributing to the development and improvement of human activity and human communication. Such adaptive forms of perception and response were fixed in certain normative, socially approved and fixed ways of individual and collective behavior that were most appropriate to the conditions that gave rise to them. The peculiarities of the national character found their expression in the primary, most profound forms of national culture, forming a kind of socio-cultural standards, standards and models of adaptive behavior. So, for example, artists have long been very figuratively noticed that “the people of the fiery climate have left the same bliss, passion and jealousy in their national dance” 132. On the contrary, in a special study, the Swedish ethnographer A. Down, having analyzed extensive material, found that the main feature of the Swedish national character is the extreme rationality of thinking. Swedes are not inclined to flaunt their feelings, in the event of conflicts they do not give free rein to emotions, they strive for compromise solutions. By this A. Down explains the peculiarities of the surprisingly clear functioning of the Swedish state machine, the weak religiosity of the population, the traditional mediating role of Sweden in international conflicts, etc.

With the increasing complexity of the methods of social organization of life, the adaptive role and adaptive value of the national character, which directly linked a person and his behavior with the physical conditions of his environment, gradually receded into the background. In developed forms of sociality, the national character leaves behind a much more modest function - a kind of "emotional feeding" of the behavior of representatives of national-ethnic groups, as if only sensually coloring those forms of behavior that are now secondarily socially and culturally determined and, therefore , inevitably a more unified character, as well as giving emotional diversity to the action of general social factors, their perception and response to them. It is clear that a Russian politician or an Azeri politician plays their generally identical social roles in quite different ways.

Laying down at the earliest, pre-social stages of the development of society, elements of a national character served as the most important way of spontaneous, empirical, direct reflection of the surrounding reality in the psyche of members of a national-ethnic community, thereby forming its primary, natural-psychological unity. Persisting in the future, they are subject to the influence of socio-political life, however, they appear in everyday life mainly at an ordinary level, in close connection with the forms of everyday national consciousness. However, in certain situations associated with crises of the usual forms of sociality, with the aggravation of national problems and contradictions, with the appearance of a feeling of “loss of the usual order,” direct manifestations of national character may come to the fore.

In these cases, as if breaking free from the oppression of sociality, they directly determine the crisis behavior of people. Numerous examples of this kind are provided by the processes of modification of political systems, in particular, the disintegration of totalitarian unitary states of the imperial type - for example, the USSR. It is precisely with explosive manifestations of national character that most cases of the rapid rise of mass national liberation movements are associated.

V structure national character is usually distinguished by a number of elements. First, it is national temperament- he is, for example, "excitable" and "stormy", or, on the contrary, "calm" and "slow". Secondly, national emotions- the type of "national enthusiasm" or, say, "national skepticism". Thirdly, national feelings- for example, "national pride", "national humiliation", etc. Fourth, primary national prejudices... Usually these are mythologemes fixed in the emotional sphere concerning the "role", "purpose" or "historical mission" of a nation or people. These mythologemes can also relate to the relationship of a national-ethnic group with neighboring nations. On the one hand, it is a "minority complex". On the other hand, it is a “national-paternalistic complex”, usually manifested in the form of the so-called “imperial syndrome” or “great power syndrome” (sometimes referred to as “Big Brother syndrome”). A variety of national-ethnic prejudices are the corresponding stereotypes of responding to events such as, for example, "national conservatism", "national obedience" or, on the contrary, "national rebellion" and "national self-confidence".