CC BY
19
UDC: 316.012:141.7
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2020-1(21)-27-41 Afonin Eduard Andriyovych,
Doctor of Sociological Sciences, Professor, Professor of the Chair of Public Policy and Political Analytics, National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, 03057, Kyiv, Str. Antona Tsedika, 20 mob.: +38 (067) 244 46 59, e-mail: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-7493-6907
Афотн Едуард Андршович,
доктор соцiологiчних наук, професор, професор кафедри публiчноi полти-ки та полiтичноi аналтики, Нащо-нальна академiя державного управлт-ня при Президентовi Украти, 03057, м. Кшв, вул. Антона Цеджа, 20, моб.: +38 (067) 244 46 59, e-mail: bpafonin@gmail. com
ORCID: 0000-0002-7493-6907
Афонин Эдуард Андреевич,
доктор социологических наук, профессор, профессор кафедры публичной политики и политической аналитики, Национальная академия государственного управления при Президенте Украины, 03057, г. Киев, ул. Антона Цедика, 20, моб.: +38 (067) 244 46 59, e-mail: bpafonin@gmail. com
ORCID: 0000-0002-7493-6907
Martynov Andrii Yuriyovych,
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Leading Researcher, Department of History of International Relations and Foreign Policy of Ukraine, Institute of History of Ukraine, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 01001, Kyiv, Str. Hrushevskоho, 4, mob.: +38 (044) 483 15 72, e-mail: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-9802-5980
Мартинов Андрш Юршович,
доктор кторичних наук, професор, провiдний науковий ствробтник вiддiлу юто-ри мiжнародних вкдносин i зовнiшньоi полтики Украти, 1нститут кторп Украти
НАН Украти, 01001, м. Knie, вул. Грушевського, 4, моб.: +38 (044) 483 15 72, e-mail: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-9802-5980
Мартынов Андрей Юрьевич,
доктор исторических наук, профессор, ведущий научный сотрудник отдела истории международных отношений и внешней политики Украины, Институт истории Украины НАН Украины, 01001, г. Киев, ул. Грушевского 4, моб.: +38 (044) 483 15 72, e-mail: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-9802-5980
TRADITION AS A FACTOR OF INTEGRATION AND CONSOLIDATION OF UKRAINIAN SOCIETY IN THE CONDITIONS OF POSTMODERN: ARCHETYPIC APPROACH
Abstract. The article deals with the phenomenon of socio-historical tradition as a factor of the social integration and consolidation of the Ukrainian society. Tradition is defined as the process of reproducing, through social institutions, the experience of generations and the adaptation of this experience to the requirements of the present. It is argued that the adaptation of tradition to the postmodern modernity is a complex socio-historical and socio-psychological process, in the context of which a paradigm shift is taking place and a new — rational type of thinking influencing the social practices and social behaviour is emerging. By setting posterity to innovation, the postmodern blurs the great narratives of the tradition and denies the social experience of the previous generations. Under the influence of innovation, the social system is fragmented and constantly gravitates to the state of anomie. In these circumstances, tradition, its subjects and carriers become a constructive factor of the social consolidation, which takes place in the context of solving pressing issues of the innovative development. Tradition and traditional activity act as a kind of value-semantic forms in the form of new myths and myth-making, which counteract the loss of the national identity and social integrity. The theoretical basis of such activity, according to the authors, was presented by the French sociologist J. Durant, who proposed the concept of the imaginary as a mechanism for constructing the social reality. This mechanism, according to J. Durant, is both imagination, imaginary and imagined, and reality is the embodiment of a free play of the imagination, which is influenced by myths and archetypes. The imaginary exists in two modes: daytime (diurnal) and night (nocturne). The former functions in a dual form characterized by the hierarchy and patriarchy embodied in the heroic myth. Instead, the second is presented as a holistic mystical myth or death as another reality. According to the authors, the
imaginary, as the embodiment of the collective unconscious, is associated with such archetypal properties of the social system as externality / internality (external / internal locus control), extraversion / introversion (social / social identity), executiveness / intentionality (female / male social roles). Accordingly, the past social and historical era of the modernity is connected with the functioning of the regime of the diurnal, archetypes and myth-making, which are closely linked to the realization of the external social control, patriarchy (social identity) and the growth in the social system of the number of women's social roles. The postmodern modernity actualizes the nocturnal regime under which conditions the system increases self-control, blurs hierarchy and increases the number of the male social roles.
Keywords: archetype, identity, imaginary, innovation, social integration, social control, social roles, postmodern.
ТРАДИЦ1Я ЯК ФАКТОР 1НТЕГРАЦП ТА КОНСОЛ1ДАЦП УКРАШСЬКОГО СУСП1ЛЬСТВА В УМОВАХ ПОСТМОДЕРНУ: АРХЕТИП1ЧНИЙ П1ДХ1Д
Анотащя. Розглядаеться феномен сощально-юторично!' традици як чин-ник сощально!' штеграци та консолщаци украшського сусшльства. Тради-щя визначаеться як процес вщтворення через сощальш шститути досввду поколшь та адаптащя цього досвщу до вимог сучасность Стверджуеться, що адаптащя традицп до постмодерно!' сучасностi е складним сощально-ю-торичним i сощально-психолопчним процесом, у контекстi якого вщбува-еться змiна свiтоглядноï парадигми та виникае новий — ращональний тип мислення, що впливае на сощальш практики i сощальну поведшку. Налаш-товуючи нащадки на iнновацiйну дiяльнiсть постмодерн розмивае великi нарративи традицш i заперечуе соцiальний досвiд попередшх поколiнь. Пiд впливом iнновацiï сустльна система фрагментуеться i невпинно тяжiе до стану аномiï. За цих обставин традищя, ïï суб'екти i носи стають конструк-тивним фактором сощально!' консолiдацiï, що вiдбуваеться в контексп ви-рiшення актуальних питань шновацшного розвитку. Традицiя i традицш-на дiяльнiсть виступають своерiдними щншсно-смисловими формами у виглядi нових мiфiв i мiфотворчостi, якi протистоять втрат нацiональноï iдентичностi i суспiльноï цшсносл. Теоретичне пiдrрунтя тако!' дiяльностi, на думку авторiв, представив французький сощолог Ж. Дюран, який за-пропонував концепщю iмажинера як механiзму конструювання соцiальноï реальностi. Цей механiзм, за думкою Ж. Дюрана, е одночасно уявою, уяв-леним та уявленням, а реальшсть — втiленням вшьно!' гри уяви, на яку впли-вають мiфи та архетипи. 1мажинер iснуе у двох режимах: денному ^урн) та нiчному (ноктюрн). Перший функщонуе в дуальнiй формi, ш властивi iерархiчнiсть i патрiархальнiсть, втшеш у геро'1'чному мiфi. Натомiсть дру-гий предстае як цiлiсний мютичний мiф або смерть як шша реальнiсть. На думку авторiв, iмажинер як втiлення колективного несвiдомого, пов'язаний з такими архетипними властивостями сусшльно!' системи як екстерналь-
шсть / штернальшсть (зовнiшнiй / внутршнш локус-контроль), екстравер-сiя / штроверая (соцiальна / соцieтальна iдентичнiсть), екзекутившсть / iнтенцiональнiсть (жiночi / чоловiчi соцiальнi ролi). Вiдповiдно минула сустльно-юторична доба модерну пов'язана з функцюнуванням режиму д^ урну, архетипами i мiфотворчiстю, якi тiсно пов'язанi з реалiзацieю зовшш-нього соцiального контролю, патрiархальностi (сощально! iдентичностi) та зростанням у сусшльнш системi кiлькостi жшочих соцiальних ролей. Постмодерна сучасшсть актуалiзуe режим ноктюрну, за умов якого в системi по-силюеться самоконтроль, розмиваеться ieрархiчнiсть та зростае кiлькiсть чоловiчих соцiальних ролей.
Ключовi слова: архетип, iдентичнiсть, iмажiнер, шноващя, соцiальна iнтеграцiя, соцiальний контроль, сощальш ролi, постмодерн.
ТРАДИЦИЯ КАК ФАКТОР ИНТЕГРАЦИИ И КОНСОЛИДАЦИИ УКРАИНСКОГО ОБЩЕСТВА В УСЛОВИЯХ ПОСТМОДЕРНА: АРХЕТИПИЧЕСКИЙ ПОДХОД
Аннотация. Рассматривается феномен социально-исторической традиции как фактор социальной интеграции и консолидации украинского общества. Традиция определяется как процесс воспроизводства через социальные институты опыта поколений и адаптации этого опыта к требованиям современности. Утверждается, что адаптация традиции к постмодерной современности является сложным социально-историческим и социально-психологическим процессом, в контексте которого происходит изменение мировоззренческой парадигмы и возникает новый — рациональный тип мышления, который влияет на социальные практики и социальное поведение. Настраивая потомки на инновационную деятельность постмодерн размывает большие нарративы традиций и отрицает социальный опыт предыдущих поколений. Под влиянием инновации общественная система фрагментируется и постоянно тяготеет к состоянию аномии. В этих условиях традиция, ее субъекты и носители становятся конструктивным фактором социальной консолидации, которая происходит в контексте решения актуальных вопросов инновационного развития. Традиция и традиционная деятельность выступают своеобразными ценностно-смысловыми формами в виде новых мифов и мифотворчества, которые противостоят потере национальной идентичности и общественной целостности. Теоретические основы такой деятельности, по мнению авторов, представил французский социолог Ж. Дюран, который предложил концепцию имажинера как механизма конструирования социальной реальности. Этот механизм, по мнению Ж. Дюрана, является первичным процессом, состоящим из воображаемого, воображающего, воображения и самого процесса воображения одновременно, а реальность — воплощением свободной игры воображения, на которую влияют мифы и архетипы. Имажинер существует в двух режимах: дневном (диурну) и ночном (ноктюрн). Первый работает в дуальной форме, ей присущи иерархичность и патриархальность, воплощенные в героическом
мифе. А второй предстает как целостный мистический миф или смерть как другая реальность. По мнению авторов, имажинер, как воплощение коллективного бессознательного, связан с такими архетипическими свойствами общественной системы, как экстернальность / интернальность (внешний / внутренний локус-контроль), экстраверсия / интроверсия (социальная / со-циетальная идентичность), экзекутивность / интенциональность (женские / мужские социальные роли). При этом прошлая общественно-историческая эпоха модерна связана с функционированием режима диурна, архетипами и мифотворчеством, которое тесно связано с реализацией внешнего социального контроля, патриархальностью (социальной идентичностью) и ростом в общественной системе количества женских социальных ролей. Постмодернистская современность актуализирует режим ноктюрна, в условиях которого в системе усиливается самоконтроль, размывается иерархичность и растет количество мужских социальных ролей.
Ключевые слова: архетип, идентичность, имажинер, инновация, социальная интеграция, социальный контроль, социальные роли, постмодерн.
General formulation of the problem. Complex and ambiguous in content and orientation, the current trends in the development of science most prominently manifest themselves in the humanitarian sphere. After all, the current transitional processes of the development of man, society and humanity as a whole will not only change the nature of people's activities, but also destroy their behavioural stereotypes, blur the values and social norms. With the transition to a postmodern society, the importance of the human imagination is enhanced as a way of constructing a social reality that results from transformational processes in the society and the disruption of cause and effect relationships characteristic of the former objective scientific method. The total "subjectivation of the public space" creates a bias towards such compensatory capacities as traditional knowledge and intuition. The real social space is becoming cybernetic, and
all the objects around us are united by the "Internet of Things", in which any significant differences between the online and offline world disappear. People need a new definition of the "common sense". We are now turning into a "world of gamification", dominated by game practices and mechanisms based on human instincts. Formation and development of the artificial social space — the space of "Internet of Things" that blurs the boundaries between the material reality and the virtual reality. Artificial intelligence becomes a threat to man, which becomes more dangerous than the nuclear weapons. The history of civilization, figuratively speaking, turns into the race between education and disaster.
Thus, as humanity progresses through innovation, it becomes more apparent that our powerlessness to solve the problems of the present with the same way of thinking we have used in the previous times.
Analysis of the recent publications and solutions to the undefined issues.
The problem of the social conflict that accompanies the path to postmodern modernity actualizes the discourse around finding ways to consolidate and harness the potential of tradition in this process. The 2017 National Report "Ukraine: The Road to Consolidation" states that "the model of the social consolidation cannot be a natural phenomenon. We need a strategy to achieve it". The authors of the report refer to social consolidation as "the unity of the society on the basis of common values and common purpose" [1, p. 12]. The components of such a strategy are social partnership, democracy, the cultural diversity of a pluralistic society and common foreign policy interests.
In search of theoretical and methodological foundations of the above strategy you come across the work of the French sociologist Gilbert Durant (1921-2012) "Anthropological Structures of the Imaginary" (1969). In this the author proposes to supplement the traditional dichotomy of object-subject with the notion of "trajectory" or of a phenomenon that is "situated" between the subject and the object, between the project (future) and the past (history). Such a trajectory he called "imaginary", which simultaneously represents "imaginary", "imagination", "imagined". In the context of this theoretical construction, J. Durant proposes to analyze the archetypes of the collective unconscious in the modes of diurnal (day) and nocturnal (night), and the imaginary interprets as an expanded structure of the imagination that feeds on the myths of the collective unconscious [2, p. 1].
A solid basis for the new theoretical construction is the modern social thought, which favoured a rational explanation of the social reality and the role of the social actors in its development. Thus, the French sociologist Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) proposed to view the society as outside and above the individual reality, which possesses and does not depend on individuals with imperative power. The German sociologist Max Weber (18641920) interpreted subjectivity through the notion of ideal type and rationalization [3, p. 6-7].
The purpose of the article is to highlight in the context of the archetypal approach of the phenomenon of tradition as a factor of the social consolidation in a post-modern social environment.
Presentation of the main material. The social reforms that testify to the new quality of the Ukrainian society have a complex systemic character. They cover different spheres of the public life — politics, economy, culture, structures of the social organization and social control. At the same time, the quality of radical institutional changes depends to a large extent on changes in the human psychology — the rate of dismantling of its old mechanisms (outside — external) social control and the speed of formation of (inside — internal) social control, which will guarantee the sustainability of a qualitatively new social system called Ukraine.
At the same time, the phenomenon of social control is one of the most controversial in the current system of the sociological terminology. The most common of these is the understanding of the social control as a set of norms
and values of the society, as well as the sanctions that are used to enforce them. This view of the mechanism of the social control was observed, in particular by E. Durkheim, who in his social theory gave a prominent place to the control social norms, emphasizing that their deformation leads to anomie, that is, the paralysis of the mechanisms of formation of the social norms, and to crises phenomena in the society that are associated with the dismantling of the social solidarity. At the same time, the social will in the anomie state is paralyzed [4, p. 64]. That is, under these socio-historical circumstances one can observe a state where the institutional power is still there, the individual will is, but there is no overall will of the sole entity aimed at controlling the observance of the social norms that form the basis of the social control mechanism. In this context, M. Weber in his classic work "Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism" (1904) emphasized the importance of the interplay between the norms of the social control and the self-control, in particular in the form of various forms of religious asceticism. The logical development of these ideas is the "imaginary" of J. Durant, whose regime of the diurnal during the last era of modernism stimulated dual, hierarchical, patriarchal social practices with their dominant forms of outside (external) social control over the activity of the social subjects. Accordingly, the social imagination (imaginary) that emerged in people in the diurnal mode, formed primarily moral and ethical norms, intended to regulate the social life from the outside. The mechanism of (outside — external) social control, established in a day, was thus fixed by
the relevant social institutions, such as the institutions of the state with their instruments of coercion and the means of influencing the public opinion.
Quite often, the notion of social control is identified with political power. For example, the American political scientist Hans Morgenthau (1904-1980) by this term understands the control over the consciousness and actions of others [5, p. 140]. It is this method of social control that has been used since the beginning of written history. Thus, it was the basis of the political rule in the ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, where the caste of priests thus exercised the sacred power. During the late Middle Ages, when the Reformation radically changed the spiritual world of the average Western European, and, according to Niccolo Machia-velli, institutionalized differentiation of the religious life and secularization of politics took place. Under these conditions, the individual skills of exercising effective social control have gained particular weight for the Machiavellian Lord.
The idea of social control has acquired some development in German sociology. In particular, Ferdinand Tonnies (1855-1936) genetically distinguished two types of societies: traditional (Gemeinschaft) and industrial (Gesellschaft), which were characterized by different types of social control. For the first, still poorly structured society, the importance of the traditional authority and, accordingly, external control, and for the industrial, modern society — the legal norm, which relies on internal social control. According to Max Weber, traditional domination is based on a belief in the sanctity of long-
standing orders. Charismatic domination is based on a leader's commitment to charisma. Legal domination exists because of established rules. Its purest type is bureaucratic domination [6, p. 157].
The foundations of the bureaucratic domination emerged in a modern society that laid the foundations for the latest means of original creating, accumulating and disseminating information as an important power resource. With the development of the modern communication technologies, social manipulation becomes essential as a method of administration, which consists in the development of latent influences on the mass consciousness and behaviour of people in order to force them to act (or to show passivity) in the interests of certain social forces [8, p. 286]. Most often this mechanism of social control is implemented through the mass media. Describing it as one of the manifestations of the mass culture, the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (1874-1965), in his memoirs, stressed that after the end of World War I, Britain was saved from a devastating social revolution by public opinion, football and traditional beer pubs. Thus, the social imagination and the instruments of influence on it neutralized the conflicting social potential and shifted people's consciousness to a new social reality, focused on consensus models of social discourse and making important power decisions.
During the 20th century the practice of the government institutions involved in social manipulation became more complex and widespread. The public administration socio-technology increasingly focused on direct influence on the
society in order to make and implement the desired political and administrative decisions. An important tool for such influence was social control and various methods of the social regulation of the community behaviour. These include legal rules, rational or irrational reasoning, or even outright manipulation and, finally, methods of force pressure. This whole arsenal is directed at the person and the public opinion as the main objects of influence of the mass communication.
Because what we call public opinion, as noted by the famous British politician Benjamin Disraeli (18041881), most likely deserves the name of public emotions — this sphere is the object of constant manipulation that become a universal mechanism for effective social control over the existence of the information society [7, p. 18]. Accordingly, a narrower, even, one might say, specialized became the view of the social control in the American sociological thought. For the most part, it is related to interpretations of the organization of control over different embodiments, first of all, deviant behaviour. Thus, the classic of the American sociology, Robert Merton (1923-2000), believed that the American society intensely creates a significant contradiction between the developed psychology of consumer desires and the circle of legally achievable, as a result, the norms and institutions that regulate and discipline people's behaviour are weakened, which ultimately leads to the denial of the authority of social norms and to various forms of deviant behaviour [9, p. 282].
Thus, apart from forms of the social control in the form of certain power
mechanisms that operate at the state level and in the structures of the civil society, as well as control over deviant behaviour, no less important category that determines the two previous ones is self-control of the individual. This concept successfully conveys the term of the social psychology, the locus of control, which is the fixation of the degree and measure of how one perceives one's life, that is, one controlled by one's own efforts and actions, or externally controlled by chance or anonymous external forces [10, p. 74].
The above forms of social control always interact in a complex system and cannot be considered separately. The mechanism of the social control functions precisely because of the complex interaction between the relevant institutions, designed to regulate social relations and the moral and ethical norms of self-control of the individuals whose decisions significantly affect the institutional social control. At the same time, any functional type of social control is always relative, because the actions of the historical entities are determined by the past at some time, and they may also determine the future, which may also influence these actions. Taking into account that the nature of the social norms of the modern past is static and social norms of the postmodern — dynamic, it can be argued that the social control always depends on the shaky balance between social static and dynamics.
In the postmodern situation, where the role of the subject in the socio-his-torical process increases, individual attitude to society becomes a key factor in further social development. After all, as noted by the German philosopher, the founder of phenomenology Ed-
mund Husserl (1859-1938), the most conceivable is the "Self", which represents for the subject-individual the initial intentional basis of his world. Under these conditions the postmodern era "blurs" the social traditions. All this is happening in the context of new meaning-making. However, new ones — dynamic norms, current stereotypes, overarching communications and sensitive prestige are acquired today in parallel with becoming a subject of object-practical activity. Even at the dawn of human history, Homo sapiens differed from herd animals with their social instincts by the presence of a normative-value system that regulates the individual behaviour. In this sense, the monkey did not create man by his hard work, but on the contrary, the man rose intelligently over the animal world through the development of language communication. With the emergence of a special — informational and sign activity, the socio-material world became already doomed to "idealize the magic of the Word". Since then there has been a psychological chasm between the animal and social worlds. An important factor in anthroposocio-genesis were moral prohibitions and ethical taboos, whose role in the development of man in the work "Taboo and Totem" (1913) was revealed by the Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). Developing his ideas, the Swiss Carl-Gustav Jung conceptualized the connection between the social and mental (psychological) in the idea of the collective unconscious, which is represented by the deep flows of the human history.
Thus, in the epoch of traditional society the unity of the biological and
the social in man was indicative. In particular, the ancient Greek thinker Aristotle (384-322 BC), emphasizing the presence in man as part of the nature of animal (biological) and social (political) traits, called members of the society "political animals". Instead, his teacher Plato (427-347 BC) believed that individuals were united in the society to meet their basic needs. Only the ideal society can best do this, since social life is the natural essence of man.
A certain objection of the biological in man in favour of the social denotes a religious tradition that sharply contrasts the bodily — the sinful with the spiritual. In this dichotomy the biological ensures the functioning of instincts, while the social is responsible for cultural values and norms. The Austrian anthropologist Conrad Lorenz (19031989), in particular, believes that some higher values, such as compassion, solidarity, altruism, interact directly with instincts. At the same time, the social allows to control the manifestations of the biological. On the other hand, cultural values are not biologically inherited but acquired socially. In general, the link between the social and the sacred is extremely important. This is the hierarchy of the social world. The social performs vital sacred functions. Firstly, it concerns the problems of connection with the world of the Absolute, spirituality, functioning of the mechanisms of psychological compensation, secondly, the social and the sacred contribute to integration, that is, to unite the members of a certain society around a sanctioned worldview, moral and ethical norms, thirdly, the sacralization of the social in the traditional society le-
gitimized the mechanisms of the social control, formed stereotypes of the mass behaviour, fourthly, the sacralized social helps to solve the existential problems by producing new meanings of the social activity in certain historical stages, finally, fifthly, the traditional le-gitimization of the power, as M. Weber has proved, is through its sacralization.
There is a constant information-energy interaction between the society and the individual, that is, between "We" and "Self". Accordingly, communicative connections are established between the social psyche, which characterizes the parameters of the society as a whole, and the individual psyche of a particular person. Therefore, we have every reason to consider as a subject only that part of the society that actively influences other objects beyond ourselves. For example, political actors are large social groups with their own specific interests that determine the meaning of the political action. At some stage in their development they create their own political structures designed to act effectively for the benefit of their groups.
Individual organizers act as direct organizers of the political action as they determine the direction, course, and content of the political processes, so another actor plays an important role — a political leader, as a person who has a decisive influence on the members of a particular social group. The leader is the entity that has organizational and integrative influence. As the rich historical experience attests, the activity of a leader helps to unlock the creative potential of a small or large social group, sometimes, on the contrary, hinders it.
According to M. Weber's typology, the following main types of leadership are distinguished: traditional, based on a belief in the sanctity of a certain entity; rational, legal or bureaucratic, based on the belief in the legitimacy of the existing order and its appropriateness; charismatic leadership, supported by a belief in extraordinary capabilities, that is, in fact, formed on the basis of a cult of the personality. The style distinguishes between authoritarian leadership, which implies sole leadership on the basis of the mechanism of threatening the use of force sanctions, and democratic leadership, which enables the members of the group to participate in the achievement of the goals and to lead its activities.
The most complete role of the subject in history is enlightened in the existential philosophical thought, the different directions of which are united by the belief that existence precedes essence. For example, the French existentialist Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980) emphasized that subjectivism means, on the one hand, that the individual subject chooses himself, and on the other, that man cannot go beyond human subjectivity. Choosing myself, I create a common understanding of the project of any other person, no matter what era she belongs. This absoluteness of the choice does not eliminate the relativity of each era. Historical circumstances change, a person may be born a slave in a pagan society, a feudal lord, or a proletarian. Not only does it change the need for her to be in the world, to be in her work, to be in it among others and to be mortal in it. The borders are not objective or subjective, but rather have objective and subjective sides.
A representative of the Frankfurt School of Sociology, Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), emphasizing the flaws of the industrial society, the conflict of the individual and the society, the contradictions between freedom and existence, said that reality became a technological reality, and the subject is now so closely linked to the object, that the concept of the object necessarily includes the concept of the subject. The subject itself is a constitutive part of a scientifically determined object. The subject of the scientific methods and the subject of business life — are the expression of the same subjectivity — man.
The above ideas characterize, in our view, only the initial stage of the formation of post-industrial civilization, which humanity is experiencing at the turn of the 20-21th centuries and which is only part of its great life cycle. We have repeatedly written that the socio-historical development can be examined as a sequential unfolding in the time-space continuum of the universal epochal cycles, which are the relevant units of the analysis and prediction of the socio-historical reality [11].
Modern societies are not just reproducing themselves in history, they are involved in the process of creating a mega-society. Therefore, decisive social relations today are not the relationships about property, but relationships about the strategy of shaping the future. Postmodern ideology denies the static norms and procedures of the social life, totally criticizing "big meanings" and projects. Faith in messianic historical perspectives is lost. Postmodernism deprives the history of the vector of the future. According to J. Durant's
concept, postmodernism draws the society into the nocturnal mode, that is, the mythological imagination of the mystical, the irrational. If democracy, equality and progress were the leading values of the modernity, then the liberals of the postmodern, on the contrary, affirm the equivalence of any intervals and suggest leaving concerns about the meaning and focus of the social time. Most symptomatic of the postmodern in interpreting the social is a return to concepts that prioritize the biological component of man. It is about racism and social Darwinism that bring the society into the arena of the struggle for existence, in which only the most adapted are victorious.
It should be emphasized that the conditional scale of values for the dominant in the Modern time of the subject of "WE" is characterized by moral and ethical values, while for the subject "SELF" of the postmodern modernity is absolutely natural the rational and pragmatic, we can even say selfish interests and values. If for a collective subject the category "SELF" is essentially an emanation of "individual manifestations of nationality", then for the subject-individual "WE" it is a personification of the social [12, p. 67].
From the point of view of social psychology, the "Self-concept" for the in-
dividual and collective subjects can be represented as follows [13, p. 72]:
Conclusions and prospects for further research. Thus, each type of the social entity has its own traits of political consciousness, which differ in five main features.
Firstly, the nature and manner of exercising power. In a totalitarian society — it is universal control and social coercion. In an autocratic society — certain areas of freedom that are unavailable to control may arise. In a pre-democratic society the government begins to engage in dialogue with independent groups that have matured under autocracy in a kind of enclave of public freedom, but it itself determines the results of that dialogue. Finally, in a democratic society the power is exercised on a representative basis in accordance with the law.
Secondly, such a sign is the attitude of the people to the regime of power. For totalitarian consciousness, a merger with power is characteristic, for authoritarian consciousness — alienation from the power, for a pre-democratic consciousness — limited influence on the power, for democratic consciousness — the choice of specific power bearers.
Thirdly, the status of horizontal social structures is an important factor.
Table
Individual subject "Self" Collective subject "We"
Identification Individual goals Public goals
Priority Personal interests, rights and freedoms Social and group interests and solidarity
Conviction Conformity Selfishness
Slogan-lifestyle "Be true to yourself" "None of us are an island"
Culture Individualistic Collective
The totalitarian regime destroys any horizontal structures. An authoritarian regime permits their existence as long as they are not political in nature. A pre-democratic regime allows any organization except those who claim power. The opposition has the same mentality as the authorities. In a democratic society the structure of the public organizations becomes the foundation of the political system.
Fourthly, the hierarchy of the social taboos is of some importance. In a totalitarian society what is ordered by the authorities is allowed, the rest is forbidden. In an autocratic society the right to life has something that is not about politics. In a pre-democratic society everything is allowed except the change of power. In a democratic society everything that is not prohibited by law is allowed.
Finally, the fifth attribute concerns the political ideals. In a totalitarian society the power is required of all-pow-erfulness, and of people — enthusiasm and modesty. In an authoritarian society competency is required from the power, from people — professionalism and loyalty. In a pre-democratic society the power is demanded morality, and from the people — activity, which is not necessarily combined with responsibility. In a democratic society the government and the citizens are required only to comply with the law.
Is it possible to define a universal formula for the social consolidation based on tradition?
Such a general formula, in our view, may be to preserve conservatism in principles and traditions, but to assume a liberal attitude to the society. In this way, the interaction of the tra-
dition and social innovation is harmonized. In particular, if the third wave of the industrial revolution was possible on the basis of national consolidation and modern traditions, then the question of the social mechanisms for securing the fourth industrial revolution remains open. Such technologies as three-dimensional printing, biotechnology, neurotechnology, production of reproductive energy, blockchain, artificial intelligence are by definition the results of the transnational industrialization.
In short, there is still a selection of forms of interaction between the social innovation and the tradition, lest the nation-state become a new closed social system that cannot functionally respond to the global innovation trends.
REFERENCES -
1. Ukraina: shliakh do konsolidatsii sus-pilstva: natsionalna dopovid [Ukraine: The Road to Social Consolidation: A National Report]. (2017). Kyiv: In-stytut politychnykh i etnonatsional-nykh doslidzhen im. I. F. Kurasa NAN Ukrainy ; Natsionalna akademiia nauk Ukrainy, Sektsiia suspilnykh i human-itarnykh nauk, Instytut politychnykh i etnonatsionalnykh doslidzhen im. I. F. Kurasa NAN Ukrainy [in Ukrainian].
2. Dugin, A. G. (2010). Sotsiologiya voo-brazheniya. Vvedenie v strukturnuyu sotsiologiyu [Sociology of imagination. Introduction to structural sociology]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy Proekt; Triksta [in Russian].
3. Shcherbina, V. (1998). Subektnaya sostavlyayushchaya teoretizirovaniya kak predmet refleksii razlichnykh napravleniy sotsiologii [The subject
component of theorizing as a subject of reflection of various areas of sociology]. Buttia liudyny. Pryroda ta sotsium: sotsialno-filosofski vymiry. Visnyk Kharkivskoho universytetu — Being of a human. Nature and society: social and philosophical dimensions. Bulletin of Kharkiv University, 5, 6-7 [in Russian].
4. Korte, H. (1992). Einführung in die Geschichte der Soziologie. München [in German].
5. Semkiva, O. I. (Eds.). (1994). Poli-tolohiia [Political Science]. Lviv: Svit [in Ukrainian].
6. Veber, M. (1998). Sotsiolohiia. Zahal-no-istorychni analizy. Polityka [Sociology. General historical analyzes. Politics]. (O. Pohorilyi, Trans). Kyiv: Osnovy [in Ukrainian].
7. Volovych, V. I., et. al. (Eds.). (1998). Sotsiolohiia: korotkyi entsykl. slov. [Sociology: a short encyclical dictionary]. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
8. Kara-Murza, S. (2000). Manipuly-atsiya soznaniem [Manipulation of consciousness]. Moscow [in Russian].
9. Osipov, G. V. (Eds.). (1972). Ameri-kanskaya sotsiologiya. Perspektivy. Problemy. Metody [American sociology. Prospects. Problems. Methods]. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
10. Myers, D. (1997). Sotsialnaya psik-hologiya [Social Psychology]. Saint Petersburg: Piter [in Russian].
11. Afonin, E. A. Bandurka, O. M., Mar-tynov, A. Yu. (2000). Suspilnyi rozvy-tok vid Rizdva Khrystovoho = Social Development AD [Social Development since the Nativity of Christ = Social Development AD]. Kyiv: Par-lam. vyd-vo [in Ukrainian].
12. Kazintsev, A. I. (1990). Novye politicheskie mify. Opyt publitsis-ticheskogo issledovaniya [New political myths. The experience of journalistic research]. Moscow: Molodaya gvardiya [in Russian].
13. Sotsialnaya psikhologiya [Social psychology]. (1998). Saint Petersburg; Moscow; Kharkov: Piter [in Russian].
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ -
1. Украша: шлях до консолщаци су-сшльства: нащональна доповщь / 1нститут полгшчних i етнонащо-нальних дослщжень iM. I. Ф. Кураса НАН Украши ; Нащональна акаде-мiя наук Украши, Секщя сусшль-них i гумаштарних наук, 1нститут полггичних i етнонащональних дослщжень iM. I. Ф. Кураса НАН Украши. Кшв, 2017. 336 с.
2. Дугин А. Г. Социология воображения. Введение в структурную социологию. Москва : Академический Проект; Трикста, 2010. 564 с. (Технологии социологии).
3. Щербина В. Субъектная составляющая теоретизирования как предмет рефлексии различных направлений социологии // Буття людини. Природа та сощум: сощально-фшософ-ськ вимiри. Вкник Харювського ушверситету. 1998. № 5. С. 6-7.
4. Hermann Korte. Einführung in die Geschichte der Soziologie. München, 1992. 216 s.
5. Полгтолопя / За ред. О. I. Семюва. Львiв : Свп-, 1994. 592 с.
6. Вебер Макс. Сощолопя. Загаль-но-кторичш аналiзи. Полпика / Пер. з шм. О. Погоршого. Кшв : Ос-нови, 1998. 534 с.
7. Сощолопя : короткий енцикл. слов. / уклад.: В. I. Волович, В. I. Тарасенко, М. В. Захарченко та ш ; за заг. ред. В. I. Воловича. Кшв, 1998. 736 с.
8. Кара-Мурза С. Манипуляция сознанием. Москва, 2000. 464 с.
9. Американская социология. Перспективы. Проблемы. Методы / Под общ. ред. Г. В. Осипова. Москва: Прогресс, 1972. 390 с.
10. Майерс Дэвид. Социальная психология. Санкт-Петербург: Питер, 1997. 688 с. (Серия "Мастера психологии").
11. Афонш Е. А. Бандурка О. М., Мартинов А. Ю. Сусшльний розви-ток вщ Рiздва Христового = Social Development AD / Укр. т-во сприян-ня соц. шноващям, Атлантична Рада Украши. Вщ. iнф.-бiбл. забезпечення апарату Верховно! Ради Украши ; пер. з укр. В. В. Кухтша. Ки!в : Пар-лам. вид-во, 2000. 312 с. (Серiя вщ-крита досл. концепщя; Вип. 1). Текст паралельно укр. та англ. мовами.
12. Казинцев А. И. Новые политические мифы. Опыт публицистического исследования. Москва : Молодая гвардия, 1990. 224 с. (Свободная трибуна).
13. Социальная психология: учеб. пособие для студентов и аспирантов психологических факультетов а также слушателей курсов психологических дисциплин на гуманитарных факультетах вузов. Санкт-Петербург ; Москва ; Харьков : Питер, 1998. 688 с.
