Social behavior concept and concept. Concept of social behavior

The concept of “behavior” came to sociology from psychology. The meaning of the term “behavior” is different, different from the meaning of such traditional philosophical concepts as action and activity. If action is understood as a rationally justified act that has a clear goal, strategy, and is carried out using specific conscious methods and means, then behavior is solely the reaction of a living being to external and internal changes. It is this reaction that can be both conscious and unconscious. Thus, purely emotional reactions - laughter, crying - will also be behavior.

Social behavior -϶ᴛᴏ a set of human behavioral processes associated with the satisfaction of physical and social needs and arising as a reaction to the surrounding social environment. Subject social behavior may be an individual or a group.

If we abstract from purely psychological factors and think at the social level, then the behavior of an individual is determined primarily by socialization. The minimum of innate instincts that a person possesses as a biological being is the same for all people. Behavioral differences depend on qualities acquired during the process of socialization and, to some extent, on congenital and acquired psychological individual characteristics.

Except for the above, the social behavior of individuals is regulated by the social structure, in particular role structure society.

Social norm of behavior— ϶ᴛᴏ such behavior which completely conforms to status expectations. Thanks to the existence of status expectations, society can predict the actions of an individual in advance with sufficient probability, and the individual himself can coordinate this behavior with the ideal model or model accepted by society. Social behavior that meets status expectations is defined by the American sociologist R. Linton as social role. It is this interpretation of social behavior that is closest to functionalism, since it explains behavior as a phenomenon determined by social structure. R. Merton introduced the category of “role complex” - a system of role expectations determined by a given status, as well as the concept of role conflict that arises when the role expectations of the statuses occupied by a subject are incompatible and cannot be realized in any single socially acceptable behavior.

The functionalist understanding of social behavior was subjected to fierce criticism from, first of all, representatives of social behaviorism, who believed that it was necessary to build the study of behavioral processes on the basis of the achievements of modern psychology. The extent to which the psychological aspects were really overlooked by the role interpretation of the command follows from the fact that N. Cameron tried to substantiate the idea of role determination mental disorders, believing that mental illness is an incorrect performance of their social roles and the result of the patient’s inability to perform them as society needs. Behaviorists argued that in the time of E. Durkheim, the successes of psychology were insignificant and therefore the functionality of the expiring paradigm met the requirements of the time, but in the 20th century, when psychology reached a high level of development, its data cannot be ignored when considering human behavior.

Forms of human social behavior

People behave differently in one or another social situation, in one or another social environment. For example, some demonstrators peacefully march along the declared route, others seek to organize unrest, and still others provoke mass clashes. These various actions of social interaction actors can be defined as social behavior. Hence, social behavior -϶ᴛᴏ the form and method of manifestation by social actors of their preferences and attitudes, capabilities and abilities in social action or interaction. Therefore, social behavior can be considered as a qualitative characteristic of social action and interaction.

In sociology, social behavior is interpreted as: o behavior expressed in the totality of actions and actions of an individual or group in society and depending on socio-economic factors and prevailing norms; o external manifestation of activity, a form of transformation of activity into real actions in relation to socially significant objects; o a person’s adaptation to the social conditions of his existence.

To achieve life goals and when implementing individual tasks, a person can use two types of social behavior - natural and ritual, the differences between which are fundamental.

"Natural" behavior, individually significant and egocentric, is always aimed at achieving individual goals and is adequate to these goals. Therefore, the individual does not face the question of the goals and means of social behavior: the goal can and should be achieved by any means. The “natural” behavior of an individual is not socially regulated, therefore it is traditionally immoral or “unceremonious.” Such social behavior is “natural”, natural in nature, since it is aimed at ensuring organic needs. In society, “natural” egocentric behavior is “forbidden”, therefore it is always based on social conventions and mutual concessions on the part of all individuals.

Ritual behavior(“ceremonious”) - individually unnatural behavior; It is thanks to this behavior that society exists and reproduces. Ritual in all its variety of forms - from dataket to ceremony - permeates all social life so deeply that people do not notice that they live in a field of ritual interactions. Ritual social behavior will be a means of ensuring the stability of the social system, and the individual who implements various forms of such behavior participates in ensuring the social stability of social structures and interactions. Thanks to ritual behavior, a person achieves social well-being, constantly being convinced of the inviolability of his social status and the preservation of the usual set of social roles.

Society is interested in ensuring that the social behavior of individuals is of a ritual nature, but society cannot abolish “natural” egocentric social behavior, which, being adequate in goals and unscrupulous in means, always turns out to be more beneficial for the individual than “ritual” behavior. Therefore, society strives to transform forms of “natural” social behavior into various forms of ritual social behavior, incl. through socialization mechanisms using social support, control and punishment.

To preserve and maintain public relations and ultimately on human survival as homo sapiens(homo sapiens) such forms of social behavior are directed as:

cooperative behavior, which includes all forms of altruistic behavior - helping each other during natural disasters and technological disasters, helping young children and the elderly, helping subsequent generations through the transfer of knowledge and experience;
parental behavior - the behavior of parents towards their offspring.

Aggressive behavior is presented in all its manifestations, both group and individual - from verbal insults of another person to mass extermination during wars.

Human Behavior Concepts

Human behavior is studied in many areas of psychology - in behaviorism, psychoanalysis, cognitive psychology, etc. Note that the term “behavior” is one of the key ones in existential philosophy and is used in the study of a person’s relationship to the world. The methodological capabilities of this concept are due to the fact that it allows us to identify unconscious stable structures of personality or human existence in the world. Among the psychological concepts of human behavior that have had a great influence on sociology and social psychology, we should mention, first of all, the psychoanalytic directions developed by Z. Freud, C. G. Jung, A. Adler.

Freud's ideas are based on the fact that an individual’s behavior is formed as a result of a complex interaction between the levels of his personality. Freud identifies three such levels: the lowest level is formed by unconscious impulses and drives determined by innate biological needs and complexes formed under the influence of the individual history of the subject. Freud calls this level It is important to understand - it (Id), in order to show its separation from the conscious self of the individual, which forms the second level of his psyche. The conscious self contains rational goal setting and responsibility for actions. The highest level is the super-ego - what we would call the result of socialization. This is a set of social norms and values internalized by the individual, exerting internal pressure on him in order to displace from consciousness unwanted (forbidden) impulses and drives for society and prevent them from being realized. According to Freud, the personality of any person is an ongoing struggle. It is important to understand that it is also the Super-Ego, which undermines the psyche and leads to neuroses. Individual behavior is entirely conditioned by this struggle and is completely explained by it, since it represents only its symbolic reflection. Such symbols can be dream images, slips of the tongue, slips of the tongue, obsessive states and fears.

Concept of C. G. Jung expands and modifies Freud's teachings, including in the sphere of the unconscious not only individual complexes and drives, but also the collective unconscious - the level of key images - archetypes - common to all people and nations. Archetypes record archaic fears and value concepts, the interaction of which determines the behavior and attitude of an individual. Archetypal images appear in basic narratives - folk tales and legends, mythology, epic - historically specific societies. The social regulatory role of such narratives in traditional societies very big. It is worth noting that they contain ideal models of behavior that form role expectations. For example, a male warrior should behave like Achilles or Hector, a wife like Penelope, etc. Regular recitations (ritual reproductions) of archetytic narratives constantly remind members of society of these ideal models of behavior.

Adler's psychoanalytic concept It is based on an unconscious will to power, which, in his opinion, will be an innate personality structure and determines behavior.
It is worth noting that it is especially strong among those who, for one reason or another, suffer from an inferiority complex. In an effort to compensate for this inferiority, they are able to achieve great success.

Further splitting of the psychoanalytic direction led to the emergence of many schools, disciplinary terms occupying a borderline position between psychology, social philosophy, and sociology. Let us dwell in detail on the work of E. Fromm.

Fromm's positions - a representative of neo-Freudianism in psychology and the Frankfurt School in sociology - can be more accurately defined as Freilo-Marxism, since along with the influence of Freud he was no less strongly influenced social philosophy Marx. The uniqueness of neo-Freudianism in comparison with orthodox Freudianism is due to the fact that, strictly speaking, neo-Freudianism is rather sociology, while Freud, of course, will be a pure psychologist. If Freud explains the behavior of an individual by complexes and impulses hidden in the individual unconscious, in short, by internal biopsychic factors, then for Fromm and Freilo-Marxism in general, the behavior of an individual is determined by the surrounding social environment. In this way, he is similar to Marx, who explained the social behavior of individuals ultimately by their class origin. It is important to note that, however, with all this, Fromm strives to find a place for the psychological in social processes. According to the Freudian tradition, turning to the unconscious, he introduces the term “social unconscious,” meaning mental experience that is common to all members of a given society, but for most of them does not reach the level of consciousness, because it is displaced by a special social mechanism of its nature, belonging not to the individual, but to society. Thanks to this mechanism of repression, society maintains a stable existence. The mechanism of social repression contains language, the logic of everyday thinking, a system of social prohibitions and taboos. The structures of language and thinking are formed under the influence of society and act as a weapon of social pressure on the individual’s psyche. For example, coarse, anti-aesthetic, ridiculous abbreviations and abbreviations of “newspeak” from Orwell’s dystopia actively distort the consciousness of the people who use them. To one degree or another, the monstrous logic of formulas like: “The dictatorship of the proletariat is the most democratic form of power” became the property of everyone in Soviet society.

The main component of the mechanism of social repression is social taboos, which act like Freudian censorship. That in the social experience of individuals that threatens the preservation of the existing society, if realized, is not allowed into consciousness with the help of a “social filter.” Society manipulates the consciousness of its members, introducing ideological clichés, which, due to frequent use, become inaccessible to critical analysis, withholding certain information, exerting direct pressure and causing fear of social isolation. Therefore, everything that contradicts socially approved ideological clichés is excluded from consciousness.

These kinds of taboos, ideologemes, logical and linguistic experiments form, according to Fromm, the “social character” of a person. People belonging to the same society, against their will, are, as it were, marked with the seal of a “common incubator”. For example, we unmistakably recognize foreigners on the street, even if we do not hear their speech, by their behavior, appearance, attitude towards each other; They are people from another society, and when they find themselves in a mass environment that is alien to them, they stand out sharply from it due to their similarities with each other. Social character -϶ᴛᴏ style of behavior brought up by society and unconscious by the individual - from social to everyday. For example, Soviet and former Soviet people are distinguished by collectivism and responsiveness, social passivity and undemandingness, submission to power, personified in the person of the “leader,” a developed fear of being different from everyone else, and gullibility.

Fromm directed his criticism against modern capitalist society, although he also paid a lot of attention to describing the social character generated by totalitarian societies. Like Freud, he developed a program for restoring individuals' undistorted social behavior through awareness of what had been repressed. “By transforming the unconscious into consciousness, we thereby transform the simple concept of the universality of man into the vital reality of such universality. This is nothing more than the practical implementation of humanism.” The process of derepression - the liberation of socially oppressed consciousness - consists in eliminating the fear of awareness of the forbidden, developing the ability to critical thinking, humanization of social life in general.

A different interpretation is offered by behaviorism (B. Skinner, J. Homans), which considers behavior as a system of reactions to various stimuli.

Skinner's concept in essence it will be biologizing, since in it the differences between the behavior of humans and animals are completely removed. Skinner distinguishes three types of behavior: unconditioned reflex, conditioned reflex and operant. The first two types of reactions are caused by exposure to specific stimuli, and operant reactions are a form of adaptation of the organism to the environment. It is worth noting that they are active and voluntary. The body, as if by trial and error, finds the most acceptable method of adaptation, and if successful, the find is consolidated in the form of a stable reaction. Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the main factor in the formation of behavior is reinforcement, and learning turns into “guiding the desired reaction.”

In Skinner's concept, a person appears as a being, all inner life is expected to react to external circumstances. Changes in reinforcement mechanically cause changes in behavior. Thinking, the highest mental functions of a person, all culture, morality, art turn into a complex system of reinforcements designed to evoke certain behavioral reactions. This leads to the conclusion that it is possible to manipulate people’s behavior through a carefully developed “technology of behavior.” With this term, Skinner refers to the purposeful manipulative control of some groups of people over others, associated with the establishment of an optimal reinforcement regime for certain social goals.

The ideas of behaviorism in sociology were developed by J. and J. Baldwin, J. Homans.

Concept by J. andJ. Baldwin is based on the concept of reinforcement, borrowed from psychological behaviorism. Reinforcement in the social sense is a reward, the value of which is determined by subjective needs. For example, for a hungry person, food acts as a reinforcer, but if the person is full, it will not be a reinforcer.

The effectiveness of reward depends on the degree of deprivation in a given individual. Subdeprivation is understood as the deprivation of something for which an individual feels a constant need. To the extent that a subject is deprived in any respect, his behavior depends on this reinforcement. So-called generalized reinforcers (for example, money), which act on all individuals without exception, do not depend on deprivation due to the fact that they concentrate access to many types of reinforcers at once.

Reinforcers are divided into positive and negative. Positive reinforcers are everything that is perceived by the subject as a reward. For example, if a certain contact with environment brought a reward, there is a high probability that the subject will strive to repeat the experience. Negative reinforcers are factors that determine behavior through the refusal of some experience. For example, if a subject denies himself some pleasure and saves money on it, and subsequently benefits from this saving, then this experience can serve as a negative reinforcer and the subject will begin to act the same way always.

The effect of punishment is the opposite of reinforcement. Punishment is an experience that causes a desire not to repeat it again. Punishment can also be positive or negative, but here everything is reversed compared to reinforcement. Positive punishment is punishment using a suppressive stimulus, such as a blow. Negative punishment influences behavior through the deprivation of something valuable. For example, depriving a child of sweets at lunch is a typical negative punishment.

The formation of operant reactions is probabilistic in nature. It is important to note that unambiguity is characteristic of reactions of the simplest level, for example, a child cries, demanding the attention of his parents, because parents always approach him in such cases. Adult reactions are much more complex. For example, a person selling newspapers in train carriages does not find a buyer in every carriage, but he knows from experience that a buyer will eventually be found, and this forces him to persistently walk from carriage to carriage. IN last decade The receipt of wages at certain Russian enterprises has assumed the same probabilistic nature, but nevertheless people continue to go to work, hoping to receive it.

Homans' behaviorist concept of exchange appeared in the middle of the 20th century. It is worth saying that while polemicizing with representatives of many areas of sociology, Homans argued that a sociological explanation of behavior must necessarily be based on a psychological approach. At the heart of interpretation historical facts must also lie psychological approach. Homans motivates by the fact that behavior is always individual, while sociology operates with categories applicable to groups and societies, therefore the study of behavior will be the prerogative of psychology, and sociology in this matter should follow it.

According to Homans, when studying behavioral reactions, one should abstract from the nature of the factors that caused these reactions: they are caused by the influence of the surrounding physical environment or other people. Social behavior is simply the exchange of activities that have some social value between people. Homans believes that social behavior can be interpreted using Skinner's behavioral paradigm, if supplemented with the idea of the mutual nature of stimulation in relationships between people. Relations between individuals always represent a mutually beneficial exchange of activities, services, in short, the mutual use of reinforcements.

Note that Homans briefly formulated the theory of exchange in several postulates:

postulate of success - those actions that most often meet with social approval are most likely to be reproduced;
incentive postulate - similar incentives associated with reward are likely to cause similar behavior;
postulate of value - the probability of reproducing an action depends on how valuable the result of that action seems to a person;
postulate of deprivation - the more regularly a person’s action is rewarded, the less he values subsequent rewards;
the double postulate of aggression-approval - the absence of an expected reward or unexpected punishment makes aggressive behavior probable, and an unexpected reward or the absence of an expected punishment leads to an increase in the value of the rewarded act and makes it more likely to be reproduced.

Do not forget that the most important concepts of exchange theory will be:

the cost of behavior is what this or that action costs an individual - the negative consequences caused by past actions. In everyday terms, this is retribution for the past;
benefit - occurs when the quality and size of the reward exceed the price that the action costs.

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the exchange theory depicts human social behavior as a rational search for benefit. This concept seems simplistic, and it is not surprising that it has attracted criticism from a variety of sociological directions. For example, Parsons, who defended the fundamental difference between the mechanisms of behavior of humans and animals, criticized Homans for the inability of his theory to provide an explanation of social facts on the basis of psychological mechanisms.

In this place exchange theory I. Blau made an attempt at a unique synthesis of social behaviorism and sociologism. Realizing the limitations of a purely behaviorist interpretation of social behavior, he set the goal of moving from the level of psychology to explaining on this basis the existence of social structures as a special reality, independent of psychology. Blau's concept is an enriched theory of exchange, in which four successive stages of transition from individual exchange to social structures are identified: 1) the stage of interpersonal exchange; 2) level of power-status differentiation; 3) stage of legitimation and organization; 4) stage of opposition and change.

Blau shows that starting from the level of interpersonal exchange, exchange may not always be equal. In cases where individuals cannot offer each other sufficient rewards, the social ties formed between them tend to disintegrate. In such situations, attempts arise to strengthen disintegrating ties in other ways - through coercion, through the search for another source of reward, through subordinating oneself to the exchange partner in the order of generalized credit. The last path means a transition to the stage of status differentiation, when a group of people capable of providing the required reward becomes more privileged in terms of status than other groups. Subsequently, the situation is legitimized and consolidated and opposition groups are identified. By analyzing complex social structures, Blau goes far beyond the behavioral paradigm. It is worth noting that he argues that the complex structures of society are organized around social values and norms, which serve as a kind of mediating link between individuals in the process of social exchange. Thanks to this link, it is possible to exchange rewards not only between individuals, but also between an individual and a group. For example, considering the phenomenon of organized charity, Blau determines what distinguishes charity as a social institution from simple help from a rich individual to a poorer one. The difference is that organized charity is a socially oriented behavior, based on the desire of a wealthy individual to conform to the norms of the wealthy class and share social values; through norms and values, an exchange relationship is established between the sacrificing individual and the social group to which he belongs.

Blau identifies four categories of social values on the basis of which exchange is possible:

particularistic values that unite individuals based on interpersonal relationships;
universalist values, which act as a yardstick for assessing individual merits;
legitimate authority is a value system that provides power and privileges to a certain category of people compared to all others:
oppositional values are ideas about the need for social change that allow the opposition to exist at the level of social facts, and not just at the level of interpersonal relations of individual oppositionists.

It can be said that Blau's exchange theory is a compromise option that combines elements of Homans' theory and sociology in the interpretation of reward exchange.

J. Mead's role concept is a symbolic interactionist approach to the study of social behavior. Its name is reminiscent of the functionalist approach: it is also called role-playing. Mead considers role behavior as the activity of individuals interacting with each other in freely accepted and played roles. According to Mead, the role interaction of individuals requires them to be able to put themselves in the place of another, to evaluate themselves from the position of another.

Synthesis of exchange theory with symbolic interactionism P. Zingelman also tried to implement it. Symbolic interactionism has a number of intersections with social behaviorism and exchange theories. Both of these concepts place emphasis on the active interaction of individuals and consider this subject from a microsociological perspective. According to Zingelman, interpersonal exchange relationships require the ability to put oneself in the position of another in order to better understand his needs and desires. Therefore, he believes that there are grounds for merging both directions into one. At the same time, social behaviorists were critical of the emergence of a new theory.

The concept of “behavior” came to sociology from psychology. The meaning of the term “behavior” is different, different from the meaning of such traditional philosophical concepts as action and activity. If action is understood as a rationally justified act that has a clear goal, strategy, and is carried out using specific conscious methods and means, then behavior is just the reaction of a living being to external and internal changes. Such a reaction can be both conscious and unconscious. Thus, purely emotional reactions - laughter, crying - are also behavior.

Social behavior - is a set of human behavioral processes associated with the satisfaction of physical and social needs and arising as a reaction to the surrounding social environment. The subject of social behavior can be an individual or a group.

In addition, the social behavior of individuals is regulated by the social structure, in particular the role structure of society.

Social norm of behavior- this is behavior that fully corresponds to status expectations. Thanks to the existence of status expectations, society can predict the actions of an individual in advance with sufficient probability, and the individual himself can coordinate his behavior with the ideal model or model accepted by society. Social behavior that corresponds to status expectations is defined by the American sociologist R. Linton as social role. This interpretation of social behavior is closest to functionalism, since it explains behavior as a phenomenon determined by social structure. R. Merton introduced the category of “role complex” - a system of role expectations determined by a given status, as well as the concept of role conflict that arises when the role expectations of the statuses occupied by a subject are incompatible and cannot be realized in any single socially acceptable behavior.

The functionalist understanding of social behavior was subjected to fierce criticism from, first of all, representatives of social behaviorism, who believed that it was necessary to build the study of behavioral processes on the basis of the achievements of modern psychology. The extent to which the psychological aspects were really overlooked by the role interpretation of the command follows from the fact that N. Cameron tried to substantiate the idea of the role determination of mental disorders, believing that mental illness is the incorrect execution of one’s social roles and the result of the patient’s inability to perform them in the way society needs. Behaviorists argued that in the time of E. Durkheim, the successes of psychology were insignificant and therefore the functionality of the expiring paradigm met the requirements of the time, but in the 20th century, when psychology reached a high level of development, its data cannot be ignored when considering human behavior.

Forms of human social behavior

People behave differently in one or another social situation, in one or another social environment. For example, some demonstrators peacefully march along the declared route, others seek to organize unrest, and others provoke mass clashes. These various actions of social interaction actors can be defined as social behavior. Hence, social behavior is the form and method of manifestation by social actors of their preferences and attitudes, capabilities and abilities in social action or interaction. Therefore, social behavior can be considered as a qualitative characteristic of social action and interaction.

To achieve life goals and in the implementation of individual tasks, a person can use two types of social behavior - natural and ritual, the differences between which are fundamental.

"Natural" behavior, individually significant and egocentric, is always aimed at achieving individual goals and is adequate to these goals. Therefore, the individual does not face the question of the correspondence between the goals and means of social behavior: the goal can and should be achieved by any means. The “natural” behavior of an individual is not socially regulated, therefore it is, as a rule, immoral or “unceremonious.” Such social behavior is “natural”, natural in nature, since it is aimed at ensuring organic needs. In society, “natural” egocentric behavior is “forbidden”, therefore it is always based on social conventions and mutual concessions on the part of all individuals.

Ritual behavior(“ceremonious”) - individually unnatural behavior; It is thanks to this behavior that society exists and reproduces. Ritual in all its diversity of forms - from etiquette to ceremony - permeates all social life so deeply that people do not notice that they live in a field of ritual interactions. Ritual social behavior is a means of ensuring the stability of the social system, and an individual who implements various forms of such behavior participates in ensuring the social stability of social structures and interactions. Thanks to ritual behavior, a person achieves social well-being, constantly being convinced of the inviolability of his social status and the preservation of the usual set of social roles.

Society is interested in ensuring that the social behavior of individuals is of a ritual nature, but society cannot abolish “natural” egocentric social behavior, which, being adequate in goals and unscrupulous in means, always turns out to be more beneficial for the individual than “ritual” behavior. Therefore, society strives to transform forms of “natural” social behavior into various forms of ritual social behavior, including through socialization mechanisms using social support, control and punishment.

Such forms of social behavior as:

cooperative behavior, which includes all forms of altruistic behavior - helping each other during natural disasters and technological disasters, helping young children and the elderly, helping subsequent generations through the transfer of knowledge and experience;
parental behavior - the behavior of parents towards their offspring.

Aggressive behavior is presented in all its manifestations, both group and individual - ranging from verbal insults of another person to mass extermination during wars.

Human Behavior Concepts

Human behavior is studied in many areas of psychology - in behaviorism, psychoanalysis, cognitive psychology, etc. The term “behavior” is one of the key ones in existential philosophy and is used in the study of a person’s relationship to the world. The methodological capabilities of this concept are due to the fact that it allows us to identify unconscious stable structures of personality or human existence in the world. Among the psychological concepts of human behavior that have had a great influence on sociology and social psychology, we should mention, first of all, the psychoanalytic directions developed by Z. Freud, C. G. Jung, A. Adler.

Freud's ideas are based on the fact that an individual’s behavior is formed as a result of a complex interaction between the levels of his personality. Freud identifies three such levels: the lowest level is formed by unconscious impulses and drives determined by innate biological needs and complexes formed under the influence of the individual history of the subject. Freud calls this level the Id (Id) to show its separation from the individual’s conscious self, which forms the second level of his psyche. The conscious self includes rational goal setting and responsibility for one's actions. The highest level is the super-ego - what we would call the result of socialization. This is a set of social norms and values internalized by the individual, exerting internal pressure on him in order to displace from the consciousness unwanted (forbidden) impulses and drives for society and prevent them from being realized. According to Freud, the personality of any person is an ongoing struggle between the id and the super-ego, which undermines the psyche and leads to neuroses. Individual behavior is entirely conditioned by this struggle and is completely explained by it, since it is merely a symbolic reflection of it. Such symbols can be dream images, slips of the tongue, slips of the tongue, obsessive states and fears.

Concept of C. G. Jung expands and modifies Freud's teachings, including in the sphere of the unconscious not only individual complexes and drives, but also the collective unconscious - the level of key images - archetypes - common to all people and nations. Archetypes record archaic fears and value concepts, the interaction of which determines the behavior and attitude of an individual. Archetypal images appear in the basic narratives - folk tales and legends, mythology, epic - of historically specific societies. The social regulatory role of such narratives in traditional societies is very great. They contain ideal models of behavior that form role expectations. For example, a male warrior should behave like Achilles or Hector, a wife like Penelope, etc. Regular recitations (ritual reenactments) of archetytic narratives constantly remind members of society of these ideal models of behavior.

Adler's psychoanalytic concept is based on an unconscious will to power, which, in his opinion, is an innate personality structure and determines behavior. It is especially strong among those who, for one reason or another, suffer from an inferiority complex. In an effort to compensate for their inferiority, they are able to achieve great success.

Fromm's positions - a representative of neo-Freudianism in and - more precisely, can be defined as Freilo-Marxism, since, along with the influence of Freud, he was no less strongly influenced by the social philosophy of Marx. The uniqueness of neo-Freudianism in comparison with orthodox Freudianism is due to the fact that, strictly speaking, neo-Freudianism is rather sociology, while Freud, of course, is a pure psychologist. If Freud explains the behavior of an individual by complexes and impulses hidden in the individual unconscious, in short, by internal biopsychic factors, then for Fromm and Freilo-Marxism in general, the behavior of an individual is determined by the surrounding social environment. This is his similarity with Marx, who explained the social behavior of individuals ultimately by their class origin. Nevertheless, Fromm strives to find a place for the psychological in social processes. According to the Freudian tradition, turning to the unconscious, he introduces the term “social unconscious,” meaning mental experience that is common to all members of a given society, but for most of them does not reach the level of consciousness, because it is repressed by a special mechanism that is social in nature, belonging not to the individual, but to society. Thanks to this mechanism of repression, society maintains a stable existence. The mechanism of social repression includes language, the logic of everyday thinking, a system of social prohibitions and taboos. The structures of language and thinking are formed under the influence of society and act as a weapon of social pressure on the individual’s psyche. For example, coarse, anti-aesthetic, ridiculous abbreviations and abbreviations of “newspeak” from Orwell’s dystopia actively distort the consciousness of the people who use them. To one degree or another, the monstrous logic of formulas like: “The dictatorship of the proletariat is the most democratic form of power” became the property of everyone in Soviet society.

The main component of the mechanism of social repression is social taboos, which act like Freudian censorship. That in the social experience of individuals that threatens the preservation of the existing society, if realized, is not allowed into consciousness with the help of a “social filter.” Society manipulates the consciousness of its members by introducing ideological clichés, which, due to frequent use, become inaccessible to critical analysis, withholding certain information, exerting direct pressure and causing fear of social isolation. Therefore, everything that contradicts socially approved ideological clichés is excluded from consciousness.

These kinds of taboos, ideologemes, logical and linguistic experiments form, according to Fromm, the “social character” of a person. People belonging to the same society, against their will, are, as it were, marked with the seal of a “common incubator”. For example, we unmistakably recognize foreigners on the street, even if we do not hear their speech, by their behavior, appearance, attitude towards each other; These are people from another society, and when they find themselves in a mass environment that is alien to them, they stand out sharply from it due to their similarities with each other. Social character - This is a style of behavior brought up by society and unconscious by the individual - from social to everyday. For example, Soviet and former Soviet people are distinguished by collectivism and responsiveness, social passivity and undemandingness, submission to power, personified in the person of the “leader,” a developed fear of being different from everyone else, and gullibility.

Fromm directed his criticism against modern capitalist society, although he also paid a lot of attention to describing the social character generated by totalitarian societies. Like Freud, he developed a program for restoring individuals' undistorted social behavior through awareness of what had been repressed. “By transforming the unconscious into consciousness, we thereby transform the simple concept of the universality of man into the vital reality of such universality. This is nothing more than the practical implementation of humanism.” The process of derepression—the liberation of socially oppressed consciousness—consists of eliminating the fear of awareness of the forbidden, developing the ability for critical thinking, and humanizing social life as a whole.

A different interpretation is offered by behaviorism (B. Skinner, J. Homans), which considers behavior as a system of reactions to various stimuli.

Skinner's concept is essentially biologizing, since it completely eliminates the differences between the behavior of humans and animals. Skinner distinguishes three types of behavior: unconditioned reflex, conditioned reflex and operant. The first two types of reactions are caused by exposure appropriate incentives, and operant responses are a form of adaptation of the organism to the environment. They are active and voluntary. The body, as if by trial and error, finds the most acceptable method of adaptation, and if successful, the find is consolidated in the form of a stable reaction. Thus, the main factor in the formation of behavior is reinforcement, and learning turns into “guidance to the desired reaction.”

In Skinner's concept, a person appears as a creature whose entire inner life comes down to reactions to external circumstances. Changes in reinforcement mechanically cause changes in behavior. Thinking, the highest mental functions of a person, all culture, morality, art turn into a complex system of reinforcements designed to evoke certain behavioral reactions. This leads to the conclusion that it is possible to manipulate people’s behavior through a carefully developed “technology of behavior.” With this term, Skinner refers to the purposeful manipulative control of some groups of people over others, associated with the establishment of an optimal reinforcement regime for certain social goals.

The ideas of behaviorism in sociology were developed by J. and J. Baldwin, J. Homans.

Concept by J. andJ. Baldwin is based on the concept of reinforcement, borrowed from psychological behaviorism. Reinforcement in the social sense is a reward whose value is determined by subjective needs. For example, for a hungry person, food acts as a reinforcer, but if the person is full, it is not a reinforcer.

Reinforcers are divided into positive and negative. Positive reinforcers are anything that is perceived by the subject as a reward. For example, if a particular encounter with the environment brings a reward, it is likely that the subject will strive to repeat this experience. Negative reinforcers are factors that determine behavior through the refusal of some experience. For example, if a subject denies himself some pleasure and saves money on it, and subsequently benefits from this saving, then this experience can serve as a negative reinforcer and the subject will always act that way.

The effect of punishment is the opposite of reinforcement. Punishment is an experience that causes a desire not to repeat it again. Punishment can also be positive or negative, but here everything is reversed compared to reinforcement. Positive punishment is punishment using a suppressive stimulus, such as hitting. Negative punishment influences behavior through the deprivation of something valuable. For example, depriving a child of sweets at lunch is a typical negative punishment.

The formation of operant reactions is probabilistic in nature. Unambiguousness is characteristic of reactions at the simplest level, for example, a child cries, demanding the attention of his parents, because parents always come to him in such cases. Adult reactions are much more complex. For example, a person selling newspapers in train cars does not find a buyer in every car, but he knows from experience that a buyer will eventually be found, and this makes him persistently walk from car to car. In the last decade, the receipt of wages at some Russian enterprises has assumed the same probabilistic nature, but nevertheless, people continue to go to work, hoping to receive it.

Homans' behaviorist concept of exchange appeared in the middle of the 20th century. Arguing with representatives of many areas of sociology, Homans argued that a sociological explanation of behavior must necessarily be based on a psychological approach. The interpretation of historical facts should also be based on a psychological approach. Homans motivates this by the fact that behavior is always individual, while sociology operates with categories applicable to groups and societies, therefore the study of behavior is the prerogative of psychology, and sociology in this matter should follow it.

According to Homans, when studying behavioral reactions, one should abstract from the nature of the factors that caused these reactions: they are caused by the influence of the surrounding physical environment or other people. Social behavior is simply the exchange of activities of some social value between people. Homans believes that social behavior can be interpreted using Skinner's behavioral paradigm, if supplemented with the idea of the mutual nature of stimulation in relationships between people. The relationships between individuals always represent a mutually beneficial exchange of activities, services, in short, this is the mutual use of reinforcements.

Homans briefly formulated the exchange theory in several postulates:

postulate of success - those actions that most often meet social approval are most likely to be reproduced;
incentive postulate - similar incentives associated with reward are likely to cause similar behavior;
postulate of value - the probability of reproducing an action depends on how valuable the result of this action seems to a person;
postulate of deprivation - the more regularly a person’s action is rewarded, the less he values subsequent rewards;
the double postulate of aggression-approval - the absence of an expected reward or unexpected punishment makes aggressive behavior probable, and an unexpected reward or the absence of an expected punishment leads to an increase in the value of the rewarded act and makes it more likely to be reproduced.

The most important concepts of exchange theory are:

the cost of behavior is what this or that action costs an individual - the negative consequences caused by past actions. In everyday terms, this is retribution for the past;
benefit - occurs when the quality and size of the reward exceed the price that the action costs.

Thus, exchange theory portrays human social behavior as a rational search for gain. This concept seems simplistic, and it is not surprising that it has attracted criticism from a variety of sociological directions. For example, Parsons, who defended the fundamental difference between the mechanisms of behavior of humans and animals, criticized Homans for the inability of his theory to provide an explanation of social facts on the basis of psychological mechanisms.

In his exchange theory I. Blau attempted a unique synthesis of social behaviorism and sociologism. Realizing the limitations of a purely behaviorist interpretation of social behavior, he set the goal of moving from the level of psychology to explaining on this basis the existence of social structures as a special reality that is not reducible to psychology. Blau's concept is an enriched theory of exchange, which identifies four successive stages of transition from individual exchange to social structures: 1) the stage of interpersonal exchange; 2) level of power-status differentiation; 3) stage of legitimation and organization; 4) stage of opposition and change.

Blau shows that starting from the level of interpersonal exchange, exchange may not always be equal. In cases where individuals cannot offer each other sufficient rewards, the social ties formed between them tend to disintegrate. In such situations, attempts arise to strengthen disintegrating ties in other ways - through coercion, through the search for another source of reward, through subordinating oneself to the exchange partner in the order of generalized credit. The last path means a transition to the stage of status differentiation, when a group of people capable of providing the required reward becomes more privileged in terms of status than other groups. Subsequently, the situation is legitimized and consolidated and opposition groups are identified. By analyzing complex social structures, Blau goes far beyond the behavioral paradigm. He argues that the complex structures of society are organized around social values and norms, which serve as a kind of mediating link between individuals in the process of social exchange. Thanks to this link, it is possible to exchange rewards not only between individuals, but also between an individual and a group. For example, considering the phenomenon of organized charity, Blau determines what distinguishes charity as a social institution from simple help from a rich individual to a poorer one. The difference is that organized charity is socially oriented behavior, which is based on the desire of a wealthy individual to conform to the norms of the wealthy class and share social values; through norms and values, an exchange relationship is established between the sacrificing individual and the social group to which he belongs.

Blau identifies four categories of social values on the basis of which exchange is possible:

particularistic values that unite individuals on the basis of interpersonal relationships;
universalist values, which act as a yardstick for assessing individual merits;
legitimate authority is a value system that provides power and privileges to a certain category of people compared to all others:
oppositional values are ideas about the need for social change that allow the opposition to exist at the level of social facts, and not just at the level of interpersonal relations of individual oppositionists.

It can be said that Blau's exchange theory is a compromise option that combines elements of Homans' theory and sociology in the interpretation of reward exchange.

J. Mead's role concept is a symbolic interactionist approach to the study of social behavior. Its name is reminiscent of the functionalist approach: it is also called role-playing. Mead views role behavior as the activity of individuals interacting with each other in freely accepted and played roles. According to Mead, the role interaction of individuals requires them to be able to put themselves in the place of another, to evaluate themselves from the position of another.

Synthesis of exchange theory with symbolic interactionism P. Zingelman also tried to implement it. Symbolic interactionism has a number of intersections with social behaviorism and exchange theories. Both of these concepts emphasize the active interaction of individuals and view their subject matter from a microsociological perspective. According to Singelman, interpersonal exchange relationships require the ability to put oneself in the position of another in order to better understand his needs and desires. Therefore, he believes that there are grounds for merging both directions into one. However, social behaviorists were critical of the emergence of the new theory.

Annotation: The purpose of the lecture: to reveal the key factors of social behavior and activity, contradictions in social behavior, the category of social character and its pathologies, types and types of deviant behavior of the individual.

Social interaction (interaction) consists of individual acts called social actions and includes statuses, roles, social relationships, symbols and meanings. It is no coincidence that it is actions and behavior, as the most objective fact, that form the core of attention of modern sociology. It is impossible to understand what society, social groups, personality, social interactions are like without analyzing how certain people behave; entire social groups and even society as a whole in one situation or another.. The problem of social behavior was the core of the theories of many classics of sociology - M. Weber, P. Sorokin, E. Fromm, T. Parsons, P. Merton and others.

Social action, social activity, social behavior as concepts of sociology

Social action is an elementary unit of social life of society. Social actions make up social interactions; they form the basis of social activity and social behavior of subjects of society. This concept was introduced into sociology by M. Weber. Moreover, the adjective “social” has a deep meaning. An action itself is an act performed by a person in relation to something. A social action is an act performed by an individual, firstly, in relation to another individual, communities of people, society as a whole, secondly, aimed at the reciprocal action of others (i.e. there is no social action without interaction), thirdly , conscious, motivated by the personality itself. According to M. Weber, an action performed in relation to non-social objects (nature, knowledge, ideas, technology, etc.), as well as an unconscious action performed due to habits or emotions, cannot be called social. M. Weber proposed four ideal types of social action - affective (performed due to emotional state personality and characterized by minimal meaningfulness), traditional (performed due to the habit of behaving within the framework of cultural patterns fixed in the form of tradition and practically not requiring rational understanding), value-rational (performed due to giving some meaning to the action itself in the form of a duty - religious, moral, aesthetic, political, etc.), purposive-rational (performed by giving meaning not only to the action itself, but also to its results). This typology of M. Weber is based on the degree of rationality (reasonableness, meaningfulness, prudence) of social action. The last type of social action is the most fully rational. The history of the West is described by M. Weber as a process of developing the degree of rationality of social action. In real social actions, M. Weber noted, one can find components of all four ideal types, but by the degree of predominance of one or another type one can judge the nature of people’s social behavior.

M. Weber's ideas were subsequently developed in the concept of social action by the American sociologist T. Parsons. If, according to Weber, the reason for behavior lies in internal motivation, that is, in the personality itself, then Parsons substantiated the presence of 4 factors. This is a biological organism social systems, culture and personality itself. The body is a source of biological energy, natural needs. A social system is interacting individuals and groups of people who present a system of social expectations to the individual. Society, through expectations, dictates how an individual should act. Culture is a system of ideal models, symbols, traditions and value standards. Personality is the actor himself, who has internal needs, desires and goals.

Social action is the basis of both social behavior and social activity. What is the difference between these concepts?

So what is social behavior? Firstly, it does not represent a single, but many social actions organized into a single whole. Secondly, social behavior is “woven” not from homogeneous, but heterogeneous, sometimes even opposing social actions. Thirdly, if a social action is performed “here and now”, i.e. has its boundaries in space and time, then social behavior unfolds in time and space, i.e. it remains so during a certain period of a person’s life and in different situations. Fourth, social behavior includes not only social action, but also inaction (for example, negligent behavior of an individual). And finally, fifthly, the main function of social behavior is the adaptation of the individual to the social environment. A person, through his social behavior, adapts to nature (organism), social systems and culture, adapts his abilities, needs, and interests to them. Socio-cultural adaptation can be active and passive, creative and destructive, aggressive and tolerant, etc. Thus, social behavior is a system of social actions and inactions aimed at ensuring the individual’s adaptation to social systems, nature and culture.

Unlike social behavior, social activity does not involve inaction. But the main difference is that social activity is a system of social actions aimed at an individual’s adaptation of social systems and culture to his own needs, abilities, and interests. In other words, the fundamental difference between social behavior and social activity is that the first represents the process of adapting oneself, and the second represents the process of adapting to oneself. For example, when we talk about labor behavior personality, we mean how she builds her actions in accordance with her own ideas about how to work, in accordance with the expectations of colleagues and management, with labor standards and the values of the organization and society. Labor activity represents a purposeful change in the subject of labor, while the goal of labor is subordinated to the abilities, needs and interests of the employee. You can also distinguish between political behavior and political activity, moral behavior and moral activity, etc. It should be recalled that labor, political, moral, aesthetic and other forms of behavior, as well as corresponding forms of activity, are in the strict sense social and only if they are focused on another person or community of people.

So, let's consider the main factors of the mechanism of social behavior. Only at first glance it may seem that the only author of social behavior is the individual himself (“I behave as I want” is the most demonstrative position of adolescents striving for self-affirmation).

The social behavior of an individual has four authors: the organism, the individual itself, social systems (society, macro- and microgroups into which the individual belongs or seeks to enter), culture. How do these four factors determine social behavior?

The natural-physical is the basis for the individual-personal. The biological component (the organism) provides the energetic basis for behavior. Social behavior in accordance with the internal nature and laws of biology, in accordance with the physical and natural essence of the individual is vital behavior

A person builds his behavior in accordance with a certain meaning. The personal meaning put into behavior (“why”, “why”, “how”) is determined by the system of social qualities of the individual, emotions, desires, abilities, needs, value orientations, motivation and social attitudes. So, the means of ensuring the social behavior of an individual is personal meaning, and the very model of social behavior determined by personal meaning can be called emotional behavior

Social systems - family, friends, organizations, class, ethnic, professional communities, etc., determine social behavior, prescribing any model of action in accordance with the social status of the individual. IN small group such behavior models as leader, outsider, favorite, animator, authority, scapegoat and others are prescribed. In the family - behavioral patterns of father, mother, son, daughter, sister, brother, etc. In an organization - behavior patterns of a specialist, manager, subordinate, colleague and others. There are also class, professional (doctor, teacher, engineer, miner, driver), ethnic (Russian, Ukrainian, French, Norwegian, Georgian, English, Indian), demographic (men, women, young man, elderly, child), territorial (city dweller, villager), etc.,

Such prescriptions - requirements for the behavior of an individual in accordance with his social status in sociology are called social expectations, and the very model of behavior that corresponds to social expectations is called a social role.

Culture as a system of social norms and values determines the social behavior of an individual, establishing certain boundaries of what is prohibited, permitted and encouraged, giving the individual’s actions social meaning. A means of ensuring that an individual’s behavior conforms to the patterns and meanings of actions accepted in a particular society is social control. With the help of social control, a person assimilates culture and passes on a cultural tradition from generation to generation. A model of social behavior that corresponds to the norms and values of society can be called traditional (value-normative) behavior.

So, the individual has to build his own behavior, focusing simultaneously on vital, emotional, traditional and role models of behavior.

The actual behavior of an individual, to one degree or another, may or may not correspond to model forms. That part of actual behavior that coincides with the social role of the individual is called role behavior. Is it possible, quoting W. Shakespeare “All the world is a stage, and all the people in it - both men and women - are actors,” all the actual behavior of an individual can be called role-playing? Let us note that the origin of the word “personality” (from the word “mask”, i.e. mask; the Latin “persona” has a similar origin) seems to add arguments in favor of this judgment. At the same time, common sense does not allow us to consider ourselves and others as actors, devoid of their own “I”. In life you have to meet the most various options role behavior of an individual - from meaningless, devoid of personality to a complete refusal to follow social expectations in one’s behavior.

Within the role behavior of an individual, there can be both consensus and dissonance and even conflict. The fact is that the social statuses of individuals are diverse (especially in modern societies), therefore, individuals are required to have different role behaviors, which may be incompatible. In classical XIX literature centuries (Balzac, L. Tolstoy, Chekhov and others) describe the so-called role conflicts confrontation in the actual behavior of the individual between incompatible social roles.

The actual behavior of an individual may also, to one degree or another, correspond or not correspond to personal meaning. It can be completely meaningless (affective, i.e. depends on an emotional impulse) or motivated, filled with meaning, corresponding to the ideals, beliefs, and principles of the individual. The choice of behavior depends on the degree of social maturity of the individual, on the level of development of his abilities and needs (primarily, the need for “I” and the ability for independence and self-actualization), interests, value orientations, motives, social attitudes.

The actual behavior of an individual, to one degree or another, may or may not correspond to the value normative model behavior. The behavior that fits within the limits of this model is called normative. If an individual’s behavior goes beyond the limits of value normative model, then it is called deviant behavior. The normative behavior of an individual, in turn, can also be twofold. Culture determines the behavior of an individual both externally (external social control), with the help of various sanctions and incentives, forcing the individual to follow behavioral patterns, and internally (self-control), acting in the form of value orientations, motives and attitudes of the individual. Accordingly, in the normative behavior of a person we will highlight adapted and internalized forms. In the adapted form of behavior, there is a discrepancy with the meaning of the personality. In the internalized form, this discrepancy is overcome (in other words, the personality behaves as is accepted, not only because it is so accepted, but also because it considers it to have personal meaning).

American sociologist R. Merton identified five types of behavior - personality adaptation. This typology is based on the attitude of the individual in his behavior (goals accepted and approved in society (what a person should strive for, what should be recognized as a value) and means (how to achieve these goals, what rules and norms should he adhere to). For For convenience, we will present the typology in the form of a table, denoting the sign (+) acceptance and the sign (-) rejection by the individual of certain elements of culture.

No.	Forms social adaptation	Attitude to
		Goals (values)	Means (standards)
1.	Conformism	+	+
2.	Innovation	+	-
3.	Ritualism	-	+
4.	Retreatism	-	-
5.	Mutiny	+-	+-

Conformism is a type of behavior characterized by a person’s complete acceptance of culture, i.e. norms and values. In psychological literature, one often encounters a negative interpretation of conformism as agreement, lack of one’s own opinion, etc. It is unlikely that such an approach will be productive. Conformism is the absence of discrepancy in the behavior of the personal principle and cultural tradition. This type of behavior is not an adapted (adapted), but an internalized type of personality behavior; it represents a completed result of the socialization of the individual. Innovative behavior is a form of mismatch of an internalized type of behavior: a person, sharing the values of society, chooses other patterns of behavior that do not fit within the framework of accepted social norms, therefore, it is a form of deviant behavior. Ritualism is a normatively adapted type of social behavior; it complies with social norms, but does not accept social values. Retreatism and rebellion represent a complete break in the behavior of an individual with the culture of society; rebellion is also characterized by the individual’s desire to establish new norms and values, i.e. new culture.

Thus, of the forms of social adaptation of the individual identified by R. Merton, two (conformism and ritualism) are normative, and the other three (innovation, retreatism, rebellion) are deviant forms of behavior. It should be emphasized that all forms of behavior cannot be declared as “good” or “bad”. It all depends on what these norms and values themselves are.

In a modern complex society, contradictions in the social behavior of an individual are inevitable.

In an archaic society such contradictions do not exist. Firstly, a person does not distinguish himself as an individual from his social environment - clan, family. Therefore, social roles and personal meaning in behavior are fused and inseparable. Secondly, a person in his behavior completely follows accepted standards and values, cultural tradition replaces the personal meaning of her behavior. The one who ignores social norms and values, turns into an outcast, i.e. finds himself outside the social system - clan and tribe. Thirdly, there are no discrepancies between social expectations for individual behavior from the clan and the norms and values of a given society. Therefore, in an archaic society, the social behavior of an individual is completely conformist.

In the pre-industrial (traditional) type of society there is also no special problem of social behavior of the individual. Although changes, unlike in an archaic society, do occur, they are so slow that they become noticeable in the life of not one, but several generations: Certain discrepancies between personal meaning, social expectations and social control are so insignificant that the individual reconciles them without much difficulty within the framework of holistic social behavior.

Industrial and emerging period post-industrial societies are dynamic in nature, significant changes occur in the life of one generation. This leads to an exacerbation of a number of contradictions in the social behavior of the individual.

Firstly, in modern societies the socialization of the individual is a continuous lifelong process. A person finds himself as a result of social movements in a variety of cultural environments of class, professional, demographic, territorial, organizational, which requires the assimilation of new norms and values. With the massification of society thanks to social communications, the socialization of the individual is aimed at the cultural tradition of not only “one’s own”, but also “alien” reference groups (to which the individual does not belong, but accepts their norms and values). From here, situations arise when a person does not see personal meaning in behavior that is prescribed by culture through social control, and considers such behavior as archaic, ritualistic. Very often, the individual does not have to reconcile the discrepancy between personal meaning and social control, but makes a difficult choice of behavior - innovative, ritualistic, retreatistic or rebellious.

Secondly, in modern societies, social processes proceed much faster than the modernization of the culture of society. Social groups (formal and informal organizations, new settlements, professional communities, etc.) are formed much faster than new norms and values. The resulting distance in the pace of social and cultural modernization of society determines the contrast between social expectations and the cultural framework of social behavior. In other words, what is required of an individual’s behavior by her social environment - family, friends, colleagues, managers, etc. - does not always and not in everything fit into ideas about what is permissible and significant. As a result, individuals again have to very often do difficult choice- either play social roles in order to meet social expectations, or follow cultural tradition, behaving within the framework of the concepts of due, decency, etiquette, etc., or find some kind of compromise.

Thirdly, in modern societies social qualities personality does not always correspond to its social status. In other words, the position of an individual in society and social groups is not yet a characteristic of the needs, abilities, interests, value orientations, motives, and social attitudes of the individual. The social status of an individual changes much faster than the personality itself. Therefore, the social roles prescribed to an individual in accordance with his social status may turn out to be completely or partially devoid of personal meaning, i.e. meaningless. The structure of social systems also changes faster than the individual included in them. Therefore, an individual occupying the same social status may be presented with completely different and sometimes opposing demands on her social behavior over a certain period of time. Once again, the individual finds himself in a situation of choice - either to play meaningless, “alien” social roles, or to refuse to play these roles, trying to follow everything own principles, beliefs, or try to rationalize social roles, endowing them with illusory meaning or rethinking them from the point of view of one’s own abilities and needs.

In critical, extreme situations, these individual choices of social behavior options serve as a source of social and intrapersonal conflicts. A person can ignore his social environment, behaving demonstratively, rejecting social roles, thereby causing opposition from others. Various forms of positive and negative deviant behavior can become widespread in society. The cause of intrapersonal conflict is the opposition of personal meaning and social role, which has not found its resolution. Classic example A similar conflict is the image of Anna Karenina in the novel by L. Tolstoy, who was torn between the requirement to play the role of a wife, therefore, to remain a mother for her son, and the meaninglessness of this role. External and internal conflicts in this case led to a tragic outcome. The so-called syndromes - Vietnamese, Afghani, Chechen - are widely known today - the personal consequences of these wars. But every war causes such syndromes. If a person has to carry out orders (i.e. play the role of a soldier, commander, etc.), in which he does not see the meaning, which go far beyond generally accepted norms and values (“war will write off everything”), then this subsequently leads to to an identity crisis, depersonalization. The consequences of such syndromes are ambiguous. Some experience this conflict painfully, withdrawing into themselves, withdrawing and isolating themselves from society. Others begin to play other meaningless social roles, sometimes quite aggressive. Still others try to drown out intrapersonal conflict with various “social drugs” - alcohol and drugs.

The intrapersonal crisis is caused not only by extreme situations, but also by modern mass processes. It is no coincidence that first writers, and then sociologists, note an increase in feelings of loneliness, meaninglessness and hopelessness of an individual as his social contacts and social statuses increase.

Formation of social behavior of the individual in modern society- also an internally contradictory process that goes through a number of crisis stages. Children have the most younger ages(up to 5 years) social behavior is determined by the social expectations of parents, which largely coincide with cultural tradition. Later, children develop “correct” behavior – “this is possible and this is not possible”, while revealing a discrepancy between the actual behavior of parents and others with the accepted and often declared norms and values of adults. Adolescence is a period of simultaneously searching for the personal meaning of social behavior and following the social expectations of those groups into which the individual is integrated - friends, companies, reference groups. Hence the disharmonious behavior, caused either by the desire for self-affirmation, or by the meaningless acceptance of various social roles.

Socionics has discovered the phenomenon of an integral type of community, which can be diagnosed by recording typical facts of social behavior. . In sociology there is a concept of social character. The behaviorist interpretation of character comes down directly to a description of the typical features of behavior itself; in other psychological schools (neo-Freudian, humanistic and others), character is understood as personality properties manifested in behavior. “A person can be thrifty,” writes E. Fromm, “because his financial situation requires it; or he can be thrifty because he has a stingy character that encourages saving for the sake of saving, regardless of real need. Different characters can be hidden behind the same behavior."

The concept of “character” in sociological science is used in some specific form. Firstly, we're talking about about the character of a person, determined not by individual properties - temperament, body structure, etc., but by the sociocultural conditions of a person’s formation. Secondly, we are talking about the character of a person not as a separate individual, but as a certain social type, a modal (most often found in a particular society) personality. “The fact that the majority of members of a social class or culture share significant elements of character, and that one can speak of a “social character” that represents the essence of the character structure common to the majority of members of a given culture, indicates the degree of participation in the formation of character by social and cultural models" (E. Fromm). Thirdly, we are talking about a character characteristic of entire social communities, groups and strata, and not just the individuals representing them. So, we can talk about national, class, professional, urban, rural, regional, youth, female and male, etc. character. The study of social character is the subject of social psychology and sociology.

Attempts at a typology of a social nature were made by E. Fromm and D. Risman. E. Fromm distinguishes two types of social character - fruitful and unfruitful orientations. He defines fruitfulness as the realization by a person of his inherent capabilities, the use of his abilities. Accordingly, a fruitful orientation of a social nature is distinguished by the creative orientation of the individual. Unproductive orientation is characterized by a consumer orientation of a social nature. E. Fromm has the following types of unfruitful orientation: receptive orientation (behavior is aimed at consuming external goods - to be loved, but not to love, to perceive some ideas, but not to create them, etc.), exploitative orientation (in contrast to receptive orientation, behavior is aimed at consuming goods received not as a gift, but with the help of force or cunning), acquisitive orientation (behavior aimed at taking as much as possible and giving as little as possible), market orientation, which developed as dominant only in the modern era.

The last type of social character deserves more detailed consideration. "Because the modern man perceives himself both as a seller and as a product for sale on the market, his self-esteem depends on conditions beyond his control. If he “succeeds”, he is valuable; if not, he is devoid of value... With a market orientation, a person faces his on our own, as with a commodity alienated from it. As a result, his sense of identity becomes as unstable as his self-esteem; the final remark in all possible roles here: “I am what you want.” Types of unproductive social character gradually replaced each other (receptive orientation in pre-capitalist society, exploitative and acquisitive orientation in modern society).

According to sociologist D. Riesman, the evolution of the social character of the Western European type is as follows:

orientation to tradition;
self-orientation;
other-oriented.

Focus on tradition is a type of social behavior determined primarily by culture.

Self-orientation– focus on one’s personality, internal motives, desires, goals (personal meaning). It was this self-orientation that gave birth to the enterprising and rational individual.

Other-oriented- a type of social behavior determined by society, the social systems in which the individual belongs. Here the social environment and the social environment of the individual are primary - the totality of his communications, fashion, functions in social organizations. Social roles determined by social expectations become decisive in the modern Western character.

As usual, D. Riesman missed the fourth orientation - as a social character - nature orientation. Over time, the ecological, vital personality will come to the fore in developed countries. A person living in harmony with nature, focused primarily on the organic, biophysical, vital factor, will replace the orientation towards social systems and social expectations.

The works of M. Weber, E. Fromm, D. Risman reveal the evolution of the social character of the Western European type, which does not mean that this typology is in finished form can be used in the analysis of social behavior and social character of other civilizations, including Russian. The Japanese character, for example, combines orientation in a completely different way to tradition and orientation towards another, these two components do not exclude, but, on the contrary, presuppose each other

The specificity of the Russian (Russian) character is the mixture of all three orientations. Orientation towards tradition, towards oneself and towards society are not exclusive, but coexist with each other. A mixed society naturally gives rise to a mixed personality (we are talking about the character of a large group of people - a nation).

There are differences in social character not only between different stages of development and civilizational types of society, but. and between different strata and groups within society. Marginal layers of society (today they are usually called “new” - “new Russians”, “new poor”, “new middle layer”, etc., who have acquired a new social status, but have not developed their own subculture and are only experiencing the process of secondary socialization) are most oriented towards themselves and others, while the “old” layers are more committed to cultural tradition than the “new” ones.

As mentioned above, the social crisis of society is also manifested in the crisis of the individual and his social behavior. The crisis of social behavior (syndromes, depersonalization) manifests itself in the fact that it becomes unpredictable, “swinging” between the search for personal meaning, cultural patterns and social roles. In psychology there is the concept of “character accentuation,” which means character being stuck between normality and pathology. The so-called difficult character is most often formed in adolescence. This happens not only with individual, but also with social character. Accentuation of a social character can manifest itself in different ways - in the forms of increased irritability and apathy, extreme mood swings, increased suspiciousness, isolation, unjustified cruelty, thoughtless submission to any authorities, etc., characterizing not individuals, but a significant part of the population. It is no coincidence that during periods of deep upheavals, social conflicts and crises, vandalism, aggressiveness, and inhumane acts become typical manifestations in social behavior. The “old” thieves’ authorities themselves today are amazed at the lawlessness and unmotivated cruelty on the part of the “new” criminal elements.

The deformed social character does not go away with the crisis; it turns into a persistent component of the mentality of the people, passed on from generation to generation. It becomes one of the most important factors determining the characteristics of the economic system, the form of the political regime, and the spiritual makeup of society.

So, the category of social behavior allows us to analyze society not only in statics, but also in dynamics. Social action is undoubtedly one of the first building blocks of social life. Mobility social structure assign social roles that are performed in the process of interaction between individuals. Social roles can be learned only in the process of behavior and activity; therefore, social actions are the basis for the formation and development of personality, the progressive transformation of social character.

Brief summary:

Social action is the first building block of social life, the basis of social interaction.
Social behavior is a system of social actions and inactions aimed at adapting the individual to society, culture and nature.
Social activity is a system of social actions aimed at an individual’s adaptation of society, culture and nature to his own needs, abilities, and interests.
R. Merton identified 5 types of behavior - personality adaptation. Two of them—conformism and ritualism—are normative. The other three - innovation, retreatism, rebellion - are deviant forms of behavior.
T. Parsons developed a theory of four factors of behavior: organism, personality, social systems, culture.
In modern society, the process of social modernization is faster than the process of cultural modernization, which is why main reason contradictions in personal behavior.
D. Risman showed the evolution of Western European character - orientation towards tradition, orientation towards oneself, orientation towards others. The social character of other societies has its own specifics. In addition, the task of human survival leads to the formation of a new type of social character - orientation towards nature.

Practice kit

Questions:

How does human interaction differ from interaction between other living beings?
Which of the founders of sociology substantiated that social action has two essential features: conscious motivation and orientation towards others (expectation)?
Why did M. Weber not classify traditional and affective actions as social actions?
What is meant by role behavior?
What is meant by vital behavior?
What is meant by “cultural” (traditional) behavior?
What is meant by emotional behavior?
Why innovative behavior in the era of innovative technologies and innovation economy qualifies as deviant behavior?
To have or to be – how can you answer E. Fromm’s dilemma? Can these two orientations be considered as types of social character?

Topics for term papers, abstracts, essays:

Social Actions and Interaction
Social behavior and personality socialization
Contradictions of social identification
Socially oriented behavior and traditional culture.
Forms of deviations in sociocultural behavior
Sociotypes and social character
M. Weber's theory of social action
Theory of social action by J. Habermas
Specifics of the Russian social character
Fashion as a manifestation of orientation towards social systems

The topic of social behavior is of great importance in modern times. Social behavior involves psychological influence on people and the occupation of a specific position among them. As a rule, this type of behavior is considered as the opposite of individual behavior, which, in turn, is not related to the position a person occupies in society, and to the relationships that develop between him and the people around him, and is also not designed to affect individual people. or society as a whole of any influence.

Psychologists distinguish several types of social behavior. We will consider the following:

Mass behavior
Group behavior
Sex role behavior
Prosocial behavior
Competitive Behavior
Obedient Behavior
Deviant behavior
Illegal behavior
Problem behavior
Attachment behavior
Maternal behavior
Some other forms

Let's look at each type in more detail.

Mass behavior

Mass behavior is a poorly controlled social activity large quantity people who are not organized and do not pursue specific purpose. It is often called spontaneous behavior. Examples include fashion, rumors, panic, various religious, political and economic movements, etc.

Group behavior

Group behavior refers to the actions of people who are united in social group. Most often it occurs due to special processes occurring in such groups. It differs in that group members act in concert, constantly interacting with each other, even when they are outside the group.

Sex role behavior

Gender-role behavior is behavior that is characteristic of people of a particular gender and is associated with the main social roles performed by these people in the life of any society.

Mass, group and sex-role behavior are characteristic of groups and individuals and depend on what social functions they perform and what goals they pursue. The following types of social behavior describe a person in the process of his interaction with other individuals.

Prosocial behavior

The basis of a person’s prosocial behavior is his desire for help and support from others. When prosocial behavior is aimed at directly helping someone who needs it, then it is called helping behavior.

Competitive Behavior

Competitive behavior is when people around him are perceived by a person as potential or real competitors, and he enters into struggle or competition with them. This behavior is designed to achieve advantage and victory. Functionally or meaningfully related to competitive behavior type behaviorA, according to which a person is impatient, irritable, hostile and distrustful, and type behaviorB, according to which a person does not seek to compete with anyone, and expresses a friendly attitude to everyone.

Obedient Behavior

Obedient behavior refers to forms of social behavior that ensure civilized and cultural interaction between people. Quite often, this type of behavior is called law-abiding behavior, and in contrast to it is called deviant, illegal and problematic behavior.

Deviant behavior

Deviant behavior is behavior that goes against accepted social, moral and/or ethical norms in society. Despite this, deviant behavior cannot be called illegal, which requires conviction under the law.

Illegal behavior

Illegal behavior is behavior that violates established social norms. This form of behavior presupposes conviction by a court - a person can receive punishment for it, based on the current legislation.

Problem behavior

Problem behavior refers to any behavior that causes a person to develop psychological problems. In most cases, problem behavior consists of behaviors that are incomprehensible and unacceptable to others and may be maladaptive, destructive, or antisocial.

In addition to other forms of social behavior, one can also find those that characterize close relationships between people. These types are attachment behavior and maternal behavior.

Attachment behavior

Attachment behavior is expressed in a person’s desire to be close to others all the time. This form of behavior manifests itself already in childhood, and the object of attachment in most cases is the mother.

Maternal behavior

In general, maternal behavior is the behavior inherent in mothers in relation to their children, as well as the behavior of any person in general, which is similar to the behavior of a mother in relation to a child.

There are also some other forms of social behavior that are interconnected with the relationships of people developing in society. Such behavior can be called behavior the purpose of which is to avoid failures and achieve success, gain power or subordination to someone; confident or helpless behavior, as well as some others.

Other forms of social behavior

Striving for success- this is a special form of social behavior that influences a person’s success and, to a certain extent, his fate. The desire for success was most developed in the last century, and today it characterizes a huge number of successful people.

Avoiding Failure is an alternative form of striving for success. This type of behavior manifests itself in a concern about not being last among other people, not being worse than them, not becoming a loser.

We can also distinguish such types of social behavior as desire for communication with other people and its opposite - avoidance of people. A separate form can be called desire for power And desire to maintain power, if a person already has it. The opposite of the last two is desire for obedience.

Another form of social behavior that scientists have noticed is confident behavior when a person is confident in himself, strives for new achievements, sets new tasks for himself, solves them, etc.

However, quite often you can see how capable people who want to achieve success and have the ability to do so, fail due to lack of confidence and in cases where they should not have shown it. This behavior is called helpless behavior, and is defined as behavior in which a person, having everything he needs to achieve success, remains inactive, thereby dooming himself to failure.

Conclusion

IN Lately Sociologists' attention is drawn precisely to those types of social behavior that have greatest influence on the state of society, the position of the individual and his fate.

These can be considered all kinds of manifestations of good and evil, friendliness or hostility, the desire for success and power, confidence or helplessness. Among the manifestations of good and evil, much attention is paid to altruism and prosocial behavior.

And as for antisocial behavior, then among its forms manifestations of aggression are especially studied. It is also interesting that aggression and aggressive behavior have become of interest to scientists for the reason that hostile behavioral forms and hostility between people have generally existed for many centuries, and for some researchers aggression is a form of social behavior that cannot be eliminated from the life of society.

NOTE: How a person behaves and what form of social behavior is most comfortable and acceptable for him is greatly influenced by his stable traits. But the more important thing is that knowing about them, a person gets the opportunity to adjust his course of action, as well as understand what his advantages and disadvantages are. And if you are reading this article, then it is likely that you yourself are interested in such questions, albeit not with the goal of changing yourself, but with the goal of... So we suggest you go through our special course on self-knowledge, which will tell you a lot of interesting things about yourself. You can find it here.

100 RUR bonus for first order

Select type of work Thesis Course work Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test Monograph Problem Solving Business Plan Answers to Questions Creative work Essay Drawing Essays Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Master's thesis Laboratory work Online help

Find out the price

Social behavior - behavior expressed in the totality of actions and actions of an individual or group in society and depending on socio-economic factors and prevailing norms

Social behavior - This qualitative characteristics of social action and interaction.

For example, 450 deputies simultaneously participate in the work of the State Duma, i.e. political activity. However, the behavior of these political subjects is ambiguous: some are dozing in their parliamentary chairs, others are shouting something from their seats, others are rushing to the microphone installed on the podium, and others are starting a fight with their colleagues.

Participants in mass events also behave differently. Thus, some demonstrators peacefully march along the declared route, others seek to organize unrest, and others provoke bloody clashes. All these differences in the actions of subjects of social interaction fall within the definition "social behavior". In other words, all the described actors are engaged in political activity or participate in a mass event, but their behavior is different.

Hence, social behavior- This way of manifestation a social actor of his preferences, motives, attitudes, opportunities and abilities in social action or interaction.

Social behavior of the individual (groups) may depend on many factors.

Let's list some of them:

. individual emotional and psychological qualities of the subject social interaction. For example, the behavior of V.V. Zhirinovsky is characterized by emotional intensity, unpredictability, shockingness; V.V. Putin - prudence, balance in words and actions, external calm;

. personal (group) interest of the subject in current events. For example, a deputy intensively lobbies for a bill that interests him, although he is quite passive when discussing other issues;

. adaptive behavior , that is, behavior associated with the need to adapt to the objective conditions of life. For example, it is difficult to imagine a daredevil who, in a crowd glorifying a political leader (Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong), would shout slogans denouncing this leader;

. situational behavior , i.e., behavior determined by the actual conditions that have arisen, when social subject in his actions he is forced to take into account the situation that has arisen;

Behavior caused moral principles and moral values actor. For example, J. Bruno and many other great thinkers could not give up their principles and became victims of the Inquisition;

. competence actor in a particular political situation or political action. The essence of “competence” is how well the subject controls the situation, understands the essence of what is happening, knows the “rules of the game” and is able to use them adequately;

. behavior caused by various types of manipulation . For example, through lies, deception, and populist promises, people are forced to behave in one way or another. Thus, a presidential candidate (governors, deputies) in his election program promises, if elected, to fulfill certain orders of his voters, but, having become president, he does not even think of fulfilling his promise;

. coercion to a certain type of behavior. Such methods of influencing behavior are usually characteristic of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. For example, under the communist regime in the USSR, people were forced to participate in mass political actions (subbotniks, rallies, elections, demonstrations) and at the same time behave in a certain way.

On the nature of behavior motivation and degree of involvement influence actor in a particular event or process. For example, for some, participation in political events is random episode, For others - policy is profession, for the third - calling and meaning of life, for the fourth - way to earn a living.

Mass behavior can be due to the socio-psychological properties of the crowd when individual motivation is suppressed and dissolves in the not entirely conscious (sometimes spontaneous) actions of the crowd.

You can select four levels of social behavior subject:

1) the subject's reaction to the current situation , on certain specific and rapidly changing influences external environment(events). These are behavioral acts;

2) habitual actions or actions , acting as elements of behavior, as its purposeful acts, which express the subject’s stable attitude towards other subjects.

Action is a process subordinated to the idea of the result that should be achieved, that is, a process subordinated to a conscious goal. Or, in other words, an act is an action that is perceived and recognized by the acting subject himself as a social act, as a manifestation of the subject, which expresses a person’s attitude towards other people. An act is a socially significant unit of behavior that allows one to establish correspondence between social situation and the social need of the subject;

3) goal-oriented sequence social actions and actions in one or another sphere of life, where a person pursues significantly more distant goals, the achievement of which is ensured by a system of actions (for example, entering a university, obtaining a profession, creating and settling a family, etc.);

4) implementation of strategic life goals .

The third and fourth levels of individual behavior are of greatest importance for sociology. The fourth level of individual behavior is of paramount importance for sociology, since it is associated with the process of realizing a goal that is vital for the individual - transforming the ideal into the real.

Types of social behavior: n moderate (intentional) behavior (carried out on purpose) and unintentional (carried out randomly, without a head).

Basic types of social behavior:

Appropriate and inappropriate behavior

Right and wrong

Syntonic and conflict behavior.

Appropriate behavior- meets the requirements of the situation and people's expectations.

Inappropriate social behavior behavior of a teenager that violates accepted social norms among people. This is, for example, rudeness, negligence, unnecessaryness, irresponsibility, refusal to fulfill one’s direct duties.

Correct behavior- behavior that meets the expectations of others (adequate behavior) and is directed towards a person’s desired goal.

Misbehavior- behavior directed away from the desired goal.

Syntonic behavior- behavior that creates harmony between people. This is usually behavior that respects the interests and needs of the person, behavior that is attentive and warm.

Conflict behavior- behavior that gives rise to conflicts. Usually this is behavior that, without sufficient reason, goes against the needs of the partner or people around him.

Forms of human social behavior

Human Behavior Concepts

Forms of human social behavior

Human Behavior Concepts

Practice kit

Mass behavior

Group behavior

Sex role behavior

Prosocial behavior

Competitive Behavior

Obedient Behavior

Deviant behavior

Illegal behavior

Problem behavior

Attachment behavior

Maternal behavior

Other forms of social behavior

Conclusion

Read also