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.

If we abstract from purely psychological factors and think at the social level, then an individual’s behavior 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 innate and acquired psychological individual characteristics.

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

A social norm of behavior 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 he

individual - to 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 a 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 role conflict, which arises when the role expectations of the statuses occupied by the 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 psychological aspects were really overlooked by the role interpretation of behavior follows from the fact that N. Cameron tried to substantiate the idea of role determination of mental disorders, believing that mental illness is the incorrect performance of one’s social roles and the result of the patient’s inability to perform them as well as possible. society needs. Behaviorists argued that in the time of E. Durkheim, the successes of psychology were insignificant and therefore the functionalist 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.

13.1. 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 big influence on sociology and social psychology, we should mention, first of all, the psychoanalytic directions developed by 3. Freud, K.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. Highest level constitutes 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 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.

KG concept. 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 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 archetypal narratives constantly remind members of society of these ideal models behavior.

Adler's psychoanalytic concept is based on the 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.

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 position - a representative of neo-Freudianism in psychology and the Frankfurt school in sociology - can more accurately be defined as Freudo-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 more of a 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 Freudo-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 by it a 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 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 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 living reality of such universality. This is nothing more than the practical implementation of humanism." The process of de-repression - 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. Homane), which considers behavior as a system of reactions to various stimuli.

Skinner's concept is essentially biologizing, since it completely eliminates the differences between human and animal behavior. 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 being, all inner life which 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. Homane.

The concept of J. and J. 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 a person is full, it is not a reinforcer.

The effectiveness of reward depends on the degree of deprivation in a given individual. Deprivation refers to 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 anything 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 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 do this.

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. Unambiguity 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 last decade the receipt took on the same probabilistic nature wages grew up on some

Russian enterprises, but nevertheless people continue to go to work, hoping to get it.

Homans' behaviorist concept of exchange appeared in the mid-20th century. Arguing with representatives of many areas of sociology, Khomane 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. Homane 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. Homane believes that social behavior can be interpreted using Skinner's behavioral paradigm, if complemented by the idea of the reciprocal 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.

Homane briefly formulated the theory of exchange 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 was 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 value

of the rewarded action and contributes to its more likely reproduction.

The most important concepts of exchange theory are: the cost of behavior - 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 appears 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, P. 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, formed between them social connections tend to decay. 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. Last way 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 the

opposition groups. 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 based on interpersonal relationships;

universalist values, which act as a yardstick for assessing individual merits;

oppositional values - ideas about the need for social change, allowing 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 reviews 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.

P. Zingelman also attempted to synthesize exchange theory with symbolic interactionism. 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.

QUESTIONS AND TASKS

1. What is the difference between the content of the concepts “social action” and “social behavior”?

2. Do you think representatives of social behaviorism are right or wrong that human behavior in society can be controlled? Should society control the behavior of its members? Does it have the right to do this? Justify your answer.

3. What is a taboo? Is it taboo, say, to prohibit outsiders from entering the territory of a military unit? Justify your answer.

4. How do you feel about social prohibitions? Should there be any prohibitions in an ideal society or is it better to abolish them altogether?

5. Give your assessment of the fact that same-sex sex is legalized in some Western countries. marriage unions. Is this a progressive step? Give reasons for your answer.

6. What, in your opinion, causes aggressive social behavior, for example, extremism of various directions?

ABSTRACT TOPICS

1. Psychoanalytic directions in the study of social behavior.

2. 3. Freud and his teaching about human behavior.

3. Collective unconscious and social behavior in the teachings of K. Jung.

4. Behaviorist concepts in sociology.

5. Social behavior within the framework of exchange theory.

6. Study of social behavior within the framework of the theory of symbolic interactionism.

Introduction

The definition of the term “behavior” was given by psychology, and sociology, as a science related to psychology, adopted this term. The very concept of “behavior” has a meaning in sociology that is different from the meaning of such traditional philosophical concepts as action and activity. Behavior is an individual's reaction to external and internal changes, while action is a rationally based and purposeful act.

Sociology is the study of society, therefore sociology studies social behavior (the interaction between several individuals).

The topic of human behavior always remains very relevant, because for the development and formation of society as a whole it is very important to know (or at least assume) and understand how this or that person will behave in a certain situation. A person’s behavior can be predicted if one knows his psychology and understands his social values and attitudes. Depending on the psychology of people, they are divided into Various types behavior, which will be discussed in this work.

The main purpose of the essay is to study the typology of personal behavior from the point of view of sociology.

To achieve this goal, the abstract solves a number of problems, namely:

1. The concept of behavior and its forms is considered;

2. The basic concepts of behavior proposed by famous psychologists and sociologists are studied;

3. The most popular typology of personal behavior proposed by the popular sociologist of the twentieth century Robert Merton is considered.

Behavior in sociology. Concept and forms

The concept of behavior in sociology

behavior sociological merton

The term “behavior” from the point of view of sociology is a set of human behavioral processes that are associated with the satisfaction of physical and social needs and arise as a reaction to the surrounding social environment.

The subject of social behavior in sociology is an individual or a group.

First of all, a person’s behavior is determined by his socialization - the assimilation of social norms necessary for functioning in society. So, if the innate instincts of all people are almost identical, then the qualities of a person acquired in the process of socialization and the very level of socialization of each person are different. In addition, the social behavior of an individual is strictly regulated social norms and the role structure of society.

A social norm of behavior is behavior that fully corresponds to status expectations. Status expectations allow society to predict the actions of an individual, and the individual himself to coordinate his behavior in accordance with socially accepted behavioral models. A social role, according to the American sociologist R. Linton, is social behavior that corresponds to status expectations. This understanding of social behavior corresponds to the functionalist approach, since in this case behavior is determined by social structure.

In contrast to the functionalists are representatives of social behaviorism, according to whom the study of behavioral processes must be carried out on the basis of the achievements of modern psychology, and in the role interpretation of behavior, psychological aspects are overlooked.

Forms of behavior in sociology

Social behavior is the form and method of manifestation by an individual or group of their preferences and attitudes, capabilities and abilities in social action or interaction.

There are two types of social behavior that a person uses to achieve life goals:

1) natural behavior;

2) ritual behavior.

The types of social behavior listed above differ significantly from each other.

“Natural” behavior” is individually meaningful and self-centered behavior that is aimed at achieving individual goals and corresponds to these goals. For natural behavior there is specific goal, which an individual achieves by any means available means. Natural behavior is not regulated by social norms; it is natural in nature and is aimed at meeting organic needs. Natural behavior in society is “forbidden”, so it is always based on social conventions and mutual concessions on the part of all individuals.

Ritual or “ceremonial” behavior is individually unnatural behavior through which society exists and reproduces. Ritual has many forms - from etiquette to ceremony. Ritual is an integral part of social life, so familiar that people live in the field of ritual interactions and do not notice it. Ritual social behavior ensures the stability of society as a social system, and the individual who implements various shapes such behavior ensures social stability social structures and interactions.

The ritual nature of individual behavior is of great importance for society, but it must be taken into account that there is “natural” egocentric social behavior, which in most cases is more beneficial for the individual. In this regard, society seeks to transform forms of “natural” social behavior into various forms of ritual social behavior, including through socialization mechanisms using social support, control and punishment.

To preserve and maintain public relations and for the survival of man as a species, the following forms of social behavior:

1) cooperative behavior, which consists of mutual assistance to each other;

2) parental behavior- parental behavior towards offspring.

Social 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.

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 innate and acquired psychological individual characteristics.

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.

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.

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 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, so 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 (“ceremonial”)- 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.

To preserve and maintain social relations and ultimately to the survival of man 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 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, one should mention, first of all, the psychoanalytic directions developed by Z. Freud, C. G. Jung, A. Adler.

7. Molchanov S.V. Peculiarities of value orientations of the individual in adolescence and adolescence // Psychological Science and education. -2005.-No.3.-S. 16-25.

8. Sergeeva T.B. Values of education and upbringing in the context of the theory of sociocultural dynamics. - Stavropol: Stavropolservisshko-la, 2000.-287 p.

S.A. Mitryushin

THE CONCEPT OF “SOCIAL BEHAVIOR”

IN SOCIOLOGICAL SCIENCE

Preamble. The article is devoted to the problem of social behavior considered within the framework of sociological science. The article analyzes different approaches to the study and definition of the concept of “social behavior”.

The relevance of the theoretical understanding of social behavior is determined by the increase in the scientific literature of studies according to the anthropocentric paradigm social cognition and management. The tendency to consider certain management problems in connection with the uniqueness and inimitability of the human personality, as well as an appeal to the reasons for its actions and deeds, is becoming increasingly noticeable in the works of scientists. Special attention attract questions related to the study of the processes of self-organization, self-determination of a person in the sphere of his social practice according to his life meanings. These management studies require further in-depth understanding.

The study of social behavior is also necessary for assessing the characteristics of life modern man, his personal status, as well as the conditions for the formation of the activity of each person as a real subject of social interaction, which is important, since the life of society as a whole can both combine and conflict with passivity specific people, the infantilism of their behavior. This aspect of the study of social behavior involves studying the issue of harmony and disharmony in the relationship between the individual and society.

So, the need to study social

Personal behavior is determined by the needs of development of both sociological knowledge and management science, their integration, on the basis of which their mutual enrichment and resolution of issues of the social future of man and society are possible. Understanding the social behavior of an individual allows us to determine the tasks and means of social management to solve current problems, both management theory and the development of society as a whole.

It should be noted that in the scientific literature there is no single point of view on the concept of social behavior. The starting point for understanding any human enterprise is the concept of social action. Let's look at its definition. Psychologists understand action as a specific act of activity of a social subject localized in space and time to transform a social situation in accordance with its needs and goals and implemented through changes in behavior, attitudes, aspirations of other individuals or communities.

Social sciencies study personal behavior insofar as individuals attach a certain meaning to their actions. Social action is the simplest unit social activities, a concept introduced into scientific circulation by M. Weber to denote the action of an individual consciously oriented towards the past

©S.A. Mitryushin, 2008

neck, present or future behavior of other people, and by “others” we mean both individual persons - acquaintances or strangers, and an indefinite number of complete strangers.

“Action,” writes M. Weber, “is called human behavior in the event and insofar as the acting individual or acting individuals associate a subjective meaning with it.”

In the sociology of the Soviet period, the following researchers devoted their works to the problem of social behavior: I.O. Kon, Yu.A. Levada, V.B. Olshansky, M.I. Bobneva, V.A. Yadov, E.M.-Penkov, N.F. Naumova, L.A. Gordon, E.V. Klopov, A.M. Katsva, E.V. Shorokhova and many others.

IN last years social behavior of individuals social groups has become a topic of research for young scientists. Among them A.G. Velyp., V.G. Vyacheslavov, Yu.V. Zagorulko, G.I. Zimirev,

N.F. Kuzmenko, V.I. Selyanin, V.Ya. Turyansky and others.

Analyzing modern sociological literature in the area of interest to us, we came to the conclusion that the concept of social behavior, which began to take shape in the twenties, by the fifties and sixties of the last century had emerged as an empirical direction in sociology, considering social behavior as a special kind of social phenomenon.

A number of scientists consider social behavior to mean a certain aspect of the activity and interaction of individuals and social groups. Each person, due to his individual properties and characteristics, becomes an independent subject of activity, the sphere of activity of which is socially conditioned. Consequently, human behavior is only a form of his activity, its outer side.

There are several classes of social theories that explain the specifics of action: using the category “system”, the needs of the social system, the needs of individuals. Action is considered according to the tradition of scientific rationality in terms of its technique, structure, etc.

So, for example, N.F. Naumova defines social behavior as a special system with unique potential and flexibility, including qualitatively different me-

mechanisms and very different in controllability. She gives following definition social behavior: “This is an activity that involves some personally significant social results, social reward (in in a broad sense this word). This reward can be “good” (knowledge, information, comfort, respect, fame, power, money), but it is necessarily social in its result; it is always social attitude, direct or indirect social interaction, since the individual deals not only with the social subjects he needs - other people, groups, organizations, institutions - “producing” and constituting these benefits.”

In our opinion, a systemic definition of behavior can only be used as an instrumental one when studying human interaction. It should be borne in mind that the action has a functional meaning, and therefore it is unlawful to define the elements of the system by their functions, especially when we're talking about about society. In order to understand social processes, the focus should not be on the actions themselves (or their systems), but on the person behaving in one way or another.

We consider the opinion of E.V. to be more accurate. Shorokhova and M.I. Bobneva, who argue that social behavior is a multidimensional process, because it takes place in a complex social environment and is determined by the action of numerous factors.

And we fully share the point of view of T.I.-Zaslavskaya that “behavior is a set of actions and actions that reflect the internal attitude of people to the conditions, content and results of activity. Behavior is always regulated by a more or less conscious goal and presupposes a certain freedom of choice of actions and actions from a variety of possible ones...”

Scientists focus their attention on the study of external and internal determinants of behavior. In general, the scheme for a deterministic explanation of human behavior can be presented as follows. There is an individual, he has a certain set of mental and social qualities that determine his individual actions and actions. Explanation of behavior

Vestnik KRU im. ON THE. Nekrasova ♦ 2008, volume 14

The situation goes from the past to the present, because information about a person is obtained from his biography. This corresponds to the very structure of cause-and-effect relationships.

The legitimacy of this research design is beyond doubt. It is applicable to explain human actions typical of a particular social environment. When a person behaves in an antisocial way, for example, we can try to explain it with logical and psychological reasons and, based on our knowledge of cause-and-effect relationships, influence a person. Thus, this person becomes an object of control for us and we “manage” this person thanks to our understanding of the reasons for his behavior. But one cannot completely agree with such logic.

To explain social behavior, a different model of explanation is needed, one that considers a person not as an object, but as a subject, as unique personality in the unity of her biological, social, spiritual qualities, responsible for her behavior. This involves discovering the personal basis that a person has for his behavior in the social world.

M. Weber pointed out that in addition to the method of causal explanation of social phenomena there should be a method for identifying the subjective intentions of the individual. He considered it necessary to take into account specific historical motives of human behavior when studying social behavior. “A motive,” wrote M. Weber, “is a certain semantic unity that appears acting person or to the observer a sufficient reason for a certain action." In this context, motivation is the meaning that a person gives to his actions and which is formed as an awareness of goals, means, and tactics for achieving them.

The approach to the study of social behavior in the aspect of subjective meaning is insufficient to understand the essence of the phenomenon under consideration. Because meaning as a person’s subjective representation is not always adequate to the true, inner meaning of the action itself. M. Weber himself pointed out that clarity of self-awareness, meaningfulness, and motivation of behavior are constantly under threat. They are threatened by the force of habit and outbursts of rage, the ordinary, brought to the point of automatism, and the extraordinary.

something that radically disrupts the course of things.

When studying behavior, one should take into account the fact that sometimes the individual “does not want” to understand true meaning of his behavior, hides it from himself, resorts to the defense mechanism of rationalization. For example, a father who cruelly punishes a child attributes an educational meaning to his actions and does not recognize violence. In other words, human consciousness deals with meanings, the content of which is not always transparent to the acting subject.

Ambiguity semantic sphere behavior can also be explained by the fact of the discrepancy between a person’s intention and the result of his action. Human behavior is influenced by both conscious and unconscious motives, which are often in contradictory relationships with each other.

To understand social behavior, it is important to identify not the subjective meaning, but the essence of social behavior itself. Contributing to the solution of this problem is a socio-philosophical analysis of the content-semantic sphere of the social development of the individual, which involves understanding the reasons for the actions and deeds of the individual. This approach differs from the traditional explanation of social behavior according to cause-and-effect logic.

Based on our own practical experience and analysis of the works of Western and Russian sociologists studying the behavior of individual professional groups and individuals, we formulated the most general concept social behavior, which has been defined as active form transformation of the social environment, as a conscious, motivated action of individuals or social groups that arises to satisfy certain needs and achieve a set goal.

Bibliography

1. Weber M. Selected works. - M., 1998.

2. Zaslavskaya T. I. Societal transformation Russian society: Activity-structural concept. - M, 2002.

3. Naumova I. F. Sociological and psychological aspects of purposeful behavior. - M, 1988.

Pedagogy. Psychology. Social work. Juvenology Sociokinetics, No. 1, 2008

4. Psychology. Dictionary / General ed. A.V.Petrovsky, M.G. Yaroshevsky. - M., 1990.

5. Self-regulation and prediction of social behavior of the individual./ Ed. V. A. Yado-

6. Shorokhova E. V., Bobneva M. I. Psychological mechanisms regulation of social behavior. - M., 1979.

E.V. Borovskaya

LIFESTYLE OF A SCHOOL-AGE CHILD AS A CONDITION FOR DEVELOPMENT AND FORMATION OF HIS PERSONALITY

Preamble. A child’s lifestyle is a condition for the development of his personality. To manage this process, you need to know what this phenomenon is, what its structure and functions are.

The formation of a person’s personality is determined not only by his activity, but also by his entire way of life. To manage the process of development and formation of a child’s personality, the teacher needs to competently adjust his lifestyle. To do this, it is important to have an idea about it.

In the context of our understanding of lifestyle, one of the first in pedagogy of the second half of the 20th century was Academician L.I. Novikova, who considered the lifestyle of the collective as the core of the educational system. A significant contribution to the study of lifestyle was made by representatives of the scientific school L.I. Novikova. A, B. Mudrik considered lifestyle as the life activity of adolescents. Yu.S. Manuilov showed a person’s way of life as a “way of being in co-existence.” An important technological role for the development of personality is given to lifestyle in the dissertation research of V.Ya. Baryshnikova, R.A. Kassina, E.V. Orlova, G.G. Sheka.

In the concept of the environmental approach to education, Yu.S. Manuylov, the analyzed concept is assigned the role liaison between the child’s personality and the environment of his existence. The environment becomes a means of personality development if it mediates a certain way of life for the child, the characteristics of which are taken into account by teachers.

There is reason to believe that lifestyle

acts as a more capacious category than a simple aggregate certain forms the existence of people represented in behavior, activity, communication and expression of attitudes towards something. Unlike situational human activity, lifestyle is stable and not easy to change.

For a child, his own way of life is most often perceived as life itself, syncretistic with the environment, while for an expert, life is more multifaceted than ideas about it, it is diverse.

Traditionally, the way of life was viewed through a successive change of forms of existence, which are repeated day after day in a person’s life. It is by the external visible form that we most often judge what a schoolchild is doing at one time or another. Forms of existence reveal themselves to our eyes various types child's activities. Activities include studying, certain types of work, playing, communicating, reading, collecting, self-care, as well as sports, music, etc. The form in which the child’s activities are presented is only a necessary shell, a frame for various combinations of ways of being. Quite often, a student lives a life that is visible to an outsider in a rather monotonous way. For example, a schoolchild wakes up in the morning after a night's sleep, washes his face; After breakfast, he goes to school,

Bulletin of KSU named after. ON THE. Nekrasova ♦ 2008, volume 14

Social behavior- the totality of actions and actions of individuals and their groups, their specific direction and sequence, affecting the interests of other individuals and communities. Behavior manifests itself social qualities a person, the characteristics of his upbringing, cultural level, temperament, his needs, beliefs. It is where his attitude towards the surrounding natural and social reality, towards other people and towards himself is formed and realized. In sociology, it is customary to distinguish two forms of behavior - normative and non-normative. Social behavior is regulated by a system of rules, norms and sanctions, united by the process of social control.

Developing as a person, a person also changes the forms of his behavior. Therefore, it is an indicator of individual and personal development.

There is a wide variety of definitions this term. Thus, according to K. Levin, it is a function of the individual in relation to his social environment. M.A. Robert and F. Tilman offer a target approach in defining this concept: “an individual’s behavior is a reaction aimed at changing the situation in order to satisfy his needs.” R.N. Harré introduces a normative connotation into the interpretation of the term: “behavior is a sequence of episodes, complete fragments, regulated by certain rules and plans.” The interactionist concept characterizes social behavior as an adaptation to the conditions of the social environment. Behavior is manifested by participation in a large collective process in which a person is involved. At the same time, both the personality itself and its behavior are a product of interaction with society.

What actions of an individual can be classified as social behavior?

Any actions performed by a person can have two sides: one and the same action can be both an act and an operation. Take, for example, the process of eating food. The very sequence of actions performed in this case reflects the purely technical side of the matter. Another question is how a person does it. There is already an element of behavior here. This manifests itself mainly when other persons are involved in the process. Even simple automatic actions under these conditions become socially oriented.

The purpose of most everyday actions performed by a person is to satisfy simple physiological needs. EAT. Penkov distinguishes three types of individual actions:

a) actions-operations;
b) purely individual actions, not socially oriented;
c) social behavior itself, that is, a system of actions - actions regulated by a system of social norms. Social behavior is considered by the author as “such an action - an act that contains the moment of the individual’s relationship to the interests of the community.” Indeed, a person does not dare to carry out some actions at all if someone is nearby (for example, undressing or picking his nose). The mere presence of other persons, therefore, significantly changes the nature of a person's actions, turning them into social behavior.

According to V. Vichev, social behavior in general is a network of actions that differ from ordinary actions not only by orientation towards other persons, but also by the presence of subjective factors, or motives, at its basis. In this case, the motive is considered as perceived need, as goal setting and selection of appropriate tactics for future action. Social behavior therefore appears to be a system of motivated actions that involve not just the satisfaction of a certain need, but also a certain moral goal, not always associated with the usefulness of the action performed for the individual himself.

Of course, there is a difference between the behavior of an individual in small and in large groups.

However, in both cases, the actions performed by the individual depend on the expected reactions. In addition, each element of behavior is individual and unique.

Behavior is characterized social competence which demonstrates how well the subject controls the situation, understands the essence of what is happening, knows the “rules of the game,” feels social differences, distances, and boundaries.

In the social behavior of a subject, four levels can be distinguished:

1) the subject’s reaction to the current situation or events;
2) habitual actions or actions that express the subject’s stable attitude towards other subjects;
3) a purposeful sequence of social actions and behaviors to achieve more distant goals by the subject;
4) implementation of strategic life goals.

Summarizing all of the above, we can define social behavior as a system of individually formed reactions to the influence of the surrounding social environment, which determine the method of adaptation to it. Social behavior reveals preferences, motives, attitudes, capabilities and abilities of acting (interacting) social subjects (individual and collective level).

The social behavior of an individual (group) may depend on many factors, including: the individual emotional and psychological qualities of the subject and the subject’s personal (group) interest in current events.

Main types of social behavior:

1. Adequate and inappropriate behavior. Adequate behavior - consistent with the requirements of the situation and people's expectations. As a type of social behavior, adequate behavior within oneself is divided into:
- a) conformal behavior;
- b) responsible behavior;
- c) helping behavior;
- d) correct behavior;
- e) syntonic behavior.

Types of inappropriate behavior: