Pages Navigation Menu

ISSN 2227-6017 (ONLINE), ISSN 2303-9868 (PRINT), DOI: 10.18454/IRJ.2227-6017
ПИ № ФС 77 - 51217, 16+

Пред-печатная версия
() Искать в Google Scholar
Цитировать

Цитировать

Электронная ссылка | Печатная ссылка

Скопируйте отформатированную библиографическую ссылку через буфер обмена или перейдите по одной из ссылок для импорта в Менеджер библиографий.
Пьянов А. И. РОЛЬ ДУХОВНЫХ ЦЕННОСТЕЙ В УКРЕПЛЕНИИ ИНСТИТУЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ СТАБИЛЬНОСТИ СЕМЬИ / А. И. Пьянов // Международный научно-исследовательский журнал. — 2020. — №. — С. . — URL: https://research-journal.org/social/role-of-spiritual-values-in-strengthening-of-institutional-stability-of-the-family/ (дата обращения: 30.10.2020. ).

Импортировать


РОЛЬ ДУХОВНЫХ ЦЕННОСТЕЙ В УКРЕПЛЕНИИ ИНСТИТУЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ СТАБИЛЬНОСТИ СЕМЬИ

Пьянов А. И.

Доцент, кандидат социологических наук, Северо-Кавказский федеральный университет

РОЛЬ ДУХОВНЫХ ЦЕННОСТЕЙ В УКРЕПЛЕНИИ ИНСТИТУЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ СТАБИЛЬНОСТИ СЕМЬИ

Аннотация

В статье рассматриваются проблемы влияния ценностных ориентаций на процессы внутренней интеграции и дезинтеграции семьи. На основе проведенных  исследований обосновывается роль духовных ценностей как фактора укрепления институциональной стабильности семьи. Данное исследование может найти практическое применение в сфере семейной политики и социальной работы с семьей.

Ключевые слова: ценностные ориентации, семья, интеграция, дезинтеграция, духовные ценности.

P´yanov A. I.

Associate Professor, PhD in Sociology, North Caucasus Federal University

ROLE OF SPIRITUAL VALUES IN STRENGTHENING OF INSTITUTIONAL STABILITY OF THE FAMILY

Abstract

The article deals with the problem of the influence of value orientations on the internal processes of integration and disintegration of the family. On the basis of the research substantiates the role of spiritual values as a factor strengthening the institutional stability of the family. This study may find practical application in the field of family policy and social work with the family.

Keywords: value orientations, a family, institutional, integration, decomposition, spiritual values.

Changing social system plunged Russian society into a transitive state, led to a reassessment of values, breaking stereotypes, devastating demographic changes. Major social link which undergoes severe trials, the fundamental and integrative unit of society is a family. The institution of the family was the main object of social risks.

Today, the main condition for the survival of Russian society is to strengthen the institutional stability of the family. Now concerning a family in a society there is a paradoxical situation. On the one hand, the results of numerous studies suggest that the family is one of the most important values in life of modern Russians [6, 9, 10]. On the other hand, the family is one of the most disadvantaged, crisis spheres of society. This is manifested in disruption of societal functions of the family, the instability of marriages, nuclearization of the family structure and small families [2, 3]. Constantly increasing number of men and women of middle age, who could marry, but are not able to find a life partner according to their expectations [3, 16]. Approximately a fifth of today’s teenagers are in constant conflict with his parents, and the number of conflicts increases as you move from the younger teen to youthful age [7].

However, the problems of the current state of the family as a social institution, a small social groups and specific socio-psychological community in Russia could be are endless. This is largely due to changes in the value orientations of the modern family. Values are generalized representations of the people about the goals and norms of their behavior, embodying the historical experience of mankind, and concentrated expressing the sense of culture of each ethnic group. It exists in the mind of every person benchmarks with which individuals and social groups to coordinate their actions [1]. On the basis of these value orientations are added specific sociocultural types of marital and family behavior.

Value orientations of modern spouses have changed a lot compared to the past. If a century ago in marriage present concepts of morality, the idea of social equity, debt (frequently mentioned in the sources), the current family more concerned about issues of equitable distribution of measures of participation of both spouses in resolving domestic and educational problems, dissatisfaction in the sexual sphere [2, 4, 16].

Representatives of the concept of “family crisis” in Russian sociology see its cause in the fact that most people nowadays want to satisfy their spiritual needs (the desire for actualization of the “I” of self-development and self-improvement) is not within the family and outside it [2, 9]. If we follow this logic, then the wife of disadvantaged families should achieve great success in the field-family to meet there needs to self-actualization and self-development. But studies show that in most dysfunctional families do not. Data obtained A. Elizarov indicates that they themselves need for self-actualization and self-development among members of disadvantaged families are not developed or are in their infancy. Hence it is logical to associate family welfare with high significance in the spiritual life of the family value orientations and marital trouble with their low significance [6, 7].

Value orientations arise whenever the “meeting” a certain level of needs and situations of a certain level of their satisfaction. Therefore, determining the basis for the classification of value orientations, it is reasonable to proceed from a particular classification of human needs. V. Jadov, based on the classification requirements, the proposed G. Diligensky, emphasizes that with a social group or that person is most identifies its existence. In the first place there is the identification of the needs of the “I”, then go to the nearest needs of a family environment, then the needs of the numerous contact groups and collectives (respectively different areas of production and non-productive activities) and, finally, the needs of an integrated social system (for example, humanity as a whole) . Personality development V. Jadov identifies it with the passage of the chain, whereby the needs of the human “I” all the more enriched [12].

From the perspective of this paradigm, values associated with involvement in the world of work, are the competing value orientations associated with involvement in family and household, recreational and leisure activity. It goes without turns out that “family and household activity@ clearly identified with “activities for the consumption of material and spiritual wealth”, and the production of both driven out of the family. This does not correspond to defend our views on the family, as an active subject of production, if not material, the spiritual blessings. Closest to our understanding of the classification of basic human needs, proposed P. Simonov [13]. Proceeding from it, can be divided into three groups of values, which are based on:

1) vital needs – food, water, sleep, protection from negative external factors, and so.. In this case, the values are a set of “material quasi needs” clothing, housing, service technician, and so on;

2) affiliative needs – membership of a particular social group and the desire to take some (not necessarily the leader) place in it, use the affection and attention of others, be the object of their respect and love;

3) spiritual needs – knowledge of the world and their place in it, meaning and purpose of their existence, the desire for self-development and self-improvement, and altruism.

This classification is most approximates the results obtained in the study of disintegrating families. It also corresponds to the tradition of separation of human values prevailing in the history of European and Russian culture [17].

In our study of the role of spiritual values in strengthening the institutional stability of the family as one of its aspects, addressed the issue of how parents from disadvantaged, conflict families substantiate their claims in relation to a child, from what values they thus precede. At the stage of information gathering techniques used a modified version of the ultimate meaning – the technique of limiting values Leontiev – Rozov [8, 11]. The subjects were asked to answer the question: “Why is your son (daughter) to learn?” (it is one of the most frequent demands of parents of families of conflict in relation to the child). To this the answer raised the question: “Why?” And so long as the subject could not answer anything else. This procedure was repeated three times. The resulting graph (“chain”) responses were processed by the method of content analysis. Transpired on what type of values (vital, affiliative or spiritual) relied parents, justifying the need for the child to work or study.

The data obtained in the survey of parents of conflict families with varying degrees of disintegration, compared with the data obtained in the survey of parents from safe families with a high degree of integration. For a selection of recent first surveyed 152 high school students with the help of questionnaires. For further study selected only those cases where respondents reported that their family is characterized by warm, cordial relations that kids want to be like their parents. In the next stage the parents surveyed for the presence of conflict relations with children and possible deviant behavior. Thus, it was selected 16 families with a high degree of integration and prosperity. Responses of parents of these families were compared with the responses of parents from disadvantaged families, based on the deviant behavior of the child (116 families). Table 1 show the frequency supports the parents of the two types of families to a particular type of value orientations in justifying the need for the child to study or work.

 

Table 1 – Number of references to the respective types of values in the two types of families (%)

Types of families Value orientations
Vital Spiritual Affiliative
Disadvantaged families 67 17 16
Safe families 34 44 22

 

As can be seen, the parents of the disadvantaged families are most likely to rely on the vital values (67 % of mentions). This refers primarily focus on material well-being and survival. Parents from safe families are more inclined to apply in this case to the spiritual values (44 % of mentions). In the first place – to live exciting, creative life as skills development. From this we can conclude that the disintegrated families dominate the vital value orientation, and highly integrated family – spiritual value orientation. Presented differences are statistically significant at p <0,001. Statistical significance was performed using Pearson’s chi-squared test.

It turned out that the parents of disadvantaged and from safe families are supported in their reasoning on the different types of affiliative values. For disadvantaged families is especially significant status moment which means very little to the latter. Safe families are more aimed at increasing competence in communication, especially with loved ones. However, they are more likely than the first, consider the study as a path leading to a happy family life. This, apparently, is because the effect of dominance spiritual value orientations marriage seen them primarily as a spiritual union.

There is reason to believe that the low significance of spiritual values for parents from disadvantaged families determines their inability to pass on to their children the appropriate spiritual values that could guide the behavior of children in socially approved channels. As the results of our research, for children from such families tend to the spiritual values are significant even less than for the parents. Thus children and reject the values that parents still cherish: the need to work, look in the eyes of the people “is not worse than the others”, to refrain from antisocial lifestyle. Children tend to reset themselves with these restrictions and increasingly engage in deviant behavior. Their dominant values are avoiding serious effort and search activities.

Parent-adolescent conflict, which is based on the child’s deviant behavior, appears as a factor in the development and function of the family. Function in the sense that it reveals a latent violation of family life – namely, a low degree of indirectness of life of its members with spiritual values, so that he appears. Factor in the development of the family, he gets because it can be resolved in a positive way only when the life of the parents first, and then the children (although it can be assumed, and conversely movement) begins to be determined primarily spiritual values. Hence it can be concluded that the dominant activity of the family is the preservation, development and transmission of subsequent generations is spiritual value orientations. Of course, it is possible and what the family can preserve, develop and transmit to other generations and spiritual value orientation. But in this case, the process of socialization is much more difficult: children easily reject those not positive spiritual values that parents still cherish; their behavior begins to be determined by primitive egoistic desire, and not the desire for positive values; they are easy to squander what parents managed to accumulate.

The family as a small group and a specific socio-psychological community is a place where accumulated and implemented social and educational potential. Family members are especially significant for each other, that creates a desire to see another better, to help him get better.

In principle, the spiritual value orientation must precede marriage or emerge already in the early stages of marriage. As the V. Sysoenko, after marriage should happen gradual merging of the two “I” – a husband and wife, the identification of needs, interests, desires and intentions. Best option one in which the maximum possible merger of interests and needs. A positive role in this process is played by the willingness of the spouses to openly discuss disagreements and willingness to compromise. Negative role played by the installation on the manipulation of a spouse, which implies rejection of sincerity in relations and the development of sophisticated methods of influence on it with a view to subjugate and thereby win. If for any reason the interests and desires are not common, the autonomy of the two “I” is retained, the marriage becomes conflict and instability [15].

What determines the installation spouses hindering the formation of unity in a young family? According to I. Dementieva, selfish attitudes of young spouses are associated with certain features of education in modern society. Parental care has become excessive. In the context of a relatively high level of material well-being thing of the past economic necessity of participation of children in domestic work. Parenting is not intended to instill in the child labor skills, on the contrary, there is an active search for “higher education” for children; often to the fore false prestige considerations parents. All this leads to the selfish attitudes of young people and the potential instability of their families [4].

It follows that since the marriage, he becomes a kind of socializing institution spouses. Entry into marriage implies the beginning of inner work, spiritual effort, spiritual growth. Must abandon their own selfishness as a key condition for self-development and self-improvement. If the life of the family members are increasingly mediated by spiritual values, marriage becomes steady, stable family – a highly integrated. Thus, the integration of the family depends on the role of spiritual value orientations in her life that are important factors in strengthening the institutional stability of the modern family.

Reference

  1. Andreeva G. M. Social psychology: a tutorial. – 3rd ed. – Moscow: Omega-L, 2006. – P. 188-210.
  2. Antonov A. I. Family crisis and ways to overcome / A. I. Antonov, V. A. Borisov. – Moscow, 1990. – 36 pp.
  3. Borisov V. A. Demography: textbook. – 2nd ed. – Moscow: Nota Bene, 2003. – 344 p.
  4. Dementieva I. F. The first years of marriage: the problems of establishing a young family. – Moscow: Nauka, 1991. – 111 p.
  5. Elizarov A. N. On the problem of searching the main integrating factor family // Bulletin of Moscow University. – Series 14. Psychology. – 1996. – № 1. – P. 42-49.
  6. Elizarov A. N. The role of spiritual value orientation in the process of integration of the family // Bulletin of Moscow University. – Series 14. Psychology. – 1997. – N 3. – P. 59-67.
  7. Judin A. A. Actual problems of youth socialization / A. A. Judin, D. G. Strelkov. – Nizhny Novgorod, 2003. – 46 pp.
  8. Leontiev D. A. Features semantic structure worldview in chronic alcoholism / D. A. Leontiev, V. N. Buzin // Bulletin of Moscow University. – Series 14. Psychology. – 1992. – № 3. – P. 22-30.
  9. Markovskaya N. G. Family place in the system of value orientations of the personality: the Author’s abstract of the dissertation … the candidate of sociological sciences. – Moscow, 1990. – 25 pp.
  10. Matskovsky M. S. Family values in the minds of a diverse population / M. S. Matskovsky, V. V. Bodrova // Family in view of the modern man. – Moscow, 1990. – P. 154-166.
  11. Rozov M. A. The problem of values and the development of science and values // Science and values / Ed. A. N. Kochergin. – Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2005. – P. 5-16.
  12. Self-regulation and predicting social behavior of the person / ed. by V. A. Jadov. – Leningrad: Nauka, 1979. – 264 pp.
  13. Simonov P. V. Origin spirituality / P. V. Simonov, P. M. Ershov, Yu. P. Vyazemskiy. – Moscow: Nauka, 1989 – 352 pp.
  14. Sobkin V. S. Life values and attitudes to education: cross-cultural analysis / V. S. Sobkin, P. S. Pisarsky. – Moscow, 1994. – 151 pp.
  15. Sysoenko V. A. Marital conflict. – Moscow: Mysl, 1998. – P. 34-36.
  16. Shapovalov V. F. Family and marriage in Russia // Social Sciences and Modernity. – 2007. – № 3. – P. 163-175.
  17. Shvyrkov V. B. About human values from the standpoint of system-evolutionary approach (eyes physiologists) // Psychological Journal. – 1993. – V. 14, № 6. – P. 124-137.
  18. Ellenson, A. Human relations. – New York: Prentice Hall, 1982. – 210 pp.

Оставить комментарий

Ваш e-mail не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *

Лимит времени истёк. Пожалуйста, перезагрузите CAPTCHA.