The theoretical basis for the analysis of generations’ culture is substantiated based on the methodology of the social-cultural approach. The generational culture is presented as a unity, which study, on the one hand, reveals culture as a form of formation and existence of norms and rules applied by social organization of people’s life; on the other, discloses institutional and non-institutional aspects of the generational reality. The assumption is made that institutionalization, which means fixation of newly changed socio-cultural dimensions, is a process promoting the formation of aggregated generative actors, and a generational institution means the transformation of individuals’ modern practices into habits, the organizational principles of interactions, behavioural limitations and the forms of intergenerational relations.
The model of the culture of a generational unity is theoretically substantiated. The possible cultural life parameters, specific for a generation, are determined and correlated with the public, social-psychological, social-cultural foundations. The basic layer is a group of socio-cultural characteristics of a generational unity; here, subgroups of the features that are flexible to time requirements, but stable as for their manifestations in the past and modern generations are determined as well as their cultural-historical, social and cultural-figurative (ethnic) parameters. The opposite, public, parameters of generational unity features are revealed also. They determine the emotional background, the peculiarities of social space perception, typical language manifestations and external social and individual attributes of generations. The idea is argued that the analysis and determination of the formation, manifestations and realization of social-psychological characteristics of the generational unity allow us to define three groups of generational parameters, namely: (1) social-cultural parameters as the basic fundamental culture; (2) social-psychological parameters, manifested in the attitudes, representations, goals of social interactions and (3) public parameters, implementing a generation in social-cultural inter-generational interactions.
The main problematic channels of generational existence in society are outlined, these channels are understood as social-historical changes of meanings characteristic for a generation that take place under influences of external social-cultural and internal generational integrative factors. The first channel, revealing social-cultural problems of generation formation, is continuous changes in existential conditions that lead the actors to reorganize forms of their inter-generational interactions. The second public channel, through which a generation passes, is formation of cultural artefacts of the generational time and space. These cultural artefacts are interpretive embodiments in actual conditions of all-time cultural forms, and that are prerequisites for the construction of socio-cultural dimensions of the era. The third channel of possible generational social-cultural problems means stable and newly formed ideas about effective forms of intercultural interactions, which objective formation is conditioned by the natural processes of tradition preservation and updating according to the requirements of time.
During the further research, the above views for research on the culture of a generational unity within the social-cultural approach will be verified as for their content as well as beyond the limits of the psychology of social-cultural interactions.
Reznik Yu. M. (2008). Sotsiokulturnyiy podhod kak metodologiya issledovaniy otechestvennyie issledovaniya [Socio-cultural approach as a research methodology domestic research] Voprosyi sotsialnoy teorii.. Tom II. Vyip. 1(2), str. 305-328. [in Russian].
Giddens Е. (1989). Sociology. Oxford,. P. 381. Po stat'e K. YU. Mihaleva, N. L. Polyakova, Koncepciya social'nogo instituta v sociologicheskoj teorii [Concept of social institute in sociological theory] // Vestnik, Sociologiya i politologiya, № 2, ser. 18, s. 117–132, 2012. [in Russian].
Giddens E. (1994). Sociologiya, Sociol. Issledovaniya, № 2, s. 129–138, Dostupno : http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/540/189/1217/020_Giddens.pdf [in English]
Parsons T. , Social'nye sistemy [Social systems], Voprosy social'noj teorii, t. II, vyp. 1(2), s. 38–71, 2008. [in Russian]
Bahtin M. M. Formyi vremeni i hronotopa v romane "Ocherki po istoricheskoy poetike". Gl. X. Zaklyuchitelnyie zamechaniya [Forms of time and chronotope in the novel "Essays on historical poetics." Ch. X. Concluding remarks]. http://www.infoliolib.info/philol/bahtin/hronotop10.html [in Russian]
Krasnoglazov A. B. (1995). Funktsionirovanie artefakta v kulturno-semantich. prostranstve. [The functioning of the artifact in the cultural-semantic. space]. Avtoref. dis. d-ra nauk. M., 1995; FlierA.Ya. Kulturogenez. M. https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_culture/216/%D0%90%D0%A0%D0%A2%D0%95%D0%A4%D0%90%D0%9A%D0%A2 [in Russian]
Sheyn E. X. (2002). Organizatsionnaya kultura i liderstvo [Organizational Culture and Leadership]/ Per. s angl. pod red. V. A. Spivaka. SPb: Piter, 336 s: str. 100. [in Russian]
Salk J. E. International Shared Management Joint Venture Teams: Their Development Patterns, Challenges, and Possibilities.* Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1992. [in English]
Kolesin I. D. (1999). Podhodyi k izucheniyu sotsiokulturnyih protsessov [Approaches to the study of socio-cultural processes] // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. # 1., s. 132. [in Russian]
Bock Ph. K. (Ed.). (1970). Culture Shock. A Reader in Modern Cultural Anthropology. - N.Y.. [in English]
Berger P. L. (2004). Kulturnaya dinamika globalizatsii [Cultural dynamics of globalization]. Многоликая глобализация: Культурное разнообразие в современном мире / Под ред. П.Бергера и С. Хантингтона: Пер. с англ. М. [in Russian]
Giddens A. (2004). Uskolzayuschiy mir: kak globalizatsiya izmenyaet nashu zhizn [Escaping the world. How globalization is changing our lives.]. M.: Izdatelstvo «Ves Mir». 120 s. [in Russian]
Astafeva O. N., Avanesova G.A. (2003). Vzaimodeystvie kultur [Cultural interaction]. Globalistika: Entsiklopediya. Gl. red. i sostav. I.I. Mazur i A.N. Chumakov; TsNPP «Dialog». M. [in Russian]
Hall S. (1992). The question of cultural identity’ in Hall, S.et. al. (ed), Modernity and its Future. Cambridge. [in English]
Parsons T. Ponyatie obschestva: komponentyi i ih vzaimootnosheniya [The concept of society: components and their relationships]. THESIS. 1993. T. 1, vyip. 2. str. 94 -122 https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kontseptsiya-t-parsonsa-kak-instrument-teoreticheskogo-analiza-sotsialnogo-vzaimodeystviya-v-sisteme-upravleniya-kadrami-organizatsiy [in Russian]
Veber M. (1990). Izbrannyie proizvedeniya [Selected Works]. Pod red. Yu.Davyidova. M., 1990. [in Russian]
Sorokin P. A. Chelovek. Tsivilizatsiya. Obschestvo [Man. Civilization. Society]. http://www.socd.univ.kiev.ua/sites/default/files/library/elclosed/sorokin.pdf
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles in the Psychological Journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License International CC-BY that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. For more detailed information, please, fallow the link - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/