THE POWER OF A SYMBOL

Main Article Content

Hanna FANDEJEVA

Abstract

The question "What is character?" has long discussed in philosophy. As a result, there are two types of concepts about character. According to one of these ideas symbol corresponds harmonious reality (positive concept). According to another the idea of a character refers to fragmented, chaotic reality (negative concept). There have been attempts to create a theory of character that would conflict of concepts.  The purpose of this work is to explore the power of a character from a philosophical point of view, to prove that the character has real power over the individual and society as a whole. Methods. This paper was used the methods of analysis and synthesis. Analysis of recent studies has shown that the psychologists and psychiatrists (Freud, Jung, Fromm) were first, who talking about power of the character. There are contemporary works that focus on particular character authorities a certain society. Some philosophers even identify the character and a power. So the question of power symbol in the philosophy remains open. Results. The symbol can be terrible destructive force. Symbols are the carrier sense dictates that history, human memory. Not every accident occurs as destruction of cultural destruction memory. The individual, attributing itself to a particular group, it selects based on their own ideas about a good and an evil, a honor and a dishonor, a fame and a shame. A symbol is a sign of solidarity with this group. The symbol may be involved in the semiotic connections: it can insult or praise. The symbolic world is protecting people from their existential fears and uncertainty. There are formed two opposing camps; each of them by protecting certain characters defends its identity. The originality of this work lies in the fact that is considered the power of a symbol as a philosophical category in her determined features of formation of the government. Conclusion. Thus it can be concluded that the symbol is two-faced Janus. One with sides, the characters appear in the capable hands as a means of manipulating the masses, and with holds that dictates standards of conduct and the impact on people's lives with different. In this case, the symbolic power is a power regulator of human behavior, character over the minds of people. The symbolic power has influence on the individual and society as a whole.

Article Details

Section
PHILOSOPHY OF CULTURE, PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

References

Sycheva, S. G (2000). The problem of character in philosophy. – Tomsk: Publishing House of Tomsk university (in Russ.)

Freud, Z. (2005). The Interpretation of Dreams. – Moscow: Eksmo; St. Petersburg: Mizhgard (in Russ.)

Jung, K. G. (1991). Archetype and Symbol. – Moscow: Renaissance (in Russ.)

Fromm, E. (2009). The Forgotten Language. Introduction to the science of understanding dreams, fairy tales and myths. – Moscow: AST (in Russ.)

Gonzalez, R. The Power of Symbols: Why People Still Defend The Confederate Flag. Retrieved from https://lockerdome.com/6292273352687937/7791563187159060

Dymerets, R (2000). Power of symbols and symbols of power in contemporary culture. Mezhdunarodnye chteniya po teorii, istorii i filosofii kul'tury (International Readings on Theory, History and Philosophy of Culture), 8. Simvoly, obrazy, stereotipy: istoricheskij i ehkzistencial'nyj opyt (Symbols, images, stereotypes: the historical and existential experience), 121-133 (in Russ.)

Lebed’ko, V (2012). Philosophy of adventure and decentration of the subject in psychotherapy and social problems of design. ChF: Socialnyj psiholog (PF: Social psychologist), 1(23) (in Russ.)

Lotman, Ju. (1996). Inside minded worlds. Man – text – semiosphere – history. – Moscow: Languages of the Russian culture (in Russ.)

Berdyaev, N. A. (1994). The philosophy of free spirit. – Moscow: Republic (in Russ.)

Cassidy, F. (2001). To the origins of Greek thought. – St. Petersburg: Aleteya(in Russ.)

Masaev, M. V. (2009). Intellectuals as a subject of symbolic power (the philosophical-historical aspect). Kul'tura narodov Prichernomor'ya (Culture of the Black Sea), 176, 220-225 (in Russ.)