Communicative activity: structural components, types, levels and forms. Communication activities: types, forms, levels. Communication channels Forms of communication activities

Forms communication activities

communication audience cooperation

Microcommunications is the participation of mass audiences (society, people, the population as a whole), who act as creators and consumers of mass information.

Mid-communication is a special communication where the roles of senders and consumers of information are targeted, usually professional social groups, and messages represent special information that is incomprehensible to non-specialists.

Microcommunications are information interactions where individuals play the role of sender and consumer of information, and information messages are reduced to live speech (oral communication channel) or personal correspondence (documentary communication).

Forms of communication activities depending on the participating subjects and their communication roles. These forms can have different content: they can serve to strengthen cooperation and consensus between communication participants, or they can express conflictual relationships, battle of views, mistrust. Table 2 provides examples of cooperation and conflict in various forms of communication activities.

As the table shows, the most “peaceful” form is imitation: there is no basis for conflicts in all types of communication (micro-, midi-, macro-). The most “militant” form should be considered management, which presents such methods of imperative coercion as orders, censorship, information warfare, counter-propaganda, cultural imperialism and other disgusting phenomena of communication violence. True, it is becoming increasingly common in modern democratic societies manipulative management that replaces conflict-generating team coercion with soft psychological technologies that create in the recipient the illusion of freedom of choice and cooperation with the communicant (advertising, public relations, image making).

Dialogue communication is most consistent with the socio-psychological nature of people and therefore it brings the greatest satisfaction to the participants. It is dialogue, forming the “WE” community, that creates the basis for joint creative activity, for friendly communication, for the disclosure and development of the personal potential of partners. Dialogue at the level of microcommunication becomes a form of spiritual friendship and effective business cooperation, which does not deny fundamental disputes and differences of opinion. At the level of midicommunication, dialogical cooperation between various social groups is possible, including dialogue with the authorities, which again does not cancel rivalry and polemical discussions between opponents. To achieve national harmony and international cooperation, macrocommunication dialogue, in which peoples, states, and civilizations become participants, is of decisive importance.

The Christian preaching of love for one's neighbor, in essence, advocates a “diffuse” friendly fusion. P.A. Florensky explained: “Everyone on the outside seeks what is mine, not me. The friend wants not mine, but me. And the apostle writes: “I seek not yours, but you” (2 Cor. 12:14). The outsider seeks the “deed,” but the friend seeks “me.” The external desires what is yours, but receives from you, from completeness, i.e. part, and part of it melts in your hands like foam. Only a friend, wanting you, no matter what you are, receives everything in you, completeness and becomes rich in it.” Israeli philosopher Martin Buber (1878-1965), emphasizing the differences between dialogue (subject-subject relationship) and management (subject-object relationship), postulates two types of human relationship to the surrounding reality: a) the “I-YOU” relationship, which involves “flowing from I to YOU”, genuine understanding and reciprocity of communicating people; b) the “I-IT” relationship, when a person, being a subject of consciousness and action, perceives the objects and other people around him as impersonal objects serving for utilitarian use, exploitation, manipulation. The existence of people is thus divided into dialogical existence, when a dialogue unfolds between the individual and the surrounding world, between the individual and God, and monological (egocentric) existence. Full realization of personality, says M. Buber in his teaching called “dialogical personalism,” is possible only in the first case. Thus, the forms of communication activity acquire an ideological sound.

It is interesting to note that different literary styles occupy different places, moving from imitation to management and then to dialogue. Old Russian hagiographical writings (lives of the holy fathers), as well as romantic (J. Byron, A. Bestuzhev-Marlinsky, M. Lermontov) and utopian-journalistic works (N. Chernyshevsky, P. Lavrov, N. Ostrovsky) offered their readers examples for imitation, a reference group, thereby controlling their behavior through the formula I and G.

Educational and critical-realist literature, starting with N.M. Karamzin and ending with M. Gorky, cultivated subject-object relationships with a “friend-reader”, which corresponds to the formula of cooperation between G and M or G and G. In modernism, which shocks the reading public (remember “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste”) and professes self-charmed egocentrism, the control scheme of G y G is in effect, but with conflicting content. Socialist realism, which propagated party doctrines, belongs to the G and M formula, as do all means of propaganda seeking to establish cooperation with recipients.

Unlike previous aesthetic styles, where the author invariably considered himself a prophet, a teacher of life, a “genius” (modernism), in modern Russian postmodernism the author refrains from a managerial monologue and invites the reader to participate in intellectual game with texts. At the same time, as a prerequisite, it is assumed that the readers know those “primary texts”, those “quotations” from which the postmodernist constructs his “secondary” work. For example, they turn to classical literature of the 19th century (“Pushkin House” by A. Bitov, “The Soul of a Patriot or Various Messages to Ferfichkin” by Evg. Popov) or to Soviet culture (the direction of socialist art, working with images, symbols, ideologies of the Soviet time, - “Polysandry” by Sasha Sokolov, “Kangaroo” by Yuz Aleshkovsky). Postmodernism finds itself in the class of G d G, where the dialogical cooperation of elite writers and elite readers is realized.

It must be admitted that the problems of cooperation and conflict have not been the subject of close attention of our scientists until recently. True, one cannot help but recall the ethical ideas of the remarkable anarchist theorist Pyotr Alekseevich Kropotkin (1842-1921). In contrast to social Darwinism, which reduced the law of the struggle for existence to an immoral war of “all against all,” Kropotkin defended the principle of universal cooperation in nature and society, mutual assistance as a factor of evolution. Referring to the institution of sociability, i.e. the innate need for communication, Kropotkin explained the origin of tribal communities, labor cooperation, cultural progress and the future communist society.

In the first years of Soviet power, Alexey Kapitonovich Gastev (1882-1941), a Russian scientist and poet, acted as the founder of the Central Institute of Labor (1920), where the methodology of scientific organization and labor culture was developed, paying considerable attention to communication between employees. The ideas of this methodology were developed in ergonomics, a science that studies the relationship between a person and a tool, and in modern management theory.

In the 90s, it was not the problems of creative cooperation that became relevant, but the problems of conflict resolution. It turned out that conflicts are an inevitable companion public life, presented at all levels of social communication - interpersonal, group, mass. Conflictology has emerged, which is one of the applied socio-communication disciplines. The subject of conflictology is marital conflicts, labor conflicts, interethnic and political conflicts and other conflict situations mentioned in Table. 2. The theoretical and methodological foundation for the study of both cooperation and conflict is social psychology, where the problem of communication has always occupied a central place.

Communication activities-- this is the activity of transmitting information from a source (communicator) to a recipient (recipient) through a specific channel. Between the communicator and the recipient there can be “ Feedback”, that is, the process by which the communicator obtains information about the extent and with what quality the recipient received information.

There are three possible forms of communication action:

· imitation;

ImitationЇ one of the oldest forms of conveying meanings, used by higher animals and birds; No wonder some scientists considered it a source of imitation herd instinct. Imitation means the recipient’s reproduction of the communicant’s movements, actions, and habits. Imitation can be voluntary or involuntary (unconscious).

· dialogue;

Dialogue-- a form of communication interaction mastered by people in the process of anthropogenesis during the formation of human language and speech. The participants in the dialogue treat each other as equal subjects who possess certain meanings. Between them it develops subject-- subjective attitude, and their interaction is creative in the sense that a socio-psychological community of partners is achieved, denoted by the word " We".

· management.

Control-- such a communication action when the communicator considers the recipient as a means of achieving his goals, as an object of control. In this case, there are established between the communicant and the recipient subject-object relationship. Management differs from dialogue in that the subject has the right to monologue, and the recipient cannot discuss with the communicator, he can only report his reaction through the feedback channel.

The boundaries between these forms are conditional; they can merge and complement each other.

The communication procedure includes the following stages.

• 1. The need for communication (it is necessary to communicate or find out information, influence the interlocutor, etc.) - encourages a person to come into contact with other people.
• 2. Orientation for communication purposes, in a communication situation.
• 3. Orientation in the personality of the interlocutor.
• 4. Planning the content of your communication - a person imagines (usually unconsciously) what exactly he will say.

Unconsciously (sometimes consciously) a person chooses specific means, phrases that he will use, decides how to speak, how to behave.

Perception and assessment of the interlocutor’s response, monitoring the effectiveness of communication based on establishing feedback.

Adjustment of direction, style, communication methods.

Communication can be:

• 1. oral and written
• 2. verbal and visual
• 3. communicative and metacommunicative
• 4. hierarchical (with priority of direct communication) and democratic (with priority of feedback).
• 5. aggressive and favorable

Communication models

· two-stage model (media - opinion leaders - recipients)

One of the most important stages in studying the impact of the media on the audience was the discovery by the American P. Lazarsfeld in the late 40s of the last century, a two-stage communication model.

The impetus for this was the results of surveys showing that the coverage of the population when exposed to a message two weeks after its broadcast was higher than immediately after the broadcast itself.

Further analysis showed that the increase in reach was a consequence of discussion of these messages with those called “opinion leaders.” Moreover, not only the reach has increased, but also the degree of influence of the message on the audience.

• · spiral of silence (E. Noel-Neumann) - German researcher public opinion; The essence of the model is that the media can manipulate public opinion by giving the floor to the minority instead of the majority.
• · gatekeeper model (Kurt Lewin)

A “gatekeeper” is someone who controls the flow of news and can change, expand, repeat, and withdraw information. It is known that out of hundreds or thousands of messages, editors select only 10% for publication in their publication. Sociologists were interested in the principles by which selection occurs. When selecting, editors are guided by their values ​​and their ideas about what might be interesting to the listener. The second benchmark is based on league tables.

· Jacobson's model (represents speech communication in the form of six factors, each of which corresponds to a special function of language: emotive, conative, phatic, metalinguistic, poetic, referential).

Functional aspect in language learning, orientation on the communication process inevitably led to the identification communicative unit higher order , through which it is carried out verbal communication. Such a unit is text, which is conceived primarily as a dynamic unit, organized in conditions of real communication.

For speech organization the text is determined by external, communicative factors. And therefore, the generation of the text and its functioning are pragmatically oriented, i.e. text is created when a certain target settings and operates in certain communication conditions.

Communication terms, or specific speech situations, are amenable to typology, thus, texts focused on certain communicative conditions should also have typological features. The establishment of these features is primarily the work of text theory, a scientific discipline that has gained access to sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and many others.

mass communicationacts as a certain type of social activity that has its own subject, object of influence, as well as conditions and means of implementation. Analysis of mass communication as a social process using the activity approach helps to identify all its main characteristics. Activities there is a way of existence of a social form of movement, that is, a way in which society exists.

Mass communication, as a social phenomenon, is no exception in this regard. Its most general, substantial characteristic is activity. That is why the theory of mass communication as a type of activity must necessarily have a theory of activity as its basis. To understand the place of mass communicative activity in the system of human activity, resulting from its essence and manifestations of this essence, we need to consider activity as a system.

So, the substance of social life is the process of jointno activity of people. This means that it acts as the ultimate basis social.The substance of mass communication, thus, is a social activity. However, substance is only the most profound thing in essence. An essence is an invariant of the content of an object. Therefore, in order to identify the essence of mass communication within the framework of a single substance “social - social activity. An important element of spiritual and practical activity is mass communication, which is a system of broadcasting social assessments of current reality into the mass consciousness, that is, assessments of current events that fall into the field of view of mass consciousness, that is, assessments of the current results of practical activity from the point of view of the interests of certain social groups. mass communication- a type of spiritual-practical activity, that is, the activity of transferring, broadcasting into mass consciousness (public opinion) assessments of current events that are recognized as socially relevant.

Mass communication is a spiritual and practical activity, but not all and not all, but only that variety of it that is associated with the implementation of the necessary operational orientation, and mainly, V ideologically relevant, for example, in important issues of domestic and foreign policy, that is, in essence, “an assessment of current events.”

The essence of mass communication as an activity (mass communication activity) is the impact on society by introducing a certain system of values ​​into the mass consciousness.

In fact subjects of mass communication as such, are social groups that realize their needs related to ensuring the conditions of their own existence, in this case, conditions related to the need to introduce into mass consciousness, that is, into the system of consciousness functioning directly in practice, social attitudes based on their own ideological paradigms expressed in the form of their group ideologies.

Based on these needs, social groups are interested in producing mass information (including in the form of texts) as a way of existence of their own ideological paradigms, a way that exactly corresponds to the social psyche and is realized through the creative activity of journalists, and promoting it into mass consciousness with the help mechanisms, that is, the means of mass communication, again corresponding to this latter.

The problem of freedom of subjects of mass communication activities

The problem of freedom of the press occupies a special place. Since the publication of one of the first works on this topic - the presentation of a speech John Milton in the English Parliament in 1644 - the problem of freedom of the press is at the epicenter of almost all projects of social change. Classic models of this kind for the theoretical understanding of freedom of the press were based, like all subsequent ones, on one basic argument - concern (or rather, from our point of view, the appearance of concern) for the well-being of citizens. The word “freedom” in natural language is very ambiguous. The Dictionary of the Russian Language has about a dozen meanings of this word.

But in this case we should be interested in “freedom” in the categorical sense, that is, freedom as a concept of social science, sociology, because the theory of mass communication cannot base its definitions on the understanding of freedom, for example, as “ease, the absence of difficulties in anything.” ", or "relaxation, lack of coherence", or "the state of one who is not imprisoned, in captivity." Indeed, Liberty - it is always freedom of activity, and therefore of the activity of any subject who realizes his own goal in it, the path to which is expressed in the form of a program. Therefore, freedom is the ability of the subject. Such an ability, or property, is inherent only to the subject of activity and cannot belong to anyone other than the subject. In other words, only a subject can be characterized by freedom as an ability. Thus, it is assumed that freedom of speech there is nothing more than the opportunity for any citizen to be heard and heard any information he wishes.

Social consciousness in the system of mass communication. \

Having identified the subjects of mass communication activity, the next logical step is to consider its object.

Any research related to the analysis of spiritual and practical varieties of social activity, sooner or later is forced to turn to consideration of the problem of mass consciousness. The layer of consciousness of society in which knowledge functions, transformed into beliefs, traditions, etc., that is, consciousness directly involved in practical activity, is called mass consciousness. Scientists have always been searching for a solution to this problem. There are several areas in which these studies were conducted.

Religious. In this direction, the dominant religion in a given society, constituting the main ideological core, was taken as the basis of mass consciousness.

Accordingly, the mass was understood as the entire body of believers, and the structure corresponded to the hierarchical organization of the church. National,

where national characteristics are used to classify and highlight mass consciousness. A nation is a mass, national consciousness is mass consciousness.

State, based on the understanding that the basis of mass consciousness is the belonging of citizens to one state.

Class approach , spread by Marxism. Class is mass, class consciousness is mass. 5. In all of the above approaches, approximately the same structure of mass consciousness can be traced: leaders, leaders, recognized authorities plus the masses. This structure gave rise to another approach called

elitist

. It was based on the thesis that the concept of “mass” should be sought in comparison with the concept of the elite, and the concept of “mass consciousness” is comparable to the concept of “elite consciousness”. It is the prevalence of this approach that underlies the identification of so-called mass culture as something secondary.- definition of mass consciousness by the subject of reflection. As such, the mass stands out, which is the main element of the study. Representatives of this approach are B. A. Trushin, N. P. Kirillov and others.

Second type - the basis for classification is the object of mass consciousness

It should be noted that the basis of mass (practical) consciousness is knowledge acquired both in the ordinary way and introduced, transferred, adapted from the level of specialized consciousness and transformed into social attitudes, beliefs, social myths, etc. “To correlate consciousness functioning in systems of practical and spiritual activity, the idea of ​​levels can be used. Then the consciousness living in the system of practice acts as practical (mass), and consciousness in the system of spiritual activity acts as specialized.”

Obviously, there cannot be any other result, because the category correlative to “mass consciousness” is not “group consciousness” or “individual consciousness,” but “specialized consciousness,” and, accordingly, the division of consciousness into mass and specialized is not a division By subjects consciousness, and according to him levels, namely, by the levels of his involvement in practice - direct(mass consciousness) and indirect(specialized consciousness).

In defining mass consciousness by highlighting the concept of “mass,” the theory, in our opinion, has two methodological shortcomings. The desire to combine the ontological and epistemological aspects of mass consciousness in the concept of “mass consciousness” is doomed to failure in advance. It is quite obvious that another concept should be introduced into scientific use, reflecting the ontological aspect of mass consciousness, since the correlation of the concept of mass consciousness with specialized, and not with group or individual (which, in fact, is, in our opinion, the elimination of the second methodological lack of existing theories) represents an epistemological cross-section of the problem under study.

Mass consciousness and the main methods of manipulative influence on it.

Public opinion is an indicator of the state of society as a whole. Naturally, sociologists are interested in the question of how public opinion is formed. Understanding the essence of this phenomenon depends on the answer to this question. It should be noted right away that public opinion is a phenomenon characteristic primarily of modern, mass societies. The American sociologist G. Bloomer considered “the public” - the substrate of public opinion - as one of the forms of mass association, which is based on interest in a particular problem. Domestic researcher Yu. Levada proposed to distinguish between “general” and “public” opinion.

“General” opinion is formed within consolidated communities where people have the opportunity to communicate directly.

“Public” opinion is formed in mass societies, among people between whom there is no direct interaction.

Communication in such societies is often indirect. The transition from general opinion to public opinion, as Levada notes, is one of the manifestations of the transformation of traditional societies into modern ones. from total monotony to a multitude of multi-level normative mechanisms (and therefore socially accepted opinions); from particularistic regulatory structures, that is, “norms for one’s own,” to universalist ones (generally valid norms and values);

from the compulsory obligatory nature of “correct” views and assessments to a spectrum of socially acceptable opinions;

from public, or “square” community, where “everyone knows everyone” in direct communication, to socially significant anonymity (mass consumption, secret voting, anonymous surveys); from normative (instrumental or ritual) “seriousness” of opinions to “ game

Thus, public opinion is formed in mass societies where group ties and group norms are weakened, where in a situation of constant choice and individual autonomy a new mechanism for achieving agreement is required. The mechanisms for achieving this agreement are different than in small, close-knit communities. In particular, the media play a large role in this process. Be that as it may, a person is inclined to voluntarily submit to the dominant opinion - this is manifested both in small groups and in mass forms of behavior (similar to voting in government elections). But how do people know which opinions are dominant and which are not? E. Noel-Neumann speaks of a person’s ability to “perceive the climate of opinions.” But given the dominance of the media, this ability is not surprising. The point of view that dominates the media is considered by a person as characteristic of the majority. The same thing happens with the published results of sociological surveys. Manipulation in mass communication activities is a way of controlling the behavior of a mass audience, carried out through the formation of public opinion. However, this management is not absolute in nature, such as, for example, administrative-legal, which presupposes the absolute subordination of citizens to adopted acts to regulate behavior. Manipulation is a psychological influence that has different effects on both individuals and different social groups.

Mass communication as a social institution

In the structure of sociological knowledge, the study of social institutions is given extremely important importance. There is enough a large number of different approaches to defining a social institution.

“The concept of a social institution has a central place in the systemic-structural analysis of social life. It presupposes the possibility of generalization, idealization and abstraction of the most significant types of social relations from the diverse actions of people, by correlating them with the fundamental goals and needs of the social system. In this sense, a social institution should be understood as the main component of the social structure, integrating and coordinating many individual actions of people, streamlining social relations in the most important spheres of public life.”

“Institutions of public life are considered to be a special type of integrative (groups - T.N.), the integrity of which is based on impersonal objective connections, the nature and direction of which does not depend on the individual properties of the people included in these institutions. Unlike non-institutional groups (like a friendly company), institutions such as the state or army are not a collection of living people, but a system of interrelated social roles performed by such people and imposing strict restrictions on their possible and acceptable behavior."

A social institution is “historically established forms of organization and regulation of social life (for example, family, religion, education, etc.), ensuring the performance of vital functions for society, including a set of norms, roles, regulations, patterns of behavior, special institutions, control system"

Having analyzed various points of view in the definition of a social institution, we can draw a conclusion about the main characteristics of the latter, which are:

♦ “a role system, which also includes norms and statuses;

♦ a set of customs, traditions and rules of conduct;

♦ formal and informal organization;

♦ a set of norms and institutions regulating a certain area of ​​public relations;

♦ a separate complex of social actions"

Mass communication, understood as a certain social process, as a type of social activity, has its own institutional forms. It performs certain roles assigned to it both in relation to other social institutions and in relation to society as a whole. common system social activities. The type of MK is determined directly by the type of society in which it operates. In one society, mass communication can function exclusively in the form of state QMS, in another - state-public, in a third - both of them, supplemented by commercial QMS. However, with any type of society and, accordingly, with any type of MC, its function, like its essence, remains unchanged, but the forms and methods of functioning can be completely different. MK, fulfilling its function of transferring and introducing assessments of current events and phenomena into mass consciousness, occupies an important place in the structure of social institutions of society. Considering the fact that the type and features of the functioning of mass communication are determined by the type of society, its social, and above all, political structure, the institution of mass communication is most closely related to politics as a social institution and a certain type of social activity. Therefore, it seems necessary to consider the features of the mutual influence of intercultural society as a social institution and other social institutions using the example of its interaction with politics.

Distinctive features of communication:
Requires 2 subjects
Availability of the transmitted object
Purposefulness of communication
Communication is a type of interaction between subjects mediated by some object.
The interaction between the communicator and the recipient can represent the movement of material objects in three-dimensional geometric space and astronomical time, or the movement of ideal objects in virtual spaces and times.
Types of communication:
1) Material – movement of material objects in geometric space and astronomical time (transport, analytical, etc.)
2) Genetic - movement of images encoded in genetic codes in biological space and time (parents pass on genes to children)
3) Mental (intrapersonal) – the movement of meanings in mental time and space
4) Social (adaptation) – movement of meanings in social time and space
5) Technical (refers to material) - the movement of technical objects in the technosphere.
Forms of communication activities
1) Imitation (perhaps arose for the purpose of self-preservation). The oldest form.
- reproduction by the recipient of movements, actions, habits of communicants
Imitation – voluntary (imitation) and involuntary (unconscious).
Imitation is an object-subject relationship, where the recipient plays an active role, and the communicator is only a passive object to be imitated.
2) Dialogue is a form of communication. interaction, mastered by people in the process of anthropogenesis during the formation of human language and speech. There must be an interest in communication. Subject-subject relationship.
3) Management – ​​form of communication. interaction when the communicator considers the recipient as a means of achieving his goals, as an object of control.

Forms of management:
Orders (army, court, slavery)
Suggestion
Belief
Infection (war, rallies, etc.)

Types, forms and levels of communication activities
Three subjects belonging to different levels of the social structure can act as a communicant (K) and a recipient (R).
1. Individual personality (I)
2. Social group (a number of people who have one or more social characteristics) (D)
3. Mass aggregate (a number of randomly gathered people, where they are united by location, and not by spiritual community) (M)
Microcommunication
I. p. I. – sample copying
I. d. I. – conversation, interest
I.u. I. – team
I.p.G. – preference
I.u. G. – team management
I. p. M. – socialization
I.u. M. – authoritarianism, tyranny

Midicommunication
G. p. G. – fashion, imitation and transmission of visual forms
G. d. G. – negotiations
G.u. G. – group hierarchy
G. p. M. - adaptation to the environment (emigrants)
G.u. M. – management of society

Macro communication
M. p. M. - borrowing achievements (baptism of Rus')
M.D.M. – interaction of cultures (the era of Peter the Great)
M. u. M. – information aggression

Communication channels are a real or imaginary line of communication between the communicator and the recipient.
Natural
Nonverbal Verbal
- gestures
- facial expressions
- call - communications
- all types of art
Kinesics – visually perceived movements of the face and eyes; smile, etc.
Vocalics - voice characteristics
Takeshika – communication through touch
Proxenics – distance
Olfactory system – natural or artificial human odors
Bustika (chemo-factors) – taste sensations
Pronomics - structuring time in communication - speech
Artificial
The need arose when the communicator and the recipient were unable to communicate.
- channel of iconic documents (paintings, scenic images)
- channel of symbolic documents (totems, amulets)
Explicit Properties
Implicit functions - developing a sense of beauty

Natural communication channels formed the basis of oral communication, artificial ones - written.
Two types of social communication
1) Pictographic writing (V.K. Shileiko)
2) Phonetic writing
Social memory
1) Genetic is the movement in biological time of genetic instincts, unconditioned reflexes and biological images characteristic of a given species.
2) Mental – this is the preservation and reproduction of a person’s life experience.
The figurative section is the memory of perceptions and ideas received through the senses.
Semantic section - understanding words, texts, etc.
The affective section is the storage of positive and negative emotions, the so-called. “memory of the heart” (memory for experiences, memories)
Motor section - physical memory
Self-awareness is the memory of oneself, the feeling of one’s Self.
Mnemonic activity (memory activity):
Memorization is the perception by the senses of external signals, stimuli, images, their mental processing, evaluation and formation of new meaning.
Preservation is the movement of meanings in time without their disappearance.
Reproduction is the retrieval of knowledge stored in memory. Conscious
Forgetting is the liberation of memory from irrelevant meanings.
The communicator's memory transmits a message to the recipient's memory
3) Social
Individual
Group - small (family) and large social groups
Memory of society (memory of the world, universal memory)
The structure of social memory
1. Social unconscious
2. Socio-cultural meanings
- intangible part (customs, traditions, rituals, etc.)
- material embodiment
A document is a stable material object intended for use in social communication as a completed message.
Distinctive features:
- stability and materiality;
- semantic content;
- intended for use in communication channels;
- completeness of the message.
Types of documents:
1. Readable (human-readable) – written works in natural and artificial languages
2. Iconic - bearing images similar to the depicted objects (paintings, drawings, photographs)
3. Ideographic - carry symbols(maps, drawings, diagrams, etc.)
4. Symbolic - objects that perform memorial and educational functions (museum exhibits, historical relics, architectural monuments)
5. Auditory (phonetic) – various sound recordings
6. Machine-readable documents - digitized texts, websites and Internet portals, etc.
1/10 – innovations 9/10 – traditions
Tradition is an innovation that remains relevant throughout the lives of three generations. A viable past inherited from grandparents and great-grandparents.
Innovation is a creative contribution of an individual or group proposed for inclusion in the cultural heritage.
A ratio of 1/10 and 9/10 guarantees survival.

2.1. Communication actions and their forms

We defined communication activity as the movement of meanings in social space. The elementary scheme of communication (Fig. 1.1) corresponds to communication activity, or more precisely, not to the activity as a whole, but to its elementary part - the communication action. Communication action is a completed operation of semantic interaction that occurs without changing communication participants. Subjects entering into communication can pursue three goals: firstly, the recipient wants to receive from the communicant some meanings that are attractive to him; secondly, the communicator wants to convey to the recipient some meanings that influence the latter’s behavior; thirdly, both the communicator and the recipient are interested in interaction with the aim of exchanging some meanings. Accordingly, three forms of communication action are possible.

1. Imitation― ξdna from the most ancient forms of conveying meanings, used by higher animals and birds; It is not without reason that some scientists considered the herd instinct to be the source of imitation. Imitation means the recipient’s reproduction of the communicant’s movements, actions, and habits. Imitation can be voluntary or involuntary (unconscious). Arbitrary imitation (imitation) is used when schooling, mastery of technology, craftsmanship. Involuntary imitation is the main method of primary socialization of preschool children.

In public life, fashionable innovations, popular ideas and trends spread through imitation. At the same time, thanks to imitation, traditions, customs, and behavioral stereotypes are passed on from generation to generation. It is not without reason that in the “Teachings of Merikara,” a monument of Egyptian writing of the XXII-XXIII centuries. BC e. It is said: “Imitate your fathers and your ancestors.” We can say that imitation is one of the ways of living social memory.

E. Fromm, among the specifically human socio-cultural needs, noted the desire to assimilate, search for an object of worship, and identify oneself with someone stronger, smarter, and more beautiful. In childhood, children liken themselves to their parents, in adulthood - to literary heroes, athletes, artists, warriors. This need can be called the need for idolatry (to find or create an idol for oneself).

One should not think that imitation does not correspond to the elementary scheme of communication action (Fig. 1.1), because there is no obvious semantic message addressed to the recipient. In fact, there is always such a message that is attractive to the recipient. The recipient purposefully selects the communicator and uses him as a source of meanings that he would like to assimilate. In this case, the communicator often does not realize his participation in the communication action. Imitation is an object-subject relationship where the recipient plays an active role, and the communicator is a passive object to be imitated.

2. Dialogue - a form of communication interaction mastered by people in the process of anthropogenesis during the formation of human language and speech. The participants in the dialogue treat each other as equal subjects who possess certain meanings. Between them a subject is formed - a subjective relationship, and their interaction is creative in the sense that a socio-psychological community of partners is achieved, denoted by the word “we”.

Dialogue communication is presented as a sequence of statements by participants replacing each other in the roles of communicator and recipient. A statement is not a word, not a sentence, not a paragraph, but a unit of meaning that makes it possible to answer it. The participants in the dialogue jointly create a dramatic Text that has relative semantic completeness. The relativity of the end of the dialogue is determined by the fact that the reaction to a particular statement can manifest itself in the behavior of the recipient after a long time. Literature, theater, lectures are precisely designed for a delayed response. An unfinished dialogue develops into a communication discourse that covers many subjects and continues indefinitely. In short, discourse is a multi-subject, endless dialogue.

3. Control- such a communication action when the communicator considers the recipient as a means of achieving his goals, as an object of control. In this case, a subject-object relationship is established between the communicant and the recipient. Management differs from dialogue in that the subject has the right to monologue, and the recipient cannot discuss with the communicator, he can only report his reaction through the feedback channel.

A managerial monologue can be: in the form order(the communicator has authority recognized by the recipient); in the shape of suggestions(suggestions), when the coercive power of the word is used through repeated repetition of the same monologue (advertising, propaganda, sermon); in the shape of beliefs, appealing not to subconscious motives, as with suggestion, but to reason and common sense using logically structured argumentation.

A special form of managerial communication action is infection, which spontaneously arises among the masses of people. Infection is characterized by emotional intensity and aggressiveness. Its sources can be ritual dances, musical rhythms, religious ecstasy, sports excitement, oratory skills. Apparently, as in the case of suggestion, unconscious impulses play a large role during infection.

Dialogue is close to behavior according to the "stimulus-response" scheme; it does not require the same level of programming and organization as a monologue speech. Therefore, dialogue is considered the original form of speech, which arose among the Pithecanthropes (150-200 thousand years ago), and monologue speech is a later communication achievement, requiring a higher culture of speech and some oratorical skills.

In Fig. 2.1 the considered forms of communicative actions are systematized according to similarities and differences. It should be noted that the forms of communication actions can include different content, and at the same time, the same meaning can be conveyed in two or even three forms, for example, something can be taught by showing (imitation), by instructing (control) or through dialogic explanation.

The boundaries between different communication forms should not be absolute. Imitation, dialogue, control can merge with each other and complement each other. Thus, dialogue can become a method of control, for example, Socratic dialogue is structured in such a way as to force the opponent to admit that Socrates is right; dialogue between teacher and student is a common form of pedagogical influence. Generally speaking, any meaningful dialogue (meaningless chatter does not count) is intended to have some kind of managerial impact on the consciousness of the interlocutors. Imitation is a degenerate dialogue, where the communicator is indifferent to the recipient (ignores him), and the recipient conducts an imaginary dialogue with the communicator.

Rice. 2.1. Forms of communication actions

Communication actions are elementary acts, one might say atoms of communication activity, but they are also used in non-communication activities (cognition, work). In almost all types of communication activities, the forms we have considered are found, but one of the forms predominates. This allows communication activity in general to be presented at its various levels in the form of dialogical, managerial, imitative, i.e., to identify the forms of communication activity and the forms of elementary communication acts.

2.2. Types, levels and forms of communication activities

Three subjects belonging to different levels of the social structure can act as communicants and recipients: an individual personality (I), a social group (G), and a mass aggregate (M). They can interact with each other, for example I - I, G - G, M - M, or with each other, for example I - G, I - M, G - M, etc. Abstractly speaking, there are 9 types of social communications. But this is not enough. As shown in section 2.1, communication actions can be carried out in the form of imitation, dialogue, control. Dialogue is the interaction of equal partners, which is possible between subjects of the same social level, and not different levels, because subjects of different levels, for example I and M, are not equal. There can be imitation or control between subjects at different levels, but not a dialogue of equal participants.

Let us accept the following notation. Those types of communication activities where I, or G, or M act as an active, purposeful subject will be called microcommunication, midicommunication, and macrocommunication, respectively. Those types where I, or G, or M act as the object of influence will be called, respectively, interpersonal, group and mass communication, understanding by them the levels of social communications. The resulting two-dimensional classification of types and levels of communication activities is presented in Fig. 2.2.

As follows from Fig. 2.2, we can distinguish 7 forms of microcommunication, 5 forms of midicommunication and 3 forms of macrocommunication. Each of the forms manifests itself at the interpersonal, group, and mass levels. Let us systematize and designate the resulting 15 forms of communication activities in the form of table 2.1.

To complete the picture of possible forms of communication activity, one should take into account quasi-communication, when the communicant addresses imaginary the subject and acquires a sense of dialogue with him. This includes the phenomenon of fetishization, which N. D. Kondratiev described as follows: “people begin to think that things have special supernatural properties of being valuable, possessing the prerogatives of holiness, greatness, a source of law, etc. In other words, people begin to endow things with physical not with significant properties inherent in them, just as savages attributed the properties of an omnipotent deity to idols." The creation of all kinds of “idols”, the cult of leaders, etc. ultimately has the goal of creating an all-knowing and all-powerful “quasi-communication” partner.

Now let us consider in more detail the listed forms of communication activity, distributing them by type of social communication: micro-, midi-, macrocommunication.

Legend:

I - individual;

G - group;

M - mass aggregate;

R - recipient;

K - communicator;

n - imitation; d - dialogue; y - control.

Rice. 2.2. Types and levels of communication activities

Table 2.1. Forms of communication activities

2.3. Types of communication activities

2.3.1. Microcommunication

Table 2.1 presents 7 forms of microcommunication, where the individual acts as an active recipient (imitation) or an active communicator (dialogue, control); the communication partners can be either another individual, or a social group, or a mass aggregate (society as a whole). The content of microcommunication is quite obvious; on interpersonal level - this is either the assimilation of forms of behavior, skills, external attributes of the chosen role model - copying a sample, or exchange of ideas, arguments, proposals between interlocutors - friendly or business conversation, or instructions for execution by a subordinate - team. On group level possible reference(the same imitation, but not of an individual person, but of a social group with which the individual wants to identify himself, for example, the imitation of merchants of the noble class or the “new Russians” of the aristocrats of the spirit; note that negative reference occurs when a person consciously avoids the signs of the group he rejects) or team management - management, organization, group leadership; finally on a massive scale level, communication actions serve to socialization - a person’s mastery of generally accepted norms, beliefs, and ideals in a given society in order to “be like everyone else,” and authoritarianism, that is, despotic control of the masses of subject people (absolutism, tyranny, autocracy - political forms of authoritarianism). Note that dialogic relations between an individual and a group or mass are excluded, because dialogue is possible only between equal-level partners. Imitation of a friendly conversation between a general and soldiers does not count, because this is a “quasi-dialogue”.

A practically important question arises: is it possible to learn microcommunication? This question is extremely significant for teachers, businessmen, people (businessmen), managers, politicians, who are essentially microcommunication professionals. This question is also of interest to people who want to be successful in society, achieve effective self-expression and public approval. There is a lot of witty and boring advice, recommendations, rules, for example: be silent or say something better than silence; use words wisely, it’s not for nothing that you have one mouth and two ears; the power of speech lies in the ability to express a lot in a few words; people listen not to the one who is smarter than others, but to the one who speaks the loudest, etc.

Since antiquity, rhetoric has been developing - the doctrine of eloquence, illuminated by the authority of Plato and Aristotle, in the 20th century as scientific discipline Stylistics, which studies linguistic norms and their areas of application, took shape, speech culture began to be taught in educational institutions, and managers and politicians began to be taught the rules of business communication, social conflict management, and the art of arguing. There's no shortage of methodological recommendations. Let's list some of them.

• Don't make incomprehensible speech acts; the meaning of the speech must be clear to those listening.
• Don't make insincere speech acts; speech must correspond to the real thoughts, intentions, and experiences of the speaker.
• Be consistent and make sure that subsequent speech acts are logically connected with the previous ones.
• The speech must be purposeful, the speaker must have an idea that is realized in the speech, etc.

There are especially many useful tips regarding non-verbal means of microcommunication: gestures, facial expressions, postures, distance between interlocutors, volume and intonation of speech. However, familiarity with the streams of educational, scientific and practical literature leads to an unambiguous conclusion: microcommunication activities cannot be “learned” from books, there are no ready-made recipes, because it is an art, i.e. creative and productive, playful, and not reproductive. ritual activity. The success of any oral presentation or written communication depends primarily on the abilities and talents of its authors. Let's say you can memorize "Letters to a Son" by the English aristocrat Philip Chesterfield (1694-1773) or study the bestsellers of the successful businessman Dale Carnegie (1888-1955), but this does not guarantee spiritual freedom, the ability to "win friends and influence people" or confidence V public speaking. However, it is very useful to become familiar with these classic works.

2.3.2. Midicommunication

The five forms of midicommunication include such social and communication phenomena as fashion- based on imitation, the transfer in social space of material forms, patterns of behavior and ideas that are emotionally attractive to social groups (note that fashion is a product of neoculture; paleoculture did not know fashion); negotiation - a common way of resolving conflicts and reaching agreements between social groups; group hierarchy develops in large institutions (managers - workers), in army units, in class-caste societies, where contacts between groups are clearly regulated; adaptation to environment turns into a communication problem for national diasporas living among foreigners; for people of other faiths, for example, Muslims among Christians; for underground revolutionaries, etc.; management of society carried out from the side creative groups, generating ideological meanings that determine the spiritual (not material!) life of society. Let us dwell in more detail on this form of midicommunication.

Worldview meanings are knowledge that explains observed phenomena, the origin of man and the Universe, the meaning of human life, ideals, norms and incentives for social activity. Social groups that develop these meanings and the communication messages in which they are imprinted find themselves at the center of the spiritual life of society. These centers shift in the course of socio-cultural evolution.

Archaeoculture is characteristic mythocentrism, the guardian of which was a caste of priests who owned sacred esoteric knowledge. Characteristic of paleoculture religioceptprism, in the mainstream of which were literature, art, education, philosophy. Western European neoculture since the 17th century (the century of universal geniuses) developed under the auspices of secular knowledge led by philosophy and in the 19th century gradually moved to science-centrism. Physicists, economists, and political scientists determined the spiritual climate in democratic Western countries. It was different in Russia.

Neocultural modernization began, as is known, with the vigorous reform activity of Peter I, which was continued in a softer manner by Catherine I I. The main military-political and economic force of Russian society in the 18th century was the nobility. After 1761, when, according to the decree of Peter III “On the freedom of the nobility,” confirmed by Catherine, this class was exempted from compulsory public service and received free hands for cultural creativity, a luxurious, brilliant, although superficial, noble culture was created, the golden age of which started by N. M. Karamzin, and finished by M. Yu. Lermontov. In spiritual life Russia XVIII- first half of the 19th century century, a characteristic “double center” has developed: one ideological center - Orthodox Church(remember Uvarov’s triad of “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality”), and the other center was in Western Europe, from where Russian nobles drew the ideas of Voltaire and Rousseau, the liberalism of Madame de Staël and Benjamin Constant, and the utopian socialism of A. Saint-Simon and Sh .Fourier.

However, since Pushkin’s times, a phenomenon began to occur in the spiritual life of Russia that was unknown to Western Europe - the center of spiritual life became fiction, and talented writers - writers, poets, critics - became the “masters of ideological thoughts” of Russian society, teachers and prophets. The second half of the 19th century - the era of Russian literary-centrism. The well-known words of A. I. Herzen date back to this time: “For a people deprived of public freedom, literature is the only platform from the height of which they make the cry of their indignation and their conscience heard. The influence of literature in such a society acquires dimensions long lost by others countries of Europe." The well-known role of literature in preparing public opinion for the abolition of serfdom (D. V. Grigorovich, I. S. Turgenev, N. A. Nekrasov), in the emergence and development of nihilism, populism, Tolstoyism, the emancipation of women, the glorification of images of selfless militants of underground Russia . A tendency toward teaching, preaching, and denunciation, characteristic of critical realism, is emerging. Literary centrism became the school for educating the heterogeneous intelligentsia, which shook the colossus of the Russian autocracy.

The phenomenon of literary centrism in Russian history is interesting and instructive due to the fact that it shows the revolutionary potential hidden in the depths of the seemingly most peaceful and harmless social and communication institution - fiction.

Soviet era - domination political centrism, the content of which was determined by a group of leading communist ideologists according to the G and M formula. Based on the Leninist principle of party membership, a gigantic propaganda system was created. This system had the following features:

• only a managerial monologue setting out ideologically consistent truths was allowed; doubts, objections, dissent, pluralism were unconditionally excluded, so there was no field for dialogue;
• centralized management, ensuring consistency and coordination of all influences on mass consciousness;
• mobilization of all communication resources: mass media, fiction, cinema, fine arts, theater;

As a result, the high efficiency of the communist education of a person of a new formation was ensured - homo soviticus. Homo sovieticus is a product of the Soviet communication system, its native brainchild, grown in the fertile soil of social mythology. The Lenin-Stalin cause, the communist future of humanity, the party - the mind, honor and conscience of the era, the hostile environment and spy mania - these were strong myths that ideologically ensured both the personality cult of Stalin and the unity of the people during the years of pre-war, war and post-war trials.

2.3.3. Macro communication

Macrocommunication forms of communication interaction, which are in Table. 2.1 named borrowing achievements(M p M), interaction of cultures(M d M) and information aggression(M y M), are clearly visible in the thousand-year history of interaction between the Russian state and Europe. Moreover, fluctuations from imitation to dialogue and back are easily noticeable. Information aggression is a relatively new phenomenon, appearing only in the 20th century.

The Baptism of Rus' at the end of the 10th century is an indisputable act of macrocommunication imitation. The time of Kievan Rus, the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, appanage civil strife and the Tatar-Mongol yoke is a period of “humble apprenticeship” among the Bulgarians and Greeks, when the Russian scribe was “poor in spirit, begging under the windows of European temples of wisdom from the fruits of someone else’s heap, grains from a spiritual meal , where he had no place" (V.O. Klyuchevsky). But gradually the Russian Church acquired its rights as a spiritual paleocultural center and freed itself from the tutelage of the Patriarchs of Constantinople. In 1346, the Moscow metropolitan was not a Greek sent from Constantinople, but a Russian man, Alexy. In 1380, Sergius of Radonezh blessed the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry for the battle with Mamai. The 15th century was the time when the Moscow state gained political independence and ideological independence, for the Church of Constantinople, having found itself in the territory since 1453 Ottoman Empire, capitulated to the papacy. The M p M phase is over.

The Russian "humble disciples", encouraged by recent victories over the Tatars, abandoned the union with the Latins and decided to serve Orthodoxy in their own way. At the beginning of the 16th century, the idea of ​​Russian messianism arose - “Moscow is the third Rome”, and national pride matured. Russian “bookish men,” according to the same Klyuchevsky, began to teach: “Brothers! Byvakh, philosophy is below ochima videh." Previously, the Russian scribe loved articles translated from Greek on various branches of knowledge: on mineralogy, logic, medicine, rhetoric, now he frantically shouted: “Anyone who loves geometry is abominable before God; I am not learned in words, I have not studied dialectics, rhetoric and philosophy, but reason I have Christ in me." Ivan IV, who started the Livonian War for access to the Baltic Sea and was about to marry Elizabeth of England, of course, considered himself not a student of European wisdom, but an equal partner of any monarch. Muscovy was ready for a dialogue of cultures according to the M d M formula.

The 17th century was a time of gradual rapprochement with Europe. A German settlement appears in Moscow, regiments of a foreign system, free-thinking Russian nobles like A.L. Ordin-Nashchokin wear European dress at home, the royal children are taught by a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, a former Jesuit, Simeon of Polotsk. However, Russian people do not lose their national dignity. Peter's reforms - unconditional apprenticeship, a new "conquest under the windows of European temples of wisdom", new phase M p M.

German dominance assumed such proportions that the Russian guards willingly gave the crown to the charming Elizabeth, mainly because she was “Petrov’s daughter.” But the illiterate Russian nobles were irresistibly attracted by the delights of European civilization, and it was no coincidence that D.I. Fonvizin put into the mouth of Ivanushka (the comedy “Brigadier”) the confession: “my body was born in Russia, but my spirit belongs to the French crown.” Europe of the 18th century gave the cultural elite of the Russian nobility, firstly, atheistic enlightenment in the spirit of Voltaire and Diderot and, secondly, Freemasonry, focused on spiritual and mystical quests.

The bloody French Revolution caused a negative reaction in Russian society and led to disappointment in the ideals of the Enlightenment. Macrocommunication imitation began to fade. In 1795, N. M. Karamzin wrote bitterly in the “Correspondence of Melidor to Philaret”: “Where are the people we loved? Where is the fruit of science and wisdom? Age of enlightenment, I don’t recognize you; in blood and flame, among murders and destruction, I don’t recognize you... I hide my face.” Paul I, fighting the revolutionary infection, banned the import of foreign books into the Russian Empire. The aggressive Napoleonic wars and the Patriotic War of 1812, it would seem, should finally alienate Russia from crazy Europe, but Russian officers returned from foreign campaigns criticizing not Europe, but his Fatherland. The Decembrists were Russian patriots, but they thought according to Western models.

In the 40s, two currents of Russian thought emerged and began to openly compete: Westernism and Slavophilism. The dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles is a struggle between two macrocommunication ideologies. Slavophiles asserted Russia's right to an equal dialogue with the West and saw Russia's mission not in conquering Europe with brute gendarme force, but in imparting new meanings to it (Orthodox ethics, conciliarity, altruism) that would heal the decrepit and decaying Europe of its weakness (communication formula M y M). Westerners emphasized Russia's belonging to Western culture and called for refraining from arrogant spiritual separatism and still willingly accepting the achievements of European progress, especially in terms of science, technology, democracy, and aesthetics (communication formula M and M).

Nikolaev official ideology, which had adopted the role of the “gendarme of Europe,” saw Western culture as a breeding ground for sedition that should be mercilessly suppressed. The depravity of this ideology was shown by the Crimean War. Reforms of Alexander II - modernization according to the Western model (M p M); counter-reforms of Alexander III were an attempt to “freeze” Russia in the spirit of Orthodoxy, autocracy, and nationality, but it was too late. The pendulum of Russian history was rapidly moving to the West.

Liberalism, constitutional democracy, social democracy, Marxism - all these are not Russian, but imported fruits. Perhaps only anarchism, decorated with the names of M.A. Bakunin and P.A. Kropotkin, is a domestic work. The Bolsheviks began building communism according to the Marxist scenario, developed not for Russia, but for industrialized Europe. The script had to be completely reworked, and now the pendulum of history is sweeping away Soviet Union into unknown distances. We cannot copy either bourgeois democracy, or bourgeois culture, or bourgeois science, we will go our own way, we will catch up and surpass America and Europe. Military victory, and then - the Iron Curtain, the fight against cosmopolitanism and servility to the West, ideologically consistent nationalism in the Soviet style. There is no longer a communication dialogue; this, according to the formula M y M, is information aggression (Table 2.1).

The Soviet Union has always waged an active offensive ideological struggle against any non-communist doctrines. The role of communicants in the international arena was played by the Comintern (the Third Communist International, created in 1919, dissolved in 1943) and the “fraternal communist parties” that existed in most countries of the world. A convincing argument in favor of the “advantages of socialism” was the victory of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War. This argument was fully exploited by communist propaganda; in the post-war years, a third of the world had a Soviet orientation.

But the ideological opponents of the Soviet Union were not asleep either. Since 1946, the Cold War began, which was a true information war, a war for the trust and sympathy of the world community. It was a confrontational dialogue according to the M d M formula. One after another, skillfully planned propaganda campaigns followed, using the Hungarian events of 1956 and the “Prague Spring” of 1968, space flights and sporting achievements, the Olympic Games and youth festivals, the Vietnam War and the War in Afghanistan. The fight was on equal terms, but in the 70s the United States managed to outplay Soviet strategists. The Soviet Union was drawn into a grueling arms race and a provocative program" star wars"Economic exhaustion, aggravated by the incompetence of the aging Politburo, led to a decline in the country's authority and the loss of the positions it had gained. Cold War ended with the defeat of the USSR, a defeat not on the battlefield, but in the virtual space of information wars. The USSR-West confrontation is over. The formula M d M was replaced again, as in Petrov’s time, by the student’s formula M p M.

It should be noted that the concepts of micro-, midi-, macrocommunication do not match with the concepts of interpersonal, group, mass communication, although they overlap with them. If we refer to the table. 2.1, it is clear that out of 7 types of microcommunication, only 3 relate to the interpersonal level, and macrocommunication is presented only in three cases out of seven at the level of mass communication. In this regard, let us clarify the subject of the theory of mass communication.

L. V. Petrov offers the following definition: “mass communication is the creation of a unified social field based on a process that includes, on the one hand, the extraction, processing and transmission of socially significant information using relatively high-speed technical devices, carried out by specialized institutions; and, on the other hand, the reception and assimilation of this information by numerically large, socially heterogeneous, dispersed audiences.” Thus, in the case of mass communication, technically equipped “specialized institutions” in the form of the press, cinema, radio, television act as communicants, and mass audiences act as recipients. Such communication interaction is characterized by the formula G and M (management of society), and it is precisely the problems of social management, as L.V. writes. Petrov, “creating a unified social field” is the main subject of the theory of mass communication. Thus, this theory does not study all forms of mass communication, but only one form of it - G u M, which can be called midi mass communication. Therefore, it cannot be considered either a theory of macrocommunication, or even a general theory of mass communication.

2.3.4. Cooperation and conflicts in communication activities

Table 2.1 presents the forms of communication activities depending on the actors involved and their communication roles. These forms can have different content: they can serve to strengthen cooperation and consensus between participants in communication, or they can express conflicting relationships, a struggle of views, and mistrust.

As the table shows, the most “peaceful” form is imitation: there is no basis for conflicts in all types of communication (micro-, midi-, macro-). The most “militant” form should be recognized as management, which presents such methods of imperative coercion as orders, censorship, information warfare, counter-propaganda, cultural imperialism and other disgusting phenomena of communication violence. True, it is becoming increasingly common in modern democratic societies manipulative management that replaces conflict-generating team coercion with soft psychological technologies that create in the recipient the illusion of freedom of choice and cooperation with the communicant (advertising, public relations, image making).

Dialogue communication is most consistent with the socio-psychological nature of people and therefore it brings the greatest satisfaction to the participants. It is dialogue, forming a community of “we,” that creates the basis for joint creative activity, for friendly communication, for the disclosure and development of the personal potential of partners. Dialogue at the level of microcommunication becomes a form of spiritual friendship and effective business cooperation, which does not deny fundamental disputes and differences of opinion. At the level of midicommunication, dialogical cooperation between various social groups is possible, including dialogue with the authorities, which again does not cancel rivalry and polemical discussions between opponents. To achieve national harmony and international cooperation, macrocommunication dialogue, in which peoples, states, and civilizations become participants, is of decisive importance.

The Christian preaching of love for one's neighbor, in essence, advocates a "diffuse" friendly fusion. P. A. Florensky explained: “Everyone externally seeks mine, A not me. The friend doesn’t want mine, and me. And the apostle writes: “I seek not yours, but you” (2 Cor. 12:14). The outsider seeks the “deed,” but the friend seeks “me.” External desires yours, but receives from you, from completeness, i.e. Part, and part of this melts in your hands like foam. Just a friend, wanting you, whatever you are, gets in you All, completeness and becomes richer in it." Israeli philosopher Martin Buber (1878-1965), emphasizing the differences between dialogue (subject-subject relationship) and management (subject-object relationship), postulates two types of human attitude to the surrounding reality: a) the "I- YOU", which presupposes a "flow from I to YOU", genuine understanding and reciprocity of communicating people; b) the "I-IT" relationship, when a person, being a subject of consciousness and action, perceives the objects around him and other people as impersonal objects serving for utilitarian use, exploitation, manipulation. The existence of people is thus divided into dialogical existence, when a dialogue unfolds between the individual and the world around him, between the individual and God, and monological (egocentric) existence, says M. Buber in his teaching. , called “dialogical personalism,” is possible only in the first case. Thus, the form of communication activity acquires an ideological sound.

It is interesting to note that different literary styles occupy different places in the table. 2.2, moving from imitation to management and further to dialogue. Old Russian hagiographical writings (lives of the holy fathers), as well as romantic (J. Byron, A. Bestuzhev-Marlinsky, M. Lermontov) and utopian-journalistic works (N. Chernyshevsky, P. Lavrov, N. Ostrovsky) offered their readers examples for imitation, a reference group, thereby controlling their behavior through the formula I and G.

Enlightenment and critical-realist literature, starting from N. M. Karamzin and ending with M. Gorky, cultivated subject-object relationships with the “friend-reader”, which corresponds to the formula of cooperation between G and M or G and G. In modernism, which shocks the reading public (remember “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste”) and professing self-charmed egocentrism, the control scheme of G and G operates, but with conflicting content. Socialist realism, which propagated party doctrines, belongs to the G and M formula, as do all means of propaganda seeking to establish cooperation with recipients.

Unlike previous aesthetic styles, where the author invariably considered himself a prophet, a teacher of life, a “genius” (modernism), in modern Russian postmodernism the author refrains from a managerial monologue and invites the reader to participate in an intellectual game with texts. At the same time, as a prerequisite, it is assumed that the readers know those “primary texts”, those “quotations” from which the postmodernist constructs his “secondary” work. For example, they turn to classical literature of the 19th century ("Pushkin House" by A. Bitov, "The Soul of a Patriot or Various Messages to Ferfichkin" by Evg. Popov) or to Soviet culture (the direction of socialist art, working with images, symbols, ideologies of the Soviet time, - “Polysandry” by Sasha Sokolov, “Kangaroo” by Yuz Aleshkovsky). Postmodernism finds itself in the class of G d G, where the dialogical cooperation of elite writers and elite readers is realized.

It must be admitted that the problems of cooperation and conflict have not been the subject of close attention of our scientists until recently. True, one cannot help but recall the ethical ideas of the remarkable anarchist theorist Pyotr Alekseevich Kropotkin (1842-1921). In contrast to social Darwinism, which reduced the law of the struggle for existence to an immoral war of “all against all,” Kropotkin defended the principle of universal cooperation in nature and society, mutual assistance as a factor of evolution. Referring to the institution of sociability, that is, the innate need for communication, Kropotkin explained the origin of clan communities, labor cooperation, cultural progress and the future communist society.

In the first years of Soviet power, Alexey Kapitonovich Gastev (1882-1941), a Russian scientist and poet, acted as the founder Central Institute of Labor(1920), where the methodology of scientific organization and work culture developed, paying considerable attention to communication between employees. The ideas of this methodology were developed in ergonomics - science that studies the relationship “man - tool”, and in modern management theories.

In the 90s, it was not the problems of creative cooperation that became relevant, but the problems of conflict resolution. It turned out that conflicts are an inevitable companion of social life, presented at all levels of social communication - interpersonal, group, mass. Formed conflictology, which is one of the applied social and communication disciplines. The subject of conflictology is marital conflicts, labor conflicts, interethnic and political conflicts and other conflict situations. The theoretical and methodological foundation for the study of both cooperation and conflict is social Psychology, where the problem of communication has always occupied a central place.

2.4. Communication as a socio-psychological and communication category

The category "communication" is often identified with the category "communication". This identification occurs by itself in English-language texts, where besides communication there is no other word to translate the Russian “communication”. In the "Psychological Dictionary" edited by V. P. Zinchenko and B. G. Meshcheryakov (M.: Pedagogika-Press, 1996) the following reference is given: Communication, cm. Communication. Communication is defined as “the interaction of two or more people, consisting in the exchange of information between them of a cognitive or affective nature,” that is, the exchange of knowledge or emotions. Social scientist Yu. D. Prilyuk came to the conclusion that “etymologically and semantically, the terms “communication” and “communication” are identical.”

However, there are social psychologists who take a broader view. B. D. Parygin states: “By communication we must mean not only relations of sympathy or antipathy on the scale of a small group, but also any social relationship in general - economic, political, since it has its own socio-psychological side and manifests itself in more or less indirect contact between people... The entire set of social relations of society, regardless of their scale (micro- or macroenvironment) can be considered as one of the manifestations and results of communication between people.”

Identifying the categories “communication” and “social communication” would be the easiest and simplest solution, but there is a danger of losing important aspects of the category “communication” that have been missed by communication theories. Usually, communication is included in the practical activities of people (joint work, cognition, play), although there is also the possibility of isolating communication into an independent activity that satisfies a person’s needs for contacts with other people, i.e., a communication need. In general, there are three sides, or three plans of communication (G. M. Andreeva, B. D. Parygin, A. V. Petrovsky, M. G. Yaroshevsky):

1. The perceptual side is mutual perception, the desire to understand the motives of the partners’ behavior;
2. The communicative side is the exchange of statements, symbolic messages;
3. The interactive side is the exchange of not only words, but also actions in accordance with the accepted program of joint practical activities.

Thus, communication appears as the sum of three different processes: perception (people’s knowledge of each other) + communication, taken as verbal-verbal-speech activity + joint purposeful actions, for example, building a house or playing football. There are four simplifications in this equation: first, the communicative side is reduced to verbal communication, consisting of the exchange of statements, and is overlooked wordless communication between people, for example, mutual understanding between players of a football team or dance partners, coordinated actions of large game hunters or soldiers on the battlefield, etc.; in these cases, side B drops out, but sides A and B remain; secondly, taking into account the case of transformation of communication into the content of communication, when side B falls out, it should be stated obligation presence in all cases of communication of the act of perception and optionality sides B and C; thirdly, interaction, i.e. joint work activity, can be in the form of physical labor (material production) or in the form of mental labor (spiritual production); This distinction is fundamentally important, because joint spiritual production is essentially merges with verbal communication between participants (for example, brainstorming, scientific debate, co-authorship of publications), but in the case of material production there is no such merger; fourthly, this formula is generally not suitable for written communication or electronic communication.

As a result, a simple arithmetic formula: O (communication) = A (perception) + B (communication) + C (interaction) turns into a more complex logical formula:

O = A Λ (B V ¬ B) Λ (B V ¬ B).

The formula reads like this: communication is perception A And(Λ - sign of conjunction - logical multiplication) verbal communication B or(V - sign of disjunction - logical addition) lack of one(¬ - negative sign, logical NOT) and material interaction IN or lack thereof. Since the case when there is neither B nor C is excluded (there can be no communication), the following options remain:

1. O 1 = A Λ B Λ C - material labor accompanied by verbal communication;
2. O 2 =A Λ B - communication through verbal (verbal) communication, spiritual work, in which B = B;
3. O 3 = A Λ B - material labor without verbal accompaniment;
4. O 4 = A Λ ¬ B - communication through non-verbal (non-verbal) communication.

Soviet philosophers and social psychologists who conceptualized the problem of communication, as a rule, had option 1 in mind and identified the concept of communication with the concept of der Verkehr (German connection, message, movement), used in the works of K. Marx. According to Marx, communication (Verkehr) is not limited to the movement of meanings, it can take a material form. Material communication reflects production relations between people (division of labor, ownership of property, management and execution), which are realized in the process of material production. According to this option, social communication, i.e. the movement of meanings in social time and space, turns out to be part social communication.

The remaining options show the limitations of this conclusion. Option 3, where there is no verbal communication at all, removes the question of the relationship between communication and communication. As for options 2 and 4, before analyzing their content, it is necessary to state continuity of perception not only with communication, but also with oral communication in verbal and non-verbal form.

In fact, real communication action in all its forms - imitation, control, dialogue - necessarily includes partners’ perception of each other, the formation of their images (images) in the minds of the subjects of communication and their emotional experience, i.e. perception. For effective management or dialogue, it is important to predict the recipient’s reaction to a particular message; you need to know the motives that guide him, his expectations and communication skills. On the other hand, the recipient forms his attitude towards the communicant: indifference, trust, sympathy, etc. In short, the communicator and the recipient “model the communicatively significant personality traits of the interlocutor” (A. A. Leontyev).

Based on the above, options 2 and 4 turn into statements: communication is spiritual work in the form of verbal (verbal) communication or communication is non-verbal (non-verbal) communication. These statements can be combined and then it turns out that oral communication in these cases is not part of communication (option 1), but is identical to communication.

So, we come to the following conclusions:

1. Oral communication: does not exist outside of communication, while communication may not include verbal communication.
2. The relationship between oral communication and communication occurs in two ways:
   1. communication is the spiritual component of material and production communication (part of communication);
   2. communication exhausts the content of spiritual communication (is identical to communication).
3. Oral communication activity is the spiritual communication of social subjects. Let us draw attention to the fact that this definition does not contradict the definition of communication activity as the movement of meanings in social space; after all, the spiritual communication of social subjects is nothing more than the mentioned movement.
4. Written communication and electronic communication coincide with written communication, since joint material and production activities are excluded.

2.5. Games and pseudo-games

The game is a communication between people, which can occur in three options:

• A game within the framework of non-verbal (non-verbal) communication, for example, sports games.
• A game within the framework of verbal communication, for example, language games like crosswords and puzzles.
• A game that combines verbal and non-verbal communication, such as dramatic performance.

But the essence of the game is not limited to communication; the game is not only the transfer of meanings, but also Creation new meanings. Therefore, the game is a creative and communicative action.

Game is an indispensable companion to the development of humanity. On the stage archaeocultures games performed extremely important functions. They were used for the socialization of the younger generation (especially the initiation rite), to prepare for collective hunting, and for training. But educational and training functions were not the main ones in ancient gaming activities; the main field of play is intraliteral - these are holidays, rituals, primitive art (dances, music, petrography, myths). All these activities are associated with the creation, storage, dissemination and assimilation of meanings, i.e. they represent archaeocultural creative and communicative activities. IN collective games primitive comprehended a feeling of unity with the team, joined the social memory of the community and tried to make his own contribution to this memory.

Becoming paleocultures led to the formation of socio-cultural institutions - religion, art, education, literature, and finally, science and journalism; the game was pushed into the leisure environment as some kind of frivolous activity. But among all nations, games have been preserved in the form of holidays that have the sacred meaning of communication with divine forces, as well as everyday festive communication. The communication significance of the Olympic Games and the grandiose holidays of imperial Rome is undeniable: these were forums for communication between citizens and the transmission of traditions from generation to generation. Christian culture condemned demonic games; Christ never laughed and there are no iconographic images of smiling saints or great martyrs. But even in the dark ages of the Middle Ages, along with ritually strict church holidays, knightly and poetic tournaments, masquerades flourished, carnivals, bullfights, and folk festivals rooted in cheerful paganism were practiced.

In paleoculture, there has been a division of cultural activity into two channels: folk culture, was of a playful nature, and elite professional culture, guided by non-gaming norms and standards. Both cultures ensured the movement of the meanings they created in social time and space.

Neoculture liberated the masses, working people had leisure and with it an increased demand for entertainment, games, and shows. In the 20th century, the leisure industry developed, which occupied all communication channels and means: newspapers, magazines and books, theater and cinema, radio broadcasting and television. The gaming essence of this industry is obvious: its machines did not produce material goods, but entertainment items that filled the leisure time of idle people. To the two varieties of culture - folk and elite - a third variety was added - commercial popular culture- a characteristic sign of mature neoculture.

Post-neoculture, which has multimedia computer tools, has enriched the entertainment market computer games. Computer games quickly became very popular: sociologists found that Americans annually spend more dollars on computer games than on buying sound recordings, movie and theater tickets combined. Computer games have been accompanying the younger generation since childhood, causing, on the one hand, physical inactivity, atrophy of the musculoskeletal system and muscles, and on the other hand, quickly developing intelligence, i.e. logical thinking and human imagination. A computer player gets used to moving from one virtual world to another, quickly perceiving unfamiliar situations and adapting to them. In a rapidly changing society XXI century, developed intellectual flexibility will ensure adaptation to new, unexpected realities. Computer games thus perform the function of socializing youth in a post-industrial society, similar to archaeocultural mysteries.

So, games have been fulfilling the creative and communication mission of creating and transmitting socially recognized meanings in social space and time from Paleolithic times to the present day. But how do games differ from other types of socio-cultural activities, and what is their enduring charm?

1. Every game exists free activity, play by order - not a game, in extreme cases - an imitation of a game. Having freely entered the game, a person can just as freely leave it. Something that can be stopped at the request of the participants is a game; non-game is something that cannot be stopped at will. Coquetry is a game, but love is not; legal laws are a game, laws of nature are not a game.

2. The game does not pursue the acquisition of material products, like labor, but it is not aimless. The goal of the game is winning, winning which may be of a moral, emotional or material nature; in the general case, moral and emotional incentives are more important, the loss of which leads to the degeneration of the game into a non-game activity.

3. Achieving a win requires non-trivial, innovative decisions from players, so the game can be qualified as creative productive activity. During the game, not only are they transmitted, but also created new meanings.

4. The game as a “kingdom of freedom” opposes ordinary real life as the kingdom of necessity. The demonstrative otherness of the game is determined by the enclosed space of the game (temple, arena, screen, classroom, office, etc.); regulation of time - the beginning and end of the game, periods of its repetition are established; use of costumes, passwords, masks; the isolation of the players, the limited circle of them initiated into the “secret” of the game; the inviolability of voluntarily adopted rules. But there may be no demonstrative signs; on the contrary, the game can be disguised, which is typical for hypocrites, seducers, deceivers and other attackers.

5. Thanks to freedom, a creative environment, harmonious order, and a break from everyday life, play creates temporary, limited perfection in the chaos of everyday life. She is able to charm people, satisfying them aesthetic need.

6. The game is unpredictable, But fair a test of strength, perseverance, courage, resourcefulness, will, intelligence, charm, erudition of the players, and thereby satisfies ethical need; That’s why people are so outraged by incorrect refereeing, cheating, unfair competition, which offends the sense of justice.

As a result, we get the following definition: Game is a creative (productive) spiritual communication of independent subjects, carried out within the framework of voluntarily accepted or conventional rules and possessing ethical and aesthetic appeal. Spiritual communication, as shown in paragraph 2.4, always has a communication side, that is, it is associated with the transfer of known meanings; creative communication in the form of a game involves not only communication of the known, but also the production of new meanings. Therefore, play is a creative communicative action.

The game is bilateral, if there are between players subject-subjective relationships characterized by ease, interest, and willingness to follow the rules of the game. But she may also be one-sided, if not all participants involved in the game want to become players or are aware that they are participating in some kind of games. Then there are subject-object or object-subjective relationships due to which the participants-objects become victims of deception, mystification, delusion and, instead of winning, find disappointment.

It is not difficult to understand that in a two-way game there is a communication dialogue; one-sided subject-object relationships are characteristic of management, where the subject “plays” with the object, like a cat with a mouse; One-sided object-subject relationships are inherent in imitation. Thus, game situations correlate well with forms of communicative actions (see Fig. 2.1). This conclusion is confirmed by the typification of games.

Every game is expedient, but the goals pursued by the playing subjects may be different. Depending on the goal, games are divided into four types:

A masquerade game, which consists in hiding the true intentions, the actual state of the playing subject, his personality. The goal of the game in this case is manipulation partner, viewers, public, control them in the desired way. The masquerade game is used in microcommunication - the psychotechnics of D. Carnegie is a vivid example of this, in party propaganda, in information wars(see paragraph 2.3). It is clear that the masquerade game is a one-sided game.

An illusion game is another example of a one-sided game, but only a game of the subject with himself, self-manipulation. The goal is to go into virtual fantasy worlds in search of mental relief, hedonistic experiences, and to escape from everyday obligations. The game of illusion apparently underlies folklore creativity, voracious reading of literature, and the basis computer games, captivating with the fabulous fantasy of their virtual worlds.

The game-solving game consists of cognition, disclosure, exposure of the real, but hidden, disguised essence of a person, event, mysterious object. There are three possible cases here, which are different variants object-subject relations: the object is deliberately involved in the game by the subject himself in order to recognize its essence; the object is specially offered to the solver, the subject (recipient), so that he can show his ingenuity, erudition, intuition, for example, charades, mysterious drawings, etc.; the subject uses the object to imitate it.

The game-competition ("agonal" game from the Latin "agon" - public competition, public battle) is a two-sided game, a subject-subject dialogue, the essence of which is the struggle to achieve victory, to prove one's superiority. This includes gambling, games of chance, lotteries, etc., which represent a “game with fate.” The main gain is a feeling of self-affirmation, satisfaction, and the delight of victory, although many participants, such as professional athletes, are not indifferent to the accompanying material prizes.

The attractiveness of gaming activity lies in the unforeseenness of the final result, in the creative contribution that the subject must make in order to remove this uncertainty. As already noted, every game is a creative activity, but only figuratively can we say that all creativity is a play of the physical and spiritual forces of the human creator. Creativity extends not only to play, but also to non-game labor and spiritual activity. For example, technical inventions and lawmaking are dictated by objective circumstances, and not by a disinterested thirst for self-expression. At the same time, it happens that gaming activity loses its creative component and degenerates into a pseudo-game.

2.5.2. Pseudo-game as a non-creative communication action

A pseudo-game is a game that has lost its creative component, but has retained the communication component contained in game form. A pseudo-game does not have ease, voluntariness, or unpredictability of the result; on the contrary, it is a mandatory sequence of predetermined actions, deviations from which are not allowed. These actions are communication verbal or non-verbal actions, devoid of creative content. Therefore, pseudo-game can be defined as a non-creative communication action. Pseudo-games are divided into labor service and ritual.

Pseudo-game labor service is carried out under the influence of external coercion (obligation, duty, violence). Thus, an actor who has lost inspiration is forced to present the audience with a pseudo-act, because he cannot leave the stage. Acting turns into a labor service, the fulfillment of which requires not innovative-productive, but imitative-reproductive activity, which creates the appearance of a playful, even theatrical action. Another example is a student who forces himself to master an academic subject that is uninteresting to him by cramming.

The game form can, borrowing a theatrical term, be called a performance, i.e. a way of performing, presenting some meaning to recipients. In a performance, the priority is not words, but non-verbal actions, behavior of participants. Performance communication is used not only in the theater, but also in public holidays and carnivals, political shows and demonstrations, corporate presentations and advertising campaigns, but its origins were in sacred rituals and palace ceremonies.

Rituals are divided into ritual And everyday. The ceremonial ritual was originally a sacred rite, a mystical dialogue with supernatural forces. It is clear that such dialogue is a serious matter on which the well-being of society depends. Therefore, serious content was clothed in theatrical performance in order to make it more palatable for divine recipients. Since improvisation was excluded, religious ritual was originally an obligatory service, not free play. Elaborate ceremonies were developed in paleoculture to communicate with the "earth gods" - various rulers.

Subsequently, ritual began to be understood as strictly observed traditional rituals of any social actions, for example, festive processions and meetings, wedding celebrations, funerals, etc. Ritual rituals do not have such signs of play as creative innovations, free entry and exit, unpredictability of the result, but retain emotional and ethical appeal thanks to a bright playful form (performance).

The ceremonial ritual is approaching game of illusion, because it is characterized by the function of social self-manipulation, smoothing out social differences and conflicts, demonstrating solidarity and unity (which are almost always absent in real social life). It can be called a “pseudo-illusion game”, playing out traditional plots in predetermined circumstances. That is why the ritual behavior of the masses was intensively implanted by totalitarian regimes as performances confirming loyalty to the regime (parades, rallies, demonstrations, etc.). This issue is comprehensively discussed in Glebkin V.V.’s monograph “Ritual in Soviet Culture.”

Everyday ritual or etiquette is a standard, stable norm of everyday communication between people, accepted in a given culture. It is assumed that ritual etiquette behavior is only a formal procedure that does not reveal the true feelings and intentions of the participants. That’s why they say: “for him this is only a ritual,” implying, if not direct hypocrisy and pretense, then at least a discrepancy between the inner world and external performance.

Ritual etiquette norms play a big role in cultural communication. The phenomenon of tact is the ritualization of everyday life. A tactful person will not insert a remark about his own personal problem into a conversation, even if it means a thousand times more to him more important than the topic small talk. He will not pay attention to the inappropriate remark or tactless act of another. In contrast to ritual rituals, which are a “pseudo-game-illusion,” everyday etiquette is closer to a “pseudo-game-masquerade.” Two conclusions follow from the above:

• Pseudo-game- a communication tool developed by society for preserving and transmitting significant meanings over time; this is quite important element social memory, operating at all stages of cultural development - from archeoculture to postneoculture.
• Two-way game, which has a dialogue communication form, is the primary source of the most important cultural meanings. I. Huizinga, the famous Dutch culturologist, asserted, not without reason: “in myth and in cult great people are born driving forces cultural life: law and order, communication, entrepreneurship, crafts and art, poetry, scholarship and science. Therefore, they are also rooted in the same soil of game action."

2.6. Truth and lies in communication activities

The meanings (knowledge, skills, emotions, incentives) that communicators convey to recipients are not always truthful, sincere, or reliable. Lies, deceit, illusion, deceit are communication phenomena, they do not exist outside of social communication. Animals do not betray or deceive each other; they do not have the “instinct of lies and deceit,” and their minds are not developed enough to invent something that does not actually exist. True, in interspecies struggle they practice various “strategic tricks” in order to confuse the enemy and save their lives, for example, mimicry, obfuscation, etc., but in general, animal communication is always truthful.

Simple-minded Homo sapiens in the Stone and Bronze Ages did not know theft and treachery, they naively believed every word, and even more so an oath, did not have locks on the doors, were not jealous of their wives and confidentially communicated with spiritualized nature. However, in military affairs provocations, ambushes, even perjury were allowed (remember specific Rus'), and myths, fairy tales and folklore served as sources of fiction and imaginary worlds. The development of civilization and communication, the emergence of cities, trade, usury, bureaucracy, writing, and fine arts contributed to the corruption of aging humanity. Marquis L. Vovenart (1715-1747), a contemporary of Voltaire, highly valued by him, sadly remarked: “all people are born sincere and die liars.” Count Honore Mirabeau (1749-1791) explained why this is so: “To be sincere in life means to enter into battle with unequal weapons and fight with an open chest against a man protected by a shell and ready to stab you with a dagger.” Oscar Wilde expressed the same idea more succinctly: “a little sincerity is a dangerous thing, but a lot of sincerity is certainly fatal.” A bleak picture of social communications emerges, saturated with deception, slander, falsehood, delusions, and hypocrisy. But let’s not give in to despondency, but try to understand the confusing problem of truth and lies.

As shown in section 2.4, communication activity is the spiritual communication of social actors, which includes two spiritual processes: oral communication and perception. In addition, communication includes the joint material and labor activities of communication partners. It follows that sources of lies can be:

• speech is an unreliable communication activity;
• the image of a partner is the result of an erroneous perception;
• failure to cooperate is the result of malicious interaction.

Malicious interaction or deceit - this is participation in material activity with the aim of preventing its successful completion, for example espionage, provocation, betrayal. Malicious interaction involves a mask (mask) that hides the true intentions of the spy or traitor and provides erroneous perception, as well as misleading communication actions, especially speech, which excludes detection. A type of deceit is perfidy(perjury) - violation of assumed obligations, use to the detriment of the trust of the recipient. Cunning and treachery are social actions that go beyond the scope of communication activities, although they include some communication actions. We will turn to truth and lies as characteristics of communication activities.

Truth should be distinguished as a dispassionate and adequate reflection of events and phenomena real world and the truth associated with the communicant’s awareness moral responsibility for your statements. It should be noted that this distinction is not characteristic of Western European peoples, but has long existed in the minds of Russian people. The idea has taken root in the Russian mentality that truth that is not connected with goodness and justice is a flawed truth and may even not be the truth at all. Of course, we are talking about truth not in the natural sciences or mathematics, but about truth in social life, where truth, or rather truth, serves as the motive for certain actions. It is no coincidence that Russian ethical philosophers N.K. Mikhailovsky and N.A. Berdyaev used the concepts of “truth-truth” and “truth-justice” in their works, giving preference to the latter. To summarize the opinions, we can state the following differences between “truth” and “truth”:

1. Truth is a category of logic and theory of knowledge, expressing the correspondence of our knowledge about the world to the world itself. Truth is a category of the psychology of mutual understanding, expressing not only the correspondence of knowledge to the world, but also a person’s attitude towards true knowledge. We know the truth, and we understand the truth (not only with our minds, but also with our feelings). Truth always contains a grain of truth, without this it cannot be true. But this grain is still not enough. Truth is a truth that has received a subjective assessment, the moral sanction of society. This circumstance leads to the fact that when comprehending the same truth, different versions of the truth may appear.

2. The motives for speaking the truth and telling the truth are different. The motive for publishing the truth: the purification of public knowledge from errors. The motives for telling the truth depend on the personal goals of the communicant, which can be: a) a selfish goal - obtaining some benefits - fame, the halo of a “truth-seeker”, the destruction of an opponent; b) self-affirmation, expression of one’s credo, “better the bitter truth than the sweet lie”; c) pedagogical and educational goal: sincere conviction that the truth will contribute to the moral improvement of the recipient; d) self-improvement through speaking the truth, despite possible adverse consequences.

3. For a Russian person, truth is only the truth in which he believes; no matter how convincing the evidence for the truth of the reported fact is, the fact is not perceived by the Russian as truth until he believes in it. The main obstacle to believing the truth of a message is that it does not correspond to ideas about what should happen, that is, what can and should happen in a given situation. The contradiction between reason and feelings becomes a psychological barrier due to which the truth is perceived as a lie.

4. Many recipients prefer to evaluate the veracity of a message primarily according to the criterion of fairness, i.e. from the point of view of their own ideal relationship between people, and not according to the criterion of objective truth.

In the metatheory of social communication, the following definition can be accepted: Truth - a reliable and subjectively motivated message from the communicant that does not contradict the ethical ideas of the recipient. This message can be text ("tell the truth") or action ("act truthfully"). The concept of truth is applicable only to the text.

The opposite of truth - not true(falsehood) manifests itself in three varieties. Firstly, untruth is a delusion: the communicator believes in the reality of the existence of something, but is mistaken; as a result, he tells a lie without meaning to. Secondly, a half-truth is a message that combines correct and incorrect information due to limited knowledge, incomplete knowledge of the situation, and trust in unreliable sources, such as rumors. Thirdly, a lie is a deliberate distortion of information. According to Augustine, “a lie is something said with the intention of telling a lie.” Let us pay attention to the fact that from a formal-logical position, all three types of untruth are equivalent in the sense that they do not correspond to the real state of affairs; Ethics is a different matter: from an ethical position, lying is condemned as an immoral act, and delusion can be justified.

In communication activities, truth is used in management and dialogue, which are motivated by cooperation; false is used in conflict situations dishonest dispute or selfish management of recipients. Deception (fraud) - communication control through lies or half-truths. For example, the recipient is told a half-truth with the expectation that he will draw erroneous conclusions that are consistent with the fraudster’s intentions. It is said that in the final race the Soviet athlete took an honorable second place, and his opponent came second to last, but it is not reported that there were only two participants. Consequently, a fraudulent communicator may avoid outright lies, but give the recipient a distorted picture of reality. Deception is a close relative of deceit and treachery, but it belongs to the realm of texts, not actions.

Successful deception is usually based on the effect of disappointed expectations. The deceiver takes into account the recipient's expectations, giving him false but expected information. Let us remember A.S. Pushkin:

Ah, it’s not difficult to deceive me!..

I'm happy to be deceived myself!

In this case, the deceived becomes an involuntary accomplice in deception, a victim of his own inadequate ideas about reality.

Illusion is voluntary self-deception when the recipient agrees to believe what the communicator reports. If deception is communication control to the detriment recipient, then the illusion is communication control for the benefit of recipient. Illusory, fantastic pictures are used in fiction, fine arts, opera, theater, cinema, and computer multimedia. Despite the obvious conventions, viewers, readers, and listeners succumb to the charm of the truth of art and enjoy this “truth.” Thus, I. A. Bunin admired the fact that Leo Tolstoy did not have a single false word in all his books. By the way, we note that irony, metaphor, joke, grotesque is not a deception, but an illusory “truth of art.” As a result of our conceptual and terminological analysis, the following oppositions emerge:

• Truth - Truth;
• Truth - Falsehood, including Misconception, Half-Truth, Lie, Illusion;
• Truth - Deception, Treachery, Cunning.

Let us note that Truth, in its Russian understanding, can justify not only delusion or half-truths, but also outright lies (“white lies,” for example), but is not compatible with actions of deception, perfidy, and deceit (“acts not in accordance with the truth”). . Let us also note that Truth goes beyond the boundaries of communication activity (truth-justice), as do its antipodes: deception, perfidy, deceit.

It is desirable that the principle of truthfulness be observed in all types of communication activities, at the interpersonal, group and mass levels. But this principle is understood in different ways. There are three points of view.

Truth for truth's sake (ethical purism). A complete liberation of communication messages from misconceptions, half-truths, lies, and deception is required. Thus, Academician D.S. Likhachev wrote: “Half-truth is the worst kind of lie: in half-truth, the lie is counterfeited as truth, covered with a shield of partial truth.” L.N. Tolstoy stated: “I would write the epigraph to the story: “I will not hide anything.” Not only is it not to lie directly, you need to try to lie, negatively and silently.”

People who adhere to the rule “truth comes at any cost” often injure the psyche of other people in everyday life. They do not think about the possible reaction of the recipient, guided by the dogmatically reinforced belief that “a bitter truth is better than a sweet lie.” The motive for the action of a truth-seeking purist is often satisfaction from a supposedly fulfilled duty (“opened people’s eyes”). Tactlessness is truth for truth's sake in the mouth of a stupid person.

However, despite the calls of ethical purists contained in the biblical commandments, in real communication the ideal of absolute truthfulness cannot be achieved for four reasons:

• honest misconceptions a communicator who may not have full and true knowledge of the facts being discussed, without knowing it;
• subjectivity of selection facts included in the message. For example, it is, in principle, impossible for a truth-seeking historian to tell about everything that took place in reality, and in this case, the “silence” condemned by L.N. Tolstoy is almost inevitable;
• inequality of social status communicator and recipient. So, when parents ask their child “where do children come from?” it is not necessary to tell the absolute truth; the military leader should not openly tell the soldiers the combat situation; the director of the company is not obliged to disclose company secrets, etc.
• psychological limitations. Psychology, in principle, denies the possibility of a true description of any fact due to unintentional, unconscious, involuntary distortions introduced by conscientious witnesses and observers.

Truth and white lies (morally sound communication). The communicator, communicating the truth known to him, strives first of all to bring benefit (good) to the recipient or other person in question, guided by the criteria of justice and goodness, and not by straightforward love of truth. If the brutal truth can be used to harm someone or mentally traumatize a person unaware of it, silence is preferable.

In the case of ethically justifiable lying, the requirement of truthfulness is overcome by a stronger ethical imperative, known from the New Testament as the “white lie.” Examples of such humane lies: misleading a patient by a doctor guided by medical ethics; concealing a plane crash to avoid panic; the silence of a prisoner in the face of the enemy.

The smartest N. Ya. Mandelstam wrote in her memoirs: “Without lies, I would not have survived in our terrible days. And I lied all my life - to students, in the service, to good acquaintances whom I did not fully trust, and these were the majority. And no one told me at the same time, I didn’t believe it - it was an ordinary lie of our era, something like stereotypical politeness, I’m not ashamed of this lie...” Who has the conscience to reproach her for this lie?

Truth and falsehood for calculation (self-serving pragmatism) occurs when the truth is revealed in order to discredit someone, to benefit personally. A lie of convenience is a deception for selfish, party, or state interests, but not for the sake of ethical considerations. A lie caused by extra-moral considerations is communication violence.

How are different understandings of truthfulness implemented in practice? The ethical purism of absolutely true communication, as already noted, is practically unattainable. Even science, always considered the citadel of true knowledge, refuses to achieve it. The words of the founder of the Athenian philosophical school, Anaxagoras (c. 500-428 BC), remain relevant: “Nothing can be completely known, nothing can be fully learned, nor V which cannot be fully verified: feelings are limited, the mind is weak, life is short." P. Laplace (1749-1827) 2200 years later stated: "what we know is limited, and what we do not know is infinite." Prominent The 20th century philosopher Karl Popper proclaimed that the principle of the movement of scientific knowledge is not the confirmation (verification) of scientific truths, but, on the contrary, their falsification, i.e. refutation. So, ethical purism is illusory and can be discarded. Other interpretations of the principle of truthfulness are used at different levels of social life. communication activities.

Interpersonal communication. Truth and lies for the greater good are manifested in everyday etiquette, in stereotypical politeness, which N. Mandelstam wrote about as “the usual lie of our era.” The famous female coquetry and capriciousness, the tendency to pretense and the favor of flattery have more than once served as a target for male wit. Stendhal stated categorically: “Being completely sincere for a woman is the same as appearing in public without a dress.” D. Diderot: “Women drink flattering lies in one sip, and the bitter truth in drops.” The gallant G. Flaubert finds an excuse for the fair sex: “Women are taught to lie, no one ever tells them the truth, and if sometimes they have to hear it, they are struck by it as something extraordinary.” Of course, the female lot at the beginning of the 21st century is significantly different from the lifestyle of women in the 19th century, but has the psychology of femininity changed radically? E. Ryazanov, who wrote: “Love is a deceitful country, where every person is a deceiver,” is as right as O. Balzac, who said: “Love is a game in which one always cheats.”

Truth and lies of convenience cause a lot of grief in everyday life: from professional swindlers, deceivers and cheaters like Sonya Zolotoy Ruchka to the sophisticated manipulation of the consciousness of one’s neighbor according to the recipes of Dale Carnegie. Who has not had to deal with the hypocrisy, duplicity, slander, cunning, rudeness and stupidity that clog everyday communication? All these are the fruits of communication violence in interpersonal communication. How can one not recall M. M. Zoshchenko, who wrote at one time: “As for deceit, then - alas! - we undoubtedly still have it, and let’s not close our eyes - there is a fair amount of it... And we even have special names we have chosen to denote this - double-dealers, schemers, adventurers, swindlers, araps, and so on. From this it is quite clear that we still have enough of this goodness. But the only good thing about us is that we have complete confidence that over time we will have this. we won’t be there. And why should he be, since there’s no reason left for that.” Zoshchenko, of course, was lying. But he himself complained about “the too soft pen of the gentlemen writers, who sometimes wrote far from what they thought. And vice versa.”

Group communication. Truth and lies for good are created by people of faith, and their breeding grounds are missionaries and preachers, magicians, fortune-tellers, and astrologers. Utopias composed by noble dreamers (T. More, T. Campanella, A. Saint-Simon, C. Fourier, R. Owen, K. Marx and F. Engels) are white lies. A. S. Pushkin dreamed of the triumph of truth and justice when he exclaimed:

The darkness of low truths is dearer to me

A deception that exalts us.

The “truth of art,” which has already been mentioned, of course, serves for the benefit of various groups of its admirers. Medical calls like “The Ministry of Health warns: smoking is dangerous for your health” are a manifestation of sincere concern for the welfare of smoking citizens, but only a quarter of smokers trust these calls.

Truth and lies of convenience extend not only to military affairs, intelligence, counterintelligence and other law enforcement agencies, but also to the sphere of business, entrepreneurship and trade, where ethically pure mutually beneficial transactions are as rare as incorruptible courts. No wonder the American millionaire Morgan said: “What cannot be done for money can be done for a lot of money.”

The struggle of political parties, scientific schools, movements in art cannot do without slander, insults, deception and direct violence. Let us remember the struggle between the “Karamzinists” and the “Shishkovists” in early XIX century; persecution of “nihilists” who allegedly set fire to shops in St. Petersburg; provocateurs of the tsarist secret police S. Degaev, E. Azef, R. Malinovsky; finally, Lysenkoism and the sciences repressed in the Soviet Union - pedology, genetics, cybernetics, the theory of social communication.

Mass communication. Mass audiences have always been considered by ambitious and power-hungry individuals and active social groups as an object of communication management. Few cared about the welfare of the people and therefore the principle of truth and falsehood of convenience triumphed. Our time is especially rich in professionals in the field of communication violence. Advertising, image-making, public relations are areas of skillful manipulation of the gullible public. Would financial pyramids like MMM be possible without advertising? Mass communications, supported by an army of talented technologists, have especially powerful potential. They skillfully use silence, selection and distortion of facts, constructing versions, and spreading rumors. They create a repulsive image of the enemy and an attractive image of their “master” who pays for communication services. The personality cult of the leader was created Soviet writers and newspapermen in accordance with the party order, and did not arise spontaneously among the people.

However, the masses who strive for truth easily succumb to lies for the benefit of. The oldest "white lie" was mythology, which has now degenerated into rumors, social mythology, sometimes deliberately distributed by cunning technologists. The secret of the influence of myth on mass consciousness is as follows:

• the myth is convincing because it simultaneously affects the rational and emotional spheres;
• myth mobilizes for action: it paints an attractive private example, instilling the illusion of its general availability;
• the myth corresponds to the aspirations, expectations, and habitual stereotypes of the social environment.

2.7. conclusions

1. Communication action is a completed operation of semantic interaction that occurs without changing communication participants. Depending on the purpose of the participants, the communication action can be carried out in three forms: imitation, control, dialogue. Communication activity consists of communication actions. The predominant form of communication actions (imitation, or control, or dialogue) becomes the form of the corresponding communication activity.

2. The subjects and objects of communication activities can be: an individual person (I), a social group (G), a mass aggregate, up to society as a whole (M). Those types of communication activities where I, or G, or M act as an active, purposeful subject are called microcommunication, midicommunication, and macrocommunication, respectively. Those types where I, or G, or M act as the object of influence are called interpersonal, group and mass, respectively. level communications. Dialogue is possible only between subjects of the same level; management and imitation - between subjects of all levels.

3. Microcommunication activity in all its forms is an art, i.e. creatively productive, playful, and not ritual-reproductive activity.

4. Mid-communication management is the driving center of the spiritual life of society, appearing at different stages of culture in the form of mythocentrism, religiocentrism, literary centrism, science centrism, political centrism.

5. In the history of all countries, and the Russian state in particular, macrocommunication (borrowing achievements, interaction of cultures, information aggression) served as a source of internal political and socio-cultural upheavals.

6. Communication activity is not a chain of sequential communication actions (operations), but a unity of communication and non-communication acts; and vice versa, any non-communication activity (cognition, work) includes communication actions in its structure.

7. Communication activity includes not one, but two social subjects (in contrast to labor and cognitive activities) with one performer. It follows that communication activity is a social relationship, the poles of which are cooperation and conflict.

8. Oral communication activity is the spiritual communication of social subjects; it never happens outside of communication.

9. Game is a creative and communicative action that served as a source for the formation of human culture. A game is a creative (productive) spiritual communication of independent subjects, carried out within the framework of conventional rules voluntarily accepted by them and possessing ethical and aesthetic appeal. Depending on the purpose, games are divided into four types: masquerade game, illusion game, puzzle game, competition game.

10. Pseudo-game is a game that has lost its creative component, but has retained the communication component contained in the game form. Pseudo-games are divided into labor service, ceremonial rituals, and everyday rituals (etiquette). Ritual-etiquette pseudo-games are part of social memory.

11. Truth - a reliable and subjectively motivated message from the communicant that does not contradict the ethical ideas of the recipient. The opposite of truth - untruth (falsehood) appears in the form of delusion, half-truth, lie. Deception is communication control through lies or half-truths. Illusion is voluntary self-deception.

12. Terra incognita communication-spatial activity is very extensive, perhaps second in this regard only to communication-temporal (mnemonic) activity, which is even less studied. Let us formulate only two problems:

For the recipient, messages that contain only meanings already known to him and messages consisting of unknown meanings are equally useless. The first are rejected as meaningless (trivial), the second - as incomprehensible (inaccessible). The optimal message is one in which the known allows one to understand (decode) the unknown and make it accessible to the recipient’s consciousness. Therefore, the message must maintain a balance between what is known and what is unknown to the recipient. What is this balance?

A person cannot free himself from communication interaction with other people; It is impossible to live in society and be free from social communication. We are all in networks of communication services that control (manipulate) us. These services often operate with lies based on calculation. However, there is no “lie detector” that would diagnose dishonest actions at the level of group or mass communication. Is it possible to develop technologies for detecting insincerity as a counterweight to communication management technologies?

Literature

1. Alekseev A.A., Gromova L.A. Don't get me wrong, or a book about how to find your own thinking style, effectively use intellectual resources and gain mutual understanding with people. - St. Petersburg: Economic School, 1993. - 351 p.
2. Borev V.Yu., Kovalenko A.V. Culture and mass communication. - M: Nauka, 1986. - 303 p.
3. Voyskunsky A. I say, we speak. Essays on human communication. - M.: Knowledge, 1990. - 239 p.
4. Glebkin V.V. Ritual in Soviet culture. - M.: Janus - K, 1998. - 168 p.
5. Dotsenko E.L. Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and defense. - M.: CheRo, 1997. - 344 p.
6. Zemlyanova L.M. Modern American communication studies: theoretical concepts, problems, forecasts. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1995. - 271 p.
7. Znakov V.V. Psychology of understanding the truth. - St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 1999. -181 p.
8. Kagan M.S. World of communication. - M.: Politizdat, 1988. - 321 p.
9. Carnegie D. How to win friends and influence people: Trans. from English - M.: Progress, 1989. - 544 p.
10. Kozyrev G.I. Introduction to conflictology: Textbook. allowance. - M.: VLADOS, 1999. - 176 p.
11. Couser L.A. Fundamentals of conflictology: Textbook. allowance. - St. Petersburg: Firefly, 1999. - 192 p.
12. Krivko-Apinyan T.A. Game world. - B. m.: Eidos, 1992. - 160 p.
13. Krizhanskaya Yu.S., Tretyakov V.P. Grammar of communication. 2nd ed. - M.: Smysl, 1999. - 279 p.
14. Leontyev A. A. Psychology of communication. 2nd ed. - M.: Smysl, 1997. - 365 p.
15. Leontyev A.A. Fundamentals of psycholinguistics: Textbook. - M.: Smysl, 1999. - 287 p.
16. Parygin B.A. Anatomy of communication: Textbook. allowance. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house of Mikhailov V.A., 1999. - 301 p.
17. Parygin B.D. Social Psychology. Problems of methodology, history and theory. - St. Petersburg: SPbGUP, 1999. - P. 297 -431.
18. Petrov L.V. Mass communication and culture. Introduction to theory and history: Proc. allowance. - St. Petersburg: SPbGAK, 1999. - 211 p.
19. Psychology and ethics of business communication: Textbook for universities. 2nd ed. - M.: Culture and sport. UNITY, 1997. - 279 p.
20. Semenov V.E. Art as interpersonal communication. - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Publishing House, 1995. - 200 p.
21. Smelkova Z.S. Pedagogical communication. Theory and practice of educational dialogue in literature lessons. - M.: Flinta, Nauka, 1999.-232p.
22. Soper P. Fundamentals of the art of speech: Trans. from English - M.: Progress, 1992. - 416 p.
23. Huizinga J. A man playing. - M.: Progress, 1992. - 464 p.
24. Shostrom E. Anti-Carnegie, or Manipulator: Trans. from English - Mn.: Polyfact, 1992. - 128 p.
25. Shcherbatykh Yu. The art of deception. - St. Petersburg: Azbuka-Terra, 1997. - 368 p.
26. Ekman P. Psychology of lies. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000. - 270 p.