At the end of the ninth grade of secondary school, students are asked to write a statement as part of the final exam. Often, for such assignments, texts are selected on various current topics, for example, about how the idea of individualism is cultivated in society. Without sufficient knowledge on this issue, completing this work can be much more difficult than if you prepare in advance to write it. This article can be used as additional material for studying the topic before taking the exam.
Individualism is one of the characteristics that can be inherent both in the human community as a whole and in individual individuals. The question of its essence and role in people’s lives has been studied for several years within the framework of a number of disciplines, which are collectively called behavioral. These include such branches of knowledge as psychology, philosophy, pedagogy, sociology and many others.
First mentions
Typically, two terms - individualism and collectivism - are opposed to each other. If you look at the earliest scientific works in which these phenomena were mentioned, you will notice that their authors, as a rule, gave an unambiguous assessment of these characteristics.
In ancient philosophy and in medieval treatises, most often there was no hint of considering personality from the point of view of its relationship to the norms of public morality, foundations and traditions of society.
The British scientist Adam Smith (see the illustration above for the portrait) and the Frenchman Alexis Tocqueville were the first creators of individual scientific works devoted to this topic. They were of the opinion that individualism is the only social and personal worldview that leads to progress.
Speaking about this, they cited the example of prehistoric societies that existed under the so-called communal system. In these societies, the collectivist form of consciousness dominated.
Individualism: concept and characteristics
An important stage in the development of philosophical thought was the period when individualism arose in philosophy. From Latin the term “individualism” is translated as “indivisible, individual.” The term means a worldview that proclaims the primacy of the personal over the social, of a specific individual and his interests over the opinions and hobbies of a group or collective. The appearance of this view arose as an awareness of one’s own independence, independence, and value as a unique being. This creature turned out to be separated from other people, society, nature, as well as from the divine principle, embodied in one image or another. Within the framework of individualism, concepts such as:
- Personality is defined as a subject born and developing in a social environment and acquiring the necessary social qualities. The institution in which the personality develops is the family, later these are organizations such as schools, universities, informal organizations, etc.
- Individuality is a set of characteristics and properties of a person that only he possesses and which distinguish him from other people. This includes biological parameters, socially acquired and psychological characteristics.
These terms can be used in the same context; they are interrelated, but not identical to each other.
Joint confrontation with the forces of nature
Ancient people, who did not understand the laws of the structure of the surrounding world and did not know more effective ways of obtaining food and building housing except those that required the participation of a large number of people, accordingly could not even think about contrasting their individuality with the collective.
Separation from society, expulsion from its ranks meant inevitable death. In this sense, circumstances changed little in antiquity and even during the Middle Ages. Moreover, in those days, only a very limited circle of people knew about the latest achievements of science.
The role of personality in history
These ideas eventually formed into a doctrine called methodological individualism.
His followers believed that the role of various human communities in world history was greatly exaggerated.
Groups of people should not be studied according to the same principles that are used in the study of individuals. Ultimately, society is nothing more than a collection of people. Therefore, when studying various historical events, one must rely not on the psychology of the masses, but on information about individual characters and destinies. A presentation of the idea of individualism of this kind in its extreme form of manifestation may look like this.
All historical events, such as wars, revolutions, migrations of peoples, are the ideas of individual people, which were then picked up by the masses.
Individualists' idea of ideals
From the definition of individualism and its principles follow the corresponding ideals that are of paramount importance for supporters of this philosophical movement:
- Emotional independence from others.
- Freedom of thought, having your own opinion.
- Leadership qualities, social initiative.
- Independence in action, decision making, leadership and responsibility.
- The desire for self-improvement, achievement and success.
- The right to private property, personal acquisitions.
Individualists are focused on caring only about themselves and significant others. The situation in the country, hometown or region will worry them provided that it affects them directly, otherwise it is of no interest. A positive aspect in the desire to separate from the team is focusing on yourself, your needs, desires and feelings, which allows you to think about personal improvement. In the modern world, this trend is clearly visible. And it should be understood not only as realization in the material world, but also as work towards spirituality.
People are still part of certain institutions, as before, dependent on each other and need social contacts in personal, professional and other ways. Any person, be it a child or an adult, needs friends and support from others to a greater or lesser extent. Therefore, now it cannot be said that an adherent of individualism is clearly separated from social processes; he can be included in them or not at his own request.
Another point of view
In contrast to this theory, there is another, which at different times was expressed by supporters of such teachings as holism and historicism. These thinkers argued that an individual cannot play any significant role on the scale of world civilization.
All processes occurring in the sphere of politics and economics, as a rule, follow the same scenarios. The same can be said about the fate of individual peoples and states. Each of these social formations goes through the stages of origin, development, flourishing, extinction and death. According to some historians, most major highly developed civilizations have existed for about 2000 years. There are some exceptions (India, China), but they, as is commonly believed, only confirm the rule.
Collectivism and socialism
Proponents of individualistic theories in historical science in the 19th century were subject to numerous attacks by socialists. According to the latter, those researchers who are inclined to consider human societies only as collections of individual people are like fools who, seeing many trees, refuse to call them a forest.
Karl Marx also rejected the idea of methodological individualism. He argued that regardless of the actions and desires of individuals, all civilizations go from the primitive communal system to capitalism, the collapse of which leads to socialism.
Thus, for historical and sociological science, individualism is the doctrine according to which individual people have the greatest influence on global processes. The opposite of this theory are concepts such as holism, historicism and some others.
Individualism in Economics
This concept also exists in economics. Within the framework of this discipline, it is interpreted as follows: individualism is a way of doing business in which small businesses and small enterprises managed by one person predominate.
According to the same Karl Marx, this method of organizing production and carrying out agriculture began to become obsolete by the 19th century, although it was relevant at the birth of capitalism.
The works of this scientist say that small-scale entrepreneurship should be replaced by large collective forms of economic organization. The Bolsheviks began to adhere to this concept in order to lead the country out of the economic crisis that arose as a result of the First World War and the Civil War.
Such an economic policy in the first years of Soviet power turned out to be extremely effective. As a result of the creation of large industrial enterprises in large settlements and collective farms in villages and villages, thousands of people got jobs, and the products produced were of adequate quality, thanks to the widespread introduction of innovative technologies.
However, subsequently significant mistakes were made during the transition to this method of farming in some Asian republics of the Soviet Union. Thus, collectivization in Kazakhstan had numerous negative consequences, which took many years to overcome. In connection with the creation of collective farms, people who had previously been involved in camel breeding found themselves tied to a certain territory. This circumstance deprived the animals of the opportunity to move to another place when the green vegetation was depleted. Thus, one of the traditional livestock industries of Kazakhstan was almost completely destroyed.
The evolution of theories of individualism.
In pre-capitalist societies, as a rule, the worldview of collectivism was dominant. The right to independence and demonstrative disregard for generally accepted norms was recognized only for outstanding individuals (like the legendary Achilles from the Iliad or the real Joan of Arc), but not for ordinary people. The widespread dissemination of individualistic values began only in Western Europe in the late Middle Ages, during the Renaissance.
The concept of “individualism” was formed among English political philosophers of modern times (John Locke, David Hume). At the same time, it was not so much about the isolation of a person from society, but about the need to limit the pressure on an individual from other people. Such a positive understanding of individualism as the independence and self-worth of the individual reflected the spirit of the Enlightenment, glorifying the free individual as the main bearer of the values of European civilization (remember Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe). It was the principle of methodological individualism that became the basis of classical political economy: Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations (1776) clearly formulated the principle that when an individual cares about personal gain, then, regardless of his desire, he also benefits society, and better than if consciously strived for the common good.
Almost until the end of the 19th century. the term "individualism" was widespread only in French. It came into English through the translation of a book by Alexis Tocqueville, who used this term in his famous work Democracy in America (1864). According to his interpretation, individualism is “a balanced and calm feeling that encourages a citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his own kind and isolate himself in a narrow circle of family and friends. Having thus created a small society for himself, a person ceases to worry about the whole society as a whole.” Despite the ambiguity of the wording, this definition did not contain an understanding of individualism as concern exclusively with the needs of one’s own personality. The “self” that people were supposed to care about was naturally extended to include family and friends.
In parallel with the positive interpretation of individualism, another point of view emerged. Proponents of socialist theories, followers of Henri Saint-Simon, began to use the concept of “individualism” to contrast “socialism.” In his work On Individualism and Socialism (1834), Pierre Leroux identified two fundamental principles in society - “man’s desire for freedom” and “man’s desire for society” (“sociality”). The desire for “sociality” was called “socialism,” which he opposed, on the one hand, to selfishness and individualism, and on the other, to “absolute socialism,” identified with the tyranny of the bureaucratic state. P. Leroux considered “individualism” and “absolute socialism” to be the two extreme poles of the organization of society.
Thus, in the socialist tradition, in contrast to the liberal one, a negative interpretation of individualism as selfishness and denial of social ties has taken root. However, within the framework of the Marxist tradition, the individualistic worldview was considered as organically inherent in the capitalist era, and therefore historically inevitable, although overcome in the process of progressive social development. One can recall the Manifesto of the Communist Party (1847) by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels: “The bourgeoisie, wherever it has achieved dominance, ... has left no other connection between people than naked interest, heartless “purity.” In the icy water of selfish calculation, she drowned the sacred thrill of religious ecstasy, knightly enthusiasm, and bourgeois sentimentality.”
The antithesis “individualism – collectivism” was firmly established in the 19th century. in the works of sociologists and social psychology specialists.
The first sociological concepts analyzing individualism were based on the opposition of modern and traditional cultures. Generally accepted in the second half of the 19th century. a liberal point of view was considered, according to which the higher the level of individualism in a society, the more developed that society is.
For example, E. Durkheim, describing different types of society, chose social solidarity, which can be either mechanical or organic, as a system-forming factor. With mechanical solidarity, the individual is absorbed into the collective, and collective consciousness dominates in society. This archaic type of solidarity is being replaced by organic solidarity, in which each individual is considered as an individual, and the collective consciousness, although not lost, plays a secondary and insignificant role. The progress of society consisted of a gradual transition from mechanical to organic solidarity. Although Durkheim contrasted the development of personality with collective consciousness, nevertheless, they were not, in his opinion, mutually exclusive phenomena. Well aware of the negative consequences of the dominance of organic solidarity in society, which can manifest themselves in the separation of individuals, Durkheim developed the idea of creating professional corporations that should help strengthen social solidarity. Thus, the relationship between the collective and individual principles in the life of any society was determined by the economic development of society (division of labor), but at the same time had a certain balance.
Another concept of the same kind was proposed by the German sociologist F. Tennis. Like Durkheim, he identified two types of relationships that determine social life. The first type is communal (gemeinschaftliche) relations, which are based on the will of the whole, which determines all aspects of social life, and the second is social (gesellschaftliche) relations, where the principle of “every man for himself” operates. The prerequisite for the transition from community ties to social ones, in his opinion, is modern individualism.
The tradition of linking the development of individualism with the progressive development of society continued into the 20th century. One can name, for example, the concept of the American psychologist Jerome S. Bruner, who in the second half of the 20th century. continued to emphasize the contrast between the individualistic orientation characteristic of modern cultures and the collectivist values characteristic of traditional cultures. In his opinion, the starting point of this opposition was the power of people over the nature around them. Unable to change their environment and completely dependent on it, people of traditional cultures were inclined to unity with both the physical world and the world of their own kind. Having acquired the opportunity to influence the world around them, people increasingly pay attention to the success of their personal actions, regardless of other people. The more people become masters of their own destiny, the wider, according to J. Bruner, the spread of individualistic orientation occurs.
20th century thinkers who predict the further development of human society make very different predictions about the individualization of its members. Some believe that the future belongs to the spirit of individualism (F. von Hayek, K. Popper), while others, on the contrary, associate growing individualism with the degradation of humanity (V.I. Vernadsky, P. Teilhard de Chardin).
Significant changes in the interpretation of the concept of individualism occurred in the 20th century. in connection with the transition from purely theoretical reasoning and the construction of largely abstract concepts to empirical research.
Individualism as a personality quality
It is in this vein that psychology views this phenomenon. Therefore, we can say that individualism is the desire for independence or the least dependence on society. It, in turn, can be interpreted as the ability to think and act outside existing patterns (traditions, customs, public opinion, and so on). All great scientists, artists and other people with a pronounced creative beginning possessed this quality. This property can otherwise be called nonconformism.
In the literature on psychology, this term is often given another definition, namely: individualism is a person’s concentration solely on the search for personal benefits. Such people are not capable of showing mutual assistance, compassion, and so on. This spiritual quality can be differently designated by the word “egoism.”
This personality characteristic most often evokes a sharply negative attitude, while free critical thinking, a healthy desire to act outside the mold, and to find new paths are, without a doubt, a positive characteristic of a person.
Instilling such qualities in the younger generation is one of the goals of modern school education, spelled out in the new educational standard.
Basic principles of individualism
The concept is based on several principles that support the integrity of the views and behavior of adherents of the chosen program. There are 3 postulates:
- Society is viewed not as an integral system consisting of relationships between people, but as a collection of individuals. Moreover, each of them has its own specific temperament, character traits, individual needs and intentions. A person has the right to have his own opinion on various issues.
- The essence of a person lies in the unique properties initially given to him, which he fully owns and which under no circumstances can be taken from him.
- There is a distinction between laws relating to social life and those rules that govern an individual. The group and its members do not represent a single organism.
Unfortunately, individualistic categories are not without internal contradictions, which results in instability of the worldview. New significant aspects of human existence are promoted. Negative traits arise in a person - selfishness, cynicism, the desire to dominate and achieve goals through convenient means. The subject is given the opportunity to be free in a broad sense, but he is alienated from the collective itself.
Along with autonomy, there is a growing feeling of loss of belonging to society. The last factor provokes ardent individualists to behave quite aggressively and try to subjugate society and, with its help, obtain maximum benefits for themselves. Such individualism is considered rebellious, and it is the opposite of the bourgeois (philistine) type. If the first is not inclined to take into account or somehow cooperate with the majority, then the other is able to conclude a mutually beneficial agreement with the team. Both forms may well manifest themselves in different historical eras. It must be remembered that individualism is one of the signs of a developing group and the construction of communication in it at a higher level. But the widespread dominance of individual aspirations can demonstrate the growing problems of the system and lead to its split.
