к.ф.н., доцент Шингарева М.Ю., магистрант Айтенов Ф.В.

Региональный социально-инновационный университет

Privacy in the system of concepts of cultural anthropology

By the definition of the cultural dictionary, the cultural anthropology is a "special area of research, focusing on the process of the relationship between man and culture" [1, p. 37]. Often there is a confusion of terms, names of cultural disciplines such as anthropology, ethnography, ethnology. All these sciences, in the broader sense refer to the study of culture. Ethnography and ethnology often differentiate as part of a general science - anthropology. Ethnography is usually associated with the field studies of specific cultures, ethnology "represents the first step in the synthesis" [2, p. 355], i.e. the collation of data collected as a result of ethnographic observations. Anthropology also represents the highest stage of the synthesis of both ethnographic and ethnological data. Hence the topic about the location privacy in the system which consists of the concepts of cultural anthropology, ethnography and ethnology.

Privacy, as it was noted above, is a cultural phenomenon and certainly is of interest to cultural anthropology. Within this discipline it can be seen in terms of the concepts such as cultural differences and cultural universals, along with the behavior patterns, cultural attitudes and its values.

As regarded as a value by itself, privacy is closely linked with the concept of anthropology, which in the English tradition has been called "cultural pattern". This term is referred to all kinds of "cultural landmarks, including ... relations, norms and material aspects ..." [3, p. 84].

According the Russian-speaking tradition it is often called as ethnic stereotypes of behavior, which is defined as "stable, recurring behaviors ... kind of stamps, templates, patterns of behavior accepted in one culture or another" [4, p. 3]. Ethnographer is actively engaged in the study of such stereotypical behavior in a comparative perspective. It should be noted that the typified are usually those forms which are important for the culture, and " the more important areas of behavior, the more tightly they are regulated " [ibid].

Of course, the behavior of each person depends on the combination of their roles performed - gender and age, status, ethnicity, etc. Therefore, speaking about behavior patterns, scientists have resorted to a certain degree of abstraction.

The concepts of stereotype behavior and social norms are very similar, although not identical to each other. They differ in that the norm that is associated with the evaluative characteristics indicating the types of behavior that are correct from the point of view of a given culture, and the stereotypes include both the correct and incorrect behaviors that reinforce cultural traditions in the form of specific patterns [ibid. 10].

Studying the patterns of behavior, the ethnography works closely with semiotics, treating these forms in terms of sign theory thus subjecting them to the procedure of semiotic analysis.

The term patterns of behavior acts as a generic one with respect to the names of specific behaviors such as "rituals, customs, etiquette, labor skills and techniques, game, fashion, vacation, holiday, methods of training, grooming, abuse, punishment, etc." [ibid, 14].

For example, the ethnographic studies of traditional forms of education of children can afford to draw some conclusions about the attitude to the privacy in the Russian and American cultures. The American tradition of privacy has become an important aspect of the education of children from the moment of their birth. Children in the American family, as a rule, immediately get a private room (private room) and a child learns to be independent both emotionally and economically from their parents. They soon begin to earn money and many people live separately from their parents after graduation [5, p. 49]. Thus, fostering of self-sufficiency and independence becomes an integral part of education in America. In Russian culture, on the contrary, the relationship of children and parents are closer and long-term both economically and emotionally. Parents tend to support their children financially until they get education and begin working. Young adults often continue to live with their parents creating their own family and usually help their parents.

Another type of behavior that can give a rich material for studying the mechanisms of privacy, along with its stereotypes of communication, which include etiquette.

The system concepts of privacy according to the anthropology are also associated with the study of national customs and traditions. Ethnographic research in this area can provide a wealth of material for comparison of two cultures (for example, the one which has always enjoyed the special attention of ethnographers as the tradition of receiving guests, being different in different cultures). In comparison, for example, the custom to warn of the visit (even friends), common in American culture and freer attitude to this rule in Russian culture (indicating greater adherence of the Americans to their own privacy).

Cultural patterns are often studied in terms of some "cultural dimensions" (in the terminology of Dutch explorer G. Hofstede, 1980). The notion of cultural dimension is often based on the idea that different peoples to have the same values, but to varying degrees" [6, p.3], which seemed to be distributed on some imaginary scale of importance. Hence, the different cultures in the same dimension and study the degree of reflection in it certain values can be considered.

One of these measurements is the individualism versus the collectivism. Comparing Russian and American cultures, in terms of this measure, we can talk about the prevalence of behavioral inherent patterns of individualism in American culture on the one hand and the gravitation toward collectivism of Russian culture on the other hand. It also affects the expression of such values as privacy. We highlight its presence in both cultures, but its place in the scale of values is different.

The American concept of individualism is a part of the cultural and historical heritage and dates back to the days of mass emigration in the "New World" of immigrants from Europe and other countries. America is associated with freedom and independence, the people opened opportunities for self-realization, but each could rely only on themselves. There is a strong preference for personal initiative and not familial ties and titles, highly appreciated the privacy of the individual, understood in a broad sense as personal freedom and choice, both in relation to other individuals and to the state. Now these traditions are prevalent in American culture. The desire to limit the power of the state is evident in both the economic and social spheres. Therefore, every person is individually responsible and for their financial well-being (widely acclaimed Business), and physical health (e.g., no state health insurance system).

To sum up the typical characteristics of individualism it can be said that the personal goals and interests are placed above the groups’, which is involved in the high level of competition and the low level of the individual, depending on various group formations [3, p. 89].

Russian culture, in contrast, tends to be collectivist traditions, preferring the group values that dates back to the ancient tradition of catholicity (from the word "cathedral" is a collection of the congress (TSRYA). Many researchers point out that this feature as an important distinguishing characteristic is compared to American culture [7, p. 14], and also note the unusual fusion of Eastern and Western traditions in Russian culture, the commitment to the Western culture of personal freedom and the importance of communication with society inherent Eastern culture [ibid].

Richmond also notes that the presence of the old Russian language words such as "zadruga", "community", "peace", "commune", "artel" refer to the relevant phenomena shows that collectivism is not an invention of the Communists, but a long-standing historical heritage [ibid 15]. The word "individualism" in Russian language has a negative connotation.

During the Soviet period of Russian history, the tradition of collectivism has been brought to the absurdity, individual initiative has often been suppressed, and the individual well-being is condemned (The soviet-era slogan reads: "be like everyone else and you won’t get isolated from the masses"). The researchers noted this phenomenon and the contradictory "simultaneous public approval and rejection, encouraged private belief system ..." [8, p.66], which has a negative psychological impact on the human personality. Such differences cannot be explained just by the influence of economic and historical conditions, but also features the national consciousness. In this regard, there is a difference in mentality.

Under the mentality it is defined "the system of images, ideas that... are the basis for the human notions about the world and their place in this world, therefore, define the actions and behavior of people ... " [9, p. 52]. This system is quite stable and is transmitted from generation to generation. That is why even the abrupt economic changes (such as those that occurred in Russia) cannot as dramatically change peoples’ mentality.

Mentality is still characterized by the fact that the assimilation of all these images and ideas happens on a subconscious level, hence some difficulties for conscious consideration. It is this quality, according to anthropologists, that is of particular interest - the study of these concepts is important, as they are "devoid of intentional bias" [10, p.115].

The above differences had an impact on the understanding of privacy in both cultures. The privacy is a fundamental value of American culture which has had some negative connotation in Russian culture and even, as noted above, does not have a single word for its name in the Russian language. Currently, under the influence of economic and social change, as well as Western influence its the value system changes, but the differences are still evident, as its content in both cultures define the mental differences of peoples settings that change very slowly.

Literature:

1. Воронкова Л.П., Белик А.А. Антропология // Культурология. XX век. Словарь. СПб: Университетская книга, 1997. С. 37 – 42.

2. Levi-Strauss C. Structural Anthropology. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972.

3. Samovar L.A. and Porter R.E. Communication Between Cultures. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing, 1995.

4. Байбурин А.К. Некоторые вопросы этнографического изучения поведения // Этнические стереотипы поведения. Л.: Наука, 1985а. С. 7 – 21.

5. Natadecha-Sponsel P. The Young, the Rich, and the Famous: Individualism as an American Cultural Value // Distant Mirrors. America as a Foreign Culture. Ed. P. DeVita and J. Armstrong. Belmont: Wadsworth Puiblishing Company, 1993. P. 46 – 53.

6. Rokeach M. The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press, 1973.

7. Richmond Y. From Nyet to Da. Understanding the Russians. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press, 1996. 219 p.

8. Хиршхорн Г.Л. Кросс-культурное значение коллективно-семейной терапии в условиях меняющейся политической ситуации // Вопросы психологии. 1996. № 3. С. 63 – 71.

9. Дюби Ж. Развитие исторических исследований во Франции после 1950 года // Одиссей. Человек в истории. Сборник. Культурно-антропологическая история сегодня. М.: Наука, 1991. С. 48 – 59.

10. Гуревич А.Я. Смерть как проблема исторической антропологии: о новом направлении в зарубежной историографии // Одиссей. Человек в истории. Сборник. Исследования по социальной истории и истории культуры. М.: Наука, 1989. С. 114 – 135.