Каталог статей из сборников научных конференций и научных журналов- Intercultural communication in ethnic communities: the concept and essence of prejudice

O. Yu. Kolosova, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, associate professor,

Stavropol branch of Krasnodar university of

Ministries of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation,

Stavropol, Russia

Prejudice is installation of biased and hostile attitude to anything without sufficient reason for such a relationship or knowledge [1, p. 95–100]. It arises as a consequence of an incomplete or distorted understanding of the object, in relation to which the installation is formed. The arising on the basis of association, imagination or assumptions, such an installation with a distorted information component has, nevertheless, a persistent effect on the attitude of people to the object [2, p. 168–177].

The stereotype and prejudice should be distinguished. Stereotypes are a reflection of those traits and signs that are peculiar to all members of one or another group [5, p. 21–24]. There are no pronounced emotional estimates. Therefore, stereotypes contain the possibility of positive judgments about the stereotypes of [11, p. 282–284].

In contrast to the stereotype, the prejudice is a negative and hostile assessment of the group or the individual belonging to it only on the basis of attributing certain negative qualities [12, p. 73–78]. For prejudices, thoughtless negative attitude towards all members of the group or more of it is characterized. In the practice of human communication, the object of prejudice is usually people who are sharply different from most by any features that cause negative ottism in other people [13, p. 177–182].

Prejudice are elements of culture, since they are generated by public, and not biological reasons [9, p. 123–128]. However, they are sustainable and widespread elements of ordinary, daily culture, which are transmitted by their carriers from generation to generation and persist with customs or regulations [10, p. 87–93].

The mechanism of formation of prejudice is most often used in the cultivation of ethnocentrism, stereotypes and prejudices and is called the process of moving.

Psychological movement is used by people or unconsciously, as a protective mechanism of the psyche, or deliberately, in search of the extreme in all the occurrence, where it would be possible to recover an annoyance about any situation [8, p. 136–143]. At the same time, psychological movement is not an attribute of only individual mental activity. It occurs both in collective mental processes and can cover significant masses of people [7, p. 6–9]. The movement mechanism is used to direct anger and hostility of people to an object that has nothing to do with the reasons for these emotions.

Prejudice may arise in relation to objects of various kinds: to things and animals, to people and their associations, to ideas and ideas [14, p. 10–16]. The most common type of prejudice is ethnic. One of the reasons is an attempt by representatives of the dominant ethnic group located at the bottom of the social staircase, to find a source of mental satisfaction from the feeling of imaginary superiority.

Not the latter role in this belongs the theory of frustration and aggression. A voltage status is created in the human psyche i.e. it is frustration. This state requires its discharge, and its object can be any person. In a situation where the causes of difficulties and adversities are seen in any ethnic group, irritation is directed against this group.

There is also a theory that explains the formation of prejudice the need for people to determine their position in relation to others. At the same time, it often focuses on the superiority of its ethnic group (and thus its own, individual) over others.

Prejudice is assimilated by a person in the process of socialization and crystallized under the influence of cultural norms and values [3, p. 80–85]. Their source serves the near environment of man. Thus, individual prejudices in most cases arise not from personal intercultural communication experience, but by learning previously established prejudice.

The following types of prejudice are exists. The presence of one or another prejudice seriously distorts for its carrier the process of perception of people from other ethnic groups or sociocultural groups [4, p. 118–124]. The prejudice carrier sees in them only what he wants to see, and not what is really. As a result, a number of positive qualities of the prejudice object are not taken into account when communicating and interaction. In the environment of people infected with prejudice, an unconditional feeling of anxiety and fear arises before those who are the object of discrimination. The carriers of prejudice see in their face a potential threat, which gives rise to even greater distrust of them. The existence of prejudices and the traditions based on them and the practices of discrimination, segregation, infringement of civil rights, ultimately distorts the self-evaluation of the objects of these prejudices. A significant number of people is imposed on a sense of social inferiority, and as a response to this feeling there is a readiness to approve personal fullness through inter-ethnic and intercultural conflicts [6, p. 21–24].

Stereotypes and prejudices change very slowly and with great difficulty. People tend to remember that information that supports prejudice, and ignore the information that is contrary to them. Therefore, if the prejudices were ever learned by a person, then they are manifested for a long time.

Bibliography

1. Бакланова О. А., Бакланов И. С., Ерохин А. М. Методологические конструкты исследования социальности современного общества // Историческая и социально-образовательная мысль. - 2016. - Т. 8. - № 3-1. - С. 95-100.

2. Бакланова О. А., Бакланов И. С. Современная российская социальность в контексте социального конструкционизма // Вопросы социальной теории. - 2015. - Т. 7. - № 1-2. - С. 168-177.

3. Болховской А. Л., Говердовская Е. В., Ивченко А. В. Образование в глобализирующемся мире: философский взгляд // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2013. - № 5. - С. 80-85.

4. Говердовская Е. В., Добычина Н. В. Взаимные референции между реальным и виртуальным пространством: новая коммуникационная среда // Социально-гуманитарные знания. - 2014. - № 7. - С. 118-124.

5. Гончаров В. Н. Информационная потребность в обществе: социокультурный аспект // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2012. - №6. - С. 21-24.

6. Гончаров В. Н. Информатизация образования общества: фундаментальный аспект исследования информатики // Фундаментальные исследования. - 2012. - № 3-1. - С. 21-24.

7. Daraganova Yu.S. Философия науки // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2011. - № 4. - С. 6-9.

8. Джиоева Д. А., Камалова О. Н. Значение сенсорных технологий в жизнедеятельности человека // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. 2011. - № 1. - С. 136-143.

9. Ерохин А. М. Научно-информационный аспект исследования социокультурного развития общества в области культуры и искусства // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2015. - № 2. - С. 123-128.

10. Камалова О.Н., Карпун А.Б. Основные структурные элементы политической власти // Гуманитарные и социальные науки. - 2010. - № 1. - С. 87-93.

11. Лобейко Ю.А. Социальная активность личности в обществе: социально-педагогические аспекты формирования // European Social Science Journal. - 2014. - № 7-2 (46). - С. 282-284.

12. Лобейко Ю. А. Социально-психологические проблемы общения в контексте межличностных общественных отношений// Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2015. - №4. - С. 73-78.

13. Несмеянов Е. Е. Соотношение религии и науки в гуманитарном знании и современном обществе (по материалам монографии К.В. Воденко и А.А. Мекушкина «Христианство и наука: история и современность» (М., 2014)) // Гуманитарий Юга России. - 2015. - № 1. - С. 177-182.

14. Матяш Т. П., Матяш Д. В., Несмеянов Е. Е. «Науки о природе» и «науки о духе»: судьба старой дилеммы // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2015. - № 1 (80). - С. 10-16.