What is a custom: definition, history, sources and interesting facts. Traditions: what is it? Types of traditions - national, social, cultural, religious and others What are traditions definition

Introduction. 3

1. Concept, essence and nature of traditions. 4

2.Traditions in culture. 7

4. Traditions and innovation in culture. 11

5. Trends in changing values in the modern world. 13

Conclusion. 14

Introduction.

National culture is the national memory of a people, what distinguishes a given people from others, protects a person from depersonalization, allows him to feel the connection of times and generations, receive spiritual support and support in life. The meaning of national traditions, habits, and their content differ among individual nations.

People adhere to them to varying degrees. For example, the British have a pronounced need to resolve matters “according to custom.” We can say that if an American is a slave to the standard, then an Englishman is a slave to his traditions. Traditions in England turn into a fetish, a cult, they are deified and admired. The British strive to remain themselves everywhere, to maintain their habits, tastes, morals, isolation, assortment of dishes, a certain superiority complex, and sometimes a condescending attitude towards others in any conditions.

People's traditions are varied. This is how they were described in the novel “People, Years, Life” by I. Ehrenburg. “Europeans, when greeting, extend their hand, but a Chinese, Japanese or Indian are forced to shake a stranger’s limb. If a visitor were to stick his bare foot into the Parisians, it would hardly cause delight. The Englishman, outraged by the tricks of his competitor, writes to him: “Dear sir, you swindler", without "dear sir" he cannot begin a letter. Christians, entering a church, church or church, remove their hats, and a Jew, entering a synagogue, covers his head. In Catholic and Orthodox societies, women should not enter the temple with bareheaded. In Europe the color of mourning is black, in China it is white. When a Chinese man sees for the first time a European or an American walking arm in arm with a woman, sometimes even kissing her, it seems excessively shameful to him. If a guest comes to a European and admires a painting on the wall, a vase or other trinket, then the owner is pleased. If a European begins to admire a thing in a Chinese house, the owner gives him this item - this is required by politeness. In China, no one touches a cup of dry rice, which is served at the end of dinner - you need to show that you are. full The world is diverse...: if there are other people's monasteries, then, consequently, there are other people's statutes." It must be borne in mind that people, as a rule, are very sensitive to their traditions, customs, tastes, so it is advisable not to violate them.

National traditions and habits are manifested not only in actions, deeds, clothing, style of communication, etc., but also in movements, gestures and other subtle manifestations of people’s psychology. This is fundamentally important. Every person has an unconscious mechanism that records the “friend” - “stranger” situation based on subtle manifestations of the psyche.

The concept, essence and nature of traditions.

Traditions are elements of social and cultural heritage passed down from generation to generation and preserved in a particular community for a long time. But what definition of traditions is given by I.V. Sukhanov: Traditions are not regulated by legal regulations, supported by the power of public opinion, forms of transferring to new generations ways of implementing the ideological relations that have developed in the life of a given class, society (political, moral, religious, aesthetic). There are many types of traditions, for example, the author of the book “Customs, Traditions and Continuity of Generations”, I.V. Sukhanov gives an example of revolutionary traditions, and defines them as the process of reproduction in new generations of Soviet people of those moral and political qualities that were developed by the Russian working class during the period of three revolutions and the civil war. The ultimate goal of traditions comes down to introducing the activities of the new generation into the channel along which the activities of older generations developed, believes I.V. Sukhanov. And I completely agree with this opinion, because it was not in vain that our ancestors passed on the traditions of, say, arable farming, from generation to generation, so that their sons would not repeat the mistakes made by their fathers, but for some reason we believe that according to tradition, we should do everything the way our ancestors did, and this is a deeply wrong opinion. After all, if we repeat what has been done, then progress will stop, so humanity has introduced and is introducing something new into what previous generations were doing. Meanwhile, it is difficult for the previous generation to pass on all the socially accumulated experience, because activities related to traditions are so multifaceted that the generation tries to direct development in line with these traditions, rather than following exactly in the footsteps of their fathers. That is, tradition does not regulate behavior in detail in specific situations, but solves the problem through the regulation of spiritual qualities necessary for correct, from the point of view of a given class, society, behavior in one or another area of public or personal life. From here we see that traditions function in all social systems and are a necessary condition for their life. Thus, traditions transmit, consolidate and support diverse social experiences, and thereby create a spiritual connection between generations. Traditions perform two social functions: they are a means of stabilizing the relations established in a given society and carry out the reproduction of these relations in the lives of new generations. Tradition carries out these functions in the following way: traditions are addressed to the spiritual world of man, they fulfill their role as means of stabilizing and reproducing social relations not directly, but through the formation of the spiritual qualities required by these relations. The ideological content, the formula of tradition, is directly the norm or principle of behavior. The latter, unlike rules, do not provide detailed instructions for action. They indicate the direction of behavior (honesty, truthfulness, simplicity and modesty, hard work and frugality, etc.). Traditions, in their essence, do not have a strict connection with a specific action in a certain situation, since those spiritual qualities that tradition instills in us are necessary for any specific actions and the implementation of these actions is not an end in itself, but only a means for the formation of a person’s spiritual appearance.

Traditions also have an educational effect on a person; they form complex habits - a certain direction of behavior. A complex habit is an active form of reflecting the demands of life; in any situation related to it, within the boundaries of the direction of behavior it affirms, it provides a person with the freedom to choose a specific action (I.V. Sukhanov). Based on a complex habit, there is always the opportunity to improvise behavior. Traditions, as mass complex habits, guide behavior not only in established relationships, but also in those new variants of them that arise unexpectedly, sharply different from the usual. For example: the tradition of a creative attitude to work encourages a person to search for more productive techniques, methods in new types of production activities, to deeply master new specialties.

Tradition directly and directly establishes the connection between actions and spiritual qualities. Moreover, it is very important that in this regard, the spiritual quality always becomes the cause of the corresponding action. For example, someone invariably keeps his word, accurately fulfills his obligations. We see the reason for this behavior in the decency and commitment of a person. Actions in tradition are subordinated to the conscious goal of education. “Show me,” says an Indian proverb, “how you raise children, and I will tell you what’s on your mind.”

Reactionary traditions, which usually carry an openly expressed hostile idea, can be successfully combated by means of direct ideological influence. Each of these, for example, reactionary traditions, which are relics of the past in the minds of some of our people, such as nationalism, careerism, acquisitiveness, parasitism, has its own set of views, perceived by some of the youth from some representatives of the older generation. But the views hidden by a person are necessarily manifested in his behavior, which helps those around him to fight their carrier, so that they do not spread to other people. In overcoming reactionary traditions, criticism of their ideological content and convincing demonstration of their failure and incompetence play a huge role.

Tradition is the earliest way to ensure the unity of generations and the integrity of cultural subjects. Tradition does not allow for any logical consequence, and does not require rational proof for existence and legitimacy.

Traditional forms of activity and behavior are focused not on achieving a specific goal, but on repeating a given pattern or stereotype; in this sense, tradition ensures the stability of any society. Admiration for the tradition of its culture is the characteristic features of such societies and cultures that differ in the traditional features of cultures that primitive, Asian and patriarchal social forms possess to the greatest extent. Their peculiarity is intolerance to any innovations in the mechanism of traditions. And also the preservation and strengthening of an appropriate social order, intolerance to even the slightest manifestations of individualism and spiritual independence. Obviously, these features were most characteristic of other cultures such as the cultures of India, Japan, China, etc. A characteristic feature of traditional cultures is their so-called anti-historicism, the denial of the possibility of historical development and any change at all. Time in traditional societies is, as it were, rolled into a ring, that is, it rotates in a circle.

However, traditions, despite their stability and conservatism, are being destroyed. In the process of development of society, tradition is supplemented by other means of reproduction and is subject to the integrity and sustainability of culture (ideology, law, religion, politics and other forms of spirituality). This is where a historical trend arose, which is called traditionalism, the essence of which can be reduced to the assumption of the existence of some “original tradition” that expresses the universal, deep meaning of the universe and in the course of historical development, the “original tradition” that manifests itself in a certain way is considered uniform in all cultures and standing at their origins as the original state of the world, the unity of all cultures is postulated, and the plurality and division of cultures is postulated as regression, decline, retreat to the original position.

lat. tiaditio - transfer) - a form of continuity in various types of humans. activity, material and spiritual, presupposing a complete and partial reproduction of the methods, techniques and content of the activities of previous generations. To class. about-ve T. are class. character and depending on their social content can play different roles. In the development of socialism. Socialist culture and the formation of a new person become of great importance. T.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

TRADITION

from lat. traditio - transmission, tradition) - a way of being and reproducing elements of social and cultural heritage, recording the stability and continuity of the experience of generations, times and eras. The philosophical status of the term “tradition” is determined by the fact that it includes the entire complex of norms of behavior, forms of consciousness and institutions of human communication that have any value, characterizing the connection of the present with the past, more precisely, the degree of dependence of the modern generation on the past or commitment to it. Universality This concept is confirmed by its presence in all spheres of human life and its active use in various fields of knowledge (they talk about the tradition of “national”, “folk”, “group”, as well as “cultural”, “scientific”, “artistic”, etc.). d.). In terms of value and content, tradition accumulates a certain system of norms, customs and worldviews that make up the most significant part of the “classical” heritage of a given society, cultural community, and thought direction. In functional terms, tradition acts as an intermediary between modernity and the past, a mechanism for storing and transmitting samples, techniques and skills of activities (technologies), which are clearly included in the real lives of people and do not need any special justification and recognition, except for reference to their antiquity and rootedness in culture. The transmission is carried out through repeated repetition and replication of traditional actions and relationships (customs), ceremonies and rituals (ritual), symbolic texts and signs (see Creed. Symbols of culture). Tradition is a type of historical consciousness where the past claims to be a prototype of the present and even one of the sources of the perfection of the future (as with P. A. Florensky, who prefers to talk about “antiquity”). But only in the so-called. In primitive, archaic societies, organized on the principle of “self-sufficient communities that constantly reproduce themselves in the same form” (K. Marx), the regulating role and world-building function of tradition acquire a universal scale and character.

The nature of tradition is contradictory, which naturally gives rise to extremes in its perception and assessment. On the one hand, tradition looks like an apology and conservation of the past, a symbol of immutability, and sometimes a synonym for lag and “backwardness.” Such an emotionally negative characterization and assessment of tradition certainly has an objective basis. It is due to the unreflective commitment to the past characteristic of tradition (K. Mannheim), the mythologization of reality and cult psychology (E. Cassarer), distrust of creative activity and underestimation of the individuality of the subject of action, etc. On the other hand, tradition acts as a necessary condition for preservation, continuity and stability of human existence, a prerequisite and constitutive beginning of the formation of the identity of a person, a group or an entire society. Once an identity has been formed, it acquires the features and status of a tradition, which prompts some modern authors to talk about the identity of these concepts. The loss or weakening of tradition is often perceived and experienced as a break with the past, the disintegration of the “connection of times,” amnesia of historical memory, without which the meaningful and purposeful activity of an individual or society becomes simply impossible. The existence of such timeless truths as “a return to the roots” or “the new is the well-forgotten old” only confirms the importance and relevance of the problem of interpreting tradition, the source of its vital power.

Recognizing the legitimacy of contrasting tradition with innovation and modernity, great caution should be exercised in interpreting this antithesis. This is possible if the problem of heritage, or tradition, is considered in the context of the more general concept of developed. With this approach, any tradition becomes an equal participant in the process of development, the dialogue of the “new” with the “old,” providing not only a moment of continuity, but also vitality, richness of the very process of change and renewal of reality. A modern analytical approach to the problem of tradition overcomes the tendency to reduce it to “inert and obsolete elements of the past”, placing emphasis on the study of the historical dynamics and fate of cultural heritage and cultural identity. The projection of the future is unthinkable without the “shadow” cast by tradition. This concept is associated not only with “stagnation”, but also with “rebirth”, which gives new life meaning to old patterns and values.

At the same time, tradition can act as a conservative, retrograde force on the path to the formation of new, more progressive forms and norms of life. A tradition that becomes rigid and frozen in its “immutability” can take a position of “conscious conservatism,” even archaism, and thereby turn into traditionalism, when it is not the values of a particular tradition that are defended, but the very principle of immutability and immutability. The living contradiction “tradition-innovation” shows its real strength when tradition is ready for renewal and becomes a source of development, and innovation has no other way to assert itself and survive other than by proving its organicity and rootedness in culture. Practice shows that modernization is more successful where the traditions of the society being reformed are taken into account, and, in turn, traditions retain their vitality, responding to the needs of the time and growing into new forms of life, that is, being renewed. The collapse of a particular tradition is associated not only with the awareness of the constraint of its framework, but also with the discovery of new opportunities and prospects in development (social life, science, art, etc.).

The role and importance of tradition in scientific (see Tradition in Science) and artistic creativity is great. The term “tradition” is widely used in characterizing and assessing the aesthetic and cultural significance of the art of entire eras, movements and individual artists who made a special contribution to the treasury of world culture, creating unique examples - monuments of art. If it is true that without the past there is no future, then true innovation is possible only on the basis of preserving traditions, their creative continuation and development. This is true both for art and for historical creativity in general.

Lit.: Sarsenbaev N. S. Customs, traditions and public life. Alma-Ata, 1974; Sukhanov I.V. Customs, traditions and continuity of generations. M., 1976; ErasovV. C. Socio-cultural traditions and public consciousness in developing countries of Asia and Africa. M., 1982; Shatsky E. Utopia and tradition. M., 1990; Traditions and renewal. Dialogue of worldviews, parts 1-2. Nizhny Novgorod, 1995.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

People's lives, one way or another, are closely intertwined with traditions and customs. Celebrating a birthday or New Year, congratulating you on the eighth of March - is it a custom or a habit? What about a black cat or a bird knocking on the window? And who said that older people need to give up their seat in transport? All of the above are customs and traditions. But how to understand where is custom and where is tradition? What are their main differences?

Definition of “tradition” and “customs”

Traditions are the knowledge that is passed on word of mouth, from generation to generation, this is the knowledge that will be relevant in any area of human life: everyday life, society, culture, work, family, and so on. The main feature of traditions is their universality and lack of attachment to territory.

Customs are stereotypes about the rules and norms of behavior of people in society However, they are relatively stable in society. They are also passed down from generation to generation. These include certain rules formed in a certain sphere of human life.

The main differences between tradition and customs

The extent of distribution of traditions and customs in society. Customs relate to something specific: a people, a tribe, a territory. Tradition, in turn, relates to family, profession, and so on.

For example, there is a tradition to celebrate New Year, this reflects the connection between the old and new years. People have been saying goodbye to the old year and welcoming the new one for centuries. Nevertheless, everyone is familiar with the action - decorating the Christmas tree is already a custom. It is worth noting that the custom of decorating the Christmas tree and home in each nation has its own characteristics.

Level of influence. Custom, in other words, custom is a habit, people already automatically repeat it every day. And tradition is a direction of activity that is more complex and multifaceted. For example, custom is the position of a woman in the family, the attitude towards her and her responsibilities at home. And traditions include celebrating a birthday or a Saturday family trip to the park, theater, cinema, and so on.

Rooting in human consciousness. Over time, the custom becomes a tradition. Its duration is shorter than traditions. And traditions go on for decades and centuries. The custom of respecting elders in the family has become a tradition - respecting parents, taking care of them, visiting them, and so on.

Direction. The custom is aimed at practicality in the life of every person. And tradition, in turn, is aimed at informing people.

It is customary for household members to look well-groomed, and tradition informs people that they should be well-groomed and take care of their appearance.

The main point. The customs and traditions themselves are very similar. We can say that tradition is a deep custom. But if you look in more detail, you will notice a certain difference. The bride wearing a white dress at her wedding is a custom, and celebrating this holiday is a tradition.

Impact on life. Customs connect modern man with his ancestors; by pursuing customs, man shows his respect for the previous generation. Traditions reflect the life of a people and its development. Through customs people learn, acquire skills and experience, and through tradition a person joins society.

For example, in a family there is a tradition of cooking turkey for Sunday dinner, but what recipe and what family cooking secrets are a custom.

Change over time. Customs change over time, following fashion trends and do not carry much meaning. In the primitive communal system, customs acted as a moral law. They depend on the opinion of society on what can be done and what cannot be done. Traditions remain unchanged over time.

Other differences

Function.Tradition has informational functions. Every positive experience is passed down from generation to generation as a tradition. Custom performs official, regulatory and social functions.
Emergence. Customs arose from the same repeated human actions. Traditions arose thanks to the support of many people of any type. For example, alumni meet on the same day every year.
The nature of the rules of conduct. Traditions contain only general rules for a particular action. A custom is always planned in detail and has its own plan of action, depending on the opinion of society. For example, certain nationalities have a number of customs on how a husband should behave with his wife, how to behave in society, and how he should treat older people.

Scope. Despite the fact that today many areas of life are connected, the custom can be attributed more to family and everyday life. Traditions are more accustomed to being attributed to politics, philosophy, production, and so on.
Motives for compliance. People adhere to different customs because they are already accustomed to doing so. And traditions are observed only on the basis of one’s own personal beliefs. After all, not every person celebrates Epiphany or goes to church.
Scope of compliance. As previously mentioned, customs are rules governing the behavior of society, so customs can be followed by an entire nation or a large group of people. Traditions are followed by a small group of people, for example, a family.
Society's attitude. We can say that customs are viewed neutrally or even negatively. Traditions have always been respected in society.
Content. A custom is just an example of how one can or should act in a situation. Tradition is everything inherited from ancestors.

(from Latin traditio - transmission) - an anonymous, spontaneously formed system of samples, norms, rules, etc., which guides a fairly large and stable group of people in their behavior. T. can be so broad as to cover the entire society at a certain period of its development. The most stable T., as a rule, are not recognized as something transitory, having a beginning and an end in time. This is especially evident in the so-called. traditional society, where T. determines all significant aspects of social life. T. have a clearly expressed dual character: they combine description and evaluation (norm) and are expressed in descriptive-evaluative statements. T. accumulates previous experience of successful collective activity, and they are a unique expression of it. On the other hand, they represent a blueprint and prescription for future behavior. T. is what makes a person a link in the chain of generations, which expresses his presence in historical time, his presence in the “present” as a link connecting the past and the future. Two extremes in the interpretation of T. - traditionalism and anti-traditionalism - contrast T. with reason: the first puts T. above reason, the second evaluates it as a prejudice that must be overcome with the help of reason. T. and reason do not oppose each other, however: T. is established through reflection on past activities and does not require blind obedience. The opposition between theory and reason, characteristic of the Enlightenment and romanticism, did not take into account the fact that reason is not some kind of original factor called upon to play the role of an impartial and infallible judge. Reason develops historically, and rationality can be considered one of T. “... Rational standards and the arguments that justify them are visible elements of specific traditions, which include clear and clearly expressed principles and imperceptible and largely unknown, but absolutely necessary the basis of predispositions to actions and assessments” (P. Feyerabend). At the same time, reason is not one of many equal Ts, but a special, one might say, privileged T. It is older than all other Ts and is capable of surviving any of them. It is universal and covers all people, while all other T. are limited not only in time, but also in space. Reason is the most flexible of technologies, changing from era to era. It represents critical, and in particular self-critical T. And, finally, reason deals with truth, the standards of which are not conventional. T. pass through the mind and can be evaluated by it. This assessment is always historically limited, since the mind always belongs to a certain era and shares all its “prejudices.” Nevertheless, the assessment of the mind can be broader and deeper than the assessment of one T. with viewpoint. some other, non-universal and non-critical. Different T. do not simply coexist with each other. They form a certain hierarchy in which the mind occupies a special place. The opposition between theory and reason is relative: thoughts are formed with the participation of reason, and reason itself is a continuation and development of the rationality immanent in man. “Even the most genuine and lasting tradition is formed not just naturally, thanks to the ability for self-preservation of what is available, but requires consent, acceptance, and care. In essence, tradition is the preservation of what exists, preservation that takes place during any historical changes. But such preservation is an act of reason, distinguished, however, by its invisibility” (H.G. Gadamer). Everyday life relies heavily on T., and appeal to it is a standard method of practical argumentation. Appeal to T. is a common way of argumentation in morality. Our moral attitudes and actions are largely determined by T. All attempts to substantiate or improve the moral system that abstract from T. inevitably remain declarative and have no practical consequences. It would be completely unrealistic to expect modern science to substantiate some new morality. The argument to T. is inevitable in all scientific discussions that include the “present” as a topic of discussion or as one of the factors determining the position of the researcher. “...In the sciences of the spirit, despite all their methodologism, there is an effective element of tradition, which constitutes their true essence and characteristic feature” (Gadamer). Feierabend P. Fav. works on the methodology of science. M., 1986; Gadamer X.G. Truth and Method. M., 1988; Ivin A.A. Theory of argumentation. M., 2000.

Definitions, meanings of words in other dictionaries:

Social psychology. Dictionary under. ed. M.Yu. Kondratieva

Tradition [lat. traditio - transmission, narration] - historically established and passed on from generation to generation forms of activity and behavior, as well as accompanying customs, rules, values, ideas. T. is formed on the basis of those forms of activity that...

Philosophical Dictionary

(Latin tradi-tio, lit. - transmission) - a set of religions. provisions and regulations that are supposedly of a divinely revealed nature. Purpose and purpose of P. s. - support and justify the “divine establishment” of St. scripture, as well as interpret its most important provisions, developed long before...

Philosophical Dictionary

1) Tradition- (lat. tiaditio - transfer) - a form of continuity in various types of humans. activity, material and spiritual, presupposing a complete and partial reproduction of the methods, techniques and content of the activities of previous generations. To class about-ve T. are class. character and depending on their social contents can play different roles. In the development of socialism. Socialist culture and the formation of a new person become of great importance. T.

2) Tradition- (from Latin traditio - tradition) - 1) transmission of samples and norms of spiritual life, sacred texts, rituals and morality from generation to generation. Tradition is anonymously authoritative, accepted and transmitted in free agreement with the fact that deceased bearers have the right to vote in the lives of their heirs. Tradition is passed on not mechanically, but through the living creative efforts of its participants. 2) Tradition is often mistakenly identified with traditionalism, neglecting the fact that participation in the life of tradition allows the individual to counteract the degeneration of man in mass society. 3) In hermeneutics: participation in the life of tradition is necessary for understanding sacred texts (G.-G. Gadamer).

3) Tradition- (from Lat.-transmission) – a mechanism for the reproduction of social institutions and norms; transfer of spiritual values from generation to generation; social relations characterized by a certain historical stability, repeatability, and commonality. The traditions that have developed in society, reflecting the objective conditions of its existence, express continuity in social life and consolidate its most stable moments. Traditions manifest the life of the past in the present and future. The existence of traditions, their formation, consolidation, development and disappearance are determined by social circumstances, ideas and ideals of people.

4) Tradition - (from Latin traditio - transmission) - an anonymous, spontaneously formed system of samples, norms, rules, etc., which guides a fairly large and stable group of people in their behavior. T. can be so broad as to cover the entire society at a certain period of its development. The most stable T., as a rule, are not recognized as something transitory, having a beginning and an end in time. This is especially evident in the so-called. traditional society, where T. determines all significant aspects of social life. T. have a clearly expressed dual character: they combine description and evaluation (norm) and are expressed in descriptive-evaluative statements. T. accumulates previous experience of successful collective activity, and they are a unique expression of it. On the other hand, they represent a blueprint and prescription for future behavior. T. is what makes a person a link in the chain of generations, which expresses his presence in historical time, his presence in the “present” as a link connecting the past and the future. Two extremes in the interpretation of T. - traditionalism and anti-traditionalism - contrast T. with reason: the first puts T. above reason, the second evaluates it as a prejudice that must be overcome with the help of reason. T. and reason do not oppose each other, however: T. is established through reflection on past activities and does not require blind obedience. The opposition between theory and reason, characteristic of the Enlightenment and romanticism, did not take into account the fact that reason is not some kind of original factor called upon to play the role of an impartial and infallible judge. Reason develops historically, and rationality can be considered one of T. “... Rational standards and the arguments that justify them are visible elements of specific traditions, which include clear and clearly expressed principles and imperceptible and largely unknown, but absolutely necessary the basis of predispositions to actions and assessments” (P. Feyerabend). At the same time, reason is not one of many equal Ts, but a special, one might say, privileged T. It is older than all other Ts and is capable of surviving any of them. It is universal and covers all people, while all other T. are limited not only in time, but also in space. Reason is the most flexible of T., changing from era to era. It represents critical, and in particular self-critical T. And, finally, reason deals with truth, the standards of which are not conventional. T. pass through the mind and can be evaluated by it. This assessment is always historically limited, since the mind always belongs to a certain era and shares all its “prejudices.” Nevertheless, the assessment of the mind can be broader and deeper than the assessment of one T. with viewpoint. some other, non-universal and non-critical. Different T. do not simply coexist with each other. They form a certain hierarchy in which the mind occupies a special place. The opposition between theory and reason is relative: thoughts are formed with the participation of reason, and reason itself is a continuation and development of the rationality immanent in man. “Even the most genuine and lasting tradition is formed not just naturally, thanks to the ability for self-preservation of what is available, but requires consent, acceptance, and care. In essence, tradition is the preservation of what exists, preservation that takes place during any historical changes. But such preservation is an act of reason, distinguished, however, by its invisibility” (H.G. Gadamer). Everyday life relies heavily on T., and appeal to it is a standard method of practical argumentation. Appeal to T. is a common way of argumentation in morality. Our moral attitudes and actions are largely determined by T. All attempts to substantiate or improve the moral system that abstract from T. inevitably remain declarative and have no practical consequences. It would be completely unrealistic to expect modern science to substantiate some new morality. The argument to T. is inevitable in all scientific discussions that include the “present” as a topic of discussion or as one of the factors determining the position of the researcher. “...In the spiritual sciences, despite all their methodologism, there is an effective element of tradition, which constitutes their true essence and characteristic feature” (Gadamer). Feierabend P. Fav. works on the methodology of science. M., 1986; Gadamer X.G. Truth and Method. M., 1988; Ivin A.A. Theory of argumentation. M., 2000.

5) Tradition - (Latin traditio - transfer, imparting) - a universal form of fixation, consolidation and selective preservation of certain elements of sociocultural experience, as well as a universal mechanism of its transmission, ensuring stable historical and genetic continuity in sociocultural processes. Thus, T. includes what is transmitted (a certain amount of sociocultural information is recognized as important and necessary for the normal functioning and development of society and its subjects), and how this transmission is carried out, i.e. communicative-translational-transmutation method of intra- and intergenerational interaction of people within a particular culture (and corresponding subcultures) based on a relatively common understanding and interpretation of the meanings and meanings accumulated in the past of a given culture (and corresponding subcultures). Technology ensures the reproduction in systems of present (“living,” “immediate”) activity of tested and time-tested samples of past (“dead,” “materialized”) activity, i.e. it determines the present and future by the past, which has already come true and acts as the sum of the conditions of any sociocultural activity. This understanding of T. makes this concept applicable to almost any fragments and levels of organization of sociocultural experience (both the past - cultural heritage, and the present), which sometimes serves as the basis for identifying T. and sociocultural experience. The latter, however, is unjustified, since in order to be included in the T. system, sociocultural experience must undergo selective selection for stability and relative mass reproduction in the structures of activity. In the narrow sense of the word, the term T. is used to characterize self-organizing and self-regulating (autonomous) subsystems of human activity and the associated sociocultural experience, the functioning and development of which is not associated with institutional forms of support through a special apparatus of power. The behavior of social subjects, organized and regulated with the help of technology, does not imply the formulation and explication of goals by the acting subjects; its meanings are hidden (given) in itself. The legitimacy of traditional forms of action is justified and legitimized by the very fact of their existence in the past, and their effectiveness is assessed through the accuracy of following the accepted pattern. This type of T. can be called authentic, “primary,” non-reflective T. It is transmitted both directly and practically, through the reproduction of certain forms of action and following certain regulating rules of behavior (ritual), and orally through folklore and mythology. All elements of T. are imbued with symbolic content and refer to the meanings and archetypes enshrined in a particular culture. The loss of semantic components in the ritual form of existence of authentic T. reduces it to the level of custom as a constantly and massively reproduced form. This type of T. statically reproduces the past and is capable only of extensive development, selecting elements of sociocultural experience according to the matrix fixed in a given culture. It is precisely these Ts that are usually discussed when they talk about “conservatism,” “inertness,” “immutability,” etc. T. as a form of fixation and a mechanism for transmitting cultural contents. Already in ancient Eastern, and especially in ancient societies, technology acquires its transformed form, being reflected and rationalized within the framework of a professionally created culture. Here it is recorded in certain texts and receives written and symbolic expression. Having undergone this kind of processing, T. again returns to the layer of real behavior and can be quite consciously supported and transformed by the acting subjects. Moreover, this return has a significantly different character depending on the agents to whom T is addressed. It can be socialized in the activities of both “consumers” and “creators” of culture. In the latter case, such specific types as, for example, author's T. are generated, and T. works with written and symbolic fragments of sociocultural experience are also developed. It is in these cases that we can talk about inauthentic, “secondary,” reflexive T. The totality of “primary” and “secondary” T. constitutes the concept of T. in the broad sense of the word. Both of these types of T. are united by their self-organizing nature, functioning in a mode of autonomy that does not imply institutionalized forms of support. What distinguishes, first of all, is one or another degree of reflexivity of “secondary” T. and changes due to this in their regulatory potential. “Secondary” technologies are capable of intensive development, suggest the possibility of restructuring the past through its constant reinterpretation in active and symbolic forms, and select elements of sociocultural experience through changing the very matrices rooted in culture. In this sense, the possibility of changing T. acts as a condition for its constant reproduction and preservation in sociocultural systems. A broad understanding of technology allows us to consider it as a universal form and mechanism for ordering and structuring the contents of any culture and its subsystems that are significant for living generations of people. It, ensuring continuity, presupposes, on the one hand, the establishment of certain boundaries of human activity, giving it spatio-temporal stability, a certain inertia, and on the other, a certain shift in meanings in the transmitted contents, i.e. gradual explicit or implicit (unreflected by individuals) change. Innovation only takes root in society when it fits into the system of existing meanings of sociocultural experience, is consistent with the existing T. or generates a new T.T., therefore, to a large extent, it is what keeps us in culture and history. By “binding” a person with the past, closing (to a certain extent) to him the possibility of retrospective arbitrariness, T. opens up to him the prospect of freedom in the present and future based on the past. A special type of T. are the so-called negative T., i.e. based not on the affirmation of any values, but on the denial of values unacceptable for a given culture or subjects. The latter are either condemned or prohibited explicitly (through taboos) or hidden (through the permission of others). Negative T. is built on the basis of an example of how one should not act or what one should not focus on. Thus, it turns out to be dependent on its “enemy”, and, therefore, unwittingly contributes to the consolidation, preservation and transmission of those meanings and meanings that it is trying to fight. Thus, the fight against religious heresies contributed to the preservation of the ideas they preached. Only the explicitly (reflexively) or implicitly non-evaluable - value-neutral - does not fall into the field of action of T. It goes unnoticed, is hushed up and dies. The loss of value in technology is the cessation of movement, the impossibility of development in a given direction. Phenomena associated with this value fall out of the transmission system and, as it were, cease to exist, at least in reality. Being a genetically primary form of ordering and structuring sociocultural experience and the activities of social objects, technology serves as the basis for the emergence of sociocultural norms. However, in developed social systems, technology itself can be considered as a special type of normative regulation. If a norm presupposes, in the limit, heteronomous, authorial sources of its origin, is, as it were, introduced into the array of available experience by a subject from the outside and is supported by certain social institutions, then T. can be interpreted as a type of autonomous in origin and non-institutionalized norms, which is true, first of all, for "primary" T. Already “secondary” T., having a derivative origin from the subject, but not needing institutionalization, can be considered as occupying an intermediate position between the norm itself and T. proper. The same position can be occupied by fragments of T. that have undergone institutionalization, for example, the so-called customary law. On the other hand, the norms themselves, being stereotyped and internalized in the activities of subjects, lose the need for constant institutional support and can evolve into T. Regulation of social systems ch. O. based on T. (as a rule, “primary”) or the innovation norm itself serves (along with others) as one of the criteria for distinguishing the so-called. traditional and modern societies. In modern (industrial and post-industrial) societies, the sphere of activity of technology is narrowing, among the technology itself the weight of “secondary” technology is increasing. Technology becomes the subject of a number of intellectual operations in order to justify the chosen future behavior through reference to the authority of the past or, conversely, the subject of criticism under the slogan of “liberation from the oppression of the past.” However, even in these societies, the role of technology as an indispensable mechanism for the development of culture remains. V.L. Abushenko

6) Tradition- (Latin traditio - transfer) - a type (or form) of custom, characterized by special stability and directed efforts of people to preserve unchanged the forms of behavior inherited from previous generations. T. is characterized by: a careful attitude towards the previously established way of life as a cultural heritage of the past; attention not only to the content of behavior, but also to its external manifestations, to style, as a result of which the external form of behavior becomes especially stable. In cases where this form is strictly canonized and begins to dominate the content of people’s behavior, T. becomes a rite and degenerates into a ritual. The T. that has developed in an society or team, reflecting the objective conditions of its existence, expresses continuity in social life and consolidates its most stable moments. T. (national, cultural, everyday, sometimes also spoken of socio-political T.) perform a progressive role as long as they meet historical needs. They become a brake on social development when they cultivate an outdated way of life. An example is the patriarchal attitude towards women, polygamy, bride price, which are sometimes tried to be portrayed as national T. The CPSU program, pointing out the need to combat harmful T. of the past, hindering the progress of the socialist society, at the same time emphasizes the need to “in every possible way develop new, revolutionary traditions of the builders of communism, common to all nations...” (CPSU Program, p. 115). Using the revolutionary heritage of the past, the socialist society constantly enriches it with new content corresponding to the conditions of communist construction. This is one of the aspects of the communist education of the masses.

7) Tradition- (from Latin traditio - transfer) - transfer of spiritual values from generation to generation; Cultural life is based on tradition. Tradition is also called what is passed on; at the same time, everything that is based on tradition is called traditional.

8) Tradition- (Latin traditio - transmission, tradition) - historically established customs, rituals, social institutions, ideas and values, norms of behavior, etc., that are historically established and passed on from generation to generation; elements of socio-cultural heritage that are preserved in society or in individual social groups for a long time. A distinction is made between progressive, associated with the creative development of culture, and reactionary, associated with outdated remnants of the past. In science, technology means continuity of knowledge and research methods; in art, it means continuity of style and skill.

Tradition

(Latin tiaditio - transfer) - a form of continuity in various types of humans. activity, material and spiritual, presupposing a complete and partial reproduction of the methods, techniques and content of the activities of previous generations. To class about-ve T. are class. character and depending on their social contents can play different roles. In the development of socialism. Socialist culture and the formation of a new person become of great importance. T.

(from Latin traditio - tradition) - 1) transmission of samples and norms of spiritual life, sacred texts, rituals and morality from generation to generation. Tradition is anonymously authoritative, accepted and transmitted in free agreement with the fact that deceased bearers have the right to vote in the lives of their heirs. Tradition is passed on not mechanically, but through the living creative efforts of its participants. 2) Tradition is often mistakenly identified with traditionalism, neglecting the fact that participation in the life of tradition allows the individual to counteract the degeneration of man in mass society. 3) In hermeneutics: participation in the life of tradition is necessary for understanding sacred texts (G.-G. Gadamer).

(from Lat.-transmission) - a mechanism for the reproduction of social institutions and norms; transfer of spiritual values from generation to generation; social relations characterized by a certain historical stability, repeatability, and commonality. The traditions that have developed in society, reflecting the objective conditions of its existence, express continuity in social life and consolidate its most stable moments. Traditions manifest the life of the past in the present and future. The existence of traditions, their formation, consolidation, development and disappearance are determined by social circumstances, ideas and ideals of people.

(from Latin traditio - transmission) - an anonymous, spontaneously formed system of samples, norms, rules, etc., which guides a fairly large and stable group of people in their behavior. T. can be so broad as to cover the entire society at a certain period of its development. The most stable T., as a rule, are not recognized as something transitory, having a beginning and an end in time. This is especially evident in the so-called. traditional society, where T. determines all significant aspects of social life. T. have a clearly expressed dual character: they combine description and evaluation (norm) and are expressed in descriptive-evaluative statements. T. accumulates previous experience of successful collective activity, and they are a unique expression of it. On the other hand, they represent a blueprint and prescription for future behavior. T. is what makes a person a link in the chain of generations, which expresses his presence in historical time, his presence in the “present” as a link connecting the past and the future. Two extremes in the interpretation of T. - traditionalism and anti-traditionalism - contrast T. with reason: the first puts T. above reason, the second evaluates it as a prejudice that must be overcome with the help of reason. T. and reason do not oppose each other, however: T. is established through reflection on past activities and does not require blind obedience. The opposition between theory and reason, characteristic of the Enlightenment and romanticism, did not take into account the fact that reason is not some kind of original factor called upon to play the role of an impartial and infallible judge. Reason develops historically, and rationality can be considered one of T. “... Rational standards and the arguments that justify them are visible elements of specific traditions, which include clear and clearly expressed principles and imperceptible and largely unknown, but absolutely necessary the basis of predispositions to actions and assessments” (P. Feyerabend). At the same time, reason is not one of many equal Ts, but a special, one might say, privileged T. It is older than all other Ts and is capable of surviving any of them. It is universal and covers all people, while all other T. are limited not only in time, but also in space. Reason is the most flexible of technologies, changing from era to era. It represents critical, and in particular self-critical T. And, finally, reason deals with truth, the standards of which are not conventional. T. pass through the mind and can be evaluated by it. This assessment is always historically limited, since the mind always belongs to a certain era and shares all its “prejudices.” Nevertheless, the assessment of the mind can be broader and deeper than the assessment of one T. with viewpoint. some other, non-universal and non-critical. Different T. do not simply coexist with each other. They form a certain hierarchy in which the mind occupies a special place. The opposition between theory and reason is relative: thoughts are formed with the participation of reason, and reason itself is a continuation and development of the rationality immanent in man. “Even the most genuine and lasting tradition is formed not just naturally, thanks to the ability for self-preservation of what is available, but requires consent, acceptance, and care. In essence, tradition is the preservation of what exists, preservation that takes place during any historical changes. But such preservation is an act of reason, distinguished, however, by its invisibility” (H.G. Gadamer). Everyday life relies heavily on T., and appeal to it is a standard method of practical argumentation. Appeal to T. is a common way of argumentation in morality. Our moral attitudes and actions are largely determined by T. All attempts to substantiate or improve the moral system that abstract from T. inevitably remain declarative and have no practical consequences. It would be completely unrealistic to expect modern science to substantiate some new morality. The argument to T. is inevitable in all scientific discussions that include the “present” as a topic of discussion or as one of the factors determining the position of the researcher. “...In the spiritual sciences, despite all their methodologism, there is an effective element of tradition, which constitutes their true essence and characteristic feature” (Gadamer). Feierabend P. Fav. works on the methodology of science. M., 1986; Gadamer X.G. Truth and Method. M., 1988; Ivin A.A. Theory of argumentation. M., 2000.

(Latin traditio - transfer, imparting) - a universal form of fixation, consolidation and selective preservation of certain elements of sociocultural experience, as well as a universal mechanism of its transmission, ensuring stable historical and genetic continuity in sociocultural processes. Thus, T. includes what is transmitted (a certain amount of sociocultural information is recognized as important and necessary for the normal functioning and development of society and its subjects), and how this transmission is carried out, i.e. communicative-translational-transmutation method of intra- and intergenerational interaction of people within a particular culture (and corresponding subcultures) based on a relatively common understanding and interpretation of the meanings and meanings accumulated in the past of a given culture (and corresponding subcultures). Technology ensures the reproduction in systems of present (“living,” “immediate”) activity of tested and time-tested samples of past (“dead,” “materialized”) activity, i.e. it determines the present and future by the past, which has already come true and acts as the sum of the conditions of any sociocultural activity. This understanding of T. makes this concept applicable to almost any fragments and levels of organization of sociocultural experience (both the past - cultural heritage, and the present), which sometimes serves as the basis for identifying T. and sociocultural experience. The latter, however, is unjustified, since in order to be included in the T. system, sociocultural experience must undergo selective selection for stability and relative mass reproduction in the structures of activity. In the narrow sense of the word, the term T. is used to characterize self-organizing and self-regulating (autonomous) subsystems of human activity and the associated sociocultural experience, the functioning and development of which is not associated with institutional forms of support through a special apparatus of power. The behavior of social subjects, organized and regulated with the help of technology, does not imply the formulation and explication of goals by the acting subjects; its meanings are hidden (given) in itself. The legitimacy of traditional forms of action is justified and legitimized by the very fact of their existence in the past, and their effectiveness is assessed through the accuracy of following the accepted pattern. This type of T. can be called authentic, “primary,” non-reflective T. It is transmitted both directly and practically, through the reproduction of certain forms of action and following certain regulating rules of behavior (ritual), and orally through folklore and mythology. All elements of T. are imbued with symbolic content and refer to the meanings and archetypes enshrined in a particular culture. The loss of semantic components in the ritual form of existence of authentic T. reduces it to the level of custom as a constantly and massively reproduced form. This type of T. statically reproduces the past and is capable only of extensive development, selecting elements of sociocultural experience according to the matrix fixed in a given culture. It is precisely these Ts that are usually discussed when they talk about “conservatism,” “inertness,” “immutability,” etc. T. as a form of fixation and a mechanism for transmitting cultural contents. Already in ancient Eastern, and especially in ancient societies, technology acquires its transformed form, being reflected and rationalized within the framework of a professionally created culture. Here it is recorded in certain texts and receives written and symbolic expression. Having undergone this kind of processing, T. again returns to the layer of real behavior and can be quite consciously supported and transformed by the acting subjects. Moreover, this return has a significantly different character depending on the agents to whom T is addressed. It can be socialized in the activities of both “consumers” and “creators” of culture. In the latter case, specific types of it are generated, such as, for example, author’s T., and T. works with written and symbolic fragments of sociocultural experience are also developed. It is in these cases that we can talk about inauthentic, “secondary,” reflexive T. The totality of “primary” and “secondary” T. constitutes the concept of T. in the broad sense of the word. Both of these types of T. are united by their self-organizing nature, functioning in a mode of autonomy that does not imply institutionalized forms of support. What distinguishes, first of all, is one or another degree of reflexivity of “secondary” T. and changes due to this in their regulatory potential. “Secondary” technologies are capable of intensive development, suggest the possibility of restructuring the past through its constant reinterpretation in active and symbolic forms, and select elements of sociocultural experience through changing the very matrices rooted in culture. In this sense, the possibility of changing T. acts as a condition for its constant reproduction and preservation in sociocultural systems. A broad understanding of technology allows us to consider it as a universal form and mechanism for ordering and structuring the contents of any culture and its subsystems that are significant for living generations of people. It, ensuring continuity, presupposes, on the one hand, the establishment of certain boundaries of human activity, giving it spatio-temporal stability, a certain inertia, and on the other, a certain shift in meanings in the transmitted contents, i.e. gradual explicit or implicit (unreflected by individuals) change. Innovation only takes root in society when it fits into the system of existing meanings of sociocultural experience, is consistent with the existing T. or generates a new T.T., therefore, to a large extent, it is what keeps us in culture and history. By “binding” a person with the past, closing (to a certain extent) to him the possibility of retrospective arbitrariness, T. opens up to him the prospect of freedom in the present and future based on the past. A special type of T. are the so-called negative T., i.e. based not on the affirmation of any values, but on the denial of values unacceptable for a given culture or subjects. The latter are either condemned or prohibited explicitly (through taboos) or hidden (through the permission of others). Negative T. is built on the basis of an example of how one should not act or what one should not focus on. Thus, it turns out to be dependent on its “enemy”, and, therefore, unwittingly contributes to the consolidation, preservation and transmission of those meanings and meanings that it is trying to fight. Thus, the fight against religious heresies contributed to the preservation of the ideas they preached. Only the explicitly (reflexively) or implicitly non-evaluable - value-neutral - does not fall into the field of action of T. It goes unnoticed, is hushed up and dies. The loss of value in technology is the cessation of movement, the impossibility of development in a given direction. Phenomena associated with this value fall out of the transmission system and, as it were, cease to exist, at least in reality. Being a genetically primary form of ordering and structuring sociocultural experience and the activities of social objects, technology serves as the basis for the emergence of sociocultural norms. However, in developed social systems, technology itself can be considered as a special type of normative regulation. If a norm assumes, in the limit, heteronomous, authorial sources of its origin, is, as it were, introduced into the array of available experience by a subject from the outside and is supported by certain social institutions, then T. can be interpreted as a type of norms that are autonomous in origin and non-institutionalized, which is true, first of all, for "primary" T. Already “secondary” T., having a derivative origin from the subject, but not needing institutionalization, can be considered as occupying an intermediate position between the norm itself and T. proper. The same position can be occupied by fragments of T. that have undergone institutionalization, for example, the so-called customary law. On the other hand, the norms themselves, being stereotyped and internalized in the activities of subjects, lose the need for constant institutional support and can evolve into T. Regulation of social systems ch. O. based on T. (as a rule, “primary”) or the innovation norm itself serves (along with others) as one of the criteria for distinguishing the so-called. traditional and modern societies. In modern (industrial and post-industrial) societies, the sphere of activity of technology is narrowing, among the technology itself the weight of “secondary” technology is increasing. Technology becomes the subject of a number of intellectual operations in order to justify the chosen future behavior through reference to the authority of the past or, conversely, the subject of criticism under the slogan of “liberation from the oppression of the past.” However, even in these societies, the role of technology as an indispensable mechanism for the development of culture remains. V.L. Abushenko

(Latin traditio - transfer) - a type (or form) of custom, characterized by special stability and directed efforts of people to preserve unchanged the forms of behavior inherited from previous generations. T. is characterized by: a careful attitude towards the previously established way of life as a cultural heritage of the past; attention not only to the content of behavior, but also to its external manifestations, to style, as a result of which the external form of behavior becomes especially stable. In cases where this form is strictly canonized and begins to dominate the content of people’s behavior, T. becomes a rite and degenerates into a ritual. The T. that has developed in an society or team, reflecting the objective conditions of its existence, expresses continuity in social life and consolidates its most stable moments. T. (national, cultural, everyday, sometimes also spoken of socio-political T.) perform a progressive role as long as they meet historical needs. They become a brake on social development when they cultivate an outdated way of life. An example is the patriarchal attitude towards women, polygamy, bride price, which are sometimes tried to be portrayed as national T. The CPSU program, pointing out the need to combat harmful T. of the past, hindering the progress of the socialist society, at the same time emphasizes the need to “in every possible way develop new, revolutionary traditions of the builders of communism, common to all nations...” (CPSU Program, p. 115). Using the revolutionary heritage of the past, the socialist society constantly enriches it with new content corresponding to the conditions of communist construction. This is one of the aspects of the communist education of the masses.

(from Latin traditio - transfer) - transfer of spiritual values from generation to generation; Cultural life is based on tradition. Tradition is also called what is passed on; at the same time, everything that is based on tradition is called traditional.

(Latin traditio - transmission, tradition) - historically established customs, rituals, social institutions, ideas and values, norms of behavior, etc., historically established and passed on from generation to generation; elements of socio-cultural heritage that are preserved in society or in individual social groups for a long time. A distinction is made between progressive, associated with the creative development of culture, and reactionary, associated with outdated remnants of the past. In science, technology means continuity of knowledge and research methods; in art, it means continuity of style and skill.

You may be interested in knowing the lexical, literal or figurative meaning of these words:

- Structureless-tonic (structureless-tone, irrational) analogue of a message (signal). Specific anti-information...
Antilogos - See explanation in Art. EROS LOGOS CHAOS. ...
Abstractness is a characteristic of culture, social relations, reproductive activity, a component...

Our button code.