Symbolic function in the structure of consciousness

Relevance. The results of the interaction of man and the environment are fixed and function in the mind with the help of signs and symbols. The need to study the patterns of mastering the subject content presented in a symbolic form, as well as socialization in general, makes it important to appeal to the fundamental question of the correlation of symbolic function with the structure and work of consciousness.

Objective. This article represents the processual model of consciousness allowing to consider the symbolic function as a moving force of human connection with the surrounding world. The essence of this connection is cognitive. 

Methods. Analysis, synthesis and modeling. The study was carried out in the concept of a semiotic approach.

Results. Social origin of consciousness allows to model its structure. The following components of consciousness can be distinguished: the sensual fabric of an image; biodynamic fabric of the movement and action; meaning; sense.  

The symbolic function should be studied within the concept of the processual model consciousness. Logic of processual model imposes studying of signs and symbols moving from the separate nominal condition through the systemic organization to the reflection.

Conclusions. Consciousness can be studied through the processual model, where the main characteristic of its elements is the interaction and mediation by signs and symbols. The primacy of a sign or symbol is determined by the degree of orientation of the subject in the situation. The transition of a sign into a symbol occurs as a result of the inclusion of a separate sign in an increasing number of sign-symbolic systems. This is possible in the process of personal temporal and spatial inclusion in the general vector of the “chronotope”.

References

Assadzhioli,R. (2002). Psikhosintez. Printsipy i tekhniki [Psychosynthesis. Principles and techniques]. Moscow: EKSMO-Press.

Basin, E.Ya. (2012). Semanticheskaya filosofiya iskusstva [Semantic philosophy of art]. Moscow: Gumanitariy.

Bauehr, V., Dyumotts, I., Golovin, S. (2000). Ehntsiklopediya simvolov [Encyclopedia of symbols]. Moscow: KRON-PRESS.

Bakhtin, M.M. (1975). Formy vremeni i khronotopa v romane. Ocherki po istoricheskoy poehtike [Forms of time and chronotope in the novel. Essays on historical poetics]. In Bakhtin, M.M. Voprosy literatury i ehstetiki. Issledovaniya raznykh let [Questions of literature and aesthetics. Studies of different years] (pp. 234—407). Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literatura.

Bernshteyn, N.A. (1947). O postroenii dvizheniy [About building movements]. Moscow: Medgiz.

Bibler, V.S. (1990). Ot naukoucheniya — k logike kulʹtury: Dva filosofskikh vvedeniya v dvadtsatʹ pervyy vek [From science to the logic of culture: Two philosophical introduction to the twenty-first century]. Moscow: Politizdat.

Dobrynin,N.F. (2001). Ob aktivnosti soznaniya [About the activity of consciousness]. In L.V. Kulikov(Comp. & Ed.), Psikhologiya soznaniya [Psychology of consciousness] (pp. 63—72).St. Petersburg: Piter.

Freud Z. (1998). Osnovnye printsipy psikhoanaliza [Basic principles of psychoanalysis]. Moscow: Refl-buk; Kiev: Vakler.

Grof, S. (2004). Kosmicheskaya igra. Issledovanie rubezhey chelovecheskogo soznaniya [Space game. Study of the frontiers of human consciousness]. Moscow: AST.

James W. (1991). Psikhologiya [Psychology]. Moscow: Pedagogika.

Jung K. (2010). Simvolicheskaya zhiznʹ[Symbolic life]. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr.

Jung K.G., Frants M.-L. fon, Yakobi I. (2006). Chelovek i ego simvoly [Man and his symbols]. Moscow: Serebryanye niti.

Kassirer,E. (2006). Poznanie i deystvitelʹnostʹ. Ponyatie substantsii i ponyatie funktsii [Cognition and reality. The concept of substance and the concept of function]. Moscow: Gnozis.

Kassirer,E. (2011). Filosofiya simvolicheskikh form[The philosophy of symbolic forms]: In 3 v.Vol. 3: Fenomenologiya poznaniya [Phenomenology of knowledge]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy proekt.

Lacan, J. (1995). Funktsiya i pole rechi i yazyka v psikhoanalize [Function and field of speech and language in psychoanalysis]. Moscow: Gnozis.

 Langer, S.К. (1969). Philosophy in а New Key: А study in the symbolism of reason, rite and art. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Leontiev,A.N. (1975).Deyatelʹnostʹ. Soznanie. Lichnostʹ [Activity. Consciousness. Personality]. Moscow: Politizdat.

Meshcheryakov, B.G., Zinchenko, V.P. (2003, Comp. & Eds.) Bolʹshoy psikhologicheskiy slovarʹ [Big psychological dictionary]. St. Petersburg: PRAYM-EVROZNAK.

Morris, Ch. (1974). Fondements de la theorie des signes.Langages, IX, 35, 15—21.DOI: doi.org/10.3406/lgge.1974.2263

Petrenko, V.F., Mitina, O.V., Karitskiy, I.N. (2015). K probleme issledovaniya mentalʹnosti [To the problem of the study of mentality]. Istoricheskaya psikhologiya i sotsiologiya istorii [Historical psychology and sociology of history],8,2,5—17.

Peirce, C.S. (2011). Philosophical Writings of Peirce Paperback/ Ed. by J. Buchler. N.Y.: Dover Publications.

Piaget J. (2003). Psikhologiya intellekta [Psychology of Intellect]. St. Petersburg: Piter.

Rubinshteyn,S.L. (1957). Bytie i soznanie. O meste psikhicheskogo vo vseobshchey vzaimosvyazi yavleniy materialʹnogo mira [Being and consciousness. On the place of the mental in the general interrelation of the phenomena of the material world]. Moscow: Izd-vo AN SSSR.

Salmina,N.G. (1988).Znak i simvol v obuchenii [Sign and symbol in training]. Moscow: MSU Press.

Salmina, N.G., Zvonova, E.V. (2018). Razvitie simvolicheskoy funktsii v kontseptsii dialoga kulʹtur [The development of symbolic function in the concept of the dialogue of cultures]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya [Moscow University Psychology Bulletin], 2, 24—39. DOI: doi.org/10.11621/vsp.2018.02.24

Smirnov, S.D. (2016). Prognosticheskaya napravlennostʹ obraza mira kak osnova dinamicheskogo kontrolya neopredelennosti [The prognostic orientation of the image of the world as the basis for the dynamic control of uncertainty]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psychological Journal],37,5,5—13.

Veraksa, A.N. (2013). Symbol as a cognitive tool. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art. 6, 1, 57—65. DOI: doi.org/10.11621/pir.2013.0105

Veraksa,A.N. (2014).Simvolicheskoe oposredstvovanie v poznavatelʹnoy deyatelʹnosti doshkolʹnikov i mladshikh shkolʹnikov: Diss. ... doktora psikhologicheskikh nauk[Symbolic mediation in the cognitive activity of preschoolers and younger students: Dissertation of the doctor of psychological sciences]. Moscow.

Vygotsky, L.S. (2001). Psikhika, soznanie i bessoznatelʹnoe [Mind, Consciousness and Unconscious]. In L.V. Kulikov (Comp. & Ed.), Psikhologiya soznaniya [Psychology of consciousness] (pp. 31—47). St. Petersburg: Piter.

Wartofsky, M.(1979). Perception, representations, and the forms of action: Towards an historical epistemology (written 1973). In M. Wartofsky, Models: Representation and the scientific understanding (pp. 188—210). Dordrecht: D. Reidel. DOI: doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9357-0_11

Zaporozhets, A.V. (1986). Izbrannye psikhologicheskie trudy: V 2 t. [Selected psychological works: In 2 v.]. Moscow: Pedagogika.

Zinchenko, V.P. (1991). Miry soznaniya i struktura soznaniya [Worlds of consciousness and structure of consciousness].Voprosy psikhologii [Psychology Issues], 2, 15—34.

Zinchenko, V.P. (2006). Soznanie kak predmet i delo psikhologii [Consciousness as a subject and matter of psychology]. Metodologiya i istoriya psikhologii[Methodology and history of psychology], 1, 1, 207—232.

Zinchenko, V.P., Morgunov, E.B. (1994). Chelovek razvivayushchiysya: Ocherki rossiyskoy psikhologii [A Man Developing: Essays on Russian Psychology]. Moscow: Trivola.