facebook
twitter
vk
instagram
linkedin
google+
tumblr
akademia
youtube
skype
mendeley
Wiki
Global international scientific
analytical project
GISAP
GISAP logotip
Перевод страницы
 

END OF YOUTH AND WHAT WILL BE AFTER IT?

END OF YOUTH AND WHAT WILL BE AFTER IT?
Сергей Чирун, профессор, кандидат социологических наук, доктор политических наук, доцент

Участник первенства: Национальное первенство по научной аналитике - "Россия";

Открытое Европейско-Азиатское первенство по научной аналитике;

The article is devoted to the status and age- related aspects of youth policy is updated in the postmodern situation. This article discusses the methodological approaches sociology of youth, current concepts of youth and youth policy, including the "conceptual denial of Youth", conducted a comparative analysis.

The author draws attention to the change in the status of young people in society, linking the dynamics of changes in the global socio-political processes.

The combination of institutional analysis, the network approach and the theory of informal institutionalization has enabled the author to identify both formal and informal characteristics of the new youth policy. The author offers his own concept «post youth», as a category conforming, the postmodern situation in politics.

Keywords: youth, age, postmodern, political participation.

 

The essence of youth lies in its characteristics, which are determined by the specifics of age and the specific historical character of social relations. In the context of the problem under consideration, a particular interest in such a social group as young people is due, first of all, to the fact that the future of our society depends on it. In fact, young people are the embodiment of time. Such an understanding of youth can be interpreted from the position of the relational concept of time, according to which time is understood as a change in the qualitative states of a changing object. At the same time, associating time with the youth, it turns out that the future of the state, the political system can be predicted by observing the new generation that already exists in the present time in the youth community.

Thus, in this case, the specificity of young people is that in the person of youth the future exists in the present (which is not typical for many objects), and only then the present is potentially projected into the future. [17, p. 230]

V.A. Lukov identifies three main models of theoretical comprehension of the category "youth": youth as the carrier of the psychophysical properties of youth; as a subcultural phenomenon; as a participant in the juvenization-adaptation processes. [9]

The youth have a dual nature, that is, it cannot be regarded merely as a phenomenon of a biological order. Of course, youth as a certain chronological phase, the stage of the biological cycle is universal, but the boundaries of the youth age, its associated statuses and characteristics depend on the specific features of the political regime, political culture and youth policy.

In Russia, one of the first definitions of the concept of "youth" was given in 1968 by V.T. Lisovsky, who defined it as a special generation: "The youth is a generation of people who are in the stage of socialization, who are assimilating, and in more mature age have already acquired educational, professional, cultural and other social functions; depending on the specific historical conditions, the age criteria of young people can fluctuate from 16 to 30 years." [11]

Let's try to analyze the correctness of this definition of youth, proposed in the industrial period of "developed socialism", for the youth in the society of postmodernity.

So, firstly: "Youth is a generation of people passing through the stage of socialization ..." . This in itself is not in doubt, however, if the author sees in this the peculiarity of the youth that distinguishes it from other socio-demographic groups, then questions arise. Are not other socio-demographic groups also characterized by the passage of a certain stage of socialization? After all, the peculiarity of socialization in the modern (postmodern) society lies in its permanence throughout the life of man and irreducibility only to the individual stages of this life.

Secondly, it follows from the definition that the youth is those who acquire the functions they need for life: educational, professional, cultural and not yet ready, but are preparing to fulfill social roles in demand for society. Here is a typical picture for an industrial society (Modern), because in the Modern world young people are not considered as a full-fledged acting subject, but is such an approach acceptable for postmodernity? I think no. The knowledge, skills, skills, competences that were needed once, which the older generation possesses, lose their relevance, and under the conditions of postmodern it happens very quickly. As a result, education becomes continuous [17, p.91], continuing during the whole work career, and here the older generations are losing the youth due to their psychophysical characteristics due to age characteristics. I. I. Ilyinsky and V.A. Lukov, noting the universal properties of the youth, wrote that the social status of youth in all specific societies and at all times in the main is the same. Young people are both an object and a subject of socialization. [18, с.300-302] However, only the youth today is both an object and a subject of socialization? Can we not say, for example, that older people are the object and subject of socialization? Another "classical" definition of youth belongs to I.S. Kon: "Youth is a socio-demographic group, allocated on the basis of a combination of age characteristics, features of the social situation and due to both socio-psychological properties" [10].

Researchers continue to regard the youth as an objectively formed socio-demographic community characterized by typical conditions of formation, homogeneity of the world view, unity of the dominant socio-psychological qualities, similar methods of solving the tasks set by history that correspond to specific historical conditions. The youth of the modern era are internally divided into different attributes (age, socio-class, national, confessional, political, sociocultural and others), but characterized by relative stability, being a product of natural historical development, since members of one generation are interconnected by the time of their social existence.

Therefore, I.S. Kon defined the youth as a socio-demographic group with its own social status. However, he limited the main specificity of youth to individual differences, the need and ability to intimate psychological intimacy, as well as to productive creative activity [10, p.7]. Thus, the following characteristics are distinguished in the definition of youth (the modern epoch): chronological interpretation of the boundaries of youth, features of social status, role stereotypes of behavior, characteristics of the socio-demographic group, socio-psychological characteristics, the process of socialization in a specific historical period, self-identification and self-determination of youth as a social group. In other words, in the postmodern situation, the situation is drastically changing, and no longer young people, as it was in modernity, and older generations experience discrimination according to the criterion of chronological age. 

In part, this is due to the fact that postmodern society makes absolutely opposite demands on the social qualities of the individual in comparison with the Soviet system. It focuses on individualism, the priority of private interest, self-reliance, initiative, enterprise, the value of time, on maximum achievements in work and personal success [15, p.97-110].

Chronological indicators of age are not perfect, since they do not take into account the sufficiently differentiated duration of training of various social groups for work (from 4 years for some groups of workers, up to 20 years for a scientist). Therefore, the period of social "youth" among different groups of the population turns out to be different in duration. As a result, according to statistics and official documents, students receiving specialty students, workers, employees, as well as successful young politicians and entrepreneurs who already have a sufficient level of public recognition, one's own business, a family occupying high administrative positions are in one generation of youth (up to 30 years) in the typologies of research Let's give some examples.

Boris Nemtsov was elected in 30 years as a People's Deputy of the RSFSR in the Gorky National-territorial District, and a year later he became an authorized representative of the President of the Russian Federation in the Nizhny Novgorod region and the head of the administration of the Nizhny Novgorod region. The well-known entrepreneur and politician M.D. Prokhorov becomes the head of the department of the International Bank for Economic Cooperation (IBEC) at the age of 24. At 27, he is the chairman of the board of the joint-stock commercial bank "International Finance Company", a year later he is chairman of ONEXIM Bank, and by 35 He was the president of JSCB "ROSBANK". To everything, he is also an active blogger [17, p. 34].

 Belykh N.Y. becomes a vice-president of the Perm Financial and Production Group at the age of 23, at 29 he becomes vice-governor of the Perm region, a year later he is elected chairman of the Union of Right Forces, and at 33 he becomes Governor of the Kirov region. D.N. Patrushev (son of N.P. Patrushev) at 23 years became chairman of the Rosselkhozbank. Ivanov S.S. (son of Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov) even before his thirtieth birthday, managed to work as vice-president of Gazprombank and deputy chairman of Gazprombank. The son of Valentina Matveenko, S. Matveenko, by the age of 30 becomes the vice-president of the bank "St. Petersburg" [17, p.41].

P. Y. Gubarev in the age of 30 years becomes the head of the mobilization department of the Ministry of Defense of the Donetsk People's Republic and the "People's" Governor of Donbass.

Modern researchers, in particular A.A. Zelenin, define the youth as "a socio-historical and sociocultural phenomenon that represents a large biosocial age group that has a certain measure of subjectivity and development potential, the possibility of realizing it depends both on the concrete historical conditions of social development of the macro level social reality, and on the type of social structure of a single state"[6].

Giving a description of the youth, one cannot help but see that this is, as a rule, a dynamic subject of social life. The appearance of the youth is often due to the peculiarities of both the national and international political process.

Today, the attention of the authorities and society to youth is objectively conditioned by the fact that the younger generation is the bearer of innovative and creative potential, special abilities for creation. With the concept of "youth" in a direct dependent relationship is the concept of "future" of any society. But, unfortunately (especially during the period of serious political transformations), this connection is recognized more often only at the level of concepts and notions, and not real practice and politics.

Understanding the nature of the qualitative characteristics of youth is directly related to the subjective contradictions that are the source of its development. Young people, being a part of society, are included in all the variety of its connections and relations. At the same time, it has specific social functions - biologically-reproducing, translational, innovative.

By simplifying the problem somewhat, it can be argued that the youth can make such a contribution to the life of society in terms of scope and nature, what kind of a system of ideas, values, knowledge and moral qualities society will put into it.

From the economic point of view, the specificity of young people lies in the fact that in the modern society a significant part of it has not yet been included in the production process and therefore excluded from the distribution of products of this production and does not have complete personal independence in decision-making .

Youth is not a homogeneous system; it is a part of society and is included in the whole variety of relationships between processes and relations, and fulfills a number of its public functions inherent in it, acting simultaneously as the subject and object of youth policy. With this, its specific features are related, and by exercising its functions in practice, young people face contradictions, often turning into conflicts.

First, directly with the world of politics, the youth faced are already being primarily socialized. Therefore, the physical, intellectual, emotional potential of young people often comes into collision with political reality.

Secondly, socially active activity often encounters rejection of youth as a group having its own specific interests (contradictions of activities and norms). When explaining the impact of these conflicts on a young person, it is appropriate to use the concept of R. Merton, which connects the emergence of deviant and retreat forms of behavior of young people with the inability to realize priority goals.

Thirdly, discrepancies between social choice and individual-personal preferences arise (the contradiction of norms and interests).

Youth policy from the standpoint of the youthful subjectivity is bilateral, on the one hand - socialization, as a form of social relations, and on the other hand, juvenileization, as a form of society renewal, connected with the inclusion of young people in his life.

At present, the complication of social and labor activity, in which a young person must participate, has entailed an extension of the necessary terms of training. New generations of young people start their independent labor life much later, study longer than their peers in the past. Hence the lengthening of the period of the role moratorium (when the young man "tries on" various adult roles, but is not yet identified with them definitively) and the change in the corresponding socio-psychological stereotypes.

Therefore, some researchers argue that unstable role and status positions are one of the specific characteristics of youth in our individualized society [18, p. 131-133].

In postmodern conditions, where the criteria of social stratification and class identity are maximally blurred and unstable, individual social mobility itself begins to acquire features of a virtual hallucination, when everyone is free to believe in anything, to consider himself and others anything. Traditional society (pre-modern) denies the concept of youth, because it is possible only two socio-demographic categories - children and adults, the ritual of initiation clearly defines the boundaries and sacralizes the fact of the transition from a child's state to an adult. And modern, recognizing the concept of "youth", considers it, nevertheless, as a kind of temporary, intermediate state, as "a shortcoming that quickly passes" (I. Goethe). Or in another version: "Youth is the only defect that goes on with the years" (B. Shaw), but in a postmodern society, the youth, as a status, universalizes and loses a rigid binding to the chronological age.

In modern, and even more so in the premodern, neither the youth itself, nor the youth movements, organizations could not be independent without patronage, or in some sense analogue in adult structures. Since for a young man of modernity "... the main social function is to prepare for the status of an adult member of society" [18, p. 410]. Accordingly, state was, if not the main, the most significant institution of youth policy in the "modern".

In the transition from industrial society (modernity) to postmodern, youth policy reaches the international level. Youth movements and organizations acquire subjectivity in youth policy. Here, too, there is a change in the vector of gerontology-juvenile segregation, which creates difficulties for juvenologists. They argue that young people are universalized as an object of discrimination on the basis of age [1, p. 75-81]. And the youth policy is called upon to compensate this status inferiority of the youth. Methodologically, singling out "juvenology" into a special science means recognizing the universality of the characteristics of youth, their independence from the social order.

So, in the "Main Directions of the State Youth Policy in the Russian Federation" [13], adopted by the Supreme Council in 1993, the developers laid certain ideas as priorities. The first is that regardless of personal circumstances, including the level of the family's well-being, a young person experiences difficulties in social development. The shortcomings of his social status must be compensated, therefore the object of the youth policy is not individual youth groups, but all young people. Apparently such an approach and encouraged some of the researchers to consider the youth policy exclusively within the boundaries of social policy [7].

The second idea is that the state forms conditions and guarantees for the self-realization of the personality of the young person and the development of youth associations in the movement of initiatives, and the youth was seen as the potential of the future state of society.

However, this approach is acceptable for modernity, but in the context of implementing the functions of youth policy in a post-modern society is ineffective. The reason for this is that young people are not a homogeneous socially discriminated group according to the age criterion of "youth" in today's postmodern conditions, and therefore youth policy, unlike the policy on veterans, the elderly, the disabled, etc., can not be a policy compensation, replenishment of what the supposedly youth is deprived due to its status "inferiority". Some researchers believe that the "broad" approach is more justified, it unites the whole set of young individuals from the moment of birth and until they reach a certain age (30-35 years) under the indicated socio-demographic group [12].

The concept of "prefigurative culture" M. Mead, described to her in the 60s of the XX century, is a very relevant postmodern theory. According to M. Mead, the society of "prefigurative culture" [22] is confronted with the situation when older generations begin to yield significantly to their efficiency to younger generations. As a result, the traditional pyramid of the gerontocratic hierarchy turns out to be inverted, and the formation of a youth policy is accompanied by its own dezontologization. The absence of a response to semantic questions in postmodern culture is manifested in the positive dynamics of youth deviations in the forms of crime (novation), drug addiction, alcoholism, suicide (retreat). The young man in the postmodern appears no longer as a "bridge", but as an ontologically completed model, like that which does not transform into an adult, and even more so an older person, but that which is eternal always remains a young man.

And here the state of youth acquires an unprecedented value. Gradually, this value orientation of age and state is fixed through culture, through the imperatives of the consumer society. Here, the phenomenon of postmodern youth policy arises, because in postmodern, a young man who in his transitional state has not passed the mandatory initiation in the pre-modern and, in part, modern, but already ceased to be a child in the biological sense, is accepted as a standard.

Approaches to solving most of these problems are seen by many scientists in the development of the integral science of youth - juvenology. F. Mahler singles out ontological problems and paradigmatic bases of juvenology (genesis of youth, structure and dynamics, "status-role") in his work "Introduction to Juventology" [21].

Juveniological concepts  consider the youth as a group possessing a certain degree of autonomy and a number of similar features in various socio-political systems. This, first, the degree of involvement in public life, different from the older generations, and secondly, the permanent desire for innovation, to some "extremism", which is especially active during periods of bifurcation in an era of change, crises.

Interpreting juvenologists, it can be said that the youth are a kind of "bridge" from childhood to maturity [17, p.98]. We will return to this idea and its transformation in postmodernity.

In science, it is customary to consider youth as a partly marginal state [1]. In modernity, marginality is due to the fact that the young man is in an intermediate state between the world of childhood, from which he has grown and the adult world into which he passes, but has not yet passed completely. The young man is on "no man's land," and his whole being is "torn" between these worlds.

The specificity of the same postmodern society is that in this state, both realities are in symbiosis, and the state of transition itself is taken as the norm, that is, becomes the "basic" state. A significant problem for juvenists remains the uncertainty of their basic approaches and categories, which can lead to confusion, according to S.N. Pershutkin. [17, p.43]. The fact is that Juvenologists have a confusion in the definition of the concept: some speak of juvenology (I.M. Il'inskii, D.M. Davpetshishina, E.G. Slutsky), others of the Juvenile justice (V.A. Lukov, F. Mahler , V.V. Pavlovsky) [7, 8, 12, 21].

Meanwhile, the processes observed in the youth environment require a fundamental rethinking of the methodology of youth research. We observe the separation of "youth" from the boundaries of the chronological age. The phenomenon of "older boys" becomes massive, manifested in communication, political participation, consumption, marital behavior. Things become attribution of group affiliation and distancing from "outsiders", to which the older generation groups are counted, and stigmatization of "strangers" occurs according to criteria different from the traditional (chronological) age. According to P. Bourdieu, the similarity of the social positions of individuals is expressed in the similarity of their views, the similarity of the habitus. Habitus (mental models of comprehension of the world), represented in the form of attitudes and orientations of subjects, as models of perception and evaluation, as well as cognitive structures, arises as a result of internalization of the structures of social reality by an individual. The habitus reflects the social position within which it was designed.

In turn, the habitus produces classifiable and objectively differentiated patterns of behavior and presentation [4, p.143]. However, their perception is accessible only to the subjects possessing the code, these most classification models, allowing to understand the significance of this behavior and representations.

In real interactions, the community and differences in the social attributes of the subjects are expressed symbolically, social differentiation functions as a symbolic differentiation. For example, the hierarchy of status positions explicitly exists as a hierarchy of life styles. This means that the structure of the social space is latent, and the subjects realize their social differences only in symbolic form, that is, the individual draws a conclusion about the status differences in the differences in behavior, manners, clothing subjects, etc.

Traditional society limited youth as "not enough adults", but in a prefigurative reality society sees adults as "lack of youth". This becomes a new paradigmatic model of views. There is a process of univelization of the entire social space.

In postmodern, a young man is in a sense an ideal to which one should strive. If in the previous era, young people and adolescents often copied the image features of older age groups - they grew a mustache, beard, etc., trying to transform their youth under-prestigious status. In post-modernism, on the contrary, plastic surgeries, stem cells, diets, youth "party style" - are tools for creating the desired status image that corresponds to the youth age. A vivid example - pop-stars, both domestic and world-wide.

The problem of age is a special theme of postmodernity. It is known that we can not reduce our age to only its chronological expression.

Many researchers try to interpret the idea of youth as a readiness for change, and old age, as attachments to established forms of life [17, p. 230].

However, it should be noted that age is an objective but far from unambiguous indicator characterizing the individual. Often researchers, talking about age, have in mind different concepts. Thus, a chronological or absolute age is a period of time from birth to the moment under consideration. From the point of view of the chronological approach, O.M. Karpenko and I.A. Lomanov divide young people into four groups. Teenagers - 14-15 years. They, in their opinion, are dependents, for whom disproportions in physiological and psychological development are characteristic. Youth is 16-19 years old, they are intensifying the process of political socialization, expanding the range of socio-political roles and related responsibilities. The average youth - 20-25 years - are physiologically grown adults, they continue the process of political socialization. Senior youth (young adults) - 26-30 (in some cases up to 35 years). At this age, the process of forming a politically mature personality is completed [8].

The biological age corresponds to the stages of the development of the organism and is determined by such characteristic physical characteristics as, for example, puberty. Physiologically, youth, as a process of development of the biological system, ends in 19-20 years in women and in 21-22 years in men. However, in other dimensions, the completion of youth does not coincide with the biological one and ends much later.

In everyday life, speaking of age, often mean completely different characteristics and manifestations: this is the state of man as a biological system, and the social dimension of age, that is, the totality of his recognized achievements, both psychological and other dimensions of age. Y. R. Vishnevsky and V.T. Shapko recognize the "stylistic" approach to the interpretation of youth, according to which young people appear to be a very "blurred" phenomenon: "... we can consider young people who lead a youth lifestyle, but not yet, or already are out of youth age. The modern relationship between the once open youth and what is called "postmodernity" has even violated many categories, including associations between youth and age, youth and innovation "[18, p. 221]. In modernity I.S. Kon notes the growing uncertainty of the boundaries of youth: "Some authors enroll here people from 14 to 25 years, others - from 17 to 25" [10].

Kon notes that "... on the whole, the boundaries of transition to maturity in modern society are blurred, uncertain." Now, let us assume that postmodernism differs from previous epochs in a total displacement and mixing of age positions, that is, positions of chronological, physiological, psychological, political and social. Perhaps this is why the category "generation" is increasingly replaced in scientific research by the concepts "age class" or "cohort", the latter, according to L. Shovel, "should be understood not as a public organized group, but as a concrete public period of time: a sand of public hourglass" [18, p.212].

Postmodernism in this sense is characterized not just by the inconsistency, but sometimes by the antagonism of biological, chronological, socio-psychological, cratological age positions - statuses that provoke permanent intrapersonal tension. There are more and more "young" people who are more than 40 and even 60 years, who are unable to reconcile with the fact that they are no longer young. The state of age inconsistency, that is, discrepancies within the personality, or groups of several age positions, is observed in the postmodern and even becomes massive. Such a phenomenon, of course, took place both in the modern and in the pre-modern era, but only in the postmodern this phenomenon becomes global. The state of age inconsistency, when by some criteria a person is young and by another is no longer, we propose to designate as post-youth, that is, young postmodernity.

It can be said that in the postmodern, the youth do not disappear, according to the authors of the conceptual negation of young people M. Byzerman and D. Manguson [16, p.61], it is transformed into a new youth (post-youth). We have in mind the article of the American scientists M. Beizerman and D. Magnuson "Do we still need young people as a social phase?" The authors of the article express the idea that in a postmodern society, the isolation of young people as a socio-demographic category loses its relevance. And they urge "to learn to look over the age of a person and a person." Commenting on this concept, A.I. Kovalyova and V.A. Lukov notes that "In the idea of ​​denying young people ... least of all it would be necessary to look for the intention of researchers to depart from life's realities."

On the contrary, in their opinion, those youth concepts that were established in modern science, "... do not allow to represent adequately at the theoretical level the reality quickly and radically changing" [9].

So, in the premodern (traditional society), the youth have not yet exist (children and adults interact), and in postmodern the youth does not exist in the understanding characteristic of modernity, but exists in a completely different capacity, as a new youth (post-youth) as the dominant "age class "of the postmodern era. The concept "postmodern" proposed by us is related to two categories; it is a category of postmodernism that is revealed in the works we consider in the postmodernist thesis and the category of "post-policy", which is used to describe the process and result of the desacralization of traditional structures in politics. [18, p.401-403].

To indicate the state of age inconsistency, when according to some criteria a person is young and some are no longer, the author suggests a category of "post-youth" related to postmodern and post-political categories (A. Badew, A. Dugin, J. Rancière, S. Mouffe , S. Zizek).

The author is of the opinion that according to it, in the postmodern, young people do not simply disappear, because its isolation as an independent category loses its relevance, as follows from the concept of denying the youth of M. Byzerman and D. Manguson. There is a transformation into "post-youth" associated with the loss some and the acquisition of other characteristics.

 

Youth

Post-youth

The age boundaries (upper and lower) of the youth (chronological) age are determined.

 

There is no validity in the definition of parameters of age boundaries.

 

Characterized by status inferiority (is preparing to become ...).

 

Has a status superiority (afraid to lose ...).

 

 

The main occupation is teaching (roles, mastering knowledge, skills, skills).

 

Stay in a state of permanent play, mastery of game competencies.

 

Relatively homogeneous.

 

Heterogeneous.

 

There is a limited role moratorium: the formation of political convictions, models of political behavior, choice of forms, methods and technologies of political participation.

 

There is a significant extension of the term of the role moratorium, for many people it becomes permanent and continues throughout life.

 

Transitional marginality.

 

Immanent marginality.

 

Age coherence, where each age

(psychological, physiological, chronological

and others) is an element of a single system and there is no contradiction between them.

Aggregation of age positions, their

inconsistency, conflict of age statuses.

 

In this regard, it seems rhetorical question: why Lenin (died at age 53) at the age of 50 was already "grandfather Lenin", and V.V. Putin at 60 years is still a young, energetic leader?

It is also appropriate to quote the statement of former Prime Minister of Italy Silvio Berlusconi "... I like to be among young people, I like listening to them, I like to surround myself with youth" [14]. 74 - year - old Silvio was accused of using the services of minors hookers and abuse of office in the release of one of them from the police station. However, Berlusconi himself estimates his biological age only at 36 years [2].

One of the largest domestic experts in the field of youth policy, S. V. Aleschenok notes: "The" youth " phase of life that exists in all modern societies, within which young people themselves function and develop a specifically youth way of life, can also be viewed as a kind of reservation. However, the framework of the "youth" phase of life is mobile and depends on specific social conditions. For certain social groups of the population, this framework can be narrowed, until it completely disappears, just as it was in the pre-industrial phase of social development "[1, p. 5].

The absence of young people at an early stage in the development of human society is also noted by I.M. Il'inskii [7, p.121].

The transition from a child's state to an adult state (in the aspect of gaining a social and political status) in the premodern is one-act and continues during the act of initiation, accompanied, as a rule, by trials, pain and embodying the symbolism of spiritual and social birth. Youth first appear in modernity, as a period of multi-act, extended initiation. In the premodern initiation was one-act - hence the absence of mass youth in the premodern, an exception could be individual elite groups, castes or estates. "Postmodern" is finally deprived of initiation, unlike the "extended" initiation of the modern youth. Similarly, political socialization in postmodernism, unlike premodern, cannot be considered completed in adolescence or maturity, but continues throughout the life of a person.

In conclusion, the youth is the concept of the society of the modern era (industrial society), in the pre-modern (traditional society) its time has not yet come (that's why there are no youth - only children and adults), and now, in the coming postmodern - it apparently already ends and young people are replaced by post-youth.

 

References:

  1. Алещенок, С. В. К проблеме новой концептуализации молодежи / С. В. Алещенок // Методологические проблемы исследования молодежи: Материалы к дискуссии /НИЦ при Ин-те молодежи. – М., 1998.

  2. Берлускони попутал свой возраст // Moscow-post [Электронный ресурс] официальный сайт организации – Режим доступа: http://www.moscow-post.ru/news/in_world/001290774121995.

  3. Вишневский, Ю. Р. Парадоксальный молодой человек / Ю. Р. Вишневский,  В. Т. Шапко // – М.: Социологические исследования  2006, №6.

  4. Бурдье, П. Социальное пространство и символическая власть / П. Бурдье // THESIS. Весна 1993.

  5. Голофаст, В. Б. Элементы социологической теории молодёжи / В. Б. Голофаст // Человек и общество: Социальные проблемы молодёжи / Под общ. ред. Б. Г. Ананьева, Д. А. Керманова; Ленингр. гос. ун-т. Учен. зап. Вып. VI. – Л.: Изд-во Ленингр. Ун-та, 1969.

  6. Зеленин, А. А. Механизмы реализации молодёжной политики Российской Федерации на региональном уровне / А. А. Зеленин. Автореф. Дисс. д-ра. полит. наук. – Н. Новгород, 2008.

  7. Ильинский, И. М. Молодёжь и молодёжная политика. Философия. История. Теория / И. М. Ильинский. – М.: Голос, 2001.

  8. Карпенко О.М., Ломанов И.А. Молодежь в современном политическом процессе в России / О.М. Карпенко, И.А. Ломанов – М.: Изд-во СГУ, 2006.–560 с.

  9.  Ковалева А.И., Луков В.А.Социология молодежи: Теоретические вопросы / А.И. Ковалева, В.А. Луков. – М.: Социум, 1999. – 351с.

  10. Кон, И. С. Психология юношеского возраста / И. С. Кон. – М., 1979.

  11. Лисовский, В. Т. Методология и методика изучения идеалов и жизненных планов молодёжи / В. Т. Лисовский. – Автореф. Дисс. канд. филос. наук. – Л., 1968;

  12. Павловский, В. В. Ювенология: становление науки о молодежи / В. В. Павловский. – Красноярск, 1997 –136 с.

  13. Постановление ВС РФ «0б основных направленных государственной молодёжной политики в Российской Федерации, № 5090-1 от 3 июня 1993 г. // Ведомости Съезда народных депутатов РФ и Верховного Совета РФ. 1993- № 25.

  14. Процесс по делу Сильвио Берлускони стартовал в Милане // Новости от Первого канала на 06.04.2011. http://subscribe.ru/archive/tv.news.1tv/201104/06180121.html, свободный. – Загл. с экрана.

  15. Чирун, С. Н. Молодежная политика: теория и практика взаимодействия: монография / С. Н. Чирун. – Кемерово, 2008. – 167 с.

  16. Чирун, С. Н. Проблемы экстремизма в молодёжной политике постсовременности: монография [Текст] / C. Н. Чирун. – Кемерово, 2010. – 129 с.

  17. Чирун, С. Н. Молодежная политика в ситуации постмодерна: государство, власть, общество: дис. ... д-ра. полит. наук. 23.00.02 / С. Н. Чирун. – Казанский (Приволжский) федеральный университет. Казань, 2016, 2016. –430 с.

  18.  Чирун, С.Н. Молодёжная политика в состоянии постмодерна: модели, механизмы, риски: монография / С.Н. Чирун. – Saarbrucken, Deutchland: LAPLAMBERTAcademicPublishing, 2011. – 522 с.

  19. Fouriuier M. Generattions: volees, dorees, sacrificees?// Sciens Humaines. – № 108. – 2000. – P.19.

  20. London Communique Towards the European Higher Education Area: responding to challenges in a globalised world, 18 May 2007.

  21. Introduzere in Juventologie / F. Mahler. ­­– Bucurestj. 1983.

  22. Mead, M. Culture and Commitment /M, Mead. – N.Y.: Natural History Press. Doubleday and Co Ins. 1970.

0
Ваша оценка: Нет Средняя: 5.3 (3 голоса)
Комментарии: 9

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый Алексей Петрович, за интерес, проявленный к моей публикации. Категория "постмодерн" получила достаточно глубокий анализ в научных исследованиях. Основы теории постмодерна и постполитики, представляющие огромную важность моей статьи, получили свое развитие в работах Ж. Бодрийяра, Ж.Ф. Лиотара, М. Фуко , Ж. Делёза, Ф. Гваттари, Ф. Джеймсона, Дж. Ваттимо, Э. Лакло, Ш. Муфф, П. Богесона, М. Постера, Т. Одена, А. Бадью , О. Ф. Шаброва , Ю. В. Ирхина , Т.А. Алексеевой , Ж. Рансьер , Ш. Муфф, С. Жижека и др. Впрочем, подходы к пониманию этой категории, ровно как и индикаторы "постмодерна" в радикальном и умеренном постмодернизме существенно различаются. Из российских авторов, работающих над проблематикой постмодерна, могу порекомендовать работы Юрия Васильевича Ирхина. Желаю Вам дальнейших успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.

Королев Евгений Сергеевич

Очень содержательная научная работа. Затронутая автором исследовательская тематика более чем актуальна и как юристу было интересно взглянуть на проблематику развития молодежи в ином аспекте. С уважением, Е.С. Королёв.

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый Евгений Сергеевич за интерес проявленный к моей статье. Желаю дальнейших успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.

Тойво Таннинг

Уважаемый профессор Сергей Чирун! Работа актуальная и интересная. С пожеланием творческих успехов. Тойво Taннинг

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый господин Тайво Таннинг за Ваш интерес проявленный к моей работе. Желаю Вам дальнейших исследовательских успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.

Тойво Таннинг

Dear professor Sergey Chirun! The work is actual and interesting. For best salutatory, Toivo Tanning

Чирун Сергей

Dear professor Toivo Tanning! Many thanks for the wonderful present!

Aleksey Konovalov

Представляется интересной попытка гносеологии категории "молодежь" в постмодерный период. Действительно, социальные условия современных молодых людей в значительной мере изменяют привычным оценкам данной категории людей. Нельзя не согласиться, что многие качественные характеристики молодых людей "продлевают" их статус: образование, интеллектуализация труда, зависимость от родителей, коллективов и т.д. Однако к автору имеются вопросы. В статье не онтологизирована категория "постмодерн". Хотелось знать какие качества в нем рассматривает автор? Жаль, что в статье мало собственной эмпирики. Хорошо бы выводы наполнить социальными исследованиями. Чтобы не постулировать многие выводы. Надеемся на продолжение исследований

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый Алексей Петрович, за интерес, проявленный к моей публикации. Категория "постмодерн" получила достаточно глубокий анализ в научных исследованиях. Основы теории постмодерна и постполитики, представляющие огромную важность моей статьи, получили свое развитие в работах Ж. Бодрийяра, Ж.Ф. Лиотара, М. Фуко , Ж. Делёза, Ф. Гваттари, Ф. Джеймсона, Дж. Ваттимо, Э. Лакло, Ш. Муфф, П. Богесона, М. Постера, Т. Одена, А. Бадью , О. Ф. Шаброва , Ю. В. Ирхина , Т.А. Алексеевой , Ж. Рансьер , Ш. Муфф, С. Жижека и др. Впрочем, подходы к пониманию этой категории, ровно как и индикаторы "постмодерна" в радикальном и умеренном постмодернизме существенно различаются. Из российских авторов, работающих над проблематикой постмодерна, могу порекомендовать работы Юрия Васильевича Ирхина. Желаю Вам дальнейших успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.
Комментарии: 9

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый Алексей Петрович, за интерес, проявленный к моей публикации. Категория "постмодерн" получила достаточно глубокий анализ в научных исследованиях. Основы теории постмодерна и постполитики, представляющие огромную важность моей статьи, получили свое развитие в работах Ж. Бодрийяра, Ж.Ф. Лиотара, М. Фуко , Ж. Делёза, Ф. Гваттари, Ф. Джеймсона, Дж. Ваттимо, Э. Лакло, Ш. Муфф, П. Богесона, М. Постера, Т. Одена, А. Бадью , О. Ф. Шаброва , Ю. В. Ирхина , Т.А. Алексеевой , Ж. Рансьер , Ш. Муфф, С. Жижека и др. Впрочем, подходы к пониманию этой категории, ровно как и индикаторы "постмодерна" в радикальном и умеренном постмодернизме существенно различаются. Из российских авторов, работающих над проблематикой постмодерна, могу порекомендовать работы Юрия Васильевича Ирхина. Желаю Вам дальнейших успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.

Королев Евгений Сергеевич

Очень содержательная научная работа. Затронутая автором исследовательская тематика более чем актуальна и как юристу было интересно взглянуть на проблематику развития молодежи в ином аспекте. С уважением, Е.С. Королёв.

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый Евгений Сергеевич за интерес проявленный к моей статье. Желаю дальнейших успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.

Тойво Таннинг

Уважаемый профессор Сергей Чирун! Работа актуальная и интересная. С пожеланием творческих успехов. Тойво Taннинг

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый господин Тайво Таннинг за Ваш интерес проявленный к моей работе. Желаю Вам дальнейших исследовательских успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.

Тойво Таннинг

Dear professor Sergey Chirun! The work is actual and interesting. For best salutatory, Toivo Tanning

Чирун Сергей

Dear professor Toivo Tanning! Many thanks for the wonderful present!

Aleksey Konovalov

Представляется интересной попытка гносеологии категории "молодежь" в постмодерный период. Действительно, социальные условия современных молодых людей в значительной мере изменяют привычным оценкам данной категории людей. Нельзя не согласиться, что многие качественные характеристики молодых людей "продлевают" их статус: образование, интеллектуализация труда, зависимость от родителей, коллективов и т.д. Однако к автору имеются вопросы. В статье не онтологизирована категория "постмодерн". Хотелось знать какие качества в нем рассматривает автор? Жаль, что в статье мало собственной эмпирики. Хорошо бы выводы наполнить социальными исследованиями. Чтобы не постулировать многие выводы. Надеемся на продолжение исследований

Чирун Сергей

Благодарю Вас, уважаемый Алексей Петрович, за интерес, проявленный к моей публикации. Категория "постмодерн" получила достаточно глубокий анализ в научных исследованиях. Основы теории постмодерна и постполитики, представляющие огромную важность моей статьи, получили свое развитие в работах Ж. Бодрийяра, Ж.Ф. Лиотара, М. Фуко , Ж. Делёза, Ф. Гваттари, Ф. Джеймсона, Дж. Ваттимо, Э. Лакло, Ш. Муфф, П. Богесона, М. Постера, Т. Одена, А. Бадью , О. Ф. Шаброва , Ю. В. Ирхина , Т.А. Алексеевой , Ж. Рансьер , Ш. Муфф, С. Жижека и др. Впрочем, подходы к пониманию этой категории, ровно как и индикаторы "постмодерна" в радикальном и умеренном постмодернизме существенно различаются. Из российских авторов, работающих над проблематикой постмодерна, могу порекомендовать работы Юрия Васильевича Ирхина. Желаю Вам дальнейших успехов. С уважением, С. Н. Чирун.
Партнеры
 
 
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
Would you like to know all the news about GISAP project and be up to date of all news from GISAP? Register for free news right now and you will be receiving them on your e-mail right away as soon as they are published on GISAP portal.