THE POWER OF A SYMBOL

Abstract

The question "What is character?" has long discussed in philosophy. As a result, there are two types of concepts about character. According to one of these ideas symbol corresponds harmonious reality (positive concept). According to another – the idea of a character refers to fragmented, chaotic reality (negative concept). There have been attempts to create a theory of character that would conflict of concepts. The purpose of this work is to explore the power of a character from a philosophical point of view, to prove that the character has real power over the individual and society as a whole. Methods. This paper was used the methods of analysis and synthesis. Analysis of recent studies has shown that the psychologists and psychiatrists (Freud, Jung, Fromm) were first, who talking about power of the character. There are contemporary works that focus on particular character authorities a certain society. Some philosophers even identify the character and a power. So the question of power symbol in the philosophy remains open. Results. The symbol can be terrible destructive force. Symbols are the carrier sense dictates that history, human memory. Not every accident occurs as destruction of cultural destruction memory. The individual, attributing itself to a particular group, it selects based on their own ideas about a good and an evil, a honor and a dishonor, a fame and a shame. A symbol is a sign of solidarity with this group. The symbol may be involved in the semiotic connections: it can insult or praise. The symbolic world is protecting people from their existential fears and uncertainty. There are formed two opposing camps; each of them by protecting certain characters defends its identity. The originality of this work lies in the fact that is considered the power of a symbol as a philosophical category in her determined features of formation of the government. Conclusion. Thus it can be concluded that the symbol is two-faced Janus. One with sides, the characters appear in the capable hands as a means of manipulating the masses, and with holds that dictates standards of conduct and the impact on people's lives with different. In this case, the symbolic power is a power regulator of human behavior, character over the minds of people. The symbolic power has influence on the individual and society as a whole.

Authors and Affiliations

Hanna FANDEJEVA

Keywords

Related Articles

HUMAN SCIENCE AND ITS “POLITICS” IN HORIZON OF MODERNITY

Introduction. Article is devoted to the philosophical analysis of actual situation of humanities and the problem of their social role. The political role of humanities lies primarily in promoting the creation of public s...

THE FIGURE OF SILENCE AND PHILOSOPHEME OF MEMORY IN THE WORK OF G. S. SKOVORODA AND MODERN TRADITION

Introduction. The urgency of the topic of the article is determined by the search for modern philosophy, social and political philosophy in the domain of genesis, the establishment and functioning of the fundamental axio...

TWO HUMANITIES OF CHARLES WILLIAM MORRIS

Introduction. Contemporary philosophy of science and epistemology reverts to the project of the unified sciences introduced by Rudolf Carnap, Charles William Morris and Otto Neurath in 1930s.It leads to revision of philo...

SYMBOLISM OF SPEECH AND DIALOGICAL PARADIGM IN PHILOSOPHY

Introduction. The urgency of this article theme is determined by the searching of modern philosophy, cognitive sciences, linguistics, social and political philosophy, psycholinguistics in the problem area of the dialogic...

THE DETERMINANTS OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF UKRAINIAN RELIGIOUS CULTURE

The religious revival in Ukraine is happening on the background of the ideological vacuum and is used as a means of cultural consolidation. Ukrainian religious culture is considered as a historically made up form of reli...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP177545
  • DOI -
  • Views 143
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Hanna FANDEJEVA (2016). THE POWER OF A SYMBOL. Вісник Черкаського університетету. Серія Філософія, 1(1), 105-110. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-177545