2408-932XResearch Result. Social Studies and Humanities2408-932X10.18413/2408-932X-2021-7-2-0-12422RESEARCHES<strong>The interindividual nature of the self: complementarity of symbolic interactionism to C.&nbsp;Jung&#39;s concept of the collective unconscious</strong><br /> &nbsp;<strong>The interindividual nature of the self: complementarity of symbolic interactionism to C.&nbsp;Jung&#39;s concept of the collective unconscious</strong><br /> &nbsp;LvovDenis V.LvovDenis V.devlal86@gmail.comSiberian Federal University20217200

The problem of building a picture of the world is closely related to the formation of a person&#39;s own image of themselves. Questions related to the definition of a person&#39;s place in the world and the understanding of one&#39;s own personality have been at the center of philosophical understanding since ancient times. Psychoanalysis and symbolic interactionism have also suggested possible answers to these questions. Below is a comparative analysis of the theoretical calculations of some representatives of these two trends, which in one way or another revealed the social conditionality of individuality. The psychoanalytic tradition is represented by the archetypal approach and the concept of the collective unconscious by C.G.&nbsp;Jung. In presenting the paradigm of symbolic interactionism, attention is drawn to the theories of the &quot;generalized other&quot; by G.H.&nbsp;Mead and the &quot;looking-glass self&quot; by C.H.&nbsp;Cooley. The complementarity of symbolic interactionism and the theory of the collective unconscious is shown. Both analyzed approaches reveal fundamental ideas about the full realization of an individual&#39;s personal potentials only through inclusion in social ties and establishing communication with their own kind. Such communication is carried out by collectively developed symbolic means. This is explicitly stated in the very name of symbolic interactionism. For the functioning of the collective unconscious, the symbolic content of archetypes also plays a key role.

The problem of building a picture of the world is closely related to the formation of a person&#39;s own image of themselves. Questions related to the definition of a person&#39;s place in the world and the understanding of one&#39;s own personality have been at the center of philosophical understanding since ancient times. Psychoanalysis and symbolic interactionism have also suggested possible answers to these questions. Below is a comparative analysis of the theoretical calculations of some representatives of these two trends, which in one way or another revealed the social conditionality of individuality. The psychoanalytic tradition is represented by the archetypal approach and the concept of the collective unconscious by C.G.&nbsp;Jung. In presenting the paradigm of symbolic interactionism, attention is drawn to the theories of the &quot;generalized other&quot; by G.H.&nbsp;Mead and the &quot;looking-glass self&quot; by C.H.&nbsp;Cooley. The complementarity of symbolic interactionism and the theory of the collective unconscious is shown. Both analyzed approaches reveal fundamental ideas about the full realization of an individual&#39;s personal potentials only through inclusion in social ties and establishing communication with their own kind. Such communication is carried out by collectively developed symbolic means. This is explicitly stated in the very name of symbolic interactionism. For the functioning of the collective unconscious, the symbolic content of archetypes also plays a key role.

Selfcollective unconscioussymbolic interactionism"looking-glass self""generalized other"Selfcollective unconscioussymbolic interactionism"looking-glass self""generalized other"Список литературыCamus,&nbsp;A. (1990), &ldquo;The Myth of Sisyphus. An essay about Absurd&rdquo;, A. Kamju. Buntujushhij chelovek: Filosofija. Politika. Iskusstvo: Sbornik [A.&nbsp;Camus. The rebellious man: A Philosophy. Politics. Art: Collection], Politizdat, Moscow, Russia, 23-92 (in Russ.).Cooley,&nbsp;C.&nbsp;H. (2000), Chelovecheskaya priroda i sotsial&#39;niy poryadok [Human Nature and the Social Order], Ideja-Press, Dom intellektual&#39;noy knigi, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).Fromm,&nbsp;E. (2006), Begstvo ot svobody. Chelovek dlya sebya [Escape from Freedom. Man for Himself], AST, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).Goffman,&nbsp;E. (2000), Predstavlenie sebya drugim v povsednevnoy zhizni [The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life], KANON-Press-C, Kuchkovo Pole, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).Heidegger,&nbsp;M. (1997), Bytie i vremya [Being and Time], Ad Marginem, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).James,&nbsp;W. (1920), Psychology. Briefer Course, Henry Holt and Company, New York.Jung,&nbsp;C.&nbsp;G. (2010), Ocherki po psihologii bessoznatel&#39;nogo [Essays on the psychology of the unconscious], Kogito-Centr, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).Jung,&nbsp;C.&nbsp;G. (2008), Struktura i dinamika psikhicheskogo [Structure and dynamics of the mental state], Kogito-Centr, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).Jung,&nbsp;C.&nbsp;G., von Franz,&nbsp;M.-L., Henderson,&nbsp;J.&nbsp;L., Jacobi,&nbsp;J. and Jaff&eacute;,&nbsp;A. (2006), Chelovek i ego simvoly [Man and His Symbols], Medkov&nbsp;S.&nbsp;B., &ldquo;Serebrjanye niti&rdquo;, Moscow, Russia (in Russ.).Marx,&nbsp;K. (2021), Tezisy o Fejerbakhe [Theses on Feuerbach] [Online], available at: https://www.politpros.com/library/14/24/ (Accessed 18 January 2021).Mead,&nbsp;G.&nbsp;H. (2019), Mind Self and Society. Section 20 Play, the Game, and the Generalized Other [Online], available at: https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Mead/pubs2/mindself/Mead_1934_20.html (Accessed 20 April 2019).Stonequist,&nbsp;E.&nbsp;V. (2015), &ldquo;The Marginal Man&rdquo;, Chikagskaya sociologiya: Sbornik perevodov [Chicago Sociology: Collection of Translations], in Efremenko,&nbsp;D.&nbsp;V. (ed.), RAN INION, Moscow, Russia, 265-299 (in Russ.).Tomova,&nbsp;L., Wang,&nbsp;K.&nbsp;L., Thompson,&nbsp;T., Matthews,&nbsp;G.&nbsp;A., Takahashi,&nbsp;A., Tye,&nbsp;K.&nbsp;M., Saxe,&nbsp;R. (2020), &ldquo;Acute social isolation evokes midbrain craving responses similar to hunger&rdquo;, Nature Neuroscience, 23, 1597-1605.