| Annotation |
The surrounding space of a modern person is especially dynamic in terms of the complication of the
sign-symbol environment, the change in the language of culture, the emergence of new meanings and interpretations.
Understanding and predicting social processes is impossible without analyzing the identity of a person
within a certain space. The purpose of the article is the identification and socio-philosophical analysis of socio-
cultural types of personality in the conditions of a transboundary region. The article makes an attempt to systematize
and streamline the features and properties of a person in a socio-cultural transboundary environment.
The identification and study of personality types in a transboundary region contributes to an objective prediction
of human behavior, its relationship with the external space, and the development of territories. The analysis of
socio-cultural personality types of a cross-border region is built on the study of the interaction and mutual influence
of culture, society and a person. The article uses the theory of R. Park about a marginal person in the
context of global migrations, the field theory of K. Levin and his interpretation of the living space of a person,
the works by A. I. Neklessa about a transboundary person and the landscape of transboundary. The synthesis
of different methods made it possible to approach comprehensively the socio-cultural typology of personality. In the study, the transboundary region is conceptualized as an internally structured space within the subject of the
country, formed as a result of social and cultural processes under the influence of internal and external factors,
and is defined as the regional localization of the national socio-cultural space. Presence within a transboundary
region requires a person to choose his belonging to a particular culture, value, symbolic and semantic system.
The selected types (transboundary, marginal, transit) reflect the degree of acceptance (or non-acceptance) by
a person of certain values, traditions, rules, conditions of transboundary. The proposed typology allows us to
formulate an adequate strategy for the development of the region, taking into account the behavior and response
of the regional personality itself within the transboundary space. Personality types that arise as a reaction to a
cross-border socio-cultural reality are the result of a person’s identification within such a space. |
| References |
1. Zimina, N. S. Formation of a regional cross-border socio-cultural space in the context of globalization (on
the example of the Trans-Baikal Territory). Cand. sci. diss. Chita, 2012. (In Rus.)
2. Kemalova, L. I. Marginal personality: socio-psychological portrait. Bulletin of the Sevastopol State Technical
University, no. 86, pp. 94–97, 2008. (In Rus.)
3. Magomed-Eminov, M. Sh. Deconstruction and construction of the concept of socialization in psychological
scientific discourse: from socialization to resocialization. Personality in extreme conditions and crisis situations
of life, no. 8, pp. 29–36, 2019. (In Rus.)
4. Yemchenko, D. G. Cultural identification of a person in a transboundary region. Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk
State Academy of Culture and Arts, no. 1, pp. 67–69, 2009. (In Rus.)
5. Yemchenko, D. G. Marginal man in the context of a culture of cross-border region. Chelyabinsk State
University journal. Philosophy. Sociology. Cultural Studies, no. 11, pp. 47–50, 2009. (In Rus.)
6. Blyakher, L. E. Dialogue across the border: regional options for cross-cultural economic interaction. Eurasia
Bulletin, no. 4, pp. 93–112, 2003. (In Rus.)
7. Park, R. Human migration and the marginal man. Social and Human Sciences. Domestic and foreign
literature, series 11. Sociology, no. 3, pp. 167–177, 1998. (In Rus.)
8. Stonequist, E. V. The marginal man: a study in personality and culture conflict. NY: Russell & Russell,
1961. Ch. 7: 159–174. (In Eng.)
9. Hjelle, L. A., Ziegler, D. J. Personality Theories: Basic assumptions, research, and application. NY, 1976.
(In Eng.)
10. Smith, A. D. National Identity. London: Penguin Books, 1991. (In Eng.)
11. Tajfel, H. Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, Paris, 1982. (In Eng.)
12. Azarenko, S. A. Perspectives on topological anthropology. URL: https://elar.urfu.ru/bitstre
am/10995/93855/1/978-5-7525-4025-7_2011_003.pdf. DOI: 10.21209/1996-7853-2021-16-5-69-76. (In Rus.)
13. Lustin, Yu. M. Typology of socio-cultural transformation of personal properties in the philosophical paradigm
of activity. Culture and civilization, no. 2, pp. 46–55, 2022. (In Rus.)
14. Zimina, N. S. The problem of human identity in the cross-border socio-cultural space. Humanitarian
vector, no. 5, pp. 69–76, 2021. (In Rus.)
15. Orlova, E. A. Anthropological foundations for the study of identity. Personality. Culture. Society. Vol. XII,
Iss. 4, pp. 123–141, 2010. (In Rus.)
16. Gurin, S. P. Marginal anthropology. Web. 22.02.2023. URL: http://filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/
z0000963/st000.shtml (In Rus.)
17. Neklessa, A. I. Transboundary: its landscapes and inhabitants. From a conversation on the shore of
Lake Teletskoye. Web. 22.02.2023. URL: http://viperson.ru/articles/aleksandr-neklessa-transgranichie-ego-landshafty-
i-obitateli-iz-besedy-na-beregu-teletskogo-ozera (In Rus.)
18. Levin, K. Field theory in the social sciences. St. Petersburg: Speech, 2000. (In Rus.)
19. Leontiev, D. A. On Kurt Lewin’s field theory. Living space in psychology: theory and phenomenology:
collection of articles. Edited by N. V. Grishina, S. N. Kostromina. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University, 2020.
30–62. (In Rus.)
20. Kondratova, N. A. Living space of personality: space of personal freedom. Living space in psychology:
theory and phenomenology: collection of articles. Edited by N. V. Grishina, S. N. Kostromina. St. Petersburg:
St. Petersburg University, 2020. 198–222. (In Rus.)
21. Khasanov, M. R. Human living space. Web. 22.02.2023. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/zhiznennoe-
prostranstvo-cheloveka/viewer (In Rus.)
22. Sergeev, D. V. Krai. Borderlands. Cross-border. Limitrofa. Cross-border in a changing world: education
and international cooperation (Russia ‒ Mongolia ‒ China): materials of the International Scientific and Practical
Conference (October 17–19, 2007). Chita: Transbaikal State Humanitarian Pedagogical University, 2008:
147–154 (In Rus.)
23. Kolpakova, L. M. Psychological adaptability as a necessary quality of life. Tsarskoye Selo Readings,
2015. Web. 22.02.2023. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/psihologicheskaya-adaptivnost-kak-neobhodimoe-
kachestvo-zhiznedeyatelnosti/viewer (In Rus.)
24. Gromueko, Yu. V. Anthropology of political identity. Self-determination “Russians” in the global world.
Territorial development, multinational corporations and Russian identity Russians. M: ARKTI, 2006. (In Rus.)
25. Moiseev, V. I. The images of onto-sociology: onto-isolates and socio-emergents. Credo New, no. 3,
2015. Web. 22.02.2023. http://credo-new.ru/archives/567 (In Rus.)
26. Blyakher, L. E. Regional identity and transboundary practices in the Far East, Russia. Spatial economics,
no. 1, pp. 117–132, 2005. (In Rus.)
27. Khilkhanov, D. L. Transculturation Processes in the Focus of Cultural Identity. Bulletin of the Moscow
State Pedagogical University. Series Philosophical Sciences, no. 2, pp. 25–31, 2021. (In Rus.) |
