KRIZE OSEBNOSTIH IDENTITET V VRTINCU POSTMODERNE DRUŽBE (KRIMINOLOŠKI VIDIK)
Diplomsko delo obravnava temo, ki se tiče prav vseh ljudi, ne glede na to, ali se tega sploh zavedamo. Gre za osebnostno identiteto, njeno iskanje, vzpostavljanje in krizo le-te v družbi, kjer živimo. Prav ta pojem sodobne družbe naredi to temo zanimivo in posebno, kot je posebna današnja družba, dr...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Bachelor Thesis |
| Language: | Slovenian |
| Published: |
D. Donko
2011
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dk.um.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=17219 https://dk.um.si/Dokument.php?id=19954&dn= https://plus.si.cobiss.net/opac7/bib/4178219?lang=sl |
| Summary: | Diplomsko delo obravnava temo, ki se tiče prav vseh ljudi, ne glede na to, ali se tega sploh zavedamo. Gre za osebnostno identiteto, njeno iskanje, vzpostavljanje in krizo le-te v družbi, kjer živimo. Prav ta pojem sodobne družbe naredi to temo zanimivo in posebno, kot je posebna današnja družba, družba neštetih protislovij in absurdov. Diplomsko delo zajema v bistvu dva sklopa vprašanj, ki se seveda tematsko močno povezujeta in dopolnjujeta. Začenši s samim pojmom identitete, prvi sklop vprašanj predstavi različne poskuse definiranja pojma identitete, kratek zgodovinski razvoj vprašanja identitete ter razliko identitete od sebstva. Gre torej za vzpostavitev in predstavitev samega pojma identitete. Sledijo pogledi nekaterih temeljnih teorij, ki zadevajo to tematiko, od psiho-dinamičnih, preko psiho-socialnih do čisto socialno-konstruktivističnih. Kot drug sklop vprašanj pa je predstavljeno ozadje identitete kot svet, v katerem živimo. S pojmom sveta je mišljena sodobna družba, tako imenovana postmoderna družba, njene zakonitosti, značilnosti in vsa njena protislovja. Rdeča nit je seveda posameznik, ki se mora nenehno »najti«, uspeti, zadovoljiti in »se uresničiti« v tej družbi, ki mu (navidezno) ponuja nešteto možnosti za zadovoljitev še tako specifičnih potreb in želja. Gre torej za pojem in problem individualizacije, ki bi naj pomenila pot k sreči, duševnemu miru posameznika, vendar pa je na žalost v večjem delu zgolj nenehno iskanje smisla, reflektiranje v preteklost, mišljenje o prihodnosti in pozabljanje na sedanjost, ki prej rezultira v krizi osebnostne identitete kot pa v sami sreči in notranjem zadovoljstvu. Tako torej drugi sklop diplomskega dela skuša približati »duh današnje družbe«, najprej s primerjanjem predmoderne, moderne in postmoderne dobe, nato pa obravnava tudi nekaj najpomembnejših pojavov, ki so značilni za našo, torej postmoderno (postmodernistično) družbo in kateri imajo najmočnejši vpliv na dojemanje, oblikovanje posameznikove identitete, njeno krizo in skorajšnjo zavestno ali nezavedno izgubo. V prvi vrsti gre za sam proces individualizacije, ki pomeni v bistvu nenehno iskanje lastne identitete v svetu neštetih možnosti, odločitev, tveganj in nevarnosti. Podrobneje je izpostavljen problem globalizacije skozi pogled globaliziranega kapitala in lokalizacije revščine v odnosu z dojemanjem neponovljivega časa, ki dejansko ustvarja »dva svetova« ljudi, torej tudi dvoje čisto različnih identitet, ki pa se absurdno povezujejo v iskanju in razreševanju problemov v zvezi z identiteto obojih. V tem delu je s kriminološkega vidika opozorjeno tudi na dojemanje revščine kot zločina, kot posledice in vzvoda strukturnega nasilja v družbi. Tematika samega dela se nadaljuje z obravnavo »zapovedane sreče« v zvezi s potrošništvom, ki vsem ljudem nekako potihoma, nezavedno ukazuje in vsiljuje naše potrebe, zaradi česar nezavedno izbiramo točno določene življenjske vzorce oziroma življenjske stile, ki bi nam naj prinesli zadovoljstvo, žal pa se ne zavedamo, da so naše želje, po zadovoljitvi katerih hrepenimo, v bistvu skonstruirane »zunaj« nas in primarno ne izhajajo iz nas samih, zaradi česar skoraj nikoli ne moremo najti tistega duševnega miru, ki bi nas notranje izpopolnil in nam dal občutek samouresničitve v različnih situacijah. V tem kontekstu je s kriminološkega vidika pozornost namenjena kriminalnemu življenjskemu stilu kot alternativi oziroma odgovoru na posameznikovo nezmožnost samoaktualizacije v tisti meri, ki bi iz posameznika naredila kreativno, zadovoljno bitje, ki ne bi rabil izraziti svojih potlačenih ambicij v destruktivnih, delikventnih in deviantnih ravnanjih, ki predstavljajo nekakšen »kričeč« odgovor na vso breme, ki ga posamezniku nalaga družba s svojimi zakonitostmi, značilnostmi in zahtevami. Never before was the formation of an individual's personal identity as unpredictable as it is now, in this time of late modernity including all its contradictory rules. In different fields of his or her life, the individual repeatedly feels insecure, which further leads to fear and to the individual's state of being subjected to various identity crises. This insecurity is present in all fields of life, including those that should actually be the least questionable, e.g. friendship, partnership, family, education in correlation with employment, assurance of human-worthy life and health conditions, spending leisure time in connection with encouraging creativity, formation of physical and mental integrity etc. In a time of globalised capitalism on the one hand and of accentuating pure individuality on the other, the meaning of autonomy − e.g. a sovereign entity offering the individual a feeling of unique value as a basis for growth and seeking ontological security − is diminishing increasingly. We are facing a growing gulf between the poor and the rich, still more: two different worlds have been created, each of them perceiving time differently and with the need to know each other less and less. This leads people to an increasingly rough materialistic perception of the world and of life in general and further to catastrophic consequences of the heteronomous regulation of working ethics. Such ethics deprive the individual of the majority of his waking time and consequently of nearly all of his sense as a "creative being with a strong backbone" who can stand for his rights, respect the rights of others and achieve his obligations. Such regulation of the working system actually represents structural violence over the individual and his identity. The heteronomous work goes hand in hand with consumerism as the inversely proportional reflection of the fascination with materialism and longing for hedonism. The human submerges inner distress, failure and personal discontent by buying products and services that promise satisfaction and happiness, though they can never be reached, since it is a concealed intrusion of wishes and needs upon the human. The inner mental peace, which in my opinion should guide each individual towards personal growth, development and happy life, is becoming increasingly lost. We are witnessing different deviations that are constantly trying to convince us that people need diverse "safety valves" yet, the question remains: to what extent − since we still hold on to social conformism and do not hasten away into the darkness of seemingly interesting and tempting criminal alternatives − e.g. beyond law and general morality, which can be equally (if not even more) objectionable, divisive and bad. The individual is being institutionalised he is becoming more responsible for himself, even in fields that were previously for the most part taken care of by the state as an institution (e.g. health service, pensions, residential situation, unemployment etc.) and provided the individual with a feeling of safety and consequently appurtenance. Today, the individual sees himself as an independent being who by carrying too much burden on his shoulders can feel omnipotent on one side, or weak − displayed either in (self-)destruction or loneliness − on the other. Actually, individualisation is a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it offers the human a formation of an entirely autonomous life style and its identity project, on the other, individualisation in late modernity means suffering and resignation for all those people who are unable or incapable of doing so by remaining "captives of their own freedom". When talking about freedom: our lives are captured in the media and marketing reality construction, which through shows, series and advertisements tell us how to live, what to fear and how to invest our time and money in order to be happy. Actually, this is only one more field of the so-called structural (systemic) violence that dictates or forces upon us our life style, which unfortunately often pr |
|---|