|
DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2022.9.38779
EDN: DMTVON
Received:
16-09-2022
Published:
08-10-2022
Abstract:
In the evolution of homo sapiens, running acquires the character of an activity, that is, it assumes both a derivative of reflexivity and participation in its implementation in order to transform both the subject and the environment of his existence. Thus, running acquires cultural significance, the clarification of which is the purpose of this work. To achieve it, the question is raised about the personality-creating resources of running practices, about their contribution to the formation of consciousness and phenomena derived from its activity, for example, will, endurance, meditative states. The features of these resources expressing the metaphysical components of the human "I" are also revealed. The personal need for running activity has the following dimensions: ontological (the choice of running locomotion as a response to the "motor call" of being); anthropological (the realization of a specific hereditary predisposition that bases many elements of culture); psychological (achieving maximum sensations from extreme motor actions) and socio-cultural (participation in a variety of social practices). Systematic running activity develops the ability for long-term endurance, the general cultural significance of which lies in the fact that runners find practically effective and in many ways universal ways of value-semantic motivation to carry out activities that have a lack of motivation. Highly automated running action becomes a way of reproducing a specific ability to dynamic meditation, that is, it creates its own subject and participates in the development of physical culture of the individual, and the formation of the ability ("motor professionalism") to such running is one of the directions of the educational process. The subject-subject orientation of meditative running action means directing efforts towards the implementation of personal activity associated with the support of the "substance" of subjectivity ‒ social, where only the possibility of reflexive human existence is provided. The marker of the social "load" of running motor action, in addition to highly automated and the production of specific structures of consciousness, is its moral component, which is especially pronounced in competitive practices and running events.
Keywords:
culture, personality, running practices, endurance, volition, conscience, dynamic meditation, philosophy of sports, the Olympic run of Antiquity, social environment
This article is automatically translated.
You can find original text of the article here.
Conclusion The results of the study allow us to come to the following conclusions: 1. In the evolution of homo sapiens, running acquires the character of an activity, i.e. it assumes both a derivative of reflexivity and participation in its implementation in order to transform both the subject himself and his environment of existence. Thus, running practices gain cultural significance. 2. Running activity in a social environment can act as an effective means of forming the cultural potential of the individual. It seems that personality-building running practices have four most important features: 1) awareness of the inner need for running action, which acts as a way to collect, formalize and realize one's personal potential through running; 2) the duration and systematic nature of running classes, as well as perseverance in achieving running goals; 3) focus on the maximum manifestation of the reflexivity of human existence in running activity, which is expressed in achieving the optimal ratio of "feelings of the body" and "feelings of the environment" and manifests itself in the meditative nature of the exercise of running locomotion; 4) the realization of running activity in a morally oriented social environment that actualizes, supports and strengthens the metaphysical resources of the human "I". 3. The personal need for running activity has the following dimensions: ontological (the choice of running locomotion as a response to the "motor call" of being); anthropological (the realization of a specific hereditary predisposition that bases many elements of culture); psychological (achieving maximum sensations from extreme running actions) and socio-cultural ("running" participation in a variety of social practices). 4. The duration and systematic nature of running classes, as well as perseverance in achieving running goals, develop the will and ability for long-term endurance, the general cultural significance of which lies in the fact that stayers find practically effective and in many ways universal ways of value-semantic motivation to carry out actions that have a lack of motivation. 5. Highly automated running action becomes a way of reproducing a specific ability to dynamic meditation, that is, it creates its own subject and participates in the development of physical culture, and the formation of the ability ("motor professionalism") to such running is one of the directions of educational activity. 6. Subject-subject orientation of a highly cultured (meditative) running action means directing the efforts of the individual to maintain the activity that forms the "substance" of subjectivity ? the social, where the possibility of reflexive human existence is provided. A marker of the social "load" of running motor action, in addition to highly automated and the production of specific structures of consciousness, is its moral component, which is especially pronounced in competitive practices and running events. 7. The cultivation of running practices by modern society ensures its need for the main engine of development – purposeful, physically and mentally developed, striving for continuous improvement, "environmentally loaded", harmoniously combining healthy individualism and collectivism, benevolent, self-reliant and appreciating fair competition personality.
References
1. Aristotle. (1976). On the Soul // Aristotle. Works: in 4 vols. M. Thought. V.1.
2. Belkin, Z. P. (2004). Reflex of freedom. Natural and technical sciences, 3(12), 67-75.
3. Weller, M. I. (2010). Energyеvolutionism. Moscow: AST: Astrel.
4. Visitey, N.N. (2009). Theory of physical culture: to the adjustment of basic ideas. Philosophical essays. Moscow: Soviet sport.
5. Visitey, N., Manolaki, V. (2017). Motor action of an athlete: an introduction to sports kinesiology // Science and sport: modern trends, 3,10-19.
6. Germanov, G. N., Sabirova, I. A., Tsukanova, E. G. (2014). Classification approach and theoretical representations of special and general in the manifestations of endurance // Uchenye zapiski universiteta Lesgaft, 2(108), 49-57.
7. Gutos, T. (2011). History of running. Moscow: Text.
8. Dmitriev, V. A. (1981). National sports of the peoples of the USSR. Soviet ethnography, 2, 157-159.
9. Ivannikov, V. A. (2010). Will. National Psychological Journal, 1(3), 97-102.
10. Kannykin, S. V. (2021). Running in the light of the ideas of P. de Coubertin's Olympism. Philosophical Thought, 3, 51-65. doi: 10.25136/2409-8728.2021.3.33124.
11. Kannykin, S.V. (2021). Olympic endurance race and the spirit of athleticism. Sociodynamics, 6, 67-80. doi: 10.25136/2409-7144.2021.
12. Karnazes, D. (2018). Running without sleep. Confessions of an ultramarathon runner. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber.
13. Kravtsov, G. G. (2012). Ontogeny of will. Vestnik RGGU. Series “Psychology. Pedagogy. Education", 15 (95), 29-41.
14. McGonigal, K. (2020). The joy of movement. How physical activity can help you find happiness, meaning, self-confidence, and overcome adversity. Moscow: MIF.
15. McDougal, K. (2013). Born to run. Moscow: AST: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber. Retrieved from: https://royallib.com/read/makdugl_kristofer/rogdenniy_begat.html#0
16. Pavlov, I. P. (2021). Freedom reflex. St. Petersburg: Peter.
17. Pindar. (1980). Odes. Fragments. Moscow: Science. Retrieved from: http://ancientrome.ru/antlitr/pindar/pindar03.htm
18. Rykov, S. S. (2021). Marathon running in the system of amateur hobbies of Russians: statistical analysis and socio-cultural reflection. Chelyabinsk humanitarian, 1 (54), 31-38.
19. Fitzgerald, M. (2018). How badly do you want it? Psychology of the superiority of the mind over the body. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber.
20. Heinrich, B. (2001). Why do we run, or How to catch up with our antelope. A new look at human evolution. Moscow: Azbuka-Atticus.
21. Chiksentmihalyi, M. (2018). Running in the stream. How to enjoy sports and improve results. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber.
22. Bramble, D., Carrier, D. (1983). Running and breathing in mammals. Science, 219, 251-256. doi: 10.1126/science.6849136. Retrieved from: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/219/4582/251
23. Bramble, D., Lieberman, D. (2004). Endurance running and the evolution of Homo. Nature, 432, 345-352. doi:10.1038/nature03052. Retrieved from: https://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/Nature2004_EnduranceRunningandtheEvolutionofHomo.pdf
24. Lieberman, D.E., Bramble, D.M., Raichlen, D.A., Shea, J.J. (2009). Brains, Brawn, and the Evolution of Human Endurance Running Capabilities. Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, 10, 77-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9980-9_8. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-9980-9_8
25. Lieberman, D. E., Bramble, D.М., Raichlen, D. А., Shea, J.J. (2007). The evolution of endurance running and the tyranny of ethnography: A reply to Pickering and Bunn (2007). Journal of Human Evolution, 53(4), 439-442. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2007.07.002. Retrieved from: https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3743587/2007i.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
26. Lieberman, D. Е., Bramble, D. М. (2007). The evolution of marathon running: Capabilities in humans. Sports Medicine, 37(4-5), 288-290. DOI: 10.2165/00007256-200737040-00004. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.2165%2F00007256-200737040-00004
27. McCloskey, J. (2007). Living through the Generations: Continuity and Change in Navajo Women's Lives. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Peer Review
Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.
The concept of "cultural content" is considered quite common in science: in fact, it is difficult or even impossible to answer the question of what is meant by the cultural content of a particular phenomenon, process or state, since culture itself is defined as a comprehensive phenomenon, and therefore, "cultural content" does not necessarily mean a connection with culture as the value-semantic system of human existence. In short, clarifying the content of this concept, in general, will largely ensure the success of the material submitted for review. First of all, we note that the author refers to "personality–creating" running practices - again, it seems to me that such a capacious word should be put in quotation marks, because in fact, the creation of a personality does not depend at all a priori on any running practices, and completely different factors and circumstances are decisive in its formation and development. I suspect that the author could not ignore such an important point when revealing the designated topic. But even in this case, it is quite possible to justify your point of view, if you are guided by an adequate chosen research methodology. So, let's turn to the content of the article. It reveals the following important point: the author compares the natural and cultural dimension of running (by the way, it is the cultural dimension that, apparently, could become a more definite concept in the title of the article, meeting the goals and objectives of the study). Such a comparison is quite natural and has an undeniable heuristic potential for the whole work. At the same time, the author proceeds from an understanding of the "humanistic specifics" of running and, thus, justifies the need for philosophical reflection on the relative phenomenon. There are no objections to this, because, indeed, the role of running in human existence is great, but still one important correction should be made: this role is rather determined not by the essence of running itself, but by the natural and cultural features of human development, for whom running can have an ontological dimension. From this point of view, one could appeal to the activity aspect of the study of being, which the author, in general, undertakes unsuccessfully, believing, in particular, that "in the evolution of homo sapiens, running acquires the character of an activity, i.e. it assumes both a derivative of reflexivity and participation in its implementation in order to transform the subject himself, and the environment of its existence." On the other hand, the author's attention is focused on the more important line of the entire study – the personal one. The author cites several opinions of researchers who tend to believe that running has a sufficiently "personality-building" beginning. Judging by the fact that the author recognizes the need for methodological elaboration of this state of affairs in the tasks of the study, in principle, one can count on obtaining verifiable final generalizations. In addition, the author cites a convincing case with H. Murakami, who has his own opinion about the personality-creating function of running. We believe that this is a curious opinion, which partly helped the author of the article to bring the problem under consideration to a receptive level and, thus, get closer to realizing the goal of the entire study. Meanwhile, the author divides the article into several parts, which allow us to trace the logic of scientific research and, in addition, reflect the key positions of the entire work. The author is looking for "philosophical equipment", as he puts it, in running itself, or rather it should be looked for in the system of values and norms, especially since it was assumed that special attention in the article would be paid to the identification of the cultural content of running, but probably this could be the next stage of the researcher's work in the future. The author gives the results of various "measurements" of running, compares them and summarizes them. In general, the findings allow, at least with caution, to talk about the cultural content of personality-building running practices. Thus, the topic has been disclosed, and the author has generally implemented
Link to this article
You can simply select and copy link from below text field.
|
