Approach to social representations from some 'theorists of the spirit'

Social representations are expressions of the social fabric interrelated with attitudes, stereotypes, prejudices, customs, traditions and values, as dimensions of everyday subjectivity (Martin, 1986). In them converge feelings, emotions, experiences and symbolisms that promote effective cognitive unity; This determines the great regulatory potential of the behavior that this category has.

To address social representations as collective constructions that articulate the psychological with the social, with a symbolic character and peculiar in each context, psychology is accompanied by contributions made from other social sciences such as Philosophy and Sociology. This analysis, without pretending to be conclusive, assesses some theoretical positions that due to their relevance are considered necessary to take into account in the study of social representations.

Approach to social representations from some 'theorists of the spirit'

The object of psychology is the study of subjectivity at the level of individual experience, but also of the collective fact. Both in the academic research programs that gave rise to it, as well as in some of the paradigms that allowed it to leave the crisis, one can notice tendencies to propose the experiment and other qualitative procedures as an alternative in the search for what subjective.

They highlight positivism with reflexology and behaviorism; while within phenomenology, the Gestalt He also opted for the sufficiency of "hard" sciences as the only way to access the subjective.

Psychoanalysis and Humanism On the other hand, they were born within phenomenology, but already further away from positivist tendencies, however they maintained the attachment to individuality as the main limitation. Would these paradigms be enough to plausibly approach psychosocial dynamics as subjective group elements? - Obviously not.

Much could be said about Freud and of the turn that his transgressive theory implied in the understanding of the human. But while this psychoanalyst has the merit of inaugurating a trend that seriously highlighted and justified the value of the symbolic in collective behavior; had the limitation of reducing social behavior to projections of the individual psychodynamic.

Some of his less orthodox successors advanced in the understanding of the social. In this sense, it stands out Carl Jung, who introduced the concept of the collective unconscious. In her criteria, the individual carries within him the experiences accumulated by previous generations. This collective unconscious is shared by all human beings and an important part of it is the universal images or symbols.

In the author's opinion, these positions are of interest, especially for psychology. but they fail to adequately assess the bilateral relationship that the individual establishes with the society.

While it is true that authors like Vigotsly, Rubinstein and Petrosky, supported by the dialectical-materialist understanding of history, they were able to explain in a coherent and dynamic way the role of the historical and social in the constitution of the subjective phenomenon, other valuable contributions made from the sciences should not be ignored social.

To achieve a unbiased analysis psychological representations as a category, it is not appropriate to conceive of the social sciences isolated from each other, since they have been complementing each other through the historical development of the humanity. Each of them has used its theoretical-methodological framework to respond to the demands and phenomena that appear in social consciousness, in its complex interaction with the social being; and this own work has generated knowledge, sometimes from different perspectives, but with equal scientific value in understanding the psychosocial.

First, it is necessary to address the Kantian notion (taken up in the 19th century by Sociology) and to think about social phenomena from the legitimation of the existence of a “reality in itself” and a reality for the subject who experiences it. This suggests since what has been called mother is all the sciences, that reality, before being a psychologically significant content, it passes through the filter of perception as a phenomenon cognitive; to then go through the sieve of representations and personality as a peculiar system in each case.

This being the case, the cause of this plurality of realities suggested by Kant could probably be found in psychological representations, both individual and social (since they are categories that intertwine) and this explanatory possibility highlights the importance of their study as category.

Kant at the same time raises a notion of subjectivity, and according to this author's criteria, also of social construction of meanings and representations, when He states that a man abandoned on a desert island would not decorate his cabin for himself, nor would he look for flowers; and he refers that the same meaningless flowers in the previous situation may end up acquiring social importance, being of great interest, but only in the bond with the other (cited by Hoyos, Vargas, 2002).

Such ideas refer above all to the role of the social in the formation of representations from the constitution and legitimation of meanings, meanings and values; All categories that make up the referential framework from which people perceive a certain element of reality as valuable or useless, beautiful, accepted or questionable.

Therefore, the criterion expressed by Hoyos and Vargas in 2002 is shared, when they express that for Kant aesthetics are expresses to the extent that you want levels of coexistence, agreement, sedimentation of the community experience, communicative; and that it is revealed as a space for the understanding of meaning and the constitution of agreements.

It can be seen that when approaching the issue of aesthetics, Kant makes, perhaps without intending to, a clear description of the interpsychological and of the importance of the social bond in the formation of subjective. Such proposals were later reaffirmed by Pichón Riviére, an important exponent of psychology in Argentina, who highlighted the leading role of the bond in the constitution of the subjective.

Within Sociology we can find two fundamental pillars for the understanding of the group psychological. The first is Emile durkheim, when you highlight the need to study the social fact, which he defines as ways of acting, thinking and feeling, endowed with the power of coercion (Durkheim, 1956). Undoubtedly, he is referring to social constructions that are culturally consolidated and internalize at the individual level, functioning as a driving and guiding force of social and individual.

For him, the social fact can have a positive or negative contribution to the maintenance or change of the social structure. In this direction one could point to the existence of some coincidence between this analysis and the approach of Marx regarding the existence of a dialectical and bidirectional relationship between social being and consciousness Social. It is valid to highlight in Durkheim's thought, which locates the possibility of social action in all spheres of constitution and manifestation of the psychic (Cognitive, affective, behavioral).

In convergence with the previous author we can cite Max Weber, who also places social action as the objective of the interpretation of Sociology, and thinks of it as a behavior loaded with meaning.

For Weber, social action is all social attitude and behavior, which can be explicit or subjective; whether it is an active or passive intervention, or an aptitude for abstention in the different situations and contexts in which individuals develop in their social actions. However, it is considered that his last interest is in the subjective component of social action, as a determinant of it.

From his point of view, man is embedded in webs of meaning that he himself constructs. This construction is clearly social valued, inasmuch as it is not only about the individual meanings that mobilize social action, but also about the internationalizations of collective meanings crystallized from historical experience and transmitted transgenerationally through culture.

The elements raised above make one reflect on the study of social representations and the need to think it free from scientific inflexibilities, deterministic thoughts and generalizations; since by their nature, the representations are given by the articulation of the individual senses and the shared meanings, peculiar in each context.

Even when delving into the particularities of this category implies noting great complexity in its understanding, it is essential to challenge the "sciences of the spirit" to try to get as close as possible to their essences. Because as previous authors have suspected for a long time, in their understanding goes the possibility of explaining and even modifying collective behavior and social functioning.