Tradition in the information society

Lobatyuk Victoria Valer'evna PhD in Sociology Associate Professor; Higher School of Social Sciences; Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University 195251, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Politechnicheskaya str., 29-3, office 201 vlobatyuk@yandex.ru

Bylieva Dar'ya Sergeevna PhD in Politics Associate Professor; Higher School of Social Sciences; Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University 195251, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Politechnicheskaya str., 29-3, office 201 bylieva_ds@spbstu.ru

Introduction

The relevance of the study of traditions in the modern information society is due to the huge role they play in the system of factors that ensure the sustainable functioning of society. The preservation of national culture is considered today as a basic prerequisite for the spiritual security of society, and traditional values are recognized as the most important condition for the development of personality, a component of the security of the nation. From the very beginning of human history, people formed into groups that shared common customs, rituals and knowledge. This formed the first ideas about traditions as the basis of social unity and identity, as a tool for transferring knowledge from generation to generation and creating common values based on them. The genesis of modern ideas about traditions reflects the complex processes of adaptation and interaction between different cultural and social contexts, allows us to preserve identity and adapt to modern technological changes.

Many authors note that the term tradition does not have a clear definition ^[1], and is used in relation to a wide range of phenomena. A.B. Hoffman argues that the word "tradition" is completely indefinable, and its relevance is explained precisely by its ambiguity ^[2]. As noted earlier, traditions are most often interpreted in relation to the category of time, concepts of culture and history, which requires a specific approach to their analysis in the modern digital age. In addition, the term tradition is used in a wide range of meanings. At the global level, as special features of local civilizations in historical and geographical perspective ^{[3, 4]}. At the local level, the concept of tradition is used in an applied sense to highlight trends: as features of the inheritance of certain practices in different genres of art ^{[5, 6]}, in other areas of professional, intellectual, educational activities ^{[7, 8, 9]}. A special place is occupied by the study of ancient traditions ^{[10, 11]}, as well as traditions with a long and ongoing history ^{[12, 13, 14]}. The concept of traditions also penetrates into political and legal discourse ^{[15, 16]}. At the same time, all the variety of uses of the term is based on a single intuitive core, inextricably linked with the spiritual aspect of human life and the people.

This study aims to reveal the concept of "tradition" based on the historical experience of its understanding and the influence of modern realities of the information society, dramatically changing the socio–cultural aspects of people's lives. Thus, the subject of the study is traditions in the modern information society, which are revealed through the use of dialectical and historical methods that allow us to identify the features of the conceptualization of tradition in opposition to other categories, and the authors also present a comparative analysis of various approaches to this problem. In the future, based on the philosophical and methodological foundations proposed in the work for assessing traditions in the information society, it is planned to collect and analyze an array of modern traditions.

The opposite of tradition

Although tradition is an important part of social relations, its understanding is largely based on opposition to the other. Throughout her thinking, she often stood out as the opposite of something. This juxtaposition can be understood both in a temporal context: as a dichotomy of epochs, so in a single time within the framework of one culture, as the dialectic of its components. The society called "traditional" (that is, pre-industrial) did not reflect on tradition, as it lived by them. It was the destruction of traditions that required their scientific consideration and determination of their role and significance. An active discussion of the concept of "tradition" began in the late XVIII–early XIX centuries, when established traditions were being broken due to economic, ideological and political reasons.

Past vs Present

The ideologists of enlightenment and revolution opposed tradition to reason, which should ensure the development of society. Sometimes tradition was identified with resistance to innovation, the desire to preserve the old way of life at any cost despite changing external conditions. Defenders of traditions saw in them the "national spirit", the basis of society, ensuring its integrity and originality.

E. Durkheim and M. Weber saw in the rejection of traditions – the "disenchantment of the world" – the growth of rationality, intellectuality. As a result, the dominance of the scientific and technical paradigm of civilizational development means progress in the field of science and technology. The opposition of tradition and innovation can be traced to G. Tarde, who saw in the alternation of epochs the change of imitation of ancestors to imitation of contemporaries, that is, fashion. at m.Tradition acts as the antipode of innovation (being an inert habit) and rationality (being an unreflexive, quasi-automatic imitation) ^[17]. K. Marx considered tradition as a brake slowing down the development of society, however, he also took into account the possibility of using traditions as camouflage, as a kind of disguise, which is deliberately used to lull vigilance in the implementation of innovations.

O. Comte saw in tradition the continuity of social life, the preservation of social unity over time. E. Durkheim also believed that fundamental traditions are embedded in the foundation of society, imprinted in the "collective consciousness". Traditions, according to Durkheim, along with such "social facts" as customs and rituals, have the properties of compulsion and existence external to individuals. At the same time, the French sociologist believed that the weakening of the influence of traditions is a natural process. And as A. B. Hoffman notes, the transition from a traditional to a modern industrial, "rational" society is the basic trend of social evolution ^[18]. At the same time, anomie, as a value–normative vacuum, is associated with the lack of an equivalent replacement: "now traditional morality has been undermined, and no other has been formed to take its place. The old duties have lost their power, and we do not yet see clearly and definitely what our new duties are" ^{[19, p. 194]}. A number of representatives of the Durkheim school addressed the problems of traditions, as a rule, based on information about the life of archaic communities in an ethnographic or historical perspective. Thus, Marcel Moss focused on the omnipotence and coercive power of tradition, which is significantly inferior to innovative pressure. At the same time, he expanded the possibility of using the term traditions widely beyond religion, law and morality, believing that traditions affect all spheres of society, including science and technology, art and economics ^[20].

Since tradition did not die, being rejected by the Enlightenment, and more and more new epochs acquired their traditions, their perception expanded. The traditions of the pre–industrial era have sunk into oblivion, but the understanding (peculiar to that time) of tradition as the preservation of any past continues to be relevant. Tradition quite often acts as a kind of conditional antonym for innovation, rationality and modernity. There is even a simplified idea that modernity is the first stage of traditionalism, and innovations become traditions simply over time ^[21], which leads to the idea of a kind of eternal cycle, where all innovations that have been preserved for a long time become a tradition.

Tradition seems to relate to the past, it is as if it is connected with preservation and is opposed to movement and development. At the same time, postmodernism has a more complex relationship with tradition, unlike, for example, the modern era, which actively throws it back. But the past is not discarded, it is not canceled, it is only distorted. Tradition remains "alive" only by staying in the same context and meaning, while the postmodern concept involves deconstruction, reinterpretation and conscious and fundamental distortion of the past.

Continuity vs mobility

In a number of sociological and philosophical theories, tradition is associated with the historical development of society, and in this role remains in the past. Tradition is often viewed as a cultural field, a symbolic communication system that ensures continuity in society. However, as we pointed out above, tradition is an extremely broad concept, and when viewed on a smaller scale, it becomes obvious that it continues to function as part of the modern social system in various ways. In general, the removal of tradition beyond the historical past or archaic customs contributed to the expansion of its understanding. Starting with the research of E. Shils, S. Eisenstadt and other researchers, the tradition began to be considered not as a past stage, but as an active part of modern society.

If traditional cultures demanded strict observance of rituals, subordination to the collective memory of individual behavior, then what can be interpreted as a tradition in modern society is a much more flexible and ambiguous mechanism that requires special consideration.

The idea of tradition will change depending on the scale and method of consideration. E. Hobsbawm, considering tradition from the point of view of the socio–political life of society, saw in it a strictly formalized and protected ritual, an invariably fixed practice, regardless of whether it has a real connection with the past or only symbolically refers to it ^[22]. That is, the British historian assumed that traditions could arise and be constructed, but did not see this as an evolutionary process, some strictly formalized traditions replacing others. Hobsbawm introduces the concept of "invented" traditions – as created by a new elite for its own legitimization, artificial connection with the past ^[23]. Pain writes about constructed traditions as "innovations disguised in tradition" ^[24]. In any case, we are talking about the use of certain communication technologies that mimic traditions, quite often associated with political and social transformations in society.

Max Weber, turning to a less global scale of consideration, distinguished tradition–a habit carried out automatically, without hesitation, from tradition–a value in which a conscious orientation towards certain ideals is visible ^[25]. M. Moss suggests only the second type to keep the name of tradition, and social conformism, thoughtless following of familiar patterns, to be called custom. At the same time, the author sees in tradition, first of all, knowledge, in which society's understanding of itself and its past is revealed.

Continuing this idea, it is possible to connect tradition with collective memory. In this case, traditions are tightly embedded in modernity, they turn out to be that part of the "present" that is responsible for the connection with the past. Maurice Halbwax seemed to distinguish two layers in the same society: memory, connecting with the past, and rational activity, focused on the present. At the same time, collective memory is able to be reconstructed under the influence of the present, which contains the current collective experience: the mind opposes tradition as a broader society to a narrower society ^[26]. At the same time, tradition represents the essence of collective memory and a means of preserving it, appearing in different guises.

H.–G. Gadamer saw tradition as a link between a person and the past, ensuring the stability of values and cultural symbols, and facilitating orientation in the world due to recorded past experience. Moreover, due to the preservation of tradition, the past and the present merge: "there is no horizon of the present in oneself and for oneself, just as there are no historical horizons that need to be acquired. On the contrary, understanding is always a process of merging these supposedly existing horizons for oneself. Under the domination of tradition, such a fusion always takes place. After all, where tradition reigns, the old and the new always merge into a living unity, and neither one nor the other is completely separated from each other" ^{[27, pp. 362-363]}.

To distinguish between different aspects of the existence of traditions, researchers have proposed several classification options. So E. Shatsky proposes to distinguish between functional, objective and subjective approaches to understanding tradition ^[28]. In the first case, the method is emphasized, that is, how it is transmitted, in the second – the object, that is, what is transmitted, in the third – the recipient and his interpretation, that is, to whom it is transmitted. The subjective approach draws attention to the importance of modernity in understanding tradition. J. Gusfield emphasizes that tradition is the result of an individual's current choice, it is created and adapted to the current needs and aspirations of a specific historical situation ^{[29, p. 358]}.

Thus, it is possible to distinguish the view of traditions not as historically fixed indisputable patterns, but as rather mobile social technologies that depend on the present. In particular, E. Giddenns argues: "All traditions are made up. None of the traditional societies was traditional from beginning to end, and there are many reasons for inventing traditions and customs" ^{[30, p. 57]}. I.N. Polonskaya notes that the naturalistic approach to understanding traditions (emphasizing continuity) is opposed by the constructivist one, paying attention to variability, where tradition appears completely devoid an unchangeable definable core ^[31]. That is, we are talking not only about the possible gradual modification of traditions under the influence of the present, but about abrupt changes, and about reinventing traditions ^{[30, p. 57]}.

What are modern traditions?

Classical theories about traditions linking them to traditional society, although they assumed that rationality and reason would take their place, in many cases noticed the inconsistency and inadequacy of such a replacement. It is obvious that the processes of the emergence and formation of traditions in modern society are not accidental. They are designed to fill a value–normative or "moral vacuum" ^[32].

At the same time, if initially the idea of tradition as a phenomenon formed from outside was not questioned, then speaking of modern tradition, we can see two opposite trends. N. R. Khupenia writes about the interdependence of individual and common identity: on the one hand, individual identity is conditioned by sociocultural and "grows from the outside inwards", on the other, common identity it consists of the sum of self–identities, does not exist outside the individuals who form and embody this collective "we" ^{[33, p. 37]}. The same picture develops with modern traditions, which, on the one hand, are formed under the influence of a common cultural field, on the other hand, they themselves generate it, which provides a certain combination of continuity and uniqueness. The rapid pace of development of modern society has a great impact on the practice of traditions, many of which are becoming difficult to follow. At the same time, traditions are transformed, adapted to existing realities, preserving the spirit, not the form, or completely reinvented. And if we leave out the "pseudo-traditions" that are passed off as ancient, then the phrase "the emergence of traditions" in modern society sounds paradoxical, because most often the main property of tradition is called continuity, the transmission of the unchangeable from generation to generation. However, it can be assumed that the main thing for tradition is to preserve the connection between generations, and maintain inner spiritual meaning. V.A. Kutyrev calls traditions a manifestation of the absolute, eternal, identical to the so-called universals of culture ^[34]. A. Saidov sees traditions as the basis for transferring values to the next generation ^[35] Considering tradition as a set of symbols amenable to logical analysis (for example, within the framework of structuralism) does not correspond to its role in today's rapidly changing society. The rapid obsolescence of forms of interaction implies the possibility of preserving the essence in new forms. Growing into the depths of being, traditions preserve the most important things in culture. For a number of orthodox communities, which can be characterized as homogeneous, conservative and technologically non-progressive ^[36], changing the form of traditions is unacceptable in any form, any changes in society cause violent protest, which means abandoning many technological and social transformations in order to preserve tradition unchanged. Which, in general, means a specific way of dominating tradition as opposed to innovation. Most often, in this case, traditions have not only a value, but a sacred meaning, and opposition to changes is supported by increased sanctions and an increase in the number of prescriptions that restrain going beyond traditional practices. First of all, we are talking about religious traditions in their most orthodox manifestations. For example, the rejection of any changes in traditional religious practices during the Covid–19 pandemic contributed to a rapid increase in morbidity among Orthodox Jews in Israel. In non-traditional/religious communities, innovations can be perceived as a culturally specific expression and embodiment of a tradition that dates back to the origins of the most modern civilization ^[37].

In general, traditions in modern society often demonstrate mobility and adaptability, changing or acquiring completely new forms. I. N. Polonskaya notes that as the authentic sacred tradition is lost, new traditional forms are being constructed to consolidate and reproduce macroidenticity, while calling the new traditions "artificial" ^[31]. The lack of strict regulation of traditions means that they can be adjusted to a changing environment. E. Shils argued that tradition does not hinder the modernization of society, and called it a substance within which development originates, as well as a factor contributing to social integration ^[38]. S.A. Madyukova and Yu.V. Popkov write about "socio–cultural neotraditionalism" when The rapidly changing social reality promotes the revival and reproduction of traditions as a way of national identification, however, the sacred meaning may change to a rational one ^[39]. The communicative network space, representing a part of the cultural and symbolic, today plays the role of a certain buffer in which traditions can be fixed, reflected and refracted. The digital environment promotes familiarity with new forms of traditions, primarily youth ones, and the rapid dissemination of the most liked ones. Posts, photos and videos are approved with the help of "likes" and distributed through reposts. Of course, what may be the basis of a tradition makes up a very small part of the content. And here not only the dominance of entertaining surface content plays a role, but also the fact that traditions are often personal and important, something that is not always appropriate to share with the public. However, traditions associated with certain holidays and events, with the preparation of culinary dishes, the implementation of good deeds, often appear in digital form. Cooking a certain dish can be a tradition when it precedes a joint meal that unites family members, becoming an integral part of it, etc.

Especially many modern traditions presented in the digital environment are dedicated to holidays and significant events that have a pronounced symbolic meaning and are associated with interactions with other people. Traditions here play a supportive role, contributing to the isolation of a holiday or event from the ordinary plan of life. At the same time, the digital environment demonstrates both ancient rituals associated with a wedding, the birth of a child, the onset of the new year, funerals, etc., as a rule, in the form of informative and entertaining content from a third person, and modern traditions demonstrated as direct actions of the author. In some cases, the author's motive is clearly traced to share what is customary to do on a holiday in his family. For example, the digital environment contains a lot of modern New Year's family traditions related to the manufacture of toys for the Christmas tree, gifts and surprises, joint games, events, cooking certain dishes, etc.

At the same time, the Internet serves not only as a place for relaying traditions to a wide audience, but also for the emergence of new traditions that are possible only in the digital age. For example, changing the means of communication has made traditional family "video meetings" that were previously impossible in such a format. A family channel in popular messengers is also becoming a new tradition, where all family members post photos and something interesting from their lives, primarily for older relatives. Digital ways to confirm a friendly or family connection reduce the communicative burden on a person – it is easier to send a funny picture than to call, but they allow you to consolidate certain rituals that allow you to be sure that everything is fine with your family.

Although a significant number of historical traditions can be observed in Russia today, "modern" prevails in it, defining the dominant social structures. At the same time, the concept of tradition is used in society in two meanings – in high (and large-scale) as preserved from the ancestors, and in everyday, everyday life – as regularly recurring significant habits / rituals (periodically or upon the occurrence of a certain event). The ritualization of traditions is facilitated by special material or spiritual artifacts accompanying their implementation. Their difference from other daily repetitive tasks is the special meaning attributed to them, their symbolic and often valuable meaning. They differ from routine repetitions in life not so much by some unique properties or unusual actions (which is also possible), but by a specific attitude, which sometimes has a reflexive significance, a focus on the connection of generations, and / or is associated with values. Thus, in modern society, traditions stand out from the mass of other social rituals due to the special symbolic meaning attributed to them, they seem to elevate the individual's experience to the transcendent (at the same time, the same action can be perceived and carried out as a tradition by one person, and be part of everyday life for another, precisely due to the presence or absence of symbolic meaning). Moreover, this value can be historically fixed and passed down from generation to generation, as well as created within families and social groups. At the same time, even newly generated traditions are carriers of a common identity, supporting it and feeding on it. Another question is that what is newly created by individual communities does not have the power of a ritual fixed in centuries, known and practiced by the whole community, such traditions are short-lived, and may need specific, new mechanisms of consolidation. One of these mechanisms can be digital methods of engagement and dissemination – a successful idea has great network virality, easily transmitted from user to user and sometimes becoming the motivating reason for actions. And if earlier it was a difficult research task to find and highlight traditions among the general digital content, and the success of distribution depended not only on the tradition itself, but also on more or less random factors of the digital environment, today more and more projects aimed at collecting and presenting traditions appear in the Russian network space. As an example, the Russian Government's project dedicated to the year of the family 2024, where family traditions uploaded by users are presented on the map. With all the scale and good digital support for this project, it should be noted that the authors of the uploaded traditions in most cases are limited in their understanding of what can be considered as it.

Conclusion

Today, there is uncertainty in understanding what a modern tradition is: on the one hand, there is a culturally rooted tendency to call only historically established rituals a tradition, on the other hand, there is a tendency to call any repetitive action a tradition. This study proposes to consolidate the understanding of tradition in modern society in terms of its internal content. In the course of the study, it was proposed to abandon the historically established interpretation of tradition in modern society as related to the past and opposed to rational activity, the following key features were identified to define tradition: periodicity of action, use of material or spiritual artifacts, and possession of a certain symbolic value. Correlation with the digital age in this case can manifest itself both indirectly – in the constant transformation of the technical environment in which tradition as an action is carried out (in particular, the use of digital technical means in the implementation of certain actions, during their photo or video recording, during distribution), and directly when traditions have a pronounced digital essence (digital rituals online communities, etc.). The digital environment is becoming an important part of the cultural space ^{[40, 41]}, so traditions naturally penetrate into it and take their supporting position.

As V. A. Kutyrev notes, the philosophical essence of the concept of tradition is not change in itself, nor preservation as such, but something constant within change, constant in development, absolute in relative, eternal in temporal ^[34]. Traditions today do not form an opposition to technologies, they are not in conflict with their driving force, which seemed to be their basic property in historically established concepts of consideration. Currently, traditions are being integrated into the development of a rapidly changing man-made world, filling it with deeper meanings referring to unchanging values. Although modern traditions are far from diverse in terms of symbolic and value content, they are of interest in terms of genesis, transformation and dissemination, as well as the role that technology plays in these processes.