The theme of the secondary image in the Leningrad psychological school

Golovinov Evgenii Ivanovich Postgraduate student, Department of General Psychology, Moscow Institute of Psychoanalysis 111123, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, 3rd Vladimirskaya str., 8 Golovinov@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Gostev Andrei Andreevich Doctor of Psychology Professor; Department of History of Psychology and Historical Psychology; Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences Office 1, Yaroslavskaya St., 13, Moscow, 129366, Russia aagos06@rambler.ru

Introduction

In the history of the Leningrad Psychological School (hereinafter LPS), researchers identify the main periods or stages of its development: Bekhterevsky, Ananyevsky and post-Ananyevsky. Each of them had its own milestones of addressing both the figurative sphere as a whole and the subject of the secondary image ^[1].

The importance of secondary images and their study by psychological science is also due to the use of appropriate technologies in psychocorrective practice ^[2]. Relying on the imaginative sphere opens up wide possibilities for the psychologist both in terms of diagnosis and corrective action, a way to stimulate personal changes, actualize the potential of self-regulation and self-improvement of the patient.

The use of a secondary image in the course of applying altered states of consciousness as a "bridge" to changing a person's perception of the world from the perspective of a positive or negative reaction that determines his inner state, "opens the door" to the specifics of the conscious and unconscious, clarifies the meanings and ways of their regulation in a particular situation.

The purpose of the study is to examine the dynamics of treatment and approaches to the figurative sphere of a person in general, and to the subject of the secondary image in particular.

The object of research is the figurative sphere of a person. The subject of the research is the subject of the secondary image in the Leningrad psychological school.

The main part

In the context of the authors' research, the issue of secondary image, based on the priorities and paradigms of LPS, is extremely important for the study of altered states of consciousness, where the image is the central category, and the contribution of Leningrad scientists to understanding the interdependence of issues related to altered states of consciousness and general psychology is important. It is the approach to the issues of the figurative sphere from the perspective of the possibility of considering them from the point of view of altered states of consciousness that determines the novelty of the research.

As part of the research, a theoretical analysis of the themes of the secondary image has been carried out throughout almost the entire history of the LPS. Available materials and publications are used as sources. The paper uses a review, comparison, generalization, and systematization of data.

The Leningrad Psychological School is known not only for being at the forefront of Russian science, but also for the fact that the human personality was at the center of the interests of the great scientists and thinkers who worked in it. The countdown can be traced back to the middle of the nineteenth century – from the fundamental philosophical and psychological work of A. I. Galich "The Picture of Man", which, in fact, laid the emphasis on the anthropological principle in human research in the further development of the LSE.

This approach to personality was taken up by V. M. Bekhterev, who is rightly considered the creator of the Leningrad psychological school. Even then, anthropologism became the philosophical basis for the study of cognitive processes, and then the approach to the study of personality as a combination of biosocial and functional in combination with the principle of self–determination ^{[3, 4]}.

Consideration of the subject of the secondary image cannot be separated from the study of consciousness. V. M. Bekhterev also began the study of the human personality with an understanding of consciousness, which is reflected in the work "Consciousness and its boundaries". Of the interpretations available at that time, the scientist most often refers to G. Spencer, who defines consciousness as a well-known internal change (sequence of changes) organized by a personality: "Changes form the raw material of consciousness, and the development of consciousness is their organization" ^{[5, pp. 303-304]}. This practically means the formation of secondary images used by consciousness to interpret reality and predict the outcome of actions.

Bekhterev begins to know personality based on the postulates of subjective psychology through introspection, and the subject is consciousness, which, unlike his predecessors, he separated from the unconscious (before Freud), and by which he understood "... an internal, directly perceived state by us, which or which accompanies many of our mental processes" ^{[6, p. 204]}. Based on an objective scientific analysis of a person, Bekhterev drew parallels with the physiological processes that take place in the personal space.

By associating character types with certain nervous excitations in the cerebral cortex, he mediated by them a person's ability to react to the environment in one way or another. It was his objective assessment and differentiated diagnosis that allowed him to lay the foundation for the study of human character and personality, and his ideas to form the basis of the psychophysiology of individual human qualities at various levels of scientific knowledge. Bekhterev's works lay the basic foundation for an approach to the study of consciousness as connecting all human mental processes. At the same time, the scientist identifies several levels of it, stipulating that their formation occurs in a person gradually, during his maturation. He calls the most striking qualitative leap the ability of a person to separate and isolate his own "I" from the environment, linking this with a person's self-awareness.

Despite the fact that consciousness as such remains one of the least studied areas of the human psyche even at the level of terminology, scientists have attempted to analyze consciousness from the perspective of its structure and transformation. Singling out the "intimate" core of consciousness as a set of socio-moral concepts, he puts the concepts of human will there, thereby designating the latter as a subject of cognition. As a subjective position, a person can analyze the mental phenomena and processes occurring with him, while rising to a higher level of consciousness.

The scientific school created by V. M. Bekhterev has formed a whole galaxy of the largest Russian psychologists. Of these, B. G. Ananyev deserves special attention in the light of the study of the secondary image, through whose purposeful efforts the LPS was created. It was he who continued the implementation of V. M. Bekhterev's ideas regarding the comprehensive study of man in order to understand the laws of his social behavior. Since the work of B. G. Ananyev, there has definitely been a single vector of development of psychology within the framework of LPS, integrating the principles of anthropologism and an integrated approach to the study of the human personality, where individual mental development is considered by him as the final part of the structure of human development.

Despite the breadth of scientific research, B. G. Ananyev proceeded from the basic position that man is the subject of activity, social behavior and consciousness. Such a psychobiosocial structure is an internal determinant of the whole personality, determining its mental processes and activities ^[7]. In the context of considering secondary images, the scientist associated the formation of such a structure with the processes of continuous interaction of an individual with the world based on mental reflection, which forms or corrects secondary images. Holistic mental reflection and regulation mediates and relies on the functioning of all classes of secondary images in a particular situation of human life. At the same time, a person is an active actor who constantly acts, changes and develops in accordance with individual psychological mechanisms ^{[8, 9]}. Individuality is considered by scientists as the eclectic integrity of all the properties of a particular person that determine his psychological uniqueness.

According to B. G. Ananyev, the inner world of a personality consists not only of individual psychological properties of a person, but also on the basis of formed value systems, personal attitudes and a certain "organization of images, claims and self-esteem" ^[10]. The determination of the image is adjusted by the subject from the side of the structure of mental perception and the actual activity of the subject. B. G. Ananyev's works "Spatial discrimination" and "Psychology of sensory cognition" are devoted to the research of the sensory sphere of the psyche. The research brilliantly continued in this direction by colleagues and followers of the scientist results in the collective work "Theory of Sensations".

The set of secondary images forms a person's individuality as an independent substructure of his psychological organization. B. G. Ananyev finds this new quality in the combination of the properties of open and closed systems in humans – the inner world of man and his functioning in the environment. The criterion of the richness of a person's inner world is his individuality as a system of secondary images, the social behavior caused by them, and the ability to self-develop ^{[11, 12]}.

The approach to a person as a unique system in the form of a set of psychological characteristics that collectively create the integrity and stability of a personality can be traced in the works of V. N. Myasishchev. Educated by the LPS, the desire to study the human personality deeply and carefully, with respect and awe, allows Myasishchev to identify beyond the limits of the personality structure its orientation, temperament and emotionality, through which, in the process of developing his concept, he designates the central element – attitude. The scientist identifies this category as a system–forming element of personality, and the human relationship system as a manifestation of the relationship of the subject with both individual parties and the surrounding world and society as a whole. Focusing on attitude as a criterion of human interaction with the world, through this category Myasishchev essentially considers the formation of a person's imaginative sphere, and a change in attitude as a correction of a secondary image, although he does not use such terminology ^[13].

Considering Myasishchev's concept from the point of view of our research interest, it is important for us that he separately identified an emotional component in the structure of the relationship, in addition to the evaluative and conative. In his opinion, it is the emotional side of the relationship that determines motivations, behavioral reactions, assessments, and the formation of attitudes, which further mediate the formation or change of the human psyche. Characterizing the level of personality development, V. N. Myasishchev designates both its intellectual, volitional, and emotional properties, including them in the general structure of the relationship. This understanding, which continues the traditions of the LPS, creates the foundation for further research of consciousness in the context of education and the modification of images as the basis of human interaction with the outside world.

A. N. Leontiev viewed the subjective world of a person as an image that develops in the subject in the process of his contacts with the outside world. It is mediated by a person's perception of reality, his activities and his assessment, contacts. And the image itself, in turn, is adjusted depending on what or with whom a person interacts ^[14].

In the paradigm of consciousness perception by B.G. Ananyev, V.M. Bekhterev and other well-known scientists belonging to the LPS, L.M. Vekker created an all-encompassing theory combining mental processes and human consciousness, especially carefully considering aspects of sensory perception in image formation ^[15]. Considering the image as a subjective reality, B.F. Lomov described its transformative function, mediating reality in the context of needs, motives, goals and the emotional component of a particular person related to the mental reflection of the world.

Thus, B. G. Ananyev and his students A. A. Bodalev, L. M. Vekker, L. A. Golovey, B. F. Lomov, N. A. Loginova, V. N. Myasishchev and many others laid the foundation for the psychology of secondary images. The reflection of the surrounding world in secondary images forms the transformation of what is represented by direct perception to the level of higher mental processes and functions.

Attention to the imaginative sphere of personality as the most important component of the inner world of a person is due to the fact that secondary images create conditions for the penetration of unconscious information into the inner world of a personality and express themselves precisely in the language of images – the most ancient language of the psyche. This expression makes it possible to interpret the language of metaphors, symbolism and mythology, to realize spiritual meanings. Through images, it is possible to master knowledge and experience inaccessible to conscious thinking, which manifest themselves, for example, in intuition. At the same time, images mediate the mental regulation of a person, and he forms a kind of program for changing the circumstances taking place here and now, for purposeful movement towards the desired ^[16].

At the same time, the importance of LPS is beyond doubt, although in the modern world there is a contradiction between the relevance of studying secondary images and the level of appeal to the problem. Even with the growing attention to the topic, more traditionally psychology and related fields of scientific knowledge prefer the study of other mental processes ^[17]. In this regard, there is an obvious need to study the deep mechanisms of mental reflection and regulation from the perspective of describing the diverse interrelated classes of secondary images that form the "imaginative sphere" of a person. Considering the latter, it is important to designate the "translational function" as a mechanism that forms the inner world of a person and the ways of interacting with reality in the context of a person's subjective perception, mediated by his emotional, sensual and spiritual preferences. It is the multidimensional description of the set of characteristics of secondary images with the allocation of their basic constants, as well as taking into account the individual characteristics of the figurative sphere and their personal correlates, that will determine the study of the functioning of the figurative sphere of a person with the possibility of deep self-knowledge of personality and its changes ^{[18, 19]}.

Conclusions

So, in psychology, the term "secondary image" has taken shape as a generalizing term for a variety of figurative phenomena corresponding to a certain cognitive and psychoregulatory situation and, in fact, means a qualitatively new stage of cognition.

The exceptional role of images in the human psyche makes them an integral part of almost any psychological problem in various fields of psychological knowledge.

The research vector set by the LPS will encourage the psychological community to pay closer attention to the problems of secondary images, and their roles and functions that ensure the activity of human consciousness and the spheres of the unconscious mental.

Conclusion

The use of historical, psychological, interdisciplinary and cultural aspects in scientific analysis allows for a deeper understanding of the role of the figurative sphere in the cognition of moral and spiritual meanings. In the context of the demands of the time for a deeper and more thorough study of consciousness, particularly in the figurative sphere, the study of secondary images is becoming in demand in the scientific community.

Therefore, the role and contribution of LPS in the problem of secondary images cannot be overestimated. And the foundations of this perception and the awareness of the need to study them were laid by its creators and their students and followers, who carried the traditions of the school's psychological approaches through the centuries.