EVERYDAY LIFE IN THE SUBJECT FIELD OF THE HUMAN-ORIENTED APPROACH

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31392/cult.alm.2023.3.37

Keywords:

everyday life, leisure, free time, people-oriented approach

Abstract

The article examines the main characteristics of everyday life, taking into account the methodological positions of the human-oriented approach, which is based on the analysis of its relationship with other socio-cultural phenomena – leisure and free time. It is emphasized that the study of everyday life is at the forefront of scientific interest not least due to the fact that its study can be based on a human-oriented analysis of social and cultural realities of social life, when the elements of everyday life begin to be analyzed from the position of the articulation of intra-personal socio-cultural meanings. However, despite the significant interest in the issues of everyday life and related socio-cultural phenomena, the emphasis of attention on the possibilities of a human-oriented approach to their research remains an urgent issue. It was concluded that everyday life, free time, and leisure are closely related phenomena, as well as most of the material and spiritual attributes of life, which demonstrate the unity of the material and the ideal, the fictional and the real. Like any socio-cultural phenomena, they are usually investigated in the context of the whole reality, which is based on culturalcivilizational, social, national-spiritual and personal-sensual meanings. Within the framework of an anthropocentric research paradigm, attention is focused on their new meaningful and meaningful content and qualities that affect not only the characteristics of a person, focused on expanding the boundaries of his intercultural competence and motivation, but also on the level of his everyday life and the subjective feeling of satisfaction with it.

References

Аршава І., Салюк М. (2019). Імпліцитні теорії інтелекту та особистості як предиктори психологічного благополуччя та оптимізму. Journal of psychology research. 25 (8): 10–20.

Борейко Ю. (2015). Структури повсякденності в конструюванні релігійної ідентичності. Українське релігієзнавство. 74–75: 5–13. URL: https://www.readcube.com/articles/10.32420%2F2015.74-75.557

Бочуля О. (2012). Повсякденність: загальний аналіз природи і структури. Вісник Львівського університету. Серія філософські науки. Випуск 15. С. 120–128. URL: http://fs-visnyk.lnu.lviv.ua/archive/15_2012/17.pdf

Ручка, А. О., & Скокова, Л. Г. (2008). Дім як приватний соціокультурний простір. Вісник Львівського університету. Серія соціологічна, (2), 162–181.

Шюц А. (1989). Структура повсякденного мислення URL: https://ktpu.kpi.ua/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/ASHyuts-struktura.pdf

Bordieu P. (1990). Sociología y cultura. México: Grijalbo, 228 р.

Bourdieu Р. (1972). Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique. Librairie Droz, 272 р.

Dumazedier J. (1968). Hacia una civilización del ocio. Barcelona, 1968. 345 р.

Moreno I. (2006). Todos tenemos tiempo. Nuevas prácticas del tiempo libre en el siglo XXI. Buenos Aires: Editorial Lumen-Humanitas, 185 р.

Román M. G. (2006). El tiempo libre y ocio reivindicado por los trabajadores. Pasos. 4(3): 301–326.

Schütz A. (1972). On multiple realities. The Problem of Social Reality: Collected Papers. I: 207–259.

Sheringham М. (2013). Traversées du quotidian. Des surréalistes aux postmodernes. 416 р.

Published

2023-12-25

How to Cite

Kozlovska М. В., & Chrona К. В. (2023). EVERYDAY LIFE IN THE SUBJECT FIELD OF THE HUMAN-ORIENTED APPROACH. Культурологічний альманах, (3), 264–270. https://doi.org/10.31392/cult.alm.2023.3.37

Issue

Section

CULTUROLOGY