Young people’s transitioning into adulthood is accompanied by their inclusion into society’s socio-cultural context, together with the development of their own cultural models and interaction practices. Youth cultural space develops as a result of layered connections between young people and culture in general – elements of which are simultaneously inherited and altered by them – as well as subculture models, which emerge in the realm of intra-group interactions, i.e. within youth communities. During the dialectical process of inheritance, denial and construction, young people obtain their own social-group characteristics. In turn their cultural space is distinguished by features which differentiate their activities from other social groups. In modern society youth cultural space is very much a self-regulating realm, within which occurs the development and construction of the most important values which then become the foundation for purpose in life. Base culture plays an essential role in shaping purpose, with its models – contained within the collective unconscious – being directly linked to historic memory. Historic memory, reflected in archetypical and mental structures, influences the content of life purpose values. Engraining itself into habitus during the habitualization process, it becomes the basis for purpose which defines the direction for behavioral predispositions. Together with historic memory, youth life purpose values are significantly influenced by everyday knowledge and experience, which accumulate as a result of young people interacting with others participating in the development of cultural space. In order to confirm self-regulation of youth life purpose values as a holistic process, this article analyzes the connection between young people’s concepts on the meaning of life and various types of culture, archetypes, mentality, habitus. This was facilitated by the fact that the article presents results of developing a cultural space typology, of highlighting – based on analyzing existing approaches towards studying the unconscious – the most common archetypes, mental and modern features of national character, habitual attitudes. Analyzing their relationship allowed for tracing the influence of each on the development of young people’s purposes in life during the self-regulation process. The article substantiates the conclusion – drawn as a result of analyzing how life purposes are connected with types of culture and archetypes – that young people for the most part accept traditional culture, which defines the general direction for the development of meaning in their lives. Based on analyzing the connection between life purpose values and mental, modern features of national character, the study reveals the dialectics of “traditional” and “contemporary” in the altering of meanings in young people’s lives. Analyzing the connection between life purpose values and habitus allows us to consider the modification (hybridization) of meanings in the process of developing behavioral inclinations among young people in terms of self-regulating their living activity. Therefore self-regulation of young people’s life purpose values appears to be a dynamic process which fills their lives with new meanings in an evolving cultural space.

sociology, Russia, youth, culture, values, the meaning of life, understanding, behavior, development

Abakumova I.V., Savchenko N.A. Профессиональные диспозиции как компонент личностного становления. Rossijskiy psihologicheskiy zhurnal = Russian Psychologies Journal, 2008; 5; 1: 23–32 (In Russ.).

Aleksandrova G. G. К проблеме психологического содержания понятий «совесть» и «совестливость». Uchionye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki.= Humanitarian sciences, 2012; 154; 6: 200–210 (In Russ.).

Chuprov V.I. Саморегуляция жизнедеятельности молодежи в культурном пространстве: концепция социокультурного механизма. Gumanitariy Yuga Rossii = South Russia Humanities, 2018; 7; 4: 13–25 (In Russ.).

Chuprov V.I., Zubok J.A. Социокультурный механизм формирования отношения к образованию. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya = Sociological Studies, 2013; 1: 78–90 (In Russ.).

Chuprov V.I., Zubok J.A., Romanovich N.A. Attitude to social reality in Russian society: sociocultural mechanism of formation and reproduction. Moscow: Norma, 2014: 352 (In Russ.).

Civ'yan T. V. Human being and its fate – reprimand in the model of peace. In: Ponyatie sud'by v context raznykh cul'tur. Moscow: Nauka, 1994: 122–129 (In Russ.).

Giddens A. Modernity and self-Identity. Self and society in the late modern age. Oxford: Polity, 1991: 37.

Giddens A. The Consequences of Мodernity. Cambridge: PolityPress, 1994: 186.

Golosovker Y.E. Favourites. Logic of the myth. Moscow, Saint-Petersburg: CHI publ., 2010 (In Russ.).

Gurevich A.Y. Historical Synthesis and Annals School. Moscow: Indrik, 1993: 328 (In Russ.).

Leontiev D.A. Psychology of Meaning: Nature, Structure and Dynamics of Sense Reality. Moscow: Smysl, 2003: 487 (In Russ.).

Mental programs and models of social behavior in Russian society. Lubskiy A.V. et al. Rostov-on-Don: Foundation of education and science, 2016: 391 (In Russ.).

Minyushev F.I. Sociology of Culture. Moscow: Akademichesky proekt, 2004: 272 (In Russ.).

Morozov N.M. Conceptualization of historical knowledge about Russian civilization at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries in Russian historiography. Kemerovo: Praktika, 2014: 401 (In Russ.).

Nikitina S. E. The concept of fate in the Russian national consciousness (on the material of oral texts). Moscow: Nauka, 1994: 320 (In Russ.).

Olport G. Personality Formation: Selected Works. Moscow: Smysl, 2002 (In Russ.).

Omelchenko E.L. Is Russia 's Case of Transformation of Youth Cultural Practices Unique? Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: Economicheskie i social'nye peremeny = Public opinion monitoring: economic and social change, 2019; 1: 3–27 (In Russ.).

Orlova T.G., Nikulina E.F. Выражение добра и зла в английских и русских пословицах как отражение менталитета английского и русского народов. 2016. Vestnik Rossijskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Teoriya yazyka. Semiotika. Semantika. // Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vyrazhenie-dobra-i-zla-v-angliyskih-i-russkih-poslovitsah-kak-otrazhenie-mentaliteta-angliyskogo-i-russkogo-narodov (accessed: 09.09.2019). (In Russ.).

Rutkevich M.N. Life and views of K. G. Jung. In: Young K.G. Arhetip i simvol. Moscow: Renessans, 1991: 304 (In Russ.).

Shihirev P.I. Research of social attitudes in the USA. Voprosy filosofii = Philosophical Studies, 1973; 4: 47–53 (In Russ.).

Shutz A. Structure of daily thinking. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya = Sociological Studies, 1988; 2: 129–137 (In Russ.).

Sikevich Z.V., Krokinskaya O.K., Possel' Y.A. Social unconscious: sociological and socio-psychological aspects. Saint-Petersburg: Piter, 2005: 267 (In Russ.).

Sorokin P.A. Social and cultural dynamics: research of changes in big systems of art, truth, ethics, law and social relations. Saint-Petersburg: RHGI, 2000: 1056 (In Russ.).

Tarshis E. Y. Human Mentality: Approaches to Concepts and Setting Research Objectives. Moscow: Librokom, 2012: 88 (In Russ.).

Toshchenko Zh.T. Kentavr-problem. Moscow: Novy Khronograf, 2011: 552 (In Russ.).

Vishnevsky Y.R., Shapko V.T. Paradoxical young person. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya = Sociological Studies, 2006; 6: 26–37 (In Russ.).

Young K.G. Archetype and symbol. Moscow: Renessans, 1991: 304 (In Russ.).

Young K.G. Psychology of unconscious. Moscow: Kanon+, Reabilitaciya, 2013: 320 (In Russ.).

Zubok J.A., Chuprov V.I., Lyubutov A.S. Self-organization in the mechanism of youth self-regulation. In: Molodiozh' i molodiozhnaya politika: novye smysly i praktiki. Ed. by S.V. Riazantsev, T.K. Rostovskaja. Moscow: Econ-inform, 2019: 15–35 (In Russ.).

Zubok J.A., Chuprov V.I., Lyubutov A.S. Life values in the cultural space of young people. Nauchny rezul'tat. Sotsiologiya i upravlenie, 2018; 4; 3. (In Russ.).

Self-regulation and prediction of individual social behaviour. Ed. by V.A. Yadov. Leningrad: Nauka, 1979: 264 (In Russ.).