ANTHROPOLOGICAL MEANING OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION (expert opinion)

Slobodchikov V.I.

Institute for the Study of Childhood, Family and Education
Russian Academy of Education
e-mail: dir-irdorao@ya.ru

In this topic, it is necessary to identify two tensions, two poles within the conference's problematic field [1]. The first pole is human reality (in the fullness of human endowments); the second pole is the socioeconomic structure of human life. Situated between these poles are professional and specialized education, oriented toward both.

Today, two ideological models of the relationship between these poles clearly coexist. The first (socioeconomic) insists on the necessity and inevitability of all-encompassing capitalization, total unification, and, ultimately, the utilization of human resources. Essentially, this is achieved through the fragmentation of the original totality of human reality—in all its conceivable and inconceivable properties and characteristics—and their subsequent rigid specification, followed by their literal, natural utilization in a variety of sociotechnical, production mega-machines; their use as interchangeable tools or replaceable materials. In the current socioeconomic order, based on, I would say, information radiation (contamination), a vast number of exotic needs, desires, and temptations are provoked (fragmented) among a mass of atomized, homeless individuals (and this is the fragmentation of the human essence, or, in other words, the dehumanization of man). In the future, these fragments, both individually and collectively, and most importantly, without a remainder, become the objects of capitalization.

The second model (anthropological) believes that only the most complete formation of human potential (the actual human potential given by God to man) – its identification and development, the amplification of the highest human capabilities will make it possible to organize the world of man, to harmonize the meeting of man and the world.

It's clear that both of these models (resource utilization and potential enrichment), despite their apparent alternative nature, actually coexist not only in our shared lives but also within each individual's lives. We are both seemingly educated as people and utilized as material in the existing order of life. But it's important to clearly see and distinguish between these two. In fact, within this conflict, the question of professional education exists and must be addressed. Where to begin?

I'll start from the beginning - with the category work, which underlies all key concepts of professional education. Labor is the universal and absolute mode of human existence in the world. As the Lord said to Adam after his fall, "In the sweat of your brow you shall eat your bread" (Genesis 3:19). This "in the sweat of your brow..." is absolute labor, the absolute mode of existence in this world, in this life.

According to S.N. Bulgakov, labor is understood as one of the most important universal human qualities, expressed through "actual, active will," through "an active exit from oneself," aimed primarily at creation and self-realization in their anthropological dimension. Modern social practices most often provide people not with labor, but with work that is completely devoid of not only an anthropologically justifiable quality, but also of purposefulness (the latter is almost entirely replaced by expediency—external goal-setting).

Labor, as a way of being, has specific forms of embodiment, which in Russian are presented in their actual, active content. Labor is an action, an activity, a deed, and an activity. Depending on the scale of the active format of labor, we can speak of a sociocultural and socioeconomic reality in which we sooner or later find ourselves.

It is precisely the entry into these formats, the mastery of them for the first time, that gives rise to the reality we collectively call professional education. This education itself must be concretely defined and considered within a semantic field defined, as I have already said, by two poles: human reality as such and the socio-economic structure—as a historically specific and transient format (one today, another tomorrow).

In understanding the specifics of professional education, it's crucial to distinguish activities based on the types of positions that exist in any professional environment. In their studies of profession genesis, Russian scholars identify three fundamentally different positions: specialist, professional, and expert. Looking ahead, I'd like to emphasize that a position is not a place of work or a job title; the latter refers rather to a person's socio-professional status within a particular organization. A position, however, is, first and foremost, a way of realizing one's core values in relationships with others.

So, for a specialist it is enough to possess knowledge, skills, abilities and specific abilities to transform the subject of a specific activity, which are formed in the so-called, special Training. Here, the primary normative structure is mastered and established—specific objective activity: the subject of this activity—its object—the method of transforming it. It is here that the dignity of the active person—as proactive, independent, and responsible—is first established and preserved.

A professional—in addition to possessing knowledge about the subject of their activity and the methods of working with it—always belongs to a professional community, and therefore maintains an awareness of the entire professional sphere. They are able to correlate their own activities with those of other professionals in the same field and are able to build meaningful communication with them. A professional's abilities, unlike those of a specialist, include the most important aspect: reflecting on the full scope of the normative structure of their activity (I emphasize—their own, not their "uncle's"). This presupposes genuine knowledge of: a) oneself as an autonomously acting subject, b) the methods of one's actions, and c) the diversity of the objects of one's activity.

But perhaps the most important system-forming ability of a professional is their positionality within the professional space where they manifest themselves in this capacity. Clearly, such abilities now require a truly professional education, which enables them to develop into the subject of their own activity, enabling them to transform, manage, and, once again, design their own active existence.

Experts no longer rely solely on possessing professional knowledge and being part of a professional community; they need to transcend their professional field to see the full diversity of positions within it. Unlike professionals, experts must be able to objectify and present their professional competencies to others, identify the boundaries of the subject areas of various professionals, and construct standards for activity systems within a given professional field. Expertise is a consequence not of "advanced training," but of the genuine professional development of any professional capable of performing meta-professional activities, namely research, design, organizational management, and strategizing.

Thus, the comprehensive anthropological meaning of professional education is the development of the subject of one's own activity and its positioning in the modern information environment. Key here is the possession of holistic knowledge, the ability to integrate into existing and build new professional communities, and the ability to develop one's own position within them. These qualitative characteristics have a specifically anthropological meaning and, at the same time, are fundamental conditions for successful professional development, as genuine professional activity is today one of the most important modes of human personal existence. Within the traditional system of professional education, however, this educational super-goal is neither discussed nor even posed in principle.

The essence of the humanities-anthropology approach to professional education is that its goals and value foundations are rooted in the practice of cultivating and nurturing "the inherently human in man." Fundamentally important in this approach is not the individual's integration into existing society, but the development of their subjectivity in life and work and their personal position in relationships with others.

The modern professional must possess a new, integrated capability that enables them to: 1) quickly navigate the complex and multi-layered world of activities and resources; 2) create spaces for potential activity for which there is as yet no place in the existing society; 3) become the subject of their own activity, including harmonizing the content of their professional activity with their personal position and the value-semantic attitudes of the community in which their own activity unfolds.

It is precisely this ability that turns out to be the initial instance, the basic principle of integration and preservation, literally – the salvation of the entire diversity of properties «that are specifically human in man.».

Literature

1. Cultural and historical trends in the development of professional activity [Electronic resource]: Proceedings of the international scientific and practical conference. Moscow, December 18-19, 2020 / editorial board: S. V. Myskin (editor-in-chief), E. F. Tarasov, V. T. Kudryavtsev. - Electron, text data. (10 MB). - M .: OOO "Agency of Social and Humanitarian Technologies", 2020. - 198 p. - Access mode: http//www.psycholinguistic.ru. - Title from the screen.

References

1. Cultural and historical tendencies in the development of professional activity [Jelektronnyĭ resurs]: Materialy mezhdunarodnoĭ nauchno-practicalĭ konferencii. Moscow, 18-19 dekabrja 2020 goda / ed. collegium: SV Myskin (otv. ed.), EF Tarasov, VT Kudrjavcev. – Jelektron, text files. (10 MV). – M.: OOO «Agentstvo sotsial'no- gumanitarnyh tehnologiĭ», 2020. – 198 s. – Access mode: http//www.psycholinguistic.ru. – Zagl. s jekrana.