Archetype and Public Administration: Challenges and Risks of Social Transformation

Seventh International Theoretical and Methodological Seminar i
IV International Contest for Young Scientists “Archetype and Public Administration: Challenges and Risks of Social Transformation”; Kiev, Ukraine – Tbilisi, Georgia; May 28 – June 3, 2016

The purpose of the forum is to combine the interdisciplinary efforts of researchers working in various fields of social and humanitarian knowledge, and to discuss the theoretical and methodological foundations of the influence of the archetypes of the collective unconscious on public administration.

The program framework of the forum is connected with the idea of ​​social transformation and political modernization of the countries of the late XX – early XI centuries, which do not necessarily coincide with the “Western European model” that appeared during the “Great Depression” of the 30-40s. XX century The modern political life of the countries of the “second modern” (as defined by Ulrich Beck) leads to the emergence of new socio-economic and socio-political forms of organization of society. The natural palette of the conflict of political modeling is growing, growing acute and widening; it is discovered, in particular, by the countries of the post-Soviet space. The social transformation process is indicated by a number of new phenomena of “convertible democracy” or “chameleon democracy”. It seems that modern political modernization is stimulated not only by universals of institutional matrices and archetypes of the collective unconscious, but also by specific manifestations of the conscious and unconscious in different spatio-temporal incarnations of the sociocultural nature of national-state formations. At the same time, modern challenges and threats to global, regional and social integrity and security, which are gaining strength in the context of the establishment of post-modern realities of the modern world, significantly change the traditional ideas about the nature and factors of social and state development. Under these conditions, the most sensitive issue in the socio-transformational process is the question of the balance between the pace of building up socio-political, socio-economic and other sociocultural forms of manifestation of the institutional activity (freedom) of citizens and the potential psychosocial (archetypal) nature of social reforms. This balance – between the institutional form and the psychological content – in fact, ensures the regime of sustainable development of society.