the Pandemic creates new social mores? Discuss the topic from a sociologist, Professor at the HSE Simon Kordonsky.
Achieve the necessary level of social protection from the coronavirus will probably require making some changes in our lives. What, in your opinion?
Simon Kordonsky: do Not understand what the necessary level of protection. Protection from kovida is called immunity. Measures that are undertaken by people and the state, are reduced to isolated cases, protection from aerosols, which spreads the virus, and treatment of patients. Oh and all the frills that frightened officials and ordinary people trying magically to stop the spread of the disease. Like cleaning the streets and all sorts of surfaces. Viruses, from the point of view of ordinary people, these are microscopic entities that people are doing all sorts of nasty things. That is a modern form of the medieval notion of “hell”. Around viruses already formed mythology, not too much different from the one in which the devils have played a very significant role. Electron microscopic images of viruses are given the characteristics of images of hell.
Changes in our lives that have made covid, relate primarily to the revival (becoming) another branch sanitary. Despite the fact that the number of poisonings and intestinal infections does not depend on inspectors ‘ activities, as determined by the time of the year, the culture of the people of the state of municipal infrastructure. Therefore, the question of efficiency of services, controlling the sanitary-epidemiological situation, had not stood. And now in the struggle with kovida these services in fact received the right to intervene in personal relationships of people to limit their administration of natural needs and apply “social protection measures” in violation of people situational norms. The actual law may eventually become a legal norm because of the sanctions activities favorable to the service itself.
Wearing of masks has become not only a preventative measure. This is already a dress code, not follow that in the first place indecent, and unsafe – in the second. Here ethics ahead of prevention. Or I think so?
Simon Kordonsky: In our situation, the people were divided into three groups that differ with respect to the threats and fears, mythological and real. The first group – the hypochondriac that believes in all the scary what you write and show about covid-19. Them, judging by the results of street observations of those who were wearing masks and gloves, no more than 10 percent. The second group kovid dissidents who don’t believe in that talk about the virus. It is unlikely that their number is also more than 10 percent. The rest is coved-conformists who do not really believe what they say about the virus, but��distributsia – on the situation. The first and second groups in conflict with each other, sometimes to the use of force comes. From the point of view of a hypochondriac, not to wear a mask improper and dangerous. From the point of view of kovid dissidents wearing masks – evidence of credulity, and shameful weakness.
To me recently in Auchan, in line at the checkout, very close people. I asked him to keep his distance. Received the answer: “you have to – you and obey”. I – again, and delicatesse. He threateningly: “You don’t like something?!”. We live in a society where polite request to slightly move away (to turn down the music, stop swearing on the whole bus) is perceived as a challenge, and concessions – as a sign of weakness. Only one way out – to step aside. That’s what I did. It turns out, there is no “new” ethics, and there are the usual social norms that are in “peaceful” time is not respected by all?
Simon Kordonsky: Innate intelligence prevents you from sensibly assess these situations. The relationship between people in our society are built on concepts, and not to some ethical standards. You made a person “present”, people appreciated you as coming not concepts, since nothing in you indicates you have the resources to establish their order. That is, you acted against the rules and proved it by moving away. Don’t see the problem. Now, if you were not so intelligent appearance well, or tattoos on the hands, for example, then maybe things would have developed differently.
Another trend is to stigmatize the sick. Carriers of the coronavirus seen as criminals. Therefore, infected people often hide their illness. – Established a habit of avoiding each other, to see ill almost enemy?
Simon Kordonsky: there was a time when intelligent people excelled in the quest for the identification of those who voluntarily or under duress informed, “people with clean hands and hot heart.” Don’t see the difference between the search of informers and hidden patients and their stigmatization. It seems to me that this behavior lies in the nature of intellectuals and there is nothing new in the course of the epidemic arose. The desire for personalization of threats, detection and identification of enemies, the foreigners, the sick, all sorts of agents – in our society long ago has become a social norm.
a few months ago, the very idea of e-admissions and General accounting movements would have caused a storm of indignation, but today the frightened citizens agree on everything. You do not mind the acceptance of digital control an absolute majority?
Simon Kordonsky: it seems to Me that the indifference of people to the digital innovation largely due to the fact that while no such innovations have been implemented to the extent that it became the basis for mass discontent. Because all attempts to create a digital control system while ended with the establishment of weak programs in Chinese hardware. Attempts to adapt private projects, such as Yandex, to create a “big brother” is taking due to the fact that this is due to the volume of budget financing and the corresponding sawing resources. Of course, the allocated resources for the establishment of a system of digital control the behavior are mastered, however, it is unlikely in the foreseeable future it makes sense to expect something similar on Chinese social rating.
due to coronavirus registration of marriages may be held in unusual format, when in the hall but the newlyweds, just the photographer and employees of the registry office. Maybe the wedding will now become another format will lose some mandatory attributes, such as mass brawl at the end?
Simon Kordonsky: You touch on the broad topic associated with the evolution family. The traditional family implies its sexual, economic, reproductive and other relations. Fixation of marriage and wedding in the family means the triumph of its and duly celebrated. But the family has long been a rarity. In the modern family, these relationships are already partially separated. Economic, sexual, and other relations are often implemented outside of them. It may well be that for some populations the elimination of the wedding rites will accelerate the natural processes of transformation of the families.
Can some new ethical norms, which arose because of the pandemic, to legal consolidation? And how to hold the line between the law, which is mandatory for everyone, and ethics as a form of public and personal self-regulation?
Simon Kordonsky: In the criminal code there are articles 121 and 122 of the criminal responsibility for deliberate infection with venereal diseases and AIDS. And now in the state Duma a bill on criminal liability for infringement of epidemiological rules. Deliberate infection that caused the death of one or more persons will be depending on the intent to qualify as terrorism, vandalism or sabotage. So if someone deliberately infects runny nose buddies at work, in the case of a law he may be subject to criminal prosecution for disorderly conduct, for example.
Many commercial companies use the coronavirus for advertising purposes. The new Zealand bar has published in social networks pictures of people in hazmat suits with bottles of Corona beer and the caption “catch Corona at home this summer.” Here the word play in English “catch” – to catch – also translated as “infected”. Ukraine has depicted the pizza, edge�� which is designed as protrusions of the coronavirus, and among the “symptoms of disease” – “a powerful feeling of satiety”. In Lebanon the sale of furniture advertised a giant stretch marks with the image of the chair in a medical mask. Some call it “dancing on the bones”, and someone – “adaptive business approach” to new realities. What do you think?
Simon Kordonsky: If there is a market, it is a sin not to earn in such a situation. After all, in the market nothing is sacred. If the market appears something is Holy, it is not a market, and socialism. I believe that the carnivalesque threats, sublimation market fears serve as a powerful therapeutic tool in the traumatic reality in which we find ourselves.
the MEPs may be allowed to participate in the meetings of the European Parliament via video link, and the politicians – welcome interlocutors shaking elbow. The Minister of health of France Oliver Veran advised people to avoid popular among the French kisses on the cheek when meeting. The world people have seen footage of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, greeting, holds out his hand to the Minister of internal Affairs Horst Seehofer, and he refuses to shake it and explains that he would like to be careful. We are witnessing the birth of a new etiquette? Or it doesn’t hold?
Simon Kordonsky: In clinical practice is allocated a syndrome called nosophobia – fear of Contracting something. This kind of obsessive fear in one way or another always present in society, but particularly acute during epidemics. Highlighted above, the group paranoid just suffer nosophobia. Such fears can be widespread and implemented in a non-trivial actions, such as procurement of kilometers of toilet paper, or the refusal of handshakes. These actions may eventually lose its psychopathological color and turn into a routine. Hand washing, too, once was commonplace. It’s not forever, even kissing can disappear from everyday practices in force on the mythological fears.
How to appropriate the term “ethics coronavirus” in relation to different groups of the modern global society? And if in the face of illness are all equal, then should there be universal ethical standards that are the same for young and old, rich and poor? Or each social group here also has its own ethics?
Simon Kordonsky: the Current epidemic is not the first and not the last. But I have not heard anything about the ethics of plague or flu-the Spanish flu. People react differently to threats to their health and well-being. Religious people believe disease is a punishment from God and fervently pray, the rich try to bribe, the weak trying to Stoke fears in alcohol, the believers in modern medicine looking for the magic “health wand”, and inArousa in homeopathy in your medications. There is no reason to believe that the threat response is specific to any social groups. Rather, it is in line with reactions to threats are generated specific to the epidemic social group, which represented rich and poor, young and old, nervous, and kovid dissidents.
Simon Kordonsky – sociologist, Professor at the HSE. Born in 1944, in Gorno-Altaysk. Graduated from Tomsk state University on a speciality the teacher of chemistry and biology. Since the early 70-ies became a sociologist, in 80-e years worked in the team of the then best country sociologist Tatyana Zaslavskaya. Developed an original methodology of analysis of Russian society, which uses to the present day. Participated in the organization of an informal Association of scholars who conducted the seminars on economic issues in Central Economics and mathematics Institute, USSR Academy of Sciences. Was active participant in seminars and working groups on formation of strategy of the market and liberal reforms. Since 2006 he has taught at the HSE. Scientific Director of the support Fund for social research “Khamovniki”.
