Denis V. L’vov, Сand. Sci. (Philosophy), Associate professor, Associate professor at Sociology chair, Siberian Federal University, Institute of Pedagogy, Psychology and Sociology, Krasnoyarsk, Russia.

The paper addresses the problem of the legitimacy of authority. The author analyzed the role of the collective unconscious archetypes in the legitimization of power faction through the reference to the satisfaction of the need for security. Reliance on the models of the archetypes of corporate nature and hierarchy gives the possibility to show the impact of in-depth structures of the unconscious on the formation of power relations within socio-cultural communities. It has been shown that the archetype of corporate nature maintains the group identity as separated from the World entirety. The archetype hierarchy establishes a framework for vertical and horizontal intra-group stratification, which provides an effective functioning of communion in satisfying both common and individual needs. Corporate tendencies, at that, produce the perceptions of individuals organizing themselves in a collective as principally equal ‘the same as me-self selves” in a situation of confrontation with the World, structurally similar for each of them. Hierarchical tendencies predispose the fundamentally unequal distribution of rights and obligations of people belonging to this communion. Thus, the interaction of the corporate nature and hierarchy archetypes creates a dialectical tension between a ruling faction and their subordinate community members. The resolution of the highlighted controversy occurs through recourse to the need for security. The consorted influence of the archetypes under discussion supports the priority of collective interests over individual ones, restricting the former by the necessity to satisfy the latter to the full extent possible.

L’vov DV. Archetypes of Corporate Nature and Hierarchy in Providing Psychological Security of Socio-Cultural Integrity. In: Perelygina EB, Zotova OYu, Drozdova AV, Tarasova LV. (eds.) Wellbeing and Security in the Face of Social Transformations: Collection of academic papers from the 10th International Symposium (Yekaterinburg, July 9–10, 2019). Yekaterinburg: Liberal Arts University – University for Humanities; 2019. p. 263–271. Available from: doi:10.35853/LAU.WS.2019.MD06.

1. Arentd H. Istoki totalitarizma [The origin of the totalitarianism]. Moscow: TsentrKom; 1996. 672 p. (In Russ.).
2. Hobbes T. Leviafan [Leviathan]. Moscow: Mysl’; 2001. 478 p. (In Russ.).
3. Locke J. Dva traktata o pravlenii [Two Treatises of Government]. In: Locke J. Sochineniya : v 3 t. [A three-book set]. Moscow: Mysl’; 1988. Vol. 3. p. 135–405. (In Russ.).
4. Maslow А. Motivatsiya i lichnost’ [Motivation and personality]. Saint Petersburg: Piter; 2012. 352 p. (In Russ.).
5. Orwell J. Politika protiv literatury. Vzglyad na «Puteshestviya Gullivera» [Politics vs. literature. An examination of Gulliver’s travels]. In: Pamyati Katalonii [To the remembrance of Catalonia]: an essay. Moscow: АSТ; 2003. p. 344–370. (In Russ.).
6. Aquinas T. O korolevskoi vlasti k korolyu Kipra, ili O pravlenii knyazei [On kingship to the king of Cyprus, or on the rule of princes]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie = Sociological review. 2016;15(2): 96–128. (In Russ.).
7. Fromm E. Begstvo ot svobody. Chelovek dlya sebya [Escape from freedom. Man for himself]. Moscow: АSТ; 2006. 571 p. (In Russ.).
8. Declaration of Independence: A Transcription. National Archives. Website. Available from: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript [Accessed 17.06.2019].
9. Gritskov YuV, Lvov DV. Interaction of In-Group Archetypes and Hierarchy while Forming in-Group Community. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences. 2015;11: 2325–2330.
10. Fukuyama F. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: The Free Press; 1992. 418 p.