Philosophic and psychological understanding of concept ‘fidelity to personality’
This article presents the psychological analysis of the leading issues in classic and modern philosophy research that was performed in relation to the phenomenon of fidelity. Retrospective is presented regarding the beliefs about the fidelity in the works of ancient, medieval and 20th century philosophers, as well as specialists working at the present stage of development of this science. It has been proved that the content of ancient interpretations of fidelity was reflected in its understanding as a stable integrating construct, which is inherent to a personality with its own invincible beliefs. Such personality is capable of establishing deep trust-based relationships in the interpersonal and professional planes of interaction. It was stated that in the medieval age, understanding of fidelity was based on religious beliefs that in most cases act as quite severe ethical criteria for validity of a deed-fidelity of a person. Maintenance of fidelity was obligatory for a person, though psychologically they could suffer from a discomfort due to tightening of their comfort zone and subconsciously they tried to free themselves from such burden. Modern philosophic ideas of fidelity are
built through the perspective of transience of events happening in society, as well as the occupational
guidance and pragmatism of modern personality. Value importance of fidelity is getting a more surfacing effect in the era of globalization, and its presence in relations is decreasing. However, on the other hand, modern personality is characterized by expressivity rise, sensitivity to offences, emotional instability and vulnerability in interpersonal communications. This article proves that the etymology of this phenomenon should be investigated within the framework of a person’s emotional distress, social trends and diversity of people’s activities. An assumption is made in the research that this formation is non-uniform by its nature and its usage has long ago exceeded the bounds of inter-personal relations only. Most of the famous philosophers depict understanding of this phenomenon by interpreting its content based on their own perception of the world, identify the psychological nature of this formation, fix its negative and positive modalities, point at its ability to get assimilated with other formations, and prove its ability to be filled in the process of personal growth in a quality manner.