Abstract

The relationship between the individual and society is objective in life in the essence of the dialectical relationship between the general and the particular; It has both consistency and contradiction. As a historical phenomenon, the personal-social relationship works, transforms and develops around the clock. With the development of society, the role of the individual and its boundary in relation to the society must be clearly defined. In each country or nation, in a particular cultural context, the personal-social relationship manifests itself in different ways. Particularly, there is a fundamental difference between Western and Eastern culture when considering this relationship. Within the scope of the article, the author approaches, exploits the similarities of some Eastern countries (including Vietnam) about the concept and orientation to solve the relationship between the individual and society. This is considered to be a new direction on the issue that has not been deeply researched during this period.

1. Introduction

Individuals and society are historical categories. Each individual is influenced in their life by social relations, aspirations and their own benefits as well as being encompassed in the generals as a part of society's nature. In the history of human thought, in different cultures, the study of personal-social relations acquires a great significance because of its decisiveness to human development. It is the dialectical manifestation of the relationship between the part and the whole, which is both consistent and contradictory. The reality, however, is that with fundamentally different characteristics, from a philosophical point of view, the relationship between the individual and society in both the West and the East is approached in its own ways.

It can be said that the individual, the society and the relationship between them are the major point of the history of Western philosophy's study. In particular, from around the 17th to 18th centuries - the age of the philosophical French enlightenment, along with the strong development of capitalism with private ownership, the individualism emerged and gradually became a lifestyle in the culture of the Westerners. Recent prominent philosophers discuss this issue such as Thomas Hobbes (1588 - 1679); John Locke (1632 - 1740), Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712 - 1778)…

John Locke (1632-1704) was a British philosopher with a famous work “Second Treatise of Government” (1690). In chapter IX “Of the ends of political society and government”, he wrote “For in the state of nature, to omit the liberty he has of innocent delights, a man has two powers. The first is to do whatsoever he thinks fit for the preservation of himself, and others within the permission of the law of nature: by which law, common to them all, he and all the rest of mankind are one community, make up one society, distinct from all other creatures. And were it not for the corruption and vitiousness of degenerate men, there would be no need of any other; no necessity that men should separate from this great and natural community, and by positive agreements combine into smaller and divided associations. The other power a man has in the state of nature, is the power to punish the crimes committed against that law. Both these he gives up, when he joins in a private, if I may so call it, or particular politic society, and incorporates into any commonwealth, separate from the rest of mankind” [ ¹; p.39-40]. Thus, his doctrine of natural rights which outlined the fundamental rights all humans should enjoy: life, liberty, and property... Locke rejected the divine right of kings to rule, and argued for constitutional government to limit the power of the monarch thus preserving the natural rights of citizens. Locke invoked Hobbes' social contract theory that humans, being “by nature, free, equal, and independent” ². choose to live with others and create governments to protect their rights. The social contracts citizens form with the government binds them to act in support of the common good of society, and for government to do the same. Thus government develops at the consent of the governed and can be dissolved if the citizens believe that their government fails to act in their best interests. The committee which drafted the Declaration of Independence, led by Thomas Jefferson, adapted Locke's concept of natural rights and social contract as the philosophical rationale for breaking with England.

Summary, they assume that the individual is centered, promoted from the fields of politics, economics and also philosophy, culture, etc. Entering the modern Western stage, the individual and society relationship has been increasingly discussed. Philosophy and culture are seen as effective means of communicating about individualism. One of the highlights of Western philosophy at this time is the process of digging into the "personalism" – aims at the value, autonomy and free will of the individual mentally. Some philosophical movements refer to this aspect as New Positivism, Freudianism, American and French Personality, Existentialism, etc.

Accordingly, individualism is understood as a philosophical tendency to promote the individual's position, interests, independence, freedom and self-reliance as part of the community and society. In that sense, the individual is aware of their own personality. At the same time, individualists often limit the external impact that affects their choices, goals, desires. Independence and self-reliance are they key to individualism. This means that the intervention of social factors on personal life is limited. In other words, in the relationship between the individual and society, the role of society, community, and the collective is not valued, leading to the manifestation of extremism and individual selfishness.

If Western philosophy aims to promote or even absolutize the role and position of the individual, Eastern philosophy, which asserts the dialectical relationship between individual and society, aims at collectivism. That is a big difference between Eastern and Western thinking. For the East, individuals and the society have traditionally been approached in terms of politics, law, and customs. The highlight of this issue is expressed in terms of thought. It is marked by a system of Oriental doctrines such as Chinese, Indian and Japanese philosophies... Under the influence of communal agricultural production, closed economies in villages in a long-term, Eastern cultural thought emphasizes collectivism, the role, and responsibility of individuals towards social life. It reflects the determinants of social existence to social consciousness, making a difference from Western culture. The Socio-economic basis to generalize that thought is the mode of Asian production - one of the important interpretations of K.Marx and F.Engels to the East. Accordingly, Eastern thinking is more introverted and closed; promote the communal and social sense, personal awareness in improving the society. This is the dialectic of the individual-social relationship in Eastern culture, which is unique towards Western culture.

However, in the research community, this issue has not been concerned, discussed and built into a system to look into the whole. Researching is a new direction when approached from a philosophical perspective. Accordingly, the study of the author presents in a systematic way, from the foundation of the formation to the manifestations of individual-social relationships in Eastern culture. This affirmed the characteristic of Eastern culture in relation to the West. Studying the issue is of great significance in both theoretical and practical aspects.

Theoretically, the author's issue is to illustrate the correctness of the dialectical view between the individual and society. At any stage, individuals are not separated but placed in relation to society. In particular, society plays a decisive role towards the individual because the nature of the social organization is to solve the relationship of interests in order to create the highest possibility for individuals to carry out activities and stimulate the development. In addition, personal improvement and responsibility also have an effect on the development of the society. It is a dialectical relationship between the individual and society.

On the practical side, research has firstly oriented one of the basics of Eastern culture under the influence of the socio-economic condition when discussing the relationship between the individual and society. On the other hand, this is an important basis for the author to analyze the changes of this relationship in Vietnam, especially at this stage, in order to promote the responsibility of each individual to the community and society.

2. Content

An individual is a particular person, living in a particular society as an individual, a member of that society. Thus, every human being is an individual. An individual - a person is an object and a phenomenon that is born, develops in interaction with people in general, not separated from people in general. However, each individual possesses the specific biological and social characteristics, in order to be distinguished from other members of society. A person is an individual who exists objectively, indivisibly and is characterized by personalities, qualities, abilities, needs, and interests. Moreover, an individual is also a social subject that is independent of self-determination to express his or her own will, should be reflected and respected.

The society is formed by the connection between individuals. Society is the foundation of personal activities. Individuals are the mode of society's existence, the element that creates society. Individuals can only develop through relationships with society and in certain social conditions. The development of individuals is a condition, a measure of the level of development of society. Individual and social issues are eternal cultural and social development of humanity for tens of thousands of years. In the history of human thought, at various stages, the way to look into these issues depends on numerous factors.

Individual and the relationship between the individual and society in the Easterners' perception have their socio-economic foundations. It is "Asian mode of production" [ ³, p.16].

The “Asian mode of production” concept is cited by K.Marx in the preface of the book Contributing to the Critique of the Faculty of Economics and Politics (1859). “On the whole, The ancient feudal Asian modes of production and modern bourgeoisie can be considered as gradually progressive periods of the socio-economic pattern” [ ³, p.16]. Through the exchanges between K.Marx and F.Engels, the mode of production in Asia has the following basic characteristics:

Thus, the “Asian mode of production” is the primitive form of class society in the East. The main form of ownership is special which a directly religious occupation in communities is. According to K. Marx, there is no private ownership of land in this mode of production. There, the aristocratic middle class is the ruling class, claiming to be the embodiment of divinity holding the society's chief materials for production. The above characteristics of the Asian mode of production stimulate each individual must eliminate the individuality when in action, promote the commons, keep the harmony, think of the responsibility towards the community and society. This is reflected in Eastern culture.

Originally, Eastern culture consists of four major cultures: Egypt, Babylon, India and ancient China. However, in the 4th century BC, Persia came to invade and transformed Babylon, while Egypt was also enforced by Western culture by the Greek (IV century - I BC) [3, p.36]. When exploring Eastern culture, first of all, it is essential to understand that the Indian and Chinese culture, which have deep roots and continuous development, has a profound influence on the culture of the Eastern peoples.

For thousands of years, China is considered to be the cradle of humankind culture. Chinese culture has had its fulcrum, the firm nucleus which is family, clan [ ⁵, p.67]. In Chinese, the term “country” is a meaning combination of two words as a nation and home. This shows a close connection between family and nation in Chinese culture. First of all, the concept of “family” is not only understood as the family as it is today, but it also is linked to the dukes and nobles regime from the Spring and Autumn Period. Family is the nucleus of society. The king functions as a patriarch according to Montesquieu's assessment “The Chinese Empire was built on the idea of ruling the family. If the father's power in the family is diminished, the respect for the ruler also decreases because mandarins are the parents of the people” [ ⁵, p. 165].

Historically, the Chinese nation was built on blood relations. The country is just one person, one family. It is the apostolic state. The patriarchal behavior becomes the monarchical manner, the freedom in thought is abolished and instead is a man's thought – the king's thought. This limits the freedom of thought, freedom in the discovery of individuals. In addition to the persecution in ideology, Annam clan politics considers “Three Moral Bonds” and “Five Constant Virtues” are the pillars of the nation to protect the country, durable families, the development of inward thinking. About the position of the individual in society, Chinese social-political doctrines are also concerned and discussed extensively in this regard, typically Confucianism. When advocating the social order in society, Confucianism also mentioned the position of the individual. Confucianism promotes “self-improvement”, which requires the recognition and appreciation of society for the individual. However, it is placed in relation to “the state management, the nation governing, and the universe stability”. Thus, each and every individual needs to cultivate virtue, practice virtue to serve family, country and society.

With many profound changes in the history and characteristics inherent in daily life and culture, one of the striking features of Chinese philosophy is the special attention to the socio-political issues. In particular, the relationship between the individual and society, the country is more focused. That explains why most of the Chinese philosophical doctrines focus on the state governance and the demand of individual responsibility for the national mission. For example, in Confucianism, Confucius advocated the construction of a “humanitarian” state, requiring the individual to cultivate Kindness, Decorum, Uprightness, Wisdom, Faithfulness; Mencius advocate the regime of “Educating the people”, each citizen must study humanity, morality, martial arts ... The school of philosophy lays the governance down as a policy by the “Wu-Wei” doctrine, requiring individuals to live naturally, follow the rule of balance and reflection.

On the other hand, agricultural production faced many difficulties, natural disasters require many human resources' cooperation, first and foremost is the synergy of family members. It is this vital need that engages individuals together and in interpersonal relationships that individuals must maintain harmony, unity in a strong system of homes and the government

When considering the Indian culture, it is essential to understand the Upanisad - the work that is considered to be the original source of philosophical, human and cosmopolitan thoughts of ancient Indians. The birth of the Upanishad marked the transition from religious mythology to philosophical thought [ ⁶; p.68]. The basic category in the Upanisad is Atman and Brahman. Brahman is the universal soul, the Supreme Self, the absolute, the first and only, the immortal, the creative which dominate all things, the deep enmity of all existence, the origin of everything and of all things merging when existing in this world. Brahman is considered to be “the creative spirit of the supreme universe”, “the source of all light”, “the thing from which all things are born, through which all things grow, in which all things enter after dissipating” [ ⁶; p.76]. Atman is an internal entity, a soul, a manifestation of Brahman in each individual. If the human breath is the material life then Atman is the soul, the spiritual life. Atman is the entity that causes men to transcend all things.

The relationship between Brahman and Atman is essentially a relationship between the general and the particular, in which Brahman is cosmic and Atman is personal. Brahman is the master of the world, encompassing the whole world, the vast spiritual entity of all things. Atman was born from Brahman, based on Brahman to exist. When Atman died, he returned to Brahman “The basic purpose of the Upanisad is to outline the ultimate, absolute principles, the universal essence, the explanation human's nature and the relationship between the human spiritual life and the eternal life of the universe, thereby pointing out the way to liberate mankind” [ ⁷; p.107]. An important method to achieve liberation is yoga, which is the word that is to connect, to harmonize, to unite Atman with Brahman. Because, in essence, Atman is a part, a different manifestation of Brahman in things and phenomena.

In history and the present stage, India defines classes clearly. There, individuals when thinking, acting cannot be anything other than obeying a prescriptive and fixed order. In addition, with a long history of cultural and religious diversity, Indians attach great importance to traditional rituals and long-standing relationships in the community such as family values, humility, harmony, cooperation spirit... Besides, they perceive the nature of work is to serve “God” not for the purpose of economic development but the development of cultural - spiritual values. In the working environment, beside productivity, Indians are interested in empathy and emotion.

Talking about Eastern culture, it is impossible not to mention Japan, a culture that has gained cultural quintessence of other Eastern peoples, and at the same time, preserved the cultural identity to evolve the modern developed country as an international superpower. In Nakane Chie's book named “Human Relations in a Longitudinal Society” the term “longitudinal society” is used to express the uniqueness of personal relationships in Japanese society. Nakane Chie thinks that the basic unit of Japanese society is the people sharing the same “place” and the relationship between individuals in society connected in a longitudinal relationship [ ⁸; p.5].

Relationships in Japanese society - superior and subordinate relations; senior and inferior relations; parental relations with children; the relationship between husband and wife - inclined to the longitudinal relationship. Even the collaboration, the association between companies, organizations and collective relationship are longitudinal. Under the influence of Confucianism, the Japanese are always bound by this relationship: on the one hand, it is protection, on the other, is the subtle and loyal. Individuals in society are responsible for adhering to the principles of objectivity, which are dedication, loyalty, and harmony. Thus, until now, the Japanese have always considered patience and restraint and noble virtues. While the West gives prominence to individuals, self-assertion in any form in Japan is discouraged any nail that pops up will be hammered down. Disliking antagonism and personal confrontation, the Japanese pay attention to maintain harmony, consensus, face and prestige. Therefore, when dealing with issues, the Japanese often argue less and unify more. Communism is a unique feature of Japanese culture. At work, the Japanese believe that success or failure is not the idea, the result of an individual but of the community. Collectives, despite existing competition but depending on particular circumstances, can still cooperate to achieve the common goal. Thus, the longitudinal relationship connects individuals in society into a unified whole. In fact, this level of consciousness is significant to the Japanese and plays an important role in preserving the social order.

Thus, the relationship between the individual and the society in Eastern culture has several following basic characteristics:

First, they are introverted and static individuals who tend to focus on the spiritual world's depth and contemplate themselves. Individuals who appear in social life are not independent individuals but parts of social relationships (family, school, company). This makes individuals dependent on society, individuals lack conditions (and need no conditions) to improve human characteristics, the capability of self-determination and self-responsibility.

Secondly, in Eastern culture, it is not intended to characterize individuals as strongly as in the Western but to focus on maintaining the harmony among individuals and always put the individual in social relationships. The individuals must abide by social norms and standards in order to survive and develop. Individuals can neither stand outside of society nor be opposed to society. It is bound and depends on society. In the East, the individuals' actions are always under society's control through norms and institutions established by society.

Third, in Eastern culture, on the one hand, they do not recognize the individual self, but on the other always require the moral self, the responsibility: individuals have to be responsible for the society and act for the benefit of society. There, only the interests of society are considered legitimate. The benefits of the individual, despite not being absolutely neglected, are only noticed in terms of social private relations.

From a personal perspective, social consciousness and responsibility are not only a virtue, a criterion of truth but also a constituent element of human personality. From a social perspective, the individual responsibility to society is the basis to connect individuals, maintain sustainability and social development...

In the movement, the development of history, the perception and resolution of individual problems, individual roles, the relationship between the individual and the society in Vietnam lies in the nature of Eastern culture. Despite the cultural similarity, in Vietnam, the perception and resolution of the relationship between the individual and the society are also personal. This relationship is reflected in the strong communism in House - Village - Water system. This is very evident in the communism.

Communism is one of the original human characteristics. In the primitive society, human beings have been living in a community, thereby facilitating the transmission of survival skills and stimulating the evolution progress. From then on, social forms have been emerged from primitive to complex and developed today. For millennia, the Vietnamese people have formed and asserted themselves as a nation. The process of formation and development of the Vietnamese identity today is the whole process of asserting the intrinsic nature from geographic conditions to anthropological characteristics, beside selective evolvement of other cultures. Communism is one of the elements that make up that typical nature.

Most prestigious scientists in Vietnam such as Tran Dinh Hao, Nguyen Hong Phong, Pham Minh Hac, Do Long, Tran Hiep, Do Long, Tran Ngoc Them, Phan Huy Le... when referring to the Vietnamese communism agreed that communism does not separate from individualism; Communism is a prominent feature of the Vietnamese people, the culture of Vietnam. In particular, Professor Phan Huy Le assumed that community and personality manifested in the way of lifestyle (eating, wearing, living); mindset and behavior (human relationships between people in the community). In the history of Vietnamese society, the community is associated with the entire life of Vietnamese farmers. According to Phan Huy Le, in the same period of history from the 10th to the 19th centuries, Western society developed tremendously in both production and social development, “the birth and development of capitalism has created great changes in the whole social life”, Vietnam was still developed with the common characteristics of the feudal East. In Vietnam at this time, economic relations were still feudal land ownership and the form of exploitation of the feudal class towards farmers; the different dependencies of farmers on feudal landlords; communism is influenced by village structure; The relationship between landowners and farmers, between peasants and peasants is dependent like “the king's land, The village's pagoda”, “custom rules the law”...

Professor Tran Dinh Huou in the essay “About the issue of finding special ethnic culture” said that the long-term stability of the village is the basis for the village community to maintain and consolidate. Beside the village community, personal awareness and ownership are not well-developed ⁹. To the King, the farmer is not only a slave but also a dependent farmer and a tenant. When there are village bullies acting ruthlessly, appropriating public land, along with natural disasters leading to crop failure, lack of employment, there will be the occurrence of farmer uprising. “Normally, farmers oppose the oppression of village bullies and officials. They are against the illegal distribution of public land, not the king regime” [ ⁹; p.80]... Most of life in the Vietnamese early twentieth-century village community was a simulation of family life. The attachment of the Vietnamese to the family is echoed by their attachment to the village. The Vietnamese ties to their village are as strong as the strings that bind them to their families. When the community is highly appreciated, the individuality of the person becomes blurred. Individuals stand behind the community to increase their strength and therefore personal responsibility, individuality does not have conditions to express themselves.

The resilience of the Vietnamese community is due to working methods and historical circumstances. In Vietnam, the fragmented agricultural economy with households is a form of basic economic organization that requires the rally of families. These relationships are governed by village conventions and rules. In the community, in addition to the responsibilities that must be fulfilled towards the village, the country, each individual enjoys material and spiritual benefits. Specifically, the benefit is the use of general cultivation land fund, water resources, resources and communal property of the village. The spiritual benefits are shared to be spiritual values, friendly treatment, and the right to participate in the work of the village. It is these things that bring individuals together with solidarity.

Due to the history of the nation, the fate of individuals must be attached to the destiny of the community and society. There, individuals willingly sacrificed their own interests to protect the common ones of society; Protection of the common good also resolves the realization of personal interests. Thus, the Vietnamese existed and struggled for over a thousand years in the North and against the North.

Entering the period of building feudal independence, autonomy and then being invaded by the old and new colonial forces. In this context, the community is promoted in every individual with the will to “rather sacrifice than lose the country or be enslaved” [ ¹⁰; pp. 48-481]. With that will, each individual temporarily sacrifices his or her legitimate interests such as love, family and career to fulfill the common interests of the nation. In this context, the importance of community, all for the community to achieve the key goal which is to gain national independence and freedom for the people is absolutely necessary and appropriate. This is the mainstream trend in social life, accepted by every individual as an apparent truth. Because if the people are not independent or free, all individuals bear the same fate of slaves, suffer from the humiliation of losing country.

When the country is independent, these “heroic individuals” return to their daily life with worries and hurries. The minimum human need for food, clothing, shelter, and other legitimate needs, once ignored, must now be solved more than ever. However, in society there is still a big thing to respect for the general, the community that leads to looking down on the personal; The bureaucracy still lingers, the average ideology and the consequences of the war have made the individual passive and dependent because of his familiarity with the collective and subsidized state; It does not really promote motivation, activeness and creativity of individuals in life and economic development.

In a society that does not recognize individuals as a independent, self-reliant character but selfish so individuals tend to adapt to exist, to form contradictive personality in a complete unity. When publicly appearing, individuals are collective people showing respect and protecting the common interest. However, when living alone, the individual is a selfish self only pursuing personal interest. Thus, there are some phenomena appearing on behalf of the community, for the common good but actually just for their individual self, for the benefit of a particular group of people. Cases of corruption and bribery in recent years are manifestations of violations of personal and social relationships. In fact, if only personal emphasis lies in individualism, expression of doing what can benefit them, fear to suffer, corruption, waste, greediness for fame and wealth, power, despite the collective, arbitrary, bureaucracy, orders ... This is the source of the bad habits, the collective and social violations, the “internal invasion” of socialism. It should be aware that the struggle against individualism does not mean abolishing the legitimate interests of the individual. If the community is highly promoted, the individual will lose motivation or it will even lead to the risk of social inequality - the inequality of the rights and opportunities that individuals enjoy in society in the correlation with responsibilities and obligations that individuals must perform. Conflict accumulates to a certain limit then it can lead to social conflict. Addressing the relationship between the individual and the society is in fact the relationship between interests. It is the link to connect or vice versa that divides members in the collective.

3. Conclusion

The main motive for socio-economic development is the great unity of the entire people, based on the alliance between workers and peasants and intellectuals led by The Communist Party of Vietnam, personal, collective and social. National unity must be based on “harmonious settlement of interests among members of society”, “accepting different views not contrary to the common interests of the nation”. This is the view and direction of the Party, which must be implemented synchronously in the system of socio-economic policies in order to achieve the goal of building the country of Vietnam “The rich people, the strong country, fair, civilized”. In particular, The Communist Party of Vietnam attaches special importance to economic benefits, harmonizing the needs and legitimate interests of the people, associating interests with responsibilities and rights with the obligations of citizens, enhancing the consensus society. The practice of “enhancing benefits” over the past years has created a motive force for motivating active, dynamic and creative subjects to bring about great socio-economic achievements, contributing to the improvement of their life, material life, the spirit of the people.

References