A sociologist on us and on Ukrainian society

YouTube has published an interview by the journalist Yuliia Borysko with a person she called a great Ukrainian — and introduced as a sociologist, psychologist and philosopher — the Director of the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine Yevhen Golovakha.

The journalist opened the conversation with a kind of “warm-up” near her guest's favourite café, during which he recalled his student youth, answered a question about his professional identity — that he considers himself first of all a scholar, and only then a sociologist, a psychologist and a director responsible for the affairs of his institution and, to a large extent, of the whole field — and noted that the position of the stoics is close to him: the main thing is not to lose human dignity.

After that the journalist and her guest made their way unhurriedly to the studio through the streets of Kyiv, continuing the conversation. Asked when he had been frightened, Yevhen Golovakha recalled three moments: the panic of the mass departure of Ukrainians in the first days of Russia's full-scale invasion; the realisation in 2023 that our partners were deliberately withholding some of their aid so that we would not win; and the state of uncertainty we have observed since Trump's victory, under whose presidency three future scenarios are possible for Ukraine — a worse one, a better one and a middling one.

Confirming the psychological diagnoses that have repeatedly figured in the world's media — that the Russian leader is a sadist utterly devoid of empathy, and Trump an impulsive narcissistic personality — the sociologist explained the social, historical and psychological origins of today's turbulence in the world.

In the studio the conversation began with the theme of the amoral majority. Noting that Yevhen Golovakha is often quoted by studio guests from various fields, Yuliia asked him to unpack the term. The sociologist recalled his research from 2002, which he named exactly that: “The phenomenon of the amoral majority in Ukrainian society”. In answering the questions, respondents mostly said that in their view most other people are not entirely moral. When the majority speaks about the majority, the result is that majority's assessment of itself. Yevhen himself, though, believes that the majority is in fact moral and keeps to acceptable norms. All of this can be measured with a scale of social cynicism. But people cannot be asked about themselves where their own morality, honour and so on are concerned. People judge themselves far more leniently. Educated people, moreover, are no less cynical; they are simply better at finding justifications for their actions.

Commenting on current political themes, the scholar noted the strengthening of authoritarian tendencies in world politics, the consolidation of far-right politicians and dictatorial regimes and the loss of influence of democratic views. It turns out that it is Ukraine — and this, in the guest's view, is its great victory — that has now become the forward bastion defending the democratic world against the aggressive forces of tyranny and has galvanised the mobilisation of Europe's democratic countries.

Citing research, Yevhen Golovakha stressed that only 6% of Ukrainians agree to make concessions to the occupiers, while the majority are still prepared to endure for the sake of victory and do not agree to the loss of territory.

The conversation proved interesting. The scholar commented on several well-known psychological conceptions, showed how they work in social reality and analysed the relationship between material and technical progress and social crises.

He observed that the values of self-expression in our society still yield to the so-called values of survival, and showed how differently people act in life depending on their motivation: towards success or towards avoiding failure.

Ukraine is now suffering at the hands of hordish imperial forces whose phantom pains from a lost empire and whose ressentiment determine their aggressive motives and actions.

Answering the journalist's questions, the scholar explained how the conception of causometry, which Yevhen Golovakha and a colleague put forward and substantiated many years ago, works in every person's life. Without constructing a future, our development is held back, and so we must dream and plan.

In closing this interesting and wide-ranging conversation, the head of Ukraine's academic sociology stressed the importance of what the outstanding sociologist Émile Durkheim called organic solidarity — both within the country and with Ukraine's international partners.

Read in full here:

Watch the video on YouTube