hidden hostility. Scale of emotions: hidden hostility Hidden hostility how to work with it

ITS MANY FACES

He can be a cheerful, sociable jester, "the soul of the company." She is an inconspicuous little old maid who never forgets your birthday. He can be a cheerful, noisy salesman. Cunning scammer. A witty columnist who writes an entertaining gossip column. A luxurious office Don Juan, which can be a smiling lady from a neighboring office, who knows all the delicate details about her colleagues. He is a lover who is cheerful and tenderly in love now and scornfully caustic the next minute. He is a clever swindler who has been posing as a surgeon for fifteen years. He is a mild-mannered homosexual. Or that nice young man who "never said a bad word to anyone" but who was found guilty of six heinous sex crimes. Or the newspaper reporter who seemed so friendly until his article (full of vile insinuations) came out. And here we find that nice bank president who embezzled $100,000 and hit the road to Brazil with a dancer. He can be a sensitive poet, a suave millionaire, or a charming vagabond who, by hook or by crook, earns his livelihood and has never worked in twenty years.

Wherever he is, he will be wearing a mask. If you are generous by nature, you may be inclined to treat him with condescension. Do not do that.

In 1.1 we find an emotion that Ron Hubbard described as "the most dangerous and malevolent level on the tone scale." ("The Science of Survival") He's halfway between Fear (which causes his tone) and Anger (which he must hide). His emotion tells him to always smile and put on a good face, because he "knows" that we should never get angry. At this level, we find blatant lies used to avoid real communication. Such lies can be in the form of feigned agreement ("what a great idea"), flattery ("that's a lovely dress, my dear") or reassurance ("well, don't worry, I'll take care of everything"). 1.1 builds a false facade, an artificial personality. He is a funny hypocrite.

AS A FRIEND

You don't need enemies. You'd better stay out of the way like a hermit. Do not trust him with your money, reputation or wife. This is a person who hates, but is not able to say that he hates. He betrays and expects to be forgiven. He will tell you that he was protecting you when, in fact, he went out of his way to ruin your reputation. He will rather hypocritically flatter you, waiting for his moment to ruin you. And he will find more ways to destroy you than I can think of and describe in one chapter.

1.1 expects special privileges or exceptions. He is the person who is most likely to assume that he can break the rules in a marriage, company, group, or society.

At first we like 1.1 because it pretends to be so high-pitched. But over time (unless we are in Sympathy) we despise him more and more. However, our disgust is sometimes difficult to explain, because we can rarely pinpoint exactly what this doll does that causes our contempt.

Despite his arrogance, he is such a perfect actor that we can be deceived by his feigned modesty. Having power over all the tones below him, he shamelessly uses them to convince us of his harmlessness and good intentions. In this way, he manipulates people, always seeking covert control. He may cry, beg, appease or sympathize; he may show contempt or disdain. But by playing all these performances, he is trying to destroy others in order to lower them to a level where he can use them.

If you get mad at him, he usually falls into Appeasing (goes out of his way to do something for you or gives you gifts) or Grief ("I didn't mean to hurt you...") in order to crawl back to you. into trust. Consider that he knows your weak spots and that he plays them with virtuosity.

TALK

Here fast way define 1.1: he seeks to introvert you. This mostly happens in the first few seconds of meeting him. He says, "Oh, you got better, huh?" or "I can't figure out what's changed in you..." On the phone, he might start a conversation with: "Your voice sounds funny, do you have a cold?" Under the guise of friendly concern, these remarks are meant to direct your attention to (and away from) yourself. Soon you will start explaining to yourself or worrying: "What happened to me?"

When meeting, the 1.1 almost always tries to speak first in order to take control of the conversation. If he throws his arrows first, there's less chance of anything being thrown at him. I once introduced two 1.1. As I did this, I wondered which of them would win in the inevitable rush to start the conversation first. Well, they both started talking at the same time and kept talking like that for at least a full minute, not listening to a single word the other said. They were well suited to each other.

Covert Animosity fills his conversation with little taunts, thinly veiled as compliments ("it's a very tasty cake, almost the same as they sell in the store"). It's the 1.1 that kicks off the classic quip: "What a beautiful dress you're wearing. I've admired it for years."

He feels a constant, to the point of nervousness, need to rebuff almost every remark. If you are trying to make a sincere statement or present an upscale idea, he will question it: "I understand what you mean, but..." He will kindly correct your pronunciation and word choice (he is a fan of semantics), remove the strings off your shoulder or insert a joke at your expense (usually with puns, he loves them). He uses every conceivable method to tear your communication to shreds. Of course (haha) he didn't mean you any harm. Just friendly.

HONESTY

He lies even when there is no reason to lie. Facts are confused, twisted or hidden when he loudly proclaims his honesty, ethics and goodness. He can give you a "solemn promise" and at the same time hold a knife behind his back.

If you question his lies, he will probably tell you that it was just a sophisticated joke.

A high-tone person can play the role of a spy and do it well (although he does not like to evade). 1.1 is a born spy. If you want to make this guy come to life, present him with an enticing situation that requires deceit, deceit, insincerity, or misrepresentation. Give him an excuse to snoop, eavesdrop, spy, or covertly investigate and he'll come to his senses.

When there is an opportunity to do something directly, 1.1 will not use it, it will not occur to him. He will come up with a roundabout way to do the same. I once worked in an office where the manager in 1.1 forbade shaking ashtrays into wastebaskets. I assumed this rule was due to finicky (or fire prevention concerns) until I found out that every night he dug through all the baskets before they were emptied (he even folded scraps of paper together) so he could tell what "really happened" in the office. He liked to reveal someone's juicy detail in this way. Of course, a rumor got around, so the staff began to amuse themselves by tossing all sorts of wild, invented bits of "evidence" into the wastebaskets along with the waste.

Although 1.1 carefully hides his own motives and actions, he is zealous in coercing others into revealing their secrets. This is the tone of a traitor and treachery. Having no respect for the privacy of others, he does not miss the chance to expose people (this is even more prevalent in the next tone: Lack of Sympathy). The Hidden Animosity who has a "secret" love relationship will try to get the facts out so that people find it out, especially where it will create problems for his partner.

He is a genius at extracting information from others. A few years ago, I was working on a classified study for a company. Only three of us knew the true nature of this project, and none of us were promiscuous talkers. So I was surprised one day while having lunch with a switchboard operator when she casually said, "Yes, I understand what you found..." She was so close to the truth, it was hard to believe that she just guessed. I began to deny that I knew anything about this subject, and she said: "Oh, stop playing me. Everyone knows what you are working on." Later I realized that she must have overheard some of the information on telephone conversations; the rest was her guesswork.

Even guesses 1.1 are made with blatant pretentiousness that he knows everything; in this way, he often tempts his unsuspecting victim to talk too much.

MYSTERIOUS TECHNIQUE

1.1 not only enjoys solving mysteries, he also enjoys creating them. He may even use a knowing, enigmatic smile to embarrass you. I once saw 1.1 go through my friend's manuscript while he waited intently for comments. After finishing, 1.1 just smiled slyly and said, "I'll refrain from commenting. I'll think about it."

Insinuating hidden knowledge is a common gossip technique. A person in a higher tone may convey news about friends, but he tries to stick to the facts. 1.1 embellishes the facts with additions that sound true. "Do you know that Joe and Phyllis broke up?" This may be a fact. But Mabel (1.1) adds: "Just between us, I wouldn't be surprised if I knew she was secretly dating Bill." Her all-knowing manner suggests that she is sure of more facts than she says.

GOSSIP

A chronic gossip who likes to undermine his reputation with half-truths, assumptions and conjectures - this is 1.1. You can meet her leaning on the backyard fence; you will find him in the office leaning against the water cooler. This is often the tone of a reporter, journalist, and talk show host - someone who uses their charm to gain the interviewee's credibility before cutting it to pieces. It takes stoic discipline to resist the artful questioning technique 1.1. Many years ago, I moved into an apartment and bought furniture from the previous tenants. A little later, a neighbor from upstairs dropped in on me. "I see you bought their furniture," she said.

I nodded and changed the subject. A few minutes later, she turned the conversation back to the furniture: "I think they were asking $1500 for it..." This statement hung in the air like a question that provided the perfect opportunity for me to correct or agree with it. Having already gotten to know her kindness before, I decided to put it out on 1.1, so I just muttered, "Really?" and changed the subject.

1.1 endangers your business. He skillfully infects the entire office, turning people against each other and everyone against the company itself. It is so hidden that it is almost impossible to see it as a source of bad news and a general feeling of disappointment among people. While he can get the job done and usually manages to give the impression of being hardworking, this is often a hoax. Unable to allow himself to be anyone's effect, he avoids it in hidden ways. Ask him to complete a task and he will say, "Of course, I'll do it with pleasure," but it will never be completed. He pretends to take orders, but he has no intention of following them.

RESPONSIBILITY

Latent Animosity is irresponsible, but pretends to be responsible. I once went to a wonderful modern West Coast wedding that didn't have a best man. A relative in 1.1 from the side of the groom took it upon herself - she stood at the door, saying to the incoming guests: "Since, apparently, no best man is expected, I think you need to choose your own place." Saying this with a caustic expression, she seemed to be taking responsibility, but her intent was destructive. Of course, she wanted to make it clear to the guests that this wedding was "poorly prepared." If an upscale person noticed that the arriving guests were embarrassed (and I don't think they were), he would say, "Just sit where you like." And no malicious undertones.

1.1 is very concerned with impressing people, his need for recognition pushes him onto the stage all the time. Knowing no rest, he is an actor constantly studying his audience to see if he has impressed everyone. It's hard for a 1.1 to be a spectator for long.

In class, he is often the first to ask a question after a lecture (he may interrupt if allowed): "Professor, don't you think ..." He is not interested in getting an answer, he just wants to show his magnificence. The question is asked for effect.

Many 1.1s want attention so badly that they don't feel embarrassed at all. I once knew one who dressed in the most ridiculous clothes imaginable. He wandered around looking like he was drugged, often boasting, "Everyone noticed me." This same guy relished every opportunity to make a remark that shocked everyone in the room. By the way, there are other 1.1s who dress and speak very reservedly.

When he cannot get into the spotlight himself, he attaches himself to creative, successful people and is constantly working to push them to the bottom of the scale. We find 1.1 crowding around show business. He is often a non-productive critic who seeks covert control over certain areas of the aesthetic so that he can give destructive advice to talented people "for your own good."

If he fails to get close to the winners, he still boasts that he succeeded. He knows famous movie stars. The President himself asks him for advice. He pretends to have love relationship with the most beautiful women.

PERSISTENCE

Because of an irresistible urge to play the biggie, the 1.1 often finds his way into the upper echelons of business, politics, clubs, or social groups. He, however, loves to cut corners and with such lazy persistence that he is rarely a master in either direction. Instead, he learns enough to mask his promotion to an important position. He wants to be applauded, not even wanting to learn to dance.

He's an amateur who dabbles in music and then quits. He learns to draw and then loses interest. Too fickle to focus on one subject for long periods of time and achieve perfection in it, he prefers superficial study, after which he uses cunning and subterfuge to pass himself off as an expert.

CRIMINAL

All criminals are below 2.0 on the scale (while they are still criminals) and a very large proportion are at 1.1. Even when a 1.1 is not actively breaking the law, he is unethical and dishonest.

He has a suicidal tendency, but he actively seeks the destruction of all those around him ("I think I will die, but maybe I'll take you with me"). Here we find murder through the slow destruction of individuals and culture, each destructive act cleverly masked by verbose excuses. This is where we find the people who push pornography the most (and enjoy it immensely). Here is an insinuating pimp who persuades a young girl to become a prostitute. There is also a cunning drug dealer who convinces teenagers that they need to "keep up with fashion" and that, in any case, drugs are not harmful.

MESSAGING

He prefers to transmit only the most malicious communication. Good news is quickly forgotten or deliberately suppressed. If you send a customer a special notice about a good deal and 1.1 opens the mail there, he will try to ensure that this notice never reaches the buyer in time. People in Covert Animosity often occupy places where they can control incoming communication. This not only satisfies their spy instincts, it allows for covert control.

One morning I watched 1.1 manage the affairs of a facility while the owner was away. It was a busy day with many customers, orders and inquiries constantly coming in. One angry worker called; the foreman was not at the workplace and could not be found anywhere at all. A few minutes later, the owner called. “Oh,” our dreamy girl said with pleasure, “today there is such a mess ...” And she dwelled on one “problem” call in detail, completely not bothering to mention the good news and the normal course of affairs.

SENSE OF HUMOR

He has no real sense of humor, but in this tone you will most often hear forced laughter that rumbles when there is nothing funny at all. We can discuss the weather or the score of the match and 1.1 will be senselessly giggling and rejoicing. He laughs at the joke - maybe even longer than the others - but nothing really amuses him. Nothing.

I knew many 1.1s who weren't rude jokers; but I've never known a single rude joker who wasn't 1.1. They take pleasure in diligently engaging in secret preparations to fool, confuse, expose, belittle, or insult the victim. And all this, of course, just for fun.

The manager of a local insurance company told me about a time early in his career when he was transferred to another state. Probably, some ethnic beliefs were the reason that in this particular place people refused to buy life insurance contracts, although they were happy to buy annuity insurance contracts. Without knowing this, our friend spent two weeks completely uselessly trying to sell life insurance, but he never succeeded. Confused and upset, he told his misadventures to the guys in the office. In the end, they revealed to him the secret of selling in this city. Allowing him to fail from the start was part of the "initiation" for a newbie. Although my friend didn't like this joke at all, the guys at 1.1 found it extremely hilarious.

He's surprised when you don't laugh at his clever antics. If it annoys you, he expects you to forgive his sins.

You could write an entire book on Sexual Characteristics 1.1 (and many people have done so). Some of them are intolerant in matters of morality to the point of hypocrisy and demand morality from others. But it is also on this level that we most often find promiscuity, perversion, sadism, and any unusual practice. The strange thing is that 1.1 does not really enjoy the sexual act as such, but he is quite concerned about it. He will be a passionate advocate of "free love".

An overly promiscuous person is almost always 1.1. His fickleness is manifested in his inability to enjoy a long-term, meaningful relationship with one person. He is constantly looking for sexual pleasure in novelty and otherness.

Such people are dangerous to society because their perverted behavior is contagious. Loose love and promiscuity are dangerous signals to watch out for if the race is to continue. Such actions indicate a hidden denial of the purity of love and marriage. There are now so many publications dedicated solely to advocating, promoting, and glorifying promiscuity that high-tone people may feel like they are in the vast minority. They begin to question their natural attraction to loyalty and constancy and wonder if they are old fashioned.

Today's open struggle against abortion, birth control and the management of sex education is far more reasonable than the Victorian pedantry that has clouded these issues for years. However, the harbingers of the "free generation" (usually the press and magazines in 1.1) want us to believe that this means permissiveness. Completely irresponsible, they report the most humiliating acts of mankind and ignore the possibility that their selection of "news" is having a devastating effect.

1.1 may be the sweetest lover on the scale, but as a long-term partner, he is very dangerous. Most likely, he will cheat and / or secretly undermine the confidence of his spouse by all possible tricks. He will not be satisfied until his partner has descended into Apathy and all dreams have evaporated.

PARENTS

Although 1.1 hates children, he is sometimes able to convincingly play the role of a parent. There, however, there is always a subtle, destructive tendency, no matter how kind it is masked. We see little interest in the future of our children. We see frivolous acts in the family (such as adultery) that lead to the division of the family and the destruction of the security on which the future of children depends.

Sometimes a 1.1 takes good care of a child's physical health, but is guilty of emotional and moral neglect. This tone is always trying to stop the child's anger, thus bringing it down below 1.5 on the scale. He is overly concerned with the appearance and mannerisms of the child - his facade. Ultimately, he tries to drive the child into apathetic compliance. At best, a parent in Covert Hostility raises a child in Covert Hostility.

Since it is unpopular in society to hate children, 1.1s can hide their cruelty behind hilarious jokes. He teases, criticizes and slowly drives the child to tears. One day a shop assistant came to me and jokingly said to my youngest son: "I'll take you with me." He looked at her like she was crazy and ran to play. She said that she had recently told a little girl that she would take her little brother home; the girl burst into tears. This is typical of 1.1, having scared one child, she now tries the same technique on mine. Under the guise of a friendly joke, she wanted to harm the child.

In a safe, high tone environment, 1.1 can go up to 1.5. But generally speaking, he is not capable of Wrath. Somewhere in the past, the loss of self-control has become so dangerous that he is now afraid to do it. Hostility, however, is constantly suppressed under the guise of good, friendly relations. If he could lose his temper and get out of his system, he would go up the scale and become a wonderful person. But, since he cannot express himself in direct confrontation, he secretly harms and destroys. If you are not sure if this is 1.1, note how you feel being with him. Are you out of your mind? Feeling uncomfortable? Worried about whether you are witty enough, cold-blooded, modern enough?

This is a common social tone. People of higher and lower tones use to some extent false courtesy in everyday contacts. Such "good manners", however, do not carry the destructive intent of chronic 1.1.

Tones below this are more destructive (especially to those poor bastards who are in them), but they are weak. They have little effect on you, unless your relationship is very close. 1.1 is rarely overlooked. He invades. He makes his presence known. The more capable you are, the more likely it is to sneak into your space, your time, and your life with as much fun as a deadly virus that invades your circulation and puts you to bed for six weeks.

Several ways to manage 1.1 are discussed in later chapters, but perhaps the most best advice is: remove him from your environment. Don't even bother being delicate about it. He is insensitive to hints, unable to be embarrassed. He will continue to come around with the importunity of a fly on a hot and humid day until you tell him directly - perhaps even several times - that you do not want his company. Once you do that, he will naturally talk about you behind your back. But don't be fooled, he did it all the time. Remember that behind this fairy shimmer, there is a beating heart of pure granite.

Greetings, dear readers! Have you ever felt uncomfortable being in the company of acquaintances, colleagues or family members? I put a dollar on something that happened more than once. Do you want to know why this happens? Some people tend to show hostility towards surrounding . Sometimes to all at once, sometimes selectively, sometimes intentionally, and often following the tastes of the games of the subconscious.

Sometimes we have to deal with explosive aggression (anger), and sometimes with hidden hostility. How to understand that you are a victim aggression and how to deal with it? This is what we'll talk about today.

Hostility and its masks

Very often, becoming victims of hostility, a person does not realize this. You may ask - "What is the threat of such manifestations, if we still do not notice them?" I will explain, the hidden negativity that others pour out on us may not reach our understanding, but it will inevitably penetrate ours. Then we feel depressed, uncomfortable, insecure, we can follow the lead of the aggressors, hindering the development of our potential and suppressing our own dignity. It shouldn't be like that.

Hostility is in psychology , the emotional state of a person who wants to take control of people who do not meet his expectations.

Let's look at a more accessible and simple example. The mother-in-law is deeply convinced that the daughter-in-law should not work. At the heart of her ideas about the ideal wife is home improvement, housekeeping and caring for her beloved son. While the daughter-in-law wants to build a career, while coming to absolute agreement and understanding with her husband. Every time, being with a daughter-in-law, hint that the daughter-in-law is not good enough for her son, a bad housewife, mother, wife, and so on.

How does it manifest such hostility, if not a direct attack? Hints, non-verbal cues (smirks, sighs, eye rolls, head shakes) and a host of other ways to send the poor daughter-in-law "enveloping" as Sam Wakin would say aggression , and invade her personal boundaries.

So what is hostility? She goes under the mask hidden aggression, or through "open fire". What to do if you are faced with an "open fire" I told in the article " ».

How to understand that you have become a victim and recognize hidden aggression?

Hidden aggression - derogatory attitude rendering pressure on a person and affecting his sovereignty. The goal of the aggressor is usually to manipulate and control the victim. In the articleI help create the right line of conduct. But in order to begin to form it, you need to understand whether you really became a victim. Here are the most common signs disguised aggression:

unflattering comparisons (“you are like that crocodile from a joke”);
sarcasm (“where are we going, you know this better than anyone”);
command tone (“do as you are told”);
remarks (“you are doing it wrong”, “everyone should know this”);
condescension (“come on, didn’t you know about such simple things?”);
generalization (“well, everything is as usual with you”);
boasting (“I would have finished everything long ago”);
a reminder of failure (“it will repeat like that time”);
false sympathy (“hold on, otherwise you look just awful”);
facial expressions and gestures (the same ones that our mother-in-law used).

How to resist aggression?

The most common implementation definitions hostility and aggression, we meet at work among colleagues. That is why it is most difficult to cope with it, because if our relatives try to take control of us, they do it not out of malice, you can talk to them, find compromises. As for acquaintances and people whom we consider friends, here, if the problem cannot be solved, you can simply cut off all ties. But when it comes to work colleagues, the issue becomes acute. Do you hold on to your place, but feel that you are not favored in it? To find a solution, the article in which I raise .

The second way is based on agreement with the aggressor. Yes, it is precisely the agreement with the statement and mockery, no matter how sharp they are, that will help to discourage the opponent. Add a drop of irony and sarcasm to the agreement, and lo and behold, the wolf rushes back to his forest.

Remember that the nature of the aggressor hides his own impotence, insecurity and complexes. By humiliating others, a person asserts his self.

The main thing , because others might not notice the hidden hostility from the opponent, which means it is your behavior that will cause resentment. You can try the third option - this is a dialogue. Perhaps the opponent does not give an adequate assessment of his behavior, having a calm, but constructive one-on-one conversation, you can achieve changes for the better.

To better understand your colleagues and form the right behavior in a team, read the article in which I talk about what to do with . If you realize that you will have to get along with “heavy” people, the author of the book will help you find the right tactics “How to talk to motherfuckers. What to do with inadequate and unbearable people in your life - Mark Goulston.

On this I say goodbye. Subscribe to the newsletter and do not let the aggressors get the better of you.

How to Choose Your People Minshull Ruth

CHAPTER 9. HIDDEN HOSTILITY (1.1)

CHAPTER 9. HIDDEN HOSTILITY (1.1)

Hidden: 1) Covered or covered; hidden. 2) hidden; secret; secret.

Hostile: 1) Hostile or pertaining to the enemy. 2) feeling or showing hostility; antagonistic.

American Heritage Dictionary

The main problem with 1.1 is that it doesn't have a neon sign telling you it's 1.1.

This hidden tone is the most difficult to recognize on the scale. Once you do define it, don't expect the next 1.1 you see to bear much resemblance to this one.

ITS MANY FACES

Wherever he is, he will be wearing a mask. If you are generous by nature, you may be inclined to treat him with condescension. Do not do that.

In 1.1 we find an emotion that Ron Hubbard described as "the most dangerous and malevolent level on the tone scale." ( "The Science of Survival") He is halfway between Fear (which causes his tone) and Anger (which he must hide). His emotion dictates that he always smile and put on a good face, since he "knows" that we should never be angry At this level, we find egregious lies used to avoid real communication, such lies can be in the form of feigned agreement ("what a great idea"), flattery ("that's a lovely dress, my dear") or reassurance ("well , don't worry, I'll take care of everything"). 1.1 builds a false facade, an artificial personality. He is a cheerful hypocrite.

AS A FRIEND

1.1 expects special privileges or exceptions. He is the person who is most likely to assume that he can break the rules in a marriage, company, group, or society.

TALK

Here's a quick way to spot a 1.1: He wants to introvert you. This mostly happens in the first few seconds of meeting him. He says, "Oh, you got better, huh?" or "I can't figure out what's changed in you..." On the phone, he might start a conversation with: "Your voice sounds funny, do you have a cold?" Under the guise of friendly concern, these remarks are meant to direct your attention to (and away from) yourself. Soon you will start explaining to yourself or worrying: "What happened to me?"

HONESTY

If you question his lies, he will probably tell you that it was just a sophisticated joke.

SPY

Although 1.1 carefully hides his own motives and actions, he is zealous in coercing others into revealing their secrets. This is the tone of a traitor and treachery. Having no respect for the privacy of others, he does not miss the chance to expose people (this is even more prevalent in the next tone: Lack of Sympathy). The Hidden Animosity, who has a "secret" love relationship, will try to get the facts out so that people find it out, especially where it will create problems for his partner.

He is a genius at extracting information from others. A few years ago, I was working on a classified study for a company. Only three of us knew the true nature of this project, and none of us were promiscuous talkers. So I was surprised one day while having lunch with a switchboard operator when she casually said, "Yes, I understand what you found..." She was so close to the truth, it was hard to believe that she just guessed. I began to deny that I knew anything about this subject, and she said: "Oh, stop playing me. Everyone knows what you are working on." Later I realized that she must have - overheard some of the information on the phone; the rest was her guesswork.

Even guesses 1.1 are made with blatant pretentiousness that he knows everything; in this way, he often tempts his unsuspecting victim to talk too much.

MYSTERIOUS TECHNIQUE

GOSSIP

BUSINESS

RESPONSIBILITY

When he can't get himself into the spotlight, he attaches himself to creative, successful people and works continuously to push them down the scale. We find 1.1 crowding around show business. He is often a non-productive critic who seeks covert control over certain areas of the aesthetic so that he can give destructive advice to talented people "for your own good."

If he fails to get close to the winners, he still boasts that he succeeded. He knows famous movie stars. The President himself asks him for advice. He pretends to have love affairs with the most beautiful women.

PERSISTENCE

CRIMINAL

All criminals are below 2.0 on the scale (while they are still criminals) and a very large proportion are at 1.1. Even when a 1.1 is not actively breaking the law, he is unethical and dishonest.

MESSAGING

SENSE OF HUMOR

He's surprised when you don't laugh at his clever antics. If it annoys you, he expects you to forgive his sins.

SEX

Today's open struggle against abortion, birth control and the management of sex education is far more reasonable than the Victorian pedantry that has clouded these issues for years. However, the harbingers of the "free generation" (usually the press and magazines in 1.1) want us to believe what this means permissiveness. Completely irresponsible, they report the most humiliating acts of mankind and ignore the possibility that their selection of "news" is having a devastating effect.

HOMOSEXUALS

A friend of mine recently wrote to me about his observations of a group of homosexuals who lived near him: "I think they are properly called 'gays'," he wrote. . Almost constantly feigned fun and happiness.

This feigned "happiness" 1.1.

Homosexuals can be fearful, sympathetic, coaxing, crying, or apathetic. Sometimes they succeed in a slight outburst of irritation. But their base is 1.1.

Homosexuals don't practice love, 1.1 can't do it. Their relationship consists of: 1) short-lived, pathetic and faceless meetings or 2) longer events filled with theatrical ranting, arguments, envy and frequent betrayals. And it could hardly be otherwise, since this tone is made of suspicion and hatred, which result in a sweet sweetness strewn with petty annoyances. Their "love" eventually turns into deep contempt.

PARENTS

CONCLUSIONS

Tones below this are more destructive (especially to those poor bastards who are in them), but they are weak. They have little effect on you, unless your relationship is very close. 1.1 is rarely overlooked. He invades. He makes his presence known. The more capable you are, the more likely it is to sneak into your space, your time, and your life with as much fun as a deadly virus that invades your circulation and puts you to bed for six weeks.

Several ways to manage 1.1 are discussed in the following chapters, but perhaps the best advice is: remove him from your environment. Don't even bother being delicate about it. He is insensitive to hints, unable to be embarrassed. He will continue to come around with the importunity of a fly on a hot and humid day until you tell him directly - perhaps even several times - that you do not want his company. Once you do that, he will naturally talk about you behind your back. But don't be fooled, he did it all the time. Remember that behind this fairy shimmer, there is a beating heart of pure granite.

From the book Gods in every man [Archetypes that control the lives of men] author Bolen Jin Shinoda

Hostility of Poseidon towards the Trojans Poseidon had no equal in rancor. His anger at the Trojans was so great that, in spite of the unequivocal prohibition of Zeus, he accepted Trojan War side of the Greeks. This hatred has long roots. Once Poseidon and

From the book Neurotic Personality of Our Time by Karen Horney

From the NLP book. Bulk Techniques author Gorin Sergey Nikolaevich

Chapter 7. IMPLICIT AND HIDDEN HYPNOTISATION Trance induction through kinesthetic uncertainty S. Gorin: Now I intend to move on to methods of trance induction, which could be called "semi-official". By using them, you can induce a trance without mentioning it, but

From the book Life is good! How to have time to fully live and work author Kozlov Nikolay Ivanovich

Hostility - friendliness of the environment Hostile environment in the picture is a feeling of hostility of the surrounding world. If you ordered yourself a piercing, hostile wind in your face, then you will fight with someone or something, overcome someone or something. It's written in your

From the book On the side of a teenager author Dolto Françoise

Chapter 10 Teenage Suicide: A Hidden Epidemic BLACK FILE: FROM EUROPE TO JAPAN different countries due to the difference in medical approaches and the quality of the collected sanitary statistical

From the book Human Nature and Social Order author Cooley Charles Horton

From the book Philosophical Fiction, or Instructions for the User of the Universe author Reiter Michael

From the book Love and Orgasm author Lowen Alexander

From the book A Serious Talk About Responsibility [What to do with deceived expectations, broken promises and incorrect behavior] author Patterson Curry

Hidden Cause Believe it or not, sometimes people hide the main source of problems. They are afraid they let you down because they couldn't or didn't want to get the job done, so they hide the truth. They think that this way they will be able to avoid new problems. For example, a doctor asks a student

From the book Quick Decisions Don't Lead to Success [Understand what your brain wants and do the opposite] by Salvo David Dee

Chapter 12 Chuck Palahniuk Brain at your fingertips A few years ago I was involved in preparing a presentation for government organizations on how to conduct outreach to

From the book Deadly Emotions author Colbert Don

From the book Faith and Love author Amonashvili Shalva Alexandrovich

Hidden Reality When a person's eyes do not reach the distance of the stars, he invents a telescope and brings the Starry Sky closer to him. When the telescope also turns out to be powerless, and a person wants to look even deeper into the Cosmos, he invents a radio telescope and explores

the author Shevtsov Alexey

From the book Magic and Culture in Management Science the author Shevtsov Alexey

Hidden: 1) Covered or covered; hidden. 2) hidden; secret; secret.

Hostile: 1) Hostile or pertaining to the enemy. 2) feeling or showing hostility; antagonistic.

American Heritage Dictionary

The main problem with 1.1 is that it doesn't have a neon sign telling you it's 1.1.

This hidden tone is the most difficult to recognize on the scale. Once you do define it, don't expect the next 1.1 you see to bear much resemblance to this one.

ITS MANY FACES

Wherever he is, he will be wearing a mask. If you are generous by nature, you may be inclined to treat him with condescension. Do not do that.

1.1 expects special privileges or exceptions. He is the person who is most likely to assume that he can break the rules in a marriage, company, group, or society.

If you're angry with him, he usually falls into Appeasing (goes out of his way to do something for you or gives you gifts) or Grief ("I didn't mean to hurt you...") in order to creep back into your confidence. . Consider that he knows your weaknesses and that he masterfully plays them.

TALK

He feels a constant, to the point of nervousness, need to rebuff almost every remark. If you are trying to make a sincere statement or present an upscale idea, he will question it: "I understand what you mean, but..." shoulder or insert a joke at your expense (usually with puns, he loves them). He uses every conceivable method to tear your communication to shreds. Of course (haha) he didn't mean you any harm. Just friendly.

HONESTY

If you question his lies, he will probably tell you that it was just a sophisticated joke.

Although 1.1 carefully hides his own motives and actions, he is zealous in coercing others into revealing their secrets. This is the tone of a traitor and treachery. Having no respect for the privacy of others, he does not miss the chance to expose people (this is even more prevalent in the next tone: Lack of Sympathy). The Hidden Animosity, who has a "secret" love relationship, will try to get the facts out so that people find it out, especially where it will create problems for his partner.

He is a genius at extracting information from others. A few years ago, I was working on a classified study for a company. Only three of us knew the true nature of this project, and none of us were promiscuous talkers. So I was surprised one day while having lunch with a switchboard operator when she casually said, “Yes, I understand what you found…” She was so close to the truth, it was hard to believe that she just guessed. I began to deny that I knew anything about this subject, and she said: "Oh, stop playing me. Everyone knows what you are working on." Later I realized that she must have - overheard some of the information on the phone; the rest was her guesswork.

Even guesses 1.1 are made with blatant pretentiousness that he knows everything; in this way, he often tempts his unsuspecting victim to talk too much.

MYSTERIOUS TECHNIQUE

GOSSIP

I nodded and changed the subject. A few minutes later, she turned the conversation back to the furniture: "I think they were asking $1500 for it..." This statement hung in the air like a question that created the perfect opportunity for me to correct or agree with it. Having already gotten to know her kindness before, I decided to put it out on 1.1, so I just muttered, "Really?" and changed the subject.

RESPONSIBILITY

In class, he is often the first to ask a question after a lecture (he may interrupt if allowed): "Professor, don't you think…" He is not interested in getting an answer, he just wants to show his magnificence. The question is asked for effect.

PERSISTENCE

CRIMINAL

All criminals are below 2.0 on the scale (while they are still criminals) and a very large proportion are at 1.1. Even when a 1.1 is not actively breaking the law, he is unethical and dishonest.

MESSAGING

SENSE OF HUMOR

He's surprised when you don't laugh at his clever antics. If it annoys you, he expects you to forgive his sins.

Today's open struggle against abortion, birth control and the management of sex education is far more reasonable than the Victorian pedantry that has clouded these issues for years. However, the harbingers of the "free generation" (usually the press and magazines in 1.1) want us to believe what this means permissiveness. Completely irresponsible, they report the most humiliating acts of mankind and ignore the possibility that their selection of "news" is having a devastating effect.

HOMOSEXUALS

A friend of mine recently wrote to me about his observations of a group of homosexuals who lived near him: "I think they are correctly called 'gays'," he wrote. "I have never heard so much laughter as now when I live next door to these guys . Almost constantly feigned fun and happiness.

This feigned "happiness" 1.1.

Homosexuals can be fearful, sympathetic, coaxing, crying, or apathetic. Sometimes they succeed in a slight outburst of irritation. But their base is 1.1.

PARENTS

Tones below this are more destructive (especially to those poor bastards who are in them), but they are weak. They have little effect on you, unless your relationship is very close. 1.1 is rarely overlooked. He invades. He makes his presence known. The more capable you are, the more likely it is to sneak into your space, your time, and your life with as much fun as a deadly virus that invades your circulation and puts you to bed for six weeks.

The word "hostility" (from the Russian "Varangian", "enemy", "foreigner") has a different meaning for different authors.

In world literature, the term "hostility" (English hostility), as a rule, is used along with two others, closely related to it in meaning - "aggression" and "anger". The differentiation of these three concepts was carried out as early as 1961 (A. Buss). It is based on ideas about the three main components of mental phenomena - cognitive, emotional and behavioral. In accordance with this, the following definitions were proposed: hostility - a long-term, persistent negative attitude or rating system applied to surrounding people, objects and phenomena; aggression is an instrumental behavioral reaction that has the character of punishment; anger is an emotional state that has a motivating force.

Despite the fact that the above definitions give a fairly clear idea of each of the concepts discussed, the terms "hostility", "anger" and "aggression" are still often replaced by one another in scientific publications. The fact is that they reflect different aspects of a holistic psychological phenomenon. This circumstance makes it difficult to develop their independent conceptual definitions, which is reflected in studies of hostility.

In interpreting the ratio of hostility, anger and aggression, researchers (Barefoot et al., 1989; 1992) put forward the concept of hostility. In their opinion, hostility is an antagonistic attitude towards people, including cognitive, affective and behavioral components. The affective component represents a range of interrelated emotions, including anger, irritation, resentment, resentment, disgust, etc. The cognitive component contains negative beliefs about human nature in general (cynicism) and beliefs in the malevolence of other people in relation to the subject himself (hostile attribution, mistrust, suspicion). Finally, the behavioral component includes various forms of manifestation of hostility in behavior, often hidden - aggression, negativism, unwillingness to cooperate, avoidance of communication, etc. All three components of hostility must be studied separately. The most valuable in the approach of these researchers is that they went beyond the triad "hostility - anger - aggression" and described a fairly wide range of behavioral and emotional correlates of hostility.

To some extent "blurring" the sharp differences between the three components, J. Chaplin (J. Chaplin, 1982) defines hostility as a tendency to feel a desire to harm other people or a tendency to experience the affect of anger towards other people. Hostility is thus understood as a personality trait. Such a definition of hostility makes it quite easy to identify it empirically, however, it makes it difficult to explain the mechanisms of its occurrence and its connection with other psychological categories.

T. Smith (T. Smith, 1992) proposes to define hostility as “a complex of negative attitudes (hostility, hostility, hostility), beliefs and assessments in relation to other people, i.e. the perception of other people as a likely source of frustration, deceit, provocation and etc.” Thus, as a stable, common feature, hostility implies the devaluation of the motives and personal qualities of other people, the feeling of being in opposition to others and the desire for harm to them (active - to cause harm or passive - to observe harm).

A definition similar to the previous ones is given by A. Elizur (A. Elizur, 1949): “Hostility is feelings of hostility, resentment, resentment, which are often suppressed in our culture, but almost inevitably manifest themselves in a distorted attitude of the subject to people and in behavior.”

We proposed to consider hostility as a specific picture of the subject's world, within which negative characteristics are attributed to external objects (A. V. Sadovskaya, 1998; 1999).

Enikolopov S. N., Sadovskaya A. V., 2000. P. 59

K. Izard defines hostility as a complex affective-cognitive trait or personality orientation. Hostility has emotional and expressive components, the main ones being anger, disgust and contempt, but does not include verbal or physical actions. Thus, he separates hostility from aggression. And at the same time, he writes that “since hostility reflects negative emotions (for example, through angry expression), it can harm the one to whom it is directed, but this harm is predominantly psychological” (2000, p. 286). Consequently, the feeling of hostility can participate in the motivation of hostile behavior (aggression or, conversely, avoidance of contact) as one of the motivators and accompany these actions (which is why they are called hostile). Fuzziness and even illogicality in K. Izard's reasoning about the separation of hostility from aggression arise from the fact that he takes hostile actions for aggression. If so, then we must admit that actions to cause harm form a single inseparable emotional-motivational complex with a sense of hostility. But K. Izard, on the contrary, seeks to separate hostility and aggression from each other. Correctly stating that "hostility is not yet aggression" (p. 287), he does not take into account that aggression can also be verbal, causing, as he writes, "emotional and psychological damage."

In addition, he does not write that aggression can be carried out without a feeling of hostility. Therefore, to reduce aggression only to hostile actions (“Within the framework of the theory of differential emotions, we define aggression as a hostile action or behavior,” writes K. Izard, p. 286) is wrong. Actually, he himself obviously understands this when he immediately writes: “Aggression, as a rule, is motivated by hostility” (p. 287. Emphasis by me. - E.I.), i.e., not in all cases it is hostile actions.

P. Kutter (1998) writes that "hostility is a set of tangible, but invisible affective and cognitive reactions that form a prejudice against a certain person" (p. 58). That is, for Cutter, hostility is a hidden state of a person, in contrast to violence as an open hostile behavior. Spielberger and colleagues (Spielberger et al., 1985) consider hostility as a personality trait, which is a set of tendencies that motivate aggressive behavior. However, A. Bass notes that hostility and aggressive behavior are combined, although often, but by no means always. People can be in hostile relations, but not show any aggression, if only because its negative consequences for the “aggressor” are known in advance. There is also aggression without hostility, when, for example, a person is robbed without experiencing any hostile feelings towards him.

K. Izard also emphasizes that direct aggressive verbal and physical actions are not included in hostility, and this is true. Hostile (aggressive) behavior may stem from a feeling of hostility, be motivated by it, but it is not this feeling itself. Hostility is not yet aggression (although it is difficult to imagine that in relation to the object of hostility a person would not show indirect verbal aggression, that is, would not complain to someone about him, would not say some kind of taunt about him. Obviously, these authors it is a manifestation of direct physical and verbal aggression).

VN Myasishchev (1966) attributes hostility to emotional relationships and notes that hostility is formed in the process of interaction with its object and then sets the bias in the perception of new objects.

V. A. Zhmurov (2012) defines hostility as: 1) intense and prolonged hostility, in which a negative attitude towards someone is manifested both actively and openly, and in a hidden way; 2) desire, urge to harm someone who is perceived as an "enemy"; 3) the quality of the personality of an individual to perceive people who are neutral or benevolent towards him as his personal enemies, persons who pose a direct threat to his own security, without objective grounds for this (usually this is characteristic of persons with psychopathic qualities induced in the interests of an aggressive policy, or patients with a mental disorder ) or due to the previous negative experience of communicating with such and similar people.

In a number of studies, hostility is considered as "a negative attitude towards the objects of the surrounding reality" (Barefoot, 1992; 1994; A. V. Okhmatovskaya, 2001; A. V. Vaksman, 2005). It is difficult to agree with such an understanding - without the necessary reservations - of hostility. I may have a negative attitude towards a number of products, but this does not mean that I feel hostility towards them.

S. O. Kuznetsova and A. A. Abramova (2011) consider hostility as a complex, multidimensional formation, as a set of negative attitudes towards actually perceived objects (object), which is characterized by the degree of severity (general level of hostility), the degree of awareness and generalization, stability , degree of subjective significance, structure.

They, like other authors, single out cognitive, affective and behavioral components in hostility. The cognitive component of hostility is represented by negative beliefs about human nature as a whole (cynicism), beliefs in the malevolence of other people in relation to the subject himself (hostile attributions, distrust, suspicion), a decrease in self-worth (the individual's belief that he is a bad and unworthy person) , the belief of the individual that he cannot control the events happening to him, beliefs in his bad luck and beliefs of the individual in the maximum role of chance in life, as well as a tendency to converge the assessments of "positive" and "negative" incentives. The affective component of hostility consists of interrelated emotions, including anger, irritation, resentment, contempt, indignation, disgust, as well as suspicion, alertness, aggressiveness, etc. The behavioral component of hostility includes various forms of manifestation of hostility in behavior, often disguised: aggression, negativism, unwillingness to cooperate, avoidance of communication, socially passive behavior.

Hence, hostility can be hidden, suppressed and, as a result, not lead to hostility, i.e., direct aggression, to "war". Therefore, in many works devoted to the problem of hostility, the division into manifested and experienced hostility is used.

Point of view

Other enmity can be seemingly "peaceful" and cold. But ... a cold attitude towards another is also enmity; love has no neutral territory. In this sense, enmity is a fairly natural phenomenon that we encounter at every turn.

For example, I am a typical introvert, and therefore I tend to perceive any extrovert as superficial, too noisy, insincere and tactless interlocutor. This is a natural prerequisite for creating an enemy: I easily conclude that such a person is unpleasant to me and I should stay away from him. Since I know this peculiarity of mine, it is easier for me not to rush to add most people to the list of my enemies. A critical attitude to one's perception is too important here.

We often classify as an enemy a group of people whom we have been led to believe can be justifiably disliked: we have different standards for them. Little C.S. Lewis once said to his father, "I think I have a prejudice against the French." - "What are they?" “But, dad,” the boy replied, “if I understood what they were, it would not be prejudice.” Lewis was right: prejudice that breeds animosity grows in the dark. A person is able to create enemies for himself, without suspecting that he is doing it. Here, a phenomenon that psychologists call projection plays an extremely important role.

Zavalov M., 2012

There are people for whom a hostile perception of the world is their constant characteristic, a quality of their personality. For them, a name such as spiteful critics. S. O. Kuznetsova and A. A. Abramova characterize them as follows. They have a high level of hostility, a tendency to attribute negative qualities to other objects and phenomena. In the system of already established relations of such a person, hostility prevails; the probability of forming a negative attitude towards new objects is generally higher than the probability of forming a positive one, i.e., there is a certain bias. For spiteful critics, a hostile attitude can be inadequately generalized, to the extent that a person perceives any objects or external influences as negative, unpleasant, undesirable, etc. In such cases of generalization of a hostile attitude, it makes sense to talk about a hostile picture of the world.

Hostile people not only react more intensely to conflict situations but rather provoke and create them. In this process, such characteristics as cynicism, mistrust, suspicion, negativism play a significant role. People with a high level of hostility are more likely to attribute negative qualities to neutral objects and situations. Many situations of social interaction appear to them as conflict situations, in fact, they are not. Hostile people estimate the probability of favorable events lower and the probability of unfavorable events higher. All this creates many additional sources of stress for them compared to non-hostile subjects.

Hostility can have varying degrees of persistence. The more specific the hostile attitude, the less stable it is. In contrast, generalized hostility is resistant to change.

Hostility as an attitude can be of different types.

Hatred. A strongly expressed feeling of hostility is referred to as hatred (Allport, 1998). You can hate not only individual people, but humanity as a whole: “I hate humanity. I run away from him. My single fatherland is My desert soul,” wrote K. Balmont.

Sternberg (cited in: G. M. Breslav, 2004), analogizing the structure of hatred with the structure of love presented by him, distinguishes three components in the first: a) denial of intimacy (distancing) due to the disgust, loathing experienced; b) passion (anger or fear in case of danger); and c) devaluation of human dignity (viewing the object of hatred as inferior). A different combination of these components gives, according to Sternberg, seven types of hatred (Table 6.1).

It should be noted that this classification combines the feeling of hatred as a stable attitude towards someone and emotional experiences feelings of hatred arising suddenly (boiling hatred) when the object of hatred is perceived as disgusting (indignant hatred), and even intended or desired actions in relation to the object of hatred (burning hatred). The conditionality of this classification and the names given to the types of hatred is obvious.

Table 6.1. Types of hatred according to Sternberg

Hatred is also manifested in malice, that is, in an irritably captious attitude towards someone filled with malice, as well as in slander, especially if the hatred is hidden.

At the same time, the feeling of hatred can be beneficial for a person. However, for the moral assessment of this feeling, it is important to know what or whom the hatred is directed at.

Anger is frustration, the result of frequent suppression of resentment and anger, a form of chronic hostility towards everyone and everything, bitterness. This is a chronic state of extreme irritation, reaching the point of cruelty. Anger develops gradually and often has its origins in infancy. So, “embittered children” are often children from orphanages. Children become embittered as a result of the cruel treatment of them by parents and adults. They treat others with the same indifference, callousness, heartlessness, and sometimes cruelty, with which they were once treated. Their bitterness is designed to hide unbearable insults and disappointments.

The feeling of hostility is manifested in the emotions of anger (anger), disgust and contempt with their inherent feelings and expression, which lead to aggressive behavior. In this regard, C. Spielberger and colleagues (Spielberger et al., 1985) talk about the VAH syndrome: Hostility - Aggression - Anger.

Hostility in general has relatively low heritability. At the same time, some authors identify hereditarily determined personality characteristics related to hostility (anger, cynicism).

F. Bacon considered freaks, cripples and eunuchs, or, in his words, those who are not able to help themselves and therefore seek to harm others, to be especially prone to envy and the hostility associated with it. "For they are people<…>who believe that the misfortunes of other people atone for their own suffering. The justice of the words of F. Bacon, that those who are not able to change something in themselves are prone to envy, is also visible in the actions of people who are terminally ill. In medicine, cases are known when in former times patients with an open form of tuberculosis sought to infect other people because of envy of their health. Some people with AIDS are doing the same thing these days.

Hostility is a companion of "black" envy, manifested as hostility, that is, in destructive aggressive behavior directed at the object of envy. Being generated by a competitive feeling, the aggression of envy is aimed at the desire to destroy the superiority of the other, justified as the elimination of injustice.

Hostility may play a significant role in the etiology of various severe somatic diseases (Miller et al., 1996). Thus, a relationship has been established between hostility and overall early mortality, as well as with the severity of the course of cancer (Graves, Thomas, 1981).

Many studies have shown that hostile people are more likely to get coronary heart disease. Hostile people are characterized by more intense and prolonged psychophysiological reactions to frustrating or stressful influences (increased blood pressure, accelerated heart rate, changes in the blood levels of certain hormones). It was found that hostile subjects are characterized by a chronic state of vigilance (search and registration of sources of danger), which is characterized by an increased content of testosterone in the blood plasma, which plays a significant role in the etiology of atherosclerosis. It is no coincidence that attempts to discover the intrinsic causes of type A people's propensity for cardiovascular disease led to the need to consider hostility as the main factor (Barefoot et al., 1994; Dembroski et al., 1985; Dembroski, Costa, 1987; Houston, Vavak, 1991 ; Siegman, 1994; Shekelle et al., 1991; Smith, 1992; Watkins et al., 1992; Williams et al., 1985).

A number of studies have noted a link between hostility and asthma. Repressed aggression directed at external objects turns inward, causing "vegetative agitation" and thus creating the prerequisites for the onset of an asthma attack (Berry and Pennebaker, 1993; Groen, 1979; Mellett, 1978).

Researchers (Leiker, Hailey, 1988) suggest that hostile people are at risk of developing somatic diseases, at least in part, due to an unhealthy lifestyle. It was noted that hostile subjects are more likely to drink alcohol and smoke, take less care of their own health (meaning visits to doctors, sleep patterns, nutrition), and also play sports less often. Similar results were obtained in a number of other studies (Houston and Vavak, 1991; Krantz and Durel, 1983).

However, S. N. Enikolopov and A. V. Sadovskaya (2000) note that, speaking about the effect of hostility on human health, it should be borne in mind that here, as in many other psychosomatic studies, the problem of breeding causes and consequences. In most of the listed works, hostility was measured already at the stage of development of a particular disease, which does not allow us to draw a conclusion about the direction of a causal relationship, but gives grounds to speak only about the existence of correlations.

Turning to the methodological level of studying hostility, we should first of all note the following. While at the conceptual level hostility can be quite clearly separated from its adjacent characteristics, at the operational level there is practically no such possibility: hostility is mixed with its particular emotional, behavioral and somatic manifestations, for example, with anger and aggression. This is due to the fact that all three phenomena, as already noted, often [co-present] and are closely related. Existing methods do not adequately solve this problem, and there is an urgent need to create reliable methods that are adequate for measuring hostility itself and differentiating it with operationally similar characteristics. This problem is complicated by the fact that for such methods it is extremely difficult to single out a validation group, namely a sample of deliberately hostile subjects. Historically, the most commonly used criterion for this purpose has been all kinds of aggressive behavior, and this, as already discussed, is the wrong way. Finally, we should not forget that hostility (as a negative attitude towards the outside world) is a socially unacceptable characteristic. Therefore, when organizing a study, it is necessary to carefully consider the influence of the social factor.

The main methodological difficulty in measuring hostility lies in the fact that the latter does not have unambiguous behavioral or any other external correlates and criteria, being a hypothetical construct in its essence. By definition, hostility as such exists only in the subject's system of ideas about the external world, which can not always be formulated in speech and quantitatively fixed. For this reason, hostility can be studied only on the basis of a number of external criteria that are hypothetically derived from its properties, which raises the question of the objectivity of studies of hostility as such.

Enikolopov S. N., Sadovskaya A. V., 2000. P. 63