Cultural and Philosophical Analysis of Collective Identity and its Representation in Cinema

Introduction. The current processes of deglobalization and decolonization in culture pose the task of rethinking and conducting a systematic and holistic analysis of the concept of collective identity from the perspective philosophy of culture. By utilizing culturalphilosophical paradigms, it becomes possible to overcome the limitations imposed by social constructivism and psychodynamic approaches to describing collective identity, and to describe collective identity as a stable objective interpersonal phenomenon. This article distinguishes between introgenic and extragenic types of collective identity, which differ in their sources of formation, significance for individuals and characteristics. Methodology and sources. This research is based on the methodological foundations of symbolic interactionism, Mikhail Bakhtin's dialogical model of culture, Jurgen Habermas's ̈ discursive approach, and the systemic-holistic analysis developed by Moisey Kagan. Results and discussion. Collective identity is considered as the result of aligning sociocultural experience with a system of values through communication. It involves the establishment of boundaries and the production of symbols that guide the process of identification. Cultural and ethnic identities are considered as introgenic types of collective identity, characterized by existential significance. Being dynamic, an identification leads to the formation of a stable and defined cultural or ethnic identity that seeks to maintain its boundaries and foundations even in the face of transformative influences. This is related to the processes of intersubjective interpretation, communication, and collectivity underlying their formation. Cinematic works do not merely reflect the world directly; they present it through languages and discourses, serving as reflections of reflections and social expressions that objectify the axiosphere. Cinema as a whole, and regional cinema in particular, reflects cultural values and identity, modeling ethnic diversity and illustrating the perspectives of cultural bearers. This way of representation liberates cultural or ethnic identity from distortions typical of exoticism and ethnographism that arise when describing local cultures through the eyes of the Other. Conclusion. Currently, collective identity is only achievable through communicative interaction and it is based on the awareness of shared opportunities to participate in identity formation. This implies an equal contribution from both individuals and the objectified system of values and symbols through collective memory.