A dozen years ago, the idea of introducing the institute of psychologists in the army was met with considerable skepticism. It was believed that the unit commander was the best psychologist. New socio-economic relations in the country have dramatically changed the" psychological mentality " of society. Naturally, all this could not but affect the army system. The prolonged so-called transition period formed conscripts in the context of the war in Chechnya, growing unemployment, uncertain moral guidelines, a deep crisis in public education, and an increased number of family and household disasters. On this occasion, in a conversation with me, the deputy commander for educational work of the Leningrad-Pavlovsk Motorized Rifle Division, Lieutenant Colonel N. G. Markov, reasoned as follows:: - To put it bluntly, the Institute of military psychologists came to our army with a big delay. The idea itself was generally treated very coolly. Because it wasn't backed up by anything. And really, who was the psychologist at first? Most often, he did not have any relevant education or basic professional training. The old approaches were not suitable, and the regulatory and methodological framework was practically nonexistent. What should I do in this situation, and what documents should I rely on?.. So such an officer, often appointed to a position against his will, looked like an artificial figure, with unclear functions and capabilities. When the Military University began to produce certified specialists, when the "Manual on Psychological Work in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation" finally came to the troops, a peculiar stereotype had already developed in relation to psychologists, which could only be overcome with the help of psychology... This is a joke, of course, but there is some truth in it. Time has shown that literally all army structures should be permeated with this important work. Today, alas, only a full-time psychologist is provided for the regiment - this ... Читать далее