Linear and non-linear theories of social development. Section v. the process of development of societies

CHAPTER 21. Types of social development

21.1. The concept of social development

History is the process and result of human activity. In Soviet science since the 1930s. dominated by materialistic determinism, according to which being determines consciousness. Now it is being replaced by an opposite idealistic approach: the psychic (including consciousness) determines being. From the point of view of historical realism, both of these points of view on the driving forces of the historical process are one-sided: social being (history) is created by conscious people through their activity (practical and spiritual).

The development of societies is a process in which, on the one hand, people, communities, institutions operate, and on the other hand, objective conditions that become the framework of their goals, activities and results. From the point of view of historical realism, the decisive factor in historical development is the subjective factor - the conscious activity of elites, parties, classes, their interests, programs, organization, will, energy in the realization of interests. The objective factors in the development of societies include territory, climate, economic level, the state of public institutions (families, education, courts, armies, etc.), mentality, consciousness, worldview of the people, etc.

The development of societies includes two complementary processes - progress and regression. Progress implies the movement of societies from the lower to the higher, from the simple to the complex, from parts to the whole, regress, on the contrary, is the movement of societies from the higher to the lower, from the complex to the simple, from the whole to its parts. The progress of societies and humanity is always accompanied by regression, when there is not only the acquisition, but also the loss of some values: ecology, silence, tranquility, stability of the profession, inviolability social order etc. If progress prevails, then in general we speak of progressive development, in the case of the predominance of regression, we are talking about degradation.

One should always remember the price of social progress, its regressive side, losses. Let us recall at what cost the formation breakthrough of the USSR was achieved in the 20th century: civil war, the death of the peasantry, the decline of religiosity, the destruction of people in the Gulag, the militarization of the country, the degradation of nature, etc. Based on the sad experience of Russians, it must be remembered that social progress should not represent a "Pyrrhic victory" when losses exceed gains in the long term. From the point of view of August 1991, the path of the February bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1917, interrupted by the Bolsheviks led by Lenin, was more optimal for Russia's prospects.

The development of societies (individual spheres, formations, civilizations, etc.) includes transitional periods in which disorganization, deformation, and decivilization take place. The fundamental reason for the need for a transition period is the contradiction between the developed needs of the demo-social sphere and the formation of society, the means of production. As a result of the resolution of this contradiction, the structure of employment of the population develops. Labor skills, experience, knowledge of the majority of the able-bodied population cease to be in demand, mass unemployment arises, the standard of living decreases, a state of social tension, violence, crime, moral decline, etc. appears. The transitional period is always a national crisis or even a catastrophe.

Analysis of world history shows that the normal duration of the transition period is 15-20 years, i.e. about a generational change. Depending on the quality of the national elite and the nature of formational development, the transition period may be shortened or extended. In Russia, as a rule, this process is delayed. Thus, the formational transition from the feudal-bourgeois formation (agrarian-industrial) to the proletarian-socialist (industrial) and the accompanying inter-formation and inter-civilization crisis, the country passed under the leadership of Lenin and Stalin in 20 years, from 1917 to 1937. Now it has entered a new transitional inter-formation and inter-civilization transition from the proletarian-socialist to the post-industrial-mixed formation. Both this transition and the crisis will be quite difficult and destructive.

It is necessary to distinguish between the process of development of societies and different ways understanding it. Between understanding, which is always one-sided, and social development, which is always objective, there is an important contradiction - knowledge and object. In the history of understanding community development in social philosophy, three main approaches to this objective process can be distinguished: cyclic, progressive, spiral.

21.2. Cyclic development of societies

First of all, the cyclic (circular) was recognized, later - the progressive (linear), and now - the spiral process, as the most complex.

The study of cycles and waves of historical and socio-philosophical development was carried out by J. Vico, N. Ya. Danilevsky, O. Spengler, F. Braudel, A. Toynbee, N.D. Kondratiev and others. Theories of cyclic development (historical cycle) are diverse in terms of the material used by the authors, the form of presentation, the methods of argumentation, and the vision of world-historical perspectives. If for Vico the fundamental principle is the unity of world history, then Danilevsky, on the contrary, proceeds from the denial of this unity and considers the history of society as a combination of various cultural and historical types.

The creator of the theory of the historical cycle, Vico (1668-1744), considered the final cause of the development of societies-peoples of God. Each nation, according to his teaching, goes through four epochs in its development: divine (there is no state), heroic (an aristocratic state arises), human (democratic state, freedom, natural justice), decline, destruction, return to its original state. Vico put the form of government in society at the basis of the cyclical development of peoples. The subject of the historical process in Vico are individual peoples that go through the stages of gods (theocratic rules), heroes (rule of aristocrats), people (democratic rule) that form the historical cycle.

N. Danilevsky in his book "Russia and Europe" identifies the following cultural and historical types (civilizations): Egyptian, Chinese, Assyrian-Babylonian-Phoenician, Iranian, Jewish, Greek, Roman, New Semitic, Germano-Roman (European). Civilizations develop autonomously from one another and show their creative function in selected areas. For Greek civilization it is beauty, for Semitic civilization it is religion, for Roman civilization it is law, and so on.

The history of civilizations, according to N. Danilevsky, is created by people whose role in this creation is different. So, there are: 1) positive faces of history (people, tribes, peoples) who created world civilizations; 2) negative faces of history (Huns, Mongols, Turks, etc.), which played a destructive role in relation to other civilizations; 3) passive faces of history, which are ethnographic material for other faces of history. Each nation goes through three stages in its development: ethnic (tribal), state (political), civilizational (cultural). The listed civilizations do not have a common chronology (historical fate); they develop mainly in isolation: there is no historical event that would have an impact on the fate of all mankind.

None of the eight civilizations, according to N. Danilevsky, can be considered as the best or the worst: they are all equal. Each civilization goes through three stages of development. The formation of civilization is the longest period when the people assert the main features of their civilization: language, traditions, political independence. Prosperity is the shortest period in the development of civilization (400-600 years), when the creative forces of the people (passionarity, according to Gumilyov) are in their prime. The decline of civilization is due to the weakening of the creative forces of the people, stagnation in their forms of life, the development of cynicism, weakening and decay. The European (German-Roman) civilization entered the stage of decline, and the Russian-Slavic civilization entered the stage of formation and expected prosperity.

O. Spengler ("The Decline of Europe", 1918) defines culture as a sphere of organic life, including people, language, religious dogma, art, state, science, etc. The culture of this people goes through the stages of childhood, youth, maturity, old age. Civilization for him is a stage of decline, agony and old age of culture. It manifests itself in such features of the culture of the people as cosmopolitanism instead of blood ties, scientific approach instead of religious, mass values ​​instead of traditional ones, sex instead of motherhood, money instead of genuine values, violence instead of consent, etc.

Spengler has eight higher cultures (which have influenced humanity): Egyptian, Babylonian, Indian, Chinese, Greco-Roman (classical), Arabic, Mexican, Western (which arose about 100 years ago). Each culture has its own essence - a symbol: in Chinese it is Tao (the way of life), in Greco-Roman it is a cult of sensuality, etc. Each civilization manifests itself in certain areas of life: Greek - in beauty, Chinese - in usefulness, Indian - in imagination and mysticism, Germanic-Romance - in science and technology.

Comprehensive and widespread in scientific world was the theory of civilizations by A. Toynbee, set forth in his 20-volume work "Comprehension of History" (1934-1961). For him, the unit of study and the subject of human history are not peoples, not cultures, not national states, not humanity, but civilization. The latter represents something intermediate between a separate country and humanity, includes several peoples (and countries) and has a cultural and spiritual identity. A. Toynbee has 21 such civilizations. Each of them also has one dominant theme - activity. For example, in the civilization of the Hellenes - aesthetics, in Western civilization - technology and science, etc.

Civilizations arise as a result of the interaction of two factors: the emergence of a creative minority (elite) and not quite favorable conditions, "challenging" the creative minority. Civilization is the response of the creative minority to this historical challenge in the form of religion, art, science and technology, economics, and so on. The core of civilizations is always one or another religion, the bearer of which is at first the creative minority, and then the people. Civilizations go through stages of formation, prosperity and decline, which are based on the corresponding state of its elite, the true spiritual and organizational core of civilization. A. Toynbee identifies five living civilizations: 1) Christian (Western society); 2) Orthodox Christian (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and other countries); 3) Islamic (countries of North Africa and the Middle East); 4) Hindu (India); 5) Buddhist (China and other countries).

Cyclic development (and its understanding) can be historical and functional. They are expressed in the formation of societies, some institutions, communities, people, etc., their deployment and flourishing, and then decline and disappearance. For example, the rise, rise and fall of fascist Germany, militaristic Japan, the Soviet Union. Thus, the cyclical understanding of social development is the allocation of stages (periods) of formation, prosperity and decline in it, serving as different qualitative states of society.

In the cyclical development of societies, the following main points can be distinguished. First, a specific cycle, the repetition of the same states. Secondly, the alternation of these circles over a relatively long time. Thirdly, the repetition of these circles on a new basis in some way. The cyclical approach to the development of societies presupposes a change in the qualities of societies both within a cycle and between cycles-circles. Therefore, it is impossible to reduce cyclic development to the theory of historical circulation (Viko, Danilevsky, etc.). For example, the cyclic approach to the development of Russia distinguishes several cycles in it: princely, imperial, Soviet. And each time, having completed the next cycle-circle, Russia began a new one.

The destruction of a social organism does not occur without a trace: in each individual case, a certain connection with it is preserved by the formations that have arisen in its place. So it was in the territory of the former Roman Empire, where a number of independent societies arose, which in the Renaissance and Modern Age enriched many of the inherited achievements of Roman culture. But in this case it is legitimate to speak of the historical cycles of newly formed societies.

It is obvious that the cyclic understanding of social development (historical cyclicity) involves the allocation of progress and regress in the development, which are in different ways at each stage of the cycle. The historical cycle is the unity of the processes of flourishing and disintegration of social systems and reflects the fact that society (like everyone else) in its formational and civilizational component has its own lifespan. The formation of the new is accompanied by the disintegration of the old, and rather strong. For example, Yeltsin's period of formation of bourgeois-socialist civilization: at the same time, the formation of a new national ideology, democratic statehood, a market economy, and enterprising people is evident. At the heyday stage, the new triumphs over the old, assimilates its remnants, but at the same time gives rise to a "super-new" in society, which becomes the opposite of the new, gradually turning it into the old. At the stage of decline, this new begins to collapse. And so on ad infinitum or until the elimination of a given society as a whole, as was often the case in the history of mankind: the Romans, Aztecs, Tatars, etc.

In addition to historical cyclicity, sometimes functional cyclicity in the development of societies is distinguished, which include: 1) the stability of society, 2) instability (crisis, revolution, etc.) of society, 3) stability on a new basis. This refers to the nature of the functioning of social institutions, communities, states. During a stable cycle, naturally formed social communities (ethnoi, classes, strata), stable forms of activity of social actors, their traditional roles in society, political, social and other institutions are reproduced, self-regulation of society is carried out. A social system that is out of balance after a certain time returns to its original state again - a kind of pendulum movement takes place. The cycle is a way of existence and preservation of society and is especially evident in societies that are relatively closed.

Recurrence in historical development means the similarity of situations, opposing subjects, tasks facing society, and the negative consequences of historical actions. Historical development is a sequential temporal chain of historical events. Recurrence refers to historical events as viewed by an observer in terms of a particular concept and criterion. Therefore, the inclusion of the observer in the repetition makes repetition a subjective-objective process. In the analysis of repeatability, the method of analogies is used. Toynbee writes: It seems that the conclusion suggests itself that the history of mankind does indeed repeat itself at times, to a large extent even in those spheres of human activity where the desire and will of man were closest to mastering the situation and least of all depended on the influence of natural cycles.

1 Toynbee A. J. Civilization before the court of history. - St. Petersburg: Yuventa, 1996. - P.39.

What does it mean? This means that the needs of people are basically unchanged and manifest themselves in different social and natural situations. The repeatability of needs (and interests), the mentality of people is the basis of the repeatability of human history. This means that man, as the main subject of the historical process, does not fundamentally change, sets in principle the same goals and objectives, and strives to realize them, each time ending up relatively unsuccessfully.

The most important criteria for the relative reliability of a theory (concept) of the development of society are: 1) its compliance with historical facts; 2) understanding of the social development taking place on its basis (subjects, causes, consequences); 3) prediction of probable scenarios for the development of society; 4) the possibility of further development of the theory, i.e. rejecting its outdated ideas and acquiring new ones. The theory of historical cycles satisfies to some extent the listed requirements, but misses some important aspects of the historical process. They were expressed by the theory of linear development.

21.3. Linear development of societies

Of great importance in understanding social development is a linear paradigm called linear progress. It is also called the theory of evolutionary development (evolutionism). Its creators were O. Comte, G. Spencer, L. Morgan, E. Durkheim, L. Ward and others. Linear progressive understanding considers social development as a process of change from lower to higher, from simple to complex, from partial to integral quality societies and humanity.

The evolutionary understanding of social development was based on an analogy with a biological (living) organism and its growth. Society began to be viewed as an organism consisting of human cells, organs-institutions, and so on.

Proponents of a linear understanding of development proceeded from the fact that humanity and all specific societies develop in an interconnected manner. As a result of the evolutionary development of society, a new quality is added to its former quality (cumulative effect), some transformation of a part of the old and the loss of something. It is very important for this approach to define the criteria of lower and higher, simple and complex, partial and holistic, etc. They are different in different socio-philosophical and sociological theories.

O. Comte believed that in order to understand the modern era of mankind, it is necessary to place it in a wider historical context. driving force The development of society, according to O. Comte, is the strength of the human spirit (intelligence, morality, will). The development of society directly depends on the quantity and variety of its knowledge, which determine the military, political, economic aspects public life. Society goes through three levels in its development. In the theological stage, people base their creation of life on the presence of supernatural beings, which they worship in the form of mythology and religion. This stage is characterized by military confrontation and slavery. At the metaphysical stage of development, people increasingly proceed in their creation of life from abstract concepts created by their minds: freedom, sovereignty, rights, legitimacy, democracy, etc. At a positive stage of historical development, people discover the laws of nature, society, man, and begin to use them in organizing their lives. Science is gradually becoming the main productive force of society.

G. Spencer considered evolution to be the fundamental principle of the development of nature, society, and man. The world is a material reality in the unity of matter, motion, energy. Evolution is a movement from the homogeneity (homogeneity) of the world to heterogeneity (complexity), accompanied by the dispersion of motion and the integration of matter. Evolution is carried out with the help of structural and functional differentiation of matter from simplicity to complexity, from homogeneity, uniformity to heterogeneity, specialization, from fluidity to stability.

The evolution of society from one stage to another is characterized by: 1) differentiation of functions, power, property, prestige between different groups of people; 2) an increase in the inequality of labor, power, wealth, prestige and, in general, the complication of differentiating people into numerous strata; 3) the division of society into groups, classes, strata according to economic, professional, political, national, religious characteristics.

G. Spencer was the first to propose a dichotomous typology of societies - dividing them into two opposite ideal types. Real societies are a mixture of features of these ideal types: military society and industrial society. Military societies are focused on defense and conquest, integrated through political violence, their basis is an authoritarian state with low social mobility, an extensive, regulated economy, the dominant values ​​are discipline, patriotism, courage. Industrial societies are focused on the development of the economy, a form of integration is the voluntary cooperation of people, a democratic state with high social mobility, a dynamic market economy, the dominant qualities are initiative, ingenuity, independence.

1 See: Sztompka P. Sociology of social changes. - M.: Aspect-Press, 1966. - S. 138-141.

L. Morgan put the development of the means (technology) of production at the basis of the evolutionary theory of human development. He believed that the main driving forces of history are the inventions that people create to meet their needs (in food, clothing, transport, etc.). If the basic needs of people remain basically unchanged, then the tools and objects of their satisfaction change from epoch to epoch. Spreading among societies, these tools (technological innovations) and material goods gradually change the way of life of societies, their entire structure.

L. Morgan identified three phases in the history of mankind: savagery, barbarism, civilization. In times of savagery, people used primitive tools (fire, bow, arrows, etc.) to gather food. At the stage of barbarism, dishes were invented, animals were domesticated, irrigation, production of iron and tools began. At the stage of civilization, the invention of the phonetic alphabet and writing took place, the written history of mankind began, the spread of accumulated experience went faster.

An interesting idea of ​​human evolution was put forward by L. Ward in his Dynamic Sociology. In the history of nature, he distinguishes the following main stages: 1) cosmogenesis, covering the Universe; 2) biogenesis, covering all living things; 3) anthropogenesis inherent in people; 4) sociogenesis - the development of societies. At the last stage of human development, all four phases interact, overlapping one another. Planning, foresight, designing the future is the hallmark of the last stage of evolution, which becomes more humanistic than the previous ones.

1 Sztompka P. Decree op. pp. 143-144.

21.4. Spiral development of societies

The spiral development of society is more complex than the cyclical and linear one. We adhered to it in the presentation of the formational and civilizational development of mankind. On the one hand, it is linear, as it occurs in something from simple to complex. On the other hand, this development is cyclical (three stages), but the result is not a circle, but a spiral, when the end of the cycle does not completely return to the beginning, but acquires new features. This does not mean that there are no predominantly cyclic and linear types of development. In the development of specific societies, all types of development are closely intertwined.

If we depict the considered types of development graphically, it turns out that the spiral is a synthesis of a cycle (circle) and a line. As a graphic image, it acts as an analogue of "social continuity", which reflects the dialectical unity of discontinuity and continuity, relative identity and difference, the genetic connection of successive processes.

The spiral development of society is based on the law of negation of negation discovered by Hegel. From the point of view of this law, the development of all things and phenomena (including societies) goes through three stages: 1) the initial stage, from which the development of society begins; 2) negation of the initial stage, as a result of which the old is transformed (metaphysically or dialectically); 3) negation of the negation of the initial stage, at which a return to the initial stage is carried out, but on a qualitatively new basis and a synthesis of the previous two stages of development.

An example of such development is the growth of grain, the aging of man, the progress of mankind. Grain, from the point of view of the law of negation of negation, goes through the stages of planting in the soil, stalk and flowering, ear. The ear produces many grains similar to those planted, and reflects the soil, the sun, the wind and other factors acting in all previous stages of development as grains. A person is born weak and stupid, then becomes strong and smart, but at the end of life he returns to weakness and falls into senile insanity.

The process of denial can take place and be interpreted in different ways. Nihilistic negation is characterized by the following features: 1) there is a total destruction of the old; 2) there is no continuity between the negation and the original basis; 3) a new stage of development is deprived of the possibility of development. Nihilistic is the burning of grain, from which a pile of ashes remains, the creation by the Bolsheviks Soviet Russia, as a result of which they were destroyed Orthodox religion, bourgeois state, market economy, peasantry, etc.

Dialectical negation in development is characterized by the following features: 1) there is a negation of only the obsolete and unnecessary in the new; 2) the presence of continuity between different stages development, as a result - both preservation and renewal; 3) the possibility of development on a new basis remains. Such is the germination of grains in moist and warm soil up to the ear, the construction of bourgeois socialism (democratic capitalism) in Western countries as a result of workers gaining democratic rights, an eight-hour working day, high wages, labor protection, pensions, etc. And all this without the total destruction of the old society "to the ground" and repressions against those who act differently and those who think differently.

In accordance with the law of negation of negation, Hegel put the geography of the people and the spirit of the people living in this territory as the basis for the progressive periodization of human history. He got four progressive periods of history in which certain principles of the Absolute Spirit are realized: the Eastern world, the Greek world, the Roman world, the German world.

According to Marx, social property and collectivism operate at the primitive stage, but the efficiency of production is low. At the stage of antagonistic formations (slave-owning, feudal, capitalist), the previous stage is denied, which causes a sharp increase in the efficiency of social production. At the communist stage, they return again to social ownership of the means of production, collectivism, but retain the high efficiency of social production obtained at the middle stage of social development.

Karl Jaspers drew attention to the fact that Herder, Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche made Christianity the initial basis of their socio-philosophical and historical-philosophical theories. They look at the history of mankind as a whole, developing according to a certain law: from some source, through a state of crisis, returning to the source on a new basis. In the beginning, humanity was fine. Then the normal course of history was perverted by some kind of evil (for Marx - private property, exploitation, alienation). But in the end everything is restored and becomes good (communism in Marx).

1 Jaspers K. Nietzsche and Christianity. - M.: Medium, 1994. - S. 46.

The spiral type of social development, as can be seen from the above examples, is characterized by a number of genetically related processes that negate one another, and is distinguished by the organic inclusion (algebraic summation) of many factors at relatively long stages of the development of societies. In the course of every denial, society social community, a social institution goes not only to another qualitative state, but also to the opposite qualitative state. It is precisely in this that the complexity of the implementation of negation in a dialectical way lies.

We have shown that the formational development of mankind goes from the stage of primitiveness (syncretic), through a split into opposite formations to a mixed one. At the last stage, there is a relative synthesis of the positive accumulated at the previous stages of development, at which this positive appeared in the form of two opposite formations of society - political and economic. A huge role in the implementation of spiral development is played by the subjective factor: the level of science (social, natural, technical, human), the quality of the elite, the level of people's freedom.

Civilizational development also goes in a spiral: from a mythological civilization, through an individualistic and collectivistic civilization, to a solidaristic civilization. The latter is also a synthesis of the positive, accumulated at the previous (and opposite) stages of the civilizational development of mankind. Here, too, it is obvious that the condition for development from one civilizational stage to another is the ability of societies to dialectically (and not to metaphysically, as in Russia) deny previous stages of development.

There is also a dialectical contradiction between the social formation and civilization of societies and humanity. In the unity and struggle of these opposites, either the formational or the civilizational component prevails in the society-subject. In conditions ecological crisis, deepening globalization, multi-formation and multi-civilizational structure of mankind and individual countries, it is very important to achieve a balance between them by strengthening the civilizational universal solidaristic ecological component.

Questions for self-control

1. What is the difference between regression and progress?
2. What is the growth of a social organism?
3. What is the difference between the evolutionism of O. Comte and G. Spencer?
4. What is the difference between evolutionism and cyclicality?
5. What is the difference between the cyclic, evolutionary, spiral development of society?
6. What are the main features of Marx's theory of social development.

Driving forces of social development.

The driving forces of social development (DSSD) are essential, necessary, long-term causes that ensure the functioning and progress of society. The idea of ​​historical progress appeared in the second. floor. 18th century in connection with the objective processes of the formation and development of capitalism. The creators of his initial concepts were Turgot and Condorcet, who proposed his rationalistic theory. Subsequently, Hegel gave a deep interpretation of progress. He tried to show history as a single natural process of development from the lowest to the highest, in which each historical epoch acts as an obligatory step in the upward movement of mankind. His concept was idealistic, interpreting world history as progress in the consciousness of freedom, movement from one spiritual formation to another.

In general, supporters of the idealistic understanding of history reduce the FDLR to ideal motives, motives for the historical activity of people, to political violence, see them in the immutable nature of man, in external nature, in supernatural or irrational forces, in a mechanical combination of various factors.

Marx and his followers, based on a materialistic understanding of history, linked social progress with the development of material production, with the movement of society from one socio-economic formation to another. In accordance with this position, social progress is defined as such a change and development of the socio-economic structures of society, in which conditions are created for the successful development of productive forces and, on their basis, for an ever more complete development of man, for improving the well-being of the people. Proceeding from this understanding of progress, the question of its criteria is decided. This is, first of all, the level of development of the productive forces, the productivity of social labor. And since the main condition for the manifestation of this criterion are relations of production, they also become an important indicator of progress. Both, in turn, receive the final expression in the degree of development of a person as a person.

Thus, the classics of Marxism-Leninism asserted the primacy and determining nature of material DS in the development of society in relation to political and spiritual ones, as well as the activity and relative independence of the latter, revealed the role of the masses as the decisive driving force of history. DSOR includes social contradictions, the progressive activity of social actors aimed at resolving them, the motivating forces of this activity (needs, interests, etc.).

In the structural and functional aspect, FDLR are divided into natural (demographic and geographical) and social factors; public - into material and economic, social, political and spiritual, objective and subjective.

Social differentiation of society. spheres of public life.

The main spheres of society's life are: economic, social, political and spiritual.

The economic sphere is the basic, defining in the life of society. It includes the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods. This is the sphere of the functioning of production, the direct implementation of the achievements of scientific and technological progress, the implementation of the entire set of production relations of people, including ownership of the means of production, the exchange of activities and the distribution of material wealth. The economic sphere acts as an economic space in which the economic life of the country is organized, the interaction of all sectors of the economy, as well as international economic cooperation.

The social sphere is the sphere of relations between social groups existing in society, including classes, professional and socio-demographic segments of the population (youth, the elderly, etc.), as well as national communities about the social conditions of their life and activities. It's about creating healthy conditions production activities of people, on ensuring the necessary standard of living for all segments of the population, on solving the problems of health care, education and social security, labor and employment. This refers to the regulation of the whole complex of social-class and national relations concerning working conditions, life, education and the standard of living of people.

The political sphere is the space in which the activities of the state in the management of society, as well as the activities of polit. parties, society organizations, movements, expressing watered. interests def. classes, social groups, national communities and actively participating in the struggle for the state. power or, at least, seeking to influence what is happening watered. processes.

The spiritual sphere is the sphere of people's relations regarding the satisfaction of their diverse spiritual and aesthetic needs; the sphere of value creation, their dissemination and assimilation by all sections of society. At the same time, spiritual values ​​mean not only, say, objects of painting, music or literary works, but also knowledge of people, science, moral standards behavior, etc., in a word, everything that constitutes the spiritual content of social life or the spirituality of society, social consciousness.

The spiritual life of society is made up of the daily spiritual communication of people and from such areas of their activity as knowledge, including scientific, education and upbringing, from the manifestations of morality, religion, and art. All this makes up the content of the spiritual sphere, develops the spiritual world of people, their ideas about the meaning of life in society. This has a decisive influence on the formation of spiritual principles in their activities and behavior.

Society is an integral social system, but it is not homogeneous, differentiated. The main elements of the social structure of society: classes, estates, castes, layers; people of the city and village; representatives of physical and mental labor; socio-demographic groups (men, women, old people, youth); national communities.

Towards social sphere society, there are two main approaches: 1) class, according to which the whole society is divided into large groups - classes (as a rule, owners and non-owners, often antagonistic, between which the so-called class struggle takes place); common in Marxist philosophy; 2) the stratification approach, according to which the social structure is understood on the basis of the concept of "strata". Unlike classes, estates, strata are characterized mainly by non-economic indicators: people's involvement in power, profession, education, science, religious beliefs, ethnic groups, place of residence, relatives, etc. This approach is characteristic of Western philosophy.

The trend in the development of modern society is: its transformation into an increasingly homogeneous, smoothing out contradictions, differences between strata; complication of the structure, fragmentation of strata to the micro level - the so-called "small groups".

Revolution and evolution as forms of change in social systems.

Evolution and revolution are correlative socio-philosophical concepts that concretize, in relation to the social form of the movement of matter, the general philosophical law of the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones, and vice versa. Evolutionary changes in the economic, social and spiritual spheres of social life prepare and inevitably cause revolutionary changes in society as a whole, and vice versa, a revolution leads to a new character of evolutionary changes.

The concepts of evolution and revolution are not only correlative, but also relative: a revolutionary process in one respect can be evolutionary in another. The criterion for distinguishing between evolution and revolution is objective. Evolutionary change is a quantitative increase or decrease in what is, and revolutionary change is the process of the emergence of a qualitatively new, something that was not in the old. Evolution and revolution are dialectically connected, because the new cannot appear from nothing, as a product of supernatural creation, but only as a result of the development of the old. But a simple change of the old cannot give rise to something fundamentally new. The latter appears as a break in the gradual evolutionary development of the old, as a leap into a new state. Those. evolution is seen as a gradual change and is opposed to a spasmodic, qualitative type of change.

Revolution is a transition from one qualitative state to another as a result of the accumulation of quantitative changes. Revolution differs from evolution in the rapid nature of the manifestation of the transition to a new quality, the rapid restructuring of the basic structures of the system.

Allocate types of revolutions: scientific and technical and social. Social revolution (lat. revolutio - turn, change) - a radical upheaval in the life of society, meaning the overthrow of the obsolete and the establishment of a new, progressive social system; form of transition from one social economy. formations to others.

The experience of history shows that a revolution is not an accident, but a necessary, natural result of the historical development of antagonistic formations. The social revolution completes the process of evolution, the gradual maturation in the depths of the old society of the elements or prerequisites for a new social order; resolves the contradiction between the new productive forces and the old production relations, breaks the obsolete production relations and the political superstructure that consolidates these relations, and opens up scope for the further development of the productive forces. The old relations of production are maintained by their bearers - the ruling classes, who protect the obsolete order by the power of state power. Therefore, in order to clear the way for social development, advanced forces must overthrow the existing state system.

The main question of the revolution is the question of political power. “The transfer of state power from the hands of one class to the hands of another is ... the main ... sign of revolution, both in the strictly scientific and in the practical political meaning of this concept” (Lenin). Revolution is the highest form of class struggle. In revolutionary epochs, the broad masses of the people, who previously stood apart from political life, rise to a conscious struggle. That is why revolutionary epochs signify an enormous acceleration of social development. Revolution must not be confused with the so-called. palace coups, coups, etc. The latter are only a violent change in the government elite, a change in power of individuals or groups, which does not change its essence.

Revol. the transfer of power from the hands of some social. groups into the hands of others can be reliably identified only when it becomes clear to whom it serves, whose interests it expresses. Hence the second question of the revolution - the question of the attitude towards the masses of the people, of the driving forces, of the satisfaction of the people with the results of the complete turn in social development. In each individual country, the possibilities for the emergence and development of a revolution depend on a number of objective conditions, as well as on the degree of maturity of the subjective factor.

The concept of history. Types of interpretation of the historical process.

In their views on history, philosophers were divided into two groups: 1) those who view history as a chaotic, random process, devoid of logic, patterns (for example, irrationalists); 2) those who see def. logic in history, considering history as a purposeful, natural process - most philosophers belong to this category.

Among the approaches to history as an internally logical and regular process, the following stand out (the most common, justified, popular): the formational approach; civilizational approach; cultural approach. There are also other approaches.

The formational approach was proposed by the founders of Marxism - K. Marx and F. Engels, developed by V.I. Lenin. The key concept used in the formational approach is the socio-economic formation, which is a set of production relations, the level of development of productive forces, social relations, and the political system at a certain stage of historical development. All history is considered as a natural process of changing socio-economic formations. Each new formation matures in the depths of the previous one, denies it, and then is itself denied by an even newer formation. Each formation is a higher type of organization of society. The OEF has two chapters. component - base and superstructure. Basis - the economy of society, the components of which are the productive forces and production relations. Superstructure - the state, political, public institutions. The change in the OEF occurs as a result of a change in the economic basis, the overdue contradictions between the new level of productive forces and outdated production relations. The changed economic basis leads to a change in the political superstructure (either it adapts to the new basis, or it is swept away by the driving forces of history) - a new one arises, located on a more high quality nnom level socio-economic formation. In general, K. Marx singled out five socio-economic formations: primitive communal; slaveholding; feudal; capitalist; communist (socialist). He also pointed to a special political and economic type of society - the "Asian mode of production."

Advantages: understanding of history as a natural objective process, deep development of economic development mechanisms, realism, systematization of the historical process. Disadvantages: not taking into account other factors (cultural, national, spontaneous), excessive schematization, isolation from the specifics of society, linearity, incomplete confirmation by practice (passage by some societies of the working, capital formation, violation of linearity , jumps both up and down, economic collapse of the commune (social.) OEF.

The civilizational approach was proposed by Arnold Toynbee. The central concept used by him is civilization - a stable community of people united by spiritual traditions, a similar way of life, geographical, historical boundaries. History is a non-linear process. This is the process of birth, life, death of unrelated civilizations in different corners of the Earth. According to Toynbee, civilizations can be either basic or local. The main civilizations leave a bright mark in the history of mankind, indirectly influence (especially religiously) other civilizations. Local civilizations, as a rule, become isolated within national boundaries.

The main civilizations were: Sumerian, Babylonian, Minoan, Hellenic (Greek), Chinese, Hindu, Islamic, Christian, and some other civilizations. According to Toynbee, there were about 30 local (national) civilizations in the history of mankind (American, German, Russian, etc.). According to Toynbee, the driving forces of history are: the challenge thrown to civilization from the outside (unfavorable geographical position, lagging behind other civilizations, military aggression); response of civilization as a whole to the challenge; activities of great people. The development of the whole story is built according to the "challenge - response" scheme. Each civilization in its destiny goes through four stages: origin; growth; break; disintegration culminating in the death of civilization.

The cultural approach was proposed by the German philosopher Oswald Spengler. The central concept of this approach is culture - the totality of religion, traditions, material and spiritual life. Culture is an autonomous, self-contained, closed, isolated reality. Culture is born, lives and dies. The concept of "culture" by Spengler is close to the concept of "civilization" by Toynbee, but "civilization" in Spengler has different meanings than in Toynbee. Civilization within the cultural approach - highest level development of culture, the final period of development of culture, preceding its death. In total, Spengler singled out eight cultures: Indian; Chinese; Babylonian; Egyptian; antique; Arabic; Russian; Western European.

Hegel, taking man's self-awareness, freedom as the initial criterion, considered history as a purposeful and natural process of man's liberation and singled out three stages in it: eastern (China, Egypt, etc.) - only one person is aware of himself and is free - the ruler, all the rest are his slaves; antique (Greece, Rome, the Middle Ages) - only one group is aware of itself and free, a layer of people - the "top"; all others serve it and depend on it; German - everyone is self-aware and free.

The positivist approach, in a somewhat modified form, is now widely used.

The positivists (Auguste Comte) identified the following stages in the development of society: traditional; pre-industrial (agrarian); industrial. Modern philosopher added a post-industrial stage to this classification.

Correlation between objective and subjective in history. Freedom and historical regularity.

Each new generation of people, entering into life, does not start history anew, but continues what was done by their predecessors. Consequently, the activities of people in def. the measure is already set by objective conditions that do not depend on their consciousness and will and determine the def. the level of development of production and social relations. Thus, the objective factor in history is, first of all, labor, production and forms of social relations, which to a large extent are the crystallization of previous human activities. But each new generation does not simply repeat what was done by their predecessors, but realizes its own needs and interests. The diverse activities of people, their living labor is what constitutes the essence of the subjective factor of history. The subjective factor is called so because it reveals the activity of the subject of history, which are the masses, social groups and individual people. In other words, labor, knowledge, skills, physical, mental and moral forces of people are the only creators of any wealth and movement of history.

Turgot argued that interest, ambition and vanity determine the continuous change of events on the world stage. The content of the subjective factor reveals the mechanism of people's influence on the objective conditions of their life, the essence of the driving forces of history, showing the process of the reverse influence of political, social, ideological relations on the economic structure of society. All this speaks of relates. the self-ty of the subjective factor, about its productive and active power of influencing the course of history. The subjective factor is very dynamic, prone to decomp. fluctuations, representing a "fan of possibilities" ranging from positive active creative energy to "malignancy" (harmful to social reality).

Thus, the real canvas of history appears as an interweaving and interaction of two factors - subjective and objective. The process of their interaction is characterized by def. orientation. The role of the subjective factor in history is constantly growing, and this is a general historical pattern. A necessary condition for its implementation is a reasonable manifestation of the subjective factor based on the correct and strict consideration of the objective laws of the development of society.

The history of society differs from the history of nature primarily in that the former is created by people, while the latter occurs by itself. World history, in the words of Engels, is the greatest poetess, who creates not arbitrarily, but according to law, the beautiful and the ugly, the tragic and the comic. The life of society (for all its seeming chaos) is not a heap of accidents, but in general an ordered organized system, subject to def. laws of function and development. Out of society no life of people is conceivable, because then, without having a solid point of support, it would be impossible to be sure of anything.

At the same time, history does not proceed by itself, but is created by the combined efforts of many people with their subjective goals, intentions, and will. Without it, there would be no history. From this follows a fundamental feature of the laws of history: a necessary condition for their action is the conscious activity of people. Those. the subjective factor enters into the very content of historical laws and is one of the real forces that determine the natural development of the historical process.

And although these laws are manifested in the cumulative conscious activity of people, they are nevertheless not subjective, but objective in nature, because they do not depend on the will and consciousness of individual individuals; then it is said that laws "govern" the course of historical events. The laws of the development of society are objective, essential, necessary, recurring connections between the phenomena of social life, characterizing the main direction social development. Thus, with an increase in material and spiritual wealth, human needs also increase; the development of production stimulates consumption, and the needs determine production itself; the progress of society naturally leads to an increase in the role of the subjective factor in the historical process, and so on.

The laws of history do not exclude the freedom of action of people. They determine the "fan of possibilities" that can be realized, and moreover in different ways, or not be realized. Which of the possibilities and how are realized, and which remain unrealized, depends on the subjective thoughts and actions of people. Moreover, changes in the minds of people become a factor that changes social reality and thus the conditions for the operation of historical laws. Therefore, the "fan of possibilities" has no fixed, unchanging boundaries: new ideas and projects of social reorganization, born in the minds of theorists and gaining recognition in society, can give rise to new opportunities and expand their "fan".

The dependence of the results of the action of the laws of history on the consciousness and will of the actors leads to the fact that these laws outline only a general trend in the development of social processes. Foreseeing the future, relying on these laws, is possible only in some general terms, but not in specific details. From a synergetic point of view, in order to understand the course of history, it is necessary to take into account that society is a non-linear system. Non-linearity means, firstly, that small-scale events can give rise to grandiose consequences. Secondly, non-linear processes are characterized by situations in which the future is ambiguously determined by the present (initial conditions). This means that in critical point there are various options for the subsequent course of events. The branching of a process into several possible trajectories is called a bifurcation. The fundamental difference between society and natural systems is that the choice of the bifurcation branch depends on the subjective factor - the will, consciousness, mind of people. Here people have freedom of choice. But this freedom is limited by the need to make a choice only from several. given by the objective laws of the history of the bifurcation branches.

In the life and development of society, a much greater specific gravity and statistical laws have a place: in historical events, a lot is subject to chance. History never repeats itself: it moves not in circles, but in a spiral, and the apparent repetitions in it are always different from each other, carrying something new in themselves. But in this unique individuality and randomness of concrete events there is always something in common; for example, the fact that World War II is not like the Napoleonic Wars is not an obstacle to a philosophical understanding of the nature of wars in general. The individual in history is a concrete form of the discovery of the essentially general.

The world situation at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st centuries. Prospects for the development of planetary civilization.

With regard to the immediate future, science already now has many concrete data that allow one to make reasonable, very reliable forecasts for 20-30 years ahead.

Demographers confidently predict that 8 billion people will live on the globe in 2025; the population of individual countries, its age structure, birth rate, death rate, average life expectancy, etc. are also calculated for the same period. Reliable reserves of mineral raw materials (that is, available and economically viable with modern technology for their extraction) are also determined, as a rule, two to three decades in advance. Now, not only forecasts, but also many long-term, large-scale programs (energy, environmental, food, demographic, urban planning, scientific and technological progress, etc.) cover the first quarter of this century. Some international cooperation agreements are also concluded for two decades or longer. Since it usually takes about 20 years from a scientific discovery to its introduction into mass production, on the whole, we can reliably judge the prevailing technological level of the economy in the first decades of the 21st century. Many such examples of reliable knowledge of the immediate future can be cited from various spheres of public life.

As for the foreseeable future, which covers most of the new century, our knowledge of it is, one might say, plausible, rests on a very incomplete induction, and should be approached with a careful determination of their probability. The rapid growth of world population is expected to end in the second half of this century and reach between 10 and 12.5 billion people by 2100. To assess the availability of mineral resources for production, their potential reserves in the bowels of the earth are taken into account. The technological level of production will be determined by those scientific discoveries and inventions that will have to be made within this foreseeable future and which are now difficult to predict, at least chronologically. It is during the foreseeable future that one should expect the completion on a planetary scale of such long-term historical processes as the demographic revolution, overcoming the economic backwardness of a number of developing countries, etc. At the same time, there is little reason to limit the completion of such processes as the elimination of differences between creative and executive labor, and even more so the social and cultural integration of mankind, within the limits of the 21st century.

Regarding the distant future beyond the limits of the 21st century, one can basically judge on the basis of various hypothetical assumptions that do not contradict real possibilities, but are also not amenable to certain probabilistic estimates in terms of historical timing and specific forms of implementation. It is therefore legitimate to say that our ignorance of the distant future certainly prevails over knowledge. The fact is that by that time the social life of society will radically change, economic activity will undergo profound technological transformations, the needs of people and the means of satisfying them will be transformed, so that the problem of resources to ensure them will appear in a different form than even in the foreseeable future.

The failure of linear evolutionism. Some sociologists reject social development as a subject of sociological analysis. It is argued that the problem of development itself is a philosophical or economic problem, in the end a historical one, but not a sociological one. From their point of view, the subject of sociology can only be social change. It seems that such extreme point view is unjustified. Apparently, this is a kind of negative reaction to the ideas of straight-line evolutionism and progress and zm that were widespread in past centuries, and partly even in our time.

Thinkers of the XVIII-XIX centuries. (A. Condorcet, I. Kant, O. Comte, G. Spencer) were obsessed with the ideas of historical evolution and progress, linear, unidirectional and uninterrupted development of mankind towards some ultimate goal - ideal state of society. Each new stage in the history of society, in the history of peoples, from their point of view, is a stage of just such a development, i.e., a constant expansion of the power of the human mind over the elemental forces of nature and the laws of social evolution, a stage of improvement in the forms of organization social life based on justice and individual freedom for all. P. A. Sorokin pointed out in this regard: “In the XVIII and XIX centuries the vast majority of scientists, philosophers, representatives of the social sciences and the humanities firmly believed in the existence of eternal linear trends in the change of sociocultural phenomena. The main content of the historical process for them consisted in the deployment and ever more complete realization of this “tendency of evolution and progress”, a stable “historical trend” and “the law of socio-cultural development” ... All social thought of the 18th and 19th centuries was marked by faith in the linear laws of evolution and progress." At the same time, Sorokin singled out four variants of linear theories in which the main line of development could be built: 1) along a straight line; 2) wavy; 3) fan-shaped; 4) spirally.

The Russian philosopher and sociologist S. L. Frank, who, like Sorokin, was expelled from Soviet Russia in 1922, ridiculed such notions and wrote: understanding of history is almost always reduced to the following division: 1) from Adam to my grandfather - the period of barbarism and the first rudiments of culture; 2) from my grandfather to me - a period of preparation for great achievements that should be realized in my time; 3) I and the tasks of my time, in which the goal of world history is completed and finally realized.

It must be said that the Marxist concept of the successive change of socio-economic formations (primitive communal system, slave-owning society, feudalism, capitalism, communism, including socialism as the first phase of communism) was also largely based on the ideas of linear evolutionism: each subsequent formation seemed unconditional, necessary albeit a highly controversial one, a step forward along the path of social development.

It is obvious that the ideas of "flat" evolutionism, as events in the 20th century, and in previous centuries showed, were a great simplification of history, in which there were elements of development, and periods of stagnation, regression, destructive wars, monstrous concentration camps, the destruction of millions innocent people, etc. However, while rejecting the simplified understanding of development as a general, constant unilinear movement towards some ideal society, at the same time it is impossible not to recognize that social development exists in reality, and it can and should be the object of not only philosophical reflections, but also the subject of sociological analysis.

Social change and social development

As mentioned above, there is a significant difference between the concepts of "" and "social development". In short, this difference boils down to the fact that the concept of "social change" fixes the fact of change, regardless of its direction. The concept of "social development" is of a different nature. It is used to denote either the processes of improvement, improvement, complication, or movement back, in the opposite direction. It not only fixes the very fact of social change, but also contains some assessment of this change, characterizes its direction.

Usually, social development as a real process is characterized by three interrelated features: irreversibility, direction, and regularity. irreversibility means the constancy of the processes of accumulation of quantitative and qualitative changes over a certain period of time. Orientation— the line or lines along which the accumulation takes place. Regularity - not random but required process accumulation. A fundamentally important characteristic of social development is the period of time during which development takes place. Perhaps no less important is the fact that only over time the main features of social development come to light, since it consists of a certain chain of social changes. The result of the development process is a new qualitative (sometimes quantitative) state of a social object (for example, a social group, a social institution, an organization and the entire society).

What has been said refers, rather, to a general philosophical or socio-philosophical understanding of development. A sociological understanding of development requires a more specific selection of its criteria and indicators. Social development can be considered at different levels - theoretical sociology and empirical research, macrosociology and microsociology. In each case, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of the object, and, consequently, the selection of appropriate methods. In the scientific literature, one can find different points of view on this matter. If we keep in mind the general sociological theory, then, it seems, we can first of all distinguish the following criteria of social development. First, social development presupposes a structural complication of the object. As a rule, objects that are more complex in structure are also more developed. Secondly, social development means an increase in number, a complication of character, or even a modification of the social functions of an object. If we compare a modern society with a diversified industry, numerous systems of state and public administration, educational institutions and scientific institutions, differentiated by social groups, professions, strata, with societies that live by gathering, hunting or farming, then a huge difference in the degree of complexity and development of these two types of societies becomes apparent. Thirdly, an important criterion for the social development of social institutions and organizations is to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and competitiveness of their activities.

Social development implies an increase in the ability to meet the diverse needs (material, intellectual, spiritual, etc.) of various groups of the population and individuals. In this sense, for example, the social development of the enterprise where they work is of the utmost importance. In this case, we mean not only the development of the technology of the labor process, but, above all, the improvement of working and leisure conditions, the increase in the level of material well-being, the social security of workers and their families, the possibility of raising the cultural and educational level, etc. The social development of the district, city, region, and the whole society is of no less importance.

In this case, sociology uses the concept "social infrastructure". This is a stable set of material and material elements that create conditions for the rational organization of people's activities, their good rest, cultural and educational development. This includes systems of labor protection and safety, trade, healthcare, education, communications and information, transport, etc. It is important to emphasize that the development of the social infrastructure itself involves the use of a regulatory approach that requires a comparison of its real state in a particular area (enterprise , region, society as a whole) with scientifically based standards and guidelines. Such a comparison makes it possible to determine the level of development (or lagging behind) of social infrastructure.

But an even more important indicator and criterion of the social development of society is the development of the person himself, his personality. This issue, in view of its particular importance, will be dealt with specifically in the appendix of this chapter.

Non-linear nature of social development

What does the non-linearity of social change and social development mean. As mentioned above, the evolutionism of the XVIII - the first half of the XX century. in his most radical versions believed that social evolution as a chain social change has a linear, unidirectional character, inevitably leads to infinite progress, that such a principle of evolution is universal, applies to almost everything social phenomena that the direction of social evolution is generally predictable.

The real course of events in the world, especially in recent decades, has shown that a non-linear vision of social change and social development is more consistent with the observed processes in society. What does it mean?

First, a schematic sequential chain of social changes can be built not in one, but in different directions. In other words, a "point of change" - a bifurcation - is such a turning point, after which changes and, in general, development can go not in the same direction, but in a completely new, even unexpected direction.

Secondly, the non-linearity of social changes and social development means that there is an objective possibility of a multivariate sequence of events. In life, there are almost always alternative options changes and development. In this regard, the subject of change is in a situation of making a choice, and he becomes responsible for the chosen option.

Thirdly, the chain of social changes is not at all directed only towards progress, improvement or improvement. From "points of change" that can form in the most unexpected places, the movement can go in different directions, up to regression, decline, destruction.

Finally, the non-linear nature of social change means that in these changes one should always assume the consequences of foreseen and unforeseen, predictable and unpredictable, desired and undesired. Practical life shows that changes in the second row occur, unfortunately, much more often.

Of course, the emphasis on the nonlinearity of changes and development in society does not reject the very general idea of ​​social evolution as the idea of ​​the variability of social systems - social institutions, communities, processes, etc. The question is how to represent this evolution in science, with the help of what theories, models , concepts. In this regard, an important role can be played by a new and rapidly developing discipline - synergetics, which studies the non-linear patterns of development of complex and super-complex self-governing systems.

And one more question, which is especially relevant for modern Russian society, is the question of a conscious, thoughtful choice of one's own strategy, not just a way out of the most severe crisis that hit the country, but the foundations of the social development of the Russian person, people and state in the long term.

Does it exist ? As mentioned above, the evolutionists of the XVIII - early XX centuries. argued that progress is universal and manifests itself in the development of productive forces, in science, technology and technology, in the political, social and spiritual spheres of society. Progress is unstoppable, the wheel of history cannot be reversed, the progressive trend will cut its way through all obstacles. From this, abstract optimistic conclusions about a “bright future” have been and are being drawn, although, as a rule, no one can imagine what it consists of and in what specific ways and means it can be achieved.

A kind of specific reaction to the previous system of views is the denial of the possibility of a scientific formulation of the question of social progress, the denial of the very possibility of speaking in the language of science about the higher quality of some forms of social life and institutions compared to others. Representatives of such views, based mainly on the principles of positivist philosophy, usually take the problem of progress beyond the scope of social science. At the same time, they refer to the fact that an attempt to qualify certain social changes as manifestations of progress means an assessment of these changes in terms of certain values. Such an assessment, they argue, will always be subjective. Therefore, the concept of progress is also a subjective concept, which has no place in rigorous science.

The presence of extreme positions and heated discussions around the applicability of the concept of “progress” to social changes and social development are largely due to the fact that this concept itself really carries a value meaning, is evaluative. And, as you know, on the question of the admissibility of value judgments in scientific sociology, the opinions of scientists are again divided. Some of them are in favor of considering it appropriate to use value judgments in sociology. A significant part of Western sociologists of left or center-left orientations (C. R. Mills, G. Marcuse, A. Goldner, and others) consider it not only possible, but also absolutely necessary to use value judgments and concepts in the social sciences, including sociology. . The exclusion of such judgments and concepts would deprive sociology and other sciences of human meaning, humanistic orientation. Other authors, on the contrary, referring to the fact that value judgments and value assessments are subjective, categorically reject the possibility of using such judgments and assessments in scientific sociological research. Probably, there is an element of truth in both extreme positions, and in order to highlight it, it is necessary, in turn, to free these positions from subjective predilections.

First of all, it is necessary to define as strictly as possible the very concept of social progress, its content. Under progress usually understood as the improvement of the social structure of society and the improvement of the quality of human life. It presupposes the direction of social development from the lowest forms to the highest, from the less perfect to the more perfect.

It is hard not to agree that, on the whole, the development of society proceeds along the line of increasing progressive social changes. Here it is important to note such indicators as improving working conditions, gaining greater freedom, political and social rights for the human person (which is recorded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), the complication of the tasks facing modern societies, and the increase in technical, social opportunities to solve them. Finally, it is necessary to name the unprecedented development in the last three or four centuries of education, science, technology, which have provided modern man with the opportunity to humanize and democratize his way of life and social institutions.

At the same time, it is important not to fall into the euphoria of such an optimistic understanding of progress. The point is that it is extremely difficult to translate the general theoretical understanding of social progress into the concrete language of sociology. Is it possible, for example, to unequivocally state that the stages of the transformation of the legislative power in Russia in the 20th century. ( The State Duma in pre-revolutionary Russia, the Supreme Soviet - in the Soviet period, Federal Assembly- in the post-Soviet period) are stages of progressive development? Is it possible to consider that the way of life of a modern average person in a developed country is more progressive than, say, the way of life of free people (citizens) in ancient Greece? The questions are very difficult.

To this it should be added that in the international sociological literature of the early 20th century. there was much more confidence in the presence of social progress than at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries. At the beginning of the XX century. The problem of progress has been actively discussed by almost all major sociologists. Some articles on this topic were published in the collection New Ideas in Sociology. Sat. third. What is progress” (St. Petersburg, 1914). In particular, these are the articles: P. A. Sorokin “Review of theories and main problems of progress”, E. V. de Roberti “The idea of ​​progress”, M. Vsbsra “Evolution and progress”, etc. In the late 1960s. the famous French sociologist and philosopher R. Aron published a book with the symbolic title "Disappointment in Progress", in which he substantiated the idea that it is impossible to put into practice the high ideals generated by the progress of science and technology, and that this leads to the spread of social pessimism.

A prominent modern Western sociologist, president (in the 90s of the XX century) of the International Sociological Association I. Wallstein makes a very cautious statement in this regard: “It seems that morally and intellectually it is much more reliable to admit the possibility of progress, but such possibility will not mean its inevitability.

The contradictory nature of social progress. When considering such issues, it seems necessary first of all to single out certain spheres, areas of social life, regarding which one can directly say that the concept of progress is inapplicable to these areas, although they are subject to significant evolution. The stages in the evolution of these areas can by no means be considered stages of progressive development from the simple to the complex, from the less perfect to the more perfect. This applies primarily to the field of art. Art as a social institution does not stand still, it is subject to constant change. However, the concept of progress is not applicable to the consideration of the artistic, aesthetic aspects of art. How can it be used, for example, to compare Aeschylus and L. Tolstoy, Dante and Pushkin, Tchaikovsky and Prokofiev, etc. One can only speak of a certain progress in the technical means of creating, preserving and distributing works of art. Quill pen, fountain pen, typewriter, personal computer; simple gramophone record, long-playing phonograph record, magnetic tape, CD; handwritten book, printed book, microfilm, etc. - all these lines in certain respects can be considered lines of technical progress. But they, as it is obvious, do not affect the artistic value, the aesthetic significance of works of art.

The evolution of some other social institutions and phenomena should be evaluated in a similar way. Apparently, they include world religions. The evolution of fundamental philosophical systems over the course of intellectual history takes place, but it is hardly possible to evaluate this evolution in terms of progress-regression relative to the philosophical content (not the political positions of the authors).

At the same time, it is necessary to single out such spheres of the life of society, social institutions, the historical development of which can definitely be qualified as progress. These include primarily science, technology, technology. Each new step, each new stage in the development of science, technology, technology is a step and stage in their progress. It is no coincidence that the concept of scientific and technological progress has developed.

But most often the sociologist encounters such social structures and processes in the evolution of which progress can be fixed, but it is carried out in a very contradictory way. It must be said that sociology must see the whole variety of types of social change. Progress is not the only type. Exists regression, in its direction opposite to progress. This is development from higher to lower, from complex to simple, degradation, lowering the level of organization, weakening and attenuation of functions, stagnation. Along with these types, there are also so-called dead end lines of development leading to the death of certain socio-cultural forms and structures. Examples are the destruction and death of certain cultures and civilizations in the history of society.

The contradictory nature of social progress is also manifested in the fact that the development of many social structures, processes, phenomena, objects simultaneously leads to their advance in some directions and to a retreat, a return back in other directions; to perfection, improvement in one and destruction, deterioration in another; towards progress in some respects and regression or dead ends in others.

The assessment of the nature of social changes is also carried out according to their results. Of course, assessments can be subjective, but they can also be based on fairly objective indicators. Subjective assessments include those that come from desires, aspirations, positions individual groups, segments of the population, individuals. The main role here is played by the satisfaction of social groups with the changes that have taken place or are taking place. If a particular social change has Negative consequences for the position, the status of some (let's say, a small) group, it is usually assessed by it as unnecessary, wrong, even anti-people, anti-state. Although for other groups and the majority of society, it can have an important positive value. But it also happens vice versa, when the minority wins from the changes, and the clear majority loses. A classic example of the latter case is the completely opposite assessments by different groups of the population of our country of the results of privatization carried out in the first half of the 1990s. As you know, privatization (in the apt popular expression - "privatization") unheard of enriched an extremely small part of the population, and for a third of the population, the "income" turned out to be below the subsistence level.

Humanistic meaning of the criteria of social development. On the issue of specific criteria for social development, there are also discussions between representatives of different sociological schools and trends. The positions of those authors who seek to give the criteria of social progress humanistic meaning. The point is that it is not enough to talk about social changes, including social development, only as objectively ongoing processes, “processes in themselves,” in philosophical terms. No less important are their other aspects - their appeal to the individual, groups, society as a whole. After all, the task is not only to fix the very fact of social changes and social development, to determine their types, to identify driving forces, etc. The task is also to expose their humanistic (or anti-humanistic) meaning - whether they lead to well-being of a person, his prosperity or worsen the level and quality of his life.

The sociologist must strive to find more or less objective indicators for evaluating social change, qualifying it as progress or regression. As a rule, in such situations, a special system of social indicators is developed, which can serve as the basis for evaluation. So, in the ISPI RAS, a detailed “ The system of social indicators of Russian society". It is divided into four groups according to the spheres of public relations: social, socio-political, socio-economic and spiritual-moral. In each of the areas, the indicators are divided into three groups according to the types of measurement: social conditions as objective data that determine the "background" of social relations, social indicators as quantitative characteristics of social relations, fixed by statistical methods, and, finally, social indicators as qualitative characteristics of social relations, fixed by sociological methods. The imposition of indicators on the spheres of public relations allows us to identify 12 measuring subsystems that can serve as the basis for a systematic assessment of the level of development of each sphere of public relations and society as a whole.

Over the past decades in different countries there has been an active development of systems of social, demographic, economic, and other statistical indicators, and the number of such indicators, expressed in value (cash), natural, combined and other forms, reaches several hundred. At the same time, along with the development of sectoral indicators, they are synthesized and combined to assess the overall level of the country's social development and for the purposes of international comparisons. Thus, in Russia, the statistical authorities have developed a system of unified socio-demographic statistics, which can be presented in the form of large sectoral blocks that meet the standards of international comparisons: demographic statistics; environment, urbanization, living conditions; health and nutrition; education; economic activity of the population; social groups and population mobility; income, consumption and wealth; social Security; leisure and culture; use of time; public order and security; social relations; political activity. A system of such indicators can serve as the basis for a comprehensive assessment of the level of social development of a particular society and the opportunities it provides for human development.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Good work to site">

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Social change and social development

The failure of linear evolutionism. Some sociologists reject social development as a subject of sociological analysis. It is argued that the problem of development itself is a philosophical or economic problem, after all a historical one, but not a sociological one. From their point of view, the subject of sociology can only be social change. It seems that such an extreme point of view is unjustified. Apparently, this is a kind of negative reaction to the ideas of straight-line evolutionism and progress and zm that were widespread in past centuries, and partly even in our time.

Thinkers of the XVIII-XIX centuries. (A. Condorcet, I. Kant, O. Comte, G. Spencer) were obsessed with the ideas of historical evolution and progress, linear, unidirectional and uninterrupted development of mankind towards some ultimate goal - ideal state of society. Each new stage in the history of society, in the history of peoples, from their point of view, is a stage of just such a development, i.e., a constant expansion of the power of the human mind over the elemental forces of nature and the laws of social evolution, a stage in the improvement of the forms of organization of social life based on justice. and individual freedom for all. P. A. Sorokin pointed out in this regard: “In the 18th and 19th centuries, the vast majority of scientists, philosophers, representatives of the social sciences and the humanities firmly believed in the existence of eternal linear trends in the change of sociocultural phenomena. The main content of the historical process for them consisted in the deployment and ever more complete realization of this “tendency of evolution and progress”, a stable “historical trend” and “the law of socio-cultural development” ... All social thought of the 18th and 19th centuries was marked by faith in the linear laws of evolution and progress." At the same time, Sorokin singled out four variants of linear theories in which the main line of development could be built: 1) along a straight line; 2) wavy; 3) fan-shaped; 4) spirally. social progress non-linear failure

The Russian philosopher and sociologist S. L. Frank, who, like Sorokin, was expelled from Soviet Russia in 1922, ridiculed such notions and wrote: understanding of history is almost always reduced to the following division: 1) from Adam to my grandfather - the period of barbarism and the first rudiments of culture; 2) from my grandfather to me - a period of preparation for great achievements that should be realized in my time; 3) I and the tasks of my time, in which the goal of world history is completed and finally realized.

It must be said that the Marxist concept of the successive change of socio-economic formations (primitive communal system, slave-owning society, feudalism, capitalism, communism, including socialism as the first phase of communism) was also largely based on the ideas of linear evolutionism: each subsequent formation seemed unconditional, necessary albeit a highly controversial one, a step forward along the path of social development.

It is obvious that the ideas of "flat" evolutionism, as events in the 20th century, and in previous centuries showed, were a great simplification of history, in which there were elements of development, and periods of stagnation, regression, destructive wars, monstrous concentration camps, the destruction of millions innocent people, etc. However, while rejecting the simplified understanding of development as a general, constant unilinear movement towards some ideal society, at the same time it is impossible not to recognize that social development exists in reality, and it can and should be the object of not only philosophical reflections, but also the subject of sociological analysis.

As mentioned above, there is a significant difference between the concepts of " social change' and 'social development'. In short, this difference boils down to the fact that the concept of "social change" fixes the fact of change, regardless of its direction. The concept of "social development" is of a different nature. It is used to denote either the processes of improvement, improvement, complication, or movement back, in the opposite direction. It not only fixes the very fact of social change, but also contains some assessment of this change, characterizes its direction.

Usually, social development as a real process is characterized by three interrelated features: irreversibility, direction, and regularity. irreversibility means the constancy of the processes of accumulation of quantitative and qualitative changes over a certain period of time. Orientation-- the line or lines along which the accumulation takes place. Regularity - not accidental, but a necessary process of accumulation. A fundamentally important characteristic of social development is the period of time during which development takes place. Perhaps no less important is the fact that only over time the main features of social development come to light, since it consists of a certain chain of social changes. The result of the development process is a new qualitative (sometimes quantitative) state of a social object (for example, a social group, a social institution, an organization and the entire society).

What has been said refers, rather, to a general philosophical or socio-philosophical understanding of development. A sociological understanding of development requires a more specific selection of its criteria and indicators. Social development can be considered at different levels - theoretical sociology and empirical research, macrosociology and microsociology. In each case, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of the object, and, consequently, the selection of appropriate methods. In the scientific literature, one can find different points of view on this matter. If we keep in mind the general sociological theory, then, it seems, we can first of all distinguish the following criteria of social development. First, social development presupposes a structural complication of the object. As a rule, objects that are more complex in structure are also more developed. Secondly, social development means an increase in number, a complication of character, or even a modification of the social functions of an object. If we compare modern society, which has a diversified industry, numerous systems of state and public administration, educational and scientific institutions, differentiated by social groups, professions, strata, with societies that live off gathering, hunting or farming, then a huge difference in the degree of complexity and development of these two types of societies. Thirdly, an important criterion for the social development of social institutions and organizations is to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and competitiveness of their activities.

Social development implies an increase in the ability to meet the diverse needs (material, intellectual, spiritual, etc.) of various groups of the population and individuals. In this sense, for example, the social development of the enterprise where they work is of the utmost importance. In this case, we mean not only the development of the technology of the labor process, but, above all, the improvement of working and leisure conditions, the increase in the level of material well-being, the social security of workers and their families, the possibility of raising the cultural and educational level, etc. The social development of the district, city, region, and the whole society is of no less importance.

In this case, sociology uses the concept "social infrastructure". This is a stable set of material and material elements that create conditions for the rational organization of people's activities, their good rest, cultural and educational development. This includes systems of labor protection and safety, trade, healthcare, education, communications and information, transport, etc. It is important to emphasize that the development of the social infrastructure itself involves the use of a regulatory approach that requires a comparison of its real state in a particular area (enterprise , region, society as a whole) with scientifically based standards and guidelines. Such a comparison makes it possible to determine the level of development (or lagging behind) of social infrastructure.

But an even more important indicator and criterion of the social development of society is the development of the person himself, his personality. This issue, in view of its particular importance, will be dealt with specifically in the appendix of this chapter.

Non-linear nature of social development

What does the non-linearity of social change and social development mean. As mentioned above, the evolutionism of the XVIII - the first half of the XX century. in his most radical versions, he believed that social evolution as a chain of social changes has a linear, unidirectional character, inevitably leads to unlimited progress, that such a principle of evolution is universal, extends to almost all social phenomena, that the direction of social evolution is generally predictable.

The real course of events in the world, especially in recent decades, has shown that a non-linear vision of social change and social development is more consistent with the observed processes in society. What does it mean?

First, a schematic sequential chain of social changes can be built not in one, but in different directions. In other words, a "point of change" - a bifurcation - is such a turning point, after which changes and, in general, development can go not in the same direction, but in a completely new, even unexpected direction.

Secondly, the non-linearity of social changes and social development means that there is an objective possibility of a multivariate sequence of events. In life, there are almost always alternative options for change and development. In this regard, the subject of change is in a situation of making a choice, and he becomes responsible for the chosen option.

Thirdly, the chain of social changes is not at all directed only towards progress, improvement or improvement. From "points of change" that can form in the most unexpected places, the movement can go in different directions, up to regression, decline, destruction.

Finally, the non-linear nature of social change means that in these changes one should always assume the consequences of foreseen and unforeseen, predictable and unpredictable, desired and undesired. Practical life shows that changes in the second row occur, unfortunately, much more often.

Of course, the emphasis on the nonlinearity of changes and development in society does not reject the very general idea of ​​social evolution as the idea of ​​the variability of social systems - social institutions, communities, processes, etc. The question is how to represent this evolution in science, with the help of what theories, models, concepts. In this regard, an important role can be played by a new and rapidly developing discipline - synergetics, which is engaged in the study of non-linear patterns of development of complex and super-complex self-governing systems.

And one more issue, especially relevant for modern Russian society, is the issue of a conscious, thoughtful choice of one's own strategy, not just a way out of the most severe crisis that hit the country, but the foundations of the social development of the Russian person, people and state in the long term.

Does it exist social progress? As mentioned above, the evolutionists of the XVIII - early XX centuries. argued that progress is universal and manifests itself in the development of productive forces, in science, technology and technology, in the political, social and spiritual spheres of society. Progress is unstoppable, the wheel of history cannot be reversed, the progressive trend will cut its way through all obstacles. From this, abstract optimistic conclusions about a “bright future” have been and are being drawn, although, as a rule, no one can imagine what it consists of and in what specific ways and means it can be achieved.

A kind of specific reaction to the previous system of views is the denial of the possibility of a scientific formulation of the question of social progress, the denial of the very possibility of speaking in the language of science about the higher quality of some forms of social life and institutions compared to others. Representatives of such views, based mainly on the principles of positivist philosophy, usually take the problem of progress beyond the scope of social science. At the same time, they refer to the fact that an attempt to qualify certain social changes as manifestations of progress means an assessment of these changes in terms of certain values. Such an assessment, they argue, will always be subjective. Therefore, the concept of progress is also a subjective concept, which has no place in rigorous science.

The presence of extreme positions and heated discussions around the applicability of the concept of “progress” to social changes and social development are largely due to the fact that this concept itself really carries a value meaning, is evaluative. And, as you know, on the question of the admissibility of value judgments in scientific sociology, the opinions of scientists are again divided. Some of them are in favor of considering it appropriate to use value judgments in sociology. A significant part of Western sociologists of left or center-left orientations (C. R. Mills, G. Marcuse, A. Goldner, and others) consider it not only possible, but also absolutely necessary to use value judgments and concepts in the social sciences, including sociology. . The exclusion of such judgments and concepts would deprive sociology and other sciences of human meaning, humanistic orientation. Other authors, on the contrary, referring to the fact that value judgments and value assessments are subjective, categorically reject the possibility of using such judgments and assessments in scientific sociological research. Probably, there is an element of truth in both extreme positions, and in order to highlight it, it is necessary, in turn, to free these positions from subjective predilections.

First of all, it is necessary to define as strictly as possible the very concept of social progress, its content. Under progress usually understood as the improvement of the social structure of society and the improvement of the quality of human life. It presupposes the direction of social development from the lowest forms to the highest, from the less perfect to the more perfect.

It is hard not to agree that, on the whole, the development of society proceeds along the line of increasing progressive social changes. Here it is important to note such indicators as improving working conditions, gaining greater freedom, political and social rights for the human person (which is recorded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), the complication of the tasks facing modern societies, and the increase in technical, social opportunities to solve them. Finally, it is necessary to name the unprecedented development in the last three or four centuries of education, science, technology, which have provided modern man with the opportunity to humanize and democratize his way of life and social institutions.

At the same time, it is important not to fall into the euphoria of such an optimistic understanding of progress. The point is that it is extremely difficult to translate the general theoretical understanding of social progress into the concrete language of sociology. Is it possible, for example, to unequivocally state that the stages of the transformation of the legislative power in Russia in the 20th century. (The State Duma in pre-revolutionary Russia, the Supreme Soviet in the Soviet period, the Federal Assembly in the post-Soviet period) are stages of progressive development? Is it possible to consider that the way of life of a modern average person in a developed country is more progressive than, say, the way of life of free people (citizens) in ancient Greece? The questions are very difficult.

To this it should be added that in the international sociological literature of the early 20th century. there was much more confidence in the presence of social progress than at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries. At the beginning of the XX century. The problem of progress has been actively discussed by almost all major sociologists. Some articles on this topic were published in the collection New Ideas in Sociology. Sat. third. What is progress” (St. Petersburg, 1914). In particular, these are the articles: P. A. Sorokin “Review of theories and main problems of progress”, E. V. de Roberti “The idea of ​​progress”, M. Vsbsra “Evolution and progress”, etc. In the late 1960s. the famous French sociologist and philosopher R. Aron published a book with the symbolic title "Disappointment in Progress", in which he substantiated the idea that it is impossible to put into practice the high ideals generated by the progress of science and technology, and that this leads to the spread of social pessimism.

A prominent modern Western sociologist, president (in the 90s of the XX century) of the International Sociological Association I. Wallstein makes a very cautious statement in this regard: “It seems that morally and intellectually it is much more reliable to admit the possibility of progress, but such possibility will not mean its inevitability.

The contradictory nature of social progress. When considering such issues, it seems necessary first of all to single out certain spheres, areas of social life, regarding which one can directly say that the concept of progress is inapplicable to these areas, although they are subject to significant evolution. The stages in the evolution of these areas can by no means be considered stages of progressive development from the simple to the complex, from the less perfect to the more perfect. This applies primarily to the field of art. Art as a social institution does not stand still, it is subject to constant change. However, the concept of progress is not applicable to the consideration of the artistic, aesthetic aspects of art. How can it be used, for example, to compare Aeschylus and L. Tolstoy, Dante and Pushkin, Tchaikovsky and Prokofiev, etc. One can only speak of a certain progress in the technical means of creating, preserving and distributing works of art. Quill pen, fountain pen, typewriter, personal computer; simple gramophone record, long-playing phonograph record, magnetic tape, CD; handwritten book, printed book, microfilm, etc. - all these lines in certain respects can be considered lines of technical progress. But they, as it is obvious, do not affect the artistic value, the aesthetic significance of works of art.

The evolution of some other social institutions and phenomena should be evaluated in a similar way. Apparently, they include world religions. The evolution of fundamental philosophical systems over the course of intellectual history takes place, but it is hardly possible to evaluate this evolution in terms of progress-regression relative to the philosophical content (not the political positions of the authors).

At the same time, it is necessary to single out such spheres of the life of society, social institutions, the historical development of which can definitely be qualified as progress. These include primarily science, technology, technology. Each new step, each new stage in the development of science, technology, technology is a step and stage in their progress. It is no coincidence that the concept of scientific and technological progress has developed.

But most often the sociologist encounters such social structures and processes in the evolution of which progress can be fixed, but it is carried out in a very contradictory way. It must be said that sociology must see the whole variety of types of social change. Progress is not the only type. Exists regression, in its direction opposite to progress. This is development from higher to lower, from complex to simple, degradation, lowering the level of organization, weakening and attenuation of functions, stagnation. Along with these types, there are also so-called dead end lines of development leading to the death of certain socio-cultural forms and structures. Examples are the destruction and death of certain cultures and civilizations in the history of society.

The contradictory nature of social progress is also manifested in the fact that the development of many social structures, processes, phenomena, objects simultaneously leads to their advance in some directions and to a retreat, a return back in other directions; to perfection, improvement in one and destruction, deterioration in another; towards progress in some respects and regression or dead ends in others.

The assessment of the nature of social changes is also carried out according to their results. Of course, assessments can be subjective, but they can also be based on fairly objective indicators. Subjective assessments include those that come from the desires, aspirations, positions of certain groups, sections of the population, individuals. The main role here is played by the satisfaction of social groups with the changes that have taken place or are taking place. If this or that social change has negative consequences for the position, the status of some (let's say, a small) group, it is usually assessed by it as unnecessary, wrong, even anti-people, anti-state. Although for other groups and the majority of society, it can have an important positive value. But it also happens vice versa, when the minority wins from the changes, and the clear majority loses. A classic example of the latter case is the completely opposite assessments by different groups of the population of our country of the results of privatization carried out in the first half of the 1990s. As is known, privatization (in the apt popular expression - "grabbing") unheard of enriched an extremely small part of the population, and for a third of the population, the "income" turned out to be below the subsistence level.

Humanistic meaning of the criteria of social development. On the issue of specific criteria for social development, there are also discussions between representatives of different sociological schools and trends. The positions of those authors who seek to give the criteria of social progress humanistic meaning. The point is that it is not enough to talk about social changes, including social development, only as objectively ongoing processes, “processes in themselves,” in philosophical terms. No less important are their other aspects - their appeal to the individual, groups, society as a whole. After all, the task is not only to fix the very fact of social changes and social development, to determine their types, to identify driving forces, etc. The task is also to expose their humanistic (or anti-humanistic) meaning - whether they lead to the well-being of a person, his prosperity or worsen the level and quality of his life.

The sociologist must strive to find more or less objective indicators for evaluating social change, qualifying it as progress or regression. As a rule, in such situations, a special system of social indicators is developed, which can serve as the basis for evaluation. So, in the ISPI RAS, a detailed “ The system of social indicators of Russian society". It is divided into four groups according to the spheres of public relations: social, socio-political, socio-economic and spiritual-moral. In each of the areas, the indicators are divided into three groups according to the types of measurement: social conditions as objective data that determine the "background" of social relations, social indicators as quantitative characteristics of social relations, fixed by statistical methods, and, finally, social indicators as qualitative characteristics of social relations, fixed by sociological methods. The imposition of indicators on the spheres of public relations allows us to identify 12 measuring subsystems that can serve as the basis for a systematic assessment of the level of development of each sphere of public relations and society as a whole.

Over the past decades in different countries there has been an active development of systems of social, demographic, economic, and other statistical indicators, and the number of such indicators, expressed in value (cash), natural, combined and other forms, reaches several hundred. At the same time, along with the development of sectoral indicators, they are synthesized and combined to assess the overall level of the country's social development and for the purposes of international comparisons. Thus, in Russia, the statistical authorities have developed a system of unified socio-demographic statistics, which can be presented in the form of large sectoral blocks that meet the standards of international comparisons: demographic statistics; environment, urbanization, living conditions; health and nutrition; education; economic activity of the population; social groups and population mobility; income, consumption and wealth; social Security; leisure and culture; use of time; public order and security; social relations; political activity. A system of such indicators can serve as the basis for a comprehensive assessment of the level of social development of a particular society and the opportunities it provides for human development.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

...

Similar Documents

The concept of social work, the history of origin and development, its subject, object, moral and humanistic character. Professional activity in this area, practical implementation of the philosophy of human rights. Areas of training for a social worker.

term paper, added 03/29/2011


Essence of social planning. Levels of social planning. Forms and methods of social planning. Indicators and criteria of social development. The structure of the plan for the social development of the team. The main functions of the social service.

term paper, added 05/03/2007


Change of common sense as a consequence of changes in social life. Fundamentals of the unity of mankind. The special nature of the social space of the world as an element of the space of the biosphere and space and its human sense. The structure of social time.

control work, added 12/13/2011


The process of change in society and its transition from one state to another. Criteria and signs of social progress. Concepts of social progress and its driving forces. System changes social connections and the type of regulation of social relations.

control work, added 06/15/2012


The need to develop tolerance. Normative-legal bases of social design. Choice of methods and diagnostic criteria. Development of a social project aimed at increasing the level of social and ethnic tolerance among students.

term paper, added 10/13/2017


The concept, essence, goals, objectives, types and ways of development of social security, its role in social work. Analysis of the main functions of state social security. Targeting of social payments as essential principle social policy in Russia.

abstract, added 07/27/2010


Social management: concept, object, functions. Methodological approaches to social management. Political level of social management. The main ways of implementing the social policy of the PRC. Comparison of social management practices in Russia and China.

thesis, added 07/24/2012


The concept, essence, functions, content, subject, methods and system of social security law, general characteristics of the evolution and formation of its scientific thought. Analysis of the relationship between social security, social protection and the welfare state.

term paper, added 07/11/2010


concept social technology. The relevance and importance of social services for the elderly. Social problems older people in modern Russian society. Characteristics of social service technologies, definition of effectiveness.

thesis, added 10/26/2010


Social design as a branch of sociological science. Types of social design, its essence, stages and methods. Predictive design in the social sphere as a factor in accelerating socio-economic and scientific and technological progress.