Forms of the historical process, linearity and nonlinearity of history.
Ancient Greek ideas express the idea of the development of society as a cycle, a cyclical process. Christian philosophy allowed for the end of human history and its resumption at the will of God.
According to Herder, history is the natural development of culture along the line of progress. Marx justified the linear development of society. Spengler, Toynbee and Sorokin developed the idea of local societies, the uniqueness of which does not allow history to be presented in the form of a linear process. Toynbee argues that every civilization goes through stages of emergence, growth, breakdown and decay in its development, after which it dies. The presented examples illustrate the well-known steps of the development of history.
Nonlinear interpretations of history roots go back to ancient times, being embodied in ideas about the “wheel of history”, the cycle of events, “eternal return”.
Linear interpretations of history presented in two basic models, called “regression” and “progressivism”. What they have in common is the statement of the obvious direction and progression of the socio-cultural development of society, but what is different is the vector of this direction and the nature of the change in qualitative states of sociodynamics. The “key” to understanding the essence of these models is the formative concepts of social “progress” and “regression”, which set the main trajectory of the development of society: progress as a consistent improvement of social life and its transition to an ever higher quality state (“ascending” development), regression - as a consistent deterioration conditions and destruction of forms of organization of society (downward development).
Regression in the interpretation of the development of society, it appears in the ancient world and expresses the sentiments characteristic of the era of the disintegration of tribal relations and the transition to a new, largely incomprehensible and internally contradictory society of the period of civilization. The concept of the “return of names” of the ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius (VI-V centuries BC) and the widespread ideas about the past “golden age” in Ancient Greece are permeated with nostalgic sentiments.
In our time, the positions of historical regressism are shared by representatives of fairly widespread ideological trends of environmental pessimism, technocratic dystopianism, and religious-sectarian finalism.
Progressivism takes shape in the 18th century - in the “century of Enlightenment”, full of hopes for the omnipotence of reason and the power of the transformative capabilities of man, endowed with the ability to understand nature and society. The Enlighteners believed that the entire mass of the human race is always moving, albeit with slow steps, towards ever greater perfection, and the procession has a natural and directed character.
Posted on ref.rf
The criterion of progress for G. Hegel is the development of freedom, in the Marxist interpretation of the historical process as a natural change in the types of socio-economic formation, which K. Marx defined as “a society at a certain stage of historical development, a society with a unique distinctive character, the criterion is character economic basis.
The 20th century, full of drama and human tragedies, seemed to show the inconsistency of the historical optimism inherent in progressivism and the illusory nature of hopes for a “bright future”. Unconditional priority is beginning to be given to non-linear interpretations of history, incl. postmodernist concept of “posthistory”, which is assigned the authorship of such advantages as defending the plurality of equal and valuable forms of social life, emphasizing the pluralism and variability of the historical process, emphasizing the role of socio-cultural alternatives in history, and the contradictory nature of the development of society. The concepts of “limits to growth” arise ( J. Forrester, D. Meadows), ʼʼconflict of civilizationsʼʼ ( S. Huntington), “golden billion”, etc., having a regressive connotation. In a state of euphoria from the failures of perestroika and the collapse of the USSR, the concept of “the end of history” appears ( F. Fukuyama), which, in essence, also has nothing to do with the idea of social progress of mankind. However, progressivism was able to revive and currently has a fairly strong position, formalized in civilization-stage model linear interpretation of history. It is presented, first of all, in the concepts of post-industrial ( D. Bell, A. Touraine) and information society ( E. Masuda, O. Toffler). This direction has its origins in the positivist-oriented constructions of sociodynamics of the early and mid-nineteenth century. ( O. Comte, J. Mill, G. Spencer), technological determinism and technocratism of the late 19th-20th centuries. (T . Leblen, W.J. Burnham, J. Galbraith and others), who considered the development of science and technology as the main determinant of the world historical process. Hence the progressive continuity in the concepts of post-industrial society of three stages - pre-industrial (traditional, agrarian), industrial (industrial, technogenic) and post-industrial civilizations, and in the concepts of the information society, for example, O. Toffler, three “waves of history” - agricultural, industrial and informational. Another source of the general linear development of society was the teaching of K. Jaspers of the axial time. It introduces a world-historical dimension of history into the philosophy of history. As we see, the concept of civilization and the philosophical aspects of the civilizational development of society are interpreted ambiguously in the literature and require special consideration.
3. Civilization and pharmaceutical wastes and histories.
A number of categorical structures of philosophical history (grammarism, history, sense and meta history, forms of evolution, collapsing forces, linearity and nonlinearity of social dynamics, etc.) This is a great problem - hellish history. This ideological structure appears to be a chestnut in a reasonable anthology of social life (which is what grammaticality is) and the corrupting statements of life and history, falls, hell diverse life of different countries and people. All the panic is “civilized process”, which is why it is “civilized” and the characteristic steps of the process, through the change of civil society. I realized that this is not an adzinny step, there are pharmaceutical steps in full, the actualization of the culture is logical through history, magic and other steps.
At the basis of this rational adzinstva, there is a historical knowledge of a fundamental system of indoor systems, which is the result of the crumbling social reality, and the identification of natural trends in the evolution of the game. madness. Mildly, it is necessary to carry out a thorough analysis of the assigned income. Pharmaceutical analysis of the entire dynamics of the chemical bases, including the totality of creative substances, on the basis of which there is a type of grammatics, and the changed aposhnyaga - the flow of history. The Hramadian way of creativity is an object of the hidden adzinism of history, it is related to historic materialism. Pharmaceutical cases may and illnesses, assembling metadalagic. It is more schematic and more detailed than before. Nevypadkova, philosophy has a great history of civilized steps that soften, emancipate, subjective historical processes (subjective histories are more successful in culture zrezu, why tsyvilizatsyinamu). Civilized-shmatsemantic panyatstse. This new version has its own pros and cons. Disadvantages - problems with a complex logic history, the social dynamics are not linear, but continuous, the history seems to be scattered into separate history, problems, “squeezing” “scraping” dynamics and adzina process, problems of social networks, etc. Pros (multi-parallel histories) trample with respect ethnicities, human psychology, demography, ecology and other tanks and aspects of history, the elements of history are not substantial, but dynamic history, This is not a piecemeal scheme, but an arganic modified technique - technical methods of zeinastry, social structures, spiritual chestnut people and extraordinary, non-idealgic reasons of the chalavek, supernatural people, etc. Metadychna karysna vylutatsya 3-4 main interpretations of the panic “civilization”:
a) synonym of culture (A. Toinbi, N. Danilevski, P. Sarokin) ᴦ.з.
civilized culture.
b) degradation, decline of culture (A. Spengler, M. Berdzyaev) ᴦ.з.
amonym of culture.
c) level and stage of development of the kingdom, state and processes of the world
social, cultural, spiritual plowing, what I go for
dzikastsyu, barbarism (Morgan, F. Engels, Tofler) ᴦ.з.
ethnically intelligent civilizations.
Abagulnyayuchy, it is possible to work out synthetic developments as a cultural-historical process and a complete nation, based on the adzinstvo of the historical forest, the tsesnaga social-cultural high level of institutional duties and mechanisms of social organization, regulation of civil society. Geta is the social soul of culture. In parapharmaceutical and civil medicine, it is necessary to distinguish both separate and continuous. This has the task of increasing this civilized output and history - forming the idea of a multi-dimensional social dynamic, advocating a “civilized”, social-cultural change, echanalogies of the known grammar in the adzinism of “scrappers”, “scrappers”), material and spiritual, palette and ekalagic , psychological and ethnic, social and social processes.
It is clear that it is possible to apply civil engineering technologies to soil structures. Structural blocks are being created mechanism of civilization process, functions of any kind of educational methods and assemblies to the nature of the hysterical structures in the city. The growing trend of civilized processes is based on the integration of structural blocks, rather than their rigid hierarchy (as in pharmaceuticals). The subject and the subject of the history are not subject to, but on the contrary, they are culturally familiar. In real history, there are different types of determinants, but only in other cases. Adsul padstava for shmatlik conceptual pabudo civolizatsyynaga pratsesu, specific typological gramadstva (more than 30 on this day). The current history of civilized processes characterizes the world, the history of life and the history of civil society. The insufficient evidence of the crisis of civilizations, due to A. Toynbee, civilizations are not adequate to the process, and past social cultural forms are exhausted . Panyatstse civilizatsyynaga pratsesu nadae new sense of social revaluations and problems of current civil society.
From the different publications in the literature, typalagizatsy, padaetstsa aptimalnay typalagizatsiya V.S. Scepina, in history there are two distinct types:
1) traditional;
2) technogenic.
Pershy - characterizes stable conservative tendencies and the rise of social-cultural adnosins and zeynasces. Stereate types of kanіzavany stylі, paўtorі i аdapеdіа culturаl kastoўnаstі – rysy gаtаy civіlіzatsі.
Others characterize intensity, hour, and innovation. The basics here are: a) autonomy of the individual; b) cultural matrix of technology-technological and scientific innovations; c) rap culture among ancient traditional cultures; d) pastured changed social principles - created natures, civilizations and centuries.
Current civilizations - this critical stage of technological civilization, transition, transformation into a new civilization - pharmaceutical, post-industrial, anthragenic, value-added, etc. Today's civilization has a global character, including global integration processes. It is clear that the social philosophy has a special pharmaceutical approach that does not cure, but rather actualizes its connection with civilized and cultural developments. Forests are the primary problem of exclusion in everyday civilized processes, not only of the country, ethnicity, but especially of the world.
There are topics highlighted by philosophy, technology, culture, culture, education, etc. Meta-dynamic and clear-eyed meaningful panic of “civilization processes” are the dominant idea. The chalavkamernasts of social changes, humanization and prospects of the chalaveks – this is the essence of science and humanistic light. Raspratsoўka of such light from the perspective of the chalavek is the task of philosophy and the following.
Literature:
Kalmykov V.N. Fundamentals of philosophy. – Mn., 2000. P.369-390.
Fundamentals of modern philosophy. – St. Petersburg, 1999. Chapter YIII, X, XII.
Reale J., Antiseri D. Western philosophy from its origins to the present day. T.4.-SPb., 1996.
Philosophical ideas of our time // Philosophy: Textbook \ Edited by Gubin V.D.-M., 2004
Ersh J. Philosophical thoughts. -Mn., 1996.
Gaidenko P.P. The problem of rationality at the end of the twentieth century // VF, 1991, No. 6.
Gurina M. Philosophy: Textbook. allowance. -M., 1998. P. 358-389.
Deep reading:
Krapivensky S.E. Social philosophy. – M., 1998.
Stepin V.S. Philosophy of non-violence and the future of civilization // Thought No. 2, 1999ᴦ.
Markov B.V. Philosophical anthropology: essays on history and theory. –
Novikova L.M. Civilization as an ideal and as a unifying principle of the historical process // Civilization. Vol. 1. – M., 1992.
Zhukov N.I. The problem of consciousness. -Mn.: Universitetskoe, 1987.
Zinchenko V.P. Worlds of consciousness and the structure of consciousness // Psychology of consciousness. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. pp. 149-161.
Zolotukhina-Abolina. Country of philosophy. -Rostov-on-Don.: ʼʼPhoenixʼʼ. 1995. pp. 26-45, 508-528.
Fundamentals of modern philosophy. St. Petersburg: Lan, 1999. Part 4. P.188-260.
The problem of consciousness in modern Western philosophy. M., 1989. P.5-14.
Rachkov V.L. General theory of consciousness. -M., 2000.
Consciousness in the sociocultural dimension. -M, 1990.
Stereotypes and dynamics of thinking. -Mn.: Science and Technology, 1993.
Forms of the historical process, linearity and nonlinearity of history. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Forms of the historical process, linearity and nonlinearity of history." 2017, 2018.
History is the movement of society through time. The dynamic unity of past, present and future reveals history as a purposeful process. The historical dynamics of society are diverse, individual, eventful, and unique.
Despite the heterogeneity, the historical development of society is carried out, in general, naturally, although in the social philosophy of history this issue is debatable.
There are several approaches to determining the nature of the historical process: linear (stage-progressive) and non-linear (cultural and civilizational). The linear approach evaluates history as the progressive ascent of society to more perfect states based on the continuity of accumulated experience and knowledge, as well as the descent of society to simpler states. Within the framework of the linear approach, such interpretations of history are distinguished as regressism (ancient philosophy, philosophy of the Ancient East, environmental pessimism) and progressivism (L. Morgan, G. Hegel, K. Marx).
The most developed version of the progressivist approach is presented in the Marxist concept of socio-economic formations. History, from the point of view of K. Marx, has a natural historical character and is realized through a change of main stages - socio-historical formations.
A socio-economic formation is a concrete historical unity of base and superstructure, society as an integral organism at a certain stage of its historical development. The law of transition from one formation to another determines the specificity of the mode of production on which society is based and the nature of its contradictions. The method of production is an objective economic factor in the development of society. K. Marx identified, as the main one, a five-member formational model of history: any society, as a whole, must go through the stages of primitive, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist, communist formations. Communism, according to K. Marx, is the goal of historical development.
In the second half of the 19th century. the social and economic crisis of Western Europe dispelled the claims of Eurocentrism - a trend in the philosophy of history, according to which the history of Europe is an ideal model of development as a whole. On the other hand, social science of this time focused not only on the general and universal, but also on the special, unique in history. This side of the historical process was developed in the civilizational and cultural concept of history. They became the basis of a nonlinear approach to history, according to which it represents many global independent cycles, states, civilizations, and cultures.
The concept of “civilization” (Latin civil - civil, state) has a number of meanings: the stage of human development that followed barbarism (L. Morgan); synonym of culture (A. Toynbee), the stage of decline and degradation of local culture (O. Spengler), etc. We can accept the following definition of civilization: it is a stable cultural and historical community of people, which is distinguished by a commonality of spiritual and moral values and cultural traditions, similarity of economic and socio-political development, lifestyle features, personality type, geographical conditions.
The civilizational approach to history presupposes a global division of the world historical process (Eastern and Western civilization; traditional, industrial, post-industrial civilizations, etc.). The culturological approach affirms the change in cultural types of social development as the basis of the dynamics of society (primitive society, cultures of the ancient East, etc.).
Civilizational and cultural approaches to history emphasize its diversity and uniqueness. The most authoritative concept of cultural and historical types is N.Ya. Danilevskaya, the concept of local cultures by O. Spengler, the concept of A. Toynbee, P. Sorokin, K. Jaspers.
Formational, civilizational and cultural approaches significantly complement each other. Within the framework of the formational approach, history is a natural, predictable, unified process of sociodynamics aimed at more perfect states of society. Modern globalization confirms the importance of this aspect of historical development. However, history in the concept of K. Marx has no alternative, has a prophetic character (the final goal is proclaimed - communism); economically determined (therefore simplified and schematized).
Civilizational and cultural approaches emphasize the originality and uniqueness of the destinies of peoples; without denying repetition in history, they affirm the cyclicality and nonlinearity of its development; emphasize the spiritual and cultural unity of people. The civilizational approach to the development of society reflects the unity of its diverse manifestations. A specific synthesis of various aspects of social life (political, moral, religious, economic, etc.) is refracted in the real relationships of people, the system of values and norms. One and the same civilization can include different economic, political, religious and other types of society. There are regional (Western, Eastern) and local (national) levels of civilization.
Possessing uniqueness, local cultures also exhibit a certain commonality. This allows us to consider world civilization as the history of the relationship between two types of civilizational development - Western and Eastern. The interaction between Eastern and Western civilizations has a “pendulum-like” character: each of them in turn dominated history.
Eastern civilization is, first of all, a traditional society (Western society is characterized as technogenic). Western society also passed through this stage of development, but it was in the east that this type of civilizational dynamics became widespread. The modern East is heterogeneous in ethnic composition, economic status, and religion, but has common features of social life. These include the extensive type of economy; the dominance of communal property, the subordination of society to the state, the individual to the community (with a rigid social hierarchy); despotic state; regulation of social life by customs and traditions; dominance of cultural values over economic ones. The modern East is changing, demonstrating effective models of combining traditional values and the achievements of Western civilization (Japan, Taiwan, India, Turkey, etc.), as well as options for uncompensated development (Afghanistan, Cambodia, etc.).
The Western path of development in the historical-genetic model is represented by such theorists as D. Bell, A. Toffler, J. Fourastier, R. Aron, etc. This model distinguishes three main stages of development: pre-industrial, industrial, post-industrial. Actually, technogenic civilization has existed since the period of industrialism, since that time it has been opposing the East and interacting with it. Technogenic civilization is characterized by the development of science and technology; capitalist economic structure (in the early stages); progress in production and management; the rule of law, as well as such values as: consumption, transformation of society and nature, progress and personal freedom, civil society. This is a society with a high level of social mobility.
The high pace of civilizational dynamics of the West in the middle of the 20th century. is facing a systemic crisis, which indicates the transition of Western society to a new stage - post-industrial society. The transition to a post-industrial society is accompanied by a reorientation of the economy towards the service sector; high-tech production, computer and information technologies begin to dominate in industry; the class structure of society changes to a professional one. Human production (culture, social sphere) becomes the main thing, a new system of values is established: environmentalism, humanism, the priority of spiritual values, the cult of knowledge and intelligence.
The modern historical moment is characterized by inconsistency, mosaic and diversity of social forms of life. The threat to today's and future humanity is the global processes of destruction of the social, human, and natural world, which is captured in the term “global problems.” They were first conceptualized in the 60s. XX century
Global problems vary in nature and scale. The main components of this systemic crisis of socio-natural reality: the problem of war and peace, environmental and demographic problems, depletion of natural resources, the problem of uneven social development, anthropological, etc.
The transitional nature of modern history is emphasized in many concepts and models of sociodynamics, in particular, in the theory of a civilizational turn to a post-industrial (information) society. The main goals of this theory - a stable world, improving the quality of life, personal self-determination - have found concrete elaboration as a social strategy of the 21st century, focused on achieving sustainable development.
Sustainability concept proclaimed a program for the evolutionary transition of the world community to sustainable development, taking into account the solution of not only social, but also economic problems.
The idea of transition to a new civilizational strategy through a state of systemic socio-natural crisis (chaos) to subsequent complication and self-organization, the formation of a global society, correlates with the international community’s focus on sustainable socio-economic development.
The impetus for the transition to a humanistic, economic, unified and at the same time diverse society can be given by a person endowed with new morality and ethics. The search for new spiritual guidelines is evidenced by active moral reflection (ethics of non-violence, bioethics, “living ethics”, ethics of “reverence for life”, environmental ethics. This search is based on the idea of a synthesis of the achievements of Western civilization and the spiritual values of the East.
What does the nonlinearity of social change and social
development? As already mentioned, evolutionism XVIII -
first half of the 20th century in its most radical variants
believed that social evolution as a chain of social
changes are linear, unidirectional, with
inevitably leads to boundless progress, which is
the principle of evolution is universal, applies to almost everything
social phenomena that the direction of social evolution in
generally predictable.
The real course of events in the world, especially in recent decades,
showed that a nonlinear vision of social change
and social development is more consistent with 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, the “point of change” is a bifurcation
- this is a turning point after which changes
and in general, development can proceed not in the same way, but in
a completely new, even unexpected direction
Secondly, the nonlinearity of social changes and social
development means the presence of an objective opportunity
multivariate sequence of events. In life practically
There are always alternative options for change
and development. In this regard, the subject of change is in
situation of making a choice, and he becomes responsible
for the chosen option.
Thirdly, the chain of social changes has no
orientation only towards progress, improvement
or improvements. From "change points" that can
form in the most unexpected places, movement can
go in different directions, up to regression, decline,
destruction.
Finally, the nonlinear nature of social change means
that these changes should always assume consequences
foreseeable and unforeseeable, predictable and
unpredictable, desired and undesirable. Practical
life shows that changes in the second row occur, to
unfortunately, much more often.
Of course, emphasizing the nonlinearity of change and development
in society does not reject the very general idea of social
evolution as the idea of variability of social systems - social
institutions, communities, processes, etc. The question is:
how to represent this evolution in science, with the help of which theories,
models, concepts. And one more question, especially relevant
for modern Russian society, this is a question
conscious, thoughtful choice of one’s own strategy
not just a way out of the severe crisis that
struck the country, and the choice of the strategy that will serve as the basis
social development of Russian people, people and
state for the long term.
Is there social progress? In sociological and
social and philosophical literature close to it have developed
two extreme points of view on the problem of progress in history
society. One is to affirm the absoluteness and inevitability
progressive development of society as a whole and many
its individual spheres. As already mentioned, evolutionists
XVIII - early XX centuries. proved that progress is universal
character and manifests itself in the development of productive
forces, in science, technology and technology, in political, social
and spiritual spheres of society. Progress is unstoppable
the wheel of history cannot be reversed, progressive
the trend will make its way through all obstacles. From here they made
and abstractly optimistic conclusions are drawn about the bright
future, although, as a rule, no one imagines what it is
consists and in what specific ways and means can
be achieved.
The other extreme is a kind of specific reaction to
previous system of views - consists essentially in the denial
the possibility of scientifically posing the question of social
progress, in denying the very possibility of speaking the language
sciences about the higher quality of some forms of social life
and institutions compared to others. Representatives of such
views usually take the problem of progress beyond the framework of social
Sciences. At the same time, they refer to the fact that an attempt to qualify
certain social changes as manifestations
progress means assessing these changes in terms of
certain values. Such an assessment, they prove, is always
will be subjective. Therefore, the concept of progress is also a concept
subjective, which has no place in strict science.
Existence of extreme positions and heated debates around applicability
the concept of "progress" towards social change and
social development is largely determined by
because this concept itself actually carries within itself
value meaning is an evaluative concept. And, as you know,
on this issue - about admissibility in scientific sociology
value judgments - the opinions of scientists are again divided.
Some of them advocate considering it appropriate
the use of value judgments in sociology. Such
positions were held by the classics of Marxism, but not only
They. A significant portion of Western sociologists are left or center-left
orientation (C.R. Mills, G. Marcuse, A. Goldner
etc.) are considered not only possible, but also absolutely necessary
the use of value judgments and concepts in
social sciences, including sociology. Exception
such judgments and understandings would deprive sociology and others
science of human meaning, humanistic orientation.
judgments and value assessments are subjective in nature,
categorically reject the possibility of using such
judgments and assessments in scientific sociological research.
There is probably some truth in both extreme positions, and
in order to select it, it is necessary, in turn, to release these
positions from subjective biases.
First of all, it is necessary to define as strictly as possible
the very concept of social progress, its content. Under
progress is usually understood as the improvement of social
the structure of society and improving the quality of human life.
It presupposes such an orientation of social
development, which is characterized by a transition from lower forms to
highest, from less perfect to more perfect.
It is difficult not to agree that, in general, human development
society follows the line of increasing progressive
social changes. It is important to note the following indicators:
as improving working conditions, acquiring a human personality
greater freedom, political and social rights (which
enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights),
increasing complexity of the challenges facing modern societies,
and increasing the technical and social capabilities of solving them.
Finally, the unprecedented development in the last two
three centuries of education, science, technology, which provided modern
people the opportunity to humanize and democratize
their 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
it is difficult to translate the general theoretical understanding of social
progress into the specific language of sociology. Is it possible, for example,
unequivocally state that the stages of transformation of the legislative
authorities in Russia in the 20th century (State Duma in
pre-revolutionary Russia, the Supreme Council - in the Soviet
period, Federal Assembly - in the post-Soviet period)
are stages of progressive development? Is it possible to consider
that the lifestyle of a modern person in a developed country
is more progressive than, say, the way of life
people in medieval Europe or in the era of ancient Greece?
The questions are very difficult.
To this it should be added that in 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 century.
At the beginning of the century, the problem of progress was actively discussed in fact
all major sociologists. Some articles on this
third. What is progress” (St. Petersburg, 1914). In particular, these articles:
P. A. Sorokina “Review of theories and main problems of progress
", E. V. de Roberti "The Idea of Progress", M. Websra "Evolution
and progress”, etc. In the late 60s. famous French
sociologist and philosopher R. Aron publishes a book with a symbolic title
“Disappointment in Progress,” which justifies
the idea that it is impossible to implement high standards in practice
ideals generated by the progress of science and technology, and this leads
to the spread of sentiments of social pessimism.
A prominent modern Western sociologist, president (currently
time) International Sociological Association
I. Wallerstein makes a very cautious statement in this regard:
“It seems that morally and intellectually
it is much safer to admit the possibility of progress,
but such a possibility will not mean its inevitability.” 1 .
The contradictory nature of social progress. By revising
such questions, apparently, are necessary first of all
highlight some areas, areas of social life, relatively
which can be directly stated about the inapplicability of the concept
progress towards these areas, although they are subject to significant
evolution. The stages in the evolution of these areas are by no means
simple to complex, from less perfect to more perfect.
This includes primarily the field of art. Art
as a social institution does not stand still, it is constant
subject to change. However, the concept of progress
not applicable when considering artistic, aesthetic
side of art. How can it be used, for example,
when comparing Aeschylus and L. Tolstoy, Dante and Pushkin,
Tchaikovsky and Prokofiev, etc. We can only talk about a certain
progress in technical means of creating, preserving
and distribution of works of art. Goose feather,
gramophone record, long-playing gramophone record,
magnetic tape, CD; handwritten book, printed book, microfilm
etc. - all these lines in some specific relationships
they obviously do not affect the artistic value,
aesthetic significance of works of art.
The evolution of some
other social institutions and phenomena. Apparently to them
include world religions. The same can be said about fundamental
philosophical systems: their evolution over the period of intellectual
history takes place, but the concept of progress is relative
the entire philosophical content of these systems (not political
At the same time, it is necessary to highlight such areas of life
societies, as social institutions, historical
the development of which can clearly be qualified as
seen as progress. These include primarily science, technology,
technology. Every new step, every new stage in
the development of science, technology, technology is a step and stage
in their progress. It is no coincidence that such a concept arose,
as scientific and technological progress.
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 very
contradictory. It must be said that sociology must see
all the variety of types of social change. Progress is not
is the only type. There is also this type
as regression, in its direction opposite to progress.
This is a 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 sociocultural forms and
structures. Examples include the destruction and death of some
cultures and civilizations in the history of society.
The contradictory nature of social progress is manifested
and that the development of many social structures and processes,
phenomena, objects simultaneously leads to their advancement
forward in one direction and to retreat, return
back in other directions; to improve, improve
in one and destruction, deterioration in the other, to their progress
in some respects and to regression or dead ends in others
relationships.
The nature of social changes is assessed by
their results. Of course, assessments can also be subjective,
but they can also be based on fairly objective indicators.
Subjective assessments include those that
come from the desires, aspirations, positions of individual groups
or segments of the population or even individuals. Home
the role here is played by the satisfaction of social groups with what happened
or ongoing changes. If this or that
social change has negative consequences for the situation,
the status of some (say, small) group,
it is usually assessed by her as unnecessary, incorrect,
even anti-people, anti-state. Although for others
groups and the majority of society, it can have an important role
living meaning. But it also happens the other way around, when changes
the minority wins and the clear majority loses.
In any case, representatives of the winning group will
evaluate the results of change as positive, and losers
- as negative.
The humanistic meaning of the criteria for social progress. What
concerns specific criteria of social progress, then according to
Discussions are also ongoing on this issue between representatives
different sociological schools and directions. Most
give the criterion of social progress a humanistic
meaning. The point is that it is not enough to talk about social
changes, including social development, only as
about objectively occurring processes, “processes in themselves”,
speaking philosophically. Their other aspects are no less important.
- their appeal to individuals, groups, and society as a whole.
After all, the task is not only to record
the very fact of social change and social development,
determine their types, identify driving forces, etc. Task
also in exposing their humanistic (or anti-humanistic)
meaning - do they lead to human well-being,
its prosperity or worsen the level and quality of its
life.
The sociologist should strive to find more or less
objective indicators for assessing social changes,
qualifying them as progress or regression. Usually,
in such situations, a special system is developed
social indicators, which can serve as a basis for
assessments. Thus, ISPI RAS developed a detailed
“System of social indicators of Russian society.” She
was divided into four groups according to areas of public relations:
actually social, socio-political,
socio-economic and spiritual-moral. In each
From the spheres, indicators are divided into three groups by type of measurement:
social conditions as objective data determining
“background” of social relations; social indicators
as quantitative characteristics of social relations,
recorded by statistical methods, and, finally,
social indicators as qualitative characteristics of social
relations recorded by sociological me-
\todami. Imposition of indicators on the spheres of public relations
allows you to select 12 measuring subsystems, which
can serve as the basis for a systematic assessment of the level of development
each sphere of social relations and society as a whole.
Over the past decades, in different countries there has been
active development of social, demographic,
economic, other statistical indicators and number
such indicators, expressed in cost (monetary),
natural, combined and other forms, reaches
already several hundred. At the same time, along with the development of industry
indicators are synthesized and combined
to assess the overall level of social development of the country and
for the purposes of international comparisons. So, in the State Statistics Committee
Russia is developing a system of unified socio-demographic
statistics, which can be presented in the form
large industry blocks that meet international standards
comparisons: demographic statistics; Environment
environment, urbanization, living conditions; healthcare
and nutrition; education; economic activity
population; social groups and population mobility; income, income
consumption and welfare; social Security;
leisure and culture; time use; public order
and safety; social relations; political
activity. A system of such indicators can serve as a basis
comprehensive assessment of the level of social development of that
or another society and the opportunities it provides
for the development of man himself.
CHAPTER 21. Types of social development
21.1. The concept of social development
History is a process and a result of human activity. In Soviet science since the 1930s. materialistic determinism reigned, according to which being determines consciousness. Now it is being replaced by the opposite idealistic approach: the mental (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 existence (history) is created by conscious people through their activities (practical and spiritual).
The development of societies is a process in which, on the one hand, people, communities, institutions act, and on the other hand, objective conditions that become the framework for 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 realizing interests. Objective factors in the development of societies include territory, climate, economic level, state of public institutions (family, education, court, army, etc.), mentality, consciousness, worldview of the people, etc.
The development of societies includes two complementary processes - progress and regression. Progress presupposes the movement of societies from lower to higher, from simple to complex, from parts to the whole; regression, on the contrary, involves the movement of societies from higher to lower, from complex to 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, the inviolability of the social order, etc. If progress predominates, then in general we talk about progressive development; if regression predominates, we talk about degradation.
You always need to remember the cost of social progress, its regressive side, losses. Let us remember 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 extermination of people in the Gulag, the militarization of the country, the degradation of nature, etc. Based on the sad experience of Russians, one must remember 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 transition periods during which disorganization, deformation, and decivilization occur. The fundamental reason for the need for a transition period is the contradiction between the developed needs of the demosocial sphere and the formation of society, the means of production. As a result of the resolution of this contradiction, the employment structure of the population develops. The labor skills, experience, and knowledge of the majority of the working population cease to be in demand, mass unemployment arises, the standard of living decreases, a state of social tension, violence, crime, decline in morality, etc. appears. The transition period is always a national crisis or even a catastrophe.
An analysis of world history shows that the normal duration of the transition period is 15-20 years, i.e. approximately the period of generational change. Depending on the quality of the national elite and the nature of the formational development, the transition period can be shortened or extended. In Russia, as a rule, this process is delayed. Thus, the country went through the formational transition from the feudal-bourgeois formation (agrarian-industrial) to the proletarian-socialist (industrial) and the accompanying inter-formation and inter-civilizational crisis 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-civilizational transition from the proletarian-socialist to the post-industrial-mixed formation. Both this transition and the crisis will be quite complex and destructive.
It is necessary to distinguish between the process of development of societies and different ways of 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 social development in social philosophy, three main approaches to this objective process can be distinguished: cyclical, progressive, spiral.
21.2. Cyclical development of societies
The first to receive recognition was the cyclic (circular) process, later the progressive (linear) process, and now the spiral-shaped 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. Kondratyev and others. Theories of cyclical development (historical cycle) are diverse in the material used by the authors, the form of presentation, methods of argumentation, and the vision of world-historical prospects. 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 set of different cultural and historical types.
The creator of the theory of the historical cycle, Vico (1668-1744), considered God to be the final cause of the development of people-societies. Each nation, according to his teaching, goes through four eras 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 based the cyclical development of peoples on the form of government in society. The subject of the historical process in Vico are individual peoples who go through the stages of gods (theocratic rules), heroes (rule of aristocrats), people (democratic rule), forming the historical cycle.
N. Danilevsky identifies in his book “Russia and Europe” the following cultural and historical types (civilizations): Egyptian, Chinese, Assyrian-Babylonian-Phoenician, Iranian, Jewish, Greek, Roman, New Semitic, Germanic-Roman (European). Civilizations develop autonomously from one another and manifest their creative function in selected areas. For Greek civilization it is beauty, for Semitic civilization it is religion, for Roman civilization it is law, etc.
The history of civilizations, according to N. Danilevsky, is created by people whose roles in this creation are different. Thus, there are: 1) positive persons of history (people, tribes, nations) who created world civilizations; 2) negative figures of history (Huns, Mongols, Turks, etc.), who played a destructive role in relation to other civilizations; 3) passive persons of history, who are ethnographic material for other persons of history. Every 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), i.e. they develop mainly separately: there is no historical event that would have an impact on the fate of all humanity.
None of the eight civilizations, according to N. Danilevsky, can be considered as better or worse: they are all equal. Every civilization goes through three stages of development. The formation of civilization is the longest period when a people asserts the main features of its civilization: language, traditions, political independence. Prosperity is the shortest period in the development of civilization (400-600 years), when the creative powers of the people (passionarity, according to Gumilyov) are in their prime. The decline of civilization is caused by the weakening of the creative powers of the people, stagnation in their forms of life, the development of cynicism, weakening and decay. European (German-Roman) civilization entered a stage of decline, and Russian-Slavic civilization entered a stage of formation and expected flourishing.
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 a given people goes through the stages of childhood, adolescence, maturity, and old age. For him, civilization 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, a scientific approach instead of a religious one, mass values instead of traditional ones, sex instead of motherhood, money instead of genuine values, violence instead of consent, etc.
Spengler lists eight higher cultures (that 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 the Tao (the way of life), in Greco-Roman it is the cult of sensuality, etc. Each civilization manifests itself in certain areas of life: Greek - in beauty, Chinese - in benefits, Indian - in imagination and mysticism, German-Roman - in science and technology.
A. Toynbee’s theory of civilizations, set out in his 20-volume work “Comprehension of History” (1934-1961), was thorough and widespread in the scientific world. 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 counts 21 such civilizations. Each of them also has one dominant theme - activity. For example, in the Hellenic civilization - 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 entirely favorable conditions that “challenge” the creative minority. Civilization is the response of a creative minority to this historical challenge in the form of religion, art, science and technology, economics, etc. The core of civilizations is always one religion or another, the bearer of which is 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 development and flourishing, and then decline and disappearance. For example, the formation, flourishing and decline of fascist Germany, militaristic Japan, and the Soviet Union. Thus, the cyclical understanding of social development is the identification of stages (periods) of formation, prosperity and decline, which are different qualitative states of society.
The following main points can be identified in the cyclical development of societies. Firstly, a specific cycle, repetition of the same states. Secondly, the alternation of these circles over a relatively long period of time. Thirdly, repeating these circles on a somewhat new basis. The cyclical approach to the development of societies presupposes changes in the qualities of societies both within the cycle and between cycles. Therefore, it is impossible to reduce cyclical development to the theory of historical circulation (Vico, Danilevsky, etc.). For example, the cyclical approach to the development of Russia identifies several cycles: princely, imperial, Soviet. And each time, having completed another cycle, 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 of the formations that arose in its place is preserved. This was the case in the territory of the former Roman Empire, where a number of independent societies arose, which in the Renaissance and Modern times enriched many of the inherited achievements of Roman culture. But in this case it is legitimate to talk about the historical cycles of newly formed societies.
Obviously, the cyclical understanding of social development (historical cyclicality) presupposes the identification of progress and regression in the development, which are in different relationships at each stage of the cycle. The historical cycle is the unity of the processes of flourishing and decay of social systems and reflects the fact that society (like everything) in its formational and civilizational component has its own lifespan. The formation of the new is accompanied by the disintegration of the old, and quite strong. For example, the Yeltsin period of the formation of bourgeois-socialist civilization: at the same time, there is the formation of a new national ideology, democratic statehood, market economy, and enterprising people. At the flourishing stage, the new triumphs over the old, assimilates its remnants, but at the same time gives rise to a “supernova” 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 liquidation of a given society as a whole, as often happened in the history of mankind: the Romans, Aztecs, Tatars, etc.
In addition to historical cyclicality, functional cyclicality in the development of societies is sometimes distinguished, which includes: 1) 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, and states. During a stable cycle, naturally formed social communities (ethnic groups, classes, strata), sustainable forms of activity of social actors, their traditional roles in society, political, social and other institutions are reproduced, and self-regulation of society is carried out. A social system that is out of balance returns after a certain time to its original state - a kind of pendulum movement occurs. The cycle is a way of existence and preservation of society and is especially clearly revealed in societies that are relatively closed.
Recurrence in historical development means the similarity of situations, opposing actors, tasks facing society, and the negative consequences of historical actions. Historical development is a consistent time chain of historical events. Repeatability refers to historical events viewed by an observer in terms of a specific concept and criterion. Therefore, the involvement of the observer in the repeatability makes repeatability a subjective-objective process. When analyzing 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 from time to time, to a large extent even in those areas of human activity where the desire and will of man were closest to mastering the situation and were least dependent 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 people's needs are basically unchanged and manifest themselves in different social and natural situations. The recurrence of needs (and interests), the mentality of people is the basis for the recurrence of human history. This means that man, as the main subject of the historical process, does not change at his core, sets, in principle, the same goals and objectives and strives to realize them, each time ultimately relatively unsuccessfully.
The most important criteria for the relative reliability of a particular theory (concept) of social development are: 1) its compliance with historical facts; 2) understanding of the social development occurring 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. denying her 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
A linear paradigm called linear progress is of great importance in understanding social development. 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. The linear-progressive understanding considers social development as a process of change from lower to higher, from simple to complex, from partial to holistic 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, etc.
Proponents of a linear understanding of development proceeded from the fact that humanity and all specific societies develop interconnectedly. As a result of the evolutionary development of society, a new quality is added to its previous quality (cumulative effect), some transformation of a part of the old and the loss of something. It is very important for this approach to determine the criteria of lower and higher, simple and complex, partial and complete, etc. They are different in different socio-philosophical and sociological theories.
O. Comte believed that to understand the modern era of mankind, it is necessary to place it in a broader historical context. The driving force for the development of society, according to O. Comte, is the strength of the human spirit (intellect, morality, will). The development of society directly depends on the quantity and diversity of its knowledge, which determines the military, political, and economic aspects of social life. Society goes through three levels in its development. At 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 base their creation of life on abstract concepts created by their minds: freedom, sovereignty, law, legitimacy, democracy, etc. At a positive stage of historical development, people discover the laws of nature, society, and 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, movement, energy. Evolution is a movement from homogeneity (homogeneity) of the world to heterogeneity (complexity), accompanied by the dispersion of movement and the integration of matter. Evolution is carried out through the 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) increasing inequality of labor, power, wealth, prestige and, in general, complicating the differentiation of people into numerous strata; 3) the division of society into groups, classes, layers according to economic, professional, political, national, religious characteristics.
G. Spencer was the first to propose a dichotomous typology of societies - dividing them into two opposing ideal types. Real societies represent a mixture of the features of these ideal types: military society and industrial society. Military societies are focused on protection and conquest, integrated through political violence, their basis is an authoritarian state with low social mobility, the economy is extensive, regulated, the dominant values are discipline, patriotism, courage. Industrial societies are focused on economic development, the form of integration is voluntary cooperation of people, the state is democratic with high social mobility, the economy is dynamic market, the dominant qualities are initiative, ingenuity, independence.
1 See: P. Sztompka. Sociology of social changes. - M.: Aspect-Press, 1966. - P. 138-141.
L. Morgan based the evolutionary theory of human development on the development of means (technology) of production. He believed that the main driving forces of history are the inventions that people create to satisfy their needs (for food, clothing, transportation, etc.). If the basic needs of people remain essentially unchanged, then the tools and objects for satisfying them change from era to era. 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. During the barbaric stage, utensils were invented, animals were domesticated, and irrigation and the 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, and the spread of accumulated experience began faster.
An interesting idea of human evolution was put forward by L. Ward in his “Dynamic Sociology”. In the history of nature, he identifies 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, design of the future is a distinctive feature of the last stage of evolution, which becomes more humanistic compared to the previous ones.
1 Shtompka 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 precisely in our presentation of the formational and civilizational development of mankind. On the one hand, it is linear, since 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 not predominantly cyclical 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, we find 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, and the genetic connection of successive processes.
The spiral development of society is based on the law of the negation of the 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) denial 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 original 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, human aging, and the progress of humanity. From the point of view of the law of negation of negation, grain goes through the stages of planting in the soil, stem and flowering, and ear. The ear produces many grains similar to those planted, and reflects in the quality of the grains the soil, sun, wind and other factors operating at all previous stages of development. A person is born weak and stupid, then becomes strong and smart, but at the end of his life he returns to weakness and falls into senile insanity.
The process of denial can occur 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) the new stage of development is deprived of the possibility of development. Nihilistic is the burning of grain, from which only a pile of ashes remains, the creation of Soviet Russia by the Bolsheviks, as a result of which the Orthodox religion, the bourgeois state, the market economy, the peasantry, etc. were destroyed.
Dialectical negation in development is characterized by the following features: 1) there is a negation only of what is outdated and unnecessary in the new; 2) the presence of continuity between different stages of development, resulting in both preservation and renewal; 3) the possibility of development on a new basis remains. This 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 receiving 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 dissidents and dissidents.
In accordance with the law of the negation of the negation, Hegel laid the basis for the progressive periodization of human history on the geography of the people and the spirit of the people living in this territory. He came up with four progressive periods of history, in which certain principles of the Absolute Spirit were realized: the Eastern world, the Greek world, the Roman world, the German world.
According to Marx, at the primitive stage, social ownership and collectivism operate, but production efficiency is low. At the stage of antagonistic formations (slaveholding, feudal, capitalist), the previous stage is negated, 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 single whole, developing according to a certain law: from some source, through a crisis, returning to the source on a new basis. In the beginning, everything was fine for humanity. 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 according to Marx).
1 Jaspers K. Nietzsche and Christianity. - M.: Medium, 1994. - P. 46.
The spiral type of social development, as was evident from the examples given, 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 each negation, society, a social community, a social institution pass not only into another qualitative state, but also into the opposite qualitative state. This is precisely the difficulty of implementing negation in a dialectical way.
We have shown that the formational development of humanity proceeds from the primitive (syncretistic) stage, through a bifurcation into opposite formations to a mixed one. At the last stage, there is a relative synthesis of the positive accumulated in the previous stages of development, in which this positive acted in the form of two opposing 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 freedom of people.
Civilizational development also proceeds in a spiral: from mythological civilization, through individualistic and collectivistic civilization, to solidaristic civilization. The latter also represents a synthesis of the positive accumulated at 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 metaphysically, like 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 takes over in the society-subject. In conditions of the environmental crisis, deepening globalization, multi-formation and multi-civilizational structure of humanity and individual countries, it is very important to achieve a balance between them by strengthening the civilizational universal solidaristic environmental component.
Questions for self-control
- What is the difference between regression and progress?
- What is the growth of a social organism?
- How is the evolutionism of O. Comte and G. Spencer different?
- How does evolutionism differ from cyclicity?
- What is the difference between cyclical, evolutionary, and spiral development of society?
- Name the main features of Marx's theory of social development.
The failure of linear evolutionism. Some sociologists deny 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 appears that such an extreme point of view is unjustified. Apparently, this is a kind of negative reaction to the ideas of straightforward evolutionism and progress and change that were widespread in past centuries, and partly even in our time.
Thinkers of the 18th-19th centuries. (A. Condorcet, I. Kant, O. Comte, G. Spencer) were obsessed with the ideas of historical evolution and progress, the linear, unidirectional and continuous development of humanity towards some final 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 precisely such development, i.e., a constant expansion of the power of the human mind over the spontaneous forces of nature and the laws of social evolution, a stage of improvement of 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 overwhelming majority of scientists, philosophers, representatives of the social sciences and humanities firmly believed in the existence of eternal linear trends in changes in sociocultural phenomena. The main content of the historical process for them was the unfolding and ever more complete implementation of this “tendency of evolution and progress”, a stable “historical trend” and “the law of sociocultural development”... All social thought of the 18th and 19th centuries is marked by faith in the linear laws of evolution and progress." At the same time, Sorokin identified four variants of linear theories in which the main line of development could be built: 1) in a straight line; 2) wavy; 3) fan-shaped; 4) spirally.
The Russian philosopher and sociologist S. L. Frank, expelled, like Sorokin, from Soviet Russia in 1922, ridiculing such ideas, wrote: “If you look closely at interpretations of history of this kind, it will not be a caricature to say that at their limit understanding of history almost always comes down to the following division: 1) from Adam to my grandfather - the period of barbarism and the first beginnings 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 a consistent change of socio-economic formations (primitive communal system, slave 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 an extremely controversial step forward on the path of social development.
It is obvious that the ideas of “flat” evolutionism, as shown by events in the 20th century, and in previous centuries, 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, rejecting the simplified understanding of development as a universal, constant unilinear movement towards some ideal society, at the same time one cannot help but admit that social development exists in reality, and it can and should be the object of not only philosophical reflections, but also a 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” captures the fact of change without regard to its direction. The concept of “social development” is of a different nature. It is used to denote either processes of improvement, improvement, complication, or movement back, in the opposite direction. It not only records the very fact of social change, but also contains some assessment of this change and characterizes its direction.
Typically, 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. Focus— the line or lines along which accumulation occurs. Pattern - not an accidental, but a necessary process of accumulation. A fundamentally important characteristic of social development is the period of time during which development occurs. Perhaps no less important is the fact that only over time the main features of social development are revealed, 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 identification 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 therefore 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 distinguish, first of all, the following criteria for social development. Firstly, social development presupposes the structural complication of an object. As a rule, objects that are more complex in structure are also more developed. Secondly, social development means an increase in the number, complexity of the 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 institutions and scientific institutions, differentiated by social groups, professions, strata, with societies living through gathering, hunting or agriculture, 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 involves increasing the ability to satisfy the diverse needs (material, intellectual, spiritual, etc.) of various population groups and individuals. In this sense, for example, the social development of the enterprise in which they work is of utmost importance. In this case, we mean not only the development of the technology of the labor process, but first of all the improvement of working and rest conditions, increasing the level of material well-being, social security of workers and their families, the possibility of increasing the cultural and educational level, etc. n. The social development of the district, city, region, and the whole society is no less important.
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 proper rest, and cultural and educational development. This includes systems of labor protection and safety, trade, health care, education, communications and information, transport, etc. It is important to emphasize that the development of the social infrastructure itself involves the use of a normative approach, which requires 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 lag) of social infrastructure.
But an even more important indicator and criterion for the social development of society is the development of the person himself, his personality. This issue, due to its special importance, will be discussed specifically in the appendix of this chapter.
Nonlinear nature of social development
What does the nonlinearity of social change and social development mean? As mentioned above, evolutionism of the 18th - first half of the 20th centuries. in its most radical versions, he believed that social evolution as a chain of social changes has a linear, unidirectional character, inevitably leading to unlimited progress, that this principle of evolution is universal, extends to almost all social phenomena, and 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 nonlinear vision of social change and social development is more consistent with the observed processes in society. What does it mean?
Firstly, a schematic sequential chain of social changes can be built not in one, but in different directions. In other words, the “point of change” - bifurcation - is a turning point after which changes and development in general can go not in the same direction, but in a completely new, even unexpected direction.
Secondly, the nonlinearity of social changes and social development means the existence of 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 “change points” that can form in the most unexpected places, movement can go in different directions, right up to regression, decline, and destruction.
Finally, the nonlinear nature of social change means that these changes should always assume consequences that are foreseeable and unforeseen, predictable and unpredictable, desirable and undesirable. Practical life shows that changes in the second row are, unfortunately, much more common.
Of course, emphasizing the nonlinearity of changes and development in society does not reject the very general idea of social evolution as the idea of variability of social systems - social institutions, communities, processes, etc. The question is how to represent this evolution in science, with the help of which theories, models , concepts. In this regard, an important role can be played by a new and rapidly developing discipline - synergetics, which studies nonlinear patterns of development of complex and super-complex self-governing systems.
And one more question, 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 severe crisis that hit the country, but the basis for the social development of the Russian people, people and state for the long term.
Does it exist ? As mentioned above, evolutionists of the 18th - early 20th centuries. argued that progress is universal and is manifested 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 make its way through all obstacles. From here, abstract optimistic conclusions about a “bright future” have been and are being made, although, as a rule, no one has any idea 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 scientifically posing 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 assessing these changes from the point of view 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 strict science.
The presence of extreme positions and heated discussions around the applicability of the concept of “progress” to social change and social development are largely due to the fact that this concept itself actually carries a value sense and is evaluative. And, as you know, on the issue of the admissibility of value judgments in scientific sociology, the opinions of scientists are again divided. Some of them advocate that it is 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, etc.) consider not only possible, but also absolutely necessary, the use of 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 and humanistic orientation. Other authors, on the contrary, citing the fact that value judgments and value assessments are subjective in nature, categorically reject the possibility of using such judgments and assessments in scientific sociological research. There is probably some truth in both extreme positions, and in order to highlight them, it is necessary, in turn, to free these positions from subjective biases.
First of all, it is necessary to define, as strictly as possible, the very concept of social progress and its content. Under progress usually refers to improving the social structure of society and improving the quality of human life. It presupposes the direction of social development from lower to higher forms, from less perfect to more perfect.
It is difficult not to agree that, in general, the development of society follows the line of increasing progressive social changes. Here it is important to note such indicators as the improvement of working conditions, the acquisition of greater freedom, political and social rights by the human person (as recorded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), the increasing complexity of the tasks facing modern societies, and the increase in technical and social capabilities for solving them. Finally, it is necessary to name the unprecedented development in the last three or four centuries of education, science, and 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 fact is that it is extremely difficult to translate a general theoretical understanding of social progress into the specific language of sociology. Is it possible, for example, to unequivocally state that the stages of transformation of legislative power in Russia in the 20th century? (The State Duma in pre-revolutionary Russia, the Supreme Council in the Soviet period, the Federal Assembly in the post-Soviet period) are stages of progressive development? Is it possible to consider that the lifestyle of the modern average person in a developed country is more progressive than, say, the lifestyle 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 significantly more confidence in the existence of social progress than at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries. At the beginning of the 20th century. The problem of progress was lively 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 implement in 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 20th century) of the International Sociological Association I. Wallsstein makes a very cautious statement in this regard: “It seems that, morally and intellectually, it is much safer to admit the possibility of progress, but such possibility will not mean its inevitability.”
The contradictory nature of social progress. When considering such questions, apparently, it is necessary first of all to identify certain areas, areas of social life, in relation to which we can directly say that the concept of progress is not applicable to these areas, although they are subject to significant evolution. The stages in the evolution of these areas cannot in any way be considered stages of progressive development from simple to complex, from less perfect to more perfect. This includes primarily 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 consider the artistic, aesthetic sides of art. How can it be used, for example, to compare Aeschylus and L. Tolstoy, Dante and Pushkin, Tchaikovsky and Prokofiev, etc. We can only talk about 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 gramophone record, magnetic tape, CD; a handwritten book, a printed book, microfilm, etc. - all these lines in certain respects can be considered lines of technical progress. But they, as 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 assessed in a similar way. Apparently, these include world religions. The evolution of fundamental philosophical systems over the course of intellectual history has taken place, but it is hardly possible to evaluate this evolution in terms of progress and regression relative to the philosophical content (not the political positions of the authors).
At the same time, it is necessary to highlight such spheres of society’s life, social institutions, the historical development of which can absolutely be qualified as progress. These include, first of all, science, technology, technology. Every new step, every 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 emerged.
But most often the sociologist is faced with such social structures and processes in the evolution of which progress can be recorded, but it is carried out very contradictorily. It must be said that sociology must see all the variety of types of social changes. Progress is not the only type. Exists regression, in its orientation 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 development lines, leading to the death of certain sociocultural forms and structures. Examples include the destruction and death of some 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 advancement in some directions and to retreat and return in other directions; to perfection, improvement in one thing and destruction, deterioration in another; to progress in some respects and to regression or dead ends in others.
The nature of social changes is also assessed based on 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 individual groups, segments of the population, and individuals. The main role here is played by the satisfaction of social groups with the changes that have occurred or are ongoing. If this or that social change has negative consequences for the position or status of some (say, small) group, it is usually assessed by it as unnecessary, incorrect, even anti-people, anti-state. Although for other groups and the majority of society it can have important positive meaning. But it also happens the other way around, when the minority benefits from the changes, but 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 (according to the apt popular expression - “privatization”) has incredibly enriched an extremely small part of the population, and a third of the population’s “income” turned out to be below the subsistence level.
The humanistic meaning of the criteria for social development. On the issue of specific criteria for social development, discussions are also ongoing between representatives of different sociological schools and directions. The most preferable positions are those of authors who seek to attach criteria to social progress humanistic meaning. The fact is that it is not enough to talk about social changes, including social development, only as about objectively occurring processes, “processes in themselves,” speaking in philosophical language. No less important are their other aspects—their appeal to individuals, groups, and society as a whole. After all, the task is not only to record the very fact of social changes and social development, to determine their types, to identify driving forces, etc. The task is also to reveal their humanistic (or anti-humanistic) meaning - whether they lead to human well-being, his prosperity, or worsen the level and quality of his life.
A sociologist must strive to find more or less objective indicators for assessing social changes and qualifying them 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 assessment. Thus, the ISPI RAS developed a detailed “ System of social indicators of Russian society" It is divided into four groups according to the spheres of social relations: social itself, socio-political, socio-economic and spiritual-moral. In each of the areas, the indicators are divided into three groups according to the type of measurement: social conditions as objective data that determine the “background” of social relations, social indicators as quantitative characteristics of social relations recorded by statistical methods, and, finally, social indicators as qualitative characteristics of social relations. recorded by sociological methods. The overlay of indicators on the spheres of social relations allows us to identify 12 measurement subsystems, which can serve as the basis for a systematic assessment of the level of development of each sphere of social relations and society as a whole.
Over the past decades, systems of social, demographic, economic, and other statistical indicators have been actively developing in different countries, and the number of such indicators, expressed in value (monetary), natural, combined and other forms, has already reached several hundred. At the same time, along with the development of sectoral indicators, they are synthesized and combined to assess the overall level of social development of the country and for the purposes of international comparisons. Thus, in Russia, 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, housing conditions; health and nutrition; education; economic activity of the population; social groups and population mobility; income, consumption and welfare; social Security; leisure and culture; time use; public order and safety; 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.
Loading...