Social philosophy explores the state of society as an integral system, the universal laws and driving forces of its functioning and development, its relationship with the natural environment and the surrounding world as a whole.

Subject of social philosophy— society in a philosophical approach. Social philosophy- this is a section, a part of philosophy, and therefore all the characteristic features of philosophical knowledge are also inherent in social philosophy.

In social and philosophical knowledge such common characteristic features are the concepts of: being; consciousness; systems; development; truths, etc.

Social philosophy has the same basic functions as philosophy:

— ideological;

— methodological.

Social philosophy interacts with many non-philosophical disciplines that study society:

— sociology;

— political economy;

— political science;

— jurisprudence;

— cultural studies;

- art history and other social and human sciences.

Social philosophy is helped to develop its concepts, to develop more deeply its subject of research, a complex of natural sciences: biology; physics; geography; cosmology, etc.

Social philosophy is a unique field of knowledge (within the framework of philosophy), which has an independent logic of philosophical reflection and a specific history of the development of its concepts, principles and laws.

When studying social philosophy, it is necessary to know at least two narrow and generally unproductive research strategies:

1) naturalistic, which seeks to reduce society to biological problems;

2) sociologizing, which absolutizes sociological factors in their development and in the determinism of human essence. Philosophical explanations of social philosophy, its tasks and subject matter focus on the individual, his multifaceted needs and ensuring a better human life.

In social philosophy there are different points of view on almost every problem and different approaches to them.

The most common approaches: civilization-on; formational.

Philosophy is a complex type of knowledge, methods of its installation: an objective method, objectivity, which characterizes science; subjective mode, subjectivity that characterizes art; a method of sociability (communicative method) characteristic of morality, and only morality; contemplation of a mystical quality (or “contemplative way of thinking”). Philosophical knowledge is a complex, integral type of knowledge, it can be: natural science; ideological; humanitarian; artistic; transcendental comprehension (religion, mysticism); ordinary, everyday.

The main task of the science of society, namely social philosophy, is to:

- to understand the best system of social order for a given era;

- to encourage the governed and those who rule to understand it;

- to improve this system, since it is capable of improvement;

- to reject it when it reaches the extreme limits of its perfection, and to build a new one out of it with the help of materials collected by scientific specialists in each separate field.

Clarification of the features of social philosophy as a special branch of philosophical knowledge
obviously relies on a certain understanding of the subject and tasks of philosophy as a whole. Is our
the presentation of the problems and methods of social philosophy is based on a general understanding of philosophy as
such knowledge, the subject of which is “truth, i.e., what is, being”1
. With such understanding
tasks of social philosophy are consistent with the recognition of the need to take into account the results of
research in special scientific disciplines addressing various aspects of life
human beings, primarily such as the behavioral sciences, sociology and history. Speaking in relation to
to these latter as a general methodology, social philosophy, in turn, only then can
count on the strength and reliability of their positions when they represent
correct generalizations consistent with the data of special scientific research. One of the most important features of social philosophy is related to the fact that it studies phenomena and
processes that are significantly related to the actions of thinking beings - people. Therefore, no explanation of the events observed in this area can be sufficient without taking into account the peculiarities of the motivation of human behavior. Given
position in one form or another is shared by most philosophers and scientists who have addressed
study of social processes. They rightly believed that one of the primary tasks of social
philosophy is to resolve the far from trivial question of the principles and methods of taking into account this
the most important distinctive feature of social processes and the resulting methods
interpretation and explanation of observed phenomena.

Problems of social philosophy can be divided into three groups: firstly, these are questions
the qualitative uniqueness of the sociocultural world, taken in relation to the natural world; in-
secondly, this is the study of the principles of structural organization of social formations (human
societies) and establishing the sources of the variability in the forms of this organization observed in history; V-
thirdly, this is the question of the presence of patterns in the historical process and the closely related search for
objective foundations of the typology of human societies.

Society is a special system of objective reality, a specific, social form of the movement of matter. From a philological point of view, this is a naturally enriched part of the material world, which includes forms of unification of people and ways of their interaction. Human cognition is subject to general laws. However, the characteristics of the object of knowledge determine its specificity. Social cognition, which is inherent in social philosophy, also has its own characteristic features. It should, of course, be borne in mind that in the strict sense of the word, all knowledge has a social, social character. The specificity of this type of cognition lies primarily in the fact that the object here is the activity of the subjects of cognition themselves. That is, people themselves are both subjects of knowledge and real actors. In addition, the object of cognition also becomes the interaction between the object and the subject of cognition. Further, society and man, on the one hand, act as part of nature. On the other hand, these are the creations of both society itself and man himself, the materialized results of their activities. In society there are both social and individual forces, both material and ideal, objective and subjective factors; in it both feelings, passions, and reason matter; both conscious and unconscious, rational and irrational aspects of human life. Within society itself, its various structures and elements strive to satisfy their own needs, interests and goals. To the difficulties of social cognition explained by objective reasons, that is, reasons that have grounds in the specifics of the object, are added the difficulties associated with the subject of cognition. Such a subject is ultimately the person himself, although involved in public relations and scientific communities, but having his own individual experience and intelligence, interests and values, needs and passions, etc.

Thus, when characterizing social cognition, one should also keep in mind its personal factor. Finally, it is necessary to note the socio-historical conditionality of social cognition, including the level of development of the material and spiritual life of society, its social structure and the prevailing interests in it. A specific combination All of these factors and aspects of the specificity of social cognition determine the diversity of points of view and theories that explain the development and functioning of social life. At the same time, this specificity largely determines the nature and characteristics of various aspects of social cognition: 1. The ontological (from the Greek on (ontos) - existing) side of social cognition concerns the explanation of the existence of society, the patterns and trends of its functioning and development. 2. The epistemological (from the Greek gnosis - knowledge) side of social cognition is associated with the characteristics of this cognition itself, primarily with the question of whether it is capable of formulating its own laws and categories and whether it has them at all. 3. value - its axiological side (from the Greek axios - valuable), which plays an important role in understanding the specifics of social cognition, since any cognition, and especially social, is associated with certain value patterns, predilections and interests of various cognizing subjects. The ontological, epistemological and axiological aspects of social cognition are closely interconnected, forming an integral structure of people’s cognitive activity.

Subject, problems and specifics of social philosophy. Research methods. Social determinism. Spheres of public life. Social laws and social relations. Models of social reality. Typology of society. Social dynamics. Society as a historical process. Types of social theories. Social communities.

Subject and problems of social philosophy (SF). Social philosophy – the area of ​​philosophy that comprehends the universal through the study of the most general patterns, development trends and functioning of society, i.e. (society, history, man as a subject of activity and sociocultural interactions) or otherwise - through society the universe as a whole is revealed to us in a different way. Social being is being relations between people, the correlation of people’s behavior in meaning.

Why is it necessary and how is it possible to understand society? ? In each of us there is simultaneously and individual(unique) and public(common with others). Only through society a person becomes a person, a person, because humanity arises in relationships between individuals, in communication, so the discovery and awareness of the social aspect is very important. It's possible only 1) in communication with Others and 2) having mastered the culture of consciousness, i.e. learning to use your mind independently and be aware of (reflect) onprerequisites Andbasics their judgments and assessments of a particular social situation on the basis of such concepts (categories) as “social being”, “social relations”, etc. Otherwise, a person does not gain true freedom of views and comprehends and evaluates society the way the state authorities want it, and not he himself.

Subject research in social philosophy is:

society in general, the conditions and factors for the development of social (collective) existence.

general philosophical methods, applied to the understanding of society, i.e. the very sociomorphic vision of the universal as one of the types of vision of the world as a whole.

Main problem social philosophy is the question of what society is, what its nature (foundations) and patterns of existence and development are revealed differently depending on the research method.

Specifics of social philosophy, differentiation of sciences. Society is the object of study in many disciplines: economics, political science, social history, sociology. The difference is What namely (subject) and How(method) is studied in society. For example, economics studies the patterns of development of industrial relations, jurisprudence studies the patterns of the functioning of law, political science studies political relations, sociology studies society as a whole, but not in the value aspect.

Features of social philosophy:

Normativity (or axiological – i.e. value) - social philosophy explores, clarifies, translates into words, cultivates norms, values, ideals . This is the main difference from sociology, which explores what is there facts (states the presence of social th institute as a given), A social philosophy also talks about it should be, comprehends these facts also from the point of view of a system of values, norms (we solve the question of whether this institution is addressed to a person, the development of his essential forces, or, conversely, is directed against the society of people).

Dialecticality (orantithetical) – social philosophy involves the formulation of not only thesis(some positive statement), but also antithesis(a statement directly opposite to the thesis), thanks to which it can pose and not necessarily finally resolve the ultimate questions of social existence and consciousness.

The structure of social philosophy:

- theoretical level: reflection of the social (descriptions, clarifications of social elements, creation of utopias and dystopias),

- practical level(creative construction of social models)

- normative level(study of norms and value systems).

So, in social philosophy, society is both a subject and a means of knowledge. In this knowledge, social philosophy, reflecting and dialectically combining vectors of extreme opposites (thesis-antithesis), poses and tries to resolve issues of both existing social reality and proper, value-significant social existence.

Research methods. The study of society is built on the basis of projection and establishing connections between various representations about social reality and itself reality, i.e. between the speculative system of categories (“social being”, “social consciousness”, etc.) and the given reality 41. Social philosophizing is realized in the dialogue between thesis and antithesis. Dialecticality is revealed in three points: 1) two approaches to society (transcendental and dialogical philosophy), 2) emotional and rational understanding, 3) humanitarian and natural science approaches.

1. Dialogical and transcendental vision of society . Transcendental the vision of society comes from oppositions subject and object of knowledge (cm. R.Descartes ), and the subject is primary, he appears as the starting point of being, the starting point of reflection, and the relationships into which he enters with other individuals are secondary. And then the object of socio-philosophical knowledge is society, and the subject is a person who purposefully reflects in his consciousness (feelings and thoughts) the objectively existing reality of social existence.

Dialogical the vision goes back to I.G. Hamann, W. Humboldt and F.H. Jacobi, in anthropological terms it was developed by L. Feuerbach (a person is himself only in unity with people), continued by G. Cohen, G. Marcel, M. Heidegger (being-with-others as the basic way of human existence), K. Jaspers ( communication as the most important mediator and evidence of being), in dialectical theology E. Levinas and M. Buber. Dialogical philosophy proceeds from concrete human existence and understanding of the world as integral unity, and not from oppositions. It is assumed that there is a certain initial continuum, which gives rise to separate individuals, each of whom initially does not know himself as a subject, the subject is not correlated in the world and does not objectify other subjects. A person here perceives himself primarily in a relationship with You (initially with the absolute You - God), therefore the world of man is a common world of human coexistence, realized in mutual speaking, in dialogue, in language.

2. Emotional and rational cognition. Emotional cognition(intuition) is based on a figurative (picture, image) form, transmitted through painting, cinema, television, music and goes back to the archaic structures of the collective soul. The researcher must not only be able to see and describe various forms of social reality (fear, anxiety for the future, humor, suffering), but also be empathetic and compassionate. Without emotional cognition, the normativity of social philosophy and wisdom as such would be impossible. Historically, the culture of emotional understanding is closely connected with the traditions of anti-scientism: existentialism, hermeneutics, German romanticism.

Rational cognition(theory) includes: knowability, validity, consistency, clarity, orientation to the most preferable norms. It allows you to model social processes and consider society itself as a model with which you can understand the world. That. social cognition can combine various forms of comprehension of reality: both emotional and rational and therefore have both a scientific (theoretical reproduction of an object in the logic of concepts) and extra-scientific character (practical everyday, artistic, religious, mythological, magical knowledge).

3. Natural science and humanitarian approaches . The socio-philosophical method represents the interaction of natural science and humanitarian approaches to society. Natural science approach explores society as world of necessity , consisting of real people operating with material objects, technology, entering into material relationships. The research here aims to repetitive, constant and the main method is explanation. The theorists of this approach, which M. Weber called “disenchantment of the world,” are close to the philosophy of positivism, and ultimately it leads to nihilism and the understanding of society in terms of science - as social synergetics.

Humanitarian approach explores society as world of freedom , where people endowed with free will base their activities not only on needs, but also on values. This approach aims to unique, inimitable and uses the method understanding.

Depending on one approach or another, various models of society. The study of society using the natural scientific approach (nomothetic) is formed naturalistic And active model, and with the help of the humanitarian (idiographic) - realistic And phenomenological.

Typology procedure . Typology of social phenomena. The order is expressed in the form of typology (classification) a lot as an ontological given of the SF. Imagining the Other as type, we put him under a category, see him in general, identify him as “Russian” or “Finn”. Self-identification with a social class or group also occurs - “I am part of the working class” or “I am a hippie.”

Max Weber proposed a theory ideal type as a model for explaining social facts and understanding them, to understand the “interest of the era.” Without being able to detect the rationality of the world itself (see...), we can impose on the world our rational forms of thinking etc. get\construct ideal types. Nature's ideal type normative, it does not reflect what is, but prescribes what should be. For example, “Germans are characterized by precision and accuracy...” is a construction of the historical individuality of the Germans. This does not mean that absolutely all Germans are precise and accurate. And on the other hand, this constructed reality has a normative effect on the real German - he strives to correspond to the image of an accurate and neat person.

Society as an integral system. The concept of “society” has many meanings (society of philatelists, getting into bad society, philosophical society, joint-stock company).

In this case, under society is understood a set of people living together and interacting with each other, united by a common production way of life, which qualitatively distinguishes them from all other living creatures. The second, narrower meaning of the term “society” is a separate, specific society, which is a relatively independent unit of historical development.

Answering the question of whether society exists independently or whether society is merely a derivative of the existence of the individuals composing it, two directions can be distinguished. Representatives first direction (sociological nominalism ) M. Weber, N.I. Kareev They believe that society is a simple aggregate, a sum of individuals. They recognize neither classes nor society as a whole. Second direction e ( sociological realism ) understands society as an integral, qualitatively new formation, developing according to its own laws inherent only to it. This includes Aristotle, E. Durkheim, O. Comte, G. Spencer . In the search for the real objective basis of society, they often resorted to an analogy between society and an animal organism, and sometimes to the desire to liken society to a biological organism. This is how the so-called organic direction, where society is sociohistorical organism or "socior".

Socior as a living organism is localized in time and space and goes through a number of stages of origin, development and decline; it can also “connect” with other sociors and form sociological system (French, English, Polish societies form Western European society) or, conversely, a single sociohistorical organism can disintegrate into many independent sociors. Each socior is made up of people subordinate to one public authority, therefore, in a class society, socior boundaries often coincide with state borders.

Socio-historical organisms can be subdivided into types according to various criteria of a substantive nature: according to the socio-economic system (slave, feudal, etc. societies), the dominant sector of the economy ( agrarian, industrial and post-industrial societies), form of government ( monarchies and republics), political regime ( authoritarian and democratic societies), the dominant denomination (Christian, Islamic, pagan countries) and so on.

Social determinism. One of the tasks of social philosophy is to study the determinism of social phenomena and the driving forces of the socio-historical process. Firstly, because society and history, in a sense, are created by people themselves and they need to know what can be changed and what cannot. Secondly, to reveal the internal logic of the historical process, the laws of its development and functioning.

The following are distinguished: types of determinism:

Geographical determinism is considering The question of the influence of the geographical environment on socio-political processes was raised by ancient authors - Hippocrates, Herodotus, Polybius. Geography emerged as a movement at the beginning of the 18th century. in the works of C. Montesquieu, and continued it in the 19th century. G. Buckle, E. Recu and others. This approach was an alternative to the theological and social-idealistic explanation of social phenomena. Now history was explained not by the intervention of God and not as a random coincidence of circumstances, but through a material factor. In the 30s In the 20th century, a school of geopolitics arose in Germany. She justified Germany's aggressive policy (starting World Wars) by cramped geographical conditions. L.I. Mechnikov and E. Reclus introduced the term "geographical environment" as part of the nature with which a given society interacts, it includes 1) natural means of subsistence - played a major role in the pre-industrial period of civilization (climate, soil fertility, size and flatness of territories, abundance of fish, animals, plants) and 2) natural means of production - in the industrial and post-industrial period (river navigability, presence of forests, coal, oil, and other minerals). The geographical environment influences: 1. social division of labor (separation of cattle breeding from agriculture), placement and development of various branches of production 2. labor productivity (weather and climatic conditions determine the result of labor - winemaking) 3. development of human abilities (unfavorability of a harsh and monotonous environment) 4. the rate of development of a given society as a whole (the increase in the rate of development of England in connection with the discovery of America and the sea route around Africa) 5. the development of production relations (among eastern peoples, agriculture is the business of communities and governments, so they did not come to private ownership of land) 6. the emergence and development of the state, religion, art (different rhythm, melodiousness in the songs of different peoples) 7. social and psychological appearance and mood of society (different natural resources stimulate different qualities - frugality or wastefulness).

Demographic determinism – a direction that absolutizes the role of the quantity and quality of population in the life of society. One typical example is Malthusianism ( Malthus T.R.) is a socio-economic doctrine, the basis of which is the model of excess population, which impedes an increase in the standard of living, since according to this model, the production of means of life grows in arithmetic progression, and the population - in geometric progression.

Economic determinism (K. Marx) – considers industrial relations as the main factor of social development.

Technological determinism (O. Toffler) - considers technique and technology as the foundation of the integrity of society and the main factor in its development.

Spheres of public life. In society as an integral system, the following are conventionally distinguished: four e dialectically interconnected spheres:

– material-production or economic (sphere of production, consumption, exchange and distribution),

- social (ethnic communities of people - clan, tribe, people, nation, etc., various classes - slaves, slave owners, peasants, bourgeoisie, proletariat, etc.),

- political (power structures - the state, political organizations, parties and movements, etc.).

- spiritual (philosophical, religious, scientific, political and other views of people).

Social laws and social relations. Social reality is not a world of ideas, not a world of things, but a world relationships. Society is a qualitatively new formation in which all elements are interconnected and constantly interact. Social relations develop in the process of people’s joint life activities based on their needs and interests. Distinguish material And spiritual public relations.

Material or industrial relations - relationships that develop in society regarding material wealth. They include:

- production, i.e. creating items that meet needs(the higher the level of division of labor, the higher the level of production, the more consumer goods are produced),

- distribution according to social laws(distribution of instruments of production, distribution of people among various branches of production, distribution of manufactured products),

- exchange, i.e. distribution according to individual needs(activities and abilities of individuals, finished products),

- consumption i.e. satisfaction of needs: productive (material for making products, tools, human vitality) and individual (consumption of material goods),

- property relations those. appropriation by an individual of consumer goods(forms of ownership: personal, private, state, public). It is private property that gives rise to collisions in society, because owners of private property exploit (appropriate) the labor of others and thereby further increase their property.

Spiritual Relationships – are determined (determined) by material relations, and therefore this secondary level of social relations. Includes: political, moral, religious, legal relations.

Objective, necessary, internal, sustainable and repetitiveconnections and relationships social reality make up social laws. In the process of its life, society is forced to obey these laws, regardless of whether it is aware of them or not. Unlike natural laws, the laws of society are the laws of the conscious activity of people, and not of spontaneous forces, and therefore these laws-trends , showing the direction of development, they are not absolute. In this regard, some philosophers do not even recognize any social laws at all.

Social laws, depending on the duration of their existence and range of action, are divided into:

- universal(act in both natural and social reality),

- are common(operate throughout the entire historical movement, for example, the law of correspondence of production relations to the level of development of productive forces),

- private(operate throughout several social formations, for example, the law of struggle)

- specific(characteristic of one formation, for example, the production of relative overpopulation).

That. social reality includes :

1. a system of social relations that arises in the process of division of labor, pleasure, property,

2. impersonal roles and statuses that fix the place of individuals in such relationships

3. systemic sets of roles that form social institutions

4. supra-individual cultural stereotypes - patterns of thinking, feelings

Models of social reality. Typology of society. An important task of the s.f. is the construction of a systemic-structural model of society in general, in which universal features of social organization will be brought together, independent of the historical forms of existence of society.

There are only four models of social reality. The first two of them are substantialist: naturalistic- explains society “from below”, from nature, realistic (or idealistic)) - explains society “from above”, from the Absolute, God. The other two are anti-substantialist, i.e. explain society from itself, and not from “earth” and not from “heaven”: active(for example, materialist, having a Marxist form, or cultural, etc.) and phenomenological.

The realistic (idealistic) model developed already in the Middle Ages (Aurelius Augustine). Naturalistic and activity models are products of modern European civilization, which were strongly influenced by Galilean science. Finally, the phenomenological model is a product of modern times, a product of the crisis of new European civilization.

Naturalistic model proceeds from the premise that humanity is an ordinary biological species among other biological species (see Charles Darwin and Darwinism), although it adapts to the environment in a special way, with the help of culture, traditions, and ethical standards. Culture does not oppose, but merely completes the natural in man. One variant of this model is sociobiology. The naturalistic model characterizes the views of C. Montesquieu, L.I. Mechnikov, the concepts of L.N. Gumilyov, S.M. Shirokogorova. The naturalistic model is also based geopolitics: national destiny is determined by the struggle for living space, the struggle for resources.

Idealistic or Realistic model (« realism" in the medieval sense of the word). This model assumes that "true being belongs not to matter, but to the spiritual principle" and explains society, revealing in it a higher spiritual principle. The realistic model is built on the basis of vertical aspiration towards the Absolute, towards God. Each person connects these two worlds because he belongs to society. On the one hand, it is subject to the law of causality, on the other hand, it is free and in this sense is not subject to the law of causality.

Activity model suggests that it is human activity that creates a new reality, specific, fundamentally non-natural and super-natural. It is postulated that the source of social change is in society itself, i.e. people in the process of their social life themselves create the basis for its change. G. Vico first spoke about this, arguing that people make their own history. Activity models of social reality appeared in their developed form in the middle of the 19th century. Activity models are usually technomorphic. People build society as a mega-machine, which, once it has arisen, begins to determine their future activities, both material and spiritual. A variety of the activity model of social reality is Marxism (see historical materialism).

Phenomenological model refuses to allow any substance into social life. Its representatives believe that there is no predetermined basis that would determine society, which would be unchangeable, always equal to itself. In any case, we know nothing about such a basis. Therefore, we must reserve judgment on this matter. Representatives: Alfred Schutz, who consistently applied phenomenological methods to the social sphere, developing the above thought, says not only that there is no social world outside recognition, but also that the social world is a world of multiple realities.

Social dynamics. Society as a historical process. Social dynamics views society as a self-developing system capable of maintaining its identity by changing its qualitative states. Possible sources of social change are the following: 1) in the realm of spirit (for example, according to M. Weber, the capitalist economy is the result of a change in religious and ethical attitudes or, according to P. Sorokin, philosophical views on the world),

2) in the material sphere (according to K. Marx, self-increasing human needs and the contradiction between production forces and production relations).

Here the problem of the philosophy of history arises: the problem of typologizing historically specific forms of social organization. Typology can be based on 1. cultural factors (Sorokin), 2. production and technological (W. Rostow, D. Bell) or economic factors (Marx).

Society as a historical process. History describes unique events occurring in the lives of certain peoples, and the philosophy of history seeks general patterns of social development in the historical path of humanity/ethnic groups. Social philosophy strives to see the hidden logic of the movements of the human spirit, which manifest themselves in the events of world history, the goals and meanings of historical existence. In order to develop a holistic picture of socio-historical reality, we study results of the work of a historian and sociologist, and cognitive procedures through which these results are obtained, because what we see in history depends on the horizon of our perception of socio-historical phenomena, on how we look.

There are several types of understanding of world history:

Social philosophy is “the philosophy of human social existence.” The subject of social philosophy is society as an integral social system, as well as the laws of the functioning and development of society.

Society is a collection of people united by historically determined social forms of joint life and activity.

There are several main functions of social philosophy: 1. The worldview function of social philosophy is that it forms in a person a general view of the social world, that is, the existence and development of society, and in a certain way resolves questions about the relationship between the existence of people, the material conditions of their life and their consciousness, about the place and purpose of a person in society, the purpose and meaning of his life, etc. 2. The theoretical function of social philosophy is that it allows one to penetrate into the depths of social processes and judge them at the level of theory, that is, a system views on their essence, content and direction of development. At the theoretical level, we can talk about trends, patterns of development of social phenomena and society as a whole. 3. Associated with the above functions is the methodological function of social philosophy, which consists in the application of its provisions in the study of individual phenomena and processes of social life, studied by certain social sciences. In this case, the provisions of social philosophy play the role of methodology in research carried out in the field of historical, legal, economic, psychological and other sciences. 4. Finally, the predictive function of social philosophy is that its provisions contribute to the prediction of trends in the development of society, its individual aspects, and the possible immediate and long-term consequences of people’s activities. On the basis of such foresight, it becomes possible to build forecasts for the development of certain social phenomena and the entire society. The indicated functions of social philosophy are manifested in a person’s thinking if he masters the philosophical worldview, theory and methodology of philosophy. In this case, he acquires the ability to think systematically, dialectically, to consider social phenomena in their interaction, change and development. As a result, a certain methodological discipline of thinking is formed, making it strictly logical and clear, which is an indicator of a culture of thinking. In conclusion, we note that all functions of social philosophy are dialectically interconnected. Each of them presupposes the others and one way or another includes them in its content. It is impossible to separate, for example, ideological and methodological, methodological and theoretical functions. Only through their integral unity is the specificity and essence of socio-philosophical knowledge revealed.

The specificity of this type of cognition lies primarily in the fact that the object here is the activity of the subjects of cognition themselves. That is, people themselves are both subjects of knowledge and real actors. In addition, the object of cognition also becomes the interaction between the object and the subject of cognition. In other words, in contrast to the natural sciences, technical and other sciences, in the very object of social cognition, its subject is initially present. Further, society and man, on the one hand, act as part of nature. On the other hand, these are the creations of both society itself and man himself, the materialized results of their activities. In society there are both social and individual forces, both material and ideal, objective and subjective factors; in it both feelings, passions, and reason matter; both conscious and unconscious, rational and irrational aspects of human life. Within society itself, its various structures and elements strive to satisfy their own needs, interests and goals. This complexity of social life, its diversity and different qualities determine the complexity and difficulty of social cognition and its specificity in relation to other types of cognition. To the difficulties of social cognition explained by objective reasons, that is, reasons that have grounds in the specifics of the object, are added the difficulties associated with the subject of cognition. Such a subject is ultimately the person himself, although involved in social relations and scientific communities, but having his own individual experience and intelligence, interests and values, needs and passions, etc. Thus, when characterizing social cognition, one should keep in mind also his personal factor. Finally, it is necessary to note the socio-historical conditionality of social cognition, including the level of development of the material and spiritual life of society, its social structure and the interests prevailing in it.

You can also find the information you are interested in in the scientific search engine Otvety.Online. Use the search form:

More on topic 22. Subject and functions of social philosophy. Specificity of philosophical knowledge of social reality:

1. Essence, specificity, subject, structure and functions of philosophy
2. Subject and range of problems of modern history and philosophy of science.

Before defining the subject of social philosophy, let us point out the basic meanings of the concept “social”. In modern philosophical and sociological literature, this concept is used in a narrow and broad sense.

In a narrow sense, “social” means the existence of a special area of ​​social phenomena that constitute the content of the so-called social sphere of society, in which its own range of problems is solved, affecting the relevant interests of people. These problems concern the social status of people, their place in the system of social division of labor, the conditions of their work, movements from one social group to another, their standard of living, education, health care, social security, etc. All these problems within the social sphere are solved on the basis of the specific social relations that develop here, also understood in a narrow sense. Their specific content is determined by the content of the specified problems about which they arise. In this they differ, say, from economic, political, moral, legal and other social relations.

In a broad sense, the concept of “social” is used in the meaning of “public”, as a synonym for this concept, coinciding with it in scope and content. In this case, the concept “social” (“public”) means everything that happens in society, in contrast to what happens in nature. In other words, it denotes the specificity of the social in relation to the natural, natural, biological. In a broad sense, the concept “social” is also used as the opposite of individual. In this case, it denotes what relates to social groups or to the whole society, as opposed to what concerns the individual qualities of an individual.

In social philosophy, the concept “social” is used both in a broad and narrow sense. In other words, it can relate to all processes occurring in society, including in its social sphere, but it can only concern those that pertain to this sphere itself and express its specificity. The social sphere itself is considered in its interactions with other spheres of public life within the framework of a single society.

The subject of social philosophy is society, taken in the interaction of all its parties, i.e. as an integral social system, as well as the laws of the functioning and development of society. This means that social philosophy examines and explains various social phenomena and processes at the macro level, i.e. at the level of the entire society as a self-developing and self-reproducing social system. It is primarily interested not so much in the specific features of, say, economic, political or spiritual phenomena - this is mainly the subject of other sciences - but rather in their place in the holistic structure of society and the role they play in its existence and development.

Social philosophy also examines the interactions between different societies. In her field of vision are also those phenomena and processes of social life that characterize the development of all mankind. In this case, the subject of social philosophy is the historical process as a whole, the interaction of its objective and subjective aspects, and the patterns of its development.

The attention of social philosophy cannot but be occupied by the practical activities of people and their social relations. After all, it is in the process of their practical activities - production-economic, spiritual, socio-political, scientific, moral, aesthetic - that people produce the material and spiritual goods necessary for their existence, transform nature, create the spiritual atmosphere and socio-cultural environment they need.

In the process of their joint activities, people enter into various relationships with each other in order to solve pressing issues of their social life. We are talking about production, family and everyday life, moral, political and other social relations, which in their totality form the structure of society. After all, society is, first of all, people in their social relations with each other. A similar understanding of society takes place in a number of socio-philosophical theories, which we will touch on later. Within the framework of social relations of people, all types of their practical activities are realized, state, economic, moral and other social institutions are created, all aspects of the culture of society are developed.

Thus, various types of human activity and their social relations constitute the main content of social life and determine the development of society. They represent the initial principles and main factors in the formation, functioning and development of any society. That is why they are the subject of attention and study of social philosophy.

Social philosophy explores both objective and objective aspects of people's activities and social relations. It explores the objective driving forces of activity, which are, for example, their objective needs and interests, as well as the motives and goals of activity inherent in their Knowledge. All these phenomena are interconnected and are in dialectical interaction.

1. Subject of social philosophy

The object of socio-philosophical analysis is society - local or humanity. Society is the object of analysis of various sciences: history, sociology, philosophy of history, social philosophy, etc. But each of them has its own subject of study, i.e. its aspect in the study of society, and therefore general and specific methods of social cognition.

The subject of social philosophy is the relationship between human society and social man. In this regard, society acts as a social being, and man in the form of social consciousness. The latter means that a social person is people united in a clan, ethnic group, people, civilization, etc., and not an individual. With this approach, society, its cognition and social consciousness, as well as social practice acquire obvious specificity in comparison with other sciences and forms of worldview that study society. Thus, social philosophy is an integral part of philosophy that studies the relationship between society and man in the form of interaction of social existence and social consciousness.

The subject of social philosophy is the relationship between social man, on the one hand, and social institutions, public spheres, social formations, social civilizations, etc. - with another. The essence of a social person in this case is social consciousness and social practice, which are carried out in the listed social forms. In this regard, it is appropriate to emphasize that social philosophy does not study social existence and social consciousness in their separateness, but the process of their functioning and development in various social forms (institutions, spheres, formations, etc.). Therefore, an important problem of social philosophy is the study of society as an integral natural-social system, the most important elements of which are social existence and the social consciousness of man.

Due to the complexity of the object being studied, several areas of analysis have arisen in the history of social philosophy: historical idealism, historical materialism, historical realism. They solve the problem of the relationship between social existence and social consciousness and other related problems in different ways. All these directions are equivalent from the point of view of social truth, i.e. are hypotheses that have their own cognitive value in different societies and in different historical periods. For example, historical materialism dominated in socialist societies, and historical idealism in bourgeois ones. Now both humanity and social philosophy are rising to a new level of social knowledge.

An important problem of social philosophy is the study of the forms of communication between the main spheres of the social organism, i.e. studying ways to integrate elements of social life. Such forms of integration are formations of societies (social formations), which act as unique metasystems. We distinguish three types of such metasystems: political, economic, mixed. The same societies correspond to them. Within the framework of these formations of societies, corresponding forms of social consciousness arise, in which economic, political, and mixed existence is cognized.

2. Functions of social philosophy.

The subject and specifics of social philosophy cannot be revealed without touching on the question of its functions.

The functions of social philosophy are basically the same as philosophy in general, but they have their own characteristics. Let's name the main ones.

1. The ideological function of social philosophy lies in the fact that it forms a person’s general view of the social world, that is, the existence and development of society, and in a certain way resolves questions about the relationship between the existence of people, the material conditions of their life and their consciousness, about the place and purpose a person in society, the purpose and meaning of his life, etc.

2. The theoretical function of social philosophy is that it allows one to penetrate into the depths of social processes and judge them at the level of theory, that is, a system of views about their essence, content and direction of development. At the theoretical level, we can talk about trends, patterns of development of social phenomena and society as a whole.

3. the methodological function of social philosophy, which consists in the application of its provisions in the study of individual phenomena and processes of social life, studied by certain social sciences. In this case, the provisions of social philosophy play the role of methodology in research carried out in the field of historical, legal, economic, psychological and other sciences.

4. The prognostic function of social philosophy is that its provisions contribute to the prediction of trends in the development of society, its individual aspects, and the possible immediate and long-term consequences of people’s activities. On the basis of such foresight, it becomes possible to build forecasts for the development of certain social phenomena and the entire society.

The indicated functions of social philosophy are manifested in a person’s thinking if he masters the philosophical worldview, theory and methodology of philosophy. In this case, he acquires the ability to think systematically, dialectically, to consider social phenomena in their interaction, change and development. As a result, a certain methodological discipline of thinking is formed, making it strictly logical and clear, which is an indicator of a culture of thinking.

In conclusion, we note that all functions of social philosophy are dialectically interconnected. Each of them presupposes the others and one way or another includes them in its content. It is impossible to separate, for example, ideological and methodological, methodological and theoretical functions. Only through their integral unity is the specificity and essence of socio-philosophical knowledge revealed.

3. Society as a subject of philosophical analysis.

The task of social philosophy is to understand what society is and what significance it has in human life.

The concept of “society” is defined both in the broad and narrow sense of the word. In a narrow sense, society is understood as a certain stage in the historical development of mankind or a specific country. For example, feudal society or French society. In the broad sense of the word, society is a part of the material world isolated from nature, which includes ways of interaction between people and forms of their unification.

Of all the phenomena of reality, social life is one of the most complex. If in nature interactions between material formations are carried out without the intervention of conscious beings, then in society there are people gifted with consciousness who set certain goals for themselves and strive to achieve them. As a result of people's actions, society is constantly changing and developing.

Social philosophers constantly reflect on the problem of the connection between man and society. There are two approaches to this problem - objectivist and subjectivist. Objectivism is deterministic: society produces the people it needs. The teachings of the famous French philosopher and sociologist Emile Durkheim (1858 - 1917) can serve as an example of such an understanding of the relationship between man and society.

Durkheim understood society as a set of social facts. He called social facts patterns of thoughts and actions that are of a collective nature and have the characteristic of exerting coercion on an individual. It is the collective consciousness, public opinion that guides the behavior of the individual, who cannot arbitrarily choose a path of life not dictated by society. He is not free to choose his own language or abandon the existing monetary system. The individual is forced to submit to the collective consciousness. Durkheim drew attention to the fact that social consciousness should be studied by its objective manifestations in various cultural monuments: by codes of law, by proverbs, customs, mores, etc. The subjectivist approach to the problem “man - society” is based on the understanding of society as the sum of autonomous individuals capable of meaningful actions and conscious choice. Subjectivism was characteristic of the German philosopher and sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920). He created the concept of social action. Social action is an action the motive of which is recognized by the individual; it is an action that has a social reaction, i.e. directed at other people and causes a reaction from others. Society, according to Weber, is the total result of the meaningful behavior of people, the product of their consciousness and will. For example, he explained the emergence of capitalist society by the formation in humans of the ability to behave rationally in the economic field and everyday life.

The social structure of society is interpreted differently in different sociological perspectives. Two main approaches to its understanding: 1) objectivist (K. Marx, E. Durkheim, T. Parsons and others), according to which social structure exists independently of the will and consciousness of people, largely determining their social behavior and social actions; 2) subjectivist (A. Schutz, J. Mead and others), whose supporters reduce social structure to the interactions of individuals (13), considering them as the only social reality; social structure, in their opinion, is an abstraction that exists only in the minds of people; it can only be comprehended through the assessment of individual opinions.

An attempt to “reconcile” these opposing points of view was made by P. Berger. He confirms that “social structure is not characterized as something capable of standing on its own, separate from the human activity that created it.” However, once constructed, it “opposes the individual both as an alien facticity and as a means of coercion.” The reality constructed by people only takes on the appearance of its creation by some external, non-human force.

The most important reason for the emergence and complication of the social structure is the social differentiation of society - the increase in the diversity of social differences, which consistently complicate the picture of social interactions. Social differentiation causes inequality of property, power and status. But, in addition, it also implies social differences that are in no way connected with social inequality and are not evidence of position in the hierarchy of social statuses and social stratification (4.2). Therefore, social differentiation is a broader concept than social inequality.

The reasons for social differentiation of society in different sociological perspectives are also interpreted differently. According to functionalists, social differentiation is generated by the rational division of society into elements (classes, layers, groups, organizations, social institutions, systems and subsystems), each of which performs a corresponding function, ensuring the integrity and balance of the entire society. From the point of view of the creators of the status theory, social differentiation is explained by the fact that different people by nature have different abilities and perform roles in accordance with them, occupying different statuses in society. K. Marx and Marxists believe that the causes of social differentiation are: the emergence of private property and class struggle aimed at its redistribution.

The typology of social structures is most often considered on two grounds: 1) depending on the level of development of the division of labor and the nature of the prevailing socio-economic relations (K. Marx): slaveholding (slaves, slaveholders, artisans, priests, philosophers), feudal (serfs, feudal lords, classes of artisans, clergy, merchants), capitalist (proletariat, bourgeoisie, farmers, intelligentsia), socialist (working class, collective farm peasantry, intelligentsia); 2) by socio-historical type (M. Weber, P. Sorokin): traditional (castes, estates) and modern (classes, layers).

4. The essence of the theory of stratification by Peterim Sorokin

Introduction

P.A. Sorokin is a major sociologist of the twentieth century who made a huge contribution to the development of both Russian and American sociology. His works contain valuable material that underlies the modern science of society.

Elements of society

· living human individuals - subjects of activity,

· object of social activity. - Things, “tools”, Symbols, signs.

“Social stratification- this is the differentiation of a certain given set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank”, expressed in the existence of higher and lower strata, uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, the presence and absence of social values, Power and influence among members of a particular community . This or roughly this is how P. Sorokin thought about social stratification - the man who was the first in the world to give a complete theoretical explanation of this phenomenon, and confirmed his theory with the help of a huge empirical material extending over the entire human history.

Economic stratification

Speaking about the economic status of a group, two main types of changes should be distinguished. The first refers to the economic decline or rise of a group; the second - to the growth or reduction of economic stratification within the group itself. The first phenomenon is expressed in the economic enrichment or impoverishment of social groups as a whole; the second is expressed in a change in the economic profile of the group or in an increase or decrease in the height of the economic pyramid.

Political stratification

Political stratification is universal and constant, but this does not mean that it has always been identical everywhere.

The height of the pyramid of political stratification varies from country to country, from one period to another.

Professional stratification

It should be noted that certain classes of professions have always constituted the top of the social stratum, while other professional groups have always been at the bottom of the stratification.

Social mobility theory

Social mobility refers to any transition of an individual or social object (value) from one social position to another. There are two main types of social mobility: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal social mobility, or movement, means the transition of an individual or social object from one social group to another, located at the same level. Vertical social mobility refers to those relationships that arise when an individual or social object moves from one social layer to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there are two types of vertical mobility: upward and downward, i.e. social ascent and social descent.

The functions of social circulation are performed by various institutions and channels of social mobility. the most important of them are: the army, the church, the school, political, economic and professional organizations.

5. Karl Heinrich Marx

(1818-1883) - one of the greatest minds in the history of the spiritual culture of mankind. Let us express only some thoughts about the features of this philosophy in the context of the general process of philosophical development of the 19th century.

First of all, the formation of K. Marx’s social philosophy is the formation of materialist philosophy, historical materialism. This, of course, is its fundamental novelty and value. In the social philosophy of K. Marx there was a final break with the political-centric tendency that existed before. Society appeared as a specifically complex, multi-layered formation, the basis of which was social production and a number of special objective structures. The laws of society are defined as objective, and the development of society itself is defined as a natural historical process.

From the point of view of the form of expression, the social philosophy of K. Marx has a number of features. It is absolutely indisputable that the socio-philosophical concept of K. Marx, despite its organic proximity to general philosophical ideas, has a clearly defined content. Perhaps its, so to speak, external constitutional part is most concentratedly presented in the famous Preface to “A Critique of Political Economy” (1859). At the same time, if we compare the heritage of Hegel and Marx, we cannot help but notice that the socio-philosophical ideas of K. Marx are less explicit, identified, and theoretically formulated. In any case, K. Marx does not have such completed social and philosophical works as, say, “Philosophy of Law.” One of the features of the socio-philosophical heritage of K. Marx is that his ideas often “live” in a peculiar refracted form, mediated in the context of a different analysis, developing not on a purely philosophical basis.

Definition of labor in general. Labor is a complex, multi-quality, multi-level phenomenon. Naturally, it can be analyzed from a variety of positions. K. Marx, studying labor as a complex social phenomenon, identified its universal characteristics, which he expressed in the concepts of “labor in general”, “abstract labor”. He rightly showed that without such research it is impossible to deeply reveal the socially specific features of labor and its specific historical features. It is worth adding to this that abstract labor in general also has historically specific foundations in society, when labor within the framework of commodity production acquired a universal, impersonal, abstract form.

6. Social Determinism

The most important characteristic of S.D. is a cause-and-effect relationship, but all forms of determination (conditionality) cannot be reduced to the latter. Among them are the connections: accidental and necessary, possible and actual, direct and indirect, etc. The entire set of connections and relationships of this class of objects acts as the most important determinant of development. It has two main forms: firstly, it is the strict determination of one social phenomenon by another, and secondly, the concept of “S.D.” refers to the characteristics of certain properties or qualities inherent not to an individual subject, but to the class of objects as a whole. From the ideas about the connection between social phenomena that existed in the history of sociological thought, we can highlight:

1) mechanistic S.D., which assumed strict determination, the strictly unambiguous nature of all connections and dependencies, the reduction of the social whole to its elements, the refusal to include randomness in the chain of cause-and-effect relationships and led to the denial of free will and fatalism (recognition of inevitable predetermination events);

2) statistical S.D., who emphasized the importance of randomness in social processes and identifying causes based on recording statistical distributions;

3) systemic S.D., emphasizing the integrity of social structures, the determination of its elements by the social system, etc. V.A. Baltsevich

7. Economic determinism

The theory according to which the economic basis of society determines all other aspects of its life. This theory was adhered to, for example, by K. Marx, whose social philosophy can be defined as a combination of a linear-stage approach to history with E.D. History, according to Marx, passes through a series of stages (socio-economic formations), the uniqueness of each of which is determined by the economic structure of society, the set of production relations into which people enter in the process of producing goods and exchanging them. These relationships connect people and correspond to a certain stage of development of their productive forces. The transition to the next, higher stage is caused by the fact that the ever-growing productive forces become cramped within the framework of the old production relations. The economic structure is the real basis on which the legal and political superstructure is erected and with the change of which changes.

Under the influence of criticism, Marx tried to somewhat soften the position about the unidirectional nature of the impact of the economic base on the ideological superstructure (science, art, law, politics, etc.) and take into account the reverse impact of the superstructure on the base.

8. Biological determinism

Biological direction in sociology; the tendency to use concepts and principles of biology to describe and explain social phenomena.

9. Technological Determinism

the idea according to which the level of technological development determines the type of society, its social structure, level of consumption, etc.

10. Typology of societies

A method of scientific knowledge, which is based on the division of systems of objects and their grouping using a generalized, idealized model or type. In sociology, several approaches to the typology of societies have developed.

10.1 Vico

The Italian philosopher, founder of philosophy, history and psychology of peoples, D.V. introduced the comparative method into history and believed that all nations develop in cycles consisting of three eras:

The Age of the Gods is characterized by the absence of a state, a symbolic fixation of people’s ideas about themselves, their society and the world in theogonic myths, in which religious structures dominated in the management of sociocultural processes.

The Age of Heroes is marked by the dominance of the aristocratic state and the symbolization of sociocultural ideas in the forms of heroic epic.

The century of people - a democratic republic or monarchy and a historical form of understanding sociocultural processes.

The age of the gods is characterized by morals colored by piety and religion; The age of heroes has angry and scrupulous morals; The age of people is helpful, guided by a sense of civic duty. Accordingly, in the Age of the Gods, law is based on the idea that everything is controlled by God; in the Age of Heroes - on strength unconstrained by either morality or religion; In the Age of Man, law is based on the principles of the human mind.

After the completion of the third stage, a gradual disintegration of this society occurs. This theory of eras (stages) is set out in the work "Foundations of a new science of the general nature of the nation",

Vico's ideas had a great influence on subsequent ideas about history and culture. They were one of the first attempts to see order and consistency in the seeming chaos of historical events. Vico considered the laws of social development that he discovered to be providential. Their knowledge and comprehension of the meaning of history in general became, as it were, insight into the plans of God. The idea of ​​the possibility of such penetration is the leading thought for the worldview of the New Age.

10.2 Jean Antoine Nicolas Condorcet

Based on the works of his predecessors, J. Condorcet gives his own periodization of world history. He identifies nine eras in it. This periodization was not the most successful, because eras were distinguished according to different criteria. Therefore, she was not accepted by anyone. But the point is not in the specific picture of development. The work of J. Condorcet is interesting because it is all permeated with faith in the limitless progress of mankind.

As the author himself notes, the purpose of his work is “to show by reasoning with facts that no limit has been outlined in the development of human abilities, that man’s ability to improve is truly limitless, that success in this improvement is henceforth independent of any there were forces that wanted to stop it, their limit is only the duration of the existence of our planet, into which we are included by nature. Without a doubt, progress may be more or less rapid, but development will never go backwards..." In the future, he draws “a picture of the human race, freed from all its chains, freed from the power of chance, as well as from the domination of the enemies of its progress, and marching with a firm and faithful step along the path of truth, virtue and happiness...”.

10.3 Hegel’s historical and formational approach: the concept of spiritual formations

From the standpoint of the world-historical process of development of the spirit of freedom and its objectification in various forms of state, Hegel interpreted the problem of the typology of states. “World history,” he wrote, “is necessary only from the concept of freedom of spirit, the development of moments of reason and thereby self-consciousness and freedom of spirit - the interpretation and implementation of the universal spirit.” The forms of such realization of the world spirit, according to Hegel, are “four world-historical kingdoms: 1) Eastern, 2) Greek, 3) Roman, 4) German.” These kingdoms, according to Hegel, represent objective-historical formations (formation) of the world spirit, i.e. development of ideas of reason and freedom in world history.

With the change of these world-historical kingdoms (formations of the world spirit), there is a change in the corresponding forms of the state: the Eastern kingdom corresponds to theocracy (freedom of one, the supreme ruler), the Greek and Roman kingdoms - democracy or aristocracy (freedom of some, i.e. part of the population) , the German kingdom - a modern monarchy with a representative system (freedom for all). “The East,” Hegel wrote, “knew and knows only that one is free, the Greek and Roman world knows that some are free, the German world knows that all are free.” By “German world,” Hegel meant the countries of northwestern Europe, and by monarchy, a constitutional monarchy with a system of representation and separation of powers.

Thus, Hegel’s typology of the state is built on the basis of his doctrine of the development and change in world history of various socio-spiritual formations (kingdoms, worlds), which represent progressive stages of the implementation of reason and freedom, to which certain types (forms) of the state correspond - theocracy, democracy or aristocracy, constitutional monarchy.

10.4 Huntington

The main idea of ​​the book is quite simple - it is polemical in relation to Fukuyama’s thesis about the “end of history”, as well as in relation to Western-centric concepts, primarily advocating for the establishment of global (i.e. Western) values ​​of democracy and liberalism in the world. One of those with whom the author argues is ... S. Huntington, author of the book “The Third Wave of Democratization in the Modern World,” published in 1999.

The idea of ​​the “Clash of Civilizations” is that the conflicts of our time are not completed and exhausted, but have moved to the plane of confrontation between civilizations.

First of all, Huntington is interested in Western civilization; he assigns it the main role, both in confronting the rest of the world and in finding ways out of the crisis. To quote the author: “Fuse is the only civilization that has had a huge and at times destructive effect on all other civilizations. Consequently, the relationship between the power and culture of the West and the power and cultures of other civilizations is the most comprehensive characteristic of the world of civilizations.”

Huntington makes recommendations addressed primarily to the American government or, more broadly, to the leaders of Western countries. In his opinion, it is necessary to assert Western cultural identity in the West, especially in America, thus opposing “internal” multiculturalism. For the latter has already begun to level the West as a unique civilization with only one inherent feature: the rule of law, the division of spiritual and secular power, social pluralism, individualism, diversity of languages, and the heritage of antiquity. But in foreign policy, Huntington advocates the rejection of any cultural, civilizational, political expansionism in relation to non-Western civilizations: “The future of the United States and the West depends on Americans who reaffirm their commitment to Western civilization. Domestically, this means abandoning divisive, glamorous calls for multiculturalism. At the international level, this means abandoning vague and illusory calls to identify the United States with Asia.”

What in such a world can connect civilizations? According to the author, civilizations must “stick together,” otherwise there is a possibility of not being able to stand alone against the barbarism represented by the mafia, crime, and drug addiction.

11. Social time - space

In the history of philosophy, there were two points of view about the relationship of space and time to matter. The first of them can be conditionally called the substantial concept. In it, space and time were interpreted as independent entities, existing along with matter and independently of it. Accordingly, the relationship between space, time and matter was presented as a relationship between two types of independent substances. This led to the conclusion that the properties of space and time are independent of the nature of the material processes occurring in them.

The second concept can be called relational (from the word relatio - relationship). Its supporters understood space and time not as independent entities, but as systems of relations formed by interacting material objects. Outside this system of interactions, space and time were considered non-existent. In this concept, space and time acted as general forms of coordination of material objects and their states. Accordingly, the dependence of the properties of space and time on the nature of the interaction of material systems was also assumed.

11.2 Time, Social

Time characterized and coded according to significant events in a particular society or culture. The concepts of astronomical time or clock time are not always represented in this form of subjective time; social phenomena become the frame of reference, and therefore concepts such as “before” or “after” are registered relatively, but concepts such as “how long before” (or “how long after”) cannot exist. Social time scales can vary greatly across cultures.

11.1 Space

In the modern world, humanity has a single social space. All countries and peoples cooperate in one way or another in the fields of economics, politics and culture. There are various international organizations designed to develop appropriate events for holding international forums, meetings, sports competitions, etc. The United Nations, created after the end of World War II to resolve controversial issues through peaceful political means, includes almost all states of the world in its ranks. It is a unique political entity that deals with all problems affecting all peoples and states. Thanks to modern transport, in a matter of hours you can cross oceans and continents, get acquainted with the culture, traditions and customs of peoples, which allows you to very quickly master world spiritual values. Today's media provide an unprecedented opportunity to see and hear what is happening anywhere in the world. The influence of the mass media is extremely great. They form planetary thinking, which reacts sharply and vividly to everything that happens in the world. At one time, Jaspers, reflecting on the future of world history, noted that a single historical space should lead to global unity. “The motives on the path to global unity are, on the one hand, characteristic of our time, like any other, the will to power, which knows no rest until everything submits to it; on the other hand, the disaster hanging over the entire planet, requiring the immediate agreement of the great powers that, in the face of the enormous danger threatening everyone, do not dare to use force individually, and above both of these motives rises the idea of ​​humanity united in its aspirations." From global unity, Jaspers believes, either a world empire or a world order can emerge. In the first case, despotic power will be established, based only on violence and subjugating everyone from a single center. It will form a conformist consciousness and will suppress any free spiritual activity. In the second case, we are talking about a peaceful democratic community in a state of constant change and improvement. This "world order is a unity without a single authority, except in those cases when it is approved by agreement and by virtue of a common decision. The established order can only be changed by legislation on the basis of new regulations. The parties jointly submitted to this procedure and the decisions of the majority, guaranteed rights common to all, which protect the minority existing at any given moment and remain the basis of human existence in its movement and self-correction." In the world order there are no longer alien forces, barbarian peoples and strictly guarded state borders. All states and peoples strive to ensure that there is peace, so that the rights and sovereignty of the state are not violated.

One cannot but agree with the German thinker that the formation of global unity is a complex and difficult process. Having a single social space, humanity strives to also have a single economic and political space. But this movement towards world order is complex and contradictory. The fact is that the formation of a single economic space requires more or less the same level of economic development of all countries, since it is precisely this level that will allow maintaining normal trade relations based on mutual benefit. This is evidenced by the economic cooperation of developed countries, between which there are clashes and disagreements on economic grounds, but nevertheless, as a result of normal commercial ties, all parties benefit.

12. Features of modern society

There is also a crisis in the social sphere. Much has been written about how the middle class supposedly plays the role of a stabilizing factor in modern developed countries. Moreover, the main criterion for classifying an individual into such a class is the level of income. But this indicator cannot be the main criterion for the simple reason that it does not take into account existing living standards, traditions, customs, profession, etc. Take, for example, a professor and a minor employee who have the same income. Can they be classified as the same middle class on this basis? Of course not. The fact is that a professor, in addition to satisfying material needs, must, by definition, satisfy his spiritual needs. Therefore, he requires a higher level of income than a small employee. We should not forget that people's needs are constantly growing. And the level of income often remains the same. Consequently, the position of the middle class is changing. Of course, in general, living standards are improving in developed countries, but nevertheless, the facts indicate that millions of people are forced to eke out a miserable existence. The exploitation of man by man continues. Some are getting richer and richer, while others are getting poorer and poorer.

Modern society has not gotten rid of those negative traits that Marx and Durkheim wrote about. On the contrary, people are becoming more and more alienated from each other. Individualism and selfishness, especially among young people, often dominate social relations. Prostitution, drug addiction, AIDS and other vices have taken hold of millions of people. Modern civilization does not give anyone the confidence that he will feel comfortable, or at least more or less comfortable, among his own kind. People are increasingly showing anomie, that is, indifference, apathy, disrespect for existing values, etc.

The social sphere also includes interethnic relations. It would seem that in the modern era, when world civilization has achieved enormous success, when a single political and historical space, as well as planetary thinking, has been formed, all kinds of national conflicts should have become a thing of the past. But this did not happen. On the contrary, interethnic contradictions in many countries often lead to military action. This situation is observed not only in the territory of the former USSR, but also in other regions of the world, including developed countries. This suggests that the causes of interethnic conflicts should be sought not only in economic, but also in other phenomena, in particular in the desire to have an independent state formation. In this regard, one cannot help but recall Hegel, who wrote that “the people as a state are spirit in their substantial rationality and immediate reality, therefore they are absolute power on earth; therefore, each state has sovereign independence in relation to the other.” A people without state education is not a political people. Therefore, it is very important for the people to have their own political education. It is within its framework that he can independently develop his culture, his traditions and customs, conduct international affairs, in short, be a sovereign political subject.