The theory of progress was first described by the famous French publicist Abbé Saint-Pierre in his book “Remarks on the Continuous Progress of Universal Reason” in 1737. According to his theory, progress is inherent in every person by God and this process is inevitable, like natural phenomena. Subsequently, the study of progress as a social phenomenon continued and deepened.
Progress criteria are the main parameters of its characteristics:
Social;
economic;
spiritual;
scientific and technical.
The social criterion is the level of social development. It implies the level of people's freedoms, quality of life, the degree of difference between rich and poor, the presence of a middle class, etc. The main engines of social development are revolutions and reforms. That is, a radical complete change in all layers of social life and its gradual change, transformation. Different political schools evaluate these engines differently. For example, everyone knows that Lenin preferred revolution.
The economic criterion is the growth of GDP, trade and banking, and other parameters of economic development. The economic criterion is the most important, as it affects the others. It's hard to think about creativity or spiritual self-education when there is nothing to eat.
The spiritual criterion - moral development - is one of the most controversial, since different models of society evaluate it differently. For example, unlike European countries, Arab countries do not consider tolerance towards sexual minorities to be spiritual progress, and even vice versa – regression. However, there are generally accepted parameters by which spiritual progress can be judged. For example, condemnation of murder and violence is characteristic of all modern states.
The scientific and technical criterion is the presence of new products, scientific discoveries, inventions, advanced technologies, in short - innovations. Most often, progress refers to this criterion in the first place.
The concept of progress has been criticized since the 19th century. A number of philosophers and historians deny progress as a social phenomenon completely. J. Vico views the history of society as a cyclical development with ups and downs. A. Toynbee gives as an example the history of various civilizations, each of which has phases of emergence, growth, decline and decay (Maya, Roman Empire, etc.).
In my opinion, these disputes are associated with different understandings of the very definition of progress as such, as well as with different understandings of its social significance.
However, without social progress we would not have society at its best. modern form with his achievements and morals.
Criteria for social progress
It is very important to understand the direction in which our society is moving, constantly changing and developing. This article is dedicated to this purpose. We will try to determine the criteria for social progress and answer a number of other questions. First of all, let's figure out what progress and regression are.Social progress is a direction of development that is characterized by a progressive movement from simple and lower forms of organization of society to more complex, higher ones. Opposite this term the concept of “regression”, that is, the reverse movement - a return to outdated relationships and structures, degradation, the direction of development from higher to lower.
The problem of criteria for social progress has long worried thinkers. The idea that changes in society are precisely a progressive process appeared in ancient times, but finally took shape in the works of M. Condorcet, A. Turgot and other French enlighteners. These thinkers saw the criteria for social progress in the development of reason and the spread of education. This optimistic view of the historical process gave way in the 19th century to other, more complex concepts. For example, Marxism sees progress in changing socio-economic formations from lower to higher. Some thinkers believed that the consequence of moving forward is the growing heterogeneity of society and the complication of its structure.
In modern science, historical progress is usually associated with a process such as modernization, that is, the transition of society from agrarian to industrial and further to post-industrial.
Not everyone accepts the idea of progress. Some thinkers reject it in relation to social development - either predicting the “end of history”, or saying that societies develop independently of each other, multilinearly, in parallel (O. Spengler, N.Ya. Danilevsky, A. Toynbee), or considering history as a cycle with a series of recessions and ascents (G. Vico).
For example, Arthur Toynbee identified 21 civilizations, each of which has distinct phases of formation: emergence, growth, breakdown, decline and, finally, decay. Thus, he abandoned the thesis about the unity of the historical process.
O. Spengler wrote about the “decline of Europe.” “Anti-progressism” is especially vivid in the works of K. Popper. In his view, progress is a movement towards a specific goal, which is possible only for a specific person, but not for history as a whole. The latter can be considered both as a movement forward and as a regression.
The progressive development of society, obviously, in certain periods does not exclude regression, return movements, civilizational dead ends, even breakdowns. And it is hardly possible to talk about a uniquely linear development of humanity, since both leaps forward and setbacks are clearly observed. Progress in a certain area, in addition, can be the cause of decline or regression in another. Thus, the development of technology, technology, and tools is a clear indication of progress in the economy, but it was precisely this that brought our world to the brink of a global environmental catastrophe, depleting the Earth’s natural reserves.
Society today is also accused of a family crisis, a decline in morality, and lack of spirituality. The price of progress is high: for example, the conveniences of city life are accompanied by various “urbanization diseases.” Sometimes the negative consequences of progress are so obvious that a natural question arises as to whether it can even be said that humanity is moving forward.
Criteria for social progress
The question of the measures of social development is also relevant. There is also no agreement in the scientific world here. French enlighteners saw such a criterion in the development of reason, in increasing the degree of rationality of social organization. Some other thinkers and scientists (for example, A. Saint-Simon) believed that the highest criterion of social progress is the state of morality in society, approaching early Christian ideals.
G. Hegel had a different opinion. He connected progress with freedom - the degree of its awareness by people. Marxism also proposed its own criterion of development: according to supporters of this concept, it consists in the growth of productive forces.
K. Marx, seeing the essence of development in man's increasing subordination of the forces of nature, reduced progress in general to a more specific one - in the production sphere. He considered only those social relations to be conducive to development, which at a given stage correspond to the level of productive forces, and also open up space for the improvement of the person himself (acting as an instrument of production).
Criteria for social development
Philosophy has subjected the criteria of social progress to careful analysis and revision. In modern social science, the applicability of many of them is disputed. The state of the economic foundation does not at all determine the nature of the development of other spheres of social life.
The goal, and not just a means of social progress, is considered to be the creation of the necessary conditions for the harmonious and comprehensive development of the individual. Consequently, the criterion of social progress is precisely the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to a person to maximize his potential. Based on the conditions created in society to satisfy the totality of the needs of the individual and his free development, the degree of progressiveness of a given system and the criteria of social progress should be assessed.
A revolution is a comprehensive or complete change in most or all aspects of society, affecting the foundations of the existing system. Until quite recently, it was regarded as a universal universal “law of transition” from one socio-economic formation to another. However, scientists could not detect any signs of a social revolution during the transition to a class system from a primitive communal one. Therefore, it was necessary to expand the concept so that it could be applied to any transition between formations, but this led to the destruction of the original semantic content of the term. And the mechanism of a real revolution could only be discovered in phenomena dating back to the era of modern times (that is, during the transition to capitalism from feudalism).
Following the Marxist methodology, we can say that a social revolution means a radical social revolution that changes the structure of society and means a qualitative leap in progressive development. The deepest and most general reason for the emergence of a social revolution is the otherwise insoluble conflict between the productive forces, which are growing, and the system of social institutions and relations, which remain unchanged. The aggravation of political, economic and other contradictions in society against this background ultimately leads to revolution.
The latter is always an active political action on the part of the people; its main goal is the transfer of control of society into the hands of a new social class. The difference between revolution and evolution is that the first is considered concentrated in time, that is, it happens quickly, and the masses become its direct participants.
The dialectic of such concepts as revolution and reform seems very complex. The first, as a deeper action, most often absorbs the latter, thus the action “from below” is complemented by the activity “from above”.
Many modern scientists urge us to abandon the excessive exaggeration of the significance of social revolution in history, the idea that it is an inevitable pattern in solving historical problems, because it has not always been the dominant form determining social progress. Much more often, changes in the life of society occurred as a result of action “from above,” that is, reforms.
This reorganization, transformation, change in some aspect of social life, which does not destroy the existing foundations of the social structure, retains power in the hands of the ruling class. Thus, the understood path of step-by-step transformation of relations is contrasted with a revolution that completely sweeps away the old system and order. Marxism regarded the evolutionary process as for a long time preserving the remnants of the past as too painful and unacceptable for the people. Adherents of this concept believed that since reforms are carried out exclusively “from above” by forces that have power and do not want to give up it, their result will always be lower than expected: reforms are characterized by inconsistency and half-heartedness.
It was explained by the famous position formulated by V.I. Lenin, that reforms are “a by-product of the revolution.” Let us note: K. Marx already believed that reforms are never a consequence of the weakness of the strong, since they are brought to life precisely by the strength of the weak.
His Russian follower strengthened his denial of the possibility that the “tops” have their own incentives when starting reforms. IN AND. Lenin believed that reforms are a by-product of revolution because they represent unsuccessful attempts to extinguish, weaken the revolutionary struggle. Even in cases where reforms were obviously not the result of popular protests, Soviet historians still explained them by the desire of the authorities to prevent encroachments on the existing system.
Over time, Russian scientists gradually freed themselves from the existing nihilism in relation to transformations through evolution, first recognizing the equivalence of revolutions and reforms, and then criticizing revolutions as a bloody, extremely ineffective path full of costs and leading to an inevitable dictatorship. Now great reforms (that is, revolutions “from above”) are considered the same social anomalies as great revolutions. What they have in common is that these methods of resolving contradictions are opposed to the healthy, normal practice of gradual, continuous reform in a self-regulating society.
The “revolution-reform” dilemma is replaced by clarifying the relationship between reform and permanent regulation. In this context, both revolution and changes “from above” “treat” an advanced disease (the first with “surgical intervention”, the second with “therapeutic methods”), while early and constant prevention is perhaps necessary in order to ensure social progress.
Therefore, in social science today the emphasis is shifting from the “revolution-reform” antinomy to “innovation-reform”. Innovation means a one-time ordinary improvement associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of society in specific conditions. It is precisely this that can ensure the greatest social progress in the future.
The criteria for social progress discussed above are not unconditional. Modern science recognizes the priority of the humanities over others. However, a general criterion for social progress has not yet been established.
Social development and social progress
Social progress is the ascent, the progressive development of humanity.The very idea of progress appeared only in the 17th century with the development of science and technology. As it developed, it drew attention to various aspects of social life. Philosophers of the 18th century, which went down in history as the Age of Enlightenment, believed in the unlimited power of science and technology. Today, progress is understood as the development of all aspects of human life.
How to determine whether the development of society is progressive at a particular historical period? What are the criteria for social progress? Does society always develop along the path of progress or is there regression, i.e. moving backwards, in the opposite direction? These questions are complex and the answers are ambiguous.
In ancient society, the idea of development was understood as a simple sequence of events or as a cyclical cycle of repeated events. In the Middle Ages, a different version of development appeared in religion, which can be simplified as follows: “From the kingdom of earth to the kingdom of heaven.” In the ideology of Marxism that dominated our country, the idea of progress was seen as an increase in labor productivity, an increase in the material standard of living of people, and the comprehensive development of the human personality. At the end of the 20th century, with the emergence of global problems of society, with a growing cultural crisis, with growing instability in the world, the criteria for progress change. The question arises: as science and technology develop, does man evolve? Does he become kinder, more moral, happier? Currently, the concept of progress is associated with human development, with the creation of decent living conditions.
In modern society, humanism becomes the main criterion of progress. Humanism - (Latin humane) philosophical, moral and sociological, the principle of treating a person as a highest value. The idea of humanism has changed in different eras.
Initially, ideas about humanism were expressed in an understanding of the value of human life as such, in its historical sense.
Already in primitive society there were prohibitions regarding various attacks on human life and dignity. In the Middle Ages, in addition to laws, religion regulated people's relationships. The New Testament as a monument of Christianity reflects main idea– love for one’s neighbor, and the circle of neighbors is very wide, right up to repentant enemies.
Social Development Concepts
There are many views (concepts) on the development of society, which are combined into three large groups:
The concept of unilinear development. Representatives of this group believe that history is one and all peoples are moving towards the same goal, only in different time. Each person, pursuing his personal interests, thereby works for society, since the results of each add up to the overall result. Developing linearly, society does not stand still. The growth of human needs - material, social and spiritual - leads to the development of science and technology, the complexity of production, the improvement of living standards, the development of social connections and the person himself.
Currently, the most acceptable theory is that every society goes through the following stages of unilinear progressive development:
Traditional society is a pre-industrial stage of historical development, covering the period from the origin of humanity to capitalism. In such a society, agriculture dominates. natural economy, class relations. Traditions play a decisive role in such a society. The church and the army play a decisive role in the social life of such a society.
Industrial society. The industrial stage of development of society is characterized by the following features:
– high level industrial development;
– production automation;
– significant increase in living standards.
Post-industrial (information) society. Post-industrial society is a special social form that is born in the course of the evolution and transformation of industrial society.
It is characterized by the following features:
– creation of a service economy;
– predominance of technical specialists and liberal professions;
– the huge role of theoretical knowledge as a source of innovation;
– creation of new, intelligent technology.
The concept of multilinear development. Supporters of this trend believe that society develops according to its own laws, and each nation has its own path of development. Every nation has its own cultural characteristics, and it is not at all necessary for all nations to seek single path development.
The concept of cyclical development. A cycle is a set of phenomena and processes that make up a cycle over a certain period of time.
Supporters of this trend believe that humanity does not have a single history; peoples develop from themselves according to the laws inherent in the nature of people. After passing through the cycle, a civilization declines, and then, after a few centuries, is reborn again without any continuity with the previous one.
Social social progress
Progress cannot be localized in one sphere of social life and inevitably affects different aspects of social life, although historians and sociologists sometimes highlight economic, political, and cultural progress.The result of progress is positive changes in the life of society, but development in one area of life can cause damage in another area. For example, the development of production technologies, the scientific and technological revolution are the results of economic and cultural progress, but they deplete Natural resources and create a threat of global environmental disasters.
At the present stage of development of society, the main criteria of progress are its humanistic parameters and characteristics: average duration life, mortality rate, health status of the population, respect for individual rights and freedoms, development of culture and education, creation of conditions for the realization of human abilities, the degree of his material and moral comfort.
The concept of progress is opposite to the concept of “regression”. Regression is the degradation of social life, a return to outdated structures and relationships, which entails negative changes in society.
Social development may be suspended and delayed. This state of society is called stagnation.
Types and forms of social progress
Social progress can be gradual (evolutionary, reformist) or spasmodic (revolutionary).
A revolution is a complete change in significant aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing social system, the transition of society to a qualitatively different state. Reform is a change in any area of public life, a partial improvement that does not destroy the foundations of the existing social structure and leaves power in the hands of the former ruling class. Reform is an evolutionary path of development of society. Evolution, unlike revolution, implies slow, gradual changes to the previous state. Reforms by their nature can be progressive or regressive and do not always lead to positive changes in society.
An ordinary, one-time improvement in any aspect of social life, associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of the social organism, is called innovation.
Society as a dynamic system
Society is a dynamic self-developing system. In the course of history, social institutions, production technologies, values, standards of behavior and people's lifestyles change.
At the center of social development is man (in contrast to nature, in which spontaneous unconscious forces operate). However, the complex structure of society, the presence in it of various subsystems and components, opposing interests and goals of various people and groups determine unpredictability and nonlinearity social change. Therefore, at each historical stage there are different development options and models of the future for a given human community.
If we consider the level of development of production and the improvement of technology as the main criterion for the development of society, then it should be noted that in the history of mankind there is a clearly evident tendency to accelerate social change. Each subsequent stage of historical development is shorter than the previous one.
At the same time, many aspects of social life, fundamental social institutions, retain their significance, although their forms change significantly. For thousands of years, institutions such as production, family, state, and religion have existed. In the rapidly changing modern world, they retain their importance.
Basic concepts of social development
Progressive changes in human society cannot be localized in one sphere of social life; they inevitably affect both the material and spiritual lives of people. The development of productive forces, moral culture, science, law - all these are criteria for social development.
This development occurs unevenly throughout human history and can be the result of both revolutionary and evolutionary changes in different areas. There are several ways to classify societies. It is possible to typologize societies according to such characteristics as language, the presence or absence of writing, economy and way of life. One can take as criteria for the development of society the complication of the social structure, the growth of labor productivity, the type of economic relations, and the system of value systems.
Basic theories of social development: the concept of three waves (E. Toffler), the concept of post-industrial society (D. Bell), the formation approach (K. Marx) and the civilizational approach (A. Toynbee, O. Spengler, W. Rostow).
Alvin Toffler's Three Wave Concept
E. Toffler formulated the idea of successive waves - stages of social development. The first stage is an agrarian society, the basis of its existence is agriculture and land ownership. The second stage is an industrial society that emerged as a result of the scientific and technological revolution, urbanization and the establishment of a market economy. The third wave is a post-industrial society formed by the intellectual revolution. In a post-industrial society, science turns into a direct productive force, the production of goods and services becomes massive, and the accumulation and dissemination of knowledge comes to the fore.
Daniel Bell's concept of post-industrial society
The scientist identified three stages of development of society:
1) pre-industrial (traditional) society based on the use of primitive tools);
2) an industrial society with developed industry;
3) post-industrial society, in which knowledge becomes a production resource (this stage of development can also be characterized as an information society, the essential feature of which is the emergence of a global information space).
Traditional society
According to the concept of D. Bell, the stage of traditional society includes the history of mankind from ancient civilizations to the 17th century.
The economy of a traditional society is dominated by rural subsistence farming and primitive crafts. Man adapted to environmental conditions using extensive technology and hand tools. Traditional society is characterized by communal, corporate, conditional, and state forms of ownership.
The structure of the social sphere of traditional society is stable and immobile, social mobility is practically absent, throughout life a person remains within the same social group. Community and family are the most significant units of society. Human social behavior is subject to stable corporate norms, traditions, customs and beliefs.
Politically, traditional society is conservative, changes in it occur slowly, society dictates norms of behavior to individuals.
Oral tradition is of great importance, literacy is a rare phenomenon.
Industrial society
Industrial society existed and developed throughout the 17th–20th centuries. The economy of an industrial society is based on the use of machinery in production. Also, the economic sphere at this stage of development is characterized by an increase in the volume of fixed capital, the destruction of natural isolation and an increase in labor productivity in agriculture, the replacement of simple reproduction with expanded, the emergence and development of a market economy. Man is becoming more and more independent from nature and is actively using the achievements of scientific and technological progress in production.
Social life is characterized by significant social mobility of the population, urbanization, a reduction in the number of the peasantry, the emergence of the bourgeoisie and the gradual strengthening of its positions against the backdrop of the decline of the aristocracy.
In the political sphere, the role of the state, law and law increases, a person is increasingly involved in political life as an active subject, and a democratic regime is gradually being formed.
A significant transformation of the value system is taking place: the role of the individual and the independence of the individual within the social group are increasing. Human consciousness becomes secular, rational, and is partially freed from the influence of religion.
Information (post-industrial) society
The information or post-industrial society is being formed at the turn of the 20th–21st centuries as a result of a revolution in the organization and processing of the knowledge accumulated by mankind.
In the economy, the importance of the service sector is increasing, production and consumption are being individualized, and small-scale production is developing. In industry, the role of resource-saving, energy-saving, and high-tech technologies is increasing. The communications system is developing, computerization and informatization of various spheres of society is taking place. As a result of these changes, a global information space is emerging, which ensures effective and coordinated interaction of people around the world, their access to accumulated knowledge and universal human experience. Science and information are playing an increasingly important role in the spiritual sphere of public life.
There is a convergence in the social structure different layers and population groups, class differences are erased, the income gap is reduced, and the share of the middle class is growing.
Formational approach
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels are the authors of the formational approach that dominated Soviet science throughout the entire period of its existence. The formational approach assigns a decisive role in the development of society to material production and the dominant type industrial relations.
Theory of socio-economic formations
According to the theory of socio-economic formations, the development of society is determined by its economic sphere, relations in the process of material production. Social development is subject to objective laws that are universal: as production relations improve, society moves towards higher forms of its existence. History in the light of the formational approach appears as a natural, internally determined, progressive process. The laws of social development are the same for all countries and peoples; national specificity and the originality of historical processes are not of significant importance.
The main concept of the formational approach is socio-economic formation. This term denotes a certain stage of historical development with its inherent method of production, type of economy and socio-political system.
The formational approach identifies five socio-economic formations of human society: primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist and communist.
The formational approach to the history of society substantiates the inevitability of the transition from one socio-economic formation to another. The driving force of social development is the gradual improvement of productive forces, which entails the need to change production relations.
Productive forces are the means of production and people with productive experience and skills to work.
Production relations are the relations into which people enter in the process of material production.
Economy is the basis, the basis of society, which is a set of productive forces and production relations. The economic basis determines the nature of the socio-political superstructure, which includes power and ideological relations and views (state, law, politics, philosophy, religion, morality, culture).
In social development, a decisive role is played by the masses, who contribute to the establishment of a new socio-economic system during revolutions.
Civilizational approach
The authors of the civilizational approach (A. Toynbee, O. Spengler, W. Rostow) proceeded from the idea that the historical path of each civilization is unique, and progress is relative and depends not only on material factors, but also on the system of values and worldview that dominate in a particular society.
The authors understood civilization as a certain stage of historical development, the nature of which is determined not only by material production, but also by spiritual, cultural, and social life. The unique appearance of each civilization is formed by its specific way of life, value system, cultural traditions, and ways of interrelating with the outside world.
The civilizational approach is based on the idea of multivariate social development, which takes various forms depending on the specific conditions of existence of different countries and peoples.
Within this theory, there are two approaches.
The stage approach assumes that different peoples and cultures go through certain stages of civilization in their development.
From the point of view of the local approach, civilization is a stable socio-cultural community that exists for a long time within certain spatial boundaries and implements a specific, unique path of historical development.
The contradictions of social progress
The inconsistency of social progress:|
Positive and negative consequences of progress |
Examples |
|
Progress in some areas can lead to stagnation in others. |
A striking example is the period of Stalinism in the USSR. In the 1930s, a course was set for industrialization, and the pace of industrial development increased sharply. However, the social sphere developed poorly, light industry operated on a residual basis. The result is a significant deterioration in people’s quality of life. |
|
The fruits of scientific progress can be used both for the benefit and harm of people. |
Development information systems, The Internet is the greatest achievement of humanity, opening up vast opportunities for it. However, at the same time, computer addiction appears, a person goes into the virtual world, new disease- “computer gaming addiction.” |
|
Making progress today can lead to negative consequences in the future. |
An example is the development of virgin lands during the reign of N. Khrushchev. At first, a rich harvest was indeed obtained, but after a while soil erosion appeared. |
|
Progress in a water country does not always lead to progress in another. |
Let us remember the state of the Golden Horde. At the beginning of the 13th century there was a huge empire, with a large army and advanced military equipment. However, progressive phenomena in this state became a disaster for many countries, including Rus', which was under the yoke of the horde for more than two hundred years. |
To summarize, I would like to note that humanity has a characteristic desire to move forward, opening up new and new opportunities. However, we need to remember, and scientists first of all, what the consequences of such a progressive movement will be, whether it will turn into a disaster for people. Therefore, it is necessary to reduce the negative consequences of progress to a minimum.
Regression
The opposite path of social development to progress is regression (from the Latin regressus, that is, movement in reverse side, return back) - movement from more perfect to less perfect, from higher forms of development to lower ones, movement back, changes for the worse.
Signs of regression in society:
Deterioration in people's quality of life.
Decline in the economy, crisis phenomena.
An increase in human mortality, a decrease in the average standard of living.
Deterioration of the demographic situation, decline in the birth rate.
An increase in the incidence of people, epidemics, a large percentage of the population having.
Chronic diseases:
The decline in morality, education, and culture of society as a whole.
Resolving issues by force, declarative methods and methods.
Reducing the level of freedom in society, its violent suppression.
Weakening of the country as a whole and its international position.
Solving problems associated with the regressive processes of society is one of the tasks of the government and the country's leadership. In a democratic state following the path civil society, which is Russia, public organizations and the opinion of the people are of great importance. Problems need to be solved, and solved together - by the authorities and the people.
The Problem of Social Progress
One of the central issues in social philosophy is the question of social progress. It is closely connected with such basic issues of history and social life as the causes and driving forces of social development, the prospects of humanity, the fate of various socio-economic systems, states, classes, parties. When starting to consider this issue, it is necessary to understand, first of all, the concept of “progress”, distinguishing it from the concepts of “movement” and “development”.As is known, the concept of “movement” in philosophy means any change, including reversible and chaotic ones, i.e. without a specific focus. Development is a process of irreversible change that occurs in a spiral. The direction of such changes is an ascending or descending line. Progress is forward movement along uplink spirals, from simple to complex. The word “progress” itself is of Latin origin, it means movement forward, success. The opposite form in content is the concept of regression, meaning a downward movement from higher to lower, decline, degradation.
If we compare the two concepts of “development” and “progress,” the first will turn out to be much broader. As Hegel wrote, development is a struggle of opposites. These opposites in this case are progress and regression. Social existence is the material side of society: production, distribution and those relationships into which people enter in the production process against their will and desire.
The idea of historical progress appeared in the second half of the 18th century. in connection with the objective processes of the formation and development of capitalism. The creators of its initial concepts were A.R.Zh. Turgot and J.A. Condorcet, who proposed his rationalistic theory. Subsequently, G. Hegel gave a deep interpretation of progress. He tried to show history as a single natural process of development from lower to higher, in which each historical era acts as an obligatory step in the upward movement of humanity. His concept was idealistic, interpreting world history as progress in the consciousness of freedom, movement from one spiritual formation to another.
K. Marx and his followers, based on a materialist understanding of history, connected social progress with the development of material production, with the movement of society from one socio-economic formation to another. In accordance with this position, social progress is defined as such a change and development of the socio-economic structures of society, in which conditions are created for the successful development of productive forces and, on their basis, for increasingly full development people, to improve the well-being of the people.
Based on this understanding of progress, the question of its criteria is resolved. This is, first of all, the level of development of the productive forces, the productivity of social labor. And since the main prerequisite, the condition for the manifestation of this criterion are production relations, they also become an important indicator of progress. Both, in turn, receive final expression in the degree, the measure of development of a person as an individual.
However, when assessing the progressiveness or regressiveness of a particular social system, it is far from sufficient to interpret it from a narrow, technocratic point of view. A number of circumstances need to be taken into account here. Firstly, the level of development of the productive forces can be as high as desired, but a situation is possible when the product is barely, barely enough to cover the costs of its production. That is, the excess of products over the costs of their production - this is the real basis of all production - can be miserable, meager even with the highest material and technical base. Secondly, the excess can be quite large. But from it you need to be able to form and accumulate a social, production and reserve fund, and not squander it, not “waste it on drink”, not squander it without any public benefit, not turn it into a monstrous weapon of self-destruction.
It follows from this that when assessing the degree of progressiveness of a particular social system, it is far from sufficient to refer only to the development of the productive forces. Should be considered social consequences their development: in the name of what they develop, how this affects human life - the most important element of the productive forces. That is why “the development of the productive forces of mankind” should mean, first of all, “the development of the wealth of human nature as an end in itself” (K. Marx). Progressive is the socio-economic formation that best meets the goals of humanism and contributes to the elevation of the truly human in man. The true criterion of achievement and success of any society is not so much the production of goods as the moral character and way of life of people, their spiritual world. Progressive is the socio-economic formation that contributes to the rise of man.
Along with concepts that recognize social progress, there are many opposite ones associated with its denial. Among the “nihilists” are F. Nietzsche, O. Spengler, K. Popper, F. Fukuyama and others. They proceed from the fact that the amount of evil in the world does not decrease, people’s lives do not ultimately improve, only “changes” occur in society , there are only eternal cycles, etc. The affirmation and development of the idea of progress therefore takes place in a constant struggle with “nihilistic” and other views, and is associated with the defense of such a dialectical understanding of history, which presupposes its inconsistency, the absence of a straight line, excluding zigzags and regressive, backwards movements, lines of ascension to the best and perfect, taking into account new socio-economic realities.
Examples of social progress
Social progress is the development of society from the lowest (simple, imperfect) to the highest (complex, perfect).1. The transition from a primitive communal system (tribal community) to a class society and the creation of a state on this basis.
Specifically, in almost all nations. The earliest states in human history. - Sumer, Babylon, Egypt.
2. The arrival of bourgeois relations to replace feudalism.
Specifically - the Great French Revolution, reforms in Russia in the 60-70s of the 19th century, including the abolition of serfdom.
3. Social progress now is the development of societies towards a mixed (socialist-capitalist) formation, a solidaristic civilization, towards a post-industrial type.
The progressive development of society is obvious: let us remember the primitive ideas about hygiene in medieval society, how many thousands of people had to die before society realized the need for hygiene. Let us remember how low labor productivity was due to primitive tools, how little value human life and freedom had. All these examples certainly confirm the progressive development of society.
Man and social progress
Progress in the general sense is development from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, from simple to complex.Social progress is the gradual cultural and social development of humanity. The idea of the progress of human society began to take shape in philosophy from ancient times and was based on the facts of man’s mental movement forward, which was expressed in man’s constant acquisition and accumulation of new knowledge, allowing him to increasingly reduce his dependence on nature.
Thus, the idea of social progress originated in philosophy on the basis of objective observations of socio-cultural transformations of human society.
Since philosophy considers the world as a whole, then, adding ethical aspects to the objective facts of socio-cultural progress, it came to the conclusion that the development and improvement of human morality is not the same unambiguous and indisputable fact as the development of knowledge, general culture, science, medicine , social guarantees of society, etc.
However, accepting, in general, the idea of social progress, that is, the idea that humanity, after all, moves forward in its development in all the main components of its existence, and in the moral sense too, philosophy, thereby, expresses his position of historical optimism and faith in man.
However, at the same time, there is no unified theory of social progress in philosophy, since different philosophical movements have different understandings of the content of progress, its causal mechanism, and in general the criteria of progress as a fact of history.
The main groups of theories of social progress can be classified as follows:
1. Theories of natural progress. This group of theories claims the natural progress of humanity, which occurs naturally due to natural circumstances.
The main factor of progress here is considered to be the natural ability of the human mind to increase and accumulate the amount of knowledge about nature and society. In these teachings, the human mind is endowed with unlimited power and, accordingly, progress is considered a historically endless and non-stop phenomenon.
2. Dialectical concepts of social progress. These teachings consider progress to be an internally natural phenomenon for society, inherent to it organically.
In them, progress is the form and goal of the very existence of human society, and the dialectical concepts themselves are divided into idealistic and materialistic:
– idealistic dialectical concepts of social progress come closer to theories about the natural course of progress in that they connect the principle of progress with the principle of thinking (the Absolute, Supreme Intelligence, Absolute Idea, etc.);
– materialistic concepts of social progress (Marxism) connect progress with the internal laws of socio-economic processes in society.
3. Evolutionary theories of social progress.
These theories arose in attempts to place the idea of progress on a strictly scientific basis. The original principle These theories are the idea of the evolutionary nature of progress, that is, the presence in human history of certain constant facts of complication of cultural and social reality, which should be considered strictly as scientific facts - only from the outside of their indisputably observed phenomena, without giving any positive or negative assessments.
The ideal of the evolutionary approach is a system of natural science knowledge, where scientific facts are collected, but no ethical or emotional assessments are provided for them.
As a result of this natural scientific method of analyzing social progress, evolutionary theories identify two sides of the historical development of society as scientific facts:
– gradualism;
– the presence of a natural cause-and-effect pattern in processes.
Thus, the evolutionary approach to the idea of progress recognizes the existence of certain laws of social development, which, however, do not determine anything other than the process of spontaneous and inexorable complication of the forms of social relations, which is accompanied by the effects of intensification, differentiation, integration, expansion of the set of functions, etc. .
The whole variety of philosophical teachings about progress is generated by their differences in explaining the main question - why the development of society occurs precisely in a progressive direction, and not in all other possibilities: circular motion, lack of development, cyclical “progress-regression” development, flat development without qualitative growth, regressive movement, etc. All these development options are equally possible for human society, along with the progressive type of development, and so far no single reasons have been put forward by philosophy to explain the presence of progressive development in human history.
In addition, the very concept of progress, if applied not to the external indicators of human society, but to the internal state of a person, becomes even more controversial, since it is impossible to assert with historical certainty that a person at more developed socio-cultural stages of society becomes happier personally . In this sense, it is impossible to talk about progress as a factor that generally improves a person’s life. This applies to past history (it cannot be argued that the ancient Hellenes were less happy than the inhabitants of Europe in modern times, or that the population of Sumer was less satisfied with the course of their personal lives than modern Americans, etc.), and with particular force inherent in the modern stage of development of human society.
Current social progress has given rise to many factors that, on the contrary, complicate a person’s life, suppress him mentally and even create a threat to his existence. Many achievements of modern civilization are beginning to fit worse and worse into the psychophysiological capabilities of man. This gives rise to such factors of modern human life as an overabundance of stressful situations, neuropsychic traumatism, fear of life, loneliness, apathy towards spirituality, oversaturation of unnecessary information, a shift in life values to primitivism, pessimism, moral indifference, a general breakdown in the physical and psychological state, a level of alcoholism, drug addiction and spiritual oppression of people unprecedented in history.
A paradox of modern civilization has arisen: in Everyday life For thousands of years, people did not at all set as their conscious goal to ensure some kind of social progress, they simply tried to satisfy their urgent needs, both physiological and social. Every goal along the way was constantly pushed back as each new level satisfaction of needs was immediately assessed as insufficient, and was replaced new goal. Thus, progress has always been largely predetermined by the biological and social nature of man, and according to the meaning of this process, it should have brought closer the moment when the surrounding life would become optimal for man from the point of view of his biological and social nature. But instead, a moment came when the level of development of society revealed the psychophysical underdevelopment of man for life in the circumstances that he himself created for himself.
A person has ceased to meet the requirements in terms of his psychophysical capabilities modern life, and human progress, at its current stage, has already caused global psychophysical trauma to humanity and continues to develop along the same main directions.
In addition, current scientific and technological progress has given rise to an ecological crisis situation in the modern world, the nature of which suggests a threat to the very existence of man on the planet. If the current growth trends continue in the conditions of a finite planet in terms of its resources, the next generations of humanity will reach the limits of the demographic and economic level, beyond which the collapse of human civilization will occur.
The current situation with ecology and human neuropsychic trauma has stimulated discussion of the problem of both progress itself and the problem of its criteria. Currently, based on the results of understanding these problems, a concept has emerged for a new understanding of culture, which requires understanding it not as a simple sum of human achievements in all areas of life, but as a phenomenon designed to purposefully serve a person and favor all aspects of his life.
Thus, the issue of the need to humanize culture is resolved, that is, the priority of man and his life in all assessments of the cultural state of society.
In the context of these discussions, the problem of criteria for social progress naturally arises, since, as historical practice has shown, consideration of social progress simply by the fact of improvement and complication of socio-cultural circumstances of life does not give anything to resolve the main question - whether the current outcome for humanity is positive or not the process of its social development?
The following are recognized as positive criteria for social progress today:
1. Economic criterion.
The development of society from the economic side must be accompanied by an increase in human living standards, the elimination of poverty, the elimination of hunger, mass epidemics, high social guarantees due to old age, illness, disability, etc.
2. The level of humanization of society.
Society must grow:
The degree of various freedoms, the general security of a person, the level of access to education, to material goods, the ability to satisfy spiritual needs, respect for his rights, opportunities for recreation, etc., and decrease;
- the influence of life circumstances on a person’s psychophysical health, the degree of a person’s subordination to the rhythm of working life.
The average life expectancy of a person is taken as a general indicator of these social factors.
3. Progress in the moral and spiritual development of the individual.
Society must become more and more moral, moral standards must be strengthened and improved, and each person must receive more and more time and opportunities for developing their abilities, for self-education, for creative activity and spiritual work.
Thus, the main criteria of progress have now shifted from production-economic, scientific-technical, socio-political factors towards humanism, that is, towards the priority of man and his social destiny.
Consequently, the main meaning of culture and the main criterion of progress is the humanism of the processes and results of social development.
Forms of social progress
In the process of cognition, scientists not only state these facts, but also try to give them a scientific explanation.When studying such facts, you should remember that:
A) any historical fact is an element of objective reality, closely related to its other elements. Therefore, all historical facts must be considered in their interaction, identifying not only the place specific fact in the historical process, but also its influence on the subsequent development of society;
b) the content of a historical fact depends on the level of development of a particular society and is the result of the activities of subjects of the historical process.
The subjects of the historical process are usually understood as those individuals and their communities who take a direct part in it. Such subjects can be the masses, social groups and public associations, individual historical figures.
The popular masses in the most general sense can be called social communities formed on certain territory(usually the territory of a country), whose members have a common mentality, culture, traditions and customs and jointly create material and spiritual values. The masses of the people are the most significant subject of the historical process. Most scientists believe that it is the masses of the people who play a decisive, and sometimes decisive role in it. However, a number of philosophers point to the need to separate the concepts of “people” and “mass”. They emphasize that, unlike a people, a mass is a group of people who are not related to each other. Such groups, they say, arise from time to time and in their activities are guided not by reason, but by emotions, and their desire for destruction is sometimes stronger than the desire for creation.
Another subject of the historical process are social groups and public associations. Social groups can be distinguished according to various criteria - age, gender, professional, religious, etc. The most common social groups that have played a huge role in the historical process are classes, estates and nations. Each of the social groups has some common features that together constitute the social character of this group. Each of the groups has its own interests, which they try to defend in the historical process and for the protection of which they create public associations. Public associations are called voluntary, self-governing formations created on the basis of a community of interests to achieve a goal common to all their members. These include political parties, trade union organizations, social movements.
Individual personalities, whom scientists call historical figures, also have a great influence on the historical process. First of all, those who exercise power (monarchs, presidents, etc.) are traditionally considered to be such. However, besides them, great scientists and cultural and artistic figures have a great influence on the development of society and its self-awareness. Therefore, depending on the specific historical situation and their contribution to the historical process, they can also be classified as historical figures.
Thus, the historical process consists of the actions of both individuals performing important social functions, as well as the actions of associations of people and the activities of the masses as a whole.
In addition to resolving the issue of participants in the historical process and their role in social development, it is necessary to find out in which direction society is moving, which is in a state of continuous development and change.
Progress is understood as a direction of development, which is characterized by the progressive movement of society from the lower and simple shapes social organization to higher and more complex ones. The concept of progress is opposed to the concept of regression, which is characterized by a reverse movement - from higher to lower, degradation, return to already outdated structures and relationships. The idea of the development of society as a progressive process appeared in ancient times, but finally took shape in the works of French enlighteners (A. Turgot, M. Condorcet, etc.). They saw the criterion of progress in the development of the human mind, in the spread of enlightenment. Such an optimistic view of history changed in the 19th century. more complex ideas. Thus, Marxism sees progress in the transition from one socio-economic formation to another, higher one. Some sociologists considered the essence of progress to be the complication of the social structure and the growth of social heterogeneity. In modern sociology, historical progress is associated with the process of modernization, that is, the transition from an agrarian society to an industrial one, and then to a post-industrial one.
Some thinkers reject the idea of progress in social development, viewing history either as a cyclical cycle with a series of ups and downs (G. Vico), predicting the imminent “end of history,” or affirming ideas about a multilinear, independent from each other, parallel movement of different societies (N Y. Danilevsky, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee). Thus, A. Toynbee, abandoning the thesis about the unity of world history, identified 21 civilizations, in the development of each of which he distinguished the phases of emergence, growth, breakdown, decline and decay. O. Spengler also wrote about the “decline of Europe”. K. Popper’s “anti-progressism” is especially striking. Understanding progress as movement towards any goal, he considered it possible only for individual person, but not for history. The latter can be explained both as a progressive process and as a regression.
It is obvious that the progressive development of society does not exclude return movements, regression, civilizational dead ends and even breakdowns. And the development of humanity itself is unlikely to have an unambiguously linear character; accelerated leaps forward and rollbacks are possible in it. Moreover, progress in one area of social relations may be accompanied and even cause regression in another. The development of tools, technical and technological revolutions are clear evidence of economic progress, but they have brought the world to the brink of an environmental disaster and have depleted the Earth's natural resources. Modern society is accused of a decline in morality, a family crisis, and lack of spirituality. The price of progress is also high: the conveniences of city life, for example, are accompanied by numerous “diseases of urbanization.” Sometimes the costs of progress are so great that the question arises whether it is even possible to talk about humanity moving forward.
In this regard, the question of the criteria for progress is relevant. There is no agreement among scientists here either. French enlighteners saw the criterion in the development of reason, in the degree of rationality of the social structure. A number of thinkers (for example, A. Saint-Simon) assessed the movement forward in terms of the state of public morality and its approach to early Christian ideals. G. Hegel connected progress with the degree of consciousness of freedom. Marxism also proposed a universal criterion of progress - the development of productive forces. Seeing the essence of forward movement in the increasing subordination of the forces of nature to man, K. Marx reduced social development to progress in the production sphere. He considered progressive only those social relations that corresponded to the level of productive forces and opened up scope for the development of man (as the main productive force). The applicability of such a criterion is disputed in modern social science. The state of the economic basis does not determine the nature of development of all other spheres of society. The goal, and not the means, of any social progress is to create conditions for the comprehensive and harmonious development of man.
Consequently, the criterion of progress should be the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to an individual for the maximum development of his potential. The degree of progressiveness of a particular social system must be assessed by the conditions created in it to satisfy all the needs of the individual, for the free development of man (or, as they say, by the degree of humanity of the social system).
There are two forms of social progress: revolution and reform.
A revolution is a complete or comprehensive change in all or most aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing social system. Until recently, revolution was viewed as a universal “law of transition” from one socio-economic formation to another. But scientists have never been able to detect signs of a social revolution during the transition from a primitive communal system to a class one. It was necessary to expand the concept of revolution so much that it was suitable for any formational transition, but this led to the emasculation of the original content of the term. The “mechanism” of a real revolution could only be discovered in the social revolutions of modern times (during the transition from feudalism to capitalism).
According to Marxist methodology, a social revolution is understood as a radical revolution in the life of society, changing its structure and meaning a qualitative leap in its progressive development. The most common, deep-seated reason for the onset of the era of social revolution is the conflict between the growing productive forces and the existing system of social relations and institutions. The aggravation of economic, political and other contradictions in society on this objective basis leads to revolution.
A revolution always represents an active political action of the masses and has the first goal of transferring the leadership of society into the hands of a new class. A social revolution differs from evolutionary transformations in that it is concentrated in time and the masses directly act in it.
The dialectic of the concepts “reform-revolution” is very complex. A revolution, as a deeper action, usually “absorbs” reform: action “from below” is complemented by action “from above.”
Today, many scientists call for abandoning the exaggeration of the role in history of the social phenomenon called “social revolution”, and for declaring it a mandatory pattern in solving pressing historical problems, since revolution has not always been the main form of social transformation. Much more often, changes in society occurred as a result of reforms.
Reform is a transformation, reorganization, change in any aspect of social life that does not destroy the foundations of the existing social structure, leaving power in the hands of the former ruling class. Understood in this sense, the path of gradual transformation of existing relations is contrasted with revolutionary explosions that sweep away the old order, the old system to the ground. Marxism considered the evolutionary process, which preserved many relics of the past for a long time, too painful for the people. And he argued that since reforms are always carried out “from above” by forces that already have power and do not want to part with it, the result of reforms is always lower than expected: the transformations are half-hearted and inconsistent.
The disdain for reforms as a form of social progress was also explained by the famous position of V.I. Lenin on reforms as a “by-product of the revolutionary struggle.” Actually, K. Marx already noted that “...social reforms are never conditioned by the weakness of the strong, they must and will be brought to life by the strength of the “weak.” The denial of the possibility of the “top” having incentives to begin transformations was strengthened by his Russian follower: “... the real engine of history is the revolutionary struggle of classes; reforms - by-product of this struggle, collateral because they express unsuccessful attempts to weaken and extinguish this struggle.” Even in cases where reforms were clearly not the result of mass uprisings, Soviet historians explained the transformations by the desire of the ruling classes to prevent any encroachments on the ruling system in the future. Reforms in these cases were the result of a potential threat from the revolutionary movement of the masses.
Gradually, Russian scientists freed themselves from traditional nihilism in relation to evolutionary transformations, first recognizing the equivalence of reforms and revolutions, and then, changing signs, attacked revolutions with crushing criticism as an extremely ineffective, bloody path, replete with numerous costs and leading to dictatorship.
Today, great reforms (i.e., revolutions from above) are recognized as the same social anomalies as great revolutions. Both of these ways of solving social contradictions are opposed to the normal, healthy practice of “permanent reform in a self-regulating society.” The “reform-revolution” dilemma is being replaced by clarifying the relationship between permanent regulation and reform. In this context, both reform and revolution “treat” an already advanced disease (the first with therapeutic methods, the second with surgical intervention), while constant and possibly early prevention is necessary. Therefore, in modern social science, the emphasis is shifted from the antinomy “reform-revolution” to “reform-innovation”. Innovation is understood as an ordinary, one-time improvement associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of a social organism in given conditions.
Progress in public life
Studying history, we see how different aspects of social life change over time, one type of society replaces another.Various changes are constantly taking place in society. Some of them are being carried out before our eyes (a new president is elected, social programs to help families or the poor are introduced, legislation is changed).
Social changes are characterized by their direction, they can be both positive (positive changes for the better), they are called progress, and negative (negative changes for the worse) - regression.
Social progress - consistent positive changes in society; the process of its ascent from one historical stage to another, the development of society from simple to complex, from less developed forms to more developed ones. Social regression is the movement of society back to lower levels of development.
Let's look at a historical example. The Roman Empire developed progressively over hundreds of years. New buildings were erected, architecture, poetry and theater developed, legislation was improved, and new territories were conquered. But during the era of the Great Migration, barbarian nomadic tribes destroyed the Roman Empire. Livestock and poultry were grazed on the ruins of ancient palaces; aqueducts no longer supplied fresh water to the cities. Illiteracy reigned where arts and crafts had previously flourished. Progress gave way to regression.
Progress is made in different ways and ways. There are gradual and spasmodic types of social progress. The first is called reformist, the second - revolutionary.
Reform is a partial gradual improvement in any area; transformation carried out by legislative means. Revolution is a complete change in all or most aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing social system.
The first revolution in human history was the so-called Neolithic revolution, which represented a qualitative leap, a transition from an appropriating economy (hunting and gathering) to a producing economy (agriculture and cattle breeding). The Neolithic revolution began 10 thousand years ago. It was a global revolution - it swept the whole world.
The second global process was the industrial revolution of the 18th-19th centuries. It also played an outstanding role in human history, leading to the spread of machine production and the replacement of an agrarian society with an industrial one.
Global revolutions affect all spheres of society and many countries, and therefore lead to qualitative changes.
Revolutions taking place in individual countries also lead to reorganization in all spheres of people’s lives. A similar thing happened to Russia after the October Revolution of 1917, when the Soviets of Workers' and Peasants' Deputies came to power. The authorities changed, entire social groups disappeared (for example, the nobility), but new ones appeared - the Soviet intelligentsia, collective farmers, party workers, etc.
Reforms are partial changes that affect not the whole of society, but certain areas of it.
Reforms, as a rule, do not affect all countries, but each one separately, since this is an internal matter of the state. Reforms are carried out by the government, are transparent, are planned in advance, the general population is involved in their discussion, and the progress of the reform is covered by the press.
One of the greatest reformers in history was the Byzantine emperor Justinian I (527-565). He established a commission to create a code of Roman law (in Latin - Corpus juris civilis) with the aim of replacing outdated laws. It was also necessary to eliminate contradictions in legislation. When the Justinian Code was created, all laws not included in it became invalid. To this day, Roman law is the basis civil law most modern countries (including Russia).
Today our country is undergoing an education reform, which began back in the 1990s and led to the appearance of new textbooks, examination Unified State Examination systems, state educational standards.
The basis for the development of society is technical progress - the improvement of tools and technology, as it changes production, quality and productivity of labor, affects people and the relationship between society and nature.
Technical progress has a long history of development. About 2 million years ago, the first tools appeared (remember what they were), from which technical progress began. Approximately 8-10 thousand years ago, our ancestors moved from gathering and hunting to agriculture and cattle breeding, and about 6 thousand years ago people began to live in cities, specialize in certain types of labor, and divided into social classes. In the second half of the 17th century, with the beginning of the industrial revolution, the era of industrial factories opened, and in the 20th century - computers, the Internet, thermonuclear energy, and space exploration. A modern personal computer is superior in performance computing centers 80-90 years of the last century.
What replaced the forge (1), plow (2), pen and inkwell (3)? Can we talk about social progress in these cases?
Perhaps no other society has valued innovation as highly as the modern one. In the 20th century, unique inventions were made: electricity, radio, television, cars, airplanes, nuclear energy, rocket science, computers, laser technology and robots. Each new invention, in turn, led to the creation of even more advanced generations of technology.
Technological progress also affected the social sphere. Technical devices make a person’s life much easier, help people solve everyday problems (cook food, clean the apartment, do laundry, etc.), and come to the aid of people with disabilities. The advent of the automobile radically changed ideas about the place of work and residence, and made it possible for a person to live many kilometers from his workplace. People have become more mobile, including teenagers, who, thanks to the Internet, began to communicate with their peers from geographically distant places.
Technological progress has changed the lives of millions of people, but at the same time it has created many problems. Active human intervention in nature has led to many negative consequences: many species of plants and animals are disappearing or are on the verge of extinction, forests are being cut down, industrial enterprises are polluting water, air and soil. The conveniences of city life are accompanied by air pollution, transport fatigue, etc.
Social progress is the movement of humanity from lower to higher levels. It has a global character, covering the whole world. On the contrary, regression is a temporary retreat from the conquered positions. Revolutions and reforms are two types of social progress. Revolutions can be global or limited to one or several countries. Reforms are carried out only in one society and are gradual.
Social development is a change in society that leads to the emergence of new social relations, institutions, norms and values. The characteristic features of social development are three features: irreversibility, direction and regularity.
Irreversibility– this is the constancy of the processes of accumulation of quantitative and qualitative changes.
Focus– these are the lines along which accumulation occurs.
Pattern is a necessary process of accumulation of change.
An important characteristic of social development is the period of time during which it occurs. The result of social development is a new quantitative and quality condition social object, changing its structure and organization.
Views on the direction of social development
1. Plato, Aristotle, G. Vico, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee: movement along certain steps within a closed cycle (the theory of historical circulation).
2. Religious movements: the prevalence of regression in many areas of society.
3. French enlighteners: continuous renewal and improvement of all aspects of society.
4. Modern researchers: positive changes in some areas of society can be combined with stagnation and regression in others, i.e. a conclusion about the contradictory nature of progress. Humanity as a whole has never regressed, but its forward movement could be delayed and even stopped for a while, which is called stagnation.
The process of social development is inextricably linked with the term “social progress”. Social progress – this direction of development, characterized by a transition from lower to higher, to more advanced forms, is expressed in their higher organization, adaptation to the environment, and growth of evolutionary capabilities.
Criteria for determining progressivity: level of labor productivity and welfare of the population; development of the human mind; improving people's morality; progress of science and technology; development of productive forces, including man himself; degree of personal freedom.
Modern social thought has developed a number of other criteria for social progress: the level of knowledge, the degree of differentiation and integration of society, the nature and level of social solidarity, the liberation of man from the actions of the elemental forces of nature and society, etc. The concept of progress is applicable only to human society. For living and inanimate nature, the concepts should be used development, or evolution(wildlife), and change(inanimate nature). Humanity is continuously improving and moving along the path of social progress. This is a universal law of society. The concept of “development” is broader than the concept of “progress”. All progress is associated with development, but not all development is progress. Regression (reverse movement) - type of development from higher to lower, processes of degradation, lowering the level of organization, loss of ability to perform certain functions.
Basic manifestations of inconsistency progress is an alternation of ups and downs in social development, a combination of progress in one area with regression in another. Thus, the development of industrial production, on the one hand, leads to an increase in the amount of goods produced, to an increase in the urban population, but, on the other hand, this leads to environmental problems, to the fact that young people, leaving the village for the city, lose touch with the national culture, etc.
By its nature, social development is divided into evolutionary And revolutionary. The nature of a particular social development depends on the method of social change. Under evolution understand gradual smooth partial changes in society, which can cover various spheres of society - economic, political, social, spiritual. Evolutionary changes most often take the form of social reforms, involving various measures to transform certain aspects of social life. Reform- this is any degree of improvement in any area of public life, carried out simultaneously, through a series of gradual transformations that do not affect fundamentals, but only changing its parts and structural elements.
Types of reforms:
1. by directions: progressive reforms (60–70s of the 19th century by Alexander II); regressive (reactionary) (“counter-reforms” of Alexander III).
2. by areas of change: economic, social, political, etc.).
Under social revolution is understood as a radical, qualitative change in all or most aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing social system. Revolutionary changes are spasmodic character and represent the transition of society from one qualitative state to another. A social revolution is always associated with the destruction of some social relations and the establishment of others. There may be revolutions short-term(February Revolution 1917), long-term(Neolithic revolution).
The relationship between evolutionary and revolutionary forms of social development depends on the specific historical conditions of the state and era.
The inconsistency of progress
1) Society is a complex organism in which different “organs” function (enterprises, associations of people, government agencies etc.), various processes (economic, political, spiritual, etc.) occur simultaneously. Individual processes and changes occurring in different areas of society can be multidirectional: progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another (for example, technological progress, industrial development, chemicalization and other changes in the field of production have led to the destruction of nature, to irreparable damage to surrounding a person environment, to undermine the natural foundations of the existence of society.
2) The progress of science and technology had ambiguous consequences: discoveries in the field of nuclear physics made it possible not only to obtain a new source of energy, but also to create powerful atomic weapons; The use of computer technology not only unusually expanded the possibilities of creative work, but also caused new diseases, visual impairment, mental disorders, etc.
3) Humanity has to pay a high price for progress. The conveniences of city life are paid for by the “diseases of urbanization”: traffic fatigue, polluted air, street noise and their consequences - stress, respiratory diseases, etc.; Convenience of traveling in a car - due to congestion of city highways and traffic jams. Along with the greatest achievements of the human spirit, the world is experiencing an erosion of cultural and spiritual values, drug addiction, alcoholism, and crime are spreading.
Humanistic criteria of progress: average human life expectancy, infant and maternal mortality, health status, level of education, development various fields culture, a sense of satisfaction with life, the degree of respect for human rights, attitude towards nature, etc.
In modern social science:
* The emphasis is shifted from the “reform - revolution” dilemma to “reform - innovation”. Under innovation is understood as an ordinary, one-time improvement associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of a social organism in given conditions.
* Social development is associated with the process of modernization. Modernization– the process of transition from a traditional, agrarian society to modern, industrial societies.
1.17. Multivariate social development (types of societies)
Typology of society
1. Choice of political relations, forms of government as grounds for highlighting various types society. In Plato and Aristotle, societies differ in type government system: monarchy, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy. Modern versions of this approach highlight totalitarian(the state determines all the main directions of social life); democratic(the population can influence government structures) and authoritarian(combining elements of totalitarianism and democracy) societies.
2. Differences in societies type of production relations in various socio-economic formations: primitive communal society (primitively appropriating mode of production); societies with the Asian mode of production (the presence of a special type of collective ownership of land); slave societies (ownership of people and use of slave labor); feudal (exploitation of peasants attached to the land); communist or socialist societies (equal treatment of all towards ownership of the means of production through the elimination of private property relations).
Approaches to considering the processes of social development
1. The development of society has linearly ascending character. It is assumed that society goes through a number of successive stages, and at each of them special methods of accumulating and transmitting knowledge, communication, obtaining livelihoods, as well as different degrees of complexity of the structures of society are used. Proponents of this approach to social development include: G. Spencer, E. Durkheim, F. Tennis, K. Marx and others.
2. The development of society has cyclical, repeating nature. In this case, the model describing the development of society and its changes is based on the analogy between society and nature. One example of cyclical processes in the life of societies can be considered the historical cycles that all civilizations go through - from their emergence through flourishing to collapse. Representatives of this approach are N. Danilevsky, O. Spengler, L. Gumilev and others.
3. Nonlinear development of society. Scientists identify a “point of change” – bifurcation, i.e. a turning point after which changes and development in general may go not in the same direction, but in a completely different, perhaps even unforeseen, direction. Nonlinearity of social development means the existence of an objective possibility of a multivariate course of events. Proponents of the nonlinear development of society are S. L. Frank, M. Hatcher, D. Collman and others.
Classifications (typologies) of societies:
1) pre-written and written;
2) simple and complex (the criterion in this typology is the number of levels of management of society, as well as the degree of its differentiation: in simple societies there are no leaders and subordinates, rich and poor; in complex societies there are several levels of management and several social strata of the population located from top to bottom as income decreases);
3) primitive society, slave society, feudal society, capitalist society, communist society (the criterion in this typology is a formational feature);
4) developed, developing, backward (the criterion in this typology is the level of development);
Formational approach to the study of society (K. Marx, F. Engels).
Socio-economic formation- a society located at a certain stage of historical development, taken in the unity of all its aspects, with its inherent method of production, economic system and superstructure rising above it.
Superstructure- a set of ideological relations, views and institutions (philosophy, religion, morality, state, law, politics, etc.), arising on the basis of a certain economic basis, organically connected with it and actively influencing it. Basis– economic system (the set of production relations, i.e., relations that do not depend on the consciousness of people, into which people enter in the process of material production). The type of superstructure is determined by the nature of the base and represents the basis of the formation. This approach understands social development as a natural, objectively determined, natural-historical change of socio-historical formations: 1. Primary - primitive communal system. 2. Secondary (economic) – slave-owning; feudal; bourgeois. 3. Tertiary (communist) - communist (first phase - socialism).
Civilizational approach to the analysis of social development
Civilization– a certain stage in the development of local cultures ( O. Spengler); stage of historical development ( L. Morgan, O. Toffler); synonym for culture ( A. Toynbee); level (stage) of development of a particular region or individual ethnic group.
Any civilization is characterized not so much by its production base as by its specific way of life, value system, vision and ways of interrelating with the outside world.
IN modern theory civilization there are two approaches:
A) Local approach
Local civilization- a large socio-cultural community that exists for a long time, has relatively stable spatial boundaries, develops specific forms of economic, socio-political, and spiritual life and carries out its own individual path of historical development. A. Toynbee counted 21 civilizations in the history of mankind, which may coincide with the borders of states (Chinese civilization) or cover several countries (ancient, Western).
Modern types: Western, Eastern European, Muslim, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Latin American.
Subsystems:
* Cultural-psychological – culture as an area of norms and values that ensures the interaction of people.
* Political – customs and norms, law, government and society, parties, movements, etc.
* Economic – production, consumption, exchange of products, services, technologies, communication system, regulatory principles, etc.
* Biosocial – family, family ties, gender and age relations, hygiene, food, housing, clothing, work, leisure, etc.
Lines of comparison between Western and Eastern civilizations:
a) features of perception of the world;
b) attitude towards nature;
c) the relationship between the individual and society;
d) power relations;
e) property relations.
B) Stage approach. Civilization is a single process passing through certain stages
Theory of stages of economic growth (concept of W. Rostow)
1. traditional society– all pre-capitalist societies characterized by low levels of labor productivity and dominance of agriculture in the economy;
2. transitional society, coinciding with the transition to pre-monopoly capitalism;
3. "shift period" – industrial revolutions and the beginning of industrialization;
4. "period of maturity"– completion of industrialization and the emergence of industrially highly developed countries;
5. "the era of high levels of mass consumption."
* The most stable typology in modern sociology is considered to be based on the identification traditional, industrial And post-industrial societies (concept R. Aron, D. Bell, A. Toffler, based on technological determinism).
1. Traditional society(agrarian, pre-industrial) - a society with an agricultural structure, sedentary structures and a method of sociocultural regulation based on traditions. Characteristic features: traditional economy; the predominance of the agricultural way of life; structural stability; class organization; low mobility; high mortality; high birth rate; low life expectancy; low rates of production development, natural division and specialization of labor. Relations of redistribution rather than market exchange predominate. The social structure is characterized by a rigid class hierarchy, the existence of stable social communities, in a special way regulation of social life based on traditions and customs. A traditional person perceives the world and the established order of life as sacred and not subject to change. A person’s place in society and his status are determined by tradition (usually by birthright). Traditional societies are characterized by the primacy of collective interests of hierarchical structures (state, clan, etc.) over private ones; the place in the hierarchy (official, class, clan, etc.) that a person occupies is valued. Traditional societies tend to be authoritarian.
Modernization- the process of transition from a traditional society, which is identified mainly with social relations of the patriarchal-feudal type, to a modern society of an industrial capitalist type. Modernization is a holistic renewal of society; recognizes the main pattern of social development as the constant change and complication of social, political, economic and cultural structures and their functions in accordance with the requirement of rational and effective functioning of society.
2. Industrial society(industrial) - a type of organization of social life that combines the freedom and interests of the individual with general principles regulating their joint activities. It arises on the basis of machine production, factory organization and labor discipline, national system economies with free trade and a common market. It is characterized by flexibility of social structures, social mobility, developed system communications, developed division of labor, mass production of goods, mechanization and automation of production, development of mass communications, the service sector, high mobility and urbanization, the increasing role of the state in regulating the socio-economic sphere. Distinctive features: 1) change in the proportions of employment by industry: a significant reduction in the share of people employed in agriculture and an increase in the share of people employed in industry and the service sector; 2) intense urbanization; 3) occurrence nation-states, organized on the basis common language and culture; 4) educational ( cultural) revolution; 5) political revolution leading to the establishment political rights And freedoms(primarily the right to vote); 6) growth in the level of consumption (mass production and consumption dominates); 7) change in the structure of working and free time; 8) change demographic type of development ( low level fertility, mortality, increased life expectancy, aging of the population, i.e., an increase in the proportion of older age groups). The transformation of the social structure is accompanied by the establishment of civil society, pluralistic democracy, and gives rise to processes of various social movements.
3. In the 1960s. concepts of post-industrial (information) society appear ( D. Bell, A. Touraine, J. Habermas). Post-industrial society– a society in which the service sector has priority development and prevails over the volume of industrial production and agricultural production. Distinctive features of post-industrial society: 1) transition from the production of goods to a service economy; 2) the rise and dominance of highly educated vocational specialists; 3) the main role theoretical knowledge as a source of discoveries and political decisions in society; 4) control over technology and the ability to assess the consequences of scientific and technical innovations; 5) decision-making based on the creation of intelligent technology, as well as using the so-called information technology. The leading role in society is recognized as the role of knowledge and information, computer and automatic devices. An individual who has received the necessary education and has access to latest information, gets an advantageous chance of moving up the social hierarchy. The basis of social dynamics in the information society is information (intellectual): knowledge, scientific, organizational factors, intellectual abilities people, their initiative, creativity. Post-industrial technology produces fundamental changes in the social structure of society. Property does not disappear, however, as the basis for dividing people into classes and layers, property loses its meaning. The class structure is replaced by a professional structure.
The main directions for assessing the future development of human society:
– Ecopessimism predicts a total global catastrophe in 2030 due to increasing environmental pollution; destruction of the Earth's biosphere.
– Techno-optimism assumes that scientific and technological progress will cope with all difficulties in the development of society.
The current stage of development of earthly civilization is characterized by the following main features:
1. Multidirectionality, nonlinearity and unevenness of social changes. Social progress in some countries is accompanied by regression and decline in others.
2. Imbalance of the current system interstate relations. In various regions, local financial or economic crises arise that threaten a general crisis.
3. Exacerbation of contradictions between universal human interests and interests of a national, religious or other nature, between industrialized countries and “developing” countries, between the capabilities of the Earth’s biosphere and the growing needs of its inhabitants, etc.
Globalization– the increasing integration of economies and societies around the world; an inevitable phenomenon in the history of mankind, which consists in the fact that the world, as a result of the exchange of goods and products, information, knowledge and cultural values, becomes more interconnected. The pace of global integration has become much faster and more impressive due to unprecedented advances in areas such as technology, communications, science, transportation and industry.
Main directions of globalization: activities of transnational corporations; globalization of financial markets; globalization of migration processes; instant movement of information; international economic integration within individual regions; creation of international organizations in the economic and financial spheres.
Consequences of the globalization process
* Positive: stimulating effect on the economy; rapprochement of states; stimulating consideration of the interests of states and warning them against extreme actions in politics; the emergence of sociocultural unity of humanity.
* Negative: imposing a single standard of consumption; creating obstacles to the development of domestic production; ignoring the economic, cultural and historical specifics of the development of different countries; imposing a certain way of life, often contrary to the traditions of a given society; formalization of the idea of rivalry; loss of some specific features of national cultures.
Almost whole modern world embraced by profound changes. The intensity of changes in social reality is constantly increasing: during the life of one generation, new forms of organization of life arise, collapse, and are born, not only of individual societies, but of the entire world order.
In sociology, concepts are used to describe social dynamics social change, social development, social progress and etc.
Society is never stationary; something is always happening in it, something is happening, something is changing. By realizing their needs, people master new types of activities and communications, acquire new statuses, join new social roles, change their environment, change themselves throughout life and in the process of generational change (grown children are no longer the same as their parents and grandparents).
Social changes are uneven and contradictory. Some changes are subtle, others significantly change social life (think about how social life has changed since the invention of the plow, writing, the steam engine, and the computer).
Such phenomena as “test tube man” and “surrogate mother”, from scientific laboratory moved into public life and gave rise to new social connections and interactions, and also showed that existing legal and ethical norms are not ready to regulate them. On the one hand, in industrially developed countries, over the course of one generation, tremendous changes occur in social life and society changes beyond recognition, and at the same time, on the other hand, societies continue to exist in which changes are carried out extremely slowly (African or Australian primitive systems).
The inconsistency of social changes is due to the discrepancy between the social interests of various groups in society and their unequal perception of the changes taking place. For example, the need for a decent, materially secure existence creates an employee’s interest in selling his labor at a higher price. An entrepreneur, realizing the same need, seeks to purchase labor cheaper. Therefore, changes in the organization of work may be positively received by some social groups and not cause any satisfaction in others.
Among the large number of social changes, we can highlight those that are qualitative, targeted and irreversible. Such changes are usually called social development. Social development is a change in society that leads to the emergence of new social relations, social institutions, social norms and values. It is associated with the accumulation, increment and complication of the structures and functions of the social system, as a result of which the system becomes more efficient and its ability to satisfy people's needs increases. An important indicator of social development is the development of a person’s personal qualities.
When defining social development, it should be noted that it reflects an irreversible, directed and natural change in social phenomena or processes, as a result of which they move into a new qualitative state, that is, their composition or structure changes. The concept " social development"in its scope it is narrower than the concept " social change" Any social development is a social change, but not vice versa. Periods of wars, chaos, crises, totalitarianism, which negatively affect social life, cannot be called development.
In the history of sociology, two approaches to considering the development of society are clearly visible. This is social evolution and social revolution. Under social evolution Usually a gradual, smooth, stage-by-stage development of society is understood, and a social revolution presupposes a radical transition from the old to the new, a qualitative leap that changes all aspects of the life of society.
Changes in society do not always occur chaotically; they have a certain direction, which is indicated by such concepts as progress and regression. Social progress is a direction of social development in which there is a progressive movement of society from simple and lower forms of social life to more complex and higher ones, from less perfect to more perfect. For example, such changes in social relations that lead to greater equality, increased social freedom and social justice, and improved living conditions for people can be confidently classified as positive and called social progress.
The course of history was not always even and smooth; there were turns and kinks (zigzags). Local conflicts, world wars, crises, establishment fascist regimes- all this was accompanied by negative changes in the life of society. In addition, social phenomena that were initially assessed as only positive could have negative consequences: industrialization and urbanization have long been considered synonymous with progress, but only relatively recently have they started talking about the negative effects of pollution and environmental destruction, overcrowded cities, and traffic jams on highways. If the sum of positive consequences from ongoing changes in society exceeds the sum of negative ones, then we talk about progress, if on the contrary, there is regression.
Regression is the opposite of progress and represents a reverse movement from higher to lower, from complex to simple, from the whole to its parts, etc. But the general line of historical development as a whole has a positive, progressive orientation. Progress is a global process that characterizes the movement of society throughout history. Regression is only local: it covers individual societies and specific periods of time.
There are gradual and spasmodic types of social progress. The first is called reformist, the second - revolutionary. Reform is a partial improvement in any area of life, a series of gradual transformations that do not affect the foundations of the existing social system. Revolution is a complex change in all or most aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing system. It is of a spasmodic nature and represents the transition of society from one qualitative state to another.
The issue of criteria for social progress is quite complex and controversial. The criteria for social progress are identified by people (scientific philosophers, historians, sociologists, etc.), and they may have different value orientations and may evaluate the same phenomenon or process differently and even diametrically opposed.
Value judgments of this kind, such as “better - worse”, “progressive - reactionary”, are in themselves truly subjective, but if they reflect objectively developing social connections and interactions in real society, then in this sense they are not only subjective, but also objective .
The criteria for social progress among different scientists are far from the same.
In general terms, the generally accepted ones are:
Development of the human mind, level of knowledge;
Improving people's morality;
Development of productive forces, including man himself;
Level and nature of production and consumption;
Development of science and technology;
The degree of differentiation and integration of society;
The degree of freedom of the individual from the spontaneous forces of nature and society;
Socio-political rights and personal freedoms;
Average life expectancy.
However, the main indicator of the progressiveness or regressiveness of social changes is Human , his material, physical, moral state, free and comprehensive development of the personality, the opportunity to reveal his individuality in its entirety. Thus, in the modern system of socio-humanitarian knowledge, the humanistic concept of social progress is affirmed, i.e. the main criterion and goal of social progress is man.
In 1990, UN specialists developed the Human Development Index (HDI), which allows taking into account both economic and social components of the quality of life of the world's population. This is an integral indicator calculated annually for cross-country comparison and measurement of living standards, literacy, education and longevity as the main characteristics of the human potential of the study area. It is a standard tool for general comparisons of living standards among different countries and regions.
The HDI is calculated as the arithmetic average of three indicators:
Life expectancy - estimates longevity;
Literacy level of the country's population (average number of years spent in education) and expected duration of education;
Standard of living measured by GNI (gross national income) per capita at purchasing power parity in US dollars.
Depending on the HDI value, countries are usually classified according to their level of development: very high (42 countries), high (43 countries), medium (42 countries) and low (42 countries).
The top five countries with the highest HDI: Norway, Australia, USA, Netherlands, Germany. In 2013, data for 2012 were published, according to which Belarus is included in the group of countries with a high level of the human development index and ranks 47th out of 187 countries, and in 2006 it occupied 67th place.
Contradictions in the development of society. Crisis as a stage of development of social systems. Overcoming the crisis.
In order to understand what a crisis of a social system is, one should remember what a social system is and consider the concepts of social stability and social instability.
Social development in the twentieth century. acquires such a degree of complexity that it becomes necessary to talk about society as a system. The systems approach involves viewing society as a system consisting of many interrelated elements. A social system includes not only the specified set of elements, but also a set of social connections between these elements.
In the theory of structural-functional analysis (T. Parsons, R. Merton), society is viewed as a system consisting of subsystems, each of which performs important functions for the system and, in turn, can be considered as a relatively independent system consisting of many smaller ones subsystems
The smallest element of any social system or subsystem is the acting individual (or system social action individual). A person included in a system of social interactions (in various groups, communities, social institutions) not only fulfills the roles and functions assigned to him, but also comprehends what is happening. Endowed with consciousness and will, a person in his actions is guided not only by social norms and values, but also by his own needs and interests.
Society as a social system is a set of stable social groups, communities, social institutions, the interaction of which with each other and with the environment determines its existence, functioning and development. Thus, a social system is a set of interacting social groups whose common interest is to ensure their own preservation and development. The concept of “social system” also includes state- political relations, national entities(nations, nationalities, ethnic groups), social class groups and communities, sphere of public consciousness.
Society is viewed not only as a system, but also as a “process,” that is, a constantly ongoing flow of events, as a kind of “social field” of constant change. Recognition that society is changing raises the question of the relationship between social change and social stability.
From a sociological point of view, the stability of a social system does not mean its immutability and immobility. If the system does not change, this is a sign of stagnation, which sooner or later leads to instability, social tension, and ultimately instability.
Social stability- this is such stability of social structures (groups, communities, social institutions), processes and relationships between them, which, despite all their changes, preserves their qualitative certainty and integrity.
Social stability consists of three levels:
- internal stability of social systems(groups, institutions, organizations, communities);
- stability of their relationships and their interactions with each other;
- stability of the whole society, which is denoted by the concept societal stability.
Societal stability includes political, economic, ideological, cultural, etc. stability at the level of the entire society. Stable society- this is a developing and at the same time preserving its stability society, in which a mechanism of change has been established that preserves its stability, excluding such a struggle of social forces that leads to the weakening of the foundations of society. In such a society, stability is achieved not through immutability, immobility, but through the skillful implementation of urgent social changes at the right time in the right place. Social change is a necessary condition and element of social stability.
Thus, social stability- this is a state of society in which no changes violate its integrity and qualitative certainty.
In real social life there is almost no absolute stability. In any society, there are always imbalances within and between social systems, manifestations of real or potential instability. Instability is understood as such deformations of the structure, functions or any processes of social systems that deform these systems and threaten their integrity. Such instability can also occur at the level of individual social systems, for example, instability of the economy, government power, or instability at the level of the entire society.
In real social life, instability is a sign of some unresolved problems, dysfunctions, or deformations. Factors of instability, like factors of stability, can be external to the social system and internal. External factors, in turn, can be divided into social (anthropogenic) and natural.
System instability- this is destruction or, at least, violation of its integrity, deformation of structure and functions.
Instability deepens and widens if the ruling groups do not take control measures or if these measures are insufficient and inadequate. In this case, instability not only increases, but develops into a crisis situation, a crisis.
Three stages can be identified in the process of growing instability.
First stage is the deformation of individual structures, individual functions or processes within the social system, as well as individual violations of intersystem connections, for example, deformation of individual social institutions.
Second stage - general instability of the social system, when its integrity is significantly violated. This is the stage of a general crisis of the social system. At this stage, restoration and revival of the system in its former quality is still possible, although this requires much greater effort than at the previous stage.
Russian scientists have formulated extremely critical, threshold indicators of the systemic crisis of society, meaning the danger of the emergence of irreversible processes of decay. These indicators are grouped into seven most important spheres of life of a particular society: economic relations, social sphere of society, demographic situation, environmental situation, deviant behavior, political relations, defense capability.
Thus, the social sphere contains four indicators:
The ratio of incomes of the richest 10% and the poorest 10% of citizens. The extremely critical value in world practice is expressed by the number 10:1;
Proportion of the population living below the poverty line. The maximum critical value in world practice is 10%;
The ratio of the minimum and average wages. The maximum critical global value is 1:3;
Unemployment rate. The maximum critical global value is 8-10%.
In the mid and second half of the 1990s. many real indicators in post-Soviet societies went beyond the extremely critical, which had a very serious impact on their stability.
Third the stage of instability is a catastrophe, i.e. the destruction of a given social system, the end of its existence. A return to the previous state is no longer possible, and destructive anti-systemic social changes are becoming irreversible.
History knows only two ways out of such social catastrophes:
1) collapse, dying of a given social system (society), civilization and culture (death of ancient Egyptian, Greco-Roman, Byzantine and other civilizations);
2) transition to something fundamentally new social quality, the formation of a qualitatively new social system.
The latter is possible only under certain objective and subjective conditions, the political will of the ruling groups, and the enormous efforts of significant masses of people.
Thus, if social changes deepen and remain outside the control and regulation of social actors, primarily the ruling elite, then there is a danger of them developing into a social crisis, meaning significant violations of systemic integrity. Social crisis- an acute form of manifestation of social contradiction associated with a violation of social stability. A crisis is also called a period of aggravation of social contradictions.
The common cause of crises is the emergence of a new element in the systemic structure of society - a social group whose interests could not be satisfied within the existing system. In social systems, all contradictions are in one way or another connected with the interests of classes, layers, groups.
Interest in this case is understood not as curiosity (“what’s beyond the horizon?” or “is there life on Mars?”), but as a set of fundamental goals, aspirations, as a conscious need. In other words, realizing their needs, individuals and social groups formulate specific goals in their minds and strive to achieve them, while showing certain activity.
Scientists identify three groups of contradictions in social systems:
Contradictions of individuals within a single social group;
Contradictions between the interests of social groups;
Contradictions between the general interest of a given social system and the interests of other social systems.
These groups of contradictions have one thing in common - these are contradictions between , between goal and method of achieving it. It is this contradiction that is main (fundamental) in the development of any social system. The resolution of this contradiction leads the system to some equilibrium. The system maintains a balance of interests for some time, but the growth of needs is outpacing, and this contradiction arises again.
Controversy between needs and opportunities, between goal and method of achieving it can be divided into two factors: stimulating and restraining. For any individual or group, the goal is to satisfy ever-increasing needs - this is a stimulating factor that encourages a person to be active and take action. The limiting factor is the need for self-preservation (instinct of self-preservation), which determines that not all means are good to achieve a goal. In other words, the method of satisfying the needs of an individual, group, or social system should not violate the integrity of the system, i.e., the preservation of the individual, group, or system is a necessary condition for such satisfaction.
Situations arise when resolving a contradiction becomes impossible due to the fact that it acquires an antagonistic character: that is, the individual has needs that he is unable to satisfy using existing methods that would preserve the social role offered to him. The individual is faced with a choice: either renounce the need, or go beyond the social role and violate existing social norms. A crisis arises at the level of the individual’s social behavior.
When the number of such individuals reaches a critical level, a crisis arises within the social group. When antagonistic interests arise among different social groups, the crisis covers the entire system.
In the second half of the twentieth century. a new scientific movement arose in the natural sciences, the principles of which spread to the humanities - synergetics. Now this is a new interdisciplinary direction of scientific research, within which the processes of transition from chaos to order and back (processes of self-organization and self-disorganization) in open nonlinear systems of various natures are studied.
Crisis moments in the process of social change are called moments bifurcations, i.e., the ramifications of options for further changes. Bifurcation is reflected in the disorganization of society, in social anomie and has the property of unpredictability. From this point, the system can emerge from the crisis renewed, transform into a qualitatively different society, but it can perish, die, disappear, just as the ancient civilizations of the Incas, Mayans, Aztecs, etc. disappeared. The outcome from the bifurcation point depends on a variety of both internal and external factors. relation to the system of factors. At the bifurcation point, the choice of a new state is not guaranteed: an increase in both order and chaos can occur.
In other words, there are two possible exits from a crisis state (from a state of systemic bifurcation), which are far from equal in their results: complete disintegration of the system, disintegration into simpler states, or the death of the system; self-organization, i.e., regrouping of elements of the previous system and the emergence of a more complex organization, a new system or new systems.
When analyzing the processes of social development, it is necessary to take into account regulating the conscious human principle, which affects bifurcation processes. This means that the state, social institutions, and political leaders who manage and control the transitional state of social systems must not allow the system to transition to a trajectory of self-destructive development. Due to the fact that the main element of the social system is people endowed with consciousness, will and decision-making, a crisis society requires increased responsibility of people for their actions, primarily this applies to political leaders.
Consolidation of the efforts of various political forces, unification of their actions, cooperation, search for compromises in making anti-crisis decisions - these are the possible ways that will allow us to overcome the crisis.
In the process of transition of a system to a new quality, innovations play an important role. Social systems have the ability to increase the level of their organization and are capable of self-construction and self-organization. Innovation is usually viewed as a complex process of creation, dissemination and use of a new practical means (innovation) to satisfy human needs, as well as changes in the social environment associated with this innovation. The impetus for social change can be innovations in the economic, political sphere, science, technology, and culture.
Questions for testing and self-control
1. What is the essence of the linear-stage model of social development?
2. How do nonlinear models of explaining the historical process differ?
3. Describe evolutionism as a concept of social change. What are its limitations?
4. How does K. Marx view the historical process? What stages of the historical process does he highlight? What is the main reason for their identification?
5. Explain how social development occurs from the point of view of K. Marx.
6. Expand the content of the concept of “civilization”.
7. What is the essence of non-linear approaches to viewing history? What sociological theories contain these approaches?
8. How do the concepts of “social change”, “social development” and “social progress” relate to each other?
9. What are the differences between social progress and social regression, social revolution and social evolution, social revolution and social reform? Give examples.
10. What are the causes of social crises? What methods of resolving them, in your opinion, are the most acceptable?
Are you already familiar with the concept of social dynamics? Society does not stand still, constantly changing directions of its development. Is society really increasing the pace of its development, what is its direction? We’ll look at how to answer it correctly in task 25 after the topic.
“Progress is movement in a circle, but more and more quickly”
This is what the American writer Leonard Levinson thought.
To begin with, let us remember that we already know the concept and it and have also worked on the topic
Let us remember that one of the signs is development, movement. Society is constantly in the process of change; the institutions it needs are developing, making them more complex. Undemanded institutions are dying out. We have already traced the development of the institute
Let's look at other important institutions - imagine their development and social demand for them in the form of a table:
Social dynamics are expressed in various directions of development of society.
Progress– the progressive development of society, expressed in the complication of the social structure.
Regression– degradation of social structure and social relations (the opposite term to PROGRESS, its antonym).
The concepts of PROGRESS AND REGRESS are very conditional; what is characteristic of the development of one society cannot be acceptable for another. Let us remember that in Ancient Sparta, weak newborn boys were simply thrown off a cliff, because they could not become wars. Today this custom looks barbaric to us.
Evolution– gradual development of society (the opposite term to REVOLUTION, its antonym). One of its forms is reform– a change emanating from and changing relationships in one of the spheres (for example, the agrarian reform of P.A. Stolypin). REVOLUTION in the sense comes from
Social dynamics is the subject of study of one of the sciences about SOCIETY - social. There are two main approaches to the study of society.
According to Marx, every society must go through all stages of development and arrive at (linearity of development). The civilizational approach provides for the alternative paths of each parallel existence of societies with different levels of development, which is more consistent with modern realities. It is this approach that is most in demand in the context of Unified State Examination tasks.
Let's try to compare the three types of societies according to various important parameters in the form of a table:
And we conclude that in historical development there are three main types of society:
Traditional society – historical type of civilization based on both the predominance and
Industrial society – a historical type of civilization based on the introduction and elimination of the monarchical political system of the Middle Ages.
Post-industrial (information) society – a modern type of civilization based on the dominance (of computers in production, the result of the 20th century.
Thus, today we have worked on the following important topics from
- The concept of social progress;
- Multivariate social development (types of societies).
And now PRACTICUM! LET'S CONSOLIDATE THE KNOWLEDGE WE GOT TODAY!
We carry out
exercise 25. What meaning do social scientists put into the concept of “criterion of progress”? Drawing on the knowledge of the social science course, compose two sentences: one sentence revealing the features of progress, and one sentence containing information about the criterion(s) for determining progress.
First, let's not make the most common mistake associated with this task. What is required from us is not two sentences, but a CONCEPT and 2 SENTENCES (three in total!). So, we remembered the concept of progress - the progressive development of society, its movement forward. Let's choose a synonym for the word criterion - measure, yardstick. Respectively:
The “criterion of progress” is a measure by which the degree of development of society is judged.
1. A feature of progress is its inconsistency; all criteria for progress are subjective.
And, we remember that although the degree of development of a society can be measured in different ways (there are many approaches - the level of development of science, technology and technology, the degree of democracy, a generally accepted single criterion is the humanity of society). So:
2. The universal criterion for determining progress is the degree of humanity of society, the ability to provide maximum conditions for development to each person.
So this is what our response looks like:
25. The “criterion of progress” is a measure by which the degree of development of society is judged.
- A feature of progress is its inconsistency; all criteria for progress are subjective.
- The universal criterion for determining progress is the degree of humaneness of society, the ability to provide maximum conditions for development to each person.
Fundamental themes in the study of social science. Almost the entire modern world is undergoing profound changes. In social reality, the intensity of change is constantly increasing: during the life of one generation, some forms of life organization arise and collapse, while others are born. This applies not only to individual societies, but also to the world order as a whole.
To describe the dynamics of society in sociology, the following basic concepts are used: social change, social development and social progress. Society is never stationary. Something is happening and changing in it all the time. People, realizing their own needs, master new types of communication and activities, acquire new statuses, change their environment, join new roles in society, and change themselves both as a result of generational changes and throughout their lives.
Contradictory and uneven social changes
Social changes are contradictory and uneven. The concept of social progress is controversial. This is revealed mainly in the fact that the development of many social phenomena and processes leads both to advancement in some directions and to a return and retreat in others. Many changes in society are of such a contradictory nature. Some changes are barely noticeable, while others have a significant impact on the life of society. For example, it changed a lot after the invention of the plow, the steam engine, writing, and the computer. On the one hand, over the course of a generation in industrialized countries, enormous changes occur in the life of society. It changes beyond recognition. On the other hand, the world continues to have societies in which change is extremely slow (Australian or African primitive systems).
What causes the contradictory nature of social change?
Discrepancy in society's social interests different groups, as well as the fact that their representatives perceive the changes taking place differently, determines the inconsistency of social changes. For example, the need to ensure a decent existence for oneself creates an employee’s interest in selling his labor power as dearly as possible. By realizing this same need, the entrepreneur strives to acquire labor at a cheaper price. Therefore, some social groups may positively perceive changes in the organization of work, while others will not be satisfied with it.
Social development
Among the many changes, one can distinguish qualitative, irreversible and directional ones. Today they are commonly called social development. Let us define this concept more strictly. Social development is a change in society, leading to the emergence of new relationships, values and norms, and social institutions. It is associated with the increment, accumulation, and complication of the functions and structures of the social system. As a result of these processes, the system becomes more and more efficient. Opportunities to satisfy her different needs people are rising. qualities of individuals is an important indicator and result of social development.
When defining this concept, it should be noted that it expresses a natural, directed and irreversible change in social processes or phenomena. As a result, they pass into a certain new qualitative state, that is, their structure or composition changes. Social as a concept is narrower than social change. Periods of crisis, chaos, war, totalitarianism, which negatively affect the life of society, cannot be called development.
Social revolution and social evolution
Two approaches to the consideration of social development are clearly visible in sociology. This is a social revolution and the latter is usually understood as a stage-by-stage, smooth, gradual development of society. On the contrary, a social revolution is a radical transition to something new, a qualitative leap that changes all aspects of life.
Progress and regression
Changes in society do not always occur chaotically. They are characterized by a certain direction, denoted by such concepts as regression or progress. The concept of social progress serves to designate a direction in the development of society in which there is a progressive movement from lower and simpler forms of social life to increasingly higher and more complex, more perfect ones. In particular, these are changes that lead to growth and freedom, greater equality, and improved living conditions.
The course of history has not always been smooth and even. There were also kinks (zigzags) and turns. Crises, world wars, local conflicts, and the establishment of fascist regimes were accompanied by negative changes affecting the life of society. initially assessed as positive, in addition, could lead to negative consequences. For example, urbanization and industrialization have long been considered synonymous with progress. However, relatively recently, conversations have begun about the negative effects of environmental destruction and pollution, traffic jams on highways, and overpopulated cities. Progress is spoken of when the sum of positive consequences from certain social changes exceeds the sum of negative ones. If there is an inverse relationship, we are talking about social regression.
The latter is the opposite of the first and represents a movement from complex to simple, from higher to lower, from whole to parts, and so on. However, in general, the line of historical development has a progressive, positive direction. Social development and social progress are global processes. Progress characterizes the movement of society forward throughout historical development. Whereas the regression is only local. It marks individual societies and time periods.
Reform and revolution
There are such types of social progress as abrupt and gradual. The gradual one is called reformist, and the spasmodic one is called revolutionary. Accordingly, the two forms of social progress are reform and revolution. The first represents partial improvement in some area of life. These are gradual transformations that do not affect the foundations of the current social system. On the contrary, a revolution is a complex change in the majority of forces in all aspects of society, which affects the foundations of the current system. It has a spasmodic character. It is necessary to distinguish between two forms of social progress - reform and revolution.
Criteria for social progress
The value judgments themselves such as “progressive - reactionary”, “better - worse” are subjective. Social development and social progress cannot be unequivocally assessed in this sense. However, if such judgments also reflect the connections that objectively develop in society, then they are not only subjective in this sense, but also objective. Social development and social progress can be strictly assessed. Various criteria are used for this.
Different scientists have different criteria for social progress. The generally accepted ones in a generalized form are the following:
Level of knowledge, development of the human mind;
Improving morality;
Development including the person himself;
The nature and level of consumption and production;
Development of technology and science;
The degree of integration and differentiation of society;
Socio-political freedoms and individual rights;
The degree of her freedom from society and the elemental forces of nature;
Average life expectancy.
The higher these indicators, the higher the social progress and development of society.
Man is the goal and main criterion of social progress
The main indicator of the regressiveness or progressiveness of social changes is precisely the person, his physical, material, moral state, comprehensive and free development of the individual. That is, in the modern system of social and humanitarian knowledge there is a humanistic concept that determines social progress and development of society. Man is his goal and main criterion.
HDI
In 1990, UN specialists developed the HDI (Human Development Index). With its help, both social and economic components of quality of life can be taken into account. This integral indicator is calculated annually for comparison between countries and to measure the level of education, literacy, life and longevity of the studied territory. When comparing living standards of different regions and countries, this is a standard tool. The HDI is defined as the arithmetic average of the following three indicators:
Literacy level (average number of years spent in education), as well as expected duration of education;
Life expectancy;
Standard of living.
Countries, depending on the value of this index, are classified according to their level of development as follows: 42 countries - very high level of development, 43 - high, 42 - medium, 42 - low. The top five countries with the highest HDI include (in ascending order) Germany, the Netherlands, the USA, Australia and Norway.
Declaration of Social Progress and Development
This document was adopted in 1969 by UN resolution. The main objectives of the policy of social development and progress, which all governments and states are obliged to pursue, are to ensure fair remuneration for work without any discrimination, the establishment by states minimum level its payment, which would be high enough to ensure an acceptable standard of living, eliminating poverty and hunger. The Declaration guides countries to improve people's living standards and ensure equal and fair distribution of income. Russia's social development is also carried out in accordance with this declaration.
Social progress leads to the fact that rare, even initially exquisite, needs gradually turn into socially normal ones. This process is obvious even without scientific research; it is enough to compare the set and level of modern needs with what it was several decades ago.
Obstacles to social progress
There are only two obstacles to social progress - the state and religion. The monster state is propped up by the fiction of God. The origin of religion is connected with the fact that people endowed fictional gods with their own exaggerated abilities, powers and qualities.
