Factors (reasons) for changes in society page, fill out the table: Factors Essence of views Natural Spiritual Material Technogenic Combined approach
Factors of change in society Factors Essence of views Natural Climatic conditions determine the individual characteristics of a person, his character and inclinations Spiritual “Ideas rule the world.” Individuals are capable of ruling the world Material Before engaging in philosophy, people must drink, eat, have a home, and therefore produce all this Man-made Engineering and technology determine the course of human development Combined approach The interaction of a variety of causes and conditions of development should be taken into account
ROLE OF THE PEOPLE Page Who do scientists classify as the masses? How did Klyuchevsky interpret the concept of “people”? What did Herzen say about this? What is Berdyaev's point of view? Jaspers? What is known about elite theory?
The role of social groups and public associations, page What definition of social groups did Hobbes give? Give examples of social groups For what purpose did social groups create public associations? What do we mean by public associations? Give examples. What role do political parties play in the historical process?
The role of historical figures p What is the universality of the historical process? What do we understand by the term “historical figure”? Comment on Plekhanov's opinion. How can you evaluate a historical figure? What traits should a great personality have from Klyuchevsky’s point of view?
The term “social dynamics” is interpreted ambiguously both in our and in foreign literature. O. Comte, who introduced this term into scientific circulation, meant by it unidirectional progressive processes of social development, excluding leaps and breaks. In modern Western sociology, the development of the problem of social dynamics is associated with the name of P. Sorokin, who believed that “like the physiology of the human body, which studies the basic physiological processes that are repeated in human organisms, “social physiology” or dynamics concentrates its attention on the basic social processes that repeat in the life history of all social groups." So, in the first case, social dynamics are understood as linear processes, in the second - cyclical. In our literature, the concept of “social dynamics” until recently was denied the status of a scientific category. Moreover, in special reference publications it was emphasized that this term retained its meaning only in studies of history and sociology3.
Meanwhile, the concept of “social dynamics” reflects a certain and very significant aspect of social development as a whole. From the totality of diverse changes in historical reality, the concept of “social dynamics” absorbs and concentrates its attention on one side - the direction of social changes, their trajectory. In this regard, we can distinguish cyclical, linear and spiral types of social dynamics.
In social life, cyclical processes are widespread, having their own logic of development and specific forms of implementation. They cannot be reduced to random and short-term phenomena in the forward movement of society, to partial “deviations” from the main ascending line, as is often presented within the framework of a purely progressivist approach to the interpretation of social development.
Two classes of cyclical changes can be distinguished: systemic-functional and historical.
The system-functional cycle reflects social changes within the framework of one qualitative state, and the final result of a series of changes becomes the starting point of a new series of similar changes. As a result of the resolution of emerging contradictions within the framework of a given quality, there is a repeated alternation of ups and downs, a repetition of the same phases of the functioning of the social system. It should be emphasized that the reproduction of social quality in an unchanged form does not mean complete substantive identity of the beginning and end of the cycle, and, thus, system-functional cycles are actually quasi-cyclical, quasi-circular processes.
The development of society within the framework of social-functional cycles indicates its relatively stable state: naturally formed social communities (ethnic groups, classes, strata), stable forms of activity of social subjects, their traditional roles in society, political, social and other institutions are reproduced. Thus, self-regulation of society is carried out. A social system that is out of balance returns after a certain time to its original state - a kind of pendulum movement occurs. The cycle is a way of existence and preservation of society, and this is especially evident in societies that are relatively closed compared to the outside world.
The geographical location of a society may have a certain influence on isolation, but the activity of its internal immune systems, which prevent the penetration of innovations, is of decisive importance. Artificial restriction of contacts with the outside world is carried out by various means (political, religious, ideological, etc.), but at the same time a single main goal is pursued - the preservation of the social system in its current form through the sustainable reproduction of traditional relations and connections. Such societies, of course, change, although in general their development is hampered and they do not move to the next stage for a more or less long time. Examples of such development include classical nomadic societies, some archaic agricultural communities, as well as eastern civilizations, often called “traditional.”
When comparing the dynamics of two societies (one with a predominance of linear processes, and the other with a predominance of cyclical ones), ideas about absolute stagnation often arise in socio-philosophical literature. A striking example of such ideas is the Eurocentric views that formed in the 18th-19th centuries. In Western countries at this time there was a linear process of development of capitalist relations. Comparing it with eastern societies, in particular China, many thinkers (I.G. Herder, A.I. Herzen, N.Ya. Danilevsky, N.G. Chernyshevsky) defined the latter as stagnant societies. Meanwhile, the history of China, where feudal relations dominated for almost two millennia, is a typical example of cyclical development, conditioned, on the one hand, by geopolitical isolation and, on the other, by high internal stability and regulation. Political centralization, a strict hierarchical structure of power, regulation of economic life, the socio-economic ethics of Confucianism, which rejected and suppressed cultural, ideological and technical innovations - all this was a prerequisite for the increased stability of Chinese society. Even numerous movements of the popular masses contributed to the stabilization and ordering of society, because they freed it from certain obvious vices. And only in the second half of the 19th century. cyclical processes began to show a tendency to transform into linear regression. This trend manifested itself in the form of increasing paralysis of power, a decline in the living standards of the majority of the population, and declassification. And yet, the loss by society of certain results achieved earlier occurred while maintaining and reproducing, in the main features, traditional relations and forms of activity.
The historical cycle is the unity of the processes of genesis, flourishing and collapse of social systems and reflects the real fact that society, like any material formation, has a certain life span, after which it ceases to exist. Of course, the disappearance of a social organism does not occur completely without a trace: in each individual case, a certain connection with it of the formations that arose in its place is preserved. This was the case in the territory of the former Roman Empire, where a number of independent states arose, which in the Renaissance and Modern times enriched many of the inherited achievements of Roman culture. But in this case, it is legitimate to talk about the historical cycles of newly formed states.
Recently, more and more attention has begun to be paid to the development of the question of a possible megacycle in the evolution of the Earth as a planetary system, in which a change from an ascending line to a descending one is not excluded. This problem, first posed (albeit in an abstract form) by Charles Fourier, is becoming increasingly relevant today due to the sharp increase in contradictions on a global scale1.
A reflection of the cyclical type of social dynamics are well-known to the reader theories of the historical cycle, extremely diverse in the material used by the authors, the form of presentation, methods of argumentation, and the vision of world-historical prospects. Let us compare, for example, the concepts of D. Vico and N. Ya. Danilevsky. If for Vico the fundamental principle is the unity of world history, then Danilevsky, on the contrary, proceeds from the denial of this unity and considers the history of society as a set of different cultural and historical types, each of which ceases to exist after going through a certain life cycle.
Unfortunately, the analysis of these theories in the recent past suffered from significant simplification and one-sidedness! Firstly, these theories were strictly opposed to the idea of social progress, although a more careful study of the issue reveals that throughout the development of social philosophy, theories of the cycle in various versions included this idea, and this is quite logical, for the cycle is the combination of ascending and descending branches of development. Secondly, the emergence of cyclical theories was somewhat directly correlated in the literature with the political sympathies and antipathies of their authors, as well as the moral and psychological atmosphere of the corresponding time. Undoubtedly, these factors leave a certain imprint on any creativity, but the main thing must not be missed: the theories of cyclism reflect certain aspects of objective social dynamics and their appearance at different historical stages indicates the essential nature of these aspects. Thirdly, the metaphysical nature of these concepts was somewhat exaggerated; it was forgotten that, within certain limits, the metaphysical approach is legitimate and even necessary.
Linear processes occupy an extremely large place in historical reality. At the same time, the essence of the linear type of social dynamics is not limited to linear progress - another historical form of its implementation is linear regression, as a descending line in the development of society, when a process of narrowing the functional capabilities of the social system occurs, ultimately leading to dead-end situations in social development. Linear progress and linear regression represent a contradictory unity of opposites, one of which at a certain stage plays a dominant role.
Considering the relationship between linear progress and linear regression, let us pay attention to the following circumstance. Their understanding as multidirectional vectors of historical development often leads to a significant shift in this emphasis over time. And if linear progress is considered directed towards the future, then linear regression is perceived almost as a backward movement, even in time, as a kind of “progress in reverse.” In reality, linear regression should not be interpreted as a simple repetition in reverse order of previously completed stages and phases. At a new temporary stage of social development, there are different conditions, a different social environment, and therefore a repetition of the old is possible only primarily in relation to form, although, of course, to a certain extent this also applies to content. Old social institutions cannot be revived in their original appearance, because in new historical conditions they turn out to be unable to fulfill their former functions. In this regard, it is legitimate to talk about the asymmetrical orientation of linear progress and linear regression.
A distinctive feature of linear dynamics is its cumulative nature, expressed in the fact that each new phenomenon is not a mechanical addition to the old, but its genetic continuation. During the implementation of linear processes, irreversible states arise that do not completely deny the previous ones, but partially absorb their properties, enrich them, thereby complicating the entire process as a whole. This situation is very successfully illustrated by V.G. Revunenkov when analyzing the development of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. Characterizing the period of linear progress in the history of this revolution, V.G. Revunenkov emphasizes that “the main feature of the ascending line of the revolution was that at each subsequent stage more and more radical groups of the bourgeoisie came to power, the influence of the masses on the course of events increased more and more, and the tasks of bourgeois-democratic transformations of the country were solved more and more consistently”1 . At the same time, the stage of linear regression as “the descending line of the revolution did not represent a retreat towards the feudal past; on the contrary, it meant the strengthening and further development of social orders based on private capitalist property and the wage labor system”2. In other words, the descending phase of the revolution realized one of the possibilities genetically inherent in the ascending phase. Linear regression did not consist in a total rejection of the achievements of the first phase, but in a shift in emphasis: bourgeois democracy was replaced by bourgeois authoritarianism, protecting the interests primarily of large owners.
The implementation of the linear type of social dynamics is associated with such a historical phenomenon as the multivariance of social development. It manifests itself to the greatest extent in critical situations, when society faces the problem of historical choice. During these periods, compared to periods of stable functioning, there is a much wider range of possibilities, the diversity of which can be reduced to three main options: conservation of the existing state, forward and downward movement. The last two options are carried out in the form of linear trends, and behind each of them there are material and ideological carriers - different classes and social strata, which fight among themselves to direct these trends according to their interests.
Clarification of the limits of the linear dynamics of society is of great theoretical and practical importance. In a broad sense, these limits are limited to the period of quantitative changes between two successive qualitative states of society. In general historical terms, linear progress and linear regression replace each other when the potential for growth on its own basis is exhausted. The nature of interaction between society and the natural and historical environment has a certain influence on the limits of linear dynamics. At the same time, the limits of linear progress of society can be expanded by overcoming the historical lag by assimilating the social experience of countries ahead.
A large-scale, panoramic approach to the study of social reality makes it possible to detect in it a spiral type of dynamics, which reflects the direction of processes covering various qualitative states of society. Let us immediately emphasize: in social life, spiraling appears not as the only one, but as one of the relatively independent types of social changes. Such a remark is extremely important, given that in our philosophical literature the opinion of development as occurring exclusively in a spiral has been firmly established.
The spiral type of social dynamics reflects a set of genetically related processes that negate each other, and is revealed when summing up a large amount of data at relatively long stages of historical development. During each negation, the phenomenon passes not only into another qualitative state, but also into its opposite. In the course of subsequent negations, the phenomenon again turns into its opposite and at the same time, as it were, returns to its original state, but this return to the supposedly old is carried out at a new level, with the discovery of new properties. In terms of socio-ontology, this thesis can be illustrated by the example of a spiral associated with the denial of primitive public private property, which today, in turn, is denied by the processes of socialization and socialization. In terms of social and epistemological, we can refer to the following revolution: ancient dialectics - the centuries-old dominance of metaphysics in philosophy and natural science - a return to dialectics. It is quite clear that in both cases we are faced with only an ostensible return, taking place at a qualitatively new level.
Let's try to graphically depict the now familiar three types of social dynamics in Fig. 1
Taoism Confucianism philosophy legalism
Even a cursory analysis of these images reveals that the spiral is a synthesis of a cycle (circle) and a line.
The spiral as a graphic image, a geometric model acts as an analogue of the term “social continuity”, which reflects the dialectical unity of discontinuity and continuity, relative identity and difference, genetic connection of successive processes. When a spiral is defined by the formula “a return to the supposedly old, a repetition of the old on a different level,” then we are talking, in essence, about a development process in which renewal and obsolescence are only partial.
It would be simplistic to interpret the spiral direction as unambiguously progressive, ascending. As part of the development of the social system, downward spiral processes are also realized, which are also natural and make it possible to understand the reasons for the decomposition of a given society. Spiral processes of both directions also take place in the development of culture. So, at the beginning of the 17th century. In the European consciousness, thanks to the intensive growth of scientific and technical knowledge and their implementation in production, the psychology of man as a conqueror of nature began to take shape, which over the next two centuries became a distinctive feature of European humanism. A utilitarian attitude towards nature contributed to the economic and cultural progress of Europe and, in general, provided it with a significant breakthrough compared to other regions. But the 19th and especially the 20th centuries. with their dehumanization of production, environmental crises, etc. showed with sufficient clarity that a certain limit has been reached for the progress of European culture in its traditional forms. Awareness of this fact, on the one hand, entailed a crisis in the former psychology of the “lord of nature,” which was reflected in the widespread dissemination of anti-scientist and anti-technicist sentiments.
In social reality, cyclical, linear and spiral processes appear not as parallel or following each other at certain intervals, but as interconnected, interdependent and interpenetrating moments of the same holistic development process. In other words, the dialectics of social development is such that it simultaneously contains cyclicality, linearity, and spiraling in the diversity of its historical forms of manifestation. Turning, for example, to any transition period, we discover within its framework the action of various alternative trends, including those that, in retrospective analysis, qualify as “zigzags.” In reality, these trends represent multidirectional linear processes, reflecting society’s painful search for optimal ways of further development. During this same period, there are both the beginnings of the future society and the remnants of the past, i.e. elements of spiral dynamics of both directions. This situation characterized the period from 1917 to the mid-30s in Russian history, which was replete with various linear processes: “war communism,” the new economic policy, and the “great turning point.” At the same time, the “birthmarks” of the past system remained in society and the embryos of the future administrative-command system appeared. In general, during the transition period, a cyclical type of social dynamics prevailed in the form of a system-functional cycle, caused by a fierce struggle of opposites (“who will win?”) in economics, politics, and public consciousness.
Section 1. PERSON AND SOCIETYTOPIC 2. SOCIAL DYNAMICS. THE PROBLEM OF SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT
1. The concept of social progress.
2. Types of societies. Formational, civilizational and stage approaches to the problem of social development.
Social dynamics is a set of processes of functioning, change and development of society and its social structures.
1. The concept of social progress
Social progress (Latin progressus - movement forward) is the totality of all progressive changes in society, its development from simple to complex, transition from a lower level to a higher one.
General criteria:
development of the human mind,
improving people's morality,
development of productive forces, including man himself,
progress of science and technology,
an increase in the degree of freedom that society can provide to a person.
Humanistic criteria:
average human life expectancy,
infant and maternal mortality,
health status,
level of education,
development of various spheres of culture,
feeling of satisfaction with life,
degree of respect for human rights,
attitude towards nature.
Let's consider points of view on the criteria of social progress
Thinkers The criteria for progress they formulated
French educator
de Condorcet (full name – Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas de Carita, Marquis de Condorcet) Development of the human mind.
Utopian socialist Claude Henri Saint-Simon The criteria for progress are the happiness of more people, the realization of their abilities by gifted people, population growth, the development of science and civilization.
German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling Gradual approach to the legal organization of social life as a condition for the realization of freedom.
German philosopher Georg Hegel The criterion of progress is the awareness of freedom.
As awareness of human freedom grows, society continues to develop progressively.
In modern conditions, the criteria for social progress are increasingly shifting towards humanitarian parameters.
The opposite concept to progress is regression (Latin regressus - return, movement back) - a transition from higher forms of development to lower ones, movement back, changes for the worse.
Proponents of the concept of progressive development of human society identify two main forms of social transformation: evolution (the main method of evolution is reform) and revolution.
Forms of social development
evolution (Latin evulutio - deployment) in a broad sense is a synonym for development; processes of change (mostly irreversible) occurring in living and inanimate nature, as well as in social systems.
Evolution can lead to complexity, differentiation, an increase in the level of organization of the system (progressive evolution, progress) or, conversely, to a decrease in this level (regression).
In a narrow sense, the concept of evolution includes only gradual quantitative changes, contrasting it with development as a qualitative shift, i.e. revolution.
Social evolution is the process of progressive development of society and its elements from the simplest to the complex forms.
revolution (late Latin revolutio - turn, revolution) is a deep qualitative change in the development of society, nature, knowledge. For example, the geological revolution, the industrial revolution, the scientific and technological revolution, the cultural revolution, the revolution in physics.
A social revolution is a radical change in the socio-political system, characterized by a sharp break with the previous tradition, a violent transformation of social and state institutions as opposed to reforms and social evolution.
reform (lat. reformo - transform) - transformation, change, reorganization of any aspect of social life (orders, institutions, institutions), without destroying the foundations of the existing social structure.
Society development
Evolution Revolution
Reform
Types Types
Progressive Regressive (reactionary) Short-term Long-term
60–70s XIX century in Russia - the “great reforms” of Alexander II Second half. 80s - early 90s XIX century in Russia - “counter-reforms” of Alexander III. February Revolution of 1917 in Russia Neolithic Revolution - 3 thousand years.
Industrial revolution of the 18th–19th centuries.
Points of view of thinkers on the development of society
The German philosopher K. Marx considered revolutions to be the “locomotives of history.”
Russian philosopher N.A. Berdyaev wrote: “All revolutions ended in reactions. This is inevitable. This is the law. And the more violent and violent the revolutions were, the stronger the reactions were. There is some kind of magic circle in the alternation of revolutions and reactions.”
Modern Russian historian P.V. Volobuev wrote: “The evolutionary form, firstly, made it possible to ensure the continuity of social development and thanks to this preserve all the accumulated wealth; secondly, evolution, contrary to our primitive ideas, was accompanied by major qualitative changes in society, not only in productive forces and technology, but also in spiritual culture, in the way of life of people; thirdly, in order to solve new social problems that arose in the course of evolution, it adopted such a method of social transformation as reforms, which in their “costs” turned out to be simply incomparable with the gigantic price of many revolutions; Ultimately, as historical experience has shown, evolution is capable of ensuring and maintaining social progress, also giving it a civilized form.”
There are also cyclical concepts of social development. According to them, history periodically exhausts its potential and temporarily returns to the beginning of the process, i.e. it is reversible and repeatable. Social and historical development does not proceed in a straight line, but rather in a circle.
Proponents of the cycle theory
Nikolay Danilevsky
(1822–1885)
Russian publicist and sociologist Work “Russia and Europe” (1869)
In the history of society, he identified separate “cultural-historical types,” or civilizations.
Each civilization goes through the following development cycle: emergence - prosperity - collapse.
Oswald Spengler
(1880–1936)
German philosopher, cultural scientist Work “The Decline of Europe” (1918)
There is no linear process in history, but rather a series of separate, unique “higher cultures.”
Each individual culture experiences cycles of childhood, adolescence, maturity and old age: it arises, grows and, having fulfilled its purpose, dies.
The decline phase is called "civilization".
Arnold Toynbee
(1889–1975)
English historian and philosopher of history, 12-volume work “Comprehension of History” (1934–1961)
World history is a system of conventionally distinguished civilizations that go through identical cycles from birth to death.
The development of civilizations is cyclical; however, in general, the development of society is progressive - in the history of human society there has been progress in spirituality and religion.
Pitirim Sorokin
(1889–1968)
Russian-American sociologist and cultural scientist Work “Social and cultural dynamics” (1937–1941)
There are 2 types of cycles:
1) complete - the final phase turns into the first, and the cycle begins anew;
2) relative - the direction of a repeating process does not completely coincide with the direction of a series of similar previous processes.
Historical cycles do not mean complete repetition, but rather a new embodiment of the principles underlying them. “History repeats itself, but its themes appear in ever new variations, when not only the content changes, but the rhythm and tempo.”
The process of historical development of society is contradictory: both progressive and regressive changes can be found in it. If we tried to depict the progress of mankind graphically, what we would get is not an ascending straight line, but a broken line, reflecting ups and downs, accelerated movement forward and giant leaps back.
Humanity as a whole has never regressed, but its forward movement could be delayed and even stopped for a while, which is called stagnation.
Stagnation (lat. stagnatio - immobility, from stagnum - standing water) - stagnation, lack of development; a phenomenon in the country's economy that represents stagnation, lack of growth in industrial and agricultural production, and in trade turnover.
In modern sociology, social development is associated with the process of modernization (French moderne - new, modern).
The term “modernization” is used in the following basic meanings:
1) changes in accordance with the latest, modern requirements and standards;
2) the process of transition from traditional society to modern society, from agricultural to industrial;
3) holistic renewal of society.
2. Types of societies. Formational, civilizational and stage-based approaches to the problem of social development
All the variety of societies that exist now or have already disappeared are divided into certain types. There are different approaches to analyzing social development and many ways to classify societies.
The most common approaches to the analysis of social development are formational, civilizational and stage-based.
FORMATIONAL APPROACH
The formational approach developed in the Marxist school of social science, the founders of which were German scientists Karl Marx (1818–1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820–1895).
The key concept of the Marxist concept of society is the concept of “socio-economic formation”.
A socio-economic formation is “... a society 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.
To characterize socio-economic formations in Marxism, the concepts of base and superstructure are introduced.
The basis is understood as the economic system of society, that is, productive forces and production relations;
The superstructure is all state, political and social institutions, culture, religion, philosophy, science, the form of which directly depends on the base. Moreover, the superstructure includes the family in its concrete historical form.
Socio-economic formation
The main characteristic of the basis, i.e., the economic system of society, is the mode of production - the historically specific unity of productive forces and production relations.
Productive forces are the totality of the means of production and people involved in production.
Means of production are means of labor and objects of labor that are used in unity in the production of material goods.
Means of labor are those objects with which a person influences the objects of labor, that is, tools, machines, devices, machine tools, as well as auxiliary means without which production is impossible (power lines, communication networks, etc.).
Objects of labor are everything that human labor is aimed at, that is, raw materials, as well as objects that have already been exposed to human influence and were again included in the production process (for example, parts, workpieces).
As for people, they must have a certain professional experience, work skills and a certain amount of knowledge necessary in the production process.
Production relations are relations between people that develop in the process of production and regarding it, as well as regarding the distribution, consumption of goods produced and the exchange of them.
The main relations of production are relations of ownership of the means of production. They determine the economic position of the ruling class, as well as other relations of production. In particular, the class that owns the means of production also receives the surplus value of the product - part of the price that is not included in the costs of raw materials and wages, and therefore has the opportunity to purchase more material goods. This shows inequality in the distribution of produced products.
As long as production relations correspond to the level of development of the productive forces, they contribute to a further increase in this level. At a certain stage of development, any economic formation is progressive, as it reflects the real needs of society and its economic condition.
However, if the productive forces are constantly and rapidly changing and developing, the relations of production remain unchanged. Eventually, stable production relations begin to impede the development of productive forces. Over time, when the discrepancy between the level of development of productive forces and production relations reaches a critical level, a change in the economic formation occurs. It can occur either as a result of revolutions or peacefully. In the first case, production relations undergo a sharp, radical change; in the second case, this process occurs gradually. However, in any case, production relations must be brought into line with the level of development of the productive forces.
Changes in the basis, including production relations and productive forces, also lead to transformation of the superstructure. The fact is that, from the point of view of Marxism, the main task of the superstructure is to ensure the preservation of the existing state of affairs. The owners of the means of production in the conditions of this socio-economic formation have power, both economic and political, and therefore, naturally, do not want to give up the possession of added value for the products produced. For this reason, they use culture, morality, religion, philosophy, as well as social institutions in order to maintain and maintain their power.
K. Marx identified three eras or formations of world history according to the criterion of dominant production relations (forms of ownership):
1) primary formation (archaic pre-class societies);
2) secondary, or “economic” social formation, based on private property and commodity exchange and including
Asiatic,
antique,
feudal,
capitalist modes of production;
3) communist formation.
Marx paid main attention to the “economic” formation, and within its framework, to the bourgeois system. At the same time, social relations were reduced to economic ones (“base”), and world history was viewed as a movement through social revolutions to a predetermined phase - communism.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, generally following the logic of Marx’s concept, significantly simplified the concept of socio-economic formations, identified them with the method of production and reduced them to a system of production relations.
In Soviet Marxism (historical materialism), the concept of five socio-economic formations was established:
primitive communal
slaveholding,
feudal,
capitalist,
communist.
In its established form, the concept of socio-economic formations, together with the idea of linear progress that gave rise to it, already belongs to the history of social thought. However, overcoming formational dogma does not mean abandoning the formulation and solution of questions of social typology. Types of society and its nature, depending on the tasks being solved, can be distinguished according to various criteria, including socio-economic ones. It is important to remember the high degree of abstraction of such theoretical constructs, their schematic nature, the inadmissibility of their direct identification with reality, as well as their use for making social forecasts.
CIVILIZATIONAL APPROACH
The key concept of the civilizational approach to the analysis of social development is the concept of “civilization,” which has many interpretations.
The term “civilization” (from the Latin civilis – civil, state) is used in scientific literature in different meanings.
Basic approaches to defining “civilization”
The essence of the approach Authors Examples
Civilization is a stage, a stage of historical development, Lewis Henry Morgan,
Friedrich Engels,
Alvin Toffler American ethnographer and anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881) proposed to distinguish three stages in the development of society: savagery, barbarism, civilization
Civilization is a certain stage in the development of local cultures Oswald Spengler The German philosopher Oswald Spengler (1880–1936) believed that each local culture goes through stages of emergence, growth and decline in its development. The phase of cultural decline is called civilization
Civilization as a synonym for culture Nikolai Danilevsky
Russian researcher Nikolai Danilevsky (1822–1885) believed that the basis of social life is made up of “cultural-historical types” or “civilizations” that are more or less isolated from each other, going through a number of successive stages in their development: origin, flourishing, aging, decline.
Civilization as the level of development of a separate region or ethnic group Arnold Toynbee The English historian and philosopher Arnold Toynbee (1889–1975) develops the theory of local civilizations - i.e. civilizations inherent in this or that region, this or that country, this or that people (Babylonian, Chinese, Islamic, Christian). There are many of them, they are original, unique and incomparable, determined by geographical, ethnic, religious and other characteristics.
Civilization as a world community as a whole Modern concepts of globalization Civilization is society in all its integrity and the interconnection of its parties (world civilization).
All civilizational concepts are characterized by such features as:
rejection of the Eurocentric, unilinear scheme of social progress;
conclusion about the existence of many cultures and civilizations, which are characterized by locality and heterogeneity;
a statement about the equal importance of all cultures in the historical process.
Any civilizational concept is based on the identification of a certain number of local, more or less closed cultural formations. Each of these formations goes through certain stages of development and dies. In general, the world historical process from the point of view of the civilizational approach turns out to be nonlinear, since the stages of birth, development and death of civilization affect a separate cultural organism that is not connected with others.
Comparative analysis of formational and civilizational approaches to the study of society
Lines of comparison Formational approach Civilization approach
The relationship between the material and spiritual spheres of social life Material factors (primarily production) play a decisive role in the development of society Spiritual or ideal factors (values, worldview, etc.) play no less a role than material factors, and in some cases can become defining.
Direction of historical development. The idea of progress Society moves from a lower stage of development to a higher one.
The main criteria of progress are the improvement of productive forces and production relations. Each civilization is unique and brings its own shade to the “palette” of human diversity.
Progress is relative, it can cover certain areas of public life.
In relation to spiritual culture, this concept can be used very limitedly.
Dignity allows you to see what was common in the historical development of different peoples;
human history appears as a single process;
allows us to identify certain patterns of social development;
offers a clear periodization of world history and the history of individual countries, allowing for a deep study of the history of specific societies and peoples in all their diversity and specificity;
allows you to comprehensively study the cultural history of the society in question, analyze its inherent system of values, and identify national characteristics;
puts human activity and people at the center of research
Disadvantages: Many peoples did not pass through all or most formations in their development;
most processes of a political, spiritual, cultural order cannot be explained from purely economic positions without distortions and simplifications;
insufficient attention is paid to the originality, uniqueness, uniqueness of individual societies and peoples; it is impossible to analyze world history as a single process of development of humanity as a whole;
the possibility of studying the patterns of historical development of human society is minimized
STAGED APPROACH
In the second half of the twentieth century, the staged approach to the development of human society gained popularity, the proponents of which seek to highlight certain stages of the progressive development of mankind. As a rule, the main criterion for identifying such stages is technical and technological.
An example of a stage-based approach to the development of society is the concept of “Stages of Economic Growth” by the American sociologist, economist and historian Walt Whitman Rostow, which he outlined in his work “Stages of Economic Growth” (1960).
Based on the idea of the decisive role of technical and economic indicators in the development of society, W. Rostow divides the history of mankind into the five stages of economic growth indicated below.
1. “Traditional society.” This is an agrarian society with a primitive level of agricultural development and a “pre-Newtonian” level of science and technology, which limits the possibilities of production per capita. A society with such characteristics covers in the history of mankind, if we use Marx’s classification, three socio-economic formations (primitive communal, slaveholding and feudal), and also extends to colonial and semi-colonial, underdeveloped countries of the world according to their state in the first half of the twentieth century.
2. “Transitional society.” W. Rostow views it as a period of creating preconditions for the next industrial shift. During this period, the prerequisites arise for the transition of society to a higher level of development: scientific discoveries and inventions are born that can affect the growth of production, and enterprising people also appear who are ready to use these innovations to obtain greater profits. A determined and enterprising minority, according to W. Rostow, is the true driving force “translating traditional society” onto the path of industrial development. Thus, Rostow views “economic change” as “the consequence of non-economic human impulses and aspirations.”
3. “Shift stage”, or “industrial revolution”. This stage is marked by an increase in the share of capital accumulation and the rapid development of leading industries. According to W. Rostow, England was at this stage at the end of the 18th century, France and the USA - in the middle of the 19th century, Germany - in the second half of the 19th century, Russia - in 1890-1914, India and China - from the middle of the 20th century.
4. “Maturity stage.” At this stage, the level of capital investment increases significantly, national income rises, industry develops rapidly, and new, previously unknown branches of production emerge. The share of urban residents in the population structure reaches 60–90%. The share of skilled labor is increasing, and the structure of employment is changing qualitatively. According to W. Rostow, England reached this stage in the middle of the 19th century, the USA - in 1900, Germany and France - by 1910, Japan - in the early 40s, and the USSR only in the early 50s of the 20th century. V.
5. “The era of high mass consumption.” At this stage, the focus of society's attention is on the problems of consumption and well-being of the population in the broadest sense of these words. Based on the achieved technical maturity, a society emerges, characterized by mass consumption of durable goods (cars, televisions, refrigerators, etc.). The production of these goods, as well as the development of the service sector, becomes the main thing in the economy of society. The first to reach this era, according to W. Rostow, were the United States, followed by the countries of Western Europe and Japan. The Soviet Union, according to W. Rostow, is on the threshold of a new era. When he crosses this threshold, the existing socio-economic system will degenerate. For communism, writes W. Rostow, “by its essence is inclined to wither in an era of high mass consumption.”
Currently, the most common typology distinguishes three types of society:
traditional (agrarian);
industrial;
post-industrial.
A traditional (agrarian) society is a society in which agriculture was the main economic sector. In such a society, the bulk of the population is employed in the agricultural sector, subsistence farming dominates, and commodity relations are either completely absent or focused on meeting the needs of a small social stratum of the elite. In such a society, manual labor predominates, based on a primitive technological base. The main wealth in such a society is land, and the main element of the social structure is the agricultural community. The community, on the one hand, limits a person’s freedom, on the other, it provides him with protection and guarantees a minimum of benefits.
In a traditional society, there is a priority of collectivist values, the interests of the whole - a social community, a group - prevail over the interests of the individual, he “dissolves” in society, does not separate himself from the social environment. Expulsion from the group in such societies is tantamount to social death.
Traditional society is focused on the reproduction (repetition) of itself: existing social orders, traditions, working methods. Human behavior is strictly regulated by law, morality, and religion. The main value in such a society is stability, following the behests of our ancestors.
In the history of mankind, there were many societies - Ancient Egypt, Sumer, Ancient India, Ancient China, the Arab-Muslim East, medieval Western Europe - whose culture was traditional. Sometimes the concept of “traditional society” is identified with the concept of “Oriental society”, “East”, since societies of this type were first formed in the East.
All traditional societies develop very slowly; the process of their transition to an industrial society is called modernization.
Industrial society arises as a result of the industrial revolution, which begins first in Western European countries (primarily in Great Britain). Its basis is the capitalist mode of production, private property, individual entrepreneurship, competition. The main branch of the economy in such a society is large-scale industrial production; it is in this area that the bulk of the population is employed. The urban population in societies of this type predominates over the rural population. The development of industrial production leads to active intervention of society in natural processes. A consumer attitude towards nature is being formed, which gives rise to environmental problems.
Industrial society is often called “Western”, referring to the region of its origin.
The transition from a traditional society to an industrial one is associated with the emergence of a new value system. These include innovation, novelty, efficiency. The idea of personal autonomy arises, the value of individualism grows, a person is “liberated” from class and corporate ties, which, on the one hand, allows him to be free, on the other hand creates loneliness and uncertainty about the future, because in case of difficulties he can only count on yourself.
The concept of industrial society was formulated by the famous French philosopher and sociologist Raymond Aron (1905–1983). His work Lectures on Industrial Society, originally published in French (1964) and then translated and published in English (1968), became widely known.
R. Aron shows that social progress is characterized by a transition from the former backward “traditional society” (i.e., an agrarian society dominated by subsistence farming and class hierarchy) to an advanced, industrially developed “industrial” society. According to R. Aron, the defining characteristics of an industrial society should be considered:
1) the creation of national states united around a common language and culture;
2) commercialization of production and disappearance of the subsistence economy;
3) the dominance of machine production and the reorganization of production in the factory;
4) a fall in the share of the working class employed in agricultural production;
5) urbanization of society;
6) growth of mass literacy;
7) enfranchisement of the population and institutionalization of politics around mass parties;
8) the application of science to all spheres of life, especially to industrial production, and the consistent rationalization of social life.
In the 1980s American futurist Alvin Toffler (b. 1928) in his book “The Third Wave” (1980) outlined his understanding of industrial society. According to the general historical scheme proposed in this work, the “agricultural civilization”, called the “first wave”, “withdrew” at the dawn of the Modern Age, giving way to the “second wave” - the “industrial” civilization. In the conditions of extraordinary changes in society at the end of the 20th century, it is being replaced by the “third wave” - the coming civilization, for which, however, E. Toffler was unable to find an adequate name.
E. Toffler notes that the core of industrial civilization is machine production, mass and highly specialized in nature. In order for expensive machines to pay for themselves faster, it is better to concentrate them in one place (to quickly obtain a complete finished product, to save on warehouse space, transportation of individual components and parts along the processing and assembly line, etc.). So specialized machine production must be large by its very nature. The specialization of machine production reproduces itself in all other spheres and structures of social life: in health care, education, law enforcement.
The specialization of production places high demands on its standardization, as well as on the synchronization of people's lives. And this characteristic is again projected onto all aspects of public life.
Since the 1960s. world civilization is entering a new stage of development, which researchers call information or post-industrial society.
Basic concepts characterizing the current stage of social development
A) the theory of post-industrial society by Daniel Bell (1919–2011);
b) information society of Manuel Castells (b. 1942);
c) “third wave” of Alvin Toffler (b. 1928);
d) “risk society” by Ulrich Beck (b. 1944).
The concept of “post-industrial society” was introduced by the American sociologist Daniel Bell (1919–2011). In the early 1970s, he pointed out the defining features of the emerging new social order. D. Bell proposed five parameters on the basis of which we can talk about the transition from an industrial society to a post-industrial one:
in the economic sector, the commodity-producing economy is being replaced by a service economy;
in the professional system, people engaged in mental work are becoming increasingly important: scientists, engineers, highly qualified specialists;
The central position in society is occupied by theoretical knowledge, which is the source of innovation and determines policy;
much attention is paid to control over technology and technological assessment of innovations;
new intelligent technology is emerging.
TRADITIONAL, INDUSTRIAL AND POST-INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY
Signs
(lines of comparison) Traditional (agrarian) society
Industrial Post-industrial
Method of farming Subsistence farming
Commodity farming
Predominant economic sector
Agriculture Industrial production Service sector
Level of production mechanization
Manual labor, primitive mechanisms Mechanization and automation of production Computerization
Employment More than 75% of the population is employed in agriculture About 10% of the population is employed in agriculture, about 85% is employed in industry
In agriculture - up to 3%, in industry - about 33%, in the service sector - about 66%
Main social institutions
(according to D. Bell)
Church and army Firm and corporation University
Leading social group
(according to D. Bell)
Priests and feudal lords Businessmen Scientists and specialists
Main factor of management
Physical strength Money Knowledge
If there are no changes in society, then it dies and begins to stagnate (rot). Society is a living dynamic system, subject to the influence of both internal and external forces. The structural elements of society (social groups, social institutions, communities) enter into various complex interactions. This constant interaction naturally leads to changes in society, which can occur both at the micro level, i.e. are caused by the influence of the role of an individual, changes in the status of this individual, and at the macro level.
Social change, as noted by sociologists A.A. Radugin and KA. Radugin, this is the transition of social systems, communities, institutions and organizations from one state to another. P
The concept of “social change” is general in nature and can be specified by the concept of “development”, which in a narrow sense means “an irreversible change in objects”, which implies a transition from simple to complex, from lower to higher. This is a movement of society that is not associated with any changes, but with deep ones that change the structure of society, leading to the emergence of new social relations, institutions, norms and values. However, in everyday speech, as a rule, the concept of “development” is used as a synonym for the concept of “change”. And in this case, we can say that the concept of “development” is used not in a narrow, but in a broad sense.
Social changes occurring in a society may include population growth, changes in relations between social groups, in the electoral system, in individual rights, etc. Changes may relate to the field of inventions, to the rules of the Russian language, moral standards, etc.
Social changes vary not only in scale, but also in depth. From the totality of social changes, the following types can be distinguished: cyclic, linear, nonlinear.
Cyclic type
Sociology focuses on repeating cyclical processes. In social life, cyclical processes are as widespread as in nature. As is known, there are astronomical cycles (day, night, seasons), biological cycles (birth, childhood, adolescence, maturity, old age, death). Cycles in everyday life (weekends and weekdays), etc. are also distinguished. Political, economic, and social cycles are clearly visible in society: political crises are replaced by political stability, economic prosperity is followed by decline, an increase in the level of well-being of the population alternates with its decline, etc. . In other words, social life is like a cycle. Each of the processes in society replaces another. Each of the processes exhausts its potential. Socio-historical development goes in a circle, which allows us to talk about its certain reversibility.
Cyclicality means repeating past trends, but with some new variations. Each of the cyclic processes has similarities between the repeating states of the system and the number of repetitions in the cycle. The duration of the cycle can be short or long. Cycles differ in the number of phases, rhythm, acceleration or deceleration of intervals. Cyclic processes contribute to the reproduction of the social system, the reproduction of its functions (production of material goods, their distribution, regulation of people’s behavior, etc.), the reproduction of social communities (ethnicities, nations, classes, strata), the reproduction of sustainable forms of activity (scientific, industrial, artistic and etc.), social roles (doctor, lawyer, educator, military man). Cyclicity gives rhythm to social processes and is a way of existence and preservation of society. It is very important to know that each new cycle is not an absolute repetition of the previous one. Reproduction of society does not mean complete substantive identity of the phases of the cycle, the beginning and end of the cycle.
Consequently, cyclical changes are not purely circular processes. Therefore, Eurocentric ideas about absolute stagnation in the 17th - 18th centuries in eastern countries, such as China, whose history for a long time was a typical example of cyclical development that rejected cultural and technical innovations, are incorrect. Yet today's dynamic China largely reproduces traditional relations.
Modern sociologists consider it possible to identify forms of cyclical changes. Such forms of cyclic processes are called pendulum-type changes, wave movements, and spiral movements. Movements, or changes, like a pendulum, are considered the simplest form of a cyclic process. An example of such a movement is investment social policy, when funds for the development of the social sphere of society either increase or, on the contrary, decrease, that is, return to the original amount. An illustration of wave processes in society is, say, the cycle of technical innovations, which reaches its wave peak and again declines, as if fading.
The spiral type is the most complex form of cyclic change. Spiral dynamics are defined according to the now classic formula - “a return to the supposedly old, a repetition of the old on a different level.” It is a process of change in which renewal and obsolescence are only partial. Each cycle of a changing phenomenon (process) seems to deny the previous one, turning into its opposite, into a different quality and at the same time, as it were, returning to its previous state. But this return to the old is carried out at a new level, with the discovery of new properties. The spiral model is an image of social continuity. Spiral processes are realized in society, both ascending and descending. This means that the spiraling cycle of change cannot be understood only as progressive, upward. There are also downward spiral processes that indicate dysfunction in society, its death and decline. An example of a spiral process is the relationship of man to nature. In primitive times, nature was perceived by man as a blind dominant force. From modern times to the 20th century, thanks to scientific and technological progress, man acquired new technological capabilities and considered himself its conqueror and ruler. And only now did he realize his organic connection with nature and the need for a humane attitude towards it.
In addition to cyclical changes occurring within the framework of a qualitatively single social system, sociologists and cultural scientists especially highlight cyclic changes occurring in the cyclic dynamics of sociocultural systems. Therefore, it is appropriate, in addition to the systemic-functional cycle, which has been discussed so far, to talk about the historical cycle. The historical cycle, highlighted by such thinkers as D. Vico, N. Danilevsky and others, reflects the unity of the process of emergence, flourishing and collapse of sociocultural systems, emphasizing a certain period of life of society. The concepts of these cultural scientists strive to show the unity of world theory, its repeatability, the conjugation of ascending and descending lines, or they consider history as a set of different cultural and historical types that have their own life span (cycle).
Linear type
The linear type of social change considers the entire history of mankind as a single and, most importantly, directed process. The linear type of social dynamics arose as a result of the influence of biblical historiosophy and the Judeo-Christian tradition and turned in the public consciousness into the idea of evolutionism, into the idea of progress. Linear progress is directed towards the future and is perceived as moving forward in time and space.
The peculiarity of linear dynamics is that each stage of social progress, each stage of movement acts as a moment of genetic continuation of the previous stage. Linear processes partially absorb the properties of previous ones, enrich and develop them.
The most striking expression of linear ideas are the ideas of social evolutionism. The theories of social evolutionism, despite all their diversity, represent a desire to comprehend the historical process as a single line, as part of the overall diverse linear cosmic evolution, which incorporates the complex evolutionary processes of the Earth and the entire planetary system.
There are known classical theories of social evolution by G. Spencer, E. Durheim, F. Tennis, as well as modern theories formulated by R. Aron, W. Rostow, D. Bell, Z. Brzezinski, A. Toffler and others. Let us focus on the main provisions , put forward by these theorists, bearing in mind that previous topics have already discussed their concepts.
The evolutionary process, from the point of view of G. Spencer, consists in the complication of the forms of social life. Social life, as it is influenced by various external conditions, becomes more complex, and the heterogeneity in the subsystems that make up society increases. Thus, society differentiates, and this rate of differentiation accelerates as complexity increases. Differentiation means the division of functions between parts of society, its subsystems, and the development of specialization. Evolutionary changes increase the harmony of social processes and promote the integration of the parts that make up society. Thus, the main idea of Spencer's social evolutionism is the idea of differentiation and integration. Society is developing in the direction from simple, traditional, to differentiated, complex, rational, and increasingly integrated. E. Durkheim saw the process of evolution as a movement from a society with an undeveloped division of labor, segmental structure and mechanical solidarity of its members to a society with a developed division of labor, complex structure and organic solidarity. Mechanical solidarity, according to E. Durkheim, exists in traditional societies, where the collective absorbs the individual, where there are common norms of behavior and values. Thus, solidarity between individuals is due to the uniformity of social life in each segment of society, the undeveloped division of labor, which is why it is called mechanical. Organic solidarity, on the contrary, is due to the developed division of labor, which puts individuals in close dependence on each other, the weakening of prohibitions and an increase in the degree of individual freedom of individuals. The transition from mechanical to organic solidarity is the evolution of society, the source of which lies in the deepening division of labor and social differentiation.
F. Tönnies presented in his book “Community and Society” two types of society - a peasant, village community (in German - “Gemeinschaft”) and an industrial, urban society (“Gesellschaft”). Thus, the process of evolution is directed from traditional society to modern society. Tennis identified five main features that distinguish these societies, which can be called types of relationships. A peasant or village community assumes that the behavior of individuals and their roles in it are determined by community principles, traditions, religious values, and limited (underdeveloped) specialization. The main unit of this society is the family, the community. In urban society, everything happens the other way around. Here, social roles and individual behavior are determined by the desire for personal gain, submission to formal laws, performance of specialized formal roles, and secular values. The main unit of urban society is corporate and associative forms of uniting people.
R. Aron and W. Rostow are the authors of the theory of industrial society, which is replacing the backward agrarian, “traditional society” with a predominant subsistence economy and a class hierarchy. Industrial society is characterized not only by developed specialization of labor and a management system, but also by mechanization and automation, the development of the scientific and technological revolution, and the mass production of goods for the general public.
In the second half of the 20th century, the theories of “post-industrial society,” which is also called the “information society,” became widely known and further developed. The entire development of human society, from the point of view of the authors of these concepts, goes through three stages: pre-industrial (agrarian), industrial and post-industrial. In a post-industrial society, knowledge, intelligence, information, and creative activity embodied in a person become the main values.
It must be said that linear dynamics presupposes not only progress, not only movement forward into the future, but also regression, that is, it is perceived as a descending line in changes in society. However, regression should not be understood as a simple repetition in reverse order of already completed stages. An absolute repetition of the past is impossible in new, changed conditions, therefore it is more correct to talk about the asymmetry of linear processes. Linear progress and regression replace each other in the historical process. History is never completely reversible.
Sociologists also distinguish types of social change. Innovative changes, which turn into a factor of social development, are of particular importance.
These include various discoveries and inventions. Humanity knows many discoveries that changed its fate and the appearance of the planet (the wheel, the alphabet, the steam engine, the automobile, the doctrine of conditioned and unconditioned reflexes, the periodic table, electoral democracy, etc.).
Often innovations turn out to be incompatible with the existing culture, and then a lot of time passes before the innovation is accepted by society. And yet it happens that innovation is rejected by society. For example, in Russian society such values of liberal democracy as economic individualism, inviolability of private property, etc. cause distrust. If technical, material inventions can be tested and verified quickly enough, then social innovations prove their feasibility for a long time. Therefore, social innovations, for example, even necessary laws, have to overcome resistance, and sometimes even protest from social groups, before these laws prove their effectiveness.
What are the causes of social change? With some degree of convention, we can distinguish two main approaches that answer this very complex question in opposite ways. The source of social change, from the point of view of most sociologists, is located within society itself, that is, it lies in the interaction of its structures, spheres, groups, etc. Social conflict plays a decisive role in the change and development of society. At the same time, Marxists identified the conflict between opposing classes, parties, and ideologies as the basis of social change. All social history in Marxism appears as the history of the struggle of the oppressed classes and the oppressors. Social contradictions in the Marxist concept are the source of development.
The non-Marxist modern theory of conflict represented by L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf, L. Gumplowicz, E. Giddens and others also considers conflict as a natural phenomenon, as a way of movement and development of society. Conflict is an integral feature of social life. The task of society is to learn to resolve conflicts, to regulate them rationally, and not to suppress them. The conservation of the conflict will inevitably lead to high tension in society and ultimately to an explosion of socio-political activity and the destruction of the social system.
The difference between the Marxist and non-Marxist schools of conflict lies in the interpretation of the content of the conflict. For example, the German sociologist R. Dahrendorf believes that the basis of modern social conflict is the relationship of dominance and subordination, which permeates all spheres of society. Such relationships are present in the family, in the student body, in the army, etc. These relationships always, in any society, meet natural resistance. So, if Marxism considers the basis of the conflict to be inequality in relation to the means of production, inequality in the sphere of property relations, then R. Dahrendorf transfers the conflict to another ground - to the sphere of managing people. The Polish-Austrian sociologist L. Gumplowicz explains the conflict from the point of view of social Darwinism and social psychology, since he views it as an expression of human passions: envy, aggression, dissatisfaction, as a merciless struggle.
A different approach in sociology is associated with such a direction as functionalism. Functionalists do not deny the need for social changes in society, including deep ones. But they assume that such changes should not upset the “fluid balance” of the social system. Functionalists prefer to talk more about the equilibrium of society than about conflicts in it. Society must reduce the likelihood of conflict. It is for this “conflictlessness” that representatives of the conflictological movement criticize functionalists.
Nonlinear type
In the 20th century, the theory of linear change was criticized. Reality has proven that there are no eternal linear patterns, universal stages of evolution that would apply to the entire world community, to any societies or groups. The linear type of change is just one of many possible ones. For a linear trend to continue permanently, the status quo is required. In other words, it is necessary that the changing object (in this case, society) is not exposed to external forces, or this impact must be neutralized in such a way that the social system continues to remain in an equilibrium, balanced state.
However, society is constantly changing and is exposed to the environment. New types of interactions, new structures and norms emerge. One and the same structural formation is simultaneously involved, as a rule, in many processes. Therefore, we need to be aware of changes in structures and processes occurring simultaneously. Consecutive changes of states and movement of structural elements continuously disrupt the balance of the system. The main subject of social change is man, the people who create the social system and destroy it. It has already been said that people living in society occupy a certain place in social space. This place is determined by status and role, which presupposes the individual's possession of a set of rights and responsibilities. But the behavior of individuals is much more complex and diverse than the existing structure of roles and statuses.
The interaction of roles and statuses that individuals have occurs in a nonlinear manner. The role of each individual is implemented according to a nonlinear principle. Modern synergetics, which studies the stochastic (random) nature of processes, has had a great influence on the development of the humanities, and especially on sociology and philosophy. Sociology emphasizes that society can change in the most unexpected, unpredictable ways. This happens when the social system cannot restore its balance with the help of previous mechanisms, and the revolutionary or innovative activity of the masses strives to free itself from all systemic and structural restrictions. Then a situation arises when society faces the problem of choosing its new state. This branching, or bifurcation, is called “bifurcation.” It is very important to say that bifurcation means a violation of the logic of previous development, and it cannot be predicted. Society is a system that develops and changes not only due to cause-and-effect relationships and relationships. A society experiencing bifurcation is a chaotic system in which random deviations (fluctuations) replace the previous order.
Thus, the transition of society from one state to another is not always deterministic, and the direction of movement can be unpredictable. The historical process is a fan of possible alternatives, it is a multivariate social development, the source of which is the energy embodied in people's behavior.
The Decembrists faced the need to choose. They might not have reached Senate Square (December 12, 1825). There was an alternative to concluding a peace treaty between the USSR and Nazi Germany. During the election campaign, citizens have several options, each of which opens its own path to the future.
The founder of sociology, O. Comte, used the concept of “social dynamics” to designate the section of sociology that deals with the laws of social development. In the first half of the 20th century P.A. Sorokin created the concept of sociocultural dynamics, a multifaceted and multifactorial process of social development. In modern sociology the term "social dynamics" used in a broader sense to refer to all social changes and processes.
It should be noted that Comte's division of sociology into social statics and social dynamics is not entirely correct. Change, along with stability, is the most important parameter of movement, which in turn is considered in modern philosophy and science as a key state of the system, including the social one. In essence, society can be understood as a social movement and sociology as the study of social interactions or social change.
10.1 Basic sociological concepts of social development.
The study of social development has been the most important problem of sociology since its inception in the 19th century. At that time, there was not enough empirical data to create sociological models of social development, although there was a long philosophical tradition of describing the historical process, which was largely abstract and value-laden. It was this tradition that seriously influenced sociological concepts.
In the philosophy of history, several models of social development have emerged. Since the Middle Ages, in the works of A. Augustine (354-430), the idea of linear (linear) character historical process. History, according to the Christian philosopher, is a directed, progressive, consistent movement from the moment of the creation of society by God to the construction of the Kingdom of God on Earth.
In the works of the Italian thinker G. Vico (1668-1744). there is an idea about cyclical nature social process. The history of society, in his opinion, embodies a certain divine plan, passes through three stages: theocratic (the Gods rule), aristocratic (the best rule) and the “age of people” (the people or monarch rules). The transition from one era to another is carried out through the struggle of people, each cycle ends with the collapse of the social system.
The linear model of history formed the basis of such sociological models of social development as evolutionism and neo-evolutionism; the cyclical model was used in the works of philosophers N.Ya. Danilevsky and O. Spengler, historian A. Toynbee, sociologist P.A. Sorokina, V. Pareto. In addition to these two models of social development, there are other approaches. In particular, the Marxist model of the historical process is very famous. In the last decades of the twentieth century. Concepts of social development using the concept of “activity” as a key concept were popular (A. Touraine, M. Crozier, E. Giddens, P. Sztompka, etc.). Let us dwell briefly on each of these concepts.
Evolutionism and neo-evolutionism. Evolutionary model of development society in sociology appears in the works of O. Comte, G. Spencer, E. Durkheim. A feature of this model is the use of a naturalistic approach in sociology. Social processes are considered by analogy with natural ones, as objective, impersonal, necessary, having strictly defined stages, conditioned by one specific internal factor. The metaphor of society as an organism is widely used, therefore the development of society is considered as the development of a certain integrity, the source of which is internal, endogenous factors. A common feature of these concepts was Eurocentrism, since European society was seen as the ideal goal for all societies, and progressivism, since the development of society was seen as a progressive movement towards an ideal model.
The difference between evolutionary models is manifested, firstly, in what specific factor is considered key for understanding social changes and, secondly, in what stages of development of society are distinguished. For O. Comte, this is the thinking of a person, the three stages of development of which: religious, metaphysical and scientific (positive), are identified by the sociologist with the stages of development of society. For E. Durkheim, the key factor in development is the division of labor, which determines the nature of social ties, and the main stages of development society, mechanical and organic solidarity.. G. Spencer considered the process of social evolution as a movement from incoherent homogeneity to a complex society; the mechanism of evolution is the differentiation of people and social groups, expressed in the emergence and growth of social inequality, he wrote about military and industrial societies.
Neo-evolutionary concepts of development societies appear in the twentieth century, they develop within the framework of the structural-functional approach by sociologists such as T. Parsons, N. Smelser and others as a response to criticism of evolutionism and functionalism. They retain many of the features inherent in evolutionism, in particular, they clearly define the stages of development of society, strive to explore the processes of social determination, and Europe and North America are chosen as the ideal goal and model. Unlike classical evolutionism, neo-evolutionism is based on a multifactorial model of history, that is, it examines not just any one relationship (factor), but a system of relationships. Typically, economic, political and socio-cultural factors are distinguished. Among the latter, the role of technological development is especially emphasized, which allows us to talk about technological determinism, which is inherent in some of these concepts. As an example, we can point to the theory of post-industrial society by D. Bell, created in the 70s of the twentieth century, and the theory of modernization by N. Smelser, which were discussed in Chapter 3.
However, non-evolutionism is most often associated with the name of T. Parsons, the greatest American sociologist of the mid-twentieth century. In his book “Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives,” he writes about two types of processes inherent in any social system: integrative, ensuring the functioning and reproduction of the system and structural changes in the value-normative complexes of a given society. The goal of evolution is to increase adaptation, that is, the adaptation of the social system to the environment; the mechanisms of such adaptation will be differentiation, that is, an increase in differences between groups and institutions, an increase in the effectiveness of each institution, the processes of including newly emerging groups and institutions in the social system, the formation of common normative standards . These processes act simultaneously, therefore, the process of development of society is considered as the result of a complex series of changes. The initially linear model of the history of evolutionism here becomes more complex, becoming multifactorial and multidimensional.
Modern researchers criticize evolutionism and neo-evolutionism for being overly committed to the naturalistic paradigm. Paying the main attention to the factors that ensure change, due attention is not paid to the role of chance in history; the rigid necessity attributed to historical processes does not correspond to the real course of the history of societies, which is rich in deviations, rollbacks, and alternative possibilities. In evolutionism, social change appears as a result of structural changes and is not directly associated with the activities of people; such lack of subjectivity also raises fair objections, especially in the modern world, when conscious activity largely determines the course of development of society. In all versions of evolutionism there is a certain ideal goal towards which society is supposedly moving; such finalism also does not correspond to the real course of development of the history of societies. In general, the desire of evolutionists to give order to the historical process ignores its real diversity. Many researchers note that evolutionists attach excessive importance to the internal factor of development, while the external influence of societies on each other in the modern era of globalization is very significant. Finally, the twentieth century has given us enough examples that the development of society is by no means only progressive, but in its history there are states of stagnation, anomie, and decay.
Cyclic theories.Cyclic processes represent a sequence of changes that returns to its beginning after a certain point in time, that is, a kind of social cycle occurs. Using the metaphor of the growth of an organism, proponents of this approach believed that society goes through stages of birth, flourishing, decline and death. An example of the cyclical nature of social change is the change of generations of people who go through all these stages. However, in sociology they most often use a less rigid cycle model; they rather talk about waves. So the famous Russian economist N.D. Kondratiev introduced the concept of large cycles or long waves- these are periodic repetitions of characteristic social, economic, technological situations, such as, for example, economic ups and downs, relatively short periods of intensive implementation of technical innovations, followed by longer periods of accumulation of scientific and technical knowledge, peaks of social tension, followed by decades of social stability, etc. d. These characteristic situations regularly repeat approximately every 50 - 30 years. They are almost synchronous for most leading developed countries, their manifestations have been recorded in the statistics of these countries over the past 200 years.
The most famous cyclic theory in sociology of the twentieth century is the theory of P.A. Sorokin, developed in the book “Social and Cultural Dynamics”. Its key concept is culture, which is understood as an integrated system of achievements of society (art, education, ethics, law, etc.). The central principle that permeates all the achievements of the people of P.A. Sorokin calls it “cultural mentality.” This principle underlies the distinction between two main types of culture - speculative and sensual. Speculative culture is characterized by the fact that it understands the world as spiritual, immaterial primarily, therefore the goals and norms underlying people's behavior are requirements for fulfilling sacred duty, moral obligations, saving the soul, and serving God. To realize these goals, efforts are being made and social practices are being developed to free a person from the temptations of material life, for example, prayer, meditation, etc. Sensual culture understands the world as corporeal, material, in the process of continuous formation. The goals and needs of people are determined by this world and imply the desire for happiness, pleasure, and benefit. Intermediate to these main types, idealistic culture represents a balanced combination of speculative and sensual elements: the world is both physical and spiritual, both material and spiritual values are important.
Theory P.A. Sorokin is based on significant empirical material, with the help of which he shows that these types of culture are realized through various processes: imitation, adaptation, cultural consumption, disintegration, conflict, alienation, permeating all forms and types of culture. Therefore, the development of sociocultural systems is a multifactorial and multivariate process; waves, peaks and recessions are possible in it. The history of society turns out to be a change in types of cultures; the author believes that in Europe in the 19th century, the idealistic culture of the late Middle Ages was replaced by a sensual culture. It is the essence of the modern sociocultural system and is characterized by moral anarchy, alienation and reification of people’s relationships, chaos of opinions, lack of public consent, crisis and breakdown of the family, the dominance of mass culture, the growth of social pathologies and passivity. However, according to Sorokin, we can hope for the coming of the next type of culture, speculative or idealistic.
Cyclical models of social development largely repeat the shortcomings of evolutionist approaches. Here we also see a strict division into stages, changes appear as a result of the functioning of structures, not people, the process of development of society is schematized, its diversity, specificity, and variability disappear. And the very metaphor of the growth of the organism, which underlies these theories, raises doubts. Moreover, biological processes are not reduced to growth, which reveals existing potential and does not create a new system. In society we see not only and not so much the implementation of existing explicit and hidden programs, but a continuous creative process of creating new practices in all spheres of society.
Marxist model of historical process based on the works of K. Marx and F. Engels, who viewed the history of society as a change in socio-economic formations. A formation, a society at a certain historical stage of its development, was considered by the classics of Marxism as a set of social relations. Material relations arising in the process of labor activity form the basis of society. Ideological relations, political and spiritual, form the superstructure. The base and superstructure make up the structure of society, and the base (economic relations) are considered primary and determining, although the influence of ideological relations is not denied. Five main formations were distinguished: primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist and communist (future), the change of which was carried out in the process of social revolution. The process of social development was carried out as a process of resolving contradictions within the social structure. These are contradictions between the base and the superstructure, between the components of the material mode of production, productive forces and production relations.
K. Marx analyzed the process of development of society not only at the level of society as a whole, but also at the level of social groups. The structural contradictions of society manifested themselves as contradictions between social classes, hence the class struggle turned out to be the driving force of history.
K. Marx's theory presupposed another level of analysis; he created a theory of practice, which was developed in the works of a number of Western Marxists. Practice - the material activity of people was considered by Marx as the real social fabric of society, since everything in society, things, relationships, spiritual artifacts, are the result of human activity. Therefore, along with the fact that Marxism emphasizes the natural-historical nature of the development of society, indicates the presence of objective laws and stages of development of society, in contrast to evolutionism, it notes the importance of the active activity of a person who actually makes history. This last point in the theory of Marxism largely determined the character of the latest theories of development, based on the concept of “activity” and “action”.
Theories of action. Previous approaches to analyzing the development of society developed mainly within the framework of macrosociology, that is, they were considered at the level of social systems and structures; at best, they pointed out the role of large groups of people: classes, nations. However, a microsociological approach to development is also possible, which focuses on the behavior of individuals and small social groups. This approach emerged in the second half of the 20th century. in the works of famous French sociologists A. Touraine, M. Crozier, English sociologist A. Giddens, Polish sociologist P. Sztompka, etc. Although their theories differ significantly from each other, they have a number of common features that allow them to be combined under one heading. The key concept of this approach is the concept of “social action”, introduced at the beginning of the 20th century. M. Weber, and “practices” introduced by K. Marx.
A. Touraine, in his work “The Return of Acting Man,” emphasized that it is necessary to return to the idea that people make their own history, therefore the analysis of social changes is the main goal of sociological research. Social change is possible through collective action, the main vehicle of which is social movements. It is they, according to the French sociologist, who directly destroy the cultural foundations of society. The mechanism of social change is proclaimed to be a social conflict, understood not only as a class conflict, but as a conflict between a variety of different groups, including elite groups. The new industrial society, the sociologist believes, is not so much the result of social laws as the result of the conscious efforts of social groups. However, in his fascination with human activity, A. Touraine goes so far as to assert that there are no laws of social development at all.
A. Giddens, an English sociologist, develops a theory of structuration, in which he tries to combine the study of social structures (stable relationships) and human activity in one theoretical analysis. He believes that studying only structures, without taking into account the acting subject, is pointless, since the properties of social systems are both a means and a result of practice, during which these systems are formed. In contrast to A. Touraine, the English sociologist emphasizes that the history of society is often unintentional, and all human attempts to move towards certain goals and ideals are frustrated. The key, in his opinion, is not the organized activity of people, but everyday practices that both shape and change the fabric of social life.
Polish sociologist P. Sztompka, in his book “The Sociology of Social Change,” strives to create a concept of “social formation” that would combine macro and micro sociological approaches to social change. He assigns the role of “connective tissue” between social structures and individual human behavior to activity and practice. Society, in his opinion, consists not of people and structures, but of real events, in which both actions and social conditions affecting a person (structures) are presented together. Their unity is expressed through the concept of practice. An event is not reducible to its components; it adds something new to the social fabric, since it can change the action and the conditions for its implementation. P. Sztompka pays special attention to the influence of consciousness on the process of social change, noting the possibility of both unconscious actions, spontaneous manifestations of people’s activity, and conscious actions that control practices. He emphasizes that the latter type of social change is increasing in modern society. In his opinion, not only the social system can change, but also the social change itself; it changes its character in the course of the history of society.
An important place in the theory of social change of the Polish sociologist is occupied by the concept social trauma, negative consequences of changes in themselves, regardless of the content and direction of these changes . Social dynamics can have both positive and negative consequences. The latter in one case may be the essence of changes, for example, environmental pollution, escalation of war. In another case, negative consequences are the result of generally positively assessed changes, for example, the transition of the economy to a market organization is accompanied by negative processes of declining living standards of the population; democratization of society can in some cases lead to an increase in deviant behavior. Social trauma manifests itself in the growth of negative socio-psychological phenomena: anxiety, fears, uncertainty about the future, and passivity of the population. P. Sztompka analyzes in his works various types of social traumas, explores the processes leading to such states of society, and describes the practices of overcoming social traumas.
Consideration of approaches to the development of society that developed in sociology of the 19th and 20th centuries. allows you to do the following conclusions. The logic of the development of the concepts of social dynamics shows how sociology gradually freed itself from the influence of naturalism in understanding society. There is a rejection of the schemes of rigid, unambiguous determinism; too many factors, often random, are involved in social processes. They are no longer understood only as linear or cyclical, and an idea is formed of their multidirectionality, multifactoriality and alternativeness. Ideas about the factors of social change are expanding; they are not only diverse, but among them we see both internal to the system and external.
The ideas about the role of conscious efforts in history are being revised. Awareness of the increased role of purposeful and conscious efforts of people in the life of society raises the problem of responsibility both for people who make decisions in politics, economics, and the cultural sphere, and for ordinary citizens who follow these decisions.
Not only social systems are subject to change, but also our ideas about them, and it has been suggested that the mechanisms of social change themselves may be changing.
In conclusion, it should be noted that although there is no unified concept of social change in sociology, thanks to the author of these concepts, a number of concepts and ideas have been introduced that can be used in the analysis of real social processes, some of which will be discussed in more detail below.
10.2 Social changes, social processes
Under social change Sociology refers to differences in the state of a social system over a certain period of time. Social systems can differ in composition (elements), stable interconnections (relations), in value-normative complexes, in the nature of consciousness and self-awareness of people and social groups forming the system, in functions. For example, immigrants may appear in society, changing the composition of urban settlements, as a result of the reform, the number of social institutions may increase or decrease, new social groups with their own subcultures may appear, new ideological and religious movements may arise, existing social institutions acquire new explicit, and more often implicit functions. Finally, the boundaries between social systems may change: organizations may merge into one whole or, conversely, undergo division.
Social changes are single events that characterize the state of a social system, but an event can be regularly repeated, or entail another event, or occur in parallel with other social changes. Such relatively stable series of successive social changes that cause and accompany each other are called social processes. Social processes take place in social systems that maintain a certain stability, since any change presupposes not only something new in the characteristics of the system, but also a certain stability, otherwise we would have to talk not about change, but about its complete destruction. The stability of a changing system is often expressed in the preservation of its identity, that is, in their self-awareness, people or groups that are elements of this system define themselves as belonging to this stable community. Thus, modern Russia is undergoing modernization, which includes a number of social processes, but it retains its Russian identity.
A distinction must be made between social change and change in society. The latter term is broader in scope; it includes, along with social changes themselves, also economic, political, and spiritual changes. Social changes, in the words of the famous American sociologist N. Smelser, are changes that affect the social organization of society. Economic and political organizations are the subject of study of other social sciences, in particular economics and political science.
10.3 Types of social changes and processes
In previous sections of the manual, we looked at specific types of social change. At the level of society as a whole, we highlighted changes such as globalization and Westernization; at the level of groups and social strata, we talked about class struggle and social mobility. Finally, at the micro level, that is, at the level of the individual or small groups, we can talk about processes such as communication, acculturation, etc. Most often, when talking about social changes, we mean development processes. However, development is only one type of social process, along with such processes as adaptation, stagnation and destruction.
The following options can be selected development:
1. in the course of development, the social system acquires new characteristics (elements, relationships, functions), and they are usually assessed positively by society;
2. the development process occurs on the basis of factors internal to a given social system. An example of social development is the process of socialization, during which a person’s personality is formed and his abilities are revealed; or the process of industrialization in Western Europe in the 19th century, during which industry and the working class emerged.
If the process occurs mainly under the influence of external, exogenous factors, such as natural disasters, climate change, conquest, etc., it is more likely adaptive nature. Thus, climate change in North Africa in the first millennium AD led to a change in the agricultural structure of the region; farming was replaced by cattle breeding.
If a social system, while maintaining its existence, gradually loses important qualities, reduces growth rates, dysfunctions are discovered in social institutions, a person begins to experience a feeling of social humiliation, anxiety and fear, we can talk about state of stagnation or stagnation. The latter term is usually applied to economic systems, but is increasingly used in a broader sense as social stagnation.
It's finally possible destruction of the social system Let us remember, for example, the tragic fate of the Mesoamerican civilization, which perished during the European conquests.
It should be immediately noted that the identification of these types of social processes is quite conditional and relative; social systems can simultaneously experience various types of changes, their classification as stagnant or adaptive. for example, will depend on the position of the researcher.
Development processes may differ in the nature of their occurrence. If development proceeds slowly enough, gradually, often, especially at the beginning, and is not realized by people, we can talk about evolutionary and change. An example of such a change can be the same socialization of the individual, or the processes of social mobility leading to a change in the social structure of society, the emergence, for example, of new middle strata in the middle of the 20th century.
However, such calm periods of development can be replaced by fast, sharp, abrupt changes, in this case, we will talk about revolutionary the nature of development processes. The founder of the theory of social revolution is K. Marx, who considered it as the highest form of class struggle, serving as a transition from one socio-economic formation to another. Now the concept of revolution is used to describe not only changes in society as a whole, but also in relation to individual social spheres or phenomena. Modern researchers write about revolutions in science, about revolutions in fashion, about technological revolutions, about scientific and technological revolutions, about political and, of course, social revolutions. In each of these cases, we mean the nature of changes that affect essential aspects of the social system (science, fashion, technology, power, social structure). Such changes occur relatively quickly and are deeply experienced by people, who often assess the events as catastrophic. After revolutions, social systems change so significantly that we have to talk about new social systems (new science, new fashion, new society).
10.4 Progress, regression, crisis
Development processes can differ in their focus; usually there are two types of processes: progress and regression. Progressive development characterized by the following features. Firstly, the social system improves its parameters, for example, the growth rate of industrial production increases, the financial situation of citizens improves, and the level and quality of education in society increases. Secondly, such changes bring the system closer to a state that, according to society, is preferable and is assessed as better, happier, more worthy, more fair.
Regressive processes alienate people from recognized values, make their lives less safe, unstable, and limited in their capabilities. During regressive processes, the social system may find itself in a state of anomie, stagnation and even collapse.
The idea that society can develop progressively, improving its parameters, is very old, we can find it already in the works of ancient thinkers, but this idea became generally accepted in the philosophy of the 18th -19th centuries. In particular, O. Comte believed that his law of three stages testifies to the steady and progressive development of society based on the development of science. K. Marx argued that the basis for progressive changes in society is progress in the development of the material mode of production. E. Durkheim linked the possible improvement of the state of society with the development of the division of labor.
However, by the end of the 19th century, the voices of researchers began to be heard doubting the absoluteness of the idea of progress, since the relativity of characterizing changes as progressive or regressive became obvious. Firstly, the same phenomenon is assessed differently by different groups. For example, the process of enclosure in England in the 18th-18th centuries, which led to the development of English capitalism, is progressive from the point of view of the bourgeoisie, however, for farmers this process destroyed the foundations of their economy and was regressive. Secondly, social changes are often assessed as progressive after the fact, many years after the relevant events, and contemporaries see them only as a manifestation of chaos. For example, the decline in the level of religiosity, the growth of freedom of morals in the 18th -19th centuries. were often regarded by society as signs of a crisis, but we are now inclined to see in this the progressive growth of individualism and personal freedom. The question also arises about the price of progress, since progressive changes are often accompanied by wars, conflicts and require heavy sacrifices from the population.
An important question is about progress criteria. Obviously, such a criterion should be the values that people strive for, but we know that value complexes differ among different people, groups, and social institutions. Therefore, it is necessary to find universal values that everyone agrees with, for example, justice, security of human existence. However, the abstractness of these values immediately catches the eye, because people understand their content differently. Perhaps it should be assumed that the concept of progress applies not so much to society as a whole, but to its individual systems, each of which will have its own criteria for progress. For example, the progressive development of science means an increase in the volume of knowledge and depth of understanding of nature. Progress in technology implies an increase in its usefulness and efficiency. However, there are subsystems, for example, art, morality, where it is quite problematic to talk about progress.
Finally, it can be noted that the unevenness of the processes of social change, an improvement in the situation in one subsystem, say in the economy, may be accompanied by regressive phenomena in another, say, in the sphere of spiritual culture or morality.
All these considerations make many philosophers and sociologists skeptical about the idea of progress, making the idea of crisis the leitmotif of understanding modernity. The concept of crisis does not have an unambiguous definition, however, it can be said that crisis- this is a state of the social system when there are failures in its work, which are assessed extremely negatively by people and are acutely experienced by them as a state of instability, a lack of hope for improvement. We constantly hear about the economic, political and spiritual crisis in modern society. Perhaps these sentiments are caused by the accelerated development of society and the decreasing duration of states of relative social stability.
10.5 From mass action to social movements.
Social processes are realized through the actions of people. Depending on the degree and nature of awareness of goals, norms and conditions of action, we can talk about the following types of them. In case mass action people are each guided by their own interests and motives, but the overall result of such actions may diverge from the intentions of individual people or may even be unconscious. For example, when we go to a store, we make purchases based on our desires and capabilities, without thinking that thousands of people are doing the same. However, the indirect, final result of these decisions may be, for example, an increase in inflation, which will affect everyone, although, of course, no one wanted this. When we come to the bank to make a deposit, just like thousands of people, we do not think about the fact that we are thereby strengthening the national currency. All these are the processes that Adam Smith wrote about as the invisible hand of the market. When deciding on the number of children in a family, we do not think about the consequences of our decision for the process of population reproduction. Mass actions can occur spontaneously, but these actions can also be directed, which is what the state is doing, for example, by introducing maternity capital, it hopes to increase the birth rate, raising interest rates on deposits, and hopes that people will not rush to withdraw money from their accounts.
However, people's actions may have additional characteristics: they may be concentrated in the same space and influenced by the same situation. People still act individually, one by one, each on their own, but spatial proximity and the general situation make such actions collective behavior. An example of such behavior is a crowd, audience, public. One type of collective behavior of a crowd is panic, which arises as a result of social tension caused by political and economic disasters.
Collective Actions- a concept that allows you to describe another type of behavior. Collective actions are characterized by the following.
1. clear formulation of action goals,
2. determination of behavior strategy,
3. division of functions between participants,
4. coordination of different functions,
5. presence of a manager. Such actions are more durable and long-lasting, rational, and involve planning. If we compare collective behavior, say, a fight, acts of vandalism and the rather aggressive behavior of anti-globalization supporters during demonstrations in Quebec, Genoa, etc., then in the first case the actions were spontaneous and were a manifestation of expressive anger and hostility.. In the second case we had deal with a targeted campaign that was supposed to draw attention to the plight of developing countries. Collective action is used to achieve different goals: climbing Mount Everest, training a sports team to win, a workers' strike, scientific research carried out by a group of scientists, robbing a bank.
Types of actions can transform into each other. For example, migration, which is an example of mass action, can be transformed into collective behavior, in the case of a decision to leave the country under the influence of ethnic cleansing, or civil war, it can turn into collective action when a community of people decides to move to another country.
Another example is tourism. It can occur as mass behavior of people, leading to a wide variety of consequences for the economy of host countries, transport and tourism companies. Tourism can lead to collective behavior causing crowds, queues, and traffic jams. Finally, it can become a collective action, say group tourism.
Among collective actions, of great importance are social movements, which are characterized by: 1. the desire for a specific goal, the desire to cause specific social changes, 2. development within informal communities, which often do not have clear membership, organizational hierarchy, or a rigid management system. In modern society, the phenomenon of social movements is very widespread, which is facilitated by:
1 urbanization (the appearance of large concentrations of people interacting with each other);
2 industrialization, which leads to the concentration of masses of workers in factories, here the formation of trade unions, political parties and some religious movements takes place;
3 the massive nature of education brought students together, at the same time, education allows you to better understand situations and formulate common goals;
4 modern technologies facilitate the mobilization of social movements and the recruitment of their participants;
5, the motivation for participation in the movement increases, since in modern society the proportion of dissatisfied people is growing, despair pushes people to organize for a common, joint struggle to improve living conditions, motivation also increases under the influence of activist and progressivist ideology;
6 The key role is played by the democratization of societies, which makes possible the legal existence of the movement and its real influence on decision-making groups. In addition, democracy creates chances for participants in a social movement to really influence society.
There are different types of social movements.
Reform movements strive to change norms and rules of behavior. Most often they affect the law, for example, labor legislation, towards ensuring greater rights for workers, housing legislation, legislation related to the environment. We can also talk about customs and morals, for example, the movement for the protection of animals, the movement demanding a ban on pornography.
Radical movements strive for fundamental changes affecting the foundations of social order and order, as well as multilateral changes. For example. Solidarity movement in Poland, civil rights movement in the USA.
From a historical perspective, there are old and new social movements. In the 19th century, movements prevailed that represented individual segments of the social structure: classes, estates, professions, for example, the labor movement, trade union movements. They sought to mobilize the forces of specific groups; their focus was on material and economic interests. These movements were distinguished by a hierarchical structure, a high degree of organization, and were easily transformed into political parties and trade unions. Now these movements, especially in democratic societies, have become institutionalized and turned into parties, factions in parliament, and pressure groups.
In the 20th century they appear new social movements: environmental, feminist, anti-proliferation, peace movement, anti-abortion movement, anti-death penalty movement, human rights movement, etc. They recruit supporters from different social groups, are aimed at solving a specific problem, they concern the quality of life, personal dignity of a person, self-realization, freedom, peace, that is, universal values. Many of the new social movements are distinguished by much freer forms of organization, are rather decentralized, rely on the principle of voluntariness, and include amateur forms of activity.
A special phenomenon of the 20th century was anti-globalist movements. They are similar to the older movements because they focus on economic issues and oppose transnational corporations. What they have in common with new movements is the desire to represent the interests not of just one group, but of all people.
10.6 Social conflicts
Social processes, realized through the activities of people, can take the form of cooperation, competition and conflict. The latter form has especially attracted the attention of sociologists.
The term conflict (confliktus) is translated from Latin as a clash of opposing interests, views, opinions, serious disagreements, dispute. The most general definition social conflict- this is a hidden or open clash of subjects of social interaction.
There is an independent science conflictology, in which not only types and forms of conflicts are studied, but also technologies for introducing them into a civilized channel are developed, and specific recommendations are given for a faster and more optimal resolution.
In sociology, the topic of conflict was raised back in the 19th century. So G. Spencer believed that social conflict is a form of struggle for existence and is caused by a limited amount of vital resources and natural aggressiveness of a person.
K. Marx considered conflicts as manifestations of contradictions in the social structure of society, which are realized in the behavior of social classes. He believed that conflict is a form of manifestation of class struggle. Class conflicts are based on irreconcilable economic interests, the resolution of which requires a struggle for power (revolution) or changes in the existing system of society (reform).
Fundamentals of the study of social conflicts in the twentieth century. founded by the German philosopher and sociologist Georg Simmel(1850-1918), who viewed social conflict as a permanent state of society in general and individual social groups in particular. He explained the conflictual nature of society by the fact that the renewed content of social life comes into conflict with outdated cultural forms. Within a group, conflict can perform different functions, including acting as a driving force for its development.
The modern interpretation of social conflicts is represented by two different points of view. One belongs to a representative of the Chicago School, Robert Park, who believed that social conflict is simply one type of social interaction along with competition, accommodation and assimilation. Another approach developed by an American sociologist L. Koser and German sociologist R. Dahrendorf considers social conflict as a constant desire of individuals and groups to redistribute status, income, and values. Conflict prevents the ossification of society and opens the way for innovation. Society by its nature is contradictory, diverse and in constant conflict between the new and the old. Change and conflict are not only a necessary evil, but also a necessary condition for the existence of society.
Scientists argue that social conflict manifests itself differently in different social conditions. In open societies where democratic political regimes exist, laws are respected, where problems are raised and discussed publicly, there are alternative programs, the struggle of opinions and conflicts proceed smoothly, without social explosions, in a controlled, evolutionary way, without much loss. These conflicts are regulated. In closed societies, social conflict proceeds latently, is not revealed in the early stages, accumulates, draws in more and more new forces and layers, dividing people into hostile camps, and spilling out to the surface as a riot, uprising, revolution, coup, military violence.
In an effort to understand what social conflict is, it is necessary to correlate this concept with the concept of contradiction. These concepts, on the one hand, cannot be considered as synonyms, and on the other hand, cannot be opposed to each other. Contradictions, opposites, differences are necessary, but not sufficient conditions for conflict. Opposites and contradictions turn into conflict when the forces that bear them begin to interact. Thus, conflict- this is a manifestation of objective or subjective contradictions, expressed in the confrontation of the parties. Under with social conflict usually refers to the type of confrontation in which the parties seek to seize any resources by threatening opposition individuals or groups, their property or culture. In conflictology, terms such as “dispute”, “debate”, “bargaining”, “rivalry”, “controlled battles”, “attack”, “indirect or direct violence” are used to describe conflicts.
Social conflict always requires at least two opposing parties. Their actions are usually aimed at achieving mutually exclusive interests, which leads to a clash between the parties. That is why all conflicts are characterized by strong tension, which encourages people to change behavior in one way or another, adapt, or “protect themselves from the given situation.” In order to more accurately understand the nature of the conflict, it is necessary to determine its boundaries, that is. external limits in space and time. Three aspects of determining the boundaries of a conflict can be distinguished: spatial, temporal, and intrasystemic.
Spatial boundaries conflicts are usually determined by the territory in which the conflict occurs. A clear definition of the spatial boundaries of the conflict is important mainly in international relations, which is closely related to the problem of the parties to the conflict.
Temporal boundaries– this is the duration of the conflict, its beginning and end. In particular, the legal assessment of the actions of its participants at a given point in time depends on whether the conflict is considered to have begun, continues or has already ended. This is especially important for correctly assessing the role of those newly joining the conflict.
The beginning of a conflict is determined by objective acts of behavior directed against another participant, who recognizes these acts as directed against him and counters them. This somewhat complicated formula means that the conflict will be recognized as having begun if:
1) the first participant consciously and actively acts to the detriment of the other participant; Moreover, by actions we understand both physical actions and the transfer of information;
2) the second participant realizes that these actions are directed against his interests;
3) the second participant takes active actions directed against the first participant.
Intrasystem aspect development of the conflict and determination of its boundaries is as follows. Any conflict occurs in a certain system, be it a family, a group of colleagues, a state, the international community, etc. The conflict between parties within the same system can be deep, extensive or private, limited. Determining the intrasystem boundaries of a conflict is closely related to a clear identification of the conflicting parties from the entire circle of its participants. Participants in the conflict can be such figures as instigators, accomplices, organizers of the conflict, as well as arbitrators, supporters, advisers, opponents of certain persons in conflict with each other. All these persons are elements of the system. The boundaries of conflict in a system thus depend on how wide the circle of participants involved is. Knowledge of the intrasystem boundaries of the conflict is needed in order to influence ongoing processes, in particular, to prevent the destruction of the system as a whole.
Sociologists note a variety of functions social conflicts. The everyday assessment of any conflict is negative. The conflict is assessed by public opinion mainly as an undesirable phenomenon. In general, this is what it is - at least for one of the parties. Thus, up to 15% of working time is lost due to conflicts in production. There is another point of view, according to which conflict is not only inevitable, but also a useful social phenomenon.
Authors who recognize conflict as undesirable consider it a destroyer of a normally functioning social system. In its original basis, conflict is not inherent in the system and is usually exhausted when those forces appear that will return stability to it. It follows that already in the conflict itself there is an incentive for the emergence of institutions to maintain the system in a stable state. This includes legislative activity, and adopted procedures for resolving various disputes, and political meetings, where party conflicts are resolved in the “war of words”, that is, debates and discussions, and the market, where competing interests between buyers and sellers are resolved through contracts, etc. . It follows from this that even those experts who consider conflict a negative phenomenon see some positive features in it.
Another scientific tradition generally views conflict not as an aberrant and transitory phenomenon, but as a permanent and even necessary component of social relations. This tradition goes back to Aristotle, T. Hobbes, G. Hegel, K. Marx, M. Weber. According to this view, the fact of any shortage in society is in itself sufficient to cause conflict; each person in any group tries to increase his share of scarce resources and, if necessary, at the expense of others. And if among the seekers of territories and resources we also discover a struggle for leadership, power, and prestige, then conflict is simply inevitable.
According to L. Coser, conflict within a group can contribute to its unity or restoration of unity. Therefore, internal social conflicts that affect only such goals, values and interests that do not contradict the accepted principles of intra-group relations, as a rule, are functionally positive in nature.
At the interpersonal level, the functions of conflict are also contradictory. The problem is that in most cases, the functions of conflict are associated with its negative consequences, since they lead mainly to the violation of certain forms of communication, norms, standards of behavior, etc. The positive function of interpersonal conflicts has been less studied. The constructive functions of this type of conflict are as follows. Firstly, interpersonal conflict can help mobilize the efforts of the group and the individual to overcome critical situations that arise during joint activities. Secondly, the “developmental” function of conflict is expressed in expanding the sphere of knowledge of an individual or group, in the active assimilation of social experience, in the dynamic exchange of values, standards, etc. Thirdly, conflict can contribute to the formation of anti-conformist thinking behavior of an individual. Finally, resolving this type of conflict leads to increased group cohesion.
In addition to these, the conflict performs an informational function, showing the position of people to the group, recording their diverse interests. The signaling function of a conflict is manifested in the fact that it notifies others about the problems that exist in a given community; without this, conflict resolution is impossible. Finally, the differentiating function of conflict is manifested in the fact that it can contribute to the differentiation (separation) of groups and social institutions, which can lead to the improvement of their activities.
There are various types of social conflicts. Depending from social spheres, where they manifest themselves we can distinguish economic, political, including interethnic, everyday, cultural and social conflicts themselves.
It is worth paying attention to economic conflicts, the essence and degree of prevalence of which change noticeably during the transition of society to a market economy. In fact, the market itself is a field of constant conflicts, not only in the form of competition or ousting the enemy, but, above all, in the form of trade transactions, which are always associated with dialogue, and even with various actions aimed at forcing a partner to a profitable agreement . Along with this, other acute conflict situations arise in a market economy: strikes, lockouts, crises in monetary circulation, etc. The market generally presupposes the emergence of labor conflicts, which are regulated by specially developed rules. Although labor conflicts exist in any social system, they are most characteristic of a market economy, which are based on the purchase and sale of any product, including labor.
A feature of large-scale economic conflicts is the involvement of broad sections of the population in their sphere. For example, a strike by air traffic controllers affects the interests of not only aviation companies, but also thousands of passengers. Therefore, the institutionalization of labor conflicts, including the prohibition of certain types of strikes, is an important means of stabilizing public life.
Conflicts in the political sphere are common. Their peculiarity is that they can develop into large-scale social events: uprisings, riots, and, ultimately, civil war. Many modern political conflicts are also characterized by an interethnic aspect, which can acquire independent significance.
Conflicts that take place in the social sphere, the healthcare system, social security, and education are closely related to the two named conflicts - economic and political. Often these conflicts do not affect the foundations of a given social system, and their scale is not great. The same can be said about everyday conflicts between people at their place of work or place of residence.
By character all conflicts are divided into open (contact) - polemics, violence, class struggle, raiding, and hidden (non-contact) - intrigues, conspiracies, wars of secret diplomacy.
By temporary indicators distinguish between conflicts that last from a few minutes and hours, days, months, to many years, for example, the hundred-year war between France and England in the Middle Ages.
By composition of participants and the level at which I arise t and the conflicts that occur include interpersonal, intergroup, class, interethnic, interstate, interfaith, and ideological conflicts. Now they write about world and global conflicts.
Other types of classification of conflicts are possible: by the number of participants, by the degree of resolution, by motives, etc. It is clear that further classification is possible within any type of conflict. Let us present one of them related to interethnic conflicts. Firstly, they highlight conflicts of uncontrollable emotions. We are talking about riots, pogroms. Such conflicts are characterized by the uncertainty of the goals of the organizers of the riots and the randomness of specific events. Often the external signs of such events hide behind the true reasons that are not fully clarified. This is confirmed by the analysis of the dramatic Fergana events of 1989, when the Meskhetian Turks were subjected to pogroms that were not involved in anything, as well as events in the former Yugoslavia, which largely defy rational interpretation.
Secondly, it is possible conflicts of ideological doctrines. They are associated with political, national, religious movements and have more or less ancient historical roots. National demands are formed and developed by ideologue theorists. Supporters of a certain idea are ready to sacrifice their very lives for it, which is why such conflicts tend to be long-lasting and fierce. These types of conflicts include disputes over the ownership of territories, over their state or administrative status, the return of previously deported peoples, etc.
Thirdly, there are conflicts of political institutions. These are mainly disputes about borders, relationships, authorities, jurisdiction, and the role of political parties and movements. “Wars of laws” and “parades of sovereignties” are among the conflicts of this particular type.
Finally you can select completely non-institutionalized conflicts, conflicts, the course of which is not resolved by any mechanisms. If in institutionalized conflicts there are rules common to the parties, according to which the problem is resolved, then in the second type of conflicts the possibility of achieving agreement between the parties is minimal or completely absent, and the struggle is carried out without rules. Between these poles there is a wide variety of types of confrontation that are at least partially regulated.
Social conflict has the following stages of occurrence. On pre-conflict stage manifestations of dissatisfaction and disruption of normal interaction are visible. The state of people is characterized by frustration: anxiety, collapse of hope, a feeling of impossibility of achieving a goal. Frustration can be resolved in two ways: retreat, the conflict is, as it were, driven inwards and does not unfold, or aggression towards the parties to the conflict. At this stage, the cause of the conflict is understood, goals are set, allies are sought, and means are chosen. Analysis and search for solutions begins, and often it is at this stage that the problem can be solved.
Actually immediate conflict begins with an incident, a certain situation that serves as a kind of impetus for the deployment of a series of actions by the parties to the conflict. This stage is characterized by the desire to change the behavior of the subjects of the conflict, which can manifest itself in an open clash and take the form of debates, sanctions, protest, and violent actions. At this stage, sympathizers and allies join the parties, and the conflict is expanding. Direct conflict can also be realized through hidden actions; in this case, rumors are spread, opponents are misinformed, intrigues are woven, and deceptive actions are committed. The goal is to impose unfavorable erroneous actions on the enemy and make it easier for yourself to win.
The third stage is conflict resolution. It involves the cessation of external actions. Conflict resolution can be realized in two forms: complete resolution of the conflict, when one of the parties suffers defeat, the cause of the conflict is eliminated, and partial resolution, when the scale of the conflict is limited, the parties try to find a way to an agreement. In ways full resolution is rivalry and competition, the use of force. In ways partial resolution conflict can be a compromise (mutual concessions), adaptation (the desire to smooth out contradictions by changing one’s position), cooperation (an attempt to jointly develop a solution), negotiations, mediation (using a third party), ignoring (avoiding the conflict), arbitration (appeal to the authorities ), management (regulating the process to minimize losses and maximize gains)
At the fourth stage of the conflict, the parties monitor the implementation of decisions on the conflict.
