The civilized theory of the development of human society and its theorists. Civilizational and formational approaches

The term “civilization”: (from Latin civilis – civil, state)

1. As a synonym for culture (A. Toynbee).

2. As a certain stage in the development of local cultures, characterized by their degradation and decline (O.

Spengler).

3. As a stage in the historical development of mankind, following barbarism (Toffler, F. Engels).

One of the modern definitions of this concept is this: civilization is the totality of material and spiritual achievements of society.

In fact, civilization is understood as a cultural community of people who have a certain social genotype, a social stereotype, who have mastered a large, fairly autonomous, closed world space and, because of this, have received a strong place in the world scenario.

The civilizational approach proceeds from the fact that in human history there are several independent formations, civilizations, each of which has its own, completely independent history. The entire history of mankind is an endless creation of many of the same processes. Each civilization is based on special “character traits”, “symbols of the soul”, cultural values, which it expresses, develops and embodies in the process of its life cycle. The development of civilizations here is interpreted as cyclical, as the historical cycle of civilizations. The general trend in the development of civilizations is gradual expansion of their degrees of freedom, rejection of one-dimensionality, search for the optimal balance of cyclicality and progression in the development of civilizations, recognition of the possibility of the birth of new civilizations through the influence of random factors (external environment, supersensible and superrational genius, the role of chance, etc.). Civilizations are characterized by two levels: regional and national (local). For example, French, German, Russian

There are various theories of civilization. Among them, two main varieties can be distinguished.

Theories of the staged development of civilization (K. Jaspers, P. Sorokin, W. Rostow, O. Tofler, etc.) consider civilization as a single process of progressive development of humanity, in which certain stages (stages) are distinguished.

Local theories (N.Ya. Danilevsky, A. Toynbee) proceed from the fact that there are separate civilizations, large historical communities that occupy a certain territory and have their own characteristics of socio-economic, political and cultural development.

Both theories—stage and local—make it possible to see history differently.

In general, the civilizational approach presents man as the leading creator of history, great attention pays attention to the spiritual factors of the development of society, the uniqueness of the history of individual societies, countries and peoples.

Theory of local civilizations

The peak of popularity of these theories occurred in the first half of the 20th century. Theories of local civilizations study large historically established communities, cat. occupy a certain territory and have their own characteristics of socio-economic and cultural development. By turning to the study of eastern cultures and the cultures of written backgammon, European thinkers hoped to discover in them those values ​​and guidelines that the Europeans themselves lacked. Thus, the rejection of Eurocentrism as an ideology and scientific principle was the main reason for the emergence of theories of cultural-historical types. Spengler German philosopher Oswald Spengler (1880-1936) in his work “The Decline of Europe” attacks the idea of ​​​​the unity of the worlds. culture. namely the culture of the phenomenon. a universal category in the study of society. Consideration of culture next. directions: 1) edges as the basis for integration or differentiation; 2) identification roles in maintaining social stability, continuity, dynamics of development. His cyclical model is historical. the process is modified by the recognition of the unifying role of “world preaching religions” (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam), cat. and yavl. the highest values ​​and historical guidelines. process. He put forward the concept of the cat. is considered not as a single universal human k-ra, but as split into 8 k-r, each. from cat grows on the basis of St. own a unique “proto-phenomenon” - a way of “experiencing life”: Egyptian, Indian, Babylonian, Chinese, Greco-Roman, Byzantine-Arabic, Mayan, Russian-Siberian; secondly, as subordinate to rigid biological. rhythm that determines the main phases of its internal. development; birth and childhood, youth and maturity, old age and decline. Based on this biological Rhythms in each culture have 2 main stages: the stage of ascent and descent (civilization). The first of them is characterized by an organic type of evolution in all spheres of man. life - social and political, religious. and ethical, artistic. and the scientific, second - the "mechanical" type of evolution - the "ossification" of the organic life of the crop and its decay. The entire contents of the herb are completely exhausted by individual ones, alternating, single, unrelated, one suppressing the other. With such an understanding, there can be no talk of any integrity of the world society.

Danilevsky Slavophile, Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky (1822-1885) His book “Russia and Europe”.

In the world breed, closed species with a set of characteristics are distinguished - from ethnographic to geographical. Each type is closed, its existence is similar to life and the cycles of existence of living organisms. D. questions the idea of ​​a single historical line. and cult. development of society, substantiates the thesis about glory. exclusivity. D. argues that history is not a continuous process, it is composed. of changing other cultural-historical types, each of the cat. lives own life, has its own destiny. Affirms the “self-sufficiency” and originality of cultures created by ethnic groups. To-ry in a mature state - subjugate biological. the life of the ethnos and therefore the true figures of world history. not peoples, but races. "evolutionary principle", according to cat. next class should be richer than the previous one, since it is able to assimilate the results achieved by its predecessors. In total, there are 13 cultural and historical types in history: Egyptian, Chinese, Old Semitic, Indian, Iranian, New Semitic, Greek, Roman, Arabic, European, Peruvian, Mexican. and Slavic. Relationships between cults. types can be friendly, competitive and hostile - depending on the degree of their maturity and their inherent internal principle. D. came to the idea that elements of the crop, when entering a foreign cultural environment, are rethought and acquire new functions. Danilevsky proves the idea of ​​cultural identity by comparing the historical paths of Russia and Europe. Weak point there was a distinction between cultural types. Taking into account small cultures that have disappeared and exist today, ethnographers already count thousands of independent x types. On the other hand, the boundaries between them in space and time are much more difficult to draw than D. imagined. Being an “evolutionist,” D. emphasizes the role of internal. and underestimates the role of external development impulses. Protesting against the unilinear scheme of history and the extremes of “Eurocentrism,” D. rejected the idea of ​​historical. unity of people. Meanwhile, Approval of a single legal, economic. and information space on the planet is becoming an increasingly urgent imperative for human survival.

Toynbee Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975) - English. historian, sociologist, cultural philosopher, diplomat and public figure,

A. Toynbee’s concept is set out in the 12th volume of “A Study of History.” He dedicated his work to reviewing the world. stories, cat. he builds on the basis of the idea of ​​self-closed, separate formations-civilizations. The true objects of history are phenomena. society, civilization. His theory is the culmination. point in the development of theories of “local civilizations”. Toynbee - commitment to the idea of ​​multilinear development of sovereign cultures. He argued that the thesis about the unity of civilizations is a fallacy. The author counts from 21 to 26 independent c-th, the only thing that, in his opinion, can hold these diverse formations together is religion. T. carried out research based on ideas about closed discrete units, on the cat. historical falls apart existence of man and cat. he calls it "tsiv-mi". T. recognizes a person’s ability for independent self-determination, and dynamics c-th determined by the law of "call and response", according to cat. every step forward is associated with an adequate response to the challenge of history. situations. The adequate answer is the merit of the “creative minority”, which first rules by the power of its authority, and then turns into a dominant minority. The emergence of c-i, its growth, decline and decay are associated with the ability or inability of the “creative minority” to find an adequate response to the challenge of history. In contrast to the life cycle of culture according to Spengler, the cycle of civilization according to Toynbee is not such in the strict sense of the word. The life of civilization is rather a continuous forward movement along the path spiritual development, on which traps constantly appear that can break and destroy the c-yu. Moving along this path is difficult, but there is always a chance to overcome all obstacles, and not to miss this chance is the task of the individuals who make up a given society. It is h-k who is responsible for the growth of his society.

Pros and cons of the approach: Pros: 1) its principles are applicable to the history of any country or group of countries. 2) the idea of ​​history as a multilinear, multivariate process; 3) the approach does not reject, but assumes the integrity, unity of the people of history. 4) highlighting certain criteria for the development of civilization allows us to assess the level of achievements of countries, peoples and regions 5) the approach focuses on important role in the historical process to human spiritual, moral and intellectual factors.

The weakness of the civil methodology. approach lies in the amorphous nature of the criteria for identifying types of civilization. This selection is carried out according to a set of characteristics, which, on the one hand, should be of a general nature, and on the other, would allow us to identify specific features characteristic of many societies. The approaches should not be viewed as mutually exclusive, given the positive aspects of each approach.

For a long time in Russian literature and science there was only one approach to considering and studying the past of mankind. According to him, the entire development of society is subject to changes in economic formations. This theory was put forward and clearly substantiated by Karl Marx. But today, history is increasingly viewed from a more wide range development factors, bringing together formational and civilizational approaches to the history of origin and development

There are many explanations for this phenomenon, but the main one is that Marx’s theory is one-sided and does not take into account many factors and historical information that cannot but be taken into account when studying such a multifaceted phenomenon as society.

Formational and are based in their following on the following factors:

1. formational - based on economic development and property rights;
2. civilizational - takes into account all elements of life, from religious to the relationship between the individual and the government.

It is worth noting that, as such, a unified concept has not been developed in the civilizational approach. Each researcher also takes into account only one or two factors. Thus, Toynbee identifies sixteen based on the development of society within a single territory from its inception to its peak and decline. In contrast, Walt Rostow identifies only 5 civilizations, the basis of which is the emphasis on the “population - consumption” ratio, the highest of which is the state of mass consumption.

As can be seen from the last theory, the formational and civilizational approaches quite often overlap with each other, which does not seem strange. This situation is due to the fact that they all characterize the history of society from only one point of view. Thus, both formational and civilizational approaches to the study of society cannot fully reveal its emergence and development at all stages, based solely on one method.

Thus, the most complete of them are the theory of formations of Marx and the theory of civilizations of Toynbee. At the same time, most researchers have recently become increasingly inclined to the idea that if we combine the key parameters of these concepts, then the formational and civilizational approaches are able to fully substantiate why the development of science, economics, culture and other spheres of public life took the path that can be traced through the pages of history.

The above is due to the fact that Marx’s theory of 5 stages (formations) of human development is based mainly on the type of economy and the development of tools. Toynbee's theory effectively complements it, revealing social, religious, cultural, scientific and other factors. It is worth noting that on early stages Toynbee paid more attention to the religious component, which determined their opposition. Over time, the situation has changed, and today the formational and civilizational approaches to the study of society are divided only conditionally.

It is worth noting that these methods of comprehending history have both disadvantages and advantages. Thus, the theory of formations has a detailed study of all aspects of the five stages economic history any community. The disadvantage is the one-sided understanding of the processes occurring in states (namely, they are studied by Marx’s theory), expressed in the fact that only European countries were identified as the subject of study. Experience of Arabic, American and African world was not taken into account. The “father” of the theory of civilizations, Toynbee, based his judgments on approximately the same factor.

Formational and civilizational approaches to the history of human development in this moment are opposed, which is fundamentally wrong. This attitude to the methods of studying the essence of improving society does not leave the opportunity to most accurately consider all the deep processes taking place in society. Therefore, to prevent the formation of blind spots, formational and civilizational approaches should be applied simultaneously.

To develop an objective picture of the historical process, science needs to rely on certain general principles, methodology. This will make it possible to organize all the material accumulated by researchers and create effective descriptive models. Next, we will consider the formational and civilizational approaches (a table briefly describing them will be given at the end of the article).

General information

For a long period, subjectivist or objective-idealistic methods of studying history were used. From the standpoint of subjectivism, the process was explained by the activity of great people: kings, kings, leaders, emperors and other major political figures. In accordance with this, mistakes or, conversely, smart calculations provoked one or another event. The interrelation of such phenomena ultimately determined the course and result of the historical process. According to the objective-idealistic concept, the decisive role was assigned to the influence of superhuman forces. In particular, we're talking about about providence, the will of God and so on. With this interpretation historical process became purposeful. Under the influence of these superhuman forces, society steadily moved towards a predetermined goal. In this case, major figures acted only as an instrument, a means of these impersonal factors.

Periodization

It was determined by the solution to the question of the nature of the driving forces of the process. The most common periodization was according to historical eras. In particular, they highlight Ancient time, Antiquity, the periods of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, as well as the New and Modern times. In this sequence, the time factor was quite clearly expressed. At the same time, the periodization lacked qualitative substantive criteria for identifying these eras.

New concept

To overcome the shortcomings that the methods of studying history had, to put the process, like other humanitarian areas, on scientific basis in the mid-19th century Marx tried. He formulated a new concept of materialistic description and explanation. It was based on 4 main principles:

• The unity of humanity and, as a consequence, the historical process.
• Patterns. IN this issue Marx was based on the recognition of influence in the process of stable, general, repeating, significant connections, as well as human relations and the results of people's activities.
• Determinism. This principle presupposes the recognition of the existence of dependencies and relationships of a cause-and-effect nature. According to Marx, from the whole variety of phenomena it is necessary to single out the defining, fundamental ones. He considered one of the basic methods of producing various material goods.
• Progress. Marx believed that historical development represents the progressive improvement of society, which rises to a higher level.

Materialistic Explanation: Description

Its basis is a formational approach to history. Marx, in his reasoning, proceeded from the fact that with the progressive, natural development of humanity as a single whole, it all needs to go through certain stages. Thus, the key position in describing and explaining the driving factors of the process and periodization is occupied by the socio-economic formation. Actually, it represents the stages that Marx defined. In accordance with the thinker’s definition, a socio-economic formation is presented in the form of an association of people at a certain level of development. At the same time, society is characterized by peculiar features. The term "formation" was borrowed by Marx from natural science.

Formational approach to history: a framework

As mentioned above, Marx gave a key place to the method of production of various material goods. This or that technique is distinguished by a certain degree and nature of the development of productive forces and corresponding interactions. In the latter, Marx called property relations as the basis. The complex of production relations forms their basis. Legal, political and other interactions and institutions are built on top of it. These, in turn, correspond to forms of social consciousness. These include, in particular, morality, art, religion, science and others. Thus, the socio-economic formation contains all the diversity of human life at different stages of development.

The main stages of human development

According to the formational approach, there are five stages of human progress:

• communist (in which socialism acts as the first phase);
• capitalist;
• feudal;
• slaveholding;
• primitive communal.

Transitions are carried out on the basis of a social revolution. Its economic basis is the deepening conflict between production forces that have reached a new level and a conservative, outdated system of relations. This confrontation manifests itself in the form of increased social antagonism, an intensification of the struggle between the oppressed, demanding an improvement in their lives, and the dominant classes, interested in ensuring the preservation of the existing system.

Result of the revolution

As a result, the conflict leads to a change in the dominant layer. The victorious class begins transformations in various areas of society. As a result, prerequisites are being formed for the formation of a new structure of legal, socio-economic and other relationships, a new consciousness, and so on. As a result, a new formation appears. Based on this, in his theory Marx attached significant importance to revolutions and class confrontation. The struggle was recognized as the main driving force of history. At the same time, the revolution was characterized by Marx as the “locomotive” of progress.

Positive features

The concept described above has been dominant in Russia for the past 80 years. The advantages of the formational approach are that it forms a clear model that explains development, using certain criteria, and makes its driving forces clear. As a result, the process becomes natural, objective, and progressive.

Flaws

However, the formational approach to explanation and cognition also has disadvantages. Both domestic and foreign critics point out its shortcomings. First of all, they say that history with this approach takes on a unilinear character. Marx formulated the theory as a generalization of the European path of development. However, he saw that some states did not fit into it. However, he did not carry out detailed development. He simply classified such countries as the “Asian mode of production.” On its basis, as Marx believed, a new formation is being formed. However, in Europe itself there are states that are not always possible to correlate with such a scheme. In addition, the formational approach is characterized by a strict link between events and the production method, the economic system of relations. The decisive role is given to extrapersonal, objective factors. At the same time, the approach places man as a subject of history on a secondary level. As a result, the personal content of the process is diminished.

Secondly, within the framework of the formational approach, the importance of conflict relations, including violence, is absolutized. The description of the process is carried out mainly through the prism of the struggle between classes. Opponents of this concept, when comparing the formational and civilizational approaches, for example, say that social conflicts, being, undoubtedly, an integral component of the life of society, do not play a leading role in it. This situation, in turn, requires reassessment and political interactions. The structure of the formational approach contains elements of social utopianism and providentialism. In accordance with the above diagram, the development of the process must inevitably pass through specific stages. Marx and his students spent a lot of effort proving the inevitability of the coming of the communist era. It assumes that each person contributes his wealth according to his abilities and receives material benefits according to his needs. The utopian nature of this concept is reflected in the last decades of the existence of the socialist system and Soviet power.

Civilizational approach to history

It is to a certain extent opposed to what was described above. A civilizational approach to history began to take shape in the 18th century. But it reached its most complete development only towards the end of the 19th and 20th centuries. The most prominent supporters of this approach include Weber, Spengler, and Toynbee. Among Russian supporters, Sorokin, Leontyev, and Danilevsky stand out. The features that distinguish the formational and civilizational approaches are quite obvious. The philosophy and concepts of these systems are aimed at slightly different areas of people's lives.

Characteristic

Formational and civilizational approaches have structural differences. In particular, the main element of the latter is the cultural level of development of society. The word "civilization" has Latin roots and in translation means state, civil, urban. Initially, this term was used to designate a certain level social development, which came in people's life after a period of barbarism and savagery. The distinctive features of civilization are the presence of writing, the formation of cities, statehood, and social stratification.

Advantages

The relationship between formational and civilizational approaches in this sense is unequal. The latter undoubtedly has much more advantages. In particular, the following are worth noting:

1. The ability to apply the principles of a civilizational approach to historical development any state or groups of countries. They are focused on understanding the development of society in accordance with the specifics of the regions. Thus, the formational and civilizational approaches differ in the level of their applicability. In this case, the latter can be called universal.
2. Presenting history itself as a multivariate, multilinear process.
3. The presence of certain highlighted criteria. Thanks to them, researchers have the opportunity to assess the level of progress in a particular state, region, nationality, as well as analyze their contribution to world development.

The civilizational approach presupposes the integrity of human history. At the same time, the systems formed in the process of development can be compared with each other. Thanks to this, it becomes possible to widely apply comparative historical research methods. This, in turn, involves considering the development of a region, a people, a state not as an independent unit, but in comparison with others. Thus, formational and civilizational approaches have different depths of understanding of processes. The latter allows us to more clearly record the features of development.

Finally

The formational and civilizational approaches were described in detail above. The table below briefly illustrates their features.

Formational and civilizational approaches place different systems and values ​​in the leading positions. In the second case great importance has a social organization, culture, religion, political system. These elements have a close relationship with each other. Each component reflects the uniqueness of a particular civilization. It should be noted that, despite the changes occurring due to external and internal influences, the base and core remain unchanged. The civilizational approach to the study of human development identifies certain cultural types. They are established communities that occupy a particular area and have features of social and cultural progress that are unique to them.

The fundamental development of the civilizational analysis of society belongs to the Russian historian of the 20th century. N. Danilevsky, English historian of the 20th century. A. Toynbee, German philosopher of the 20th century. O. Spengler. A. Toynbee viewed humanity as a set of individual civilizations that unite countries and peoples, connected by a common mentality, stable stereotypes of thinking and feeling. The most important basis for the spiritual consolidation of civilization is the character religious beliefs, which made it possible to identify five major civilizations: Chinese, Indian, Islamic, Russian, Western. At the same time, the development of civilizations is local, closed in nature, passing through a number of successive stages: origin, flourishing, breakdown, collapse. A. Toynbee assigns the main role in the growth of civilizations to the elite, the creative minority - the bearer of the impulse of life. History constantly poses “challenges” to civilization. The creative minority responds to “challenges” and carries with it the inert creative majority (the crowd). The uniqueness of “challenges” and “responses” determine the specifics of each civilization and the essence of its social values. As soon as the creative minority proves unable to adequately respond to “challenges,” it turns into a dominant minority, imposing its power by force rather than by authority. Then the mass, the majority, destroys civilization. The ambiguity of the use of this category requires characterizing the most essential features that underlie all civilizations.
The emergence of civilization is a qualitatively new stage in the history of mankind, from where its true history begins. The foundation of civilization is social wealth in the unity of material and spiritual values, which is expressed in culture, covering all aspects of human life in all the diversity of its properties and needs. The connection and interdependence of culture and civilization are so great that many philosophers identify these concepts, which is not accidental. Civilization and culture are one: there is no civilization without its culture, but there is no culture without civilization. The difference between them is that civilization creates the preconditions cultural process, regulates it. In turn, culture creates the conditions for the development of civilization, being the creativity of the new. In addition, civilization includes both positive and negative conditions of human existence. Unlike civilization, culture represents the sphere of values. The core of the development of civilization, its criterion, and indicator of maturity is the degree of development of human potential. Human civilization goes through certain stages of development and at the same time is characterized by regional uniqueness.
It is possible to identify such stages in the development of human civilization as cosmogenic(man does not exist as an individual); technogenic(the power of technology prevails, personal interests prevail over public ones); anthropogenic(the person takes center stage). At the same time, civilization can be limited both by national boundaries (Chinese civilization) and regional ones (Western civilization). But this or that type of civilization as a sociocultural formation is characterized by three factors: the originality of the development of the generic, socio-natural qualities of a person, the characteristics of the natural environment and the specific social conditions of the emergence and development of this or that civilization. Summarizing the highlighted features, civilization could be defined as the integrity of the material and spiritual life of people within certain spatial and temporal boundaries. This is a broader concept than a socio-economic formation. In contrast to formation, civilization is a concrete, living social formation, endowed with diverse features, and the formational division of society gives civilization social certainty and historical concreteness. Concluding the consideration of the essence of the materialist model of society, it should be emphasized that within the framework of this concept the problem is solved differently driving forces of social development. History as a process and result of social development is carried out through the activities of people pursuing their goals. And it is people who are the driving force behind all social changes. In the materialist model, the decisive, leading role is given to the masses (people) as the creators of material and spiritual values, while the role of individuals, including outstanding ones, in their influence on the historical process is not denied, but they are not considered as the only driving force

38. SPECIFICITY OF SOCIAL DETERMINISM A physical analysis of society involves clarifying the specifics of social determinism, the relationship between the laws of society and the activities of people, and the role of the subjective factor in history. Society is the result of the purposeful activities of people. But this activity is carried out under certain objective conditions, in a certain social environment, with which people are forced to constantly reckon. Without this, their activities to change and create the surrounding world - natural and social - may be unsuccessful, that is, they may lose their most important feature - productivity, => exists general laws social development and laws of nature, which lies in the fact that they are objective.
But no matter how great the independence of people from objective circumstances, the natural course of social development, they are not a blind instrument of historical necessity. They themselves create history, they themselves create the conditions for their existence. Consequently, the laws of social development are the laws of human activity. The conditions for their emergence, functioning and disappearance are created by people. In other words, social laws are implemented only through the activities of people, which is their fundamental difference from the laws of nature. Moreover, the laws of social development are not simply implemented by the subject after their awareness, but include human activity into a system of objective social determination.
Revealing the specifics of social determinism, it is necessary to show the role of the subjective factor in the social process. The subjective factor is the conscious, purposeful activity of people (masses, classes, individuals, other communities) aimed at changing, developing and maintaining social conditions. People, as conscious beings, within the framework offered by objective circumstances, themselves choose the line of their behavior. This is due to the fact that historical necessity is always revealed in the form of various alternatives, possibilities, of which only one is realized, while the others remain unrealized. The decisive role in choosing one of the possibilities belongs to the subjective factor. The inevitability of people choosing one of the possibilities indicates that the laws of the functioning and development of society are not something introduced into people’s lives from the outside, but are objective laws of their own activities. Since different people act, having different interests, in whose actions the role of random factors is great, social laws are statistical in nature, these are laws of mass phenomena. They, in contrast to the reliable nature of dynamic laws, have a probabilistic nature. These are laws - tendencies; they are not implemented in each individual case, but appear as the resultant of numerous intersecting forces, aspirations, and actions.
Please note that the application of synergetics - the science of the general laws of self-organization of complex systems - to the analysis of social dynamics contributes to the development of new approaches to society and the role of the subjective factor in its development.
Synergetics explains the evolution of society using the concepts of “self-organization”, “nonlinearity”, “chaos”, “openness”. It shows that the imbalance of social processes determines the development of a society that is characterized by instability, when relatively slow processes are replaced by an exacerbation of instability leading to the collapse of the social system. From the point of view of synergetics, in this process of evolution of a super-complex system, the role of chance is great, which is associated to a large extent with the activity of a person who has the right to choose. Synergetics reveals the role of the individual in a new way, emphasizing that “small” influences, but properly organized, can be more effective than powerful ones. The enormous efforts that people make to achieve goals that contradict their own trends in the development of society may turn out to be meaningless or harmful. But even a single effort by an individual can be more significant for the social system. The role of the individual in history manifests itself as a “small” influence that pushes the social system towards one of the development options favorable to society. In this regard, we can talk about the increasing role of the subjective factor and such subjective qualities as responsibility, interests, ideals, and values. The solution to the problem of the relationship between the conscious activity of people and objective law, subjective and objective factors is opposite to fatalism, which portrays necessity in the form of fate (fatal, inevitable force) and denies the role of the subjective factor, and voluntarism, which absolutizes the role of this factor in history, turning human will into the creator of reality and denying social laws and necessity in society.

40.NATURE AS AN OBJECT OF PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS. Nature is something that exists independently of consciousness person material existence, characterized by its inherent laws of origin, functioning and development. This is the totality of the natural conditions of existence of man and society. Nature is divided into living and nonliving. Levels of organization inanimate nature: vacuum, elementary particles, atoms, molecules, macrobodies, planets, stars, galaxies, metagalaxy (part of the Universe accessible to modern astronomical research methods). Levels of organization living nature: molecular level (nucleic acids, proteins), cellular, organismal, population, species, biocenotic (the totality of all living things on a given piece of land or body of water), biosphere. These levels are connected both genetically and structurally and functionally. They are hierarchically subordinate. Laws of a higher level are not reducible to laws of a lower level. Philosophical concepts: develop a general idea of ​​the world, and therefore of nature; about the ways of its knowledge; about the place and role of man in the world, in nature. During the development of culture, systems of ideological views changed, and data about nature accumulated. Worldviews influence the formulation of cognitive tasks and the promotion of new ideas. They largely determine the interpretation of fundamental concepts and theories, guide and regulate scientific research. A special – dialectical – interpretation of life is proposed by I. Kant. He gives special meaning activity of living organisms, as well as transformation of external factors under the influence of internal characteristics of organic bodies. This determines the feasibility of their organization. Expresses a dialectical view of the Universe, puts forward a new cosmogonic hypothesis (Kant and Laplace, who built a theoretical model of the emergence of order solar system from the chaos of the primary nebula, can be considered the first “synergetics”). Kant creates a global concept of the emergence, development and death of worlds in the Universe. In ideological terms, it is important that he considers the emergence of life on Earth to be the same natural process as the formation of the planet. Hegel considers nature as an other being of the spirit, from which it follows that it does not develop by itself, but can be represented as a system of interconnected stages of development spiritual basis of the world. The mechanistic picture of the world dominates in science until the advent of the electrodynamic picture of the world (Faraday, Maxwell). The concept of a field was emerging, which became fundamental in subsequent physics. Special meaning for the life sciences of the 19th century. acquired cellular thorium (T. Schwan) and the theory of evolution (C. Darwin). The laws of development of living nature are established. Charles Darwin's concept contains serious arguments against mechanism, vitalism, and teleologism. On its basis, a natural science interpretation of the relationship between necessity and chance in biological processes is proposed. The approval of the theory of natural selection contributes to the spontaneous introduction of the principles of the material unity of the world and its development into the foundations of biology, and the widespread dissemination of natural-scientific materialism. IN late XIX V. physics approaches the need to study nature at the micro level. Quantum is being developed theory atom, particle physics appears. The place of the purely mechanical dualism of emptiness and atoms is taken by quantum wave dualism.

42. MATERIAL AND PRODUCTION SPHERE AS AN OBJECT OF PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS. Modern philosophy views society as the total activity of people aimed at producing, maintaining and reproducing their lives. At the same time, society is not a simple collection various parts and elements, but a single integral organism, an open self-developing system. The first ideas about the systemic nature of society originated in ancient philosophy in the form of a general concept of orderliness and integrity of being. The greatest contribution to the development of this problem was made by the thinkers of the 19th - 20th centuries: O. Comte, K. Marx, M. Weber. In society as a complex structured whole, four large subsystems (spheres) can be distinguished: material-production, social, political and spiritual . These areas perform different functions and have their own specifics. The material and production sphere (the economic existence of society) is associated with the activities of people to create material conditions for preserving and maintaining their lives; social (social being) - the sphere of relationships between various social groups regarding their living conditions; the political sphere (political being) is associated with the regulatory activities of people, ensuring the coherence and integrity of society; the spiritual sphere is the production of knowledge, experience, values, i.e. the production of information.
Material and production sphere of society. The material production sphere has a complex structure, including material production as the core of this sphere, as well as the production-regional complex and material infrastructure (material base of science, everyday life, education, healthcare, etc.). In other words, the material and production sphere is a complex, multi-quality formation.
Productive forces characterize the active attitude of people to nature and represent a system of various elements that transform the substance of nature into material goods necessary for the existence of people. This system includes material elements (means of production) and a personal factor (a person with his knowledge, production experience and skills).
The main element of the productive forces are the people who carry out the production process, since the tools of labor are created, set in motion and improved by human hands, and only human knowledge, his initiative, and talent are the basis for technical improvements. It is man who acts as an active initiative principle, and no other element of the productive forces possesses this quality. Production relations are a system of relations between people that develop in the process of producing material goods. They should be distinguished from technological relations, without which the production process is impossible and which are based on the technological division of labor in the production process (relationships between workers and engineers, sections and workshops
Productive forces are the more variable side of the mode of production. They cannot remain unchanged, since people, the means of production, even if no one sets themselves the goal of changing and developing them, are constantly being improved in the process of resolving the contradiction between the personal and material elements of the productive forces

44.ROLE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL REVOLUTION This revolution is being implemented as a process of informatization of all spheres of society and human activity; it radically changes material production and worldview, life and education, and socio-economic structures. The basis of this phenomenon is information technology, which is based on computers - high-speed computers and makes it possible to rationally technologize intellectual activity, i.e. the process of creating, transmitting, processing information and especially its highest form - knowledge. Modern information systems are becoming the basis of almost all higher modern technologies. Biotechnology, space technology, nuclear, energy, technology of new materials, waste-free production, etc. impossible without the use of computerized information systems. Becoming also generators of knowledge, they turn into special intellectual tools for solving complex technological, practical, and often theoretical problems.
Consequently, the informatization of society is a process of progressively increasing use of information technology for the production, processing, storage and dissemination of information and especially knowledge. In this process, social, technological, economic, political and cultural mechanisms are fused together. Therefore, it outgrows the framework of a technological problem and becomes the center of philosophical research, since we are talking about changes in the sphere of social and economic relations, culture, spiritual life and everyday life, the system of personal and interpersonal relationships. The information revolution leads to the formation of a new state of society, which can be called informational. The ideas of global reconstruction of society on an information basis were first expressed in the 60s - 70s of the 20th century. representatives of the technocratic trend in philosophy (R. Aron, D. Bell, O. Toffler). Main characteristics of this society: modern information technology is produced, functions and is available to everyone in society, which qualitatively changes the technical basis of material and spiritual production; there is a process of accelerated automation and robotization of all areas of production and management; Radical changes in social structures are taking place, resulting in an expansion of the sphere of information activities and services, where at least half of the working population is employed. The social structure becomes twofold: the technocratic elite and the middle class; power passes to the information elite; the consequence of these changes is a radical change in culture, social connections, family and household relations; the information society is neutral to any social system

46. ​​SOCIAL SPHERE OF SOCIETY, GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS, ITS STRUCTURE AND ESSENCE. Society is not just a sum of individuals; there are various interconnected groups of people operating in it, i.e. social communities. The totality of historically established relatively stable and interacting social communities constitutes the social sphere of society, its social existence. This complex and multifaceted education, which includes communities of different nature, scale, and social role. Their identification can be based on various characteristics - class, national, gender, age, professional, territorial, etc. Therefore, the social sphere includes such interconnected and interacting communities as classes and social strata, professional and industry groups, ethnic communities (clan, tribe, nationality ), demographic groups, territorial communities, production teams, families and other entities. At the same time, in the social sphere of society one can isolate macrostructure(for example, people, classes, nations) and microstructure, including such small social groups as family, work groups, educational groups, etc.
A significant role in the social sphere of society, if we bear in mind the previous history of mankind, belonged to such a community as classes, since it is in class relations that economic relations find their fullest expression. This community is based on the economic interests of people, exerting a decisive influence on all other elements of the social structure. According to modern ideas, classes are historical formations; they exist only at certain stages of history. Their occurrence is due to objective reasons and, above all, the development of production. Classes naturally arise at a certain stage of material production, in the process of social division of labor (separation of cattle breeding from agriculture, crafts from agriculture, mental labor from physical labor), which contributed to the strengthening of exchange, the growth of social wealth, the social differentiation of people and, ultimately, the emergence of a surplus product, private property and the split of society into two main classes: slaves and slave owners. The class as a social community is characterized by a number of signs, which are highlighted in the well-known definition of classes. The main thing is the qualitative characteristics of the class, that is, classes differ in place in a historically defined system of social production, in relation to the means of production, in their role in the social organization of labor, in the methods of obtaining and the size of the share of social wealth. Role main feature differences between classes belongs to the relation to the means of production, i.e. to the relation of property (possession, use, disposal). This feature determines all other differences: the place of classes in the system of production relations (exploiter or exploited); their role in the social organization of labor (organizer or performer), differences in methods (labor or non-labor), as well as the amount of income received. It should be noted that a class is characterized precisely by a set of characteristics, and not by any one. Each of them, taken separately, does not provide a complete description of the class and can distort it. It is important to take into account that this definition of classes reflects their basic, economic characteristics. But class differences generated by historically specific methods of production are also manifested in social activity and organization, moral character and culture, lifestyle and living conditions, level of education, etc. Thus, a class is a complex and multifaceted community.

48. THE STATE AS THE CORE OF THE POLITICAL SPHERE, ITS ESSENCE. In political science, there are several definitions of the concept of “state”. But, having analyzed the literature at my disposal, I believe that one of the best definitions was given by K.S. Gadzhiev: “ State“is an institution that organizes the joint life of the population in a certain territory and ensures proper social order there, maintaining the appropriate norms and rules of human coexistence.” 1 Among the issues regarding the state considered in the scientific literature, many theories of its origin attract attention. The most common are: theological (F. Aquinas); patriarchal (Aristotle, Filler, Mikhailovsky); patrimonial (Haller); contractual (T. Hobbes, D. Luck, J.-J. Rousseau, P. Holbach); theory of violence (Dühring, L. Gumplowicz, K. Kautsky), psychological (L.I. Petrazhitsky); Marxist (K. Marx, F. Engels). IN AND. Lenin, G.V. Plekhanov 2. But in this test work There is no goal of disclosing their content, so I will list essential features of a state: territory: laws and rules, norms and regulations sanctioned by the state are valid only in a certain space, having corresponding restrictions in regulating the behavior of citizens, the presence special management apparatus, that is, a special group of persons professionally engaged in the functions of managing and regulating public relations; sovereignty: only the state can issue laws, norms and rules for the population permanently residing on its territory; in addition, the state has the right to cancel decisions and decrees of non-state political institutions and organizations that contradict government decisions. Thus, the state establishes civil status for people living on its territory, which means both the recognition by the authorities of their own responsibility to us, and the establishment of certain rights and obligations to the state for citizens;

49. PROBLEM OF CLASSIFICATION OF STATES. Each country in the world has its own unique characteristics, but the presence of features common to other states is the basis for identifying certain types of countries.
Country type is an objectively formed and relatively stable complex of conditions and development features inherent in it, which characterizes its role and place in the world community at a certain stage of development.
The type of a country forms a set of conditions and development features that, in any important (decisive) typological features, on the one hand, make it similar to countries similar to it, and on the other hand, distinguish it from others. The existence of types of countries, their historical evolution is a consequence of the fact that countries develop at different rates, in different conditions and in different directions. A scientifically correct typology requires the maximum possible differentiation of indicators and the search for their unique combinations. The task is to find out what is similar and typical for a specific group of countries from others. At the same time, the differentiation of countries may not be limited to the main typical characteristics, but may continue further in order to clarify the reasons for the presence of these characteristics.
There are different typologies that take into account many indicators that characterize the level of economic and social development of countries, as well as historical and political aspects. Depending on the attribute that forms the basis of the typology, the following classifications of countries are distinguished according to the form of government according to political structure by area; according to form government system by ideological orientation by the form of the state regime.
In addition to the above main types of typologies, there are classifications based on distance from the sea, natural resource potential, types of population reproduction, level of urbanization, national composition of the population, level of development of science and technology, and many others.
Classification of countries by form of government
The state order of any country is characterized primarily by the form of government. Form of government - the organization of the supreme state power, the procedure for the formation of its bodies and their interaction with the population.
The form of government influences the socio-political life of countries, traditions, and sometimes the mentality of the population, but does not determine either the level of socio-economic development or the characteristics of the internal political state of countries: for example, monarchies (for example, in Europe) are often more democratic than some republics.
There are 4 forms of government in the world: republic, monarchy, Commonwealth countries and jamahiriya. [Appendix A] Republic - (Latin res - business and publis - public) - a form of government in which sovereign rights to power belong either to all capable citizens or to the majority of them. Under a republican structure, government on behalf of the people is carried out by representative bodies that are elected either by direct voting or on the basis of procedures for indirect expression of the people's will (through proxies, electors, etc.).
Types of republics: parliamentary - the parliament has supremacy, before which the government is collectively responsible for its actions, the role of the president in public administration yields to the role of parliament, and the government is headed by the prime minister. The government remains in power as long as it has the support of a majority in parliament. In its absence, the government resigns or the head of state dissolves parliament. Germany, Italy, India, etc. belong to this type of republic; presidential - in the hands of the president the powers of the head of state and head of government are combined (USA, Brazil, Argentina, etc. presidential-parliamentary - the roles of the president and parliament are balanced (Russia, Ukraine, etc.).
In the world, 3/4 of the countries are republics. This form of government is considered the most progressive and democratic. Most countries in Latin America, almost all former colonies in Asia, 49 out of 52 countries in Africa, etc. are republics. The oldest form of government, previously inherent in the states of the world, is monarchy. The monarchical form of government has experienced significant changes over the course of history, but its essence has mostly remained unchanged: the concentration of power in the hands of one person, with certain features in specific states. As a rule, the power of the monarch is lifelong and is inherited, but there are two monarchies that have elements of a republic: Malaysia is a federal constitutional monarchy, where the monarch is elected for 5 years by the sultans who are part of the state; The UAE is a federal absolute monarchy, in which the head of state - the president - is elected by the Supreme Council of Emirs, also for 5 years. There is a special situation in the Vatican, where the Pope, who has the secular title of Most Serene Prince, is elected for life to the college of cardinals, among which only cardinals under the age of 80 have the right to vote, and their number should not exceed 120 people.
Monarch's title different countries various: Sultan (Brunei, Oman), Pope (Vatican), Emir (Kuwait, Bahrain), Duke (Luxembourg), Emperor (Japan).

52. PUBLIC PSYCHOLOGY, IDEOLOGY AS SPHERES OF PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS, FEATURES OF THEIR INTERACTION, ROLE IN SOCIETY. Social psychology represents an unsystematized spontaneously the established set of spiritual formations, which include ideas, feelings, moods, customs, traditions, habits, illusions, misconceptions that arise among various social groups. Social psychology is the mass consciousness of people, which directly reflects the everyday conditions of their lives; it performs a communicative function. Stable elements of social psychology (feelings, group character) contribute to the preservation and consolidation of social structures, and dynamic elements (mass psychological reactions) stimulate their changes. Therefore, the role of social psychology in society is contradictory. Ideology unlike social psychology - it's a belief system, ideas, reflecting the essence of social relations, people's living conditions and expressing the fundamental interests of classes and other social communities. Ideology represents theoretical consciousness, which is developed by specialists, class ideologists. This is what distinguishes it from social psychology, which is formed mainly spontaneously. Progressive, conservative, and reactionary ideologies are distinguished depending on what interests and what class they express. Ideology, explaining the phenomena of social life, shapes the worldview of people, contributes to the development of ideas about the values ​​of life, its ideals, and determines the system value orientations and thereby determines the general line of behavior of people, the direction of their activities. It should be borne in mind that the levels and spheres of social consciousness do not exist in isolation, but are interconnected and interpenetrate.

53. FORMS OF SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS, THEIR RELATIONSHIP, CRITERIA.....

Civilizational concept of development of societies.
- 06/08/08 -

A. The civilizational concept of the development of societies is a concept formed on the basis civilizational approach based on identifying the potential or immediacy of a collision of certain state, ideological, religious or national-cultural interests on a global or large regional scale.

The formative provisions for the civilizational concept of the development of societies are
- subjects of the world order: dominant states (empires or “nation-states”), groups (blocs) of states or civilizations (religiously and culturally identical states); civilizations can consist of either one state, a “nation-state”, or a group of states, and it is not excluded that the most powerful actors in the world may be “nation-states”;
- criteria for correlating (dividing) the states of the world and the subjects of the world order: ideology, democracy, culture, etc.

B. The civilizational concept of the development of societies is most effectively expressed by the theory of the once famous political scientist S. Huntington, which is often called the “concept of the clash of civilizations,” since it is believed that the main potential of modern conflicts lies in the relations between civilizations.
S. Huntington's concept of the clash of civilizations argues that civilizational differences are the basis of contradictions in the post-Cold War world. During the Cold War era, “nation-states” mostly belonged to one of the three worlds (the free world, the communist bloc and the third world), but also to specific civilizations. Now nation-states are increasingly defining their interests and their identity in civilizational terms, and many experts, political scientists, and even ordinary people in the West fear the Islamic cultural threat (even more than the former Soviet ideological threat).

S. Huntington's concept of the clash of civilizations offers a new model for understanding social development modern world based on the approval of the following provisions.
Firstly, the paradigm of a single world is unrealistic (but the following statement by S. Huntington is very interesting: “only global power is capable of creating a global civilization”), and the paradigm of the Cold War (three worlds: the free world, the communist bloc and the third world) and dual existence countries (division into poor and rich countries, democratic and non-democratic...) are outdated.
Secondly, modernization and economic development contribute to strengthening cooperation all more countries and give rise to a common modern culture. But modernization is not the same as Westernization; moreover, many states prosper without being Westernized societies. The countries of the world are not becoming homogeneous and similar to each other; differences are developing, now primarily of a religious and cultural nature.
Third, there are growing concerns about Islamic fundamentalism in many Western countries; There is even an opinion that after the decline of Western power there will follow, and this has already begun, a retreat of Western culture.
Fourthly, since the conflict of ideologies is almost completed, the main criterion for the division of states is the religious and cultural aspect; religion, culture becomes a determining force that motivates human actions and mobilizes people, people are increasingly inclined to “die for culture” than for some other, perhaps more pragmatic interests (the following statement by S. Huntington is interesting: “faith and family, blood and stories are what people identify with and what they will fight and die for."
And it is concluded that the natural successors of the main subjects of the old world were civilizations that consist of religiously and culturally united states.

In the concept of the clash of civilizations, intercivilizational problems (arms proliferation, human rights and immigration) come to the fore, displacing the problems of superpowers. At the same time, it is believed that, firstly, the West has one position on these problems, and most of other major civilizations of the world - others, secondly, the borders between civilizations almost completely correspond to the limit to which countries of specific civilizations go in protecting human rights, thirdly, growing immigration is causing increasing concern in Europe and America, fourthly, These provisions become the source of current and future conflicts, as well as whether they will certainly pass along “civilizational fault lines.”

Very interesting is S. Huntington’s reasoning that the “civilizational divide” is beginning (may) to pass through the United States: if the United States does not become multicultural and ceases to adhere to its liberal-democratic position, then, S. Huntington does not exclude, it may cease to exist.
The point is that historically, US unity has been based on European culture and democracy. In the past, the US severely restricted local culture and successfully absorbed millions of immigrants from many countries who adapted to European culture. However, subsequently the demands for the rights of African Americans and other national groups were specialized. Even the ideology of “multiculturalism” appeared. The Clash of Civilizations concept concludes that the demands for special rights for certain groups and the development of multiculturalism contribute to the clash of civilizations within the United States, and it is not known how the United States will develop when more than half of the population is of African American and Hispanic descent. Can the United States become truly multicultural or will it suffer from an internal conflict of civilizations? - this is the question that S. Huntington’s reasoning leads to. On the other hand, the question arises as to whether there will be de-Westernization of the United States, and if it happens, will this mean de-Americanization?..

At the same time, the following provisions are obvious in Huntington’s theory:
- the civilization model is not absolutely universal,
- the world is “saturated” with Western culture, and its influence is growing, although Western values ​​are not comprehensive and not widespread everywhere, moreover, some of them are not suitable for a number of countries,
- there are intra-civilizational contradictions.

Despite the fact that the concept of the clash of civilizations by S. Huntington has a very solid potential for persuasion and the ability to interpret a number of historical facts in one’s favor, many experts oppose its arsenal with specific targeted arguments. For example, as R. Bartley defined, the essence of the problem new era- this is to achieve a balance between real politics and morality (which is more significant than emphasizing the facts of fundamentalism and traditionalism, and more correct than reasoning of a national conflict nature).

Note: A. Toynbee’s research relates to a plural-cyclical understanding of the development of society (see: “