Social progress

test

1.1 Criteria and signs of social progress

All societies are in constant development, in the process of changes and transition from one state to another. At the same time, sociologists identify the main forms of movement of society and modernization. First, let's look at the essence of the progressive and regressive directions.

Progress (from Latin - moving forward, success) means development with an upward tendency, movement from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. It leads to positive changes in society and manifests itself, for example:

In improving the means of production and work force;

In the development of the social division of labor and the growth of its productivity;

In the new achievements of science;

In improving the living conditions of people.

Progress criteria are declared:

1. Complicated social organizations of society (G. Spencer),

2. Changes in the system of social relations and the type of regulation of social relations (Tennis),

3. Changes in the nature of production and consumption (W. Rostow, D. Bell),

4. The degree of society's mastery of the elemental forces of nature, expressed in the growth of labor productivity, the degree of liberation of people from the yoke of the elemental forces of social development (K. Marx).

Scientists believe that an important sign of social progress is the growing trend towards human liberation - that is, exemption:

1.from suppression by the state;

2. from the dictate of the collective;

3. from any exploitation;

4. from the isolation of living space;

5. from fear for their safety and future.

In other words, this is a growing trend towards expansion and increasingly effective protection throughout the world. civil rights and freedoms of people.

Progress can be seen in human relationships themselves. More and more people understand that they must learn to live together and abide by the laws of society, must respect other people's living standards and be able to seek compromises, must suppress their own aggressiveness, value and protect nature and everything that previous generations have created. These are encouraging signs that humanity is steadily moving towards a relationship of solidarity, harmony and goodness.

So, world social progress today includes:

· Growth of well-being and social protection of people;

· Weakening of confrontation between people;

· People's desire for peace and cooperation;

· Approval of political democracy;

· Growth of morality, humanity, spirituality of people;

· Improvement of human relations themselves;

• increasing liberation of a person;

N.I. Kareev: the main areas of sociological creativity

Like most sociologists of his time, Kareev is a strict evolutionist. The essence of the historical process, according to Kareev, lies in the interaction of personality and environment ...

N.K. Mikhailovsky on social progress

The idea of ​​social progress is not new. Many thinkers have addressed this issue - from Heraclitus and Empedocles to K. Marx and F. Engels Spirkin A.G. Philosophy. M., 2002. S. 720 .. In the history of social thought, perhaps, there was not a single major thinker ...

Signs social institution in christianity

Each social institution has both specific features and common features with other institutions. The following signs of social institutions are distinguished: attitudes and patterns of behavior (for the institution of the family - attachment, respect ...

There are several hypotheses explaining the progress of morality: 1) In tolerant societies, people's energy is directed towards cooperation, not struggle among themselves. Therefore, more moral societies are more economically efficient ...

Progress and regression in morality

Throughout history, morality has always been the main condition for the socialization of the individual, taking it beyond the limits of purely natural significance. The problems of moral progress and its criteria are located at the junction of various sciences: history and ethics ...

Modern methods of social forecasting

The basis for the formation of forecasts is static information and an information array - the concept of scientifically determined characteristics and factors that comprehensively characterize the forecasting object ...

Social progress

Social progress

society change social progress Sociology began with attempts to unravel the "meaning" of history and establish laws social change... The founders of sociology, O. Comte and G. Spencer, set themselves the goal of achieving an understanding of ...

Social progress

The essence of any process of reality is the development of dialectical systems that form this process. The development of human society is, first of all, the development of the dialectical system "society - nature" ...

Auguste Comte (1798-1857), having developed a three-stage model of the development of society (religious, metaphysical and positive stages), believed that modern society is on the verge of transition to the third stage ...

Social progress and social modernization of society

By its nature, social development is subdivided into evolutionary and revolutionary. The nature of this or that social development depends primarily on the method of social change ...

Statistical reporting

Development economic reforms in Russia sets new tasks for state statistics in the field of methodology and organization of statistical observation ...

The structure of social interactions

Problematic social action introduced by Max Weber. He gave his following definition: “Social is an action that, in accordance with its subjective meaning, includes attitudes towards that ...

Management of social development of the organization

Quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the level of development, state, trends and directions of social dynamics, used in planning to assess the compliance of the actual situation with scientifically grounded requirements ...

Factors and stages of the formation of a social institution

Among common features a social institution can be attributed: - the allocation of a certain circle of subjects entering into relations in the process of activity ...

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND YOUTH POLICY OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

KYRGYZ-RUSSIAN SLAVIC UNIVERSITY

Faculty of Economics

on subject "Philosophy"

"Criteria of Social Progress".

Completed Art. gr. М1-06: Khashimov N.R.

Teacher: Denisova O. G.

Bishkek - 2007

Introduction. ……………………………………………………………… 3

1. Social progress... Progress and regression. ……………..4

2. Social progress - idea and reality …………… ... 8

3. Criteria for progress.

Social progress criteria ……………………… ..12

Conclusion ………………………………………………………… ..20

List of used literature …………………………… .22

Introduction

The idea of ​​social progress is a product of the New Age. It means that it was at this time that the idea of ​​the progressive, upward development of society took root in the minds of people and began to form their worldview. There was no such idea in antiquity. The ancient worldview, as you know, was of a cosmocentric nature. This means that the man of antiquity was coordinated in relation to nature, space. Hellenic philosophy, as it were, inscribed man into space, and the cosmos, in the minds of ancient thinkers, was something abiding, eternal and beautiful in its order. And man had to find his place in this eternal space, and not in history. The ancient perception of the world was also characterized by the idea of ​​an eternal cycle - a movement in which something, being created and destroyed, invariably returns to itself. The idea of ​​eternal return is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy, we find it in Heraclitus, Empedocles, and Stoics. In general, the movement in a circle was considered in antiquity as ideally correct, perfect. It seemed to perfect ancient thinkers because it has no beginning and end and takes place in the same place, representing as if immobility and eternity.

The idea of ​​social progress takes root in the Age of Enlightenment. This era raises the mind, knowledge, science, freedom of man on the shield and from this angle assesses history, opposing itself to previous eras, where, in the eyes of the enlighteners, ignorance and despotism prevailed. The enlighteners in a certain way understood their contemporary era (as the era of "enlightenment"), its role and significance for man, and through the prism of modernity so understood, they viewed the past of mankind. The opposition of modernity, interpreted as the onset of the era of reason, to the past of humanity, contained, of course, a gap between the present and the past, but as soon as an attempt was made to restore a historical connection between them on the basis of reason and knowledge, the idea of ​​an upward movement in history immediately arose. about progress. The development and dissemination of knowledge was viewed as a gradual and cumulative process. The accumulation of scientific knowledge that took place in modern times served as an indisputable model for such a reconstruction of the historical process. They also served as a model for the mental formation and development of an individual, an individual: being transferred to humanity as a whole, it gave the historical progress of the human mind. So, Condorcet in his "Sketch of the historical picture of the progress of the human mind" says that "this progress is subject to the same general laws that are observed in the development of our individual abilities ...".

The idea of ​​social progress is the idea of ​​history, more precisely - world history humanity *. This idea is designed to tie the story together, to give it direction and meaning. But many thinkers of the Enlightenment, substantiating the idea of ​​progress, strove to consider it as a natural law, blurring in one way or another the line between society and nature. The naturalistic interpretation of progress was their way of imparting an objective character to progress ...

1. SOCIAL PROGRESS

Progress (from lat. progressus- movement forward) is such a direction of development, which is characterized by the transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. The merit of advancing the idea and developing the theory of social progress belongs to the philosophers of the second half of the 18th century, and the socio-economic basis for the very emergence of the idea of ​​social progress was the formation of capitalism and the maturation of European bourgeois revolutions. By the way, both creators of the initial concepts of social progress - Turgot and Condorcet - were active public figures pre-revolutionary and revolutionary France. And this is quite understandable: the idea of ​​social progress, the recognition of the fact that humanity as a whole, in the main, is moving forward in its movement, is an expression of the historical optimism inherent in advanced social forces.
Three characteristics characterized the original progressive concepts.

First, it is idealism, that is, an attempt to find the reasons for the progressive development of history in the spiritual beginning - in the infinite ability to improve the human intellect (the same Turgot and Condorcet) or in the spontaneous self-development of the absolute spirit (Hegel). Accordingly, the criterion of progress was also seen in the phenomena of a spiritual order, in the level of development of one or another form of social consciousness: science, morality, law, religion. Incidentally, progress was noted primarily in the field scientific knowledge(F. Bacon, R. Descartes), and then the corresponding idea was extended to social relations in general.

Secondly, a significant drawback of many early concepts of social progress was the non-dialectical consideration of social life. In such cases, social progress is understood as a smooth evolutionary development, without revolutionary leaps, without backward movements, as a continuous ascent in a straight line (O. Comte, G. Spencer).

Thirdly, the upward development in form was limited to the achievement of any one chosen social system. This rejection of the idea of ​​unlimited progress was expressed very clearly in Hegel's statements. He proclaimed the pinnacle and culmination of world progress in the Christian-German world, affirming freedom and equality in their traditional interpretation.

These shortcomings were largely overcome in the Marxist understanding of the essence of social progress, which includes the recognition of its contradictoriness and, in particular, the moment that one and the same phenomenon and even the stage of historical development as a whole can be simultaneously progressive in one respect and regressive. , reactionary in the other. This, as we have seen, is one of the possible options for the state's influence on the development of the economy.

Consequently, speaking about the progressive development of mankind, we mean the main, main direction of the historical process as a whole, its resultant in relation to the main stages of development. Primitive communal system, slave-owning society, feudalism, capitalism, the era of socialized social relations in the formational cut of history; primitive pre-civilization, agricultural, industrial and information-computer waves in its civilizational cut are the main "blocks" of historical progress, although in some of its specific parameters the subsequent formation and stage of civilization may be inferior to the previous ones. So, in a number of areas of spiritual culture, feudal society was inferior to slave society, which served as the basis for the enlighteners of the 18th century. to look at the Middle Ages as a simple "break" in the course of history, ignoring the great advances made during the Middle Ages: the expansion of the cultural area of ​​Europe, the formation of great viable nations there in the neighborhood of each other, finally, the huge technical successes of the XIV- XV centuries. and the creation of prerequisites for the emergence of experimental natural science.

If we try to define in general terms causes social progress, then they will be the needs of man, which are the product and expression of his nature as a living and no less a social being. As noted in chapter two, these needs are diverse in nature, character, duration of action, but in any case, they determine the motives of human activity. In everyday life for thousands of years, people did not at all set their conscious goal to ensure social progress, and social progress itself is by no means some idea (“program”) originally embedded in the course of history, the implementation of which constitutes its innermost meaning. In the process of real life, people are driven by the needs generated by their biological and social nature; and in the course of realizing their vital needs, people change the conditions of their existence and themselves, because each satisfied need generates a new one, and its satisfaction, in turn, requires new actions, the consequence of which is the development of society.

As you know, society is in constant flux. Thinkers have long pondered the question: in what direction is it moving? Can this movement be likened, for example, to cyclical changes in nature: after summer comes autumn, then winter, spring and again summer? And so for thousands and thousands of years. Or, perhaps, the life of a society is similar to the life of a living being: an organism born into the world matures, becomes mature, then grows old and dies? Does the direction of development of society depend on the conscious activity of people?

Progress and regression

The direction of development, which is characterized by the transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, is called in science progress(a word of Latin origin, literally meaning forward movement). The concept of progress is the opposite of the concept regression. Regression is characterized by a movement from the highest to the lowest, degradation processes, a return to obsolete forms and structures.

Which path does society take: the path of progress or regression? The answer to this question determines people's perception of the future: does it carry better life or does it not bode well?

Ancient greek poet Hesiod(VIII-VII centuries BC) wrote about five stages in the life of mankind. The first stage was the “golden age”, when people lived easily and carelessly, the second - the “silver age”, when morality and piety began to decline. So, sinking lower and lower, people found themselves in the "Iron Age", when evil and violence reign everywhere, and justice is violated. Probably, it is not difficult for you to determine how Hesiod saw the path of mankind: progressive or regressive?

Unlike Hesiod, the ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle viewed history as a cyclical cycle repeating the same stages.

The development of the idea of ​​historical progress is associated with the achievements of science, crafts, arts, the revitalization of social life in the Renaissance. One of the first to put forward the theory of social progress was the French philosopher Anne Robert Turgot(1727-1781). His contemporary is a French philosopher and educator Jacques Antoine Condorcet(1743-1794) wrote that history presents a picture of continuous change, a picture of the progress of the human mind. Observing this historical picture shows in the modifications of the human race, in its continuous renewal, in the infinity of centuries, the path that it followed, the steps that it took in striving for truth or happiness. Observing what the person was and over

what he has become at present will help us, Condor-se wrote, to find the means to secure and accelerate the new successes for which his nature allows him to hope.

So, Condorcet sees the historical process as the path of social progress, in the center of which is the upward development of the human mind. Hegel considered progress not only as a principle of reason, but also as a principle of world events. This belief in progress was also adopted by K-Marx, who believed that mankind is moving towards an ever greater mastery of nature, the development of production and the development of man himself.

XIX and XX centuries. were marked by turbulent events that gave new "information for thought" about progress and regression in the life of society. In the XX century. sociological theories appeared that abandoned the optimistic view of the development of society, characteristic of the ideas of progress. Instead of them, theories of a cyclical cycle, pessimistic ideas of the "end of history", global ecological, energy and nuclear disasters are proposed. One of the points of view on the issue of progress was put forward by the philosopher and sociologist Karl Popper(born in 1902), who wrote: “If we think that history is progressing or that we are forced to progress, then we are making the same mistake as those who believe that history has a meaning that can be in it open, not attached to it. After all, progress means moving towards a certain goal that exists for us as human beings. This is impossible for history. Only we, human individuals, can progress, and we can do this by protecting and strengthening those democratic institutions on which freedom, and at the same time, progress depends. We will achieve great success in this if we become more aware of the fact that progress depends on us, on our vigilance, on our efforts, on the clarity of our concept regarding our goals and a realistic choice of such goals. "

2. Social progress - idea and reality

The degree of satisfaction with the social structure can be considered the most important sociological characteristic. But real customers are not interested in this characteristic of our society.

What kind of social structure do citizens need? Here we have, especially in recent times, unusual ambiguity.

The search for stable criteria for the correspondence of the social structure to the aspirations of people, step by step, narrows the range of possible solutions. There remains only a reductionist option - to find a natural scientific basis for the derivation of criteria for assessing the social structure.

Social self-organization is the result of the behavior of intelligent people. And the muscles of people are controlled by their brain. The most plausible model of the brain today is the idea of ​​a behavior optimizer brain. The human brain chooses the best next step from a set of possible options based on a prediction of the consequences.

The quality of predicting consequences distinguishes intelligent behavior from unreasonable - human unreasonable or animal. The depth and volume of causal relationships taken into account by humans are incommensurate with the capabilities of animals. How this separation occurred is a separate question. Moreover, in the field of social relations, the accuracy of forecasts is poor.

From the concept of biological species as self-organizing systems, competing under conditions of limited resources and being in a random stream of destructive external influences, the spectrum of powers of which is unlimited, and the frequency of appearance decreases with increasing power, it follows that the goal function of the optimization problem solved by the brain is to maximize the mass of matter. organized into species-specific structures. If biological species enter into competition, then, all other things being equal, the one whose brain deviates from maximizing the mass of the species will lose.

Man has withstood biological competition, which means that the human brain initially maximized the mass of the "man" species.

The ability to predict the development of the situation led to a change in the objective function. A certain functional is maximized from the number and from the degree of protection from destructive external influences, the value of which increases with the growth of each of the arguments. Let's call this functional the potential of humanity.

The reliability of the forecast, decreasing with increasing depth in time, is not controlled by a person, which often leads to obvious losses. This gives rise to two extreme positions regarding the acceptability and usefulness of using the forecast in choosing the best next step. According to these positions, there are always two trends in human society, two parties - "rationalists" and "traditionalists". "Rationalists" believe that (in a mild form) it is permissible to act on the basis of their own forecast. "Traditionalists" argue that interfering with the "natural" (read - "traditional") order is harmful. Strong supporters of both positions can cite enough historical facts to prove their case.

The noted feature of human psychology gives rise to a specific wave process "saw of social development" at the level of human society.

As a starting point for our consideration, let us take the socio-political crisis - the well-known state of human society.

The main goal achieved by uniting people in social structures is to gain in the degree of protection from destructive external influences due to the socialization of part of their resources. Therefore, the main function of public structures is to ensure the efficient use of socialized resources. The organization of society should be adequate to the chosen way of using resources.

A socio-political crisis develops when a discrepancy is revealed between the organization of society and the preferred way of using socialized resources by a significant part of people.

Over the past ten years, Russian society has been on the downward path of the "saw of social development." The efficiency of using socialized resources is low. There is an open competition for ideas. "What to do?" - the main question. The social weight of the "rationalists" is growing. There is no clear choice of society yet. And if none of the ideas gains a decisive advantage, then people will entrust the management to a specific person - a leader, a leader. This is an emergency exit, fascism, protection from chaos, a hopeless war between each and every one.

If any of the proposals manages to get enough massive support, they will begin to creep out of the crisis along the chosen path. At this point, the idea that received support is based on a close and, most likely, accurate forecast of the development of the situation. For some time, it has been possible to solve the inevitable minor problems. Confidence in the correctness of the chosen path is growing. The steering wheel turns out to be more and more firmly fixed. The immutability of his position is protected by many people. Social structures are increasingly being tailored to the chosen movement. They don't stand on ceremony with dissidents. Society finds itself on the upward side of the saw.

With the distance from the crisis point of the choice of the idea, the natural inaccuracy of the forecast begins to manifest itself. Further more. And the steering wheel is fixed. By this time, at the helm were no longer those "rationalists" practitioners who took the risk, deciding on the sin of realizing what they had invented, but officials, whose position in society rests on an unchanging path.

Crisis phenomena are growing in society. This is the top of the "saw" tine. The efficiency of using socialized resources falls. "Stop experimenting with us!" - this is how public opinion becomes. This is where the "traditionalists" enter the political scene. They convincingly prove that the chosen path was wrong from the very beginning. Everything would be fine if people did not obey these adventurers - "rationalists". I have to go back. But for some reason not to the cave state, but one step of the "saw". "Traditionalists", with massive support, form the social structures of the transition period. The "rationalists" are rejected. And the crisis continues to grow, because the "traditionalists" are counting on the natural "recovery" of society, without reasonable intervention.

Society again finds itself on the falling part of the "saw of social development". Time is passing. The acuteness of emotions caused by the exposure of the acts of the "rationalists" is being erased. People are again faced with the question: "What to do?" The cycle repeats itself.

The proposed qualitative model describes the processes of social self-organization in societies of different numbers of people. The specific dynamics of structures can be traced in the history of countries, corporations, and small collectives. The fundamental causes of structural change can be different, but the implementation of change is always mediated by intelligent behavior of people. This mediation breaks the mechanical correspondence between base and superstructure. In the degree of satisfaction with the social structure, an important role is played by people's assessment of the effectiveness of the use of socialized resources. This assessment depends on many factors, and its sharp changes can occur without real significant changes in the efficiency itself.

The initiators of competing variants of the social structure often declare their comparative "progressiveness". This quality, without a clear definition, affects public opinion.

The ability to compare the variants of the social structure according to their "progressiveness" presupposes a certain orderliness of these variants with the formation of a certain trajectory of the forward movement of mankind towards a brighter future. Despite the historical experience, scientific forecasts, perspectives drawn by world religions, the idea of ​​world progress, generated by the technological achievements of the late 19th - mid-20th centuries, occupies an important place in the everyday consciousness of people and influences their assessments.

As a real filler for the concept of "progress", one can take the growth of human potential (functional from the number of people and the degree of their protection from destructive external influences) as a result of human activity. At the same time, two processes are going on in parallel: an increase in the potential of mankind and an increase in the likelihood of meeting more and more powerful (and more rare) external influences of a different nature. This competition with time in the minds of people is displayed as a contradiction between the assessment of the achieved potential and the idea of ​​the required level of potential.

In relation to the social structure, the definition of the quality "progressiveness" is inapplicable. Here, only an assessment of the adequacy of the social structure to the chosen path of capacity building and the technological level of the economy is based. And this adequacy does not at all imply a one-to-one correspondence.

The social order should support (at least not inhibit) capacity building activities for people. This requirement can be used to base people's assessment of its satisfaction.

3. Progress criteria

mind. moral Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling(1775-1854) wrote that the decision of the survey on historical progress is complicated by the fact that the supporters and opponents of the belief in the improvement of humanity are completely entangled in the debate about the criteria of progress. Some talk about the progress of mankind in the field morality, others are about progress science and technology, legal device.

Another point of view on social progress belongs to G. Hegel. He saw the criterion of progress in consciousnessfreedom.

In our time, philosophers also adhere to different views on the criterion of social progress. Let's take a look at some of them.

One of the currently existing points of view is that the highest and universal objective criterion of social progress is development of productive forces, includingdevelopment of the person himself. It is argued that the direction of the historical process is due to the growth and improvement of the productive forces of society, including the means of labor, the degree of man's mastery of the forces of nature, the possibility of using them as the basis of human life. The sources of all human activity lie in social production. According to this criterion, those social relations are recognized as progressive, which correspond to the level of productive forces and open the greatest scope for their development, for the growth of labor productivity, for the development of man. Man is considered here as the main thing in the productive forces, therefore their development is understood from this point of view and as the development of the wealth of human nature.

This position has been criticized from a different point of view. Just like you can't find everything general criterion progress only in social consciousness (in the development of reason, morality, consciousness of freedom), so it cannot be found only in the sphere of material production (technology, economic relations). History has provided examples of countries where a high level of material production was combined with the degradation of spiritual culture. To overcome the one-sidedness of criteria that reflect the state of only one sphere of society's life, it is necessary to find a concept that would characterize the essence of human life and activity. In this capacity, philosophers propose the concept freedom.

Freedom, as you already know, is characterized not only by knowledge (the absence of which makes a person subjectively unfree), but also by the presence of conditions for its realization. It also requires a decision made on the basis of free choice. Finally, funds are also required, as well as actions aimed at implementing the decision... Let us also recall that the freedom of one person should not be achieved by infringing on the freedom of another person. This limitation of freedom is of a social and moral nature.

The meaning of human life lies in self-realization, self-realization of the individual. So, freedom acts as a necessary condition for self-realization. In fact, self-realization is possible if a person has knowledge of his abilities, the possibilities that society gives him, about the ways of activities in which he can realize himself. The wider the opportunities created by society, the freer the person, the more options for activities in which his potential will be revealed. But in the process of multifaceted activity, the multifaceted development of the person himself takes place, the spiritual wealth of the individual grows.

So, according to this point of view, criterion of socialprogress is a measure of freedom that society isto provide an individual with a degree guaranteed by societyindividual freedom. disclosure his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. This statement leads us to consider another perspective on social progress.

As we have seen, one cannot confine oneself to the characterization of man as an active being. He is also a rational and social being. Only with this in mind can we talk about the human in the person, about humanity. But the development of human qualities depends on the living conditions of people. The more fully the various needs of a person in food, clothing, housing, transport services, his needs in the spiritual field are satisfied, the more moral relations between people become, the more accessible to a person are made the most diverse types of economic and political, spiritual and material activities. The more favorable the conditions for the development of the physical, intellectual, mental powers of a person, his moral foundations, the wider the scope for the development of individual qualities inherent in each individual person. In short, the more humane the conditions of life, the more opportunities for human development in a person: reason, morality, creative powers.

Humanity, the recognition of a person as the highest value is expressed by the word "humanism". From the above, we can conclude about the universal criterion of social progress: aboutthat which contributes to the elevation of humanism is depressive.

Social progress criteria.

In the vast literature on social progress, there is currently no single answer to the main question: what is the general sociological criterion of social progress?

A relatively small number of authors argue that the very formulation of the question of a single criterion of social progress is meaningless, since human society is complex organism, the development of which is carried out along different lines, which makes it impossible to formulate a single criterion. Most of the authors consider it possible to formulate a single general sociological criterion of social progress. However, even in the very formulation of such a criterion, there are significant discrepancies.

Condorcet (like other French enlighteners) considered the development of mind. Utopian socialists put forward moral criterion of progress. Saint-Simon believed, for example, that society should take a form of organization that would lead to the implementation of moral principle: all people should treat each other like brothers. A contemporary of the utopian socialists German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling(1775-1854) wrote that the solution of the issue of historical progress is complicated by the fact that the supporters and opponents of the belief in the improvement of mankind are completely entangled in disputes about the criteria of progress. Some talk about the progress of mankind in the field morality, others are about progress science and technology, which, as Schelling wrote, from a historical point of view is rather a regression, and offered his own solution to the problem: the criterion in establishing the historical progress of the human race can only be a gradual approximation to legal device. Another point of view on social progress belongs to G. Hegel. He saw the criterion of progress in consciousness of freedom. As the consciousness of freedom grows, the progressive development of society takes place.

As you can see, the question of the criterion of progress occupied the great minds of modern times, but did not find a solution. The disadvantage of all attempts to overcome this task was that in all cases only one line (or one side, or one sphere) of social development was considered as a criterion. And reason, and morality, and science, and technology, and legal order, and the consciousness of freedom - all these indicators are very important, but not universal, not covering the life of a person and society as a whole.

The dominant idea of ​​unlimited progress inevitably led to the seemingly only possible solution question; the main, if not the only criterion of social progress can only be the development of material production, which ultimately predetermines the change in all other aspects and spheres of society. Among Marxists, this conclusion was repeatedly insisted by V.I.Lenin, who back in 1908 called for considering the interests of the development of productive forces as the highest criterion of progress. After October, Lenin returns to this definition and emphasizes that the state of the productive forces is the main criterion of all social development, since each subsequent socio-economic formation finally conquered the previous one due precisely to the fact that it opened up more space for the development of productive forces, achieved a higher productivity of social labor. ...

A serious argument in favor of this position is that the very history of mankind begins with the manufacture of tools and exists due to the continuity in the development of productive forces.

It is noteworthy that the conclusion about the state and level of development of the productive forces as the general criterion of progress was shared by the opponents of Marxism - technicians, on the one hand, and scientists, on the other. A legitimate question arises: how could the concept of Marxism (i.e., materialism) and scientism (i.e., idealism) converge at one point? The logic of this convergence is as follows. The scientist discovers social progress, first of all, in the development of scientific knowledge, but scientific knowledge acquires the highest meaning only when it is realized in practice, and above all in material production.

In the process of the ideological confrontation between the two systems, which was still receding into the past, technicians used the thesis about the productive forces as the general criterion of social progress to prove the superiority of the West, which was and is going ahead in this indicator. The disadvantage of this criterion is that the assessment of production forces involves taking into account their number, nature, the level of development achieved and the associated labor productivity, the ability to grow, which is very important when comparing different countries and stages of historical development. For example, the number of productive forces in modern India is greater than in South Korea, but their quality is lower.

If we take the development of productive forces as a criterion for progress; their assessment in dynamics, then this presupposes a comparison not from the point of view of the greater or lesser development of the productive forces, but from the point of view of the course, the speed of their development. But in this case, the question arises, what period should be taken for comparison.

Some philosophers believe that all difficulties will be overcome if we take the method of production of material goods as a general sociological criterion of social progress. A weighty argument in favor of this position is that the foundation of social progress is the development of the method
production as a whole, that taking into account the state and growth of productive forces, as well as the nature of production relations, it is possible to show much more fully the progressive nature of one formation in relation to another.

Far from denying that the transition from one mode of production to another, more progressive, underlies progress in a number of other areas, opponents of this point of view almost always note that the main question remains unresolved: how to determine the very progressiveness of this new method of production.

Rightly believing that human society is, first of all, a developing community of people, another group of philosophers puts forward the development of man himself as a general sociological criterion of social progress. It is indisputable that the course of human history really testifies to the development of people who make up human society, their social and individual forces, abilities, inclinations. The advantage of this approach is that it allows you to measure social progress by the progressive development of the very subjects of historical creativity - people.

The most important criterion of progress is the level of humanism in society, i.e. the position of the personality in it: the degree of its economic, political and social liberation; the level of satisfaction of her material and spiritual needs; the state of her psychophysical and social health. According to this point of view, the criterion of social progress is the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to the individual, the degree of individual freedom guaranteed by society. The free development of a person in a free society also means disclosure his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. The development of human qualities depends on the living conditions of people. The more fully the various needs of a person in food, clothing, housing, transport services, his needs in the spiritual field are satisfied, the more moral relations between people become, the more accessible to a person are made the most diverse types of economic and political, spiritual and material activities. The more favorable the conditions for the development of the physical, intellectual, mental powers of a person, his moral foundations, the wider the scope for the development of individual qualities inherent in each individual person. In short, the more humane the conditions of life, the more opportunities for human development in a person: reason, morality, creative powers.

Note, by the way, that within this complex in its structure, one indicator can and should be singled out, which in fact unites all the others. This, in my opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if it is 10-12 years less in a given country than in the group of developed countries, and besides, it shows a tendency to further decrease, the question of the degree of progressiveness of this country must be resolved accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, "all progress is reactionary if a person collapses."

The level of humanism of society as an integrative criterion (i.e., passing through itself and absorbing changes in literally all spheres of society's life) criterion incorporates the criteria discussed above. Each subsequent formational and civilizational stage is more progressive in terms of the personal - it expands the range of rights and freedoms of the individual, entails the development of his needs and the improvement of his abilities. Suffice it to compare in this respect the status of the slave and the serf, the serf and the wage laborer under capitalism. At first, it may seem that the slave-owning formation, which marked the beginning of the era of exploitation of man by man, stands apart in this respect. But, as F. Engels explained, even for a slave, not to mention free ones, slavery was a personal progress: if earlier a prisoner was killed or eaten, now he was left to live.

So, the content of social progress was, is and will be the "humanization of man" achieved through the contradictory development of his natural and social forces, ie, productive forces and the entire gamut of social relations. From the above, we can conclude about the universal criterion of social progress: that which contributes to the elevation of humanism is progressive.

SOCIAL PROGRESS CRITERIA

The thoughts of the world community about the "limits of growth" have significantly actualized the problem of criteria for social progress. Indeed, if in the environment around us social world Not everything is as simple as it seemed and seems to progressists, then what are the most essential signs that can be used to judge the progress of social development as a whole, about the progressiveness, conservatism or reactionary nature of certain phenomena?

Let us note right away that the question “how to measure” social progress has never received an unambiguous answer in the philosophical and sociological literature. This situation is largely due to the complexity of society as a subject and object of progress, its diversity and quality. Hence the search for its own, local criterion for each sphere of public life. But at the same time, society is an integral organism and as such it must correspond to the main criterion of social progress. People, as G.V. Plekhanov noted, make not several stories, but one story of their own relationships. Our thinking is capable and must reflect this unified historical practice in its entirety.

And yet the dominant idea of ​​unlimited progress inevitably led to the seemingly only possible solution to the problem; the main, if not the only, criterion of social progress can only be the development of material production, which ultimately predetermines the change in all other aspects and spheres of society. Among Marxists, this conclusion was repeatedly insisted by V.I.Lenin, who back in 1908 called for considering the interests of the development of productive forces as the highest criterion of progress. After October, Lenin returns to this definition and emphasizes that the state of the productive forces is the main criterion of all social development, since each subsequent socio-economic formation finally conquered the previous one due precisely to the fact that it opened up more space for the development of productive forces, achieved a higher productivity of social labor. ...

It is noteworthy that the conclusion about the state and level of development of the productive forces as the general criterion of progress was shared by the opponents of Marxism - technicians, on the one hand, and scientists, on the other. The position of the latter obviously needs some comments, for a legitimate question arises: how could the concept of Marxism (i.e., materialism) and scientism (i.e., idealism) converge at one point? The logic of this convergence is as follows. The scientist discovers social progress primarily in the development of scientific knowledge, but scientific knowledge acquires the highest meaning only when it is realized in practice, and above all in material production.

In the process of the ideological confrontation between the two systems, which was still receding into the past, technicians used the thesis about the productive forces as the general criterion of social progress to prove the superiority of the West, which was and is going ahead in this indicator. Then their opponents introduced a significant amendment to their own concept: this highest general sociological criterion cannot be taken in isolation from the nature of the production relations prevailing in a given society. After all, it is important not only the total amount of material goods produced in the country, but also how evenly and fairly they are distributed among the population, how this social organization promotes or inhibits the rational use of productive forces and their further development... And although the amendment is really significant, it does not take the criterion accepted as the main one beyond the limits of one - the economic - sphere of social reality, does not make it truly integrative, that is, it passes through itself and absorbs changes in literally all spheres of life. society.

Such an integrative, and therefore the most important, criterion of progress is the level of humanization of society, that is, the position of the individual in it: the degree of its economic, political and social liberation; the level of satisfaction of her material and spiritual needs; the state of her psychophysical and social health. Note, by the way, that within this complex in its structure, one indicator can and should be singled out, which in fact unites all the others. This, in our opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if it is 10-12 years less in a given country than in the group of developed countries, and besides, it shows a tendency to further decrease, the question of the degree of progressiveness of this country must be resolved accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, "all progress is reactionary if a person collapses."

The level of humanization of society as an integrative criterion incorporates the criteria discussed above in a removed form. Each subsequent formational and civilizational stage is more progressive in terms of the personal - it expands the range of rights and freedoms of the individual, entails the development of his needs and the improvement of his abilities. Suffice it to compare in this respect the status of the slave and the serf, the serf and the wage laborer under capitalism. At first, it may seem that the slave-owning formation, which marked the beginning of the era of exploitation of man by man, stands apart in this respect. But, as F. Engels explained, even for a slave, not to mention free ones, slavery was a personal progress: if earlier a prisoner was killed or eaten, now he was left to live.

Conclusion

1). Society is a complex organism in which different "bodies" function (enterprises, associations of people, government agencies, etc.), various processes (economic, political, spiritual, etc.) take place simultaneously, and various activities of people unfold. All these parts of one social organism, all these processes, various types of activity are in mutual connection and, at the same time, may not coincide in their development. Moreover, individual processes, changes occurring in different areas of society, can be multidirectional, that is, progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another. Thus, it is impossible to find any general criterion by which one could judge the progress of this or that society. Like many processes in our life, social progress based on different criteria can be characterized in different ways. Therefore, I believe that there is simply no general criterion.

2). Despite the inconsistency and ambiguity of many provisions of the socio-political concept of Aristotle, his proposed approaches to the analysis of the state, the method of political science and its lexicon (including the history of the issue, the statement of the problem, arguments "for" and "against", etc.), the selection what is the subject of political reflection and reasoning still have a fairly noticeable impact on political research today. The reference to Aristotle is still a fairly powerful scientific argument confirming the truth of the conclusions about political processes and phenomena.

The concept of progress, as mentioned above, is based on some kind of value or a set of values. But the concept of progress has become so firmly entrenched in modern mass consciousness that we are faced with a situation where the very idea of ​​progress - progress as such - acts as a value. Thus, progress by itself, regardless of any values, tries to fill life and history with meaning, and verdicts are made on its behalf. Progress can be thought of either as striving for some goal, or as unlimited movement and deployment. It is obvious that progress without a foundation in any other value that would serve as its goal is possible only as an endless ascent. Its paradox lies in the fact that movement without a goal, movement to nowhere, generally speaking, is meaningless.

List of used literature:

1. Gubin V.D., Sidorina T.Yu., Philosophy, Moscow Gardarina 2005.

2. Volchek E.Z., Philosophy, Minsk 1995.

3. Frolov N.V., Introduction to Philosophy, Moscow 1989.

4. Article "The concept of social progress in social philosophy"

It is very important to understand in which direction our society is moving, which is constantly changing and developing. This article is dedicated to this goal. Let's try to define the criteria of social progress and answer a number of other questions. First of all, let's figure out what progress and regression are.

Consideration of concepts

Social progress is a direction of development that is characterized by a progressive movement from simple and lower forms of organization of society to more complex, higher ones. Opposite to this term is the concept of "regression", that is, reverse movement - a return to obsolete relations and structures, degradation, the direction of development from higher to lower.

The history of the formation of ideas about the measures of progress

The problem of criteria of social progress has long worried thinkers. The idea that changes in society is precisely a progressive process appeared in antiquity, but was finally formed in the works of M. Condorcet, A. Turgot and other French enlighteners. These thinkers saw the criteria of social progress in the development of reason, the spread of enlightenment. This optimistic view of the historical process in the 19th century was replaced by other, more complex concepts. For example, Marxism sees progress in changing socio-economic formations from lower to higher. Some thinkers believed that the consequence of moving forward is the growth of the heterogeneity of society, the complication of its structure.

In modern science, historical progress is usually associated with such a process as modernization, that is, the transition of society from agrarian to industrial and then to post-industrial.

Scientists who do not share the idea of ​​progress

Not everyone accepts the idea of ​​progress. Some thinkers reject it in relation to social development - either predicting the "end of history", or saying that societies develop independently of each other, multilinearly, in parallel (O. Spengler, N. Ya. Danilevsky, A. Toynbee), or considering history as a cycle with a series of ups and downs (G. Vico).

For example, Arthur Toynbee singled out 21 civilizations, in each of which certain phases of formation are distinguished: emergence, growth, breakdown, decline and, finally, decay. Thus, he abandoned the thesis about the unity of the historical process.

O. Spengler wrote about the "decline of Europe". "Antiprogressism" is especially vivid in the works of K. Popper. In his view, progress is a movement towards a specific goal, which is possible only for a specific person, but not for history as a whole. The latter can be viewed both as a forward movement and as a regression.

Progress and regression are not mutually exclusive.

The progressive development of society, obviously, in certain periods does not exclude regression, return movements, civilizational dead ends, even disruptions. And it is hardly possible to speak about the unambiguously straightforward development of mankind, because there are clearly visible leaps forward and rollbacks. Progress in a certain area, in addition, can be the cause of recession, regression in another. Thus, the development of technology, technology, tools of labor is a vivid evidence of progress in the economy, but it was precisely this that put our world on the brink of a global ecological catastrophe, depleting the natural resources of the Earth.

Society today is also blamed for the crisis of the family, the decline of morality, and lack of spirituality. The price of progress is high: for example, the conveniences of urban life are accompanied by various "urbanization diseases". Sometimes the negative consequences of progress are so obvious that a natural question arises as to whether it is generally possible to say that humanity is moving forward.

Social Progress Criteria: History

The question of the measures of social development is also topical. There is also no agreement in the scientific world. The French enlighteners saw such a criterion in the development of reason, in an increase in the degree of rationality of social organization. Some other thinkers and scientists (for example, A. Saint-Simon) believed that the highest criterion of social progress is the state of morality in society, an approach to early Christian ideals.

G. Hegel was of a different opinion. He linked progress with freedom - the degree to which people understand it. Marxism also proposed its own development criterion: according to the supporters of this concept, it consists in the growth of the productive forces.

K. Marx, seeing the essence of development in the ever greater subordination of the forces of nature by man, reduced progress as a whole to a more particular one - in the production sphere. He considered the only social relations that contribute to development that at this stage correspond to the level of productive forces, and also open up room for the improvement of the person himself (acting as a tool of production).

Social development criteria: modernity

Philosophy has subjected the criteria of social progress to careful analysis and revision. In modern social science, the applicability of many of them is disputed. The state of the economic foundation by no means determines the nature of the development of other spheres of social life.

The goal, and not just a means of social progress, is considered to be the creation of the necessary conditions for the harmonious and all-round development of the individual. Consequently, the criterion of social progress is precisely the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to a person to maximize his potential. According to the conditions created in society for the satisfaction of the entire totality of the needs of the individual and his free development, the degree of progressiveness of the given system, the criteria of social progress, should be assessed.

Let's summarize the information. The table below will help you understand the main criteria of social progress.

The table may be complemented by the inclusion of the points of view of other thinkers.

There are two forms of progress in society. Let's consider them below.

The revolution

A revolution is a complex or complete change in most or all aspects of society, affecting the foundations of the existing system. Until recently, it was regarded as a universal universal "law of transition" from one socio-economic formation to another. However, scientists could not detect any signs of social revolution in the transition to a class system from a primitive communal one. Therefore, it was required to expand the concept so that it could be applied to any transition between formations, but this led to the destruction of the original semantic content of the term. And the mechanism of a real revolution could only be found in phenomena related to the era of the New Time (that is, during the transition to capitalism from feudalism).

Revolution from the point of view of Marxism

Following the Marxist methodology, we can say that a social revolution means a radical social upheaval that changes the structure of society and means a qualitative leap in progressive development. The deepest and common cause the emergence of a social revolution is a conflict, insoluble in other ways, between the productive forces, which grow, and the system of social institutions and relations, which remain unchanged. Aggravation against this background of political, economic and other contradictions in society, in the end, leads to a revolution.

The latter is always an active political action on the part of the people, its main goal, it puts the transfer of management of society into the hands of a new social class... The difference between revolution and evolution is that the first is considered to be concentrated in time, that is, it happens quickly, and the masses of the people become its direct participants.

The dialectics of such concepts as revolution and reform seems to be very difficult. The former, as a deeper action, most often absorbs the latter, thus the action “from below” is complemented by the activity “from above”.

Many modern scholars urge us to abandon the excessive exaggeration in history of the significance of the social revolution, from the idea that it is an inevitable pattern in solving historical problems, because it was by no means always the dominant form that determines social progress. Much more often, changes in the life of society occurred as a result of actions "from above", that is, reforms.

Reform

This reorganization, transformation, change of a certain aspect of social life, which does not destroy the existing foundations of the social structure, retains power in the hands ruling class... Thus, the understood path of a gradual transformation of relations is opposed to a revolution that sweeps away the old system and order to the ground. Marxism regarded the evolutionary process, which for a long time conserved the remnants of the past, as too painful and unacceptable for the people. The adherents of this concept believed that since reforms are carried out exclusively "from above" by forces possessing power and not wanting to part with it, their result will always be lower than expected: the transformations are characterized by inconsistency and half-heartedness.

Underestimating reforms

It was explained by the famous position formulated by V.I. Lenin, - that reforms are a "by-product of the revolution." Note: K. Marx already believed that reforms are never a consequence of the weakness of the strong, since they are brought into being by the strength of the weak.

His Russian follower intensified the denial of the possibility of the "top" having their own incentives at the beginning of the reforms. IN AND. Lenin believed that reforms are a by-product of the revolution, because they represent unsuccessful attempts to dampen, weaken the revolutionary struggle. Even in cases where the reforms were clearly not the result of the actions of the popular masses, Soviet historians still explained them by the desire of the authorities to prevent encroachments on the existing system.

Correlation "reform-revolution" in modern social science

Over time, Russian scientists gradually freed themselves from the existing nihilism in relation to transformations through evolution, first recognizing the equivalence of revolutions and reforms, and then attacking revolutions as a bloody, extremely ineffective, costly path leading to an inevitable dictatorship.

Now great reforms (that is, revolutions "from above") are considered the same social anomalies as great revolutions. They are united by the fact that these methods of resolving contradictions are opposed to a healthy, normal practice of gradual, continuous reform in a self-regulating society.

The "revolution-reform" dilemma is replaced by a clarification of the relationship between reform and permanent regulation. In this context, both the revolution and changes "from above" "cure" a neglected disease (the first one is " surgical intervention", the second -" therapeutic methods"), while perhaps early and sustained prevention is necessary in order to ensure social progress.

Therefore, in social science today, the emphasis is shifting from the antinomy "revolution-reform" to "innovation-reform". Innovation means a one-time ordinary improvement associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of society in specific conditions. It is she who can provide the greatest social progress in the future.

The criteria of social progress discussed above are not unconditional. Modern science recognizes the priority of humanitarian over others. However, the general criterion of social progress has not yet been established.

All societies are in constant development, in the process of changes and transition from one state to another. At the same time, sociologists identify two directions and three main forms of movement of society. First, let's look at the essence progressive and regressive directions.

Progress(from Latin progressus - moving forward, success) means development with an upward tendency, movement from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. It leads to positive changes in society and manifests itself, for example, in the improvement of the means of production and labor force, in the development of the social division of labor and the growth of its productivity, in the new achievements of science and culture, improvement of the living conditions of people, their all-round development, etc.

Regression(from lat.regressus - reverse movement), on the contrary, presupposes development with a downward tendency, movement backward, a transition from higher to lower, which leads to negative consequences. It can manifest itself, say, in a decrease in the efficiency of production and the level of well-being of people, in the spread of smoking, drunkenness, drug addiction in society, deteriorating health of the population, an increase in mortality, a drop in the level of spirituality and morality of people, etc.

Which path does society take: the path of progress or regression? The answer to this question will determine people's idea of ​​the future: does it bring a better life or does it not bode well?

Ancient greek poet Hesiod (8-7 centuries BC) wrote about five stages in the life of mankind.

The first stage was "golden age", when people lived easily and carelessly.

Second - "silver Age"- the beginning of the fall of morality and piety. Descending lower and lower, people found themselves in "iron age" when evil and violence reign everywhere, justice is violated.

How did Hesiod see the path of humanity: progressive or regressive?

Unlike Hesiod, the ancient philosophers

Plato and Aristotle viewed history as a cyclical cycle repeating the same stages.

The development of the idea of ​​historical progress is associated with the achievements of science, crafts, arts, the revitalization of social life in the Renaissance.

One of the first to put forward the theory of social progress was the French philosopher Anne Robber Turgot (1727-1781).

His contemporary is a French philosopher and educator Jacques Antoine Condorcet (1743-1794) sees historical progress as the path of social progress, in the center of which is the ascending development of the human mind.

K. Marx believed that mankind is moving towards an ever greater mastery of nature, the development of production and of man himself.

Let us recall facts from the history of the XIX-XX centuries. Revolutions were often followed by counter-revolutions, reforms were followed by counter-reforms, and radical changes in the political structure were followed by the restoration of the old order.

Think about what examples from Russian or world history can illustrate this idea.

If we tried to depict the progress of humanity graphically, then we would get not a straight line, but a broken line, reflecting the ups and downs. In history different countries there were times when reaction triumphed, when progressive forces of society were persecuted. For example, what disasters fascism brought to Europe: the death of millions, the enslavement of many peoples, the destruction of cultural centers, bonfires from the books of the greatest thinkers and artists, the cult of brute force.

Individual changes taking place in different areas of society can be multidirectional, i.e. progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another.

So, throughout history, the progress of technology is clearly traced: from stone tools to iron, from hand tools to machines, etc. But the progress of technology, the development of industry have led to the destruction of nature.

Thus, progress in one area was accompanied by regression in another. The progress of science and technology has had mixed consequences. The use of computer technology not only expanded the possibilities of work, but entailed new diseases associated with prolonged work at the display: visual impairment, etc.

The growth of large cities, the complication of production and the rhythms of life in everyday life - increased the load on the human body, gave rise to stress. Modern history, as well as the past, is perceived as the result of people's creativity, where both progress and regression take place.

For humanity as a whole, development along an ascending line is characteristic. Evidence of world social progress, in particular, can be not only an increase in the material well-being and social protection of people, but also a weakening of confrontation (confrontation - from Latin con - against + irons - front - confrontation, confrontation) between classes and peoples of different countries, the desire for peace and cooperation of an increasing number of earthlings, the establishment of political democracy, the development of universal human morality and genuine humanistic culture, all that is human in man, finally.

An important sign of social progress, further, scientists consider the growing tendency to liberate a person - liberation (a) from suppression by the state, (b) from the dictate of the collective, (c) from any exploitation, (d) from the confinement of living space, (e) from fear for their safety and future. In other words, the trend towards the expansion and increasingly effective protection of civil rights and freedoms of people everywhere in the world.

By the degree of ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens modern world presents a very variegated picture. Thus, according to the estimates of the American organization in support of democracy in the world community "Freedom House" (English Freedom House, founded in 1941), which annually publishes a "map of freedom" of the world, out of 191 countries of the planet in 1997.

- 79 were completely free;

- partially free (which includes Russia) - 59;

- not free - 53. Among the latter, the 17 most unfree states (the category "worst of the worst") are highlighted - such as Afghanistan, Burma, Iraq, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and others. The geography of the spread of freedom around the globe is curious: its main centers are concentrated in Western Europe and North America. At the same time, out of 53 African countries, only 9 were recognized as free, and none among the Arab countries.

Progress can be seen in human relationships themselves. More and more people understand that they must learn to live together and abide by the laws of society, must respect other people's living standards and be able to seek compromises (compromise - from Latin compromissum - agreement based on mutual concessions), must suppress their own aggressiveness, value and protect nature and everything that previous generations have created. These are encouraging signs that humanity is steadily moving towards a relationship of solidarity, harmony and goodness.

Regression is more often local in nature, that is, it concerns either individual societies or spheres of life, or individual periods... For example, while Norway, Finland and Japan (our neighbors) and other Western countries confidently climbed the steps of progress and prosperity, Soviet Union and his "comrades in socialist misfortune" [Bulgaria, the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and others] regressed, sliding uncontrollably in the 1970s and 1980s. into the abyss of collapse and crisis. Moreover, progress and regression are often complexly intertwined.

So, in Russia in the 1990s, both are clearly taking place. A decline in production, a break in the former economic ties between factories, a decline in the standard of living of many people and an increase in crime are obvious "marks" of regression. But there is also the opposite - signs of progress: the liberation of society from Soviet totalitarianism and the dictatorship of the CPSU, the beginning movement towards the market and democracy, the expansion of the rights and freedoms of citizens, significant freedom of the media, the transition from cold war to peaceful cooperation with the West, etc.

Questions and tasks

1. Define progress and regression.

2. How was the path of humanity viewed in antiquity?

3. What has changed about this in the Renaissance?

4. Is it possible, given the ambiguity of the changes, to talk about social progress in general?

5. Consider the questions posed in one of the philosophical books: is the replacement of an arrow with a firearm, a flintlock with a submachine gun, progress? Is it possible to consider as progress the replacement of hot forceps with electric current during torture? Justify your answer.

6. Which of the following can be attributed to the contradictions of social progress:

A) the development of technology leads to the emergence of both means of creation and means of destruction;

B) the development of production leads to a change social status worker;

C) development scientific knowledge leads to a change in human ideas about the world;

D) human culture undergoes changes under the influence of production.

Formational and civilizational approaches

3.2.1. Socio-economic formation- a historically defined type of society that arises on the basis of a certain mode of production of material goods

Marxism: change of formations primitive - communal, feudal, capitalist, communist (1930 socialism, communism)

Features and concepts of the formational approach

– basis ( production relations that develop between people in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods). At the heart - property relations

- superstructure - a set of legal, political, ideological, religious, cultural and other institutions and relations.

- production relations and productive forces ( people, tools) = mode of production

- social revolution- with the development of productive forces and the aging of the mode of production

Principles of the approach: universality, regularity of the change of socio - economic formations

3.2.2 Civilization- the level, stage of development of society, material and spiritual culture, following barbarism and savagery. Civilizations differ from each other: a specific way of life, a system of values, ways of interconnection with the outside world

Today scientists distinguish: Western and Eastern civilizations.

Comparison of Western and Eastern Civilization

Progress

3.3.1 Progress (moving forward) - transition from lower to higher, from simple to complex, from imperfect to more perfect.

Social progress- This is a world-historical process, which is characterized by the ascent of mankind from primitiveness (savagery) to civilization, which is based on scientific, technical, political and legal, moral and ethical achievements.

Regression (backward movement) - transition from higher to lower, degradation.

3.3.2..Types of social progress

Progress of science and technology (NTP, NTR)

Progress in the development of productive forces (industrial revolution)

Political progress (transition from totalitarianism to democracy)

Progress in the field of culture (recognition of a person as the highest value)

3.3.3. Social progress criteria:

Criterion– a metric by which something can be measured

§ development of the human mind

§ development of science and technology

§ development of productive forces

§ an increase in the standard of living, degree social protection

§ improving the morality of people (humanism)

§ the degree of individual freedom in society

The contradictory nature of social progress

3.3.5. Indicators of progressive development of society:

● average life expectancy of a person

● infant mortality

● health status

● level and quality of education

● level of cultural development

● a sense of life satisfaction

● degree of observance of human rights

● attitude to nature

Humanity as a whole has never regressed, but stopped for a while in development - stagnation