480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Thesis - 480 rubles, shipping 10 minutes 24 hours a day, seven days a week and holidays
Martirosyan Sofia Ashotovna. Social interest in political space (the Socio-philosophical analysis): Dis.... kand. ... cand. philosophy Sciences: 09.00.11: Rostov n/D, 2005 144 p. RSL OD, 61:05-9/194
Introduction
CHAPTER 1. SOCIAL INTEREST: PROBLEM FIELD AND RESEARCH METHODS
1.2. Interests as a source of social dynamics 41
CHAPTER 2. SOCIAL AND POLITICAL INTEREST RELATIONSHIP AND INTERACTION 62
2.1. The role of social interest in shaping the system of political participation 62
2.2. Political interest as a projection of the stratification structure of modern Russian society 85
CONCLUSION 116
References 128
Introduction to work
The relevance of research. Serious transformational processes are taking place in the modern world, affecting the political, economic, social and other spheres of society. Significant changes in the sphere of public consciousness are also obvious. It is hardly possible to find a phenomenon that would have undergone such changes to the greatest extent, on the one hand, and on the other hand, would be a better indicator of the depth of ongoing changes than interest. Even with a cursory glance at the trends in the development of social consciousness, one can clearly see the logic of changing its semantic content, as well as isolate the mutual influence of various social factors and the interests of society and the individual. Often, certain malignant behavioral patterns are a way of realizing certain social interests. In this connection, the search for adequate forms of stopping such patterns is impossible without a clear understanding of the content of interests, as well as an understanding of their interaction both within the individual and the group, as well as in interpersonal and interpear interaction.
In modern society, the political situation inevitably becomes more complicated, where society, social communities of people cannot do without the integration of interests and aspirations to achieve a better life, prosperity, develop in a civilized manner in the field of domestic and world politics. A person, living in a public environment, firstly, seeks to consciously realize his potential forces and activity in all areas and spheres of being in accordance with his needs and interests, or he is looking for supporters, people with close or similar interests in order to realize them together. Therefore, secondly, he is involved in the collective field of human action, that is, in politics. Politics, thanks to its institutions, resources, means and mechanisms, is able to help a person realize his interests or, on the contrary, may hinder their realization.
Particularly significant is the understanding of modern changes in the social structure associated with the transition of society to the post-industrial stage of development. Accounting for these changes is necessary, first of all, to analyze the development of the institutions of political representation that took shape during the development of an industrial society, as well as to identify the features of modern individual and collective actors of the socio-political process.
In this regard, the current situation inevitably dictates the need to analyze socio-political interests in the process of becoming a social subject of politics. Of particular importance is the issue of involvement in political activities in order to satisfy their interests.
The category "social interest" is a general humanitarian category. The prerequisites for its emergence were laid, in our opinion, by the ancient Greek philosophers, in particular, Plato and Socrates in the concept of "innate ideas". In the future, the category has been developed and in recent decades has been actively used by various specialists in descriptive and explanatory models, including philosophical, political science, psychological, economic, sociological and other paradigms. In specialized literature, the following types of social interests are found: national interests, state interests, economic interests, interests of various subjects (for example, the interests of a child or various social groups), interest in learning, legal interests, interests of the individual, etc. etc.
However, there are different interpretations of this category. Interest acts both as a "set of the most important incentives" and as
“orientation of the individual, group, social stratum”, and as “an element of the motivational-need sphere”. In other words, in various subject areas, the category is loaded with its specific content, which, on the one hand, indicates its versatility and globality, and on the other hand, is evidence of insufficient theoretical elaboration. In our opinion, a socio-philosophical analysis of social interest in the political space can become a significant step in this direction.
The degree of scientific development of the problem. Modern science has a significant amount of empirical and theoretical knowledge on various aspects of the problem, which was chosen for research by the author of the dissertation. The study of the phenomenon of social interest in the process of its formation and transformation was carried out throughout the history of the development of philosophical, sociological, political science, psychological thought (Plato, Aristotle, N. Machiavelli, Descartes, J.-J. Rousseau, Hegel, Kant, Marx, Engels , M. Weber, P. Bourdieu and others).
At the present stage, the given problematics acts as a subject and object of research, both foreign and domestic scientists from various fields of socio-political thought. The literature presents theoretical constructions and empirical works aimed at analyzing the social determinants of the emergence and evolution of interests at the micro and macro levels (G.K. Lshin, G. Burbulis, V.Yu. Vereshchagin, L.I. Guseva, L. I. Demidov, O. Offerdal, E. V. Okhotsky, L. S. Panarin, A. V. Sergunin, V. Yu. Shpak and others).
On the other hand, the scientific literature covers in detail the problem of transferring public knowledge to the level of its technological application. This determined the approach to social interest as a macrosystem - ideas in this direction can be traced in the works of B.C. Dudchenko, G.I. Ikonnikova, M. Markov, V.I. Patrusheva, N. Stefanova.
An analysis of political interest as a way of optimizing and algorithmizing professional political activity, as well as elements of studying their influence on the transformation of social interests, is the content of modern research conducted by M.G. Anokhin, S. Black, B.L. Borisov, I.A. Vasilenko, G.V. Grachev, A.A. Degtyarev, A.V. Dmitriev, 10.G. Zaprudsky, B.C. Komarovsky, E.N. Pashentsev, G. Simon, P. Sharan and others).
The dissertation research also uses the results of a political analysis of social interests in relation to the problem of political participation (M. Albert, G. Benvetiste, V.D. Grazhdan, A.I. Kitov, M. Meskon, A.L. Sventsitsky, F. Hedouri, V.M. Shepel, and others).
However, despite the extensive scientific literature on various aspects of the analysis of the concept of interest, it is quite reasonable to talk about the presence of a number of topical problems in understanding the essence of the phenomenon of social interest in its interpretation in relation to the political sphere of public life, the specific Russian features of its development, as well as its acquisition new properties and features in the conditions of modern society.
It is possible to put forward the author's hypothesis that social interest in the modern social space of Russia is in the process of formation and is incomplete. His analysis in relation to the sphere of politics is of scientific interest in the sense that progressive changes in the political sphere of Russian society are especially noticeable.
The methodological and theoretical basis of the dissertation was a synthetic method of research, which includes a logical and philosophical analysis, systemic and activity-based approaches to studying the phenomenon of social interest. For the specific purposes of the analysis, methods of institutional, technological, structural and functional analysis were used, as well as individual methods, ideas and principles developed by political science and sociology: the method of collecting and analyzing documentary and statistical material, the method of observation, the comparative method. At the same time, the basic concepts and constructions contained in the works of leading domestic and foreign scientists served as the theoretical basis of the study.
The object of research is the social interest in the space of society as a complex dynamic system.
The subject of the study is social interest as a macrosystem in relation to the interests that arise at other levels of society.
The purpose of the dissertation work is a socio-philosophical analysis of the specifics of social interest in relation to its manifestation in the political space.
The goal was specified in the following tasks:
1. Carry out a conceptual analysis of social interest as an object of interdisciplinary research
2. To reveal the specifics of the content of social interest as a macrosystem in relation to microsystems of interests of other levels.
3. Analyze the forms and mechanisms of manifestation of social interests in the political system of society.
4. Reveal the areas and features of the influence of political interests on the social sphere, in particular on the stratification structure of Russian society.
Scientific novelty of the research. The dissertation research contains a fundamentally new approach to social interest as a macrosystem that allows predicting and managing social processes at a higher level.
1. It is shown that the scientific and theoretical understanding of the content of the concept of social interest, achieved by studying it at the interdisciplinary level, allows us to define it as a multidimensional social and personal phenomenon, of a motivational-evaluative, subject-activity and referent-oriented nature.
2. It has been established that the specificity of social interest is a social and personal system implemented at various levels
4. It was revealed that the political interest, being a specific macrosystem, is in a relationship of transformation and modification with other social interests
Provisions for defense:
1. Social interest, representing a complex and multidimensional social and personal phenomenon, from the point of view of the activity-justice approach, is the result of objective activity and interaction with other people in various forms of referential-significant activity, determining the internal guidelines for a person to choose objects of interest to himself, circle of communication , reference groups, relations of socialization and cooperation, and are the subject of an interdisciplinary study that reveals additional compensatory characteristics that express the estimated-satisfactory needs for power and control over events and people and are the basis of social differentiation of society.
2. The specificity of social interest lies in the fact that it is a personal and social macrosystem that determines the content and structure of micro- and macrosystems of interests of other levels, personal and social interaction of society. At the same time, the interests on the basis of which the subjects act, determined by their social, economic, political, religious, spiritual nature, are at the same time determined by the totality of cultural, value, worldview positions of the subjects. Social interests are a socio-dynamic system that changes depending on the transformation of the social actors themselves, the variability of the social environment and forms of social interaction.
3. An interdisciplinary analysis of social interests, their forms and mechanisms of manifestation from the point of view of a rational (socio-philosophical approach) and non-rational (motivational-value socio-psychological approach) are the basis for social modeling and forecasting of social interests as a functional social system.
4. Political interests are in a complex and contradictory relationship with social interests: being formed under their influence, they not only transform and modify social interests, but also transform themselves. The dynamics of the mutual influence of interests as macrosystems is determined by the criteria parameters of the stages of development of society (social-dynamic functioning, development, stagnation, decline, systemic crisis, regression).
Theoretical and practical significance of the research.
The dissertation research complements the existing views on the problem of social interest, revealing the latter through the analysis of its theoretical and practical components. The conclusions presented in the work fill the phenomenon of social interest as a macrosystem with concrete content, and also determine its role in relation to microsystems of interests of other levels.
The conclusions and proposals formulated in the dissertation are of interest both from the point of view of theoretical understanding of the described phenomenon, and from the point of view of practical significance in predicting and modeling the development of social processes in society, making decisions in the field of social policy, and organizing the work of socio-political organizations.
The dissertation material can be used in the process of teaching theoretical and applied sociology, applied political science, conflictology, as well as in practical activities for forecasting and planning socio-political development in the country and region.
Approbation of work. The dissertation materials were reported at the scientific-practical conference "Violence in modern Russia" (Rostov n / D., 1999); at the All-Russian Scientific Conference "Teaching Comparative Political Science and World Politics in Russian Universities" (Novorossiysk, 2000); at the interuniversity scientific and theoretical conference "Political and legal institutions" (Rostov-on-Don, 2000); at the regional scientific and theoretical conference "Political and legal culture and spirituality" (Rostov n / D., 2001); at the scientific-practical conference "Globalization and regionalization in the modern world" (Rostov-on-Don, 2001); 3rd Russian Philosophical Congress "Rationalism and Culture on the Threshold of the Third Millennium" (Rostov-on-Don, 2002).
Implementation of the research results. The dissertation materials were used in the educational process when reading the special course "Political Interests in the Modern Political Process" to 3rd year students of the Department of Political Science of Rostov State University.
Structure and scope of work. The dissertation consists of an Introduction, two chapters, a conclusion with conclusions and practical recommendations, and a bibliography. The list of references includes 225 titles, 28 of which are in foreign languages. The volume of the dissertation is 143 pages.
Category "interest" in the context of social sciences and humanities
To determine the diversity of the content of the category "interest", it is advisable to consider, on the one hand, the genesis of the concept in the humanities fields of knowledge, on the other hand, to identify the specific semantic plans of the concept in each of the disciplines under consideration.
There is no unanimity of opinion among scientists of the humanitarian fields of knowledge in understanding the problem of the nature and genesis of interest. This, in our opinion, is due to the fact that this issue has not been a priority until recently. Studies of the philosophical, sociological and political content of interest are practically absent in the specialized literature. We believe that social processes in modern Russia and the world as a whole, including multidirectional and sometimes contradictory trends, have clearly formed a social order for the development of this issue. In this regard, the reasons for the intensive development of special areas of social sciences that use the category of "interest" and give it one or another specific meaning are also obvious. Most authors working in the humanities, one way or another, operate in this category. And this circumstance testifies both to the capacity, global nature of the category, and to the relevance of theoretical studies aimed at comprehending and systematizing the content of the concept of "interest" as a philosophical category.
Interest (from Latin interest) - matters, important - in scientific vocabulary it is used in various meanings. The following can be distinguished as the main meanings: attention shown to something; entertainment, fascination; importance, meaning; benefit, benefit; aspirations, needs, demands.
All pre-Marxist sociology derived interest, like other categories of philosophy, from people's ideas, from reason and spirit. Sociologists of that time argued that society does not develop according to objective laws, but according to the will of people. Separate statements, conjectures regarding the interdependence of individuals in society, causal relationships can also be found in ancient thinkers. For the first time in ancient philosophy, Democritus had the idea that the driving force behind human history was need, that is, the material needs and interests of people.
Representatives of philosophical and socio-political thought interpreted the concept of "interest" differently, sometimes extremely broadly. Thus, the author of the pamphlet "Leaves of the Tree of Life" published in 1648, W. Sedwick, attributed a unifying meaning to interest.
The prominent French philosopher C.L. Helvetius called interest “an all-powerful magician that changes the appearance of any object in the eyes of all beings”3. In this book ("On the Mind"), he tried to create a theory of interest as the driving force of human actions. In the figurative expression of Helvetius: “Rivers do not flow, and people do not go against the fast flow of their interests”4.
Interest, according to Helvetius, is selfishness. The author believed that interest is a natural feeling. It can be transformed into both vice and virtue. It all depends on the tastes and passions of a person.
Since ancient times, thinkers have singled out the concepts of general interest and private, often opposing one to the other. But if in theology the idea of the “common good” is considered irreducible to the accidental manifestations of this good (according to the scholastic definition, where this idea comes from), then the concept of the common interest is already by definition under constant pressure from numerous external manifestations through which it is perceived. individuals.
Undoubtedly, the problem of finding out in practice what the common interest is, also arises when referring to the idea of the “common good”. A particular difficulty encountered in attempting to formulate different representations of the general interest is the need to recognize the possibility of synthesizing multiple and conflicting private interests while retaining their specificity.
In the modern era, it was not so much Hobbes, for whom the problem of the transfer of interests was, in general, secondary to the urgent need to establish a political order, but Rousseau formulated the problem in socio-political terms, defining it as "the general will." In its deepest premises, this definition of Rousseau has many points of contact with the theological concept of the common good.
The problem of the collision of individual or private interests acquires special significance for the scientist. Rousseau refers to it directly in order to justify defining the nature of politics as an "art" and not as a pure science or technique of government. So, in the “Social Contract” (1761), he writes that “If there were no different interests, the general interest would hardly be felt, which would not meet obstacles; would have gone by itself and politics would have ceased to be an art” (Book II, Chapter III). However, according to the thinker, it is impossible to derive a common interest from a simple sum of individual expressions of will (from this, rather, the will of all or the will of the majority is obtained). Therefore, Rousseau constantly stresses that it is necessary that what is intended to express a general interest should always and in any case concern only general objects. One can thus assume the opposite: that the "general will" is in conflict with the desires of the numerical majority of the individuals who make up society. In this case, as Rousseau writes in the spirit of Hobbes in Chapter XI of the third book of the Social Contract, we are witnessing the "death of the political corps" due to measures of a particularistic nature and decrees that have no general effect.
Thus, Rousseau's social contract theory anticipates the "dilemma" that presents itself in various forms in modern game theory in various versions of the "captive" or "collective action": it is difficult to bring together private interests that are irreducible to each other and opposed to each other. which, moreover, compete with each other, and their consistent implementation can lead to damage for everyone. Let us take the example of "common water": the owners of two plots of land bordering each other could use a common water source in such a way as to satisfy exclusively their own interest, but acting, at the same time, to the detriment of their mutual interest, however, distant in time and not so obvious. Even when the common interest is readily recognizable, an insurmountable difficulty can arise as to whether it can be achieved through a social contract.
Consequently, for Rousseau, unlike utilitarians since Hume, the problem is not to harmoniously combine private and public interest, but to understand that the general interest is not reducible to individual benefit.
Interests as a source of social dynamics
It is obvious that the social significance of interests as a source of social dynamics manifests itself most acutely in the transitional period of the development of society in social, ethnic conflicts, deep economic and political transformations in society, when questions are raised about the ways and methods of its transformation. It is the interests that act as motivating motives for the activities of people, social communities, activate the life of classes, peoples, religious and other social groups. “A closer examination of history convinces us,” Hegel notes, “that the actions of people follow from their needs, their passions, their interests ... and only they play the main significance”16.
In the conditions of sustainable dynamic development and the political system and society as a whole, depends on the skillful consideration and coordination of the interests of various subjects.
The essence of interest lies in the need to realize the needs of the subject through its objective inclusion in social relations. The scientific consideration of social interest reveals the following elements: needs and the subject's awareness of the need to satisfy them, social conditions of life and the choice of specific practical actions that allow the subject to realize the need.
Social subjects are in constant interaction, their life situation is under a powerful influence from society, which is of a twofold nature. Either the situation of people is endangered, that is, worsens, destabilizes, or, on the contrary, it opens up new opportunities for them to improve their lives, increase their prestige, and so on. From this interaction, interest is born. It can be defined as the desire of the subject to change, improve or preserve, strengthen their living conditions and position with the help of social means. Specifically, interest is manifested as the desire of people, social groups for certain values, institutions, processes, connections, norms, for a specific attitude to reality17.
Interests express certain needs and are aimed at certain goals of people or their groups. Carriers of personal needs and interests unite in groups in order to express their interests within groups and represent them more effectively in relations with the state and other groups, which is hardly possible for one person. The process of formation of interest lies in the fact that at first the most diverse social interests and needs of members of a social group, their personal emotionally colored opinions, judgments, in the course of communication and exchange are translated into specific forms or requirements of a particular association or institution. In order to identify and make obvious often still little realized interests, so that common views become collective aspirations, a sense of community and the concept of “we” must arise (“we are miners”, “we are Yakuts”, “we are patriots”, “ we are Cossacks”, etc.). As L.G. Zdravomyslov notes, interests, like needs, are a special kind of social relations; they do not exist on their own, abstractly, outside those individuals, social groups, classes and other forces that act as their carriers. This is one of the reasons for the classification of interests. The other side of the matter is that interest, like need, is directed to a specific object. The objects of interest are material and spiritual values, social institutions and social relations, established customs and practices. If the need is focused primarily on the subject of its satisfaction, then the interest is directed to those social relations, institutions, institutions on which the distribution of objects, values, benefits that ensure the satisfaction of needs depends. Interests are especially closely connected with distributive relations in society, being aimed either at changing or at consolidating existing distributive relations.
Because of this, interests turn out to be in a certain sense more significant, important from the point of view of ensuring real living conditions. They are aimed primarily at rational means of subsistence. When a certain level of satisfaction of needs is reached, interests come to the fore. For some, these are “legitimate claims” to the existing level of consumption, for others, this is the desire for a qualitative change in living conditions. What is common between needs and interests is that in both cases we are dealing with the aspirations of people that directly affect their social and economic behavior. However, if needs orient people's behavior towards the possession of those benefits that turn out to be vital or stimulate vitally significant ways of human activity, then interests are those incentives for action that arise from the mutual relationship of people to each other.
The direct subject of social interest is not the good itself as such, but those positions of the individual or social stratum that provide the possibility of obtaining this good. But these positions are not equal, insofar as interests are in a certain sense more conflictogenic than needs. Both in everyday speech and in theoretical analysis, interests are much more often associated with social position, which fixes for a certain time the totality of opportunities provided to the actor by society. It is the social position that outlines the boundaries of what is accessible and possible for the individual and the social group. Through the possible and, in principle, accessible, it also influences the formation of realistic desires and aspirations. The situation, reflected in desires, feelings, mindsets and life plans, turns into a set of complex incentives for activity - into interests, which act as the immediate cause of social behavior.
Interests appear in the form of feelings, desires, moods and aspirations to satisfy needs, which are reflected, comprehended and realized in the individual and collective consciousness. The process of awareness is manifested in the selectivity and directed activity of the subjects of interest, which emphasizes its subjectivity.
Most supporters of sociological and psychological interpretations see the nature of interest as dialectical, they view it through the prism of the unity of objective and subjective components. In particular, a number of authors single out a three-term structure of interest: the need to satisfy a need (which in turn implies the existence of a need itself); the possibility of satisfying the need (this requires the existence of conditions and means of satisfying it); awareness of the need to meet the needs and opportunities to meet them19.
Interests directly reflect the relations of inequality that have developed in society, they constantly contain an element of comparison of a person with a person, one social group with another. It is in this that the basis of that effectiveness, that real power, which lies in interests. They directly reflect the social position of individuals, which determines their role as the most important incentives for the action of social development.
The role of social interest in shaping the system of political participation
One of the most important characteristics of political processes is the participation of people in political life. Individuals, groups, social strata are involved in the political process, constantly interact with the political environment and perform a variety of roles.
Political participation is the involvement of ordinary citizens in the formation of government bodies, in the recognition of the legitimacy of power, in the formation of the policy pursued by the ruling group and control over its implementation, in the development and establishment of a political culture, and, finally, in controlling the behavior of elites. We are talking about the involvement in one form or another of members of society in the process of forming a system of political participation. If citizens take part in the political life of a society, then the political system of that society can be considered participatory. However, individuals and social groups are not equally involved in the political process, and this largely depends on the political regime.
Thus, under the conditions of a democratic political regime, political participation is universal, "free. It acts for citizens as a means of achieving their goals, realizing their interests. Political participation makes it possible to identify the real role of a citizen, individual strata, groups in the political process.
Difficulties in the formation of a system of political participation can be caused by a lack of trust among various groups in relation to each other, their desire to take a maximalist position, as well as the weakness of political institutions.
The solution to this problem is possible by identifying, firstly, the potential for shared participation in power, which alleviates the causes of various conflicts; secondly, the difficulties of the transition to democracy, since it reinforces rather than alleviates the various causes of conflict; thirdly, differences in the systems of political participation.
The motivated political participation of citizens is a fundamental component of democratic governance and the development of civil society. According to the theories of democracy, all citizens of the country should not only have a chance to participate in making socially important decisions, but also use it from time to time. This is precisely what the theory of "civil culture" proposed by G. Llmond and S. Verba1 to describe the political culture of democratic countries says. The civic culture consists of elements of an activist political culture, balanced by elements of a more passive submissive culture and an apathetic, apolitical patriarchal culture. The activist element ensures innovation and rational involvement of the population in solving important social problems. But for stability, it must be balanced by other elements, more passive, traditional, emphasizing the loyalty of the individual to the political system. Therefore, the idea of a “reserve of influence” appears, which all citizens of a democratic state have. Using their reserve of influence, they can from time to time be actively involved in political activities in order to satisfy their interests.
Despite the fact that the topic of political participation is of interest to researchers from different countries, we have to admit that in our country this topic has not yet found worthy coverage.
If a democratic system functions successfully, then it provides the members of the group with the opportunity to choose political leaders, achieve economic success and social status without political restrictions. Individuals and groups can use the electoral system to gain official support and respect for their local institutions by voting for sympathetic candidates.
If properly organized, the electoral system reduces tensions by keeping some radicals out of power. Working with elected representatives can help a group build an electoral coalition, change controversial legislation, or defend the group's prerogatives. Successful collaboration, in turn, helps future relationships by demonstrating that groups can work together and share common interests.
In rare cases, a system of political participation can satisfy the ambitions of leadership groups. When one group rules the state (or can take control of the state due to a threat to its privileged position), then the main ambitions of the leadership group are secure. Thus, when a democratic system guarantees one group control of the process, it reduces conflict based on the satisfaction of the ambitions of the leadership group. Under these conditions, the less democracy, the greater the effectiveness of peacekeeping efforts, since a more equitable democratic system allows any group to have unfettered access to political power.
Some forms of democracy can be successful in providing power sharing in divided societies. Liberal democracy is based on the principle of a changeable majority in order to avoid the tyranny of the majority. This means that individuals can temporarily form various coalitions, based on economic, social interests, uniting on a regional basis or on other grounds, which ensures that diversity of opinions is taken into account. The majority system is effective when the majority changes from election to election, as happens in the United States and other Western democracies.
social interest
Another concept of decisive importance in Adler's individual psychology is the social interest. The concept of social interest reflects Adler's persistent belief that we humans are social creatures, and if we want to understand ourselves more deeply, we must consider our relationships with other people and, even more broadly, the socio-cultural context in which we we live. But even to a greater extent, this concept reflects a fundamental, albeit gradual, change in Adler's views on what constitutes a huge guiding force underlying all human aspirations.
Early in his career, Adler believed that people are motivated by an insatiable desire for personal power and a need to dominate others. In particular, he believed that people are driven forward by the need to overcome deep-rooted feelings of inferiority and the desire for superiority. These views met with widespread protest. Indeed, Adler has been widely criticized for emphasizing selfish motives while ignoring social ones. Many critics thought that Adler's position on motivation was nothing more than a disguised version of Darwin's doctrine that the fittest survives. However, later, when Adler's theoretical system was further developed, it took into account that people are largely motivated by social urges. Namely, people are impelled to certain actions by an innate social instinct that makes them give up selfish goals for the sake of community goals. The essence of this view, which found its expression in the concept of social interest, is that people subordinate their personal needs to the cause of social good. The expression "social interest" comes from the German neologism Gemeinschaftsgefuhl, a term whose meaning cannot be fully conveyed in another language in one word or phrase. It means something like "social feeling", "feeling of community" or "feeling of solidarity". It also includes the meaning of membership in the human community, that is, a sense of identification with humanity and similarity with every member of the human race.
1. Subsocial objects - inanimate objects, situations or activities (science, art, etc.). The interest shown in them is in no way connected with the individual's own "I". The capacity for such self-motivated interest is the foundation of the individual's future contribution to the development of mankind. But whether a person makes such a contribution or not depends to a large extent on the development of a focus on the second category of objects.
2. Social objects include all living things. Social interest here manifests itself as the ability to appreciate life and accept the point of view of another. At the same time, interest in proper social objects comes later than interest in subsocial objects, so we can talk about the corresponding stages in the development of social interest. So, for example, at the subsocial stage, a child can play with kittens with interest and at the same time torment them, cause them pain. At the social stage, he is already more respectful and reverent about life.
3. Suprasocial objects are both living and non-living objects. Social interest here means a complete going beyond oneself and unity with the entirety of the world, it is "a cosmic feeling and a reflection of the commonality of the entire cosmos and life in us", "a close union with life as a whole."
The process of social interest can be directed to three kinds of objects.
Table 3.1. Feelings, thoughts and characteristics of a person's command, reflecting the development of his social interest
Adler believed that the prerequisites for social interest are innate. Since each person has it to some extent, he is a social creature by nature, and not by the formation of a habit. However, like other innate tendencies, social interest does not arise automatically, but requires that it be consciously developed. He is trainable and produces results through appropriate guidance and training.
Social interest develops in the social environment. Other people - first of all the mother, and then the rest of the family - contribute to the process of its development. However, it is the mother, with whom contact is the first in the life of the child and has the greatest influence on him, who makes great efforts to develop social interest. In fact, Adler sees the maternal contribution to education as a double work: encouraging the formation of a mature social interest and helping to direct it beyond the sphere of maternal influence. Both functions are not easy to perform, and they are always influenced to some extent by how the child explains the behavior of the mother.
Since social interest arises in the relationship of the child with the mother, her task is to instill in the child a sense of cooperation, the desire to establish relationships and companionship - qualities that Adler considered closely intertwined. Ideally, a mother shows true love for her child—love centered on his well-being and not on his own maternal vanity. This healthy love stems from a genuine concern for people and enables a mother to nurture social interest in her child. Her tenderness for her husband, for other children, and for people in general, serves as a role model for the child, who learns from this pattern of broad social interest that there are other significant people in the world, not just family members.
Many of the attitudes formed in the process of maternal upbringing can also suppress the child's sense of social interest. If, for example, a mother is solely focused on her children, she will not be able to teach them to transfer social interest to other people. If she prefers her husband exclusively, avoids children and society, her children will feel unwanted and deceived, and the potential opportunities for their social interest will remain unfulfilled. Any behavior that reinforces in children the feeling of being neglected and unloved leads them to lose their autonomy and inability to cooperate.
Adler considered the father as the second most important source of influence on the development of a child's social interest. First, the father must have a positive attitude toward his wife, work, and society. In addition to this, his formed social interest should be manifested in relations with children. According to Adler, the ideal father is one who treats his children as equals and takes an active part, along with his wife, in their upbringing. A father must avoid two mistakes: emotional isolation and parental authoritarianism, which, oddly enough, have the same consequences. Children who feel the alienation of their parents usually pursue the goal of achieving personal superiority rather than superiority based on social interest. Parental authoritarianism also leads to a defective lifestyle. The children of despotic fathers also learn to fight for power and personal rather than social dominance.
Finally, according to Adler, the relationship between father and mother has a great influence on the development of a child's social feeling. Thus, in the case of an unhappy marriage, children have little chance of developing social interest. If the wife does not provide emotional support to her husband and gives her feelings exclusively to the children, they suffer, because excessive guardianship extinguishes social interest. If a husband openly criticizes his wife, children lose respect for both parents. If there is discord between husband and wife, children begin to play with one of the parents against the other. In this game, in the end, children lose: they inevitably lose a lot when their parents show a lack of mutual love.
According to Adler, the severity of social interest is a convenient criterion for assessing the mental health of an individual. He referred to it as a "barometer of normality" - an indicator that can be used in assessing the quality of a person's life. That is, from Adler's position, our lives are valuable only to the extent that we help to increase the value of other people's lives. Normal, healthy people really care about others; their pursuit of excellence is socially positive and includes the pursuit of the well-being of all people. Although they understand that not everything in this world is right, they take on the task of improving the lot of mankind. In short, they know that their own life is of no absolute value until they dedicate it to their contemporaries and even to those who have not yet been born.
In ill-adjusted people, on the contrary, social interest is not sufficiently expressed. As we will see later, they are self-centered, they fight for personal superiority and superiority over others, they have no social goals. Each of them lives a life that has only personal meaning - they are absorbed in their own interests and self-defense.
G.I. Larionova,
applicant,
Department of Social Pedagogy,
Omsk State Pedagogical University
Nyagan, Russia,
G.I. Larionova,
the applicant,
Department of Social Pedagogy,
Omsk State Pedagogical University
Nyagan, Russia,
Email: [email protected]
The problem of social integration of the individual is one of the main ones in sociology, which studies the mechanisms established and operating in society for the transfer of social experience from generation to generation. In the article, based on the analysis of existing concepts and theories of foreign and domestic scientists, the concept of "social integration" is defined, which can be considered, on the one hand, as a process of active inclusion of an individual in the social life of society, and on the other hand, as a process of active assimilation by an individual of social norms and values.
The continuing state of economic, political and social instability in society necessitates the search for effective measures aimed at increasing the level of social integration of the individual.
Society as a social system is characterized by the organic interaction of various communities, groups and strata. One such group is the youth. Philosophical analysis of emerging integration preferences reveals many problems of social integration of young people in modern conditions.
Keywords: socialization, social integration, society, social problems, social behavior, social experience
Social integration: the concept, the essence, the direction
The problem of social integration of the personality is a major in sociology that studies the mechanisms established and the transfer of social experience of operating in a society from generation to generation. The article based on the analysis of the existing concepts and foreign and domestic scientists theories defined the concept of "social integration", which can be seen on the one hand, as a process of active involvement of the individual in social life, and on the other hand - as a process of active assimilation of individual social norms and values.
The continuing state of economic, political and social instability in society is the need to find effective measures aimed at improving the social integration of the individual.
Society as a social system characterized by organic interfaces between different communities, groups and layers. One such group is the youth. Philosophical analysis of evolving preferences of integration brings many problems of social integration of youth in modern conditions.
keywords: socialization, social integration, society, social issues, social behavior, social experience
Social integration of personality: concept, essence, directions
The problem of social integration of the individual is one of the main ones in sociology, which studies the mechanisms established and operating in society for the transfer of social experience from generation to generation. According to the views of T. Parsons, social integration is an organic part of socialization. In sociology, many theories have been developed that reflect various scientific directions for explaining this phenomenon of social reality.
The concept of "integration" came to the social sciences from the natural - physics, biology and others, where it is understood as the state of connectedness of individual differentiated parts into a whole and the process leading to such a state.
In psychology, the concept of integration was introduced by Carl Gustav Jung. By integration, he understood: a) awareness of the conflict between fragments of consciousness; b) acceptance of the conflicting parties as equal in importance. The meaning of integration lies in the fact that the area of consciousness that was repressed, suppressed by the personality, was no longer rejected. That is, integration means the acceptance and awareness of that material of psychic reality that was expelled from the sphere of the Ego into the unconscious with the help of protective mechanisms (suppression, repression).
In modern sociological literature, the concept of social integration, as noted by Z. T. Golenkova, E. D. Ikhitkhanyan, is given insufficient attention, and there is no clear definition of the conceptual apparatus. Most often, social integration is understood as (from Latin integratio - connection, restoration) the state and process of unification into a single whole, the coexistence of previously disparate parts and elements of the system together, based on their interdependence and complementarity, including as a process of harmonizing relations between various social groups.
In foreign sociology, scientists O. Comte, G. Spencer and E. Durkheim for the first time clearly defined the foundations of the functional approach to the concept of social integration. According to O. Comte, cooperation based on the division of labor performs the function of maintaining social harmony and establishing "general agreement" (consensus) in society. G. Spencer singled out two sides of any development process: differentiation (structural and functional) and integration, which ensures the consistency of more and more specialized institutions. E. Durkheim, defining society as an integrated whole, consisting of interdependent parts, singled out two types of societies: with mechanical (archaic society) and organic (industrial society) solidarity. Organic solidarity is a consensus, that is, the cohesion of the team, is born as a result of differentiation or is explained by it. Solidarity was considered by Durkheim as a condition for the survival and stability of society, and he considered the main function of social institutions to be integrative. The division of labor in modern societies lays the foundation for a new type of social integration.
T. Parsons argued that the process of formation and maintenance of social interactions and relationships between actors (agents) is one of the functional conditions for the existence of a social system. For T. Parsons, integration is a fundamental property or functional imperative of a social system (social society), it ensures the solidarity of members of society and the necessary level of their loyalty towards each other and towards the system as a whole. Social society, being the core of society, provides "different orders and levels of internal integration." "The social order requires a clear and definite integration in the sense of a coherent normative order on the one hand, and social 'harmony' and 'coordination' on the other." Also, according to the views of T. Parsons, the central point of the process of social integration as an organic part of socialization is the internalization of the culture of the society where the individual was born, who “absorbs” common values (axiological patterns) in the process of communicating with “significant others” or adopts them. from "other". As a result, adherence to generally valid normative standards becomes part of the motivational structure of the individual, his need.
Professor of Michin University I. Kh. Cooley considered the concept of "social integration" through the initial unity of social consciousness and the unity of the individual and society. And, as the scientist noted, “the unity of social consciousness” does not consist in similarity, but in the organization, mutual influence and causal connection of its parts.
The most viable kind of social integration, as noted by Z. T. Golenkova and E. D. Ikhitkhanyan, consists of the unity of diversity, the formation of integrity based on the coincidence of the goals and interests of various social groups, and concepts close to it are consent, social cohesion, solidarity, partnership . An individual in society is valuable not so much in itself, but depending on which social whole he belongs to, which professional group, organization, etc. The individual is considered as an element of the whole, his value is determined by his contribution to the whole.
But, as E. Durkheim points out, in modern society it is difficult to resolve the issue of the integrity of any phenomenon. Everything is determined by a specific social situation, the behavior of others, a specific type of activity.
The British sociologist E. Giddens interpreted the concept of "integration" not as a synonym for cohesion or consensus, but as a process of interaction. The scientist distinguishes between the concepts of "system integration" and "social integration". Social integration is the interaction between actors of action. It is defined as a system on a personal level, which implies the spatial and temporal co-presence of interaction agents. System integration is the interaction of groups and collectives, which forms the basis of the systemic nature of society as a whole.
Domestic scientist N. N. Fedotova believes that any definitions of social integration are not universal, since they take into account very few of the elements that function in society. The scientist considers social integration as a set of processes due to which heterogeneous interacting elements cohesion into a social community, whole, system, as a form of maintaining a certain stability and balance of social relations by social groups. At the same time, the two most important approaches are the interpretation of integration based on common values (T. Parsons) and on the basis of interdependence in a situation of division of labor (E. Durkheim).
An interesting concept of social integration is presented in the studies of Russian sociologists B. G. Zhogin, T. F. Maslova, V. K. Shapovalova. According to this concept, social integration acts as a measure of the coincidence of goals, interests of various social groups, individuals. From the point of view of D. V. Zaitsev, the consideration by scientists of the unity of goals, values, views and beliefs of individuals as one of the main grounds for their integration into society is not sufficiently legitimate, since there is an association of individuals with different habitus. Considering that each person has his own system of views, values, preferences, and the process of integration into society involves, first of all, the organization of joint activities based on interpersonal interaction, mutual adaptation, and it is necessary, the author believes, to be considered as a defining feature of social integration.
Thus, the space of social integration contributes to the development of a person’s communicative culture, provides an opportunity for conscious and unconscious learning of the necessary, adequate and productive practices of social interaction, through previously mastered social roles, and forms in an individual social behavior expected by society and conditioned by social status, that is, social status. a position associated with certain rights and obligations and cultural norms. In general, social integration comes down, firstly, to the unification of people based on the existence of common values and interdependence, and secondly, to the emergence of interpersonal relationships, interaction practices, mutual adaptation between social groups and integrated individuals. At the same time, the level of social integration, from the point of view of E. Durkheim, is determined by the degree of the individual's sense of belonging to a social group or collective based on shared norms, values, and beliefs.
Analyzing and summarizing the views of researchers directly related to the problems of integration, we come to the conclusion that there are many theories that can basically be reduced to two approaches: societies (E. Giddens, O. Comte, T. Parsons, P. Sorokin and others); b) theories about the emergence and development of relationships between the individual and society - the assimilation of the value-normative system of society (E. Durkheim, I. K. Cooley, J. Habermas, etc.). However, there is no integral and unified theory that would explain what grounds are universal for the integration of both the individual and society as a whole. The concept of "social integration" can be viewed, on the one hand, as a process of active inclusion of an individual in the social life of society, and on the other hand, as a process of active assimilation by an individual of social norms and values.
In the 20th century, in the domestic and foreign socio-philosophical and sociological literature, certain directions were outlined in the study of the problems of social integration. One of the first directions in the development of problems of social integration is connected with the analysis of trends and patterns of change in the social structure of society. In Soviet philosophical science, these works were begun in the 1920s, during the formation of Soviet society, and are associated with the names of A.A. Bogdanov and N.I. Bukharin.
In the early 90s of the last century, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a large number of publications appeared in Russian literature on the problems of social integration and sociocultural identification of the individual in a transforming society. Russian scientists carried out the analysis and testing of well-known foreign theories and methods in new socio-cultural conditions. The works of such researchers as Z.T. Golenkova, G.G. Diligensky, I.M. Drobizheva, T.I. Zaslavskaya, I.G. Ionin, P.M. Kozyreva, Yu.A. Levada, V.A. Yadov and others.
Of particular interest to us is the concept of the domestic psychologist G.M. Andreeva. It is based on the approaches of foreign researchers E. Durkheim, T. Parsons, C. Cooley and others. Andreeva distinguishes two forms of socialization: socialization as adaptation to certain social conditions and socialization as integration into a certain environment, the latter involves active entry into society. Also G.M. Andreeva defines the differences between the upbringing and socialization of the individual, emphasizing that upbringing is a purposeful process, and socialization is a spontaneous process, whether we want it or not, the phenomena of reality in the political, social, cultural sphere do not leave us indifferent, we cannot "fence ourselves off" from them; education is a discrete process, i.e. discontinuous, socialization is a continuous process and is carried out until the end of a person's life; education is carried out here and now by specific subjects of education, and socialization is carried out throughout life, starting from birth and continuing throughout life. The processes of upbringing and socialization proceed in parallel and at the same time independently of each other, they are aimed at the formation of the personality, the acquisition by a person of his place in life, the path of social and professional self-determination. The purpose of education is the development of a personality ready for socialization in the form of integration.
The continuing state of economic, political and social instability in society calls for the search for effective measures aimed at increasing the level of social integration. Understanding integration in the most general sense as the unification of system elements into a single whole, social philosophy considers it as the most important element of the stabilization and development mechanism, one of the conditions for social reproduction.
Society as a social system is characterized by the organic interaction of various communities, groups and strata. One of these groups is young people who play a certain role in social reproduction. Integrating into the social structure, young people carry out not only simple reproduction, but also expanded, thanks to their innovative potential. Expanded reproduction as the most important condition for social development can be successfully carried out in an integrated society. Consequently, the integrity and stability of society largely depends on how actively and freely young people are included in social structures, and on the degree of their solidarity with them.
A philosophical analysis of the emerging integration preferences of young people shows that the personal self-identification of young people is characterized by such qualities as instability, lack of final formation, higher reactivity in relation to changes in the sociocultural environment compared to older age groups. But at the same time, it is young people who have a whole set of social resources that contribute to a higher adaptability of this social group in the context of transformations: young age, education, social activity, willingness to take risks, etc. It is the youth, having such a socio-cultural potential, that can act as a conductor of social innovations necessary to stabilize social development.
The problems of social integration of youth were of interest to such Russian sociologists as S. Grigoriev, I.M. Ilyinsky, L.V. Koklyagina, T.I. Kukhtevich, V.T. Lisovsky, L.Ya. Rubina, V.V. Semenovich, V.I. Chuprov, V.N. Shubin and many others, but there are not enough studies presenting the social aspect of the integration and self-identification of the younger generation.
Thus, at present there is a need to study the problems of social integration of young people in the context of social changes in modern society. The problem lies in the contradiction that arises between the objectively inherent desire of young people to take appropriate positions in the social structure, to acquire a certain social status, and the obstacles to its effective integration into society, which are formed in conditions of social instability and economic crisis.
Despite the controversy of the final conclusions about overcoming class differences and achieving social homogeneity, Soviet and Russian scientists made a significant contribution to the development of the theory and practice of social integration of the individual, revealed in their research, within the framework of various approaches, individual, specific aspects of the social integration of young people. However, it should be noted that the issues of social integration of the individual are currently insufficiently developed in connection with the changed socio-cultural situation in Russia.
Bibliography
- Andreeva G.M. Social psychology.- M.: Nauka, 2004.
- Golenkova Z.T., Igitkhanyan E.D. Processes of integration and disintegration in the social structure of Russian society. Sotsiologicheskie issledovanija. 1999. No. 9.
- Durkheim E.O. On the division of social labor: the method of sociology. M., 2000.
- Zaitsev D.V. Socio-educational integration of atypical children: social conclusions and prospects // Russian society and sociology in the XXI century: social conclusions and alternatives: v3t. M.: MGU, 2003. V.2.
- Cooley Ch. X. Public organization. Deep Mind Exploration. // Texts on the history of sociology of the XIX-XX centuries. Reader. - M .: Nauka, 1994.
- Parsons T. Action Coordinate System and General Systems Theory: Culture, Personality and the Place of Social Systems // American Sociological Thought. M., 1996.
- Tabylginova L.A. Scientific notes of ZabGGPU // Basic scientific approaches to the concept of "social integration". Gorno-Altaisk, 2011.
- Jung K.G. On the Formation of Personality // Jung Carl Gustav. Psyche: structure and dynamics / Per. A.A. Spector; scientific ed. per. M.V. Marischuk. M.: AST: Mn.: Harvest, 2005.
we nod today - this is the result, first of all, of the spiritual poverty of individuals, as well as the purposeful activities of unscrupulous politicians pursuing selfish goals. From history (and not only from it), you know very well what disastrous consequences the attempts to introduce racist and Nazi ideas lead to. Any racism, nationalism, anti-Semitism is a lie, and a criminal lie, because along with moral norms, constitutional human rights are violated.
NI Basic concepts: ethnicity, nation.
YANTerms: nationality, national mentality, national traditions and values.
Test yourself
1) In what sense is the concept of "ethnos" used in our science? 2) What is the difference between the definitions of the concept of "ethnos"? 3) What sign of an ethnic group is considered the main one? 4) Why is the concept of "nation", according to many scientists, not a strictly scientific category? 5) Why is it argued that the national mentality is a kind of memory of the past, which determines the behavior of people? 6) What, according to Ilyin, are the main values of the Russian people? Why did the philosopher call them supranational? 7) What confirms the ethnic diversity of modern humanity?
Think, Discuss, Do
1. Persian poet and philosopher Saadi (1210 -1292) wrote:
All the tribe of Adam is one body,
Created from the dust alone.
If only one part of the body is wounded,
Then the whole body will fall into trembling.
Over human grief you did not cry forever, -
So will people say you're human? How do you understand the meaning of these lines, written in the 13th century? Why are they said to be relevant today? Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Explain your position.
You are familiar with the wording: national
traditions, national cuisine, national income, wal
howling national product, national features,
National Philharmonic Orchestra of Russia
the rational people of Russia. The concept of "national" art
uses here in different senses, since different track
The concept of “nation” itself has a certain meaning. Explain in what
sense must be understood by each of these formulations.
As part of the tradition, experts include customs, ri
tual, rite. Each of these traditions has its own
4. In the USSR, nationality was determined and recorded in the passport. Public opinion was also dominated by a rigid norm of a single, obligatory and consanguineous nationality. And if the state wrote it down in your passport, then you are exactly what is written down. Ethnologist V. A. Tishkov calls this situation “forced identity” and notes that there are not thousands, but millions of similar examples in the territory of the former USSR. He gives an example close to him. A friend of his son, Felix Khachaturian, who lived all his life in Moscow, did not know a word of Armenian, had never been to Armenia, was listed as an Armenian on a Soviet passport, although he is Russian not only in culture, but also in self-consciousness.
The scientist raises the question: does such a person have the right to consider himself Russian? Or are the sound of the surname and appearance the main determinants of ethnic identity? The scientist has a clear, well-founded answer. What is your opinion? Explain.
Work with the source
The Russian historian V. O. Klyuchevsky (1841-1911) in his famous “Course of Russian History” noted that the living conditions convinced the Russian people that “it is necessary to cherish a clear summer working day, that nature gives him little convenient time for agricultural labor. And that the short Great Russian summer can still be shortened by untimely, unexpected bad weather. This makes the Great Russian peasant hurry. To work hard to do a lot in a short time and get out of the field in time, and then sit idle through the autumn and winter. So the Great Russian got used to the excessive short-term exertion of his strength, got used to working quickly, feverishly and quickly, and then resting during the forced autumn and winter idleness.
Klyuchevsky V. O. Works: In 9 volumes - M., 1987. - T. 1. - S. 315.
^H Questions and assignments to the source. one) What is the main idea of the fragment? 2) What features of the Russian mentality were formed under the influence of the described living conditions? 3) What impact do you think modern living conditions have on the mentality of Russians?
motivating forces of the activities of social groups, aimed at social institutions, institutions, norms of relationships in society, on which the distribution of values and benefits that ensure the satisfaction of needs depends.
Great Definition
Incomplete definition ↓
SOCIAL INTEREST
the real cause of social actions, events, accomplishments, behind the immediate motives - motives, thoughts, ideas, etc. - of individuals, social groups, communities participating in these actions. S.I. - this is the form in which the individual (social group, community) is directly aware of his real situation and his needs, which in turn are expressed in the form of goals that the individual (class, society) sets for himself.
The main difficulty in understanding interests lies in the antinomy: on the one hand, it is recognized that interest is a direct motive for human activity, if we keep in mind the material conditionality of his actions. On the other hand, interest is something external, independent of the will and consciousness of a person. The main problem is to find out whether interest in both of its qualities is one and the same phenomenon, or whether different phenomena are designated by the same term. According to A.G. Zdravomyslov, S.I. - it's not just a social position; it is a position that is reflected in consciousness, and at the same time consciousness that passes into action. In this sense, S.I. is both an objective attitude and at the same time a subjective stimulus, i.e. unity of objective and subjective.
In the structure of S.I. distinguish four main points: the social position of the subject, or the totality of his ties with society; the degree of awareness of the situation, which can vary from incomprehension through a vague sensation to clear awareness; motives of activity aimed at certain objects of interest; the action itself, which is the assertion of the subject in the objective world. S.I., thus, reflect the social position of the subject and are determined by him. This objective dependence of S.I. individuals from the material conditions of their lives can be qualified as a regularity. There is also the second side of this issue - the problem of S.I. in the processes of socio-economic development. S.I. they themselves can influence social relations, and this reverse influence has not been sufficiently studied (meanwhile, it needs a deep analysis). The problem of S.I. on the processes of socio-economic development is associated with the problem of the subject of the historical process, which has consciousness and the ability to set goals.
Based on the understanding that social relations are manifested in the form of S.I., certain conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, S.I. always have their carriers, i.e. belong to real subjects entering into relations with each other. Secondly, S.I. by their nature, they are objective, being a reflection of the role of the relevant subjects in the system of social division of labor, their connection with a certain type of social appropriation. Thirdly, social relations (and the social laws expressing their essence), manifesting themselves in S.I., acquire the character of the driving forces of social development. Neither laws considered in themselves, nor social relations as such, are yet sources of movement. They become them only by expressing themselves in S.I. subjects of action. Since S.I. is a form of expression of social relations, then each social system has its own special structure of S.I., its own specific way of their interaction.
Within the framework of a certain social structure, the structuralization of S.I. is expedient, associated with: the division of labor and the assignment of certain types of activity to the corresponding social groups; the formation of various forms of ownership and the emergence of S.I. owners; the production of forms of communication as components that make up the way of life of people; personification of social relations, i.e. the development of personality types that are most suitable for a given mode of production, the life of the whole society. In any society, on the basis of the deployment of its internal contradictions, a certain hierarchy of S.I. is formed; while the satisfaction and realization of S.I. of a more general order is the condition for satisfaction of S.I. lesser degree of generality. The question of the ratio of general and particular S.I. is of great importance for the development of a strategy for socio-economic development and its implementation in resolving tactical issues. General S.I. expresses the dominant trend in the development of the whole due to the fact that it most fully expresses the complex of basic social contradictions. At the same time, the uneven development of various components of the whole can give rise to contradictions between general and particular S.I. Two extremes are dangerous here - ignoring and underestimating common interests, bringing the interests of constituent parts to the fore and, on the contrary, separating the common interest from its own soil, turning the common interest into an abstract slogan (idea) that is not supported by concrete actions due to insufficient development, insufficient readiness of components. Both extremes lead to a slowdown in the pace of social progress, to a slowdown in the implementation of both general and private S.I.
Great Definition
Incomplete definition ↓
