The concept of a social system. social organization

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

social system

1. The concept of a social system

5. Functions of the social system

Literature

1. The concept of a social system

Social systems theory is a relatively new branch of general sociology. It originated in the early 1950s and owes its birth to the efforts of two sociologists - Talcott Parsons of Harvard University and Robert Merton of Columbia University.

There are two possible approaches to the definition of a social system.

In one of them, the social system is seen as the orderliness and integrity of a multitude of individuals and groups of individuals. Such a definition is given by analogy with the definition of a system in general as a “complex of interacting elements”, as formulated by L. Bertalanffy, one of the founders of the “general theory of systems”. With this approach, interaction turns into an adjective, which clearly does not take into account the specifics of social systems and the role of social relations in them.

But another approach is also possible, in which the consideration of the social as one of the main forms of the movement of matter is taken as a starting point. In this case, the social form of the movement of matter appears before us as a global social system. And what is fixed in the generally accepted names of the main forms of motion of matter? They fix the specifics of the type of interaction inherent in this form (for example, metabolism is a specific type of biological interaction). At the same time, the qualitative boundaries between the forms of matter movement are determined by their material carrier (macrobody, atom, electron, biosystem, social collective, etc.). Thus, the traditional approach to the definition of the system, in principle, is not violated, since both the “carrier” and “interaction” are present in it, only their logical position in the conceptual space changes, which, in our opinion, allows us to better understand the place of a person in a complex network of social relations called the social system.

With this approach, as a working definition, we can say that social system there is an ordered, self-governing integrity of a multitude of diverse social relations, the bearer of which is the individual and the social groups in which he is included.

2. Characteristic features of the social system

social system society

First, it follows from this definition that exist significant manifold social systems, for individual switched on in various public groups, large and small (planetary community of people, society within a given country, class, nation, family, etc.). As soon as this is so, then society as a whole as a system acquires a super-complex and hierarchical character: it is possible to distinguish various levels in it - in the form of subsystems, sub-subsystems, etc. - which are interconnected by subordinating lines, not to mention subordination of each of them to impulses and commands coming from the system as a whole. At the same time, it should be taken into account that the intrasystemic hierarchy is not absolute, but relative. Each subsystem, each level of the social system is at the same time not hierarchical, i.e. it has a certain degree of autonomy, which does not weaken the system as a whole, but, on the contrary, strengthens it: it allows you to respond more flexibly and quickly to signals coming from outside, not to overload the upper levels of the system with such functions and reactions that the lower levels of integrity can easily cope with.

Second, it follows from this definition that insofar as in face social systems we we have integrity, then the main thing in systems -- This them integrative quality, not inherent generating them parts and components, but inherent system in in general. Thanks to this quality, a relatively independent, separate existence and functioning of the system is ensured. There is a dialectical relationship between the integrity of the system and its integrative quality that unites the entire system: the integrative quality is generated in the process of becoming a system integrity and at the same time acts as a guarantor of this integrity, including by transforming the components of the system according to the nature of the system as a whole. Such integration becomes possible due to the presence in the system of a system-forming component that “attracts” all other components to itself and creates the very same gravitational field that allows the multitude to become an integrity.

Third, it follows from this definition that Human is an universal component social systems, is he certainly switched on in every from them, beginning with societies in in general and ending family. Having been born, a person immediately finds himself included in the system of relations that has developed in a given society, and before he becomes their carrier and even manages to have a transformative effect on it, he himself must; fit into it. The socialization of the individual is essentially his adaptation to the existing system, it precedes his attempts to adapt the system itself to his needs and interests.

Fourth, it follows from this definition that social systems relate to category self-managed. This feature characterizes only highly organized integral systems, both natural and natural-historical (biological and social) and artificial (automated machines). The very ability for self-regulation and self-development implies the presence in each of these systems of special management subsystems in the form of certain mechanisms, bodies and institutions. The role of this subsystem is extremely important - it is it that ensures the integration of all components of the system, their coordinated action. And if we remember that an individual, a social group, society as a whole always act purposefully, then the significance of the management subsystem will become even more visible. We often hear the expression: “The system is working in overdrive,” i.e., it is self-destructing. When does this become possible? Obviously, when the control subsystem begins to falter, or even fails, as a result of which a mismatch occurs in the actions of the system components. In particular, the tremendous costs that society endures during its revolutionary transformation are largely due to the fact that a temporary gap is formed between the destruction of the old system of government and the creation of a new one.

3. Components of social systems

It seems to us that this classification can be based on considerations E. WITH. Markaryan, who proposed consider this problem with three qualitatively various points vision: "I. From the point of view of the subject of activity, answering the question: who is acting? 2. From the point of view of the site of the application of activity, which makes it possible to establish what human activity is aimed at. From the point of view of the mode of activity, designed to answer the question: how, in what way is human activity carried out and its cumulative effect is formed?

What does each of the main sections of society look like in this case (let's call them subjective-activity, functional and socio-cultural)?

1. Subjectively - an activity section (“who is acting?”), The components of which in any case are people, ”because there can be no other subjects of activity in society.

People act as such in two versions: a) as individuals, and the individuality of an action, its relative autonomy are expressed the more clearly, the more personal characteristics are developed in a person (moral awareness of one’s position, understanding of the social necessity and significance of one’s activity, etc.) .); b) as associations of individuals in the form of large (ethnos, social class, or a layer within it) and small (family, primary labor or educational collective) social groups, although associations outside these groupings are also possible (for example, political parties, the army).

2. Functional cut (“what is human activity aimed at?”), which makes it possible to identify the main areas of application of socially significant activity. Taking into account both the biophysiological and social needs of a person, the following main areas of activity are usually distinguished: economics, transport and communications, upbringing, education, science, management, defense, health care, art, in modern society, obviously, the sphere of ecology should be attributed to them, and also the area with the conditional name "informatics", meaning by it not only information and computer support for all other spheres of human activity, but also the branch of the so-called mass media.

Sociocultural section (“how is the activity carried out?”), revealing the means and mechanisms for the effective functioning of society as an integral system. Giving such a definition of the cut, we take into account that basically (especially in the conditions of the modern wave of civilization) human activity is carried out by non-biological, socially acquired, i.e., socio-cultural in nature, means and mechanisms. These include phenomena that seem to be very far from each other in their specific origin, in their substrate, range of applicability, etc.: the means of material production and consciousness, public institutions such as the state and socio-psychological traditions, language and housing.

And yet, the consideration of the main sections of society, in our opinion, will be incomplete if another important section remains out of sight - the sociostructural one, which allows us to continue and deepen the analysis of both the subject of activity and the means-mechanisms of activity. The fact is that society has an overly complex social, in the narrow sense of the word, structure, within which one can distinguish as the most significant the following subsystems; class-stratification (primary and non-primary classes, large strata within classes, estates, strata), socio-ethnic (clan and tribal associations, nationalities, nations), demographic (gender and age structure of the population, the ratio of the active and the disabled population, the correlative characteristic of the health of the population) , settlement (villagers and townspeople), vocational education (the division of individuals into workers of physical and mental labor, their educational level, place in the professional division of labor).

By superimposing the sociostructural section of society on the three previously considered, we get the opportunity to connect to the characteristics of the subject of activity the coordinates associated with his belonging to completely certain class-stratification, ethnic, demographic, settlement, vocational and educational groups. Our possibilities for a more differentiated analysis of both spheres and methods of activity are increasing from the perspective of their incorporation into specific social substructures. Thus, for example, the spheres of health care and education will obviously look different depending on the settlement context in which we have to consider them.

Despite the fact that the structures of systems differ not only quantitatively, but also fundamentally, qualitatively, there is still no harmonious, much less complete, typology of social systems on this basis. In this regard, the proposal of N. Yahiel (Bulgaria) is legitimate to single out within the class of social systems systems that have a "sociological structure". The latter refers to such a structure that includes those components and relationships that are necessary and sufficient for the functioning of society as a self-developing and self-regulating system. Such systems include society as a whole, each of the specific socio-economic formations, settlement structures (city and village). "Perhaps, we can draw a line on this, because even such a system as the economy, for all its significance, does not have such a" sociological structure ".

4. Social system and its environment

The analysis of social systems carried out above was primarily of a structural-component nature. For all its importance, it allows you to understand what the system consists of, and to a much lesser extent - what is its target setting and what the system should do to achieve this goal. Therefore, the structural-component analysis of a social system should be supplemented by a functional analysis, and the latter, in turn, should be preceded by a consideration of the interaction of the system with its environment, because only from this interaction can the functions of interest to us be understood.

Society belongs to the so-called "open systems". This means that for all its relative isolation and autonomy in relation to the external, the social system experiences the active influence of the natural and social environment, exerting its active influence on it at the same time, either in the order of feedback, or in the order of own initiative. After all, society belongs to the category of special, adaptive systems, i.e., unlike biological systems, it is able not only to adapt to the environment, but also to adapt it according to its needs and interests.

And since society is an open and, moreover, adaptive system, its functions can only be adequately understood in the context of its interaction with the environment. In the course of all further analysis, the natural environment will be understood as that part of the universe that is in contact with society and is largely drawn into the orbit of its activity. Inside it, the so-called. “humanized nature”, or noosphere (from the Greek “noos” - mind), as it was named with the light hand of V. I. Vernadsky, and then Teilhard de Chardin. “The biosphere,” Vernadsky wrote, “transferred, or rather, is moving into a new evolutionary state—into the noosphere, is being reworked by the scientific thought of social humanity”1. The social environment for a given social system, a given specific society, is all other social systems and non-systemic social factors with which it is in various types of interaction.

It is very important to take into account that the types of external influences themselves can be very different, differing from each other not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. It seems appropriate to classify these species.

1. The impact on the social system of other, organically unrelated systems, as well as disparate non-systemic phenomena. Here we meet with the maximum approximation to the absolutely external, which does not exclude (and perhaps that is why it presupposes) sometimes extraordinary and even catastrophic results of interaction.

2. Interaction of the "external environment - social system" type, which is, as a rule, a more stable and orderly type of interaction compared to the first one. This stems from the circumstances that both the natural environment and the social environment change relatively slowly under normal conditions, thereby creating the prerequisites for a stable, long-term, lasting adaptation of the social system to its external environments. Another characteristic feature of this type of interaction is the adaptive impact of the social system on its natural and even social environment. What prevails (adaptation to the environment or its adaptation to one's healthy and unhealthy needs) depends on the characteristics of a particular stage of interaction. For example, the dialectics of the interaction of society with its natural environment has developed in such a way that the adaptive function, which has been developing almost exponentially over the course of many centuries, taking nature “into hands”, has led at the present stage to a breakdown in the adaptive abilities of society.

The interaction of social systems included as elements in a more complex integrity. For each of the systems participating in this interaction, all the others in their totality act as its intrasystem environment. The essence of this type of interaction, its fundamental difference from the first two are well formulated by W. Ashby: “Each part has, as it were, the right of veto for the state of equilibrium of the entire system. No state (of the whole system) can be a state of equilibrium if it is unacceptable for each of the constituent parts acting in the conditions created by other parts.

The above typology makes it possible to better understand the origin and direction of the functions carried out by the social system. After all, each of these functions arises and forms in connection with the need for the social system to respond appropriately to repetitive (usually in a certain algorithm) signals and irritations of the natural and social, including the intrasystem, environment. At the same time, most of the most important functions owe their existence primarily to influences from the external environment, it is under the decisive influence of these influences that the relationship of each element of the social system with its intrasystem environment is correlated. Of course, there are cases of intra-system mismatch, but they still remain in the background.

5. Functions of the social system

Function (from lat. functio - execution, implementation) is the role that the system or a given element of the system (its subsystem) performs in relation to it as an integrity.

Super-complex self-governing systems, which include social systems, are characterized by multifunctionality. This means that, on the one hand, the social system has many functions, but there is another plan: multifunctionality, “combination” of functions is characteristic not only for the system as a whole, but also for its components and subsystems. In a social system there is nothing like what we find in other systems, even one as complex as the brain: a strict localization of functions. In this regard, we can talk about the presence of intra-system solidarity in the society: performing “its” function, the component (subsystem) takes on some of the other functions.

All functions implemented by the social system can be reduced to two main ones.

First, it is a function of preserving the system, its stable state (homeostasis). Everything that the system does, everything that the main areas of human activity are aimed at, work for this function, i.e., for the reproduction of the system. In this regard, we can talk about the subfunction of the reproduction of the components of the system and, above all, the biological and social reproduction of a person, the subfunction of the reproduction of intrasystem relations, the subfunction of the reproduction of the main areas of activity, etc.

Secondly, it is a function of improving the system, its optimization. The question immediately arises: optimizing against what? Obviously, in relation to the natural as well as to the social environment. No less obvious is the organic connection between the two main functions, which is predetermined by the specifics of the social system as adaptive.

After all, the nature around us changes very slowly, catastrophes like glaciation or the “global flood” are very rare in it, and if it were not for the dynamic nature of society, a stable balance between it and nature would be established “for a long time”. The society itself creates anthropogenic factors (local, regional, global) to disturb this balance, and then it is forced to look for means and mechanisms for optimizing its relations with the environment, Preliminarily optimizing its internal state.

As for the interaction of the system with its social environment, it is quite clear that the disturber of the peace here is the monopoly anthropogenic factor. This is also the case in relations with the external, non-systemic social environment, and with the internal system environment. Today, for example, we are very concerned about how the reproduction of the main areas of society (economy, healthcare, ecology, upbringing, education) is going. Being unsatisfactorily reproduced both quantitatively and qualitatively, they entail the reproduction of a person that is shrinking in terms of mass and of poor quality in biological and social terms (deterioration of his psychophysical health, the spread of so-called “deviant behavior” in society, the growth of alcoholism and drug addiction ). At the same time, each component of the system experiences the negative impact of other components that together make up its intra-system social environment. The economy, for example, is falling apart not only because of the rupture of traditional economic and financial ties, but also because of the embezzlement of state and public property that has turned into lawlessness, the regression of health care activities, the mismatch of the control subsystem, etc. each of the subsystems, if this continues, threatens to result in a general collapse of sociality and the most natural genocide.

In terms of their importance and priority, the functions that make up the main content of activities in a particular area of society can historically change places. So, for millennia, the function of preserving society and optimizing it was implemented primarily at the expense of the economy, all other areas of activity, including ecology, were still on the periphery of attention in this regard. It had its own iron logic. First, the economy itself had to develop before health care, science, and environmental protection could take their rightful place. Secondly, for the time being, the environmental consequences of economic growth could be neglected, and the demographic consequences of natural phenomena (for example, the repeated extinction of almost half of Europe as a result of plague epidemics) were covered and blocked by rapid population growth. In the 20th century, especially in its second half, the situation changed radically. Today, in order to survive the terrestrial civilization, the sphere of ecological activity must come to the fore, displacing all the others, even the economy. Summing up, we can say: if before, behind the scenes, humanity implemented the slogan “Economy is everything, ecology can be neglected!”, Today it is forced to make a turn of almost 180 ° - “Ecology - first of all, economy - if possible!”.

6. Subsystems and elements of society

Consider the basic principles of a systematic approach to society. To do this, it is necessary to define the basic concepts.

The social system is a holistic formation, the main element of which are people, their connections, interactions and relationships. These connections, interactions and relationships are stable and are reproduced in the historical process, passing from generation to generation.

The functioning and development of a social system occurs on the basis of social ties and the interaction of its elements.

In its most general form, a relationship is an expression of the compatibility of the functioning or development of two or more elements of an object or two (several) objects. Communication is the most profound manifestation of such compatibility. In social studies, various types of connections are distinguished: connections of functioning, development, or genetic, causal connections, structural connections, etc. In epistemological terms, it is important to distinguish between the connections of an object and formal connections, i.e., connections that are established only in the plane of knowledge and do not have a direct analogue in the sphere of the object itself, the confusion of these connections inevitably leads to errors, both in methodology and in the results of the study. .

Social connection is a set of facts that determine joint activities in specific communities at a specific time to achieve certain goals. Social ties are established for a long period of time not at the whim of people, but objectively, that is, regardless of the personal qualities of individuals. These are the connections of individuals with each other, as well as their connections with the phenomena and processes of the surrounding world, which are formed in the course of their practical activities. The essence of social ties is manifested in the content and nature of the actions of people who make up this social community. It is possible to single out connections of interaction, control, relations, as well as institutional connections.

The establishment of these links is dictated by the social conditions in which individuals live and act. The essence of social ties is manifested in the content and nature of the actions of people who make up this social community. Sociologists single out connections of interaction, relations, control, institutional, etc.

The starting point for the formation of a social connection may be the interaction of individuals or groups that form a social community to meet certain needs. Interaction is interpreted as any behavior of an individual or group that is important for other individuals and groups of a social community or society as a whole. Moreover, interaction expresses the nature and content of relations between people and social groups, which, being constant carriers of qualitatively different types of activities, differ in social positions (statuses) and roles.

Social interaction is the mutual influence of various spheres, phenomena and processes of social life, carried out through social activities. It takes place both between separate objects (external interaction) and within a separate object, between its elements (internal interaction). social interaction It has objective and subjective sides. The objective side of the interaction is connections that are independent of individual people, but mediate and control the content and nature of their interaction. The subjective side is understood as the conscious attitude of individuals towards each other, based on mutual expectations of appropriate behavior. These are, as a rule, interpersonal (or socio-psychological) relations that develop in specific social communities at a certain point in time. The mechanism of social interaction includes individuals who perform certain actions, changes in the social community or society as a whole caused by these actions, the impact of these changes on other individuals that make up the social community, and, finally, the feedback of individuals. Interaction leads to the restoration of new social relations. The latter can be represented as relatively stable and independent links between individuals and social groups.

Social relations are relatively stable and independent ties between individuals and social groups. So, society is made up of many individuals, their social connections, interactions and relationships.

But is it possible to consider society as a simple sum of individuals, their connections, interactions and relationships? Supporters systemic approach to analysis societies answer: "Not". With them points vision, society It is not a total, but a complete system. This means that at the level of society, individual actions, connections and relationships form a new, systemic quality. Systemic quality is a special qualitative state that cannot be considered as a simple sum of elements. Social interactions and relations are of a supra-individual, transpersonal nature, that is, society is some kind of independent substance that is primary in relation to individuals. Each individual, being born, finds a certain structure of connections and relations, and in the process of socialization is included in it. Due to what is this integrity achieved, i.e. system quality?

A holistic system has many connections, interactions and relationships. The most typical are correlative connections, interactions and relationships, including the coordination and subordination of elements. Coordination - this is a certain consistency of elements, that special nature of their mutual dependence, which ensures the preservation of an integral system. Subordination- this is subordination and subordination, indicating a special specific place, the unequal value of elements in an integral system.

In the sociology of concepts “social structure" and “social system" are closely related. A social system is a set of social phenomena and processes that are in relationships and connections with each other and form some integral social object. Separate phenomena and processes act as elements of the system. The concept of “social structure” is part of the concept of a social system, and combines two components - social composition and social ties. Social composition is a set of elements that make up a given structure. The second component is a set of connections of these elements. So the way concept social structures includes, on the one hand, the social composition, or a combination of various types of social communities as the system-forming social elements of society, on the other hand, the social connections of the constituent elements that differ in the breadth of their action, in their significance in characterizing the social structure of society at a certain stage of development .

Social structure means the objective division of society into separate strata, groups, different in their social position, in their relation to the mode of production. This is a stable connection of elements in a social system. Main elements social structures are such social commonality as classes and class-like groups, ethnic, professional, socio-demographic groups, socio-territorial communities (city, village, region). Each of these elements, in turn, is a complex social system with its own subsystems and connections. The social structure reflects the characteristics of the social relations of classes, professional, cultural, national-ethnic and demographic groups, which are determined by the place and role of each of them in the system of economic relations. The social aspect of any community is concentrated in its connections and mediations with production and class relations in society.

Another type of social systems is formed on the basis of communities, the social ties of which are determined by associations of organizations. Such social connections called institutional, and social systems - social institutions. The latter act on behalf of society as a whole. Institutional ties can also be called normative, since their nature and content are established by society in order to meet the needs of its members in certain areas of public life.

Consequently, social institutions perform in society the functions of social management and social control as one of the elements of management. Social control enables society and its systems to enforce normative conditions, the violation of which is detrimental to the social system. The main objects of such control are legal and moral norms, customs, administrative decisions, etc. The effect of social control is reduced, on the one hand, to the application of sanctions against behavior that violates social restrictions, on the other hand, to the approval of desirable behavior. The behavior of individuals is conditioned by their needs. These needs can be satisfied in various ways, and the choice of means to satisfy them depends on the value system adopted by a given social community or society as a whole. The adoption of a certain system of values contributes to the identity of the behavior of members of the community. Education and socialization are aimed at conveying to individuals the patterns of behavior and methods of activity established in a given community.

Social institutions govern the behavior of community members through a system of sanctions and rewards. In social management and control, institutions play a very important role. Their task is not only to coercion. In every society there are institutions that guarantee freedom in certain types of activity - freedom of creativity and innovation, freedom of speech, the right to receive a certain form and amount of income, housing and free medical care, etc. For example, writers and artists have guaranteed freedom creativity, search for new artistic forms; scientists and specialists undertake to investigate new problems and search for new technical solutions, etc. Social institutions can be characterized in terms of both their external, formal (“material”) structure, and their internal, content.

Externally social institute looks like a set of persons, institutions, equipped with certain material resources and performing a specific social function. With meaningful sides- this is a certain system of expediently oriented standards of behavior of certain individuals in specific situations. So, if there is justice as a social institution, it can outwardly be characterized as a set of persons, institutions and material means administering justice, then from a substantive point of view, it is a set of standardized patterns of behavior of eligible persons providing this social function. These standards of conduct are embodied in certain roles characteristic of the justice system (the role of a judge, prosecutor, lawyer, investigator, etc.).

The social institution thus determines the orientation of social activity and social relations through a mutually agreed system of expediently oriented standards of behavior. Their emergence and grouping into a system depend on the content of the tasks solved by the social institution. Each such institution is characterized by the presence of an activity goal, specific functions that ensure its achievement, a set of social positions and roles, as well as a system of sanctions that ensure the promotion of desired and the suppression of deviant behavior.

The most important social institutions are political. With their help, political power is established and maintained. Economic institutions provide the process of production and distribution of goods and services. Family also one of the important social institutions. Its activities (relations between parents, parents and children, methods of education, etc.) are determined by a system of legal and other social norms. Along with these institutions, such socio-cultural institutions, as the education system, health care, social security, cultural and educational institutions, etc. Still a significant role in society continues to play institute religions.

Institutional ties, like other forms of social ties on the basis of which social communities are formed, represent an ordered system, a certain social organization. This is a system of accepted activities of social communities, norms and values that guarantee similar behavior of their members, coordinate and direct people's aspirations in a certain direction, establish ways to meet their needs, and resolve conflicts that arise in the process of everyday life. And they also provide a state of balance between the aspirations of various individuals and groups of a given social community and society as a whole. In the case when this balance begins to fluctuate, one speaks of social disorganization of the intensive manifestation of undesirable phenomena (for example, such as crime, alcoholism, aggressive actions, etc.).

A systematic approach to society is complemented in sociology deterministic and functionalist. The deterministic approach is most clearly expressed in Marxism. From the point of view of this teaching, society as an integral system consists of the following subsystems: economic, social, political and spiritual, each of which, in turn, can be considered as a system. To distinguish these subsystems from the actual social one, they are called societal. In the relationship between these systems, cause-and-effect relationships play a dominant role. This means that each of these systems does not exist by itself, but, according to Marxism, is in a causal dependence on other systems. All these systems represent a hierarchical structure, that is, they are in the ratio of subordination, subordination in the order in which they are listed. Marxism clearly points to the dependence and conditionality of all systems on the characteristics of the economic system, which is based on material production based on a certain nature of property relations.

The main subsystems of society -- the social spheres of public life: economic, Covers the relations that arise in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption, material goods; political, Covers the relations connected with interaction of the state, parties of the political organizations concerning the power and management; social, covers relations associated with the interaction of classes, social strata and groups; spiritual, embraces relations connected with the development of social consciousness, science, culture, and art.

These subsystems (spheres), in turn, can be represented by a set of their constituent elements:

economic - production institutions (factories, factories), transport institutions, stock and commodity exchanges, banks, etc.,

political - the state, parties, trade unions, youth, women's and other organizations, etc.,

social - classes, countries, social groups and strata, nations, etc.,

spiritual - the church, educational institutions, scientific institutions, etc.

So, as a result, society becomes an integral system with qualities that none of the elements included in it separately have. As a result of its integral qualities, the social system acquires a certain independence in relation to its constituent elements, a relatively independent way of its development.

7. Public relations and social communities

To characterize society as a system, it is not enough to single out its subsystems and elements. It is important to show that they are interconnected and can be represented as links between social groups, nations, individuals that arise in the process of economic, political, social, spiritual life of society. The term "public relations" is used to refer to these links.

Kinds public relations:

material: about the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods

spiritual: political, legal, moral, ideological, etc.

The functioning of social relations, institutions of control and organizations generates a complex system of social relations that governs the needs, interests and goals of people. This system unites individuals and their groups into a single whole - a social community and through it into a social system. The nature of social ties determines both the external structure of social communities and its functions. The external structure of a community can be determined, for example, by its objective data: information about the demographic structure of the community, professional structure, educational characteristics of its members, etc.

Functionally, social communities direct the actions of their members to achieve group goals. The social community ensures the coordination of these actions, which leads to an increase in its internal cohesion. The latter is possible due to patterns of behavior, norms that determine relations within this community, as well as socio-psychological mechanisms that guide the behavior of its members.

Among many types of social communities, such as family, work collective, groups of joint leisure activities, as well as various socio-territorial communities (village, small town, large cities, region, etc.) are of particular importance in terms of influencing behavior. . For example, the family socializes young people in the course of mastering the norms of social life, creates a sense of security in them, satisfies the emotional need for joint experiences, prevents psychological imbalance, helps to overcome the state of isolation, etc.

The territorial community and its condition also influence the behavior of its members, especially in the sphere of informal contacts. Professional groups, in addition to the possibility of solving purely professional issues, form a sense of labor solidarity among members, provide professional prestige and authority, and control people's behavior from the standpoint of professional morality.

8. Interaction of the main spheres of public life

Thus, society is a certain set of elements that are interdependent and interact with each other. The spheres of public life are mutually permeable and interconnected.

Economic difficulties and even more so crises (the economic sphere) give rise to social instability and dissatisfaction with various social forces (the social sphere) and lead to an aggravation of the political struggle and instability (the political sphere). All this is usually accompanied by apathy, confusion of the spirit, but also by spiritual searches, intensive scientific research, the efforts of cultural figures aimed at understanding the origins of the crisis and ways out of it. This is one of the examples illustrating the interaction of the main spheres of public life.

A military coup (political sphere) as a result of the economic crisis, a sharp decline in living standards (economic sphere), disagreement in society (social sphere) and all this affects the spiritual life of society. (Pinochet (1973) (military junta) came to power in Chile As a result of the military-fascist coup, he established a regime of the most severe terror, the economy improved, disagreement in society, the creative intelligentsia went underground.

Bibliography

1. Volkov Yu.G. Sociology. Textbook for students of bonds; Ed. IN AND. Dobrenkova.2nd edition. - M.: Social and humanitarian edition.; R / n D: Phoenix, 2007-572 p.

2. Gorelov A.A. Sociology in questions and answers. - M.: Eksmo, 2009.-316 p.

3. Dobrenkov V.I. Sociology: A short course / Dobrenkov V.I., Kravchenko A.I.. M .: Infra-M., 2008-231p.

4. Dobrenkov V.I., Kravchenko A.I. Methods of sociological research. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2009.- 860s.

5. Kazarinova N.V. and others. Sociology: A textbook for universities. M .: NOTA BENE, 2008.-269p.

6. Kasyanov V.V. Sociology: examination answers._r/nd, 2009.-319s.

7. Kravchenko A.I. General sociology: textbook for universities - M.: Unity, 2007.- 479p.

8. Kravchenko A.I. Sociology: A textbook for students of non-sociological specialties, natural sciences and the humanities. / Kravchenko A.I., Anurin V.F. - St. Petersburg et al. Peter, 2008 -431s.

9. Kravchenko A.I. Sociology: Reader for universities-M.; Yekaterinburg: Academic project: Business book, 2010.-734p.

10. Lawsen Tony, Garrod Joan Sociology: A-Z Dictionary / Transl. from English. - M.: Grand, 2009. - 602s.

11. Samygin S.I. Sociology: 100 examination answers / S.I. Samygin, G.O. Petrov.- 3rd edition.- M.; R/nD: March, 2008.-234p.

12. Sociology. Textbook for university students / V.N. Lavrinenko, G.S. Lukasheva, O.A. Ostanina and others / Ed. V.N. Lavrinenko - M.UNITI: 2009 - 447p. (Vulture UMO, a series of Golden Fund of Russian textbooks)

13. Sociology: Brief thematic dictionary / Yu.A. Agafonov, E.M. Babaosov, A.N. Danilov and others / Ed. A.N. Elsukova.- R/nD: Phoenix, 2007.-317p.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

...

ESSAY

On the topic: "The specifics of social systems"

Novosibirsk 2010
The content of the work:
Introduction ………………………………………………………………3

The concept of a social system …………………………………….3

Five organizational levels of the social system ………….6

Types of social systems ……………………………………………7

Components of social systems …………………………………15

Conclusion ……………………………………………………………18

List of used literature …………………………………..19

Introduction
Elements of any social systems are people. The inclusion of a person in society is carried out through various social communities that each individual person personifies: social groups, social institutions, social organizations and systems of norms and values accepted in society, that is, through culture. Because of this, a person is included in many social systems, each of which has a systematic impact on him. Thus, a person becomes not only an element of the social system, but he himself represents a system that has a very complex structure.
In the course of the theory of organization, social systems are considered mainly, since all others are somehow reduced to them. The main connecting element of the social system is a person.
The concept of “social system” was used in their works by ancient thinkers, but they meant by it, first of all, the general idea of the orderliness of social life, therefore, in the strict sense, it was closer to the concept of “social order”. The concept of "social system" was scientifically formalized only at the present time, in connection with the development of a systematic approach in science.

The concept of a social system

There are two possible approaches to the definition of a social system.
In one of them, the social system is seen as the orderliness and integrity of a multitude of individuals and groups of individuals. Such a definition is given by analogy with the definition of a system in general as a “complex of interacting elements”, as formulated by L. Bertalanffy, one of the founders of the “general theory of systems”. With this approach, interaction turns into an adjective, which clearly does not take into account the specifics of social systems and the role of social relations in them.
But another approach is also possible, in which the consideration of the social as one of the main forms of the movement of matter is taken as a starting point. In this case, the social form of the movement of matter appears before us as a global social system. And what is fixed in the generally accepted names of the main forms of motion of matter? They fix the specifics of the type of interaction inherent in this form (for example, metabolism is a specific type of biological interaction). At the same time, the qualitative boundaries between the forms of matter movement are determined by their material carrier (macrobody, atom, electron, biosystem, social collective, etc.). Thus, the traditional approach to the definition of the system, in principle, is not violated, since both the “carrier” and “interaction” are present in it, only their logical position in the conceptual space changes, which, in our opinion, allows us to better understand the place of a person in a complex network of social relationships called the social system.
With this approach, as a working definition, we can say that the social system is an ordered, self-governing integrity of a multitude of diverse social relations, the bearer of which is the individual and the social groups in which he is included. What then are the characteristic features of the social system?
First, it follows from this definition that there is a significant variety of social systems, because the individual is included in various social groups, large and small (the planetary community of people, society within a given country, class, nation, family, etc.). As soon as this is so, then society as a whole as a system acquires a super-complex and hierarchical character: it is possible to distinguish various levels in it - in the form of subsystems, sub-subsystems, etc. - which are interconnected by subordinating lines, not to mention the subordination of each of these, impulses and commands emanating from the system as a whole. At the same time, it should be taken into account that the intrasystemic hierarchy is not absolute, but relative. Each subsystem, each level of the social system is simultaneously non-hierarchical, i.e. it has a certain degree of autonomy, which by no means weakens the system as a whole, but, on the contrary, strengthens it: it makes it possible to more flexibly and promptly respond to signals coming from outside, not to overload the upper levels of the system with such functions and reactions that the lower levels of integrity can easily cope with.
Secondly, it follows from this definition that since we have integrity in the face of social systems, the main thing in systems is their integrative quality, which is not characteristic of their parts and components, but inherent in the system as a whole. Thanks to this quality, a relatively independent, separate existence and functioning of the system is ensured. There is a dialectical relationship between the integrity of the system and its integrative quality that unites the entire system: the integrative quality is generated in the process of becoming a system integrity and at the same time acts as a guarantor of this integrity, including by transforming the components of the system according to the nature of the system as a whole. Such integration becomes possible due to the presence in the system of a system-forming component that “attracts” all other components to itself and creates the very same gravitational field that allows the multitude to become an integrity.
Thirdly, from this definition it follows that a person is a universal component of social systems, he is necessarily included in each of them, starting with society as a whole and ending with the family. Having been born, a person immediately finds himself included in the system of relations that has developed in a given society, and before he becomes their carrier and even manages to have a transformative effect on it, he himself must; fit into it. The socialization of the individual is essentially his adaptation to the existing system, it precedes his attempts to adapt the system itself to his needs and interests.
Fourth, it follows from this definition that social systems are self-governing. This feature characterizes only highly organized integral systems, both natural and natural-historical (biological and social) and artificial (automated machines). The very ability for self-regulation and self-development implies the presence in each of these systems of special management subsystems in the form of certain mechanisms, bodies and institutions. The role of this subsystem is extremely important - it is it that ensures the integration of all components of the system, their coordinated action. And if we remember that an individual, a social group, society as a whole always act purposefully, then the significance of the management subsystem will become even more visible. We often hear the expression: “The system is working in overdrive,” i.e., it is self-destructing. When does this become possible? Obviously, when the control subsystem begins to falter, or even fails, as a result of which a mismatch occurs in the actions of the system components. In particular, the tremendous costs that society endures during its revolutionary transformation are largely due to the fact that a temporary gap is formed between the demolition of the old system of government and the creation of a new one.

Five organizational levels of the social system

A social system is a way of organizing the life of a group of people, which arises as a result of the interaction of individuals on the basis of dictated social roles. The system arises as an association into an ordered and self-preserving whole with the help of norms and values that ensure both the interdependence of the parts of the system and the subsequent integration of the whole.
The social system can be represented as a hierarchical structure of the following organizational levels: biosphere, ethnosphere, sociosphere, psychosphere, anthroposphere. At each level of the hierarchical pyramid (Fig. 1), we describe the behavior of an individual, as a member of a certain group, through certain rules of behavior aimed at achieving the goal.

Figure 1. Hierarchy of organizational levels
At the lower, biospheric, level, a group of people is a subsystem of an ecological system that lives mainly on the energy of the Sun and participates in the exchange of biomass with other subsystems of this level. The biosphere of the Earth is considered from the point of view of the theory of V.I.Vernadsky. Society in this case is a collection of separate, not exerting any noticeable influence on each other, consumers of someone else's biomass, giving away their biomass as a result of biological death. This society is better called a population.
At the second, ethnic, level, a group is already a collective of individuals capable of unified unconscious actions and characterized by the same unconscious responses to external influences, that is, a well-defined stereotype of behavior generated by the landscape (regional) conditions of the place of residence. Such a society is called an ethnos. The ethnos lives at the expense of the biochemical energy of the passionary impetus originally received at birth, which is wasted on culture and art characteristic only for it, technical innovations, wars, and on maintaining the feeding surrounding landscape.
On the third, social level, the group is society. Each individual has his own system of action, which is consistent with the public consciousness. Here we consider society on the basis of the theory of social action by T. Parsons. Combining individuals into a cohesive group, society regulates the behavior of everyone within this group. The behavior of the members of the group is based on social actions due to social status and a set of social roles.
On the fourth, psychic level, a group is a crowd. Each member of the group has a set of collective reflexes. A collective reflex is a synchronous response of a group of people to an external stimulus. The group's behavior is a chain of successive collective reflexes. The basis of the model at this level is the theory of collective reflexes by V.M. Bekhterev.
At the last level, a group is a thinking organization, each member of which has its own inner world. To construct a multi-agent model of society at this level, we can choose the theory of autopoietic systems by N. Luhmann. Here, the elements of the system are communications. Communication is not only a process of information transfer, but also a self-referential process.
Various theories describing society can be used to model a social system. But these theories complement rather than contradict each other. Modeling a social system based on the chosen theory, we get a model of a certain level. Next, we combine these models in a hierarchical manner. Such a multilevel model will most adequately reflect the dynamics of the development of a real society.

Types of social systems

In the course of the theory of organization, social systems are considered mainly, since all others are somehow reduced to them. The main connecting element of the social system is a person. Social systems, depending on the goals set, can be educational, economic, political, medical, etc. Figure 2 shows the main types of social systems according to the direction of their activities.

Fig.2 Types of social systems.
In real life, social systems are implemented in the form of organizations, companies, firms, etc. The products of such organizations are goods (services), information or knowledge. Thus, a social organization is a social (public) subsystem characterized by the presence of a person as a subject and object of management in the aggregate of interrelated elements and realizing itself in the production of goods, services, information and knowledge.
In the theory of organization, socio-political, socio-educational, socio-economic and other organizations are distinguished. Each of these types also has a priority of its own goals. So, for socio-economic organizations, the main goal is to maximize profits; for socio-cultural - the achievement of aesthetic goals, and maximizing profit is a secondary goal; for socio-educational - the achievement of a modern level of knowledge, and making a profit is also a secondary goal.
Social organizations play an essential role in the modern world. Their features:
realization of the potential capabilities and abilities of a person;
formation of unity of interests of people (personal, collective, public). The unity of goals and interests serves as a system-forming factor;
complexity, dynamism and a high level of uncertainty.
Social organizations cover various areas of activity of people in society. The mechanisms of interaction between people through socialization create the conditions and prerequisites for the development of communication skills, the formation of positive moral standards of people in social and industrial relations. They also create a control system that includes punishing and rewarding individuals so that the actions they choose do not go beyond the norms and rules available to this system. In social organizations, objective (natural) and subjective (artificial, at the will of man) processes take place. The objective ones include cyclic processes of decline and rise in the activity of a social organization, processes associated with the operation of the laws of a social organization, for example, synergy, composition and proportionality, awareness. The subjective ones include the processes associated with the adoption of managerial decisions (for example, the processes associated with the privatization of a social organization).
In a social organization there are formal and informal leaders. A leader is an individual who has the greatest influence on the employees of a brigade, workshop, section, department, etc. He embodies group norms and values and advocates for these norms. The formal leader (manager) is appointed by the higher management and endowed with the rights and duties necessary for this. An informal leader is a member of a social organization recognized by a group of people as a professional (authority) or advocate in matters of interest to them. A leader usually becomes a person whose professional or organizational potential is significantly higher than the potential of his colleagues in any field of activity.
A team can have several informal leaders only in non-overlapping areas of activity.
When appointing a leader, senior management should strive to take into account the possibility of combining a formal and informal leader in one person.
The basis of social organization is a small group of people. A small group unites up to 30 people, performs the same or related functions and is located in the territorial proximity (in the same room, on the same floor, etc.).
On fig. 3 (a, b, c, d) presents the basic schemes of the relationships of individuals in the organization and the naming of relationships.

Rice. 3a. Linear scheme (linear connections).

There is no feedback in the circuit. The linear scheme works well in small social organizations with high professionalism and authority of the leader; as well as the great interest of subordinates in the successful work of the social organization.
The ring scheme has worked well in small social organizations or in subdivisions of medium-sized social organizations, a social organization with a stable product and market, in which there is a clear division of functional responsibilities among professional workers.

Fig.3b. Ring diagram (functional connections).

Rice. 3c. Scheme "wheel" (linear-functional connections).

The "wheel" scheme has worked well in small social organizations or in subdivisions of medium-sized social organizations with an unstable product range and sales markets, where there is a clear division of functional responsibilities among professional workers. The manager implements linear (administrative) influences, and employees perform their functional duties.

Rice. 3y. Scheme "star" (linear connection).

The "star" scheme gives positive results with the branch structure of the social organization and, if necessary, confidentiality in the activities of each component of the social organization.
Basic schemes make it possible to form a wide variety of relationship schemes derived from them. (Fig. 3, e, f, g).

Rice. 3d. Hierarchical scheme (linear-functional relationships)

The hierarchical scheme is based on the "wheel" scheme and is applicable for large organizations with a pronounced division of labor.

Rice. 3e. Staff scheme (linear connection)

The scheme is based on the basic star scheme. It provides for the creation of functional headquarters under the head in the form of departments or groups (for example, the financial department, the personnel department, etc.). These headquarters prepare draft decisions on relevant issues for the head. Then the manager makes a decision and brings it to the appropriate department. The staff scheme has the advantage, if necessary, of exercising linear control (one-man management) for key divisions of the social organization.

Rice. 3g. Matrix scheme (linear and functional connections).

The matrix scheme is based on the "line" and "ring" schemes. It provides for the creation of two branches of subordination links: administrative - from the immediate supervisor and functional - from specialists who may not be subordinate to the same leader (for example, these may be specialists from a consulting firm or an advanced organization). The matrix scheme is used in complex, knowledge-intensive production of goods, information, services and knowledge.
The middle level of management determines the flexibility of the organizational structure of a social organization - this is its most active part. The top and bottom levels should be the most conservative in structure.
Within one social organization, and even within one type of social organization, there may be several types of relationships.

Components of social systems

The social organism is a set of complex structures, each of which is not just a set, a set of certain components, but their integrity. The classification of this set is very important for understanding the essence of society and at the same time it is extremely difficult due to the fact that this set is very solid in size.
It seems to us that this classification can be based on the considerations of E. S. Markaryan, who proposed to consider this problem from three qualitatively different points of view: “I. From the point of view of the subject of activity, answering the question: who is acting? 2. From the point of view of the site of the application of activity, which makes it possible to establish what human activity is aimed at. 3. From the point of view of the mode of activity, designed to answer the question: how, in what way is human activity carried out and its cumulative effect is formed? .
What does each of the main sections of society look like in this case (let's call them subjective-activity, functional and socio-cultural)?
1. Subjective-activity section (“who is acting?”), The components of which in any case are people, because in society there can be no other subjects of activity.
People act as such in two versions: a) as individuals, and the individuality of an action, its relative autonomy are expressed the more clearly, the more personal characteristics are developed in a person (moral awareness of one’s position, understanding of the social necessity and significance of one’s activity, etc.) .); b) as associations of individuals in the form of large (ethnos, social class, or a layer within it) and small (family, primary labor or educational collective) social groups, although associations outside these groupings are also possible (for example, political parties, the army).
2. Functional cut (“what is human activity aimed at?”), which makes it possible to identify the main areas of application of socially significant activity. Taking into account both the biophysiological and social needs of a person, the following main areas of activity are usually distinguished: economics, transport and communications, upbringing, education, science, management, defense, health care, art, in modern society, obviously, the sphere of ecology should be attributed to them, and also the area with the conditional name "informatics", meaning by it not only information and computer support for all other spheres of human activity, but also the branch of the so-called mass media.
3. Socio-cultural cut (“how is the activity carried out?”), revealing the means and mechanisms for the effective functioning of society as an integral system. Giving such a definition of the cut, we take into account that basically (especially in the conditions of the modern wave of civilization) human activity is carried out by non-biological, socially acquired, i.e., socio-cultural in nature, means and mechanisms. These include phenomena that seem to be very far from each other in their specific origin, in their substrate, range of applicability, etc.: the means of material production and consciousness, public institutions such as the state and socio-psychological traditions, language and housing.
And yet, the consideration of the main sections of society, in our opinion, will be incomplete if another important section remains out of sight - the sociostructural one, which allows us to continue and deepen the analysis of both the subject of activity and the means-mechanisms of activity. The fact is that society has an overly complex social, in the narrow sense of the word, structure, within which the following subsystems can be identified as the most significant; class-stratification (primary and non-primary classes, large strata within classes, estates, strata), socio-ethnic (clan and tribal associations, nationalities, nations), demographic (gender and age structure of the population, the ratio of the active and the disabled population, the correlative characteristic of the health of the population) , settlement (villagers and townspeople), vocational education (the division of individuals into workers of physical and mental labor, their educational level, place in the professional division of labor).
By superimposing the sociostructural section of society on the three previously considered, we get the opportunity to connect to the characteristics of the subject of activity the coordinates associated with his belonging to completely certain class-stratification, ethnic, demographic, settlement, vocational and educational groups. Our possibilities for a more differentiated analysis of both spheres and methods of activity are increasing from the perspective of their incorporation into specific social substructures. Thus, for example, the spheres of health care and education will obviously look different depending on the settlement context in which we have to consider them.
Despite the fact that the structures of systems differ not only quantitatively, but also fundamentally and qualitatively, there is still no harmonious, much less complete, typology of social systems on this basis. In this regard, the proposal of N. Yahiel (Bulgaria) is legitimate to single out within the class of social systems systems that have a "sociological structure". The latter refers to such a structure that includes those components and relationships that are necessary and sufficient for the functioning of society as a self-developing and self-regulating system. Such systems include society as a whole, each of the specific socio-economic formations, settlement structures (city and village).
Conclusion
A social system is a phenomenon or process consisting of a qualitatively defined set of elements that are in mutual connections and relationships and form a single whole, capable of changing its structure in interaction with external conditions.
Thus, the social system as a sociological phenomenon is a multidimensional and multidimensional formation with a complex composition, typology and functions.
The most complex and general social system is society itself (society as a whole), which reflects all the characteristics of social systems.

Bibliography:

Guts A.K. Global ethnosociology. OmGU, Omsk, 1997.

Kravchenko A.I. Sociology: General course: Textbook for universities. - M.: PERSE; Logos, 2002.- 271 p.

Milner B. Theory of organization. - M., 1998.

Radchenko Ya.V. Organization theory. part 1. (lecture summary) - M .: GAU Publishing House, 1998.

Smirnov E.A. Fundamentals of organization theory. - M .: "Audit", 1998.

As an independent science, scientists have always tried to understand society as an organized whole, highlighting its constituent elements. Such an analytical approach, universal for all sciences, should be acceptable for a positive science of society as well. The attempts described above to present society as an organism, as a self-developing entity with the ability to self-organize and maintain balance, were, in fact, an anticipation of the systems approach. The systemic understanding of society can be fully discussed after the creation of L. von Bertalanffy's general theory of systems.

Social system - it is an ordered whole, which is a collection of individual social elements - individuals, groups, organizations, institutions.

These elements are interconnected by stable ties and as a whole form a social structure. Society can itself be considered as a system consisting of many subsystems, and each subsystem is a system at its own level and has its own subsystems. Thus, from the point of view of the systems approach, society is something like a nesting doll, inside of which there are many smaller nesting dolls, therefore, there is a hierarchy of social systems. According to the general principle of systems theory, a system is much more than just the sum of its elements, and as a whole, due to its holistic organization, has qualities that all elements taken separately did not have.

Any system, including a social one, can be described from two points of view: first, from the point of view of the functional relationships of its elements, i.e. in terms of structure; secondly, from the point of view of the relationship between the system and the external world around it - the environment.

Relationships between system elements supported by themselves, no one and nothing directed from the outside. The system is autonomous and does not depend on the will of the individuals included in it. Therefore, a systemic understanding of society is always associated with the need to solve a big problem: how to combine the free action of an individual and the functioning of the system that existed before him and by its very existence determines his decisions and actions. If we follow the logic of the systemic approach, then, strictly speaking, there is no individual freedom at all, since society as a whole exceeds the sum of its parts, i.e. is a reality of an immeasurably higher order than the individual, measures itself by historical terms and scales that are incomparable with the chronological scale of an individual perspective. What can an individual know about the long-term consequences of his actions, which may be contrary to his expectations? It simply turns into "a wheel and a cog in the common cause", into the smallest element, reduced to the volume of a mathematical point. Then it is not the individual himself that falls into the perspective of sociological consideration, but his function, which ensures, in unity with other functions, the balanced existence of the whole.

Relationship of the system with the environment serve as a criterion for its strength and viability. What is dangerous for the system is what comes from the outside: after all, inside everything works to preserve it. The environment is potentially hostile to the system, since it affects it as a whole, i.e. makes changes to it that can upset its functioning. The system is saved by the fact that it has the ability to spontaneously restore and establish a state of equilibrium between itself and the external environment. This means that the system is inherently harmonious: it tends to internal balance, and its temporary disturbances are only random failures in the work of a well-coordinated machine. Society is like a good orchestra, where harmony and concord are the norm, and discord and musical cacophony are the occasional and unfortunate exception.

The system is able to reproduce itself without the conscious participation of the individuals included in it. If it functions normally, the next generations fit into its life activity calmly and without conflict, begin to act according to the rules dictated by the system, and in turn pass these rules and skills on to the next generations. Within the framework of the system, the social qualities of individuals are also reproduced. For example, in the system of a class society, representatives of the upper classes reproduce their educational and cultural level by raising their children accordingly, while representatives of the lower classes, against their will, reproduce their lack of education and their labor skills in their children.

The characteristics of the system also include the ability to integrate new social formations. It subordinates to its logic and forces to work according to its rules for the benefit of the whole newly emerging elements - new classes and social strata, new institutions and ideologies, etc. For example, the nascent bourgeoisie functioned normally for a long time as a class within the "third estate", and only when the system of class society could no longer maintain an internal balance did it break out of it, which meant the death of the entire system.

System characteristics of society

Society can be represented as a multi-level system. The first level is social roles that define the structure of social interactions. Social roles are organized into various and which make up the second level of society. Each institution and community can be represented as a complex, stable and self-reproducing systemic organization. Differences in the functions performed by social groups, opposition to their goals require such a systemic level of organization that would support a single normative order in society. It is realized in the system of culture and political power. Culture sets patterns of human activity, maintains and reproduces the norms tested by the experience of many generations, and the political system regulates and strengthens the ties between social systems through legislative and legal acts.

The social system can be considered in four aspects:

as the interaction of individuals;
as a group interaction;
as a hierarchy of social statuses (institutional roles);
as a set of social norms and values that determine the behavior of individuals.

A description of the system in its static state would be incomplete.

Society is a dynamic system, i.e. is in constant motion, development, changes its features, signs, states. The state of the system gives an idea of it at a particular point in time. The change of states is caused both by the influences of the external environment and by the needs of the development of the system itself.

Dynamic systems can be linear and non-linear. Changes in linear systems are easily calculated and predicted, since they occur relative to the same stationary state. Such, for example, is the free oscillation of a pendulum.

Society is a non-linear system. This means that the processes occurring in it at different times under the influence of different causes are determined and described by different laws. They cannot be put into one explanatory scheme, because there will certainly be changes that will not correspond to this scheme. That is why social change always contains an element of unpredictability. In addition, if the pendulum returns to its previous state with 100% probability, the society will never return back to some point in its development.

Society is an open system. This means that it reacts to the slightest influence from outside, to any accident. The reaction manifests itself in the occurrence of fluctuations - unpredictable deviations from the stationary state and bifurcations - branches of the development trajectory. Bifurcations are always unpredictable, the logic of the previous state of the system is not applicable to them, since they themselves represent a violation of this logic. These are, as it were, crisis moments of a break, when the usual threads of cause-and-effect relationships are lost and chaos sets in. It is at the points of bifurcation that innovations arise, revolutionary changes take place.

A non-linear system is capable of generating attractors - special structures that turn into a kind of "goals" towards which the processes of social change are directed. These are new complexes of social roles that did not exist before and are being organized into a new social order. This is how new preferences of the mass consciousness arise: new political leaders are put forward, rapidly gaining popular popularity, new political parties, groups, unexpected coalitions and unions are formed, there is a redistribution of forces in the struggle for power. For example, during the period of dual power in Russia in 1917, unpredictable rapid social changes in a few months led to the Bolshevization of the soviets, an unprecedented increase in the popularity of new leaders, and ultimately to a complete change in the entire political system in the country.

Understanding society as a system has undergone a long evolution from the classical sociology of the era of E. Durkheim and K. Marx to modern works on the theory of complex systems. Already in Durkheim, the development of social order is associated with the complication of society. The work of T. Parsons "The Social System" (1951) played a special role in the understanding of systems. He reduces the problem of the system and the individual to the relationship between systems, since he considers as a system not only society, but also the individual. Between these two systems, according to Parsons, there is an interpenetration: it is impossible to imagine a system of personality that would not be included in the system of society. Social action and its components are also part of the system. Despite the fact that the action itself is made up of elements, outwardly it acts as an integral system, the qualities of which are activated in the system of social interaction. In turn, the system of interaction is a subsystem of action, since each single act consists of elements of a culture system, a personality system, and a social system. Thus, society is a complex interweaving of systems and their interactions.

According to the German sociologist N. Luhmann, society is an autopoietic system - self-differentiating and self-renewing. The social system has the ability to distinguish "self" from "others". It reproduces and defines its own boundaries separating it from the external environment. In addition, according to Luhmann, a social system, unlike natural systems, is built on the basis of meaning, i.e. in it, its various elements (action, time, event) acquire semantic coordination.

Modern researchers of complex social systems focus their attention not only on purely macrosociological problems, but also on questions of how systemic changes are implemented at the living standards of individuals, separate groups and communities, regions and countries. They come to the conclusion that all changes occur at different levels and are interconnected in the sense that the "higher" arise from the "lower" and again return to the lower, influencing them. For example, social inequality stems from differences in income and wealth. This is not just an ideal measure of income distribution, but a real factor that produces certain social parameters and influences the lives of individuals. Thus, the American researcher R. Wilkinson showed that in cases where the degree of social inequality exceeds a certain level, it affects the health of individuals by itself, regardless of actual well-being and income.

Society has a self-organizing potential, which allows us to consider the mechanism of its development, especially in a situation of transformation, from the standpoint of a synergistic approach. Self-organization refers to the processes of spontaneous ordering (transition from chaos to order), formation and evolution of structures in open non-linear media.

Synergetics - a new interdisciplinary direction of scientific research, which studies the processes of transition from chaos to order and vice versa (processes of self-organization and self-disorganization) in open non-linear environments of very different nature. This transition is called the phase of formation, which is associated with the concept of bifurcation or catastrophe - an abrupt change in quality. At the decisive moment of the transition, the system must make a critical choice through the fluctuation dynamics, and this choice occurs in the bifurcation zone. After a critical choice, stabilization occurs and the system develops further in accordance with the choice made. This is how, according to the laws of synergetics, the fundamental relationships between chance and external limitation, between fluctuation (randomness) and irreversibility (necessity), between freedom of choice and determinism are fixed.

Synergetics as a scientific trend arose in the second half of the 20th century. in the natural sciences, but gradually the principles of synergetics spread to the humanities, becoming so popular and in demand that at the moment synergetic principles are at the center of scientific discourse in the system of social and humanitarian knowledge.

Society as a social system

From the point of view of a systematic approach, it can be considered as a system consisting of many subsystems, and each subsystem, in turn, is itself a system at its level and has its own subsystems. Thus, society is something like a set of nesting dolls, when inside a large nesting doll there is a smaller nesting doll, and inside it there is an even smaller one, and so on. Thus, there is a hierarchy of social systems.

The general tenet of systems theory is that a system is understood as much more than the sum of its elements—as a whole that, by virtue of its holistic organization, has qualities that its elements, taken individually, do not have.

The relations between the elements of the system are such that they are maintained by themselves, they are not directed by anyone and nothing from the outside. The system is autonomous and does not depend on the will of the individuals included in it. Therefore, a systemic understanding of society is always associated with a big problem - how to connect the free action of an individual and the functioning of the system that existed before him and determines his decisions and actions by its very existence. What can an individual know about the long-term consequences of his actions, which may be contrary to his expectations? It simply turns into a “wheel and cog in the common cause”, into the smallest element, and it is not the individual himself that is subjected to sociological consideration, but his function, which ensures the balanced existence of the whole in unity with other functions.

The relationship of the system with the environment serves as a criterion for its strength and viability. What is dangerous for the system is what comes from the outside, since inside the system everything works to preserve it. The environment is potentially hostile to the system because it affects it as a whole, making changes to it that can upset its functioning. The system is preserved, as it has the ability to spontaneously restore and establish a state of equilibrium between itself and the external environment. This means that the system gravitates towards an internal balance and its temporary disturbances are only random failures in the work of a well-coordinated machine.

The system can reproduce itself. This happens without the conscious participation of the individuals included in it. If it functions normally, the next generations fit into its life activity calmly and without conflict, begin to act according to the rules dictated by the system, and in turn pass these rules and skills on to their children. Within the framework of the system, the social qualities of individuals are also reproduced. For example, in a class society, representatives of the upper classes reproduce their educational and cultural level by raising their children accordingly, while representatives of the lower classes, against their will, reproduce in their children a lack of education and their labor skills.

The characteristics of the system also include the ability to integrate new social formations. It subordinates to its logic and forces to act according to its rules for the benefit of the whole newly emerging elements - new classes, social strata, etc. For example, the emerging bourgeoisie functioned normally for a long time as part of the “third estate” (the first estate was the nobility, the second was the clergy), but when the system of estate society could not maintain an internal balance, it “broke out” of it, which meant the death of the entire system.

So, society can be represented as a multi-level system. The first level is social roles that define the structure of social interactions. Social roles are organized into institutions and communities that constitute the second level of society. Each institution and community can be represented as a complex system organization, stable and self-reproducing. Differences in the functions performed, opposition to the goals of social groups can lead to the death of society if there is no such systemic level of organization that would support a single normative order in society. It is realized in the system of culture and political power. Culture sets patterns of human activity, maintains and reproduces the norms tested by the experience of many generations, and the political system regulates and strengthens the ties between social systems through legislative and legal acts.

Question 14. The concept of a social system.

social system there is an ordered, self-governing integrity of a multitude of diverse social relations, the bearer of which is the individual and the social groups in which he is included. What then are the characteristic features of the social system?

First of all, it follows from this definition that there is a significant variety of social systems , because the individual is included in various social groups, large and small (the planetary community of people, society within a given country, class, nation, family, etc.). If this is so, then society as a whole as a system acquires hypercomplex and hierarchical character : it is possible to distinguish different levels in it - in the form of subsystems, sub-subsystems, etc. - which are interconnected by subordination lines, not to mention the subordination of each of them to impulses and commands emanating from the system as a whole. At the same time, it should be taken into account that the intrasystemic hierarchy is not absolute, but relative. Each subsystem, each level of the social system is simultaneously non-hierarchical, i.e. it has a certain degree of autonomy, which by no means weakens the system as a whole, but, on the contrary, strengthens it: it makes it possible to more flexibly and promptly respond to signals coming from outside, not to overload the upper levels of the system with such functions and reactions that the lower levels of integrity can easily cope with.

Secondly since we have integrity in the face of social systems, the main thing in systems is their integrative quality , which is not characteristic of the parts and components that form them, but inherent in the system as a whole. Thanks to this quality, a relatively independent, separate existence and functioning of the system is ensured. There is a dialectical relationship between the integrity of the system and its integrative quality that unites the entire system: the integrative quality is generated in the process of becoming a system integrity and at the same time acts as a guarantor of this integrity, including by transforming the components of the system according to the nature of the system as a whole. Such integration becomes possible due to the presence in the system backbone component , which “attracts” all other components to itself and creates that very unified field of gravity, which allows the set to become an integrity.

Thirdly, it follows from this definition that man is a universal component of social systems , he is certainly included in each of them, starting with society as a whole and ending with the family. Having been born, a person immediately finds himself included in the system of relations that has developed in a given society, and before he becomes their carrier and even manages to have a transformative effect on it, he himself must; fit into it. The socialization of the individual is essentially his adaptation to the existing system, it precedes his attempts to adapt the system itself to his needs and interests.

Fourth, it follows from this definition that social systems are self-governing . This feature characterizes only highly organized integral systems, both natural and natural-historical (biological and social) and artificial (automated machines). The very ability for self-regulation and self-development implies the presence in each of these systems special control subsystems in the form of certain mechanisms, bodies and institutions. The role of this subsystem is extremely important - it is it that ensures the integration of all components of the system, their coordinated action. And if we remember that an individual, a social group, society as a whole always act purposefully, then the significance of the management subsystem will become even more visible. We often hear the expression: “The system is working overtime,” that is, it is self-destructing. When does this become possible? Obviously, when the control subsystem begins to falter, or even completely fails, as a result of which a mismatch occurs in the actions of the system components. In particular, the tremendous costs that society endures during its revolutionary transformation are largely due to the fact that a temporary gap is formed between the destruction of the old system of government and the creation of a new one.

A social system is an orderliness of interacting individuals, things and processes that form integrative qualities that are not characteristic of these components considered autonomously.

Levels of social systems.

A) All specifically historical society, i.e. it is a set of members of a given society, as well as the whole complex of social relations: economic, political, social and spiritual.

B) communities and associations of people of a smaller order (nations, estates, ethnic groups, settlements, etc.)

C) organizations operating in the real sectors of the economy (credit and financial institutions, scientific and educational institutions, firms, public associations, etc.)

D) the primary 3 level of social systems (departments, divisions, work areas, project groups within firms and enterprises)

Synergetic effect of the formation of social systems.

The synergistic effect of the formation of social systems allows us to solve the following tasks:

1) ensuring survival

2) Increase in people, population

3) Expansion and development of the territory

4) Consolidation, conservation and use of resources

5) Division, specialization and distribution of labor

6) Formation of the necessary diversity for existence

7) Implementation of harmonious and integrated development.

The main components of social systems.

1. Man, i.e. a social being, conscious, goal-setting, connected with other people by many relationships and forms of interaction. The presence of a human component is an essential and most important feature of a social system that distinguishes it from other systems.

2. Processes. Economic, social, political, spiritual. This is a change in the states of the system as a whole or its individual subsystems. Processes can be progressive and regressive, but they are all caused by the activities of people, social and professional groups.

3. Things. Objects involved in the orbit of economic and social life.

4. Components of a Spiritual Nature. These are social ideas, values, rituals, customs, rituals, traditions, which are determined by the actions and deeds of various social groups and individuals.

2) Essence and signs of the organization.

Organization is a type of social system . This is an association of 2 or more people who jointly realize some goal based on certain principles and rules. Organization is the primary element of any social system. This is the most common form of human community. Depending on the goal, organizations can be commercial and non-commercial (educational, political, medical, legal, etc.).

The main features of the organization:

- purpose. It gives meaning to the entire existence of the organization, and also gives a specific direction to the actions of the participants in the organization and units.

- presence of a certain number of participants. Effective achievement of the goal of the organization is possible if there is a certain critical number of participants of the appropriate qualification.

- division of labor. Allows you to specialize the activities of participants, as well as increase the productivity and quality of their work.

1) horizontal. By stages of the production process

2) vertical. by levels of control.

- Hierarchical structure of the organization. fixes the division of labor of participants in structural divisions and forms links between them.

- The organization is a self-governing system. The presence of an internal coordinating center ensures the unity of action of all participants in the organization

- principle of self-regulation or self-organization. the coordinating center independently makes a decision regarding the internal life of the organization, its employees, and also ensures the rational behavior of the organization in the external environment.

- isolation of the organization. It is expressed in the isolation of internal processes, in the presence of a boundary that separates the organization from the external environment.

- the presence of an individual organizational culture. This is a set of traditions, values, beliefs and symbols shared by the majority of members of the organization and predetermining the nature of relationships in the organization.

3) The main types of organizations (classification)

Organizations that form the basis of any civilization can be represented as a set of legal forms and organizational structures. Their classification is important for 3 reasons:

1. Grouping the organization according to organizational parameters. Allows you to create a minimum of methods for their analysis and improvement.

2. Use of a unified classification. Contributes to the creation of the necessary infrastructure, which includes

a) personnel training system

b) planning the work of control services

c) preparation of a system of legislation

3. Belonging of the organization to a particular group. Allows you to determine its relationship to tax and social benefits

Organization classification:

1) Commercial - their main goal is to make a profit

Non-commercial - their main goal is any other than commercial.

2) Public - build their activities on the basis of meeting the needs of their members.

Economic - their activities are aimed at meeting the needs of society in goods and services.

3) Government - organizations that have the appropriate status, such as ministries and departments.

Non-Governmental - organizations that do not have this status.

4) Formal - officially registered organizations.

Informal - not included in the registers and do not have relevant documents.

4) factors that determine the nature of the organization.

There are a number of dynamically changing factors that directly or indirectly affect the nature and state of the organization. These include:

1. External environment (direct and indirect impact). This is a set of variables that are outside the enterprise and are not directly affected by the management of the organization.

A) direct impact. A set of organizations and subsystems with which a given organization has connections in the course of its functioning (consumers, suppliers, media, financial institutions, competitors)

B) indirect impact. These are factors that affect all organizations without exception and create opportunities or threats for the functioning of the organization (economic, political, technological, climatic, socio-demographic, cultural).

2. Goals and strategies. Variables that are partly set by the organization itself, and partly regulated by the external environment.

A) goals. Reflection of the objective essence of the organization and its functions in society. These are the motives and incentives for the employees of the organization. These are the criteria for evaluating the performance of the organization and its units.

B) strategies. On the one hand, this is the definition of the main long-term objectives of the organization, on the other hand, it is the course of action (structures, technologies) necessary to achieve the main goals of the organization.

3. Technologies of work. This factor predetermines the production structure, as well as the methods of organizing production, and through them the organizational structure and management connections. Achievement of goals depends on the general level of development of productive forces and scientific and technical progress.

4. Staff. This is the staff of the organization. These are socio-cultural and professional qualification characteristics of employees, their individual goals and strategies, as well as values and motivation.

Portal for the student. Self-training

The concept of a social system. social organization

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

ESSAY

On the topic: "The specifics of social systems"

System characteristics of society

Society as a social system

Question 14. The concept of a social system.

Portal for the student. Self-training

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

ESSAY

On the topic: "The specifics of social systems"

System characteristics of society

Society as a social system

Question 14. The concept of a social system.

RELATED ARTICLES