(1798-1857) in his work “A Course in Positive Philosophy” (1842). Adapting this concept to the Russian language, one of the outstanding founders of world sociology, our compatriot Pitirim Sorokin, noted that sociology is “the word about society.” The entire totality of people living together, their mutual relationships, he emphasized, is society or social life, which is studied by sociology. In other words, sociology is a science that studies human relations in all forms of their manifestation.

The basis of these relationships is not the momentary impulses and moods of people (although sociologists also pay due attention to their study), but the fundamental needs of life itself and, above all, the need to achieve a reasonable (scientific) organization of any form of social activity - politics, trade, business, management, economics, culture, education, science - everything where both individual individuals and their various associations act in pursuit of their goals. Hence, sociologists are qualified teams of people who unite to comprehensively solve specific social problems. Each individual specialist, for example a psychologist, lawyer or manager, can, if necessary, quite effectively identify the weak or strong sides of his “technological chain” of social relations. However, the development of the entire space under study (workshop, plant, industry, region, country, nation, civilization), taking into account the totality of social factors operating in this space - developing, hindering or destroying - can only be achieved with the help of a specialist with sociologically developed thinking. In this sense, sociology promotes a deep understanding of the social essence and meaning of human activity, which, undoubtedly, cannot but affect its effectiveness and quality.

Object of sociology

The object of sociological knowledge is society. But isolating the concept of “society” as a starting point for defining the subject of sociology is not enough. Society can be the object of all social and human sciences. The same can be said about the concept of “social reality”. The key to justifying the scientific status of sociology, as well as any other science, lies in the difference between its object and its subject.

The object of knowledge is everything that the researcher’s activity is aimed at. Any phenomenon, process or relation of objective reality can be the object of study of a wide variety of sciences. When it comes to the subject of research of a given specific science, then this or that part of objective reality (society, culture, man) is not studied in its entirety, but only from that aspect that is determined by the specifics of this science. Other aspects of a specific part of objective reality in this case are considered as secondary or as a condition for the existence of a given object (for example, the social context of the economy).

Often in scientific literature there is a confusion or identification of the concepts of “object” and “subject” of science. This confusion or identification of two concepts that are in semantic proximity could be ignored if it did not have a significant impact on the blurring of the boundaries of science.

An object is a separate part or a set of elements of objective reality that has a certain or specific property. At the same time, each science differs from another science in its subject. Physics and chemistry, biology and psychology, economics and sociology, etc. have their own subjects. All these sciences generally study objective reality, characterized by an infinite variety of phenomena and processes. However, each of them studies, firstly, a special side or sphere of objective reality; secondly, laws and patterns of development of this reality that are specific only to this science; thirdly, the special form of manifestation and mechanisms of action of these laws and patterns. Moreover, the same sphere of objective reality can be the object of study by many sciences. Thus, physical reality is the object of study of many natural and technical sciences, social reality is the object of study of social sciences and the humanities. Determining the specifics of science only by the object of research is not enough. There can be an infinite number of objects of research in any science, but its subject is always unambiguous, limited and specific.

The difference between various sciences from each other lies in the fact that even on the same object they study their specific laws and patterns, which govern the development and functioning of a given object. Thus, the development and functioning of society is determined by the requirements of economic, social, demographic, psychological and other laws and patterns that are the subject of the relevant sciences. In this regard, parts of this objective reality can be the object of study of various sciences. For example, work, everyday life, education, family, city, village, etc. are objects of research in economics, sociology, psychology, and demography.

The laws and patterns of any science can be traced in specific phenomena and processes of objective reality included in the mechanism of their action. Thus, biological laws and patterns are manifested in the diverse forms of living organisms, their structure, functions, evolution, individual development and relationship with the environment; social laws and patterns - in historically certain types of society or its individual systems, acting as results and as a condition for the social activity of people.

The subject of science cannot be identical to the object (or objects) that it studies. The object of science is a given reality that represents one or another fragment of the objective world. The subject of science is the reproduction of such reality on an abstract level by identifying the most significant, from a scientific and practical point of view, the logical connections and relationships of this reality. The subject of any science is not just a certain phenomenon or process of the objective world, but the result of theoretical abstraction, which makes it possible to highlight certain patterns of development of the object being studied, specific to this science. This kind of abstraction (building a model of the object being studied) precisely determines that “part”, “sphere”, “side”, “aspect” of social reality to which the sociologist’s activity is directed.

Definition of the subject of sociology

One of the most important reasons that determined the rather late spin-off of sociology from other sciences - from philosophy (France), political economy (Germany), social psychology (USA), criminology (Great Britain) - and its emergence as an independent scientific discipline, lies in the uncertainty of the subject sociological knowledge.

Usually, according to established tradition, when defining the subject of sociological knowledge, one or another social phenomenon is singled out as “key”. Such phenomena include: group interactions, social relationships, social organizations, systems of social action, social groups, forms of human communities, social processes, social life.

The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences defines the subject of sociology as “the study of social aggregates and groups in their institutional organization, institutions and their organizations, and the causes and consequences of changes in institutions and social organization.” Webster's Dictionary defines sociology as the study of the history, development, organization, and problems of living together among people as representatives of social groups.

Some authors (R. Feris) believe that the starting concept of modern sociology is the concept of “social structure”, and the main content of the category “social” is the dichotomy “equality-inequality”. It is with the analysis of the “foundations of inequality in society” that the presentation of the theory and structure of sociological knowledge begins.

One can cite a number of similar definitions of the subject of sociology. A comparative analysis of these definitions will give a certain idea of ​​what acts as the main objects of sociological knowledge. But sociologists have not yet come to a consensus about the subject of their science.

When isolating the social sphere of society's life, it is completely insufficient to point out the objects that are subject to sociological study, since there are no objects in society that sociology does not study. The same can be said about economics, demography and other social and human sciences. Consequently, when we are talking about the specific features of a particular science, from the most diverse objects of the surrounding reality, those connections and relationships must be isolated that are qualitatively different from other connections and relationships and which thereby become the subject of this particular science.

The defining property of an object is that it represents the entire set of connections and relationships that are called social. The goal of sociology is to study these connections and relationships at the level of patterns, to obtain specific scientific knowledge about the mechanisms of action and forms of manifestation of these patterns in various social systems. So, the concepts of social, social connections and relationships, the method of their organization are the starting points for understanding the distinctive features of the subject of sociological knowledge, and social patterns for understanding its essence.

Concept of social

To better understand the content of the concept “social” and its difference from the concept “public”, let’s take a short historical excursion. In the works of K. Marx and F. Engels, when analyzing society, its processes and relations, two concepts are used - “social” (Gesel/ schaftlich) and "social" ( soziale). Marx and Engels used the concepts of “social” and “social relations” when talking about society as a whole, about the interaction of its parties - economic, political, ideological. When it came to the nature of the relations of people to each other, person to person, about their relationship to the factors and conditions of their life, to their own position and role in society and to society as a whole, Marx and Engels used the concept of “social” and accordingly they spoke of “social relations.”

In the works of Marx and Engels, the concept of “social” was often identified with the concept of “civil”. The latter was associated with the interaction of people within specific social communities (family, class, etc.) and society as a whole.

Since, when developing the theory of society, Marx and Engels paid main attention to the interaction of all aspects of its life activity - social relations, some Marxist scientists began to identify the concepts of “public” and “social”; The concept of “civil society” gradually disappeared from scientific circulation.

A different situation has developed in the countries of Western Europe and the USA, where empirical sociology has received significant development. As a result, in French and English the concept of “social”, being derived from the concept of society (society) , has traditionally been used in a narrow (empirical) meaning, which caused certain difficulties in designating phenomena and processes related to society as a whole. That is why at a certain stage of the development of sociology the concept of “societal” was introduced ( social), used to characterize society as a whole, the entire system of social relations (economic, socio-political, etc.).

In domestic science, the lack of a clear distinction between the concepts of “public” and “social” was to a certain extent due to certain established linguistic traditions. In Russian, the concepts “public” and “civil” were commonly used. At the same time, the concept of “social” was considered as a synonym for the concept of “public”, and the concept of “civil” related to legal science. Gradually, with the development of sociology, the concept of “social” acquired an independent meaning.

Social- this is a set of social relations of a given society, integrated in the process of joint activity (interaction) by individuals or groups of individuals in specific conditions of place and time.

Any system of social relations (economic, political, etc.) is connected with the attitude of people to each other and to society. Therefore, each of these systems always has its own clearly defined social aspect.

The social is the result of the joint activity of various individuals, manifested in their communication and interaction.

The social arises in the course of interaction between people and is determined by the differences in their place and role in specific social structures, which is manifested, in turn, in the different attitudes of individuals and groups of individuals to the phenomena and processes of social life.

The concept of “social life” is used in a broad and narrow sense.

In a broad sensesocial life- this is nothing more than the life of people, the life of a person among people; the life activity of the entire society, the functioning and interaction of its various spheres and aspects.

In a narrow sense(in a sociological concept) is a consideration of social life as an organized, orderly system of actions and interactions of people, social communities (groups), society as a whole through the functioning of social institutions and organizations, social norms and values, social control.

Social life is a special type of life. Its most diverse forms - from family to society - are immersed in nature, which can directly or indirectly, strongly or weakly influence them. Society is forced to reckon with nature and adapt to it.

Let us consider various aspects of the influence of nature on human life and forms of organization of social life.

The first mechanism is a mechanism of forced influence, or a fairly harsh influence of the geographical environment, manifested in several aspects:

First of all, this is the presence of the necessary minimum natural and geographical conditions necessary for successful human development. Outside the boundaries of this minimum, social life as such is impossible, or has a very definite character (small peoples of the north, who seem to have frozen at a certain stage of their development)

The coercive power of the environmental factor, which obliges society to develop rules that could prevent the occurrence of an environmental threat or contribute to its timely neutralization.

The influence of natural disasters (entire civilizations with their customs, orders and foundations perish; people are forced to leave their homes, settling in different parts of the Earth, as a result of which their customs and morals disappear; sometimes people move together to a new place and basically reproduce their previous customs and traditions).

The second mechanism is the mechanism of the formative influence of the natural-geographical environment, the mechanism of adaptation to external natural-geographical conditions through direct adaptation:

Nature of occupation, type of economic activity, type of housing, etc. - all this bears the imprints of the natural-geographical environment in which society is located (cotton growing, reindeer herding, etc.).

The influence of the environment on the spiritual and ethical life of society (specifics of architecture, painting, language, songs, dances, clothing, etc.).

The third mechanism is manifested in the promotion or hindrance of the geographical environment to effective social development (for example, soil fertility creates favorable conditions for the progress of the people, and vice versa, poor soils hinder the development of human well-being, the effectiveness of efforts is reduced; high mountains impede contacts between communities, while the plain promotes the emergence of large ethnic groups; the presence of rivers is favorable for establishing contacts with other peoples and developing trade).

With all this, we have to admit that the same geographical environment can have a different impact on people’s lives (i.e. in some cases the natural and climatic environment has a direct impact, in others it has an insignificant impact, in others it has no impact at all) . Consequently, there is a certain invisible wall, a “shell”, after passing through the filters of which the natural-geographical environment has one or another impact on social life. This “shell” becomes a sociocultural system, which includes values, norms of behavior, standards of economic activity, and the organization of socio-political life. And, apparently, the more perfect the organization of social life, the weaker the ability of the geographical factor to influence social life.

Of course, the connection between “geographical environment and society” should not be viewed one-sidedly. It is very important to determine the feedback: what people will see in a given geographical environment, what life options they will choose - all this depends on the values, traditions, and foundations that have developed in a given society.

Social reality is symbolic. At its core, it is the sphere of meanings and meanings born within human communication. And in order to grasp these meanings it is necessary to have “social vision”, which is formed by the social environment.

An important form of manifestation of social long-term, permanent, systemic, renewed, diverse in content connections are social relations.

They are relations of similarity and difference, equality and inequality, dominance and subordination between individuals and groups.

The basis of social relations are social connections that unite individuals, groups and other elements of society into a functional whole. Their core is relations of equality and inequality, since they reveal the relationships between people who are in different social positions. We are talking about the complex dialectic of equality and inequality between people within the boundaries of the social structure of society. Since relations of absolute equality are impossible, relations of social inequality act as leading ones.

The nature of social inequality in the system of social relations is determined by:

Differences between people are inherent in nature, inherent in them from birth: ethnicity, gender and age characteristics, physical capabilities, intellectual abilities;

Differences between people that arise in connection with professional roles;

Differences between people that are caused by possession (property, goods, privileges, etc.).

Relations of inequality in certain situations turn into relations of social equality (when it comes to fair incentives for work of equal value).

There are various types of social relations:

By the scope of power: horizontal relations, vertical relations;

According to the degree of regulation: formal (officially issued), informal;

According to the way individuals communicate: impersonal or indirect, interpersonal or direct;

By subjects of activity: inter-organizational, intra-organizational;

According to the level of justice: fair, unfair.

The basis of the differences between social relations are motives and needs, the main of which are the primary and secondary needs (power, respect) of each person.

Specifics of social relations is that:

These relationships are conscious;

They are associated with the action in society of highly developed sign systems (language, facial expressions, gestures, postures), with the system of etiquette norms and rules created in society.

Awareness of social relations is associated with the presence in a person of highly organized matter (brain), which is capable of reflecting objective reality and, on this basis, forming a subjective mental image that regulates human behavior and activity. For inanimate matter, reflection is possible only at the physical and chemical level. An essential feature of a person is the presence of intelligence, i.e. the ability not only to reflect objects, but also the connections between them, as well as to abstract from specific phenomena of reality.

The development of the animal psyche is determined by purely biological laws, and human consciousness is determined by the course of socio-historical development.

Most of the knowledge, skills and techniques of human behavior are not so much the result of personal experience (as in animals), but are formed through the assimilation of universal human experience in learning through the highest form of human communication - human speech.

Human speech is also a product of socio-historical development, which is associated with the formation of an articulatory apparatus adapted to the pronunciation of articulate sounds, the complexes of which are endowed with a certain meaning and form a symbolic-sign system - language.

Language is a unique social phenomenon. If the language of animals has no boundaries, then the language created by people of one social system may not be understandable to representatives of another social system (French, Chinese, Ukrainian, etc.).

Gestures and facial expressions are also quite complex sign systems of human communication, which not only allow representatives of the same sociocultural space to better understand each other, but also make it difficult for representatives of different cultures to communicate.

Thanks to the norms and rules of behavior formed in society, people have the opportunity to predict each other’s behavior in a given situation and behave in accordance with social expectations. In essence, these are certain rules of the game in society, which represent a kind of agreement, mutual obligations shared by everyone, in accordance with which people build their lives.

The generic prerequisite for social relations is social action. Analysis of the system of social actions leads to an understanding of the essence of social relations.

Under social action is understood meaningful individual behavior of a person, correlated with the behavior of another person and oriented towards him. The theory of social action was developed by M. Weber, K. Marx, T. Parsons, R. Merton, G. Becker and others.

M. Weber called social actions only those behavioral acts that are more or less intentional in nature, are motivated, i.e. carried out in the name of a specific goal, associated with analysis, selection of certain means that contribute to achieving the goal in a given situation, under given conditions.

Consequently, social action must meet the following conditions: intentionality, motivation, focus on another (others).

Social action is the most elementary node of social reality. But it is obvious to everyone that social life is interaction, integration of people.

Subjects enter into a social connection because depend on each other in the process of satisfying various needs, realizing life goals and attitudes.

Social connection- social action that expresses the dependence and compatibility of people or groups through mutually directed social actions, i.e. mutual conscious actions with mutual orientations towards each other, with the expectation of an appropriate response from the partner.

The main elements of a social connection, regardless of its form, are:

subjects of communication (they can be any number of people);

subject of communication (i.e. about what communication is being made);

mechanism of conscious regulation of relationships between subjects).

A social connection can take the form of either social contact or social interaction.

Social contact– this is a single act (contact with passengers in transport, passers-by on the street, cloakroom attendant in the theater, etc.)

Social interaction– systematic, fairly regular social actions of partners, aimed at each other, with the goal of causing a very specific (expected) reaction on the part of the partner; and the response generates a new reaction on the part of the partner.

It is the conjugacy of the systems of actions of both partners in relation to each other, the renewability (and not only of actions, but also their coordination), a stable interest in the reciprocal actions of one’s partner that distinguish social interaction from a social act and make it the main subject of sociological analysis.

Social interaction is always based on exchange, which manifests itself in contractual and diffuse forms.

Contract forms most clearly manifested in the economic sphere; social exchange here takes the form of a transaction in which the volume of services, the timing of their reimbursement, cost, etc. are strictly specified.

Contractual forms in the political sphere are widely developed (agreements between states, parties, agreements between politicians on coordination of activities, etc.).

Diffuseness (non-rigidity) in its pure form manifests itself in exchanges that have moral and ethical content: friendship, neighborhood, relationships between parents and children, partnership.

No matter how rigid the contractual forms of social exchange may be, they are based on such non-rigid matters as expectation, trust, etc. The bulk of exchanges between people in society are carried out on credit, on the basis of risk, on the expectation of reciprocity, on the basis of trust.

Exchange is carried out at the level of both individuals and social groups and communities.

Social interactions are built on the basis of certain principles: personal expediency, mutual effectiveness of interactions, the principle of a single criterion, social differentiation, the principle of balance in the system of social interactions.

The main types of social interactions are cooperation and competition.

Cooperation manifests itself in many specific relationships between people: business partnership, friendship, solidarity, political alliance between parties, states, cooperation between firms, etc. Distinctive features of cooperation type interactions: mutual interest, benefit of interaction for both parties, the presence of a common goal, respect, support , gratitude, loyalty.

Rivalry as a type of interaction presupposes the presence of a single indivisible object of claims of both parties (voters, authority, territory, power rights, etc.). The basis of rivalry is: the desire to get ahead, remove, subjugate or destroy a rival, the absence of common goals, but the obligatory presence of similar goals, hostility, bitterness, insincerity, secrecy.

Rivalry can take the form of competition and conflict.

Thus, social relations arise in connection with the realization of needs and interests, the achievement of certain vital goals by individuals or their groups.

The imperatives of social relations are: social needs - social interests - social goals of individuals, manifested in their activities in all spheres of life without exception.

Work plan:

Introduction.

The structure of human nature.

The role of biological and geographical factors in the formation of social life.

Social life.

Historical types of social life.

Social connections, actions and interactions as a basic element of social life.

Social ideal as a condition for social development.

Conclusion.

Introduction.

There is nothing more interesting in the world than the person himself.

V. A. Sukhomlinsky

Man is a social being. But at the same time, the highest mammal, i.e. biological being.

Like any biological species, Homo sapiens is characterized by a certain set of species characteristics. Each of these characteristics can vary among different representatives, and even within wide limits. The manifestation of many biological parameters of a species can also be influenced by social processes. For example, the normal life expectancy of a person is currently 80-90 years, given that he does not suffer from hereditary diseases and will not be exposed to harmful external influences, such as infectious diseases, road accidents, etc. This is a biological constant of the species, which, however, changes under the influence of social laws.

Like other biological species, man has stable varieties, which are designated, when it comes to man, by the concept of “race”. Racial differentiation of people is associated with the adaptation of various groups of people inhabiting different regions of the planet, and is expressed in the formation of specific biological, anatomical and physiological characteristics. But, despite the differences in certain biological parameters, a representative of any race belongs to a single species, Homo sapiens, and has biological parameters characteristic of all people.

Each person is individual and unique by nature, each has his own set of genes inherited from his parents. The uniqueness of a person is also enhanced as a result of the influence of social and biological factors in the process of development, because each individual has a unique life experience. Consequently, the human race is infinitely diverse, human abilities and talents are infinitely diverse.

Individualization is a general biological pattern. Individual natural differences in humans are supplemented by social differences, determined by the social division of labor and differentiation of social functions, and at a certain stage of social development - also by individual personal differences.

Man is included in two worlds at once: the world of nature and the world of society, which gives rise to a number of problems. Let's look at two of them.

Aristotle called man a political animal, recognizing in him a combination of two principles: biological (animal) and political (social). The first problem is which of these principles is dominant, determining in the formation of a person’s abilities, feelings, behavior, actions and how the relationship between the biological and the social in a person is realized.

The essence of another problem is this: recognizing that each person is unique, original and inimitable, we, nevertheless, constantly group people according to various characteristics, some of which are determined biologically, others - socially, and some - by the interaction of the biological and the social. The question arises, what significance do biologically determined differences between people and groups of people have in the life of society?

In the course of discussions around these problems, theoretical concepts are put forward, criticized and rethought, and new lines of practical action are developed that help improve relationships between people.

K. Marx wrote: “Man is directly a natural being. As a natural being... he... is endowed with natural powers, vital forces, being an active natural being; these forces exist in him in the form of inclinations and abilities, in the form of drives...” This approach found justification and development in the works of Engels, who understood the biological nature of man as something initial, although not sufficient to explain history and man himself.

Marxist-Leninist philosophy shows the importance of social factors along with biological ones - both play qualitatively different roles in determining human essence and nature. It reveals the dominant meaning of the social without ignoring the biological nature of man.

Disregard for human biology is unacceptable. Moreover, the biological organization of a human being is something valuable in itself, and no social goals can justify either violence against it or eugenic projects for its alteration.

Among the great diversity of the world of living beings living on planet Earth, only one person has a highly developed mind, largely thanks to which he, in fact, was able to survive and survive as a biological species.

Even prehistoric people, at the level of their mythological worldview, knew that the cause of all this was something that was located in man himself. They called this “something” the soul. Plato made the greatest scientific discovery. He established that the human soul consists of three parts: reason, feelings and will. The entire spiritual world of a person is born precisely from his mind, his feelings and his will. Despite the innumerable diversity of the spiritual world, its inexhaustibility, there is, in fact, nothing else in it except the manifestations of intellectual, emotional and volitional elements.

The structure of human nature.

In the structure of human nature one can find three components: biological nature, social nature and spiritual nature.

The biological nature of humans was formed over a long, 2.5 billion years, evolutionary development from blue-green algae to Homo Sapiens. In 1924, English professor Leakey discovered in Ethiopia the remains of an Australopithecus, which lived 3.3 million years ago. From this distant ancestor descend modern hominids: apes and humans.

The ascending line of human evolution went through the following stages: Australopithecus (fossil southern monkey, 3.3 million years ago) - Pithecanthropus (ape-man, 1 million years ago) - Sinanthropus (fossil "Chinese man", 500 thousand years ago) - Neanderthal (100 thousand years ) - Cro-Magnon (Homo Sapiens fossil, 40 thousand years ago) - modern man (20 thousand years ago). It should be taken into account that our biological ancestors did not appear one after another, but stood out for a long time and lived together with their predecessors. Thus, it has been reliably established that the Cro-Magnon lived together with the Neanderthal and even... hunted him. The Cro-Magnon man, therefore, was a kind of cannibal - he ate his closest relative, his ancestor.

In terms of biological adaptation to nature, humans are significantly inferior to the vast majority of representatives of the animal world. If a person is returned to the animal world, he will suffer a catastrophic defeat in the competitive struggle for existence and will be able to live only in a narrow geographical zone of his origin - in the tropics, on both sides close to the equator. A person does not have warm fur, he has weak teeth, weak nails instead of claws, an unstable vertical gait on two legs, a predisposition to many diseases, a degraded immune system...

Superiority over animals is biologically ensured to humans only by the presence of a cerebral cortex, which no animal has. The cerebral cortex consists of 14 billion neurons, the functioning of which serves as the material basis for a person’s spiritual life - his consciousness, ability to work and to live in society. The cerebral cortex abundantly provides scope for endless spiritual growth and development of man and society. Suffice it to say that today, over the course of a person’s entire long life, at best, only 1 billion - only 7% - of neurons are activated, and the remaining 13 billion - 93% - remain unused “gray matter”.

General health and longevity are genetically determined in human biological nature; temperament, which is one of four possible types: choleric, sanguine, melancholic and phlegmatic; talents and inclinations. It should be taken into account that each person is not a biologically repeated organism, the structure of its cells and DNA molecules (genes). It is estimated that 95 billion of us people have been born and died on Earth over 40 thousand years, among whom there was not at least one identical person.

Biological nature is the only real basis on which a person is born and exists. Each individual, each person exists from that time until his biological nature exists and lives. But with all his biological nature, man belongs to the animal world. And man is born only as the animal species Homo Sapiens; is not born as a human being, but only as a candidate for a human being. The newborn biological creature Homo Sapiens has yet to become a human being in the full sense of the word.

Let's begin the description of the social nature of man with the definition of society. Society is a union of people for the joint production, distribution and consumption of material and spiritual goods; for the reproduction of one’s species and one’s way of life. Such a union is carried out, as in the animal world, to maintain (in the interests of) the individual existence of the individual and for the reproduction of Homo Sapiens as a biological species. But unlike animals, the behavior of a person - as a being who is characterized by consciousness and the ability to work - in a group of his own kind is governed not by instincts, but by public opinion. In the process of assimilating the elements of social life, a candidate for a person turns into a real person. The process of a newborn acquiring elements of social life is called human socialization.

Only in society and from society does man acquire his social nature. In society, a person learns human behavior, guided not by instincts, but by public opinion; zoological instincts are curbed in society; in society, a person learns the language, customs and traditions developed in this society; here a person perceives the experience of production and production relations accumulated by society...

Spiritual nature of man. The biological nature of a person in the conditions of social life contributes to his transformation into a person, a biological individual into a personality. There are many definitions of personality, identifying its signs and characteristics. Personality is the totality of a person’s spiritual world in inextricable connection with his biological nature in the process of social life. A person is a being who competently (consciously) makes decisions and is responsible for his actions and behavior. The content of a person’s personality is his spiritual world, in which the worldview occupies a central place.

The spiritual world of a person is directly generated in the process of activity of his psyche. And in the human psyche there are three components: Mind, Feelings and Will. Consequently, in the spiritual world of man there is nothing else except elements of intellectual and emotional activity and volitional impulses.

Biological and social in man.

Man inherited his biological nature from the animal world. And biological nature relentlessly demands from every animal being that, having been born, it satisfies its biological needs: eat, drink, grow, mature, mature and reproduce its own kind in order to recreate its kind. To recreate one’s own race—that’s what an animal individual is born for, comes into the world. And in order to recreate its species, a born animal must eat, drink, grow, mature, and mature in order to be able to reproduce. Having fulfilled what was laid down by biological nature, an animal creature must ensure the fertility of its offspring and... die. To die so that the race continues to exist. An animal is born, lives and dies to continue its species. And the life of an animal no longer has any meaning. The same meaning of life is embedded by biological nature in human life. A person, having been born, must receive from his ancestors everything necessary for his existence, growth, maturity, and, having matured, he must reproduce his own kind, give birth to a child. The happiness of parents lies in their children. Washed away their lives - to give birth to children. And if they don’t have children, their happiness in this regard will be detrimental. They will not experience natural happiness from fertilization, birth, upbringing, communication with children, they will not experience happiness from the happiness of children. Having raised and sent their children into the world, parents must eventually... make room for others. Must die. And there is no biological tragedy here. This is the natural end of the biological existence of any biological individual. There are many examples in the animal world that after completing the biological development cycle and ensuring the reproduction of offspring, parents die. A one-day butterfly emerges from the pupa only to die immediately after being fertilized and laying eggs. She, a one-day butterfly, does not even have nutritional organs. After fertilization, the female cross spider eats her husband in order to use the proteins of the body of “her beloved” to give life to the fertilized seed. Annual plants, after growing the seeds of their offspring, calmly die on the vine... And a person is biologically programmed to die. Death for a person is biologically tragic only when his life is interrupted prematurely, before the completion of the biological cycle. It is worth noting that biologically a person’s life is programmed for an average of 150 years. And therefore, death at 70-90 years old can also be considered premature. If a person exhausts his genetically determined life span, death becomes as desirable to him as sleep after a hard day. From this point of view, "the purpose of human existence is to go through the normal cycle of life, leading to the loss of the life instinct and to a painless old age, reconciled with death." Thus, biological nature imposes on man the meaning of his life in maintaining his existence for the reproduction of the human race for the reproduction of Homo Sapiens.

Social nature also imposes criteria on a person to determine the meaning of his life.

Due to the reasons of zoological imperfection, an individual person, isolated from a collective of his own kind, cannot maintain his existence, much less complete the biological cycle of his development and reproduce offspring. And the human collective is a society with all the parameters unique to it. Only society ensures the existence of man both as an individual, a person, and as a biological species. People live in society primarily in order to biologically survive for each individual and the entire human race in general. Society, and not the individual, is the only guarantor of the existence of man as a biological species, Homo Sapiens. Only society accumulates, preserves and passes on to the next generations the experience of a person’s struggle for survival, the experience of the struggle for existence. Hence, in order to preserve both the species and the individual (personality), it is necessary to preserve the society of this individual (personality). Consequently, for each individual person, from the point of view of his nature, society is more important than he himself, an individual person. That is why, even at the level of biological interests, the meaning of human life is to take care of society more than one’s own, individual life. Even if in the name of preserving this, your own society, it is necessary to sacrifice your personal life.

In addition to guaranteeing the preservation of the human race, society, in addition to this, gives each of its members a number of other advantages, unprecedented in the animal world. So only in society does a newborn biological candidate for a person become a real person. Here it must be said that the social nature of man dictates that he see the meaning of his own, individual existence in serving society, other people, even to the point of self-sacrifice for the good of society and other people.

The role of biological and geographical factors in the formation of social life

The study of human societies begins with the study of the basic conditions that determine their functioning, their "life." The concept of “social life” is used to denote a complex of phenomena that arise during the interaction of humans and social communities, as well as the joint use of natural resources necessary to satisfy needs. The biological, geographical, demographic and economic foundations of social life differ.

When analyzing the foundations of social life, one should analyze the peculiarities of human biology as a social subject, creating the biological possibilities of human labor, communication, and mastering the social experience accumulated by previous generations. These include such an anatomical feature of a person as an upright gait.

It allows you to better see your surroundings and use your hands in the process of work.

An important role in social activity is played by such a human organ as the hand with the opposable thumb. Human hands can perform complex operations and functions, and the person himself can participate in a variety of work activities. This should also include looking forward and not to the sides, allowing you to see in three directions, the complex mechanism of the vocal cords, larynx and lips, which contributes to the development of speech. The human brain and complex nervous system provide the opportunity for high development of the individual’s psyche and intelligence. The brain serves as a biological prerequisite for reflecting the entire wealth of spiritual and material culture and its further development. By adulthood, the human brain increases 5-6 times compared to the brain of a newborn (from 300 g to 1.6 kg). The inferior parietal, temporal and frontal areas of the cerebral cortex are associated with human speech and labor activity, with abstract thinking, which ensures specifically human activity.

The specific biological properties of humans include the long-term dependence of children on their parents, the slow stage of growth and puberty. Social experience and intellectual achievements are not fixed in the genetic apparatus. This requires the extragenetic transmission of moral values, ideals, knowledge and skills accumulated by previous generations of people.

In this process, the direct social interaction of people, “living experience,” acquires enormous importance. It has not lost its significance in our time, despite the colossal achievements in the field of “materialization of the memory of mankind, primarily in writing, and recently in computer science.” memory." On this occasion, the French psychologist A. Pieron noted that if our planet were to suffer a catastrophe, as a result of which the entire adult population would die and only small children would survive, then, although the human race would not cease to exist, cultural history humanity would be thrown back to its origins.There would be no one to set culture in motion, to introduce new generations of people to it, to reveal to them the secrets of its reproduction.

When affirming the enormous importance of the biological basis of human activity, one should not absolutize some stable differences in the characteristics of organisms, which are the basis for the division of humanity into races, and supposedly predetermine the social roles and statuses of individuals. Representatives of anthropological schools, based on racial differences, tried to justify the division of people into higher, leading races, and lower ones, called to serve the first. They argued that people's social status corresponds to their biological qualities and that it is the result of natural selection among biologically unequal people. These views have been refuted by empirical research. People of different races, brought up in the same cultural conditions, develop the same views, aspirations, ways of thinking and acting. It is important to note that education alone cannot arbitrarily shape the person being educated. Innate talent (for example, musical) has an important impact on social life.

Let us analyze various aspects of the influence of the geographical environment on human life as a subject of social life. It should be noted that there is a certain minimum of natural and geographical conditions that are necessary for successful human development. Beyond this minimum, social life is not possible or has a certain character, as if frozen at some stage of its development.

The nature of occupations, type of economic activity, objects and means of labor, food, etc. - all this significantly depends on human habitation in a particular zone (in the polar zone, in the steppe or in the subtropics).

Researchers note the influence of climate on human performance. A hot climate reduces the time of active activity. Cold climates require people to make great efforts to maintain life.

Temperate climates are most conducive to activity. Factors such as atmospheric pressure, air humidity, and winds are important factors that affect human health, which is an important factor in social life.

Soils play a major role in the functioning of social life. Their fertility, combined with a favorable climate, creates conditions for the progress of the people living on them. This affects the pace of development of the economy and society as a whole. Poor soils hinder the achievement of a high standard of living and require significant human effort.

The terrain is no less important in social life. The presence of mountains, deserts, and rivers can become a natural defensive system for a particular people. J. Szczepanski, a famous Polish sociologist, believed that “democratic systems developed in countries with natural borders (Switzerland, Iceland), and that in countries with open borders susceptible to raids, a strong, absolutist power arose in the early stages.”

At the stage of the initial development of a particular people, the geographical environment left its specific imprint on its culture, both in its economic, political, and spiritual-aesthetic aspects. This is indirectly expressed in certain specific habits, customs, and rituals, in which the features of the people’s way of life associated with their living conditions are manifested. The peoples of the tropics, for example, are unfamiliar with many customs and rituals characteristic of the peoples of the temperate zone and associated with seasonal work cycles. In Rus', there has long been a cycle of ritual holidays: spring, summer, autumn, winter.

The geographical environment is also reflected in the self-awareness of peoples in the form of the idea of ​​​​the “native land”. Some of its elements are either in the form of visual images (birch for the Russians, poplar for the Ukrainians, oak for the British, laurel for the Spaniards, sakura for the Japanese, etc.), or in combination with toponymy (the Volga rivers for the Russians, the Dnieper for the Ukrainians, Mount Furzi among the Japanese, etc.) become a kind of symbols of nationality. The influence of the geographical environment on the self-awareness of peoples is also evidenced by the names of the peoples themselves. For example, the coastal Chukchi call themselves “an kalyn” - “sea inhabitants”, and one of the groups of Selkups, another small northern people - “leinkum”, i.e. "taiga people"

Thus, geographical factors played a significant role in the formation of culture in the initial stages of the development of a particular people. Subsequently, reflected in culture, they can be reproduced by the people regardless of the original habitat (for example, the construction of wooden huts by Russian settlers in the treeless steppes of Kazakhstan).

Based on the above, it should be noted that when considering the role of the geographical environment, “geographical nihilism”, a complete denial of its impact on the functioning of society, is unacceptable. On the other hand, one cannot share the point of view of representatives of “geographical determinism”, who see an unambiguous and unidirectional relationship between the geographic environment and the processes of social life, when the development of society is completely determined by geographical factors. Taking into account the creative potential of the individual, the development of science and technology on this basis, and cultural exchange between peoples create a certain independence of man from the geographical environment. However, human social activity must fit harmoniously into the natural geographical environment. It should not violate its basic eco-connections.

Social life

Historical types of social life

In sociology, two main approaches to the analysis of society as a special category have developed.

Proponents of the first approach (“social atomism”) believe that society is a collection of individuals and the interaction between them.

G. Simmel believed that the “interaction of parts” is what we call society. P. Sorokin came to the conclusion that “society or collective unity as a set of interacting individuals exists.

Representatives of another direction in sociology (“universalism”), as opposed to attempts to summarize individual people, believe that society is a certain objective reality that is not exhausted by the totality of its constituent individuals. E. Durkheim was of the opinion that society is not a simple sum of individuals, but a system formed by their association and representing a reality endowed with special properties. V. Soloviev emphasized that “human society is not a simple mechanical collection of individuals: it is an independent whole, has its own life and organization.”

The second point of view prevails in sociology. Society is unthinkable without the activities of people, which they carry out not in isolation, but in the process of interaction with other people united in various social communities. In the process of this interaction, people systematically influence other individuals and form a new holistic entity - society.

In the social activity of an individual, persistently repeating, typical features are manifested, which form his society as an integrity, as a system.

A system is a set of elements ordered in a certain way, interconnected and forming some kind of integral unity, which is not reducible to the sum of its elements. Society, as a social system, is a way of organizing social connections and social interaction, ensuring the satisfaction of people's basic needs.

Society as a whole is the largest system. Its most important subsystems are economic, political, social, and spiritual. In society, there are also subsystems such as classes, ethnic, demographic, territorial and professional groups, family, etc. Each of the named subsystems includes many other subsystems. They can mutually regroup; the same individuals can be elements of different systems. An individual cannot but obey the requirements of the system in which he is included. He accepts its norms and values ​​to one degree or another. At the same time, in society there are simultaneously various forms of social activity and behavior, between which a choice is possible.

In order for society to function as a single whole, each subsystem must perform specific, strictly defined functions. The functions of subsystems mean satisfying any social needs. Yet together they aim to maintain sustainability

society. Dysfunction (destructive function) of a subsystem can disrupt the stability of society. The researcher of this phenomenon, R. Merton, believed that the same subsystems can be functional in relation to some of them and dysfunctional in relation to others.

In sociology, a certain typology of societies has developed. Researchers highlight traditional society. It is a society with an agrarian structure, with sedentary structures and a tradition-based way of regulating relations between people. It is characterized by extremely low rates of production development, which could satisfy needs only at a minimum level, and great immunity to innovation, due to the peculiarities of its functioning. The behavior of individuals is strictly controlled and regulated by customs, norms, and social institutions. The listed social formations, sanctified by tradition, are considered unshakable; even the thought of their possible transformation is denied. Carrying out their integrative function, culture and social institutions suppressed any manifestation of personal freedom, which is a necessary condition for the creative process in society.

The term "industrial society" was first introduced by Saint-Simon. He emphasized the production basis of society. Important features of an industrial society are also the flexibility of social structures, allowing them to be modified as the needs and interests of people change, social mobility, and a developed communication system. This is a society in which flexible management structures have been created that make it possible to intelligently combine the freedom and interests of the individual with the general principles governing their joint activities.

In the 60s, two stages in the development of society were complemented by a third. The concept of post-industrial society appears, actively developed in American (D. Bell) and Western European (A. Touraine) sociology. The reason for the emergence of this concept is structural changes in the economy and culture of the most developed countries, forcing a different look at society itself as a whole. First of all, the role of knowledge and information has sharply increased. Having received the necessary education and having access to the latest information, the individual received an advantage in moving up the social hierarchy. Creative work becomes the basis for success and prosperity of both individuals and society.

In addition to society, which in sociology is often correlated with the boundaries of the state, other types of organization of social life are analyzed.

Marxism, choosing as its basis the method of production of material goods (the unity of the productive forces and the production relations corresponding to them), defines the corresponding socio-economic formation as the basic structure of social life. The development of social life represents a consistent transition from lower to higher socio-economic formations: from primitive communal to slaveholding, then to feudal, capitalist and communist.

The primitive-appropriating mode of production characterizes the primitive communal formation. A specific feature of the slave-owning formation is the ownership of people and the use of slave labor, feudal - production based on the exploitation of peasants attached to the land, bourgeois - the transition to the economic dependence of formally free wage workers; in the communist formation it was assumed that everyone would be treated equally to the ownership of the means of production by eliminating private property relations. Recognizing the cause-and-effect relationships between economic, political, ideological and other institutions that determine production and economic relations.

Socio-economic formations are distinguished on the basis of what is common to different countries within the same formation.

The basis of the civilized approach is the idea of ​​the uniqueness of the path traveled by peoples.

Civilization is understood as the qualitative specificity (originality of material, spiritual, social life) of a particular group of countries or peoples at a certain stage of development.

Among the many civilizations, Ancient India and China, the states of the Muslim East, Babylon, European civilization, Russian civilization, etc. stand out.

Any civilization is characterized not only by a specific social production technology, but also, to no lesser extent, by its corresponding culture. It is characterized by a certain philosophy, socially significant values, a generalized image of the world, a specific way of life with its own special life principle, the basis of which is the spirit of the people, its morality, conviction, which also determine a certain attitude towards oneself.

The civilizational approach in sociology involves taking into account and studying what is unique and original in the organization of the social life of an entire region.

Some of the most important forms and achievements developed by a particular civilization are gaining universal recognition and dissemination. Thus, the values ​​that originated in European civilization, but are now acquiring universal significance, include the following.

In the sphere of production and economic relations, this is the achieved level of development of technology and technology generated by the new stage of the scientific and technological revolution, the system of commodity and monetary relations, and the presence of a market.

In the political sphere, the general civilizational basis includes a legal state operating on the basis of democratic norms.

In the spiritual and moral sphere, the common heritage of all peoples are the great achievements of science, art, culture, as well as universal moral values.

Social life is shaped by a complex set of forces, in which natural phenomena and processes are only one of the elements. Based on the conditions created by nature, a complex interaction of individuals manifests itself, which forms a new integrity, society, as a social system. Labor, as a fundamental form of activity, underlies the development of diverse types of organization of social life.

Social connections, social actions and interactions as a basic element of social life

Social life can be defined as a complex of phenomena arising from the interaction of individuals, social groups, in a certain space, and the use of products located in it, necessary to satisfy needs.

Social life arises, reproduces and develops precisely because of the presence of dependencies between people. To satisfy his needs, a person must interact with other individuals, enter a social group, and participate in joint activities.

Dependence can be elementary, direct dependence on one’s friend, brother, colleague. Addiction can be complex and indirect. For example, the dependence of our individual life on the level of development of society, the effectiveness of the economic system, the effectiveness of the political organization of society, and the state of morals. There are dependencies between different communities of people (between urban and rural residents, students and workers, etc.).

A social connection is always present, realizable, and really oriented towards a social subject (individual, social group, social community, etc.). The main structural elements of social communication are:

1) subjects of communication (there can be two or thousands of people);

2) the subject of communication (i.e. what the communication is about);

3) a mechanism for conscious regulation of relationships between subjects or “rules of the game.”

Social connections can be stable or random, direct or indirect, formal or informal, constant or sporadic. The formation of these connections occurs gradually, from simple to complex forms. Social connection acts primarily in the form of social contact.

The type of short-term, easily interrupted social connections caused by the contact of people in physical and social space is called social contact. In the process of contact, individuals mutually evaluate each other, select, and transition to more complex and stable social relationships. Social contacts precede any social action.

Among them are spatial contacts, contacts of interest and contacts of exchange. Spatial contact is the initial and necessary link of social connections. Knowing where people are and how many there are, and even more so observing them visually, a person can choose an object for further development of relationships, based on his needs and interests.

Contacts of interest. Why do you single out this person or that? You may be interested in this person because he has certain values ​​or traits that meet your needs (for example, he has an interesting appearance, or has the information you need). Contact of interest may be interrupted depending on many factors, but above all:

1) on the degree of mutuality of interests;

2) the strength of the individual’s interest;

3) environment. For example, a beautiful girl may attract the attention of a young man, but may turn out to be indifferent to an entrepreneur who is mainly interested in developing his own business, or to a professor looking for scientific talent.

Exchange contacts. J. Shchenansky notes that they represent a specific type of social relationships in which individuals exchange values ​​without having the desire to change the behavior of other individuals. In this case, the individual is only interested in the subject of exchange; J. Szczepanski gives the following example characterizing exchange contacts. This example involves buying a newspaper. Initially, on the basis of a very specific need, an individual develops a spatial vision of a newsstand, then a very specific interest appears associated with the sale of the newspaper and with the seller, after which the newspaper is exchanged for money. Subsequent, repeated contacts can lead to the development of more complex relationships, aimed not at the object of exchange, but at the person. For example, a friendly relationship with the seller may arise.

Social connection is nothing more than dependence, which is realized through social action and appears in the form of social interaction. Let us consider in more detail such elements of social life as social action and interaction.

According to M. Weber: “social action (including non-interference or patient acceptance) can be oriented towards the past, present or expected future behavior of others. It can be revenge for past grievances, protection from future danger. “Others” can be individuals , acquaintances or an indefinite number of complete strangers." Social action must be oriented towards other people, otherwise it is not social. Not every human action is therefore a social action. The following example is typical in this regard. An accidental collision between cyclists may be nothing more than an incident, like a natural phenomenon, but the attempt to avoid a collision, the swearing that follows the collision, a brawl or a peaceful resolution of a conflict is already a social action.

So, not every collision between people is a social action. It acquires the character of such if it involves direct or indirect interaction with other people: a group of one’s acquaintances, strangers (behavior in public transport), etc. We are dealing with social action in the case when an individual, focusing on the situation, takes into account the reaction of other people, their needs and goals, develops a plan of his actions, focusing on others, making a forecast, takes into account whether others will contribute or hinder his actions social actors with whom he must interact; who is likely to behave and how, taking this into account, what option of action should be chosen.

Not a single individual commits social actions without taking into account the situation, the totality of material, social and cultural conditions.

Orientation towards others, fulfillment of expectations and obligations is a kind of payment that an actor must pay for calm, reliable, civilized conditions for satisfying his needs.

In sociology, it is customary to distinguish the following types of social actions: goal-rational, value-rational, affective and traditional.

M. Weber based the classification of social actions on purposeful, rational action, which is characterized by a clear understanding by the actor of what he wants to achieve, which ways and means are most effective. He himself correlates the goal and the means, calculates the positive and negative consequences of his actions and finds a reasonable measure of the combination of personal goals and social obligations.

However, are social actions always conscious and rational in real life? Numerous studies show that a person never acts fully consciously. “A high degree of awareness and expediency, say, in the actions of a politician fighting his rivals, or in the actions of an enterprise manager exercising control over the behavior of subordinates, is largely based on intuition, feelings, and natural human reactions. In this regard, fully conscious actions can be considered ideal model. In practice, obviously, social actions will be partially conscious actions pursuing more or less clear goals."

More widespread is value-rational action, subject to certain requirements and values ​​accepted in this society. For the individual in this case there is no external, rationally understood goal; the action, according to M. Weber, is always subject to “commandments” or requirements, in obedience to which the given person sees duty. In this case, the consciousness of the actor is not completely liberated; in resolving the contradictions between goal and other-orientation, he relies entirely on his accepted values.

There are also affective and traditional actions. Affective action is irrational; he is distinguished by the desire for immediate satisfaction of passion, thirst for revenge, and attraction. Traditional action is carried out on the basis of deeply learned social patterns of behavior, norms that have become habitual, traditional, and not subject to verification of truth.

In real life, all of the above types of social actions occur. Some of them, in particular traditional moral ones, may generally be characteristic, typical for certain strata of society. As for the individual, in her life there is a place for both affect and strict calculation, accustomed to focusing on one’s duty to comrades, parents, and the Fatherland.

The social action model allows us to identify qualitative criteria for the effectiveness of organizing social connections. If social connections allow one to satisfy needs and realize one’s goals, then such connections can be considered reasonable. If a given goal of relationships does not allow this to be achieved, dissatisfaction is formed, prompting a restructuring of this system of social connections. Changing social connections may be limited to minor adjustments, or may require radical changes to the entire system of connections. Take, for example, the transformations of recent years in our country. We initially sought to achieve a higher standard of living and greater freedom without making fundamental social changes. But when it became clear that solving these problems within the framework of socialist principles did not give the desired result, sentiment in favor of more radical changes in the system of social relations began to grow in society.

Social connection acts as both social contact and social interaction. Social interaction is systematic, fairly regular social actions of partners, directed at each other, with the goal of causing a very specific (expected) response from the partner; and the response generates a new reaction of the influencer. Otherwise, social interaction is a process in which people react to the actions of others.

A striking example of interaction is the production process. Here there is deep and close coordination of the system of actions of partners on issues for which a connection has been established between them, for example, the production and distribution of goods. An example of social interaction could be communication with work colleagues and friends. In the process of interaction, actions, services, personal qualities, etc. are exchanged.

A large role in the implementation of interaction is played by the system of mutual expectations placed by individuals and social groups on each other before committing social actions. The interaction can continue and become sustainable, reusable, permanent. Thus, when interacting with work colleagues, managers, and family members, we know how they should behave towards us and how we should interact with them. Violation of such stable expectations, as a rule, leads to a modification of the nature of interaction and even to an interruption in communication.

There are two types of interaction: cooperation and competition. Cooperation implies interrelated actions of individuals aimed at achieving common goals, with mutual benefit for the interacting parties. Competitive interaction involves attempts to sideline, outpace, or suppress an opponent who is striving for identical goals.

If, on the basis of cooperation, feelings of gratitude, needs for communication, and a desire to give in arise, then with competition, feelings of fear, hostility, and anger may arise.

Social interaction is studied at two levels: micro- and macro-level. At the micro level, the interaction of people with each other is studied. The macro level includes such large structures as government and trade, and such institutions as religion and family. In any social setting, people interact at both levels.

So, in all subjects that are significant for satisfying his needs, a person enters into deep, connected interaction with other people, with society as a whole. Social connections thus represent a variety of interactions consisting of actions and responses. As a result of the repetition of one or another type of interaction, different types of relationships between people arise.

The relationships that connect a social subject (individual, social group) with objective reality, and which are aimed at transforming it, are called human activity. Purposeful human activity consists of individual actions and interactions. In general, human activity is characterized by a creatively transformative nature, activity and objectivity.

It can be material and spiritual, practical and theoretical, transformative and educational, etc. Social action is at the core of human activity. Let's consider its mechanism.

Motivation for social action: needs, interests, value orientations.

Understanding social action is impossible without studying the mechanism for its improvement. It is based on a motive - an internal urge that pushes an individual to action. The motivation of the subject to activity is related to his needs. The problem of needs, considered in the aspect of the driving forces of human activity, is important in the management, education, and stimulation of labor.

Need is a state of lack, a feeling of need for something necessary for life. Need is the source of activity and the primary link of motivation, the starting point of the entire incentive system.

Human needs are diverse. They are difficult to classify. It is generally accepted that one of the best classifications of needs belongs to A. Maslow, an American sociologist and social psychologist.

He identified five types of needs:

1) physiological - in human reproduction, food, breathing, clothing, housing, rest;

2) the need for security and quality of life - stability of the conditions of one’s existence, confidence in the future, personal safety;

3) social needs - for affection, belonging to a team, communication, care for others and attention to oneself, participation in joint work activities;

4) prestige needs - respect from “significant others”, career growth, status, recognition, high appreciation;

5) the needs of self-realization, creative self-expression, etc.

A. Maslow convincingly showed that an unsatisfied need for food can block all other human motives - freedom, love, a sense of community, respect, etc., hunger can serve as a fairly effective means of manipulating people. It follows that the role of physiological and material needs cannot be underestimated.

It should be noted that this author’s “pyramid of needs” has been criticized for attempting to propose a universal hierarchy of needs, in which a higher need in all cases cannot become relevant or leading until the previous one is satisfied.

In real human actions, several needs result: their hierarchy is determined both by the culture of society and the specific personal social situation in which the individual is involved, culture, and personality type.

The formation of the system of needs of a modern person is a long process. During this evolution, through several stages, there is a transition from the unconditional dominance of vital needs inherent in the savage to an integral multidimensional system of needs of our contemporary. A person more and more often cannot, and does not want to, neglect any of his needs to please another.

Needs are closely related to interests. Not a single social action - a major event in social life, transformation, reform - can be understood if the interests that gave rise to this action are not clarified. The motive corresponding to this need is updated and interest arises - a form of manifestation of the need that ensures that the individual is focused on understanding the goals of the activity.

If a need is focused primarily on the subject of its satisfaction, then interest is directed toward those social relations, institutions, institutions on which the distribution of objects, values, and benefits that ensure the satisfaction of needs depends.

It is interests, and above all economic and material interests, that have a decisive influence on the activity or passivity of large groups of the population.

So, a social object in combination with an actualized motive arouses interest. The gradual development of interest leads to the emergence of goals in the subject in relation to specific social objects. The emergence of a goal means his awareness of the situation and the possibility of further development of subjective activity, which further leads to the formation of a social attitude, meaning a person’s predisposition and readiness to act in a certain way in certain situations determined by value orientations.

Values ​​are objects of various kinds that can satisfy human needs (objects, activities, relationships, people, groups, etc.).

In sociology, values ​​are viewed as having a historically specific nature and as eternal universal values.

The value system of a social subject may include various values:

1) meaning of life (ideas about good, evil, good, happiness);

2) universal:

a) vital (life, health, personal safety, welfare, family, education, product quality, etc.);

b) democratic (freedom of speech, parties);

c) public recognition (hard work, qualifications, social status);

d) interpersonal communication (honesty, selflessness, goodwill, love, etc.);

e) personal development (self-esteem, desire for education, freedom of creativity and self-realization, etc.);

3) particular:

a) traditional (love and affection for the “small Motherland”, family, respect for authority);

Social development and social change.

Social ideal as a condition for social development.

In all spheres of society, we can observe constant changes, for example, changes in social structure, social relationships, culture, collective behavior. Social changes may include population growth, increased wealth, increased educational levels, etc. If in a certain system new constituent elements appear or elements of previously existing relations disappear, then we say that this system undergoes changes.

Social change can also be defined as a change in the way society is organized. Change in social organization is a universal phenomenon, although it occurs at different rates. For example, modernization, which has its own characteristics in each country. Modernization here refers to a complex set of changes occurring in almost every part of society in the process of its industrialization. Modernization includes constant changes in the economy, politics, education, traditions and religious life of society. Some of these areas change earlier than others, but all of them are subject to change to some extent.

Social development in sociology refers to changes leading to differentiation and enrichment of the constituent elements of the system. Here we mean empirically proven facts of changes that cause constant enrichment and differentiation of the structure of organizing relations between people, constant enrichment of cultural systems, enrichment of science, technology, institutions, expansion of opportunities to satisfy personal and social needs.

If the development occurring in a certain system brings it closer to a certain ideal, assessed positively, then we say that development is progress. If changes occurring in a system lead to the disappearance and impoverishment of its constituent elements or the relationships existing between them, then the system undergoes regression. In modern sociology, instead of the term progress, the concept of “change” is increasingly used. According to many scientists, the term “progress” expresses a value opinion. Progress means change in a desired direction. But in whose values ​​can this desirability be measured? For example, what changes do the construction of nuclear power plants represent - progress or regression?

It should be noted that in sociology there is a view that development and progress are one and the same. This view is derived from the evolutionary theories of the 19th century, which argued that any social development by nature is also progress, because it is improvement, because an enriched system, being more differentiated, is at the same time a more perfect system. However, according to J. Szczepanski, when speaking about improvement, we mean, first of all, an increase in ethical value. The development of groups and communities has several aspects: enrichment of the number of elements - when we talk about the quantitative development of a group, differentiation of relationships - what we call the development of an organization; increasing the efficiency of actions - what we call the development of functions; increasing the satisfaction of organizational members with participation in social life, an aspect of the feeling of “happiness” that is difficult to measure.

The moral development of groups can be measured by the degree of conformity of their social life with the moral standards recognized within them, but can also be measured by the degree of "happiness" achieved by their members.

In any case, they prefer to talk about development specifically and adopt a definition that does not include any assessment, but allows the level of development to be measured by objective criteria and quantitative measures.

The term “progress” is proposed to be left to determine the degree of achievement of the accepted ideal.

A social ideal is a model of a perfect state of society, an idea of ​​perfect social relations. The ideal sets the final goals of activity, determines the immediate goals and means of their implementation. Being a value guide, it thereby performs a regulatory function, which consists in ordering and maintaining the relative stability and dynamism of social relations, in accordance with the image of the desired and perfect reality as the highest goal.

Most often, during the relatively stable development of society, the ideal regulates the activities of people and social relations not directly, but indirectly, through a system of existing norms, acting as a systemic principle of their hierarchy.

The ideal, as a value guide and criterion for assessing reality, as a regulator of social relations, is an educational force. Along with principles and beliefs, it acts as a component of a worldview and influences the formation of a person’s life position and the meaning of his life.

A social ideal inspires people to change the social system and becomes an important component of social movements.

Sociology views the social ideal as a reflection of trends in social development, as an active force that organizes the activities of people.

Ideals that gravitate towards the sphere of public consciousness stimulate social activity. Ideals are directed to the future; when addressing them, the contradictions of actual relations are removed, the ideal expresses the ultimate goal of social activity, social processes are presented here in the form of a desired state, the means of achieving which may not yet be fully determined.

In its entirety - with justification and in all the richness of its content - the social ideal can only be acquired through theoretical activity. Both the development of an ideal and its assimilation presuppose a certain level of theoretical thinking.

The sociological approach to the ideal involves making clear distinctions between the desired, the actual and the possible. The stronger the desire to achieve an ideal, the more realistic the thinking of a statesman and political figure should be, the more attention should be paid to the study of the practice of economic and social relations, the actual capabilities of society, the real state of mass consciousness of social groups and the motives of their activities and behavior.

Focusing only on the ideal often leads to a certain distortion of reality; seeing the present through the prism of the future often leads to the fact that the actual development of relationships is adjusted to a given ideal, because There is a constant desire to bring this ideal closer; real contradictions, negative phenomena, and undesirable consequences of the actions taken are often ignored.

The other extreme of practical thinking is a refusal or underestimation of the ideal, seeing only momentary interests, the ability to grasp the interests of currently functioning institutions, institutions, social groups without analyzing and assessing the prospects for their development given in the ideal. Both extremes lead to the same result - voluntarism and subjectivism in practice, to the refusal of third-party analysis of objective trends in the development of the interests and needs of society as a whole and its individual groups.

Ideals encounter resistance from reality, so they are not fully realized. Some of this ideal is put into practice, some are modified, some are eliminated as an element of utopia, and some are postponed for a more distant future.

This collision of ideal with reality reveals an important feature of human existence: a person cannot live without an ideal, a goal; critical attitude to the present. But a person cannot live by ideals alone. His deeds and actions are motivated by real interests; he must constantly adjust his actions to the available means of translating the ideal into reality.

The social ideal in all the multiplicity and complexity of its essence and form can be traced throughout the development of mankind. Moreover, the social ideal can be analyzed not only as an abstract theoretical doctrine. It is most interesting to consider the social ideal based on specific historical material (for example, the ancient ideal of the “golden age”, the early Christian ideal, the ideal of enlightenment, the communist ideal).

The traditional view that developed in our social science was that there was only one true communist ideal, which was based on a strict theory of scientific development. All other ideals were considered utopian.

Many were impressed by a certain ideal of future equality and abundance. Moreover, in the minds of each person this ideal acquired individual characteristics. Social practice proves that the social ideal can change depending on many circumstances. It may not necessarily amount to a society of equality. Many people, having observed the negative consequences of egalitarianism in practice, want to live in a society of extreme stability and a relatively fair hierarchy.

Currently, according to sociological research, Russian society does not have any dominant idea about the desired path of social development. Having lost faith in socialism, the overwhelming majority of people never accepted any other social ideal.

At the same time, in the West there is a constant search for a social ideal capable of mobilizing human energy.

Neoconservatives and social democrats present their vision of the social ideal. According to the “new right” (1), representing the first direction, in a market society, where the entire value system is focused on economic growth and the continuous satisfaction of ever-increasing material needs, a market mentality has formed. Man has turned into a selfish and irresponsible subject who can only put forward new socio-economic demands, unable to control himself and manage the situation. “A person lacks neither incentive to live nor ideals for which to die.” The “new right” sees a way out of the social crisis in the restructuring of social consciousness, in the targeted self-education of the individual based on the renewal of ethical forms. The “new right” proposes to recreate an ideal capable of ensuring the spiritual renewal of the West on the basis of conservatism, understood as a return to the origins of European culture. The conservative position consists in the desire, based on all the best that happened in the past, to create a new situation. We are talking about establishing a harmonious order, which is possible in a strict social hierarchy. An organized society is necessarily organic; it maintains a harmonious balance of all social forces, taking into account their diversity. The “aristocracy of spirit and character” is entrusted with the task of creating a new, “strict” ethics capable of giving existence a lost meaning. We are talking about restoring the hierarchy, about creating favorable conditions for the emergence of a “spiritual type of personality” that embodies aristocratic principles. The non-conservative social ideal is called the "scientific society."

Social democrats, justifying from various points of view the need to put forward a social ideal in modern conditions, associate it with the concept of “democratic socialism”. Democratic socialism usually means a continuous process of reformist social changes, as a result of which modern capitalist society acquires a new quality. At the same time, Social Democrats never tire of emphasizing that such a society cannot be created in one country or several countries, but arises only as a mass phenomenon, as a new, highest moral stage in the development of human civilization. Democracy acts as a universal means of realizing the social democratic social ideal.

In modern conditions, a new type of civilization appears as a social ideal, designed to save humanity; to ensure harmony with nature, social justice, equality in all spheres of human life.

Thus, world social practice shows that society cannot develop successfully without defining the basic principles of social structure.

Conclusion.

Man exists through metabolism with the environment. He breathes, consumes various natural products, and exists as a biological body within certain physicochemical, organic and other environmental conditions. As a natural, biological being, a person is born, grows, matures, ages and dies.

All this characterizes a person as a biological being and determines his biological nature. But at the same time, it differs from any animal and, first of all, in the following features: it produces its own environment (dwelling, clothing, tools), changes the surrounding world not only according to the measure of its utilitarian needs, but also according to the laws of knowledge of this world, as well as and according to the laws of morality and beauty, it can act not only according to need, but also in accordance with the freedom of its will and imagination, while the action of an animal is focused exclusively on satisfying physical needs (hunger, instinct of procreation, group, species instincts, etc.); makes his life activity an object, treats it meaningfully, purposefully changes it, plans it.

The above differences between man and animal characterize his nature; it, being biological, does not lie in the natural life activity of man alone. He seems to go beyond the limits of his biological nature and is capable of such actions that do not bring him any benefit: he distinguishes between good and evil, justice and injustice, is capable of self-sacrifice and posing such questions as “Who am I?”, “For what am I living for?”, “What should I do?” etc. Man is not only a natural, but also a social being, living in a special world - in a society that socializes man. He is born with a set of biological traits inherent to him as a certain biological species. A person becomes a reasonable person under the influence of society. He learns language, perceives social norms of behavior, is imbued with socially significant values ​​that regulate social relations, performs certain social functions and plays specifically social roles.

All his natural inclinations and senses, including hearing, vision, and smell, become socially and culturally oriented. He evaluates the world according to the laws of beauty developed in a given social system, and acts according to the laws of morality that have developed in a given society. New, not only natural, but also social, spiritual and practical feelings develop in him. These are, first of all, feelings of sociality, collectivity, morality, citizenship, and spirituality.

All together, these qualities, both innate and acquired, characterize the biological and social nature of man.

Literature:

1. Dubinin N.P. What is a person. – M.: Mysl, 1983.

2. Social ideals and politics in a changing world / Ed. T. T. Timofeeva M., 1992

3. A.N. Leontyev. Biological and social in the human psyche / Problems of mental development. 4th edition. M., 1981.

4. Zobov R. A., Kelasev V. N. Self-realization of a person. Tutorial. – St. Petersburg: Publishing house. St. Petersburg University, 2001.

5. Sorokin P. / Sociology M., 1920

6. Sorokin P. / Man. Civilization. Society. M., 1992

7. K. Marx, F. Engels / Collected Works. Volume 1. M., 1963

Marx K., Engels F. Soch. T. 1 P.262-263

Social life Work plan: Introduction. The structure of human nature. Biological and social in man. The role of biological and geographical factors in the formation of social life. Social life. Historical types of social life. Social connections, actions and interactions as a basic element of social life. Motivation for social action: needs, interests, value orientations. Social development and social change. Social ideal as a condition for social development. Conclusion. Introduction. There is nothing more interesting in the world than the person himself. V. A. Sukhomlinsky Man is a social being. But at the same time, the highest mammal, i.e. biological being. Like any biological species, Homo sapiens is characterized by a certain set of species characteristics. Each of these characteristics can vary among different representatives, and even within wide limits. The manifestation of many biological parameters of a species can also be influenced by social processes. For example, the normal life expectancy of a person is currently 80-90 years, given that he does not suffer from hereditary diseases and will not be exposed to harmful external influences, such as infectious diseases, road accidents, etc. This is a biological constant of the species, which, however, changes under the influence of social laws. Like other biological species, man has stable varieties, which are designated, when it comes to man, by the concept of “race”. Racial differentiation of people is associated with the adaptation of various groups of people inhabiting different regions of the planet, and is expressed in the formation of specific biological, anatomical and physiological characteristics. But, despite the differences in certain biological parameters, a representative of any race belongs to a single species, Homo sapiens, and has biological parameters characteristic of all people. Each person is individual and unique by nature, each has his own set of genes inherited from his parents. The uniqueness of a person is also enhanced as a result of the influence of social and biological factors in the process of development, because each individual has a unique life experience. Consequently, the human race is infinitely diverse, human abilities and talents are infinitely diverse. Individualization is a general biological pattern. Individual-natural differences in humans are supplemented by social differences, determined by the social division of labor and differentiation of social functions, and at a certain stage of social development - also by individual-personal differences. Man is included in two worlds at once: the world of nature and the world of society, which gives rise to a number of problems. Let's look at two of them. Aristotle called man a political animal, recognizing in him a combination of two principles: biological (animal) and political (social). The first problem is which of these principles is dominant, determining in the formation of a person’s abilities, feelings, behavior, actions and how the relationship between the biological and the social in a person is realized. The essence of another problem is this: recognizing that each person is unique, original and inimitable, we, nevertheless, constantly group people according to various characteristics, some of which are determined biologically, others - socially, and some - by the interaction of the biological and the social. The question arises, what significance do biologically determined differences between people and groups of people have in the life of society? In the course of discussions around these problems, theoretical concepts are put forward, criticized and rethought, and new lines of practical action are developed that help improve relationships between people. K. Marx wrote: “Man is directly a natural being. As a natural being... he... is endowed with natural powers, vital forces, being an active natural being; these forces exist in him in the form of inclinations and abilities, in the form of drives...” This approach found justification and development in the works of Engels, who understood the biological nature of man as something initial, although not sufficient to explain history and man himself. Marxist-Leninist philosophy shows the importance of social factors along with biological ones - both play qualitatively different roles in determining human essence and nature. It reveals the dominant meaning of the social without ignoring the biological nature of man. Disregard for human biology is unacceptable. Moreover, the biological organization of a human being is something valuable in itself, and no social goals can justify either violence against it or eugenic projects for its alteration. Among the great diversity of the world of living beings living on planet Earth, only one person has a highly developed mind, largely thanks to which he, in fact, was able to survive and survive as a biological species. Even prehistoric people, at the level of their mythological worldview, knew that the cause of all this was something that was located in man himself. They called this “something” the soul. Plato made the greatest scientific discovery. He established that the human soul consists of three parts: reason, feelings and will. The entire spiritual world of a person is born precisely from his mind, his feelings and his will. Despite the innumerable diversity of the spiritual world, its inexhaustibility, there is, in fact, nothing else in it except the manifestations of intellectual, emotional and volitional elements. The structure of human nature. In the structure of human nature one can find three components: biological nature, social nature and spiritual nature. The biological nature of humans was formed over a long, 2.5 billion years, evolutionary development from blue-green algae to Homo Sapiens. In 1924, English professor Leakey discovered in Ethiopia the remains of an Australopithecus, which lived 3.3 million years ago. From this distant ancestor descend modern hominids: apes and humans. The ascending line of human evolution went through the following stages: Australopithecus (fossil southern monkey, 3.3 million years ago) - Pithecanthropus (ape-man, 1 million years ago) - Sinanthropus (fossil "Chinese man", 500 thousand years ago) - Neanderthal (100 thousand years ) - Cro-Magnon (Homo Sapiens fossil, 40 thousand years ago) - modern man (20 thousand years ago). It should be taken into account that our biological ancestors did not appear one after another, but stood out for a long time and lived together with their predecessors. Thus, it has been reliably established that the Cro-Magnon lived together with the Neanderthal and even... hunted him. The Cro-Magnon man, therefore, was a kind of cannibal - he ate his closest relative, his ancestor. In terms of biological adaptation to nature, humans are significantly inferior to the vast majority of representatives of the animal world. If a person is returned to the animal world, he will suffer a catastrophic defeat in the competitive struggle for existence and will be able to live only in a narrow geographical zone of his origin - in the tropics, on both sides close to the equator. A person does not have warm fur, he has weak teeth, weak nails instead of claws, an unstable vertical gait on two legs, a predisposition to many diseases, a degraded immune system... Superiority over animals is biologically ensured to a person only by the presence of a cerebral cortex, which no animal has. The cerebral cortex consists of 14 billion neurons, the functioning of which serves as the material basis for a person’s spiritual life - his consciousness, ability to work and to live in society. The cerebral cortex abundantly provides scope for endless spiritual growth and development of man and society. Suffice it to say that today, over the course of a person’s entire long life, at best, only 1 billion - only 7% - of neurons are activated, and the remaining 13 billion - 93% - remain unused “gray matter”. General health and longevity are genetically determined in human biological nature; temperament, which is one of four possible types: choleric, sanguine, melancholic and phlegmatic; talents and inclinations. It should be taken into account that each person is not a biologically repeated organism, the structure of its cells and DNA molecules (genes). It is estimated that 95 billion of us people have been born and died on Earth over 40 thousand years, among whom there was not at least one identical person. Biological nature is the only real basis on which a person is born and exists. Each individual, each person exists from that time until his biological nature exists and lives. But with all his biological nature, man belongs to the animal world. And man is born only as the animal species Homo Sapiens; is not born as a human being, but only as a candidate for a human being. The newborn biological creature Homo Sapiens has yet to become a human being in the full sense of the word. Let's begin the description of the social nature of man with the definition of society. Society is a union of people for the joint production, distribution and consumption of material and spiritual goods; for the reproduction of one’s species and one’s way of life. Such a union is carried out, as in the animal world, to maintain (in the interests of) the individual existence of the individual and for the reproduction of Homo Sapiens as a biological species. But unlike animals, the behavior of a person - as a being who is characterized by consciousness and the ability to work - in a group of his own kind is governed not by instincts, but by public opinion. In the process of assimilating the elements of social life, a candidate for a person turns into a real person. The process of a newborn acquiring elements of social life is called human socialization. Only in society and from society does man acquire his social nature. In society, a person learns human behavior, guided not by instincts, but by public opinion; zoological instincts are curbed in society; in society, a person learns the language, customs and traditions developed in this society; here a person perceives the experience of production and production relations accumulated by society. .. The spiritual nature of man. The biological nature of a person in the conditions of social life contributes to his transformation into a person, a biological individual into a personality. There are many definitions of personality, identifying its signs and characteristics. Personality is the totality of a person’s spiritual world in inextricable connection with his biological nature in the process of social life. A person is a being who competently (consciously) makes decisions and is responsible for his actions and behavior. The content of a person’s personality is his spiritual world, in which the worldview occupies a central place. The spiritual world of a person is directly generated in the process of activity of his psyche. And in the human psyche there are three components: Mind, Feelings and Will. Consequently, in the spiritual world of man there is nothing else except elements of intellectual and emotional activity and volitional impulses. Biological and social in man. Man inherited his biological nature from the animal world. And biological nature relentlessly demands from every animal being that, having been born, it satisfies its biological needs: eat, drink, grow, mature, mature and reproduce its own kind in order to recreate its kind. To recreate one’s own race—that’s what an animal individual is born for, comes into the world. And in order to recreate its species, a born animal must eat, drink, grow, mature, and mature in order to be able to reproduce. Having fulfilled what was laid down by biological nature, an animal creature must ensure the fertility of its offspring and... die. To die so that the race continues to exist. An animal is born, lives and dies to continue its species. And the life of an animal no longer has any meaning. The same meaning of life is embedded by biological nature in human life. A person, having been born, must receive from his ancestors everything necessary for his existence, growth, maturity, and, having matured, he must reproduce his own kind, give birth to a child. The happiness of parents lies in their children. Washed away their lives - to give birth to children. And if they don’t have children, their happiness in this regard will be detrimental. They will not experience natural happiness from fertilization, birth, upbringing, communication with children, they will not experience happiness from the happiness of children. Having raised and sent their children into the world, parents must eventually... make room for others. Must die. And there is no biological tragedy here. This is the natural end of the biological existence of any biological individual. There are many examples in the animal world that after completing the biological development cycle and ensuring the reproduction of offspring, parents die. A one-day butterfly emerges from the pupa only to die immediately after being fertilized and laying eggs. She, a one-day butterfly, does not even have nutritional organs. After fertilization, the female cross spider eats her husband in order to use the proteins of the body of “her beloved” to give life to the fertilized seed. Annual plants, after growing the seeds of their offspring, calmly die on the vine... And a person is biologically programmed to die. Death for a person is biologically tragic only when his life is interrupted prematurely, before the completion of the biological cycle. It is worth noting that biologically a person’s life is programmed for an average of 150 years. And therefore, death at 70-90 years old can also be considered premature. If a person exhausts his genetically determined life span, death becomes as desirable to him as sleep after a hard day. From this point of view, "the purpose of human existence is to go through the normal cycle of life, leading to the loss of the life instinct and to a painless old age, reconciled with death." Thus, biological nature imposes on man the meaning of his life in maintaining his existence for the reproduction of the human race for the reproduction of Homo Sapiens. Social nature also imposes criteria on a person to determine the meaning of his life. Due to the reasons of zoological imperfection, an individual person, isolated from a collective of his own kind, cannot maintain his existence, much less complete the biological cycle of his development and reproduce offspring. And the human collective is a society with all the parameters unique to it. Only society ensures the existence of man both as an individual, a person, and as a biological species. People live in society primarily in order to biologically survive for each individual and the entire human race in general. Society, and not the individual, is the only guarantor of the existence of man as a biological species, Homo Sapiens. Only society accumulates, preserves and passes on to the next generations the experience of a person’s struggle for survival, the experience of the struggle for existence. Hence, in order to preserve both the species and the individual (personality), it is necessary to preserve the society of this individual (personality). Consequently, for each individual person, from the point of view of his nature, society is more important than he himself, an individual person. That is why, even at the level of biological interests, the meaning of human life is to take care of society more than one’s own, individual life. Even if in the name of preserving this, your own society, it is necessary to sacrifice your personal life. In addition to guaranteeing the preservation of the human race, society, in addition to this, gives each of its members a number of other advantages, unprecedented in the animal world. So only in society does a newborn biological candidate for a person become a real person. Here it must be said that the social nature of man dictates that he see the meaning of his own, individual existence in serving society, other people, even to the point of self-sacrifice for the good of society and other people. The role of biological and geographical factors in the formation of social life The study of human societies begins with the study of the basic conditions that determine their functioning, their “life”. The concept of “social life” is used to denote a complex of phenomena that arise during the interaction of humans and social communities, as well as the joint use of natural resources necessary to satisfy needs. The biological, geographical, demographic and economic foundations of social life differ. When analyzing the foundations of social life, one should analyze the peculiarities of human biology as a social subject, creating the biological possibilities of human labor, communication, and mastering the social experience accumulated by previous generations. These include such an anatomical feature of a person as an upright gait. It allows you to better see your surroundings and use your hands in the process of work. An important role in social activity is played by such a human organ as the hand with the opposable thumb. Human hands can perform complex operations and functions, and the person himself can participate in a variety of work activities. This should also include looking forward and not to the sides, allowing you to see in three directions, the complex mechanism of the vocal cords, larynx and lips, which contributes to the development of speech. The human brain and complex nervous system provide the opportunity for high development of the individual’s psyche and intelligence. The brain serves as a biological prerequisite for reflecting the entire wealth of spiritual and material culture and its further development. By adulthood, the human brain increases 5-6 times compared to the brain of a newborn (from 300 g to 1.6 kg). The inferior parietal, temporal and frontal areas of the cerebral cortex are associated with human speech and labor activity, with abstract thinking, which ensures specifically human activity. The specific biological properties of humans include the long-term dependence of children on their parents, the slow stage of growth and puberty. Social experience and intellectual achievements are not fixed in the genetic apparatus. This requires the extragenetic transmission of moral values, ideals, knowledge and skills accumulated by previous generations of people. In this process, the direct social interaction of people, “living experience,” acquires enormous importance. It has not lost its significance in our time, despite the colossal achievements in the field of “materialization of the memory of mankind, primarily in writing, and recently in computer science.” memory." On this occasion, the French psychologist A. Pieron noted that if our planet were to suffer a catastrophe, as a result of which the entire adult population would die and only small children would survive, then, although the human race would not cease to exist, cultural history humanity would be thrown back to its origins. There would be no one to set culture in motion, to introduce new generations of people to it, to reveal to them the secrets of its reproduction. When affirming the enormous importance of the biological basis of human activity, one should not absolutize some stable differences in the characteristics of organisms, which are the basis of division humanity into races, and supposedly predetermining social roles and statuses of individuals. Representatives of anthropological schools, based on racial differences, tried to justify the division of people into higher, leading races, and lower ones, called to serve the first. They argued that people's social status corresponds to their biological qualities and that it is the result of natural selection among biologically unequal people. These views have been refuted by empirical research. People of different races, brought up in the same cultural conditions, develop the same views, aspirations, ways of thinking and acting. It is important to note that education alone cannot arbitrarily shape the person being educated. Innate talent (for example, musical) has an important impact on social life. Let us analyze various aspects of the influence of the geographical environment on human life as a subject of social life. It should be noted that there is a certain minimum of natural and geographical conditions that are necessary for successful human development. Beyond this minimum, social life is not possible or has a certain character, as if frozen at some stage of its development. The nature of occupations, type of economic activity, objects and means of labor, food, etc. - all this significantly depends on human habitation in a particular zone (in the polar zone, in the steppe or in the subtropics). Researchers note the influence of climate on human performance. A hot climate reduces the time of active activity. Cold climates require people to make great efforts to maintain life. Temperate climates are most conducive to activity. Factors such as atmospheric pressure, air humidity, and winds are important factors that affect human health, which is an important factor in social life. Soils play a major role in the functioning of social life. Their fertility, combined with a favorable climate, creates conditions for the progress of the people living on them. This affects the pace of development of the economy and society as a whole. Poor soils hinder the achievement of a high standard of living and require significant human effort. The terrain is no less important in social life. The presence of mountains, deserts, and rivers can become a natural defensive system for a particular people. J. Szczepanski, a famous Polish sociologist, believed that “democratic systems developed in countries with natural borders (Switzerland, Iceland), and that in countries with open borders susceptible to raids, a strong, absolutist power arose in the early stages.” At the stage of the initial development of a particular people, the geographical environment left its specific imprint on its culture, both in its economic, political, and spiritual-aesthetic aspects. This is indirectly expressed in certain specific habits, customs, and rituals, in which the features of the people’s way of life associated with their living conditions are manifested. The peoples of the tropics, for example, are unfamiliar with many customs and rituals characteristic of the peoples of the temperate zone and associated with seasonal work cycles. In Rus', there has long been a cycle of ritual holidays: spring, summer, autumn, winter. The geographical environment is also reflected in the self-awareness of peoples in the form of the idea of ​​​​the “native land”. Some of its elements are either in the form of visual images (birch for the Russians, poplar for the Ukrainians, oak for the British, laurel for the Spaniards, sakura for the Japanese, etc. ), or in combination with toponymy (the Volga river for the Russians, the Dnieper for the Ukrainians, Mount Furzi for the Japanese, etc.) become a kind of symbols of nationality. The influence of the geographical environment on the self-awareness of peoples is also evidenced by the names of the peoples themselves. For example, the coastal Chukchi call themselves “an kalyn” - “sea inhabitants”, and one of the groups of Selkups, another small northern people - “leinkum”, i.e. "taiga people" Thus, geographical factors played a significant role in the formation of culture in the initial stages of the development of a particular people. Subsequently, reflected in culture, they can be reproduced by the people regardless of the original habitat (for example, the construction of wooden huts by Russian settlers in the treeless steppes of Kazakhstan). Based on the above, it should be noted that when considering the role of the geographical environment, “geographical nihilism”, a complete denial of its impact on the functioning of society, is unacceptable. On the other hand, one cannot share the point of view of representatives of “geographical determinism”, who see an unambiguous and unidirectional relationship between the geographic environment and the processes of social life, when the development of society is completely determined by geographical factors. Taking into account the creative potential of the individual, the development of science and technology on this basis, and cultural exchange between peoples create a certain independence of man from the geographical environment. However, human social activity must fit harmoniously into the natural geographic environment. It should not violate its basic eco-connections. Social life Historical types of social life In sociology, two main approaches to the analysis of society as a special category have developed. Proponents of the first approach (“social atomism”) believe that society is a collection of individuals and the interaction between them. G. Simmel believed that the “interaction of parts” is what we call society. P. Sorokin came to the conclusion that “society or collective unity as a set of interacting individuals exists. Representatives of another direction in sociology (“universalism”), as opposed to attempts to sum up individual people, believe that society is a certain objective reality that is not exhausted by the totality E. Durkheim was of the opinion that society is not a simple sum of individuals, but a system formed by their association and representing a reality endowed with special properties. V. Soloviev emphasized that “human society is not a simple mechanical collection of individuals: it is an independent whole, has its own life and organization.” The second point of view prevails in sociology. Society is unthinkable without the activities of people, which they carry out not in isolation, but in the process of interaction with other people united in various social communities. In the process of this interaction, people systematically influence other individuals and form a new holistic entity - society. In the social activity of an individual, persistently repeating, typical features are manifested, which form his society as an integrity, as a system. A system is a set of elements ordered in a certain way, interconnected and forming some kind of integral unity, which is not reducible to the sum of its elements. Society, as a social system, is a way of organizing social connections and social interaction, ensuring the satisfaction of people's basic needs. Society as a whole is the largest system. Its most important subsystems are economic, political, social, and spiritual. In society, there are also subsystems such as classes, ethnic, demographic, territorial and professional groups, family, etc. Each of the named subsystems includes many other subsystems. They can mutually regroup; the same individuals can be elements of different systems. An individual cannot but obey the requirements of the system in which he is included. He accepts its norms and values ​​to one degree or another. At the same time, in society there are simultaneously various forms of social activity and behavior, between which a choice is possible. In order for society to function as a single whole, each subsystem must perform specific, strictly defined functions. The functions of subsystems mean satisfying any social needs. Yet together they are aimed at maintaining the sustainability of society. Dysfunction (destructive function) of a subsystem can disrupt the stability of society. The researcher of this phenomenon, R. Merton, believed that the same subsystems can be functional in relation to some of them and dysfunctional in relation to others. In sociology, a certain typology of societies has developed. Researchers highlight traditional society. It is a society with an agrarian structure, with sedentary structures and a tradition-based way of regulating relations between people. It is characterized by extremely low rates of production development, which could satisfy needs only at a minimum level, and great immunity to innovation, due to the peculiarities of its functioning. The behavior of individuals is strictly controlled and regulated by customs, norms, and social institutions. The listed social formations, sanctified by tradition, are considered unshakable; even the thought of their possible transformation is denied. Carrying out their integrative function, culture and social institutions suppressed any manifestation of personal freedom, which is a necessary condition for the creative process in society. The term "industrial society" was first introduced by Saint-Simon. He emphasized the production basis of society. Important features of an industrial society are also the flexibility of social structures, allowing them to be modified as the needs and interests of people change, social mobility, and a developed communication system. This is a society in which flexible management structures have been created that make it possible to intelligently combine the freedom and interests of the individual with the general principles governing their joint activities. In the 60s, two stages in the development of society were complemented by a third. The concept of post-industrial society appears, actively developed in American (D. Bell) and Western European (A. Touraine) sociology. The reason for the emergence of this concept is structural changes in the economy and culture of the most developed countries, forcing a different look at society itself as a whole. First of all, the role of knowledge and information has sharply increased. Having received the necessary education and having access to the latest information, the individual received an advantage in moving up the social hierarchy. Creative work becomes the basis for success and prosperity of both individuals and society. In addition to society, which in sociology is often correlated with the boundaries of the state, other types of organization of social life are analyzed. Marxism, choosing as its basis the method of production of material goods (the unity of the productive forces and the production relations corresponding to them), defines the corresponding socio-economic formation as the basic structure of social life. The development of social life represents a consistent transition from lower to higher socio-economic formations: from primitive communal to slaveholding, then to feudal, capitalist and communist. The primitive-appropriating mode of production characterizes the primitive communal formation. A specific feature of the slave-owning formation is the ownership of people and the use of slave labor, feudal - production based on the exploitation of peasants attached to the land, bourgeois - the transition to the economic dependence of formally free wage workers; in the communist formation it was assumed that everyone would be treated equally to the ownership of the means of production by eliminating private property relations. Recognizing the cause-and-effect relationships between economic, political, ideological and other institutions that determine production and economic relations. Socio-economic formations are distinguished on the basis of what is common to different countries within the same formation. The basis of the civilized approach is the idea of ​​the uniqueness of the path traveled by peoples. Civilization is understood as the qualitative specificity (originality of material, spiritual, social life) of a particular group of countries or peoples at a certain stage of development. Among the many civilizations, Ancient India and China, the states of the Muslim East, Babylon, European civilization, Russian civilization, etc. stand out. Any civilization is characterized not only by a specific social production technology, but also, to no lesser extent, by its corresponding culture. It is characterized by a certain philosophy, socially significant values, a generalized image of the world, a specific way of life with its own special life principle, the basis of which is the spirit of the people, its morality, conviction, which also determine a certain attitude towards oneself. The civilizational approach in sociology involves taking into account and studying what is unique and original in the organization of the social life of an entire region. Some of the most important forms and achievements developed by a particular civilization are gaining universal recognition and dissemination. Thus, the values ​​that originated in European civilization, but are now acquiring universal significance, include the following. In the sphere of production and economic relations, this is the achieved level of development of technology and technology generated by the new stage of the scientific and technological revolution, the system of commodity and monetary relations, and the presence of a market. In the political sphere, the general civilizational basis includes a legal state operating on the basis of democratic norms. In the spiritual and moral sphere, the common heritage of all peoples are the great achievements of science, art, culture, as well as universal moral values. Social life is shaped by a complex set of forces, in which natural phenomena and processes are only one of the elements. Based on the conditions created by nature, a complex interaction of individuals manifests itself, which forms a new integrity, society, as a social system. Labor, as a fundamental form of activity, underlies the development of diverse types of organization of social life. Social connections, social actions and interactions as a basic element of social life Social life can be defined as a complex of phenomena arising from the interaction of individuals, social groups, in a certain space, and the use of products located in it, necessary to satisfy needs. Social life arises, reproduces and develops precisely because of the presence of dependencies between people. To satisfy his needs, a person must interact with other individuals, enter a social group, and participate in joint activities. Dependence can be elementary, direct dependence on one’s friend, brother, colleague. Addiction can be complex and indirect. For example, the dependence of our individual life on the level of development of society, the effectiveness of the economic system, the effectiveness of the political organization of society, and the state of morals. There are dependencies between different communities of people (between urban and rural residents, students and workers, etc.). A social connection is always present, realizable, and really oriented towards a social subject (individual, social group, social community, etc.). The main structural elements of a social connection are: 1) subjects of communication (there can be two or thousands of people); 2) the subject of communication (i.e. what the communication is about); 3) a mechanism for conscious regulation of relationships between subjects or “rules of the game.” Social connections can be stable or random, direct or indirect, formal or informal, constant or sporadic. The formation of these connections occurs gradually, from simple to complex forms. Social connection acts primarily in the form of social contact. The type of short-term, easily interrupted social connections caused by the contact of people in physical and social space is called social contact. In the process of contact, individuals mutually evaluate each other, select, and transition to more complex and stable social relationships. Social contacts precede any social action. Among them are spatial contacts, contacts of interest and contacts of exchange. Spatial contact is the initial and necessary link of social connections. Knowing where people are and how many there are, and even more so observing them visually, a person can choose an object for further development of relationships, based on his needs and interests. Contacts of interest. Why do you single out this person or that? You may be interested in this person because he has certain values ​​or traits that meet your needs (for example, he has an interesting appearance, or has the information you need). Contact of interest may be interrupted depending on many factors, but above all: 1) on the degree of mutuality of interests; 2) the strength of the individual’s interest; 3) environment. For example, a beautiful girl may attract the attention of a young man, but may turn out to be indifferent to an entrepreneur who is mainly interested in developing his own business, or to a professor looking for scientific talent. Exchange contacts. J. Shchenansky notes that they represent a specific type of social relationships in which individuals exchange values ​​without having the desire to change the behavior of other individuals. In this case, the individual is only interested in the subject of exchange; J. Szczepanski gives the following example characterizing exchange contacts. This example involves buying a newspaper. Initially, on the basis of a very specific need, an individual develops a spatial vision of a newsstand, then a very specific interest appears associated with the sale of the newspaper and with the seller, after which the newspaper is exchanged for money. Subsequent, repeated contacts can lead to the development of more complex relationships, aimed not at the object of exchange, but at the person. For example, a friendly relationship with the seller may arise. Social connection is nothing more than dependence, which is realized through social action and appears in the form of social interaction. Let us consider in more detail such elements of social life as social action and interaction. According to M. Weber: “social action (including non-interference or patient acceptance) can be oriented towards the past, present or expected future behavior of others. It can be revenge for past grievances, protection from danger in the future. "Others" can be individuals, acquaintances or an indefinite number of complete strangers." Social action must be oriented towards other people, otherwise it is not social. Not every human action is therefore social. The following example is typical in this regard. An accidental collision of cyclists may be nothing more than an incident, like a natural phenomenon, but an attempt to avoid a collision, scolding that follows a collision, a brawl or a peaceful resolution of a conflict is already a social action. So, not every collision between people is a social action. It acquires the character of such if involves direct or indirect interaction with other people: a group of acquaintances, strangers (behavior in public transport), etc. We are dealing with social action in the case when an individual, focusing on the situation, takes into account the reaction of other people, their needs and goals, develops a plan of his actions, focusing on others, making a forecast, taking into account whether other social actors with whom he must interact will facilitate or hinder his actions; who is likely to behave and how, taking this into account, what option of action should be chosen. Not a single individual commits social actions without taking into account the situation, the totality of material, social and cultural conditions. Orientation towards others, fulfillment of expectations and obligations is a kind of payment that an actor must pay for calm, reliable, civilized conditions for satisfying his needs. In sociology, it is customary to distinguish the following types of social actions: goal-rational, value-rational, affective and traditional. M. Weber based the classification of social actions on purposeful, rational action, which is characterized by a clear understanding by the actor of what he wants to achieve, which ways and means are most effective. He himself correlates the goal and the means, calculates the positive and negative consequences of his actions and finds a reasonable measure of the combination of personal goals and social obligations. However, are social actions always conscious and rational in real life? Numerous studies show that a person never acts fully consciously. “A high degree of awareness and expediency, say, in the actions of a politician fighting his rivals, or in the actions of an enterprise manager exercising control over the behavior of subordinates, is largely based on intuition, feelings, and natural human reactions. In this regard, fully conscious actions can be considered an ideal model. In practice, obviously, social actions will be partially conscious actions pursuing more or less clear goals." More widespread is the value-rational action, subordinate to certain requirements, values ​​​​accepted in this society. For the individual in this case there is no external, rational -understood goal, action, according to M. Weber, is always subordinated to “commandments" or requirements, in obedience to which a given person sees duty. In this case, the consciousness of the actor is not completely liberated; in resolving the contradictions between the goal and orientation towards another, he completely relies on accepted values. There are also affective and traditional actions. Affective action is irrational; it is distinguished by the desire for immediate gratification of passion, thirst for revenge, attraction. Traditional action is carried out on the basis of deeply learned social patterns of behavior, norms that have become habitual, traditional, not subject to verification truth In real life, all of the listed types of social actions occur. Some of them, in particular traditional moral ones, may generally be characteristic, typical for certain strata of society. As for the individual, in her life there is a place for both affect and strict calculation, accustomed to focusing on one’s duty to comrades, parents, and the Fatherland. The social action model allows us to identify qualitative criteria for the effectiveness of organizing social connections. If social connections allow one to satisfy needs and realize one’s goals, then such connections can be considered reasonable. If a given goal of relationships does not allow this to be achieved, dissatisfaction is formed, prompting a restructuring of this system of social connections. Changing social connections may be limited to minor adjustments, or may require radical changes to the entire system of connections. Take, for example, the transformations of recent years in our country. We initially sought to achieve a higher standard of living and greater freedom without making fundamental social changes. But when it became clear that solving these problems within the framework of socialist principles did not give the desired result, sentiment in favor of more radical changes in the system of social relations began to grow in society. Social connection acts as both social contact and social interaction. Social interaction is systematic, fairly regular social actions of partners, directed at each other, with the goal of causing a very specific (expected) response from the partner; and the response generates a new reaction of the influencer. Otherwise, social interaction is a process in which people react to the actions of others. A striking example of interaction is the production process. Here there is deep and close coordination of the system of actions of partners on issues for which a connection has been established between them, for example, the production and distribution of goods. An example of social interaction could be communication with work colleagues and friends. In the process of interaction, actions, services, personal qualities, etc. are exchanged. A large role in the implementation of interaction is played by the system of mutual expectations placed by individuals and social groups on each other before committing social actions. The interaction can continue and become sustainable, reusable, permanent. Thus, when interacting with work colleagues, managers, and family members, we know how they should behave towards us and how we should interact with them. Violation of such stable expectations, as a rule, leads to a modification of the nature of interaction and even to an interruption in communication. There are two types of interaction: cooperation and competition. Cooperation implies interrelated actions of individuals aimed at achieving common goals, with mutual benefit for the interacting parties. Competitive interaction involves attempts to sideline, outpace, or suppress an opponent who is striving for identical goals. If, on the basis of cooperation, feelings of gratitude, needs for communication, and a desire to give in arise, then with competition, feelings of fear, hostility, and anger may arise. Social interaction is studied at two levels: micro- and macro-level. At the micro level, the interaction of people with each other is studied. The macro level includes such large structures as government and trade, and such institutions as religion and family. In any social setting, people interact at both levels. So, in all subjects that are significant for satisfying his needs, a person enters into deep, connected interaction with other people, with society as a whole. Social connections thus represent a variety of interactions consisting of actions and responses. As a result of the repetition of one or another type of interaction, different types of relationships between people arise. The relationships that connect a social subject (individual, social group) with objective reality, and which are aimed at transforming it, are called human activity. Purposeful human activity consists of individual actions and interactions. In general, human activity is characterized by a creatively transformative nature, activity and objectivity. It can be material and spiritual, practical and theoretical, transformative and educational, etc. Social action is at the core of human activity. Let's consider its mechanism. Motivation for social action: needs, interests, value orientations. Understanding social action is impossible without studying the mechanism for its improvement. It is based on a motive - an internal urge that pushes an individual to action. The motivation of the subject to activity is related to his needs. The problem of needs, considered in the aspect of the driving forces of human activity, is important in the management, education, and stimulation of labor. Need is a state of lack, a feeling of need for something necessary for life. Need is the source of activity and the primary link of motivation, the starting point of the entire incentive system. Human needs are diverse. They are difficult to classify. It is generally accepted that one of the best classifications of needs belongs to A. Maslow, an American sociologist and social psychologist. He identified five types of needs: 1) physiological - in the reproduction of people, food, breathing, clothing, housing, rest; 2) the need for security and quality of life - stability of the conditions of one’s existence, confidence in the future, personal safety; 3) social needs - for affection, belonging to a team, communication, care for others and attention to oneself, participation in joint work activities; 4) prestige needs - respect from “significant others”, career growth, status, recognition, high appreciation; 5) the needs of self-realization, creative self-expression, etc. A. Maslow convincingly showed that an unsatisfied need for food can block all other human motives - freedom, love, a sense of community, respect, etc., hunger can serve as a fairly effective means of manipulating people. It follows that the role of physiological and material needs cannot be underestimated. It should be noted that this author’s “pyramid of needs” has been criticized for attempting to propose a universal hierarchy of needs, in which a higher need in all cases cannot become relevant or leading until the previous one is satisfied. In real human actions, several needs result: their hierarchy is determined both by the culture of society and the specific personal social situation in which the individual is involved, culture, and personality type. The formation of the system of needs of a modern person is a long process. During this evolution, through several stages, there is a transition from the unconditional dominance of vital needs inherent in the savage to an integral multidimensional system of needs of our contemporary. A person more and more often cannot, and does not want to, neglect any of his needs to please another. Needs are closely related to interests. Not a single social action - a major event in social life, transformation, reform - can be understood if the interests that gave rise to this action are not clarified. The motive corresponding to this need is updated and interest arises - a form of manifestation of the need that ensures that the individual is focused on understanding the goals of the activity. If a need is focused primarily on the subject of its satisfaction, then interest is directed toward those social relations, institutions, institutions on which the distribution of objects, values, and benefits that ensure the satisfaction of needs depends. It is interests, and above all economic and material interests, that have a decisive influence on the activity or passivity of large groups of the population. So, a social object in combination with an actualized motive arouses interest. The gradual development of interest leads to the emergence of goals in the subject in relation to specific social objects. The emergence of a goal means his awareness of the situation and the possibility of further development of subjective activity, which further leads to the formation of a social attitude, meaning a person’s predisposition and readiness to act in a certain way in certain situations determined by value orientations. Values ​​are objects of various kinds that can satisfy human needs (objects, activities, relationships, people, groups, etc.). In sociology, values ​​are viewed as having a historically specific nature and as eternal universal values. The system of values ​​of a social subject may include various values: 1) life-meaning (ideas of good, evil, benefit, happiness); 2) universal: a) vital (life, health, personal safety, welfare, family, education, product quality, etc.); b) democratic (freedom of speech, parties); c) public recognition (hard work, qualifications, social status); d) interpersonal communication (honesty, selflessness, goodwill, love, etc. ); e) personal development (self-esteem, desire for education, freedom of creativity and self-realization, etc.); 3) particular: a) traditional (love and affection for the “small Motherland”, family, respect for authority); Social development and social change. Social ideal as a condition for social development. In all spheres of society, we can observe constant changes, for example, changes in social structure, social relationships, culture, collective behavior. Social changes may include population growth, increased wealth, increased educational levels, etc. If in a certain system new constituent elements appear or elements of previously existing relations disappear, then we say that this system undergoes changes. Social change can also be defined as a change in the way society is organized. Change in social organization is a universal phenomenon, although it occurs at different rates. For example, modernization, which has its own characteristics in each country. Modernization here refers to a complex set of changes occurring in almost every part of society in the process of its industrialization. Modernization includes constant changes in the economy, politics, education, traditions and religious life of society. Some of these areas change earlier than others, but all of them are subject to change to some extent. Social development in sociology refers to changes leading to differentiation and enrichment of the constituent elements of the system. Here we mean empirically proven facts of changes that cause constant enrichment and differentiation of the structure of organizing relations between people, constant enrichment of cultural systems, enrichment of science, technology, institutions, expansion of opportunities to satisfy personal and social needs. If the development occurring in a certain system brings it closer to a certain ideal, assessed positively, then we say that development is progress. If changes occurring in a system lead to the disappearance and impoverishment of its constituent elements or the relationships existing between them, then the system undergoes regression. In modern sociology, instead of the term progress, the concept of “change” is increasingly used. According to many scientists, the term “progress” expresses a value opinion. Progress means change in a desired direction. But in whose values ​​can this desirability be measured? For example, what changes do the construction of nuclear power plants represent - progress or regression? It should be noted that in sociology there is a view that development and progress are one and the same. This view is derived from the evolutionary theories of the 19th century, which argued that any social development by nature is also progress, because it is improvement, because an enriched system, being more differentiated, is at the same time a more perfect system. However, according to J. Szczepanski, when speaking about improvement, we mean, first of all, an increase in ethical value. The development of groups and communities has several aspects: enrichment of the number of elements - when we talk about the quantitative development of a group, differentiation of relationships - what we call the development of an organization; increasing the efficiency of actions - what we call the development of functions; increasing the satisfaction of organizational members with participation in social life, an aspect of the feeling of “happiness” that is difficult to measure. The moral development of groups can be measured by the degree of conformity of their social life with the moral standards recognized within them, but can also be measured by the degree of "happiness" achieved by their members. In any case, they prefer to talk about development specifically and adopt a definition that does not include any assessment, but allows the level of development to be measured by objective criteria and quantitative measures. The term “progress” is proposed to be left to determine the degree of achievement of the accepted ideal. A social ideal is a model of a perfect state of society, an idea of ​​perfect social relations. The ideal sets the final goals of activity, determines the immediate goals and means of their implementation. Being a value guide, it thereby performs a regulatory function, which consists in ordering and maintaining the relative stability and dynamism of social relations, in accordance with the image of the desired and perfect reality as the highest goal. Most often, during the relatively stable development of society, the ideal regulates the activities of people and social relations not directly, but indirectly, through a system of existing norms, acting as a systemic principle of their hierarchy. The ideal, as a value guide and criterion for assessing reality, as a regulator of social relations, is an educational force. Along with principles and beliefs, it acts as a component of a worldview and influences the formation of a person’s life position and the meaning of his life. A social ideal inspires people to change the social system and becomes an important component of social movements. Sociology views the social ideal as a reflection of trends in social development, as an active force that organizes the activities of people. Ideals that gravitate towards the sphere of public consciousness stimulate social activity. Ideals are directed to the future; when addressing them, the contradictions of actual relations are removed, the ideal expresses the ultimate goal of social activity, social processes are presented here in the form of a desired state, the means of achieving which may not yet be fully determined. In its entirety - with justification and in all the richness of its content - the social ideal can only be acquired through theoretical activity. Both the development of an ideal and its assimilation presuppose a certain level of theoretical thinking. The sociological approach to the ideal involves making clear distinctions between the desired, the actual and the possible. The stronger the desire to achieve an ideal, the more realistic the thinking of a statesman and political figure should be, the more attention should be paid to the study of the practice of economic and social relations, the actual capabilities of society, the real state of mass consciousness of social groups and the motives of their activities and behavior. Focusing only on the ideal often leads to a certain distortion of reality; seeing the present through the prism of the future often leads to the fact that the actual development of relationships is adjusted to a given ideal, because There is a constant desire to bring this ideal closer; real contradictions, negative phenomena, and undesirable consequences of the actions taken are often ignored. The other extreme of practical thinking is a refusal or underestimation of the ideal, seeing only momentary interests, the ability to grasp the interests of currently functioning institutions, institutions, social groups without analyzing and assessing the prospects for their development given in the ideal. Both extremes lead to the same result - voluntarism and subjectivism in practice, to the refusal of third-party analysis of objective trends in the development of the interests and needs of society as a whole and its individual groups. Ideals encounter resistance from reality, so they are not fully realized. Some of this ideal is put into practice, some are modified, some are eliminated as an element of utopia, and some are postponed for a more distant future. This collision of ideal with reality reveals an important feature of human existence: a person cannot live without an ideal, a goal; critical attitude to the present. But a person cannot live by ideals alone. His deeds and actions are motivated by real interests; he must constantly adjust his actions to the available means of translating the ideal into reality. The social ideal in all the multiplicity and complexity of its essence and form can be traced throughout the development of mankind. Moreover, the social ideal can be analyzed not only as an abstract theoretical doctrine. It is most interesting to consider the social ideal based on specific historical material (for example, the ancient ideal of the “golden age”, the early Christian ideal, the ideal of enlightenment, the communist ideal). The traditional view that developed in our social science was that there was only one true communist ideal, which was based on a strict theory of scientific development. All other ideals were considered utopian. Many were impressed by a certain ideal of future equality and abundance. Moreover, in the minds of each person this ideal acquired individual characteristics. Social practice proves that the social ideal can change depending on many circumstances. It may not necessarily amount to a society of equality. Many people, having observed the negative consequences of egalitarianism in practice, want to live in a society of extreme stability and a relatively fair hierarchy. Currently, according to sociological research, Russian society does not have any dominant idea about the desired path of social development. Having lost faith in socialism, the overwhelming majority of people never accepted any other social ideal. At the same time, in the West there is a constant search for a social ideal capable of mobilizing human energy. Neoconservatives and social democrats present their vision of the social ideal. According to the “new right” (1), representing the first direction, in a market society, where the entire value system is focused on economic growth and the continuous satisfaction of ever-increasing material needs, a market mentality has formed. Man has turned into a selfish and irresponsible subject who can only put forward new socio-economic demands, unable to control himself and manage the situation. “A person lacks neither incentive to live nor ideals for which to die.” The “new right” sees a way out of the social crisis in the restructuring of social consciousness, in the targeted self-education of the individual based on the renewal of ethical forms. The “new right” proposes to recreate an ideal capable of ensuring the spiritual renewal of the West on the basis of conservatism, understood as a return to the origins of European culture. The conservative position consists in the desire, based on all the best that happened in the past, to create a new situation. We are talking about establishing a harmonious order, which is possible in a strict social hierarchy. An organized society is necessarily organic; it maintains a harmonious balance of all social forces, taking into account their diversity. The “aristocracy of spirit and character” is entrusted with the task of creating a new, “strict” ethics capable of giving existence a lost meaning. We are talking about restoring the hierarchy, about creating favorable conditions for the emergence of a “spiritual type of personality” that embodies aristocratic principles. The non-conservative social ideal is called the "scientific society." Social democrats, justifying from various points of view the need to put forward a social ideal in modern conditions, associate it with the concept of “democratic socialism”. Democratic socialism usually means a continuous process of reformist social changes, as a result of which modern capitalist society acquires a new quality. At the same time, Social Democrats never tire of emphasizing that such a society cannot be created in one country or several countries, but arises only as a mass phenomenon, as a new, highest moral stage in the development of human civilization. Democracy acts as a universal means of realizing the social democratic social ideal. In modern conditions, a new type of civilization appears as a social ideal, designed to save humanity; to ensure harmony with nature, social justice, equality in all spheres of human life. Thus, world social practice shows that society cannot develop successfully without defining the basic principles of social structure. Conclusion. Man exists through metabolism with the environment. He breathes, consumes various natural products, and exists as a biological body within certain physicochemical, organic and other environmental conditions. As a natural, biological being, a person is born, grows, matures, ages and dies. All this characterizes a person as a biological being and determines his biological nature. But at the same time, it differs from any animal and, first of all, in the following features: it produces its own environment (dwelling, clothing, tools), changes the surrounding world not only according to the measure of its utilitarian needs, but also according to the laws of knowledge of this world, as well as and according to the laws of morality and beauty, it can act not only according to need, but also in accordance with the freedom of its will and imagination, while the action of an animal is focused exclusively on satisfying physical needs (hunger, instinct of procreation, group, species instincts, etc.); makes his life activity an object, treats it meaningfully, purposefully changes it, plans it. The above differences between man and animal characterize his nature; it, being biological, does not lie in the natural life activity of man alone. He seems to go beyond the limits of his biological nature and is capable of such actions that do not bring him any benefit: he distinguishes between good and evil, justice and injustice, is capable of self-sacrifice and posing such questions as “Who am I?”, “For what am I living for?”, “What should I do?” etc. Man is not only a natural, but also a social being, living in a special world - in a society that socializes man. He is born with a set of biological traits inherent to him as a certain biological species. A person becomes a reasonable person under the influence of society. He learns language, perceives social norms of behavior, is imbued with socially significant values ​​that regulate social relations, performs certain social functions and plays specifically social roles. All his natural inclinations and senses, including hearing, vision, and smell, become socially and culturally oriented. He evaluates the world according to the laws of beauty developed in a given social system, and acts according to the laws of morality that have developed in a given society. New, not only natural, but also social, spiritual and practical feelings develop in him. These are, first of all, feelings of sociality, collectivity, morality, citizenship, and spirituality. All together, these qualities, both innate and acquired, characterize the biological and social nature of man. Literature: 1. Dubinin N.P. What is a person. – M.: Mysl, 1983. 2. Social ideals and politics in a changing world / Ed. T. T. Timofeeva M., 1992 3. A.N. Leontyev. Biological and social in the human psyche / Problems of mental development. 4th edition. M., 1981. 4. Zobov R. A., Kelasev V. N. Self-realization of a person. Tutorial. – St. Petersburg: Publishing house. St. Petersburg University, 2001. 5. Sorokin P. / Sociology M., 1920 6. Sorokin P. / Man. Civilization. Society. M., 1992 7. K. Marx, F. Engels / Collected Works. Volume 1. M., 1963 ----------------------- Marx K., Engels F. Op. T. 1 P.262-263