Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Volgo-Vyatka Academy of Public Administration"
Branch of the State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education Volgo-Vyatka Academy of Public Administration
in Cheboksary, Chuvash Republic
Department of Natural Sciences and Humanities
ABSTRACT
Social progress and its criteria in the light of modern social experience
Speciality: Finance and credit
Specialization: State and
municipal finance
Completed :
full-time student
group 09-F-11 Shestakov I.A.
I checked :
Ph.D. Semedova – Polupan N.G.
Cheboksary
1) Introduction……………………………………………………………..3-4
2) Social progress………………………………………………………....5-7
3) Philosophical view on the development of society………………………....8-9
4) The inconsistency of social progress……………………..10-11
5) Criteria for Social Progress……………………………...12-17
6) Conclusion………………………………………………………..18-19
7) List of references………………………………….20
Introduction
The idea of social progress is a product of the New Age. This means that it was at this time that the idea of the progressive, upward development of society took root in people’s minds and began to shape their worldview. There was no such idea in antiquity. The ancient worldview, as is known, was cosmocentric in nature. This means that the man of antiquity was coordinated in relation to nature and the cosmos. Hellenic philosophy seemed to fit man into the cosmos, and the cosmos, in the minds of ancient thinkers, was something permanent, eternal and beautiful in its orderliness. And man had to find his place in this eternal cosmos, and not in history. The ancient worldview was also characterized by the idea of an eternal cycle - a movement in which something, being created and destroyed, invariably returns to itself. The idea of eternal recurrence is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; we find it in Heraclitus, Empedocles, and the Stoics. In general, movement in a circle was considered in antiquity as ideally correct and perfect. It seemed perfect to ancient thinkers because it has no beginning and end and occurs in the same place, representing, as it were, immobility and eternity.
The idea of social progress was established during the Enlightenment. This era raises the shield of reason, knowledge, science, human freedom and from this angle evaluates history, contrasting itself with previous eras, where, in the opinion of the enlighteners, ignorance and despotism prevailed. The Enlightenmentists in a certain way understood the era of their time (as the era of “enlightenment”), its role and significance for man, and through the prism of so-understood modernity they viewed the past of mankind. The contrast between modernity, interpreted as the advent of the era of reason, and the past of humanity contained, of course, a gap between the present and the past, but as soon as an attempt was made to restore the historical connection between them on the basis of reason and knowledge, the idea of an upward movement in history immediately arose, about progress. The development and dissemination of knowledge was considered as a gradual and cumulative process. The accumulation of scientific knowledge that occurred in modern times served as an indisputable model for such a reconstruction of the historical process for the enlighteners. The mental formation and development of an individual, an individual, also served as a model for them: when transferred to humanity as a whole, it gave the historical progress of the human mind. Thus, Condorcet in his “Sketch of a historical picture of the progress of the human mind” says that “this progress is subject to the same general laws that are observed in the development of our individual abilities...”.
The idea of social progress is the idea of history, or more precisely, the world history of mankind. This idea is meant to tie the story together, give it direction and meaning. But many Enlightenment thinkers, substantiating the idea of progress, sought to consider it as a natural law, blurring to one degree or another the line between society and nature. The naturalistic interpretation of progress was their way of imparting an objective character to progress.
Social progress
Progress (from the Latin progressus - movement forward) is a direction of development that is characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. The credit for putting forward the idea and developing the theory of social progress belongs to the philosophers of the second half of the 18th century, and the socio-economic basis for the very emergence of the idea of social progress was the formation of capitalism and the maturation of European bourgeois revolutions. By the way, both creators of the initial concepts of social progress - Turgot and Condorcet - were active public figures in pre-revolutionary and revolutionary France. And this is quite understandable: the idea of social progress, the recognition of the fact that humanity as a whole, in the main, is moving forward, is an expression of historical optimism characteristic of advanced social forces.
Three characteristic features distinguished the original progressivist concepts.
Firstly, this is idealism, i.e. an attempt to find the reasons for the progressive development of history in the spiritual beginning - in the endless ability to improve the human intellect (the same Turgot and Condorcet) or in the spontaneous self-development of the absolute spirit (Hegel). Accordingly, the criterion of progress was also seen in phenomena of a spiritual order, in the level of development of one or another form of social consciousness: science, morality, law, religion. By the way, progress was noticed, first of all, in the field of scientific knowledge (F. Bacon, R. Descartes), and then the corresponding idea was extended to social relations in general.
Secondly, a significant shortcoming of many early concepts of social progress was the non-dialectical consideration of social life. In such cases, social progress is understood as a smooth evolutionary development, without revolutionary leaps, without backward movements, as a continuous ascent in a straight line (O. Comte, G. Spencer).
Thirdly, upward development in form was limited to the achievement of any one favored social system. This rejection of the idea of unlimited progress was very clearly reflected in Hegel’s statements. He proclaimed the Christian-German world, which affirmed freedom and equality in their traditional interpretation, as the pinnacle and completion of world progress.
These shortcomings were largely overcome in the Marxist understanding of the essence of social progress, which includes the recognition of its inconsistency and, in particular, the fact that the same phenomenon and even the stage of historical development as a whole can be simultaneously progressive in one respect and regressive , reactionary in another. This is precisely, as we have seen, one of the possible options for the state’s influence on economic development.
Consequently, when speaking about the progressive development of mankind, we mean the main, main direction of the historical process as a whole, its resultant in relation to the main stages of development. Primitive communal system, slave society, feudalism, capitalism, the era of socialized social relations in the formational cross-section of history; primitive pre-civilization, agricultural, industrial and information-computer waves in its civilizational cross-section act as the main “blocks” of historical progress, although in some of its specific parameters the subsequent formation and stage of civilization may be inferior to the previous ones. Thus, in a number of areas of spiritual culture, feudal society was inferior to slave society, which served as the basis for the enlighteners of the 18th century. look at the Middle Ages as a mere “break” in the course of history, without paying attention to the great strides made during the Middle Ages: the expansion of the cultural area of Europe, the formation there of great viable nations in proximity to each other, and finally, the enormous technical successes of the 14th century. XV centuries and the creation of prerequisites for the emergence of experimental natural science.
If we try to determine in general terms the causes of social progress, then they will be the needs of man, which are the generation and expression of his nature as a living being and, no less, as a social being. As already noted in Chapter Two, these needs are diverse in nature, character, duration of action, but in any case they determine the motives of human activity. In everyday life for thousands of years, people did not at all set as their conscious goal to ensure social progress, and social progress itself is by no means some kind of idea (“program”) initially laid down in the course of history, the implementation of which constitutes its innermost meaning. In the process of real life, people are driven by needs generated by their biological and social nature; and in the course of realizing their vital needs, people change the conditions of their existence and themselves, for each satisfied need gives rise to a new one, and its satisfaction, in turn, requires new actions, the consequence of which is the development of society.
As you know, society is in constant flux. Thinkers have long pondered the questions: in what direction is it moving? Can this movement be likened, for example, to cyclical changes in nature: after summer comes autumn, then winter, spring and summer again? And so it goes for thousands and thousands of years. Or maybe the life of society is similar to the life of a living being: an organism that is born grows up, becomes mature, then grows old and dies? Does the direction of development of society depend on the conscious activity of people?
Philosophical view on the development of society
Which path is society taking: the path of progress or regression? People's idea of the future depends on the answer to this question: does it bring a better life or does it not promise anything good?
Ancient Greek poet Hesiod(VIII-VII centuries BC) wrote about five stages in the life of mankind. The first stage was the “golden age”, when people lived easily and carelessly, the second was the “silver age”, when the decline of morality and piety began. So, sinking lower and lower, people found themselves in the “Iron Age”, when evil and violence reign everywhere, and justice is trampled underfoot. It is probably not difficult for you to determine how Hesiod saw the path of humanity: progressive or regressive?
Unlike Hesiod, the ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle viewed history as a cyclical cycle, repeating the same stages.
The development of the idea of historical progress is associated with the achievements of science, crafts, arts, and the revitalization of public life during the Renaissance. One of the first to put forward the theory of social progress was the French philosopher Anne Robert Turgot(1727-1781). His contemporary, French philosopher-enlightenment Jacques Antoine Condorcet(1743-1794) wrote that history presents a picture of continuous change, a picture of the progress of the human mind. Observation of this historical picture shows in the modifications of the human race, in its continuous renewal, in the infinity of centuries, the path it followed, the steps it took, striving for truth or happiness. Observations of what man was and what he has become at the present time will help us, wrote Condorcet, to find means of securing and accelerating the new successes for which his nature allows him to hope.
So, Condorcet sees the historical process as a path of social progress, at the center of which is the upward development of the human mind. Hegel considered progress not only a principle of reason, but also a principle of world events. This belief in progress was also adopted by K. Marx, who believed that humanity was moving toward greater mastery of nature, the development of production and man himself.
XIX and XX centuries were marked by turbulent events that gave new “information for thought” about progress and regression in the life of society. In the 20th century sociological theories appeared that abandoned the optimistic view of the development of society characteristic of the ideas of progress. Instead, theories of cyclical circulation, pessimistic ideas of the “end of history”, global environmental, energy and nuclear catastrophes are proposed. One of the points of view on the issue of progress was put forward by the philosopher and sociologist Karl Popper, who wrote: “If we think that history progresses or that we are forced to progress, then we are making the same mistake as those who believe that history has a meaning that can be discovered in it, rather than given to it. After all, to progress means to move towards a certain goal that exists for us as human beings. This is impossible for history. Only we, human individuals, can progress, and we can do this by protecting and strengthening those democratic institutions on which freedom, and with it progress, depends. We will achieve greater success in this if we become more deeply aware of the fact that progress depends on us, on our vigilance, on our efforts, on the clarity of our concept regarding our goals and the realistic choice of such goals."
The contradictions of social progress
Any person even slightly familiar with history will easily find in it facts indicating its progressive progressive development, its movement from lower to higher. “Homo sapiens” (reasonable man) as a biological species stands higher on the ladder of evolution than its predecessors - Pithecanthropus and Neanderthals. The progress of technology is obvious: from stone tools to iron ones, from simple hand tools to machines that enormously increase the productivity of human labor, from the use of the muscular power of humans and animals to steam engines, electric generators, nuclear energy, from primitive means of transportation to cars, airplanes, spaceships. The progress of technology has always been associated with the development of knowledge, and the last 400 years - with the progress of primarily scientific knowledge. It would seem that progress in history is obvious. But this is by no means generally accepted. In any case, there are theories that either deny progress or accompany its recognition with such reservations that the concept of progress loses all objective content and appears as relativistic, depending on the position of a particular subject, on the system of values with which he approaches history.
And it must be said that the denial or relativization of progress is not completely groundless. The progress of technology, which underlies the growth of labor productivity, leads in many cases to the destruction of nature and the undermining of the natural foundations of the existence of society. Science is used to create not only more advanced productive forces, but also destructive forces that are increasingly powerful. Computerization and the widespread use of information technology in various types of activities limitlessly expand a person’s creative capabilities and at the same time pose a lot of dangers for him, starting with the emergence of various new diseases (for example, it is already known that long-term continuous work with computer displays negatively affects vision , especially in children) and ending with possible situations of total control over personal life.
The development of civilization brought with it a clear softening of morals and the establishment (at least in the minds of people) of the ideals of humanism. But in the 20th century, two of the bloodiest wars in human history took place; Europe was flooded with a black wave of fascism, which publicly announced that the enslavement and even destruction of people treated as representatives of “inferior races” was completely legitimate. In the 20th century, the world is periodically shaken by outbreaks of terrorism from right- and left-wing extremists, for whom human life is a bargaining chip in their political games. Widespread drug addiction, alcoholism, crime - organized and unorganized - is all this evidence of human progress? And have all the wonders of technology and the achievement of relative material well-being in economically developed countries made their inhabitants happier in all respects?
In addition, in their actions and assessments, people are guided by interests, and what some people or social groups consider progress, others often evaluate from opposite positions. However, does this give grounds to say that the concept of progress depends entirely on the assessments of the subject, that there is nothing objective in it? I think this is a rhetorical question.
Criteria for social progress.
In the extensive literature devoted to social progress, there is currently no single answer to the main question: what is the general sociological criterion of social progress?
A relatively small number of authors argue that the very formulation of the question of a single criterion for social progress is meaningless, since human society is a complex organism, the development of which takes place along different lines, which makes it impossible to formulate a single criterion. Most authors consider it possible to formulate a single general sociological criterion of social progress. However, even with the very formulation of such a criterion, there are significant discrepancies.
Condorcet (like other French educators) considered the development of reason to be a criterion of progress . Utopian socialists put forward a moral criterion of progress. Saint-Simon believed, for example, that society should adopt a form of organization that would lead to the implementation of the moral principle: all people should treat each other as brothers. Contemporary of the utopian socialists, German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling(1775-1854) wrote that the solution to the question of historical progress is complicated by the fact that supporters and opponents of the belief in the perfectibility of mankind are completely entangled in disputes about the criteria of progress. Some talk about the progress of humanity in the field of morality , others - about the progress of science and technology , which, as Schelling wrote, from a historical point of view is rather a regression, and proposed his solution to the problem: only a gradual approach to a legal structure can serve as a criterion in establishing the historical progress of the human race. Another point of view on social progress belongs to G. Hegel. He saw the criterion of progress in the consciousness of freedom . As the consciousness of freedom grows, society develops progressively.
As we see, the question of the criterion of progress occupied the great minds of modern times, but they did not find a solution. The disadvantage of all attempts to overcome this task was that in all cases only one line (or one side, or one sphere) of social development was considered as a criterion. Reason, morality, science, technology, legal order, and the consciousness of freedom - all these are very important indicators, but not universal, not covering human life and society as a whole.
The prevailing idea of limitless progress inevitably led to what seemed to be the only possible solution to the problem; the main, if not the only, criterion of social progress can only be the development of material production, which ultimately predetermines changes in all other aspects and spheres of social life. Among Marxists, V.I. Lenin more than once insisted on this conclusion, who back in 1908 called for considering the interests of the development of productive forces as the highest criterion of progress. After October, Lenin returned to this definition and emphasized that the state of the productive forces is the main criterion for all social development, since each subsequent socio-economic formation finally defeated the previous one precisely because it opened up more scope for the development of productive forces and achieved higher productivity of social labor .
A serious argument in favor of this position is that the history of mankind itself begins with the manufacture of tools and exists thanks to the continuity in the development of productive forces.
It is noteworthy that the conclusion about the state and level of development of the productive forces as the general criterion of progress was shared by opponents of Marxism - technicalists, on the one hand, and scientists, on the other. A legitimate question arises: how could the concepts of Marxism (i.e., materialism) and scientism (i.e., idealism) converge at one point? The logic of this convergence is as follows. The scientist discovers social progress, first of all, in the development of scientific knowledge, but scientific knowledge acquires its highest meaning only when it is realized in practice, and, above all, in material production.
In the process of the still receding ideological confrontation between the two systems, technologists used the thesis of the productive forces as the general criterion of social progress to prove the superiority of the West, which was and is ahead in this indicator. The disadvantage of this criterion is that the assessment of the productive forces presupposes taking into account their quantity, character, the achieved level of development and the associated labor productivity, ability to grow, which is very important when comparing different countries and stages of historical development. For example, the number of production forces in modern India is greater than in South Korea, but their quality is lower. If we take the development of production forces as a criterion of progress; assessing them in dynamics, this presupposes a comparison no longer from the point of view of greater or lesser development of production forces, but from the point of view of the course and speed of their development. But in this case the question arises, what period should be taken for comparison.
Some philosophers believe that all difficulties will be overcome if we take the method of production of material goods as a general sociological criterion of social progress. A strong argument in favor of this position is that the foundation of social progress is the development of the mode of production as a whole, and that by taking into account the state and growth of production forces, as well as the nature of production relations, the progressive nature of one formation in relation to another can be shown much more fully.
Without denying that the transition from one mode of production to another, more progressive one, underlies progress in a number of other areas, opponents of this point of view almost always note that the main question remains unresolved: how to determine the very progressiveness of this new production method.
Fairly considering that human society is, first of all, a developing community of people, another group of philosophers puts forward the development of man himself as a general sociological criterion for social progress. It is indisputable that the course of human history really testifies to the development of the people who make up human society, their social and individual strengths, abilities, and inclinations. The advantage of this approach is that it allows us to measure social progress by the progressive development of the subjects of historical creativity themselves - people.
The most important criterion for progress is the level of humanism of society, i.e. the position of the individual in it: the degree of his economic, political and social liberation; the level of satisfaction of her material and spiritual needs; the state of her psychophysical and social health. According to this point of view, the criterion of social progress is the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to an individual, the degree of individual freedom guaranteed by society. The free development of a person in a free society also means the disclosure of his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. The development of human qualities depends on people's living conditions. The more fully a person’s various needs for food, clothing, housing, transport services, and his needs in the spiritual field are satisfied, the more moral the relations between people become, the more accessible to a person the most diverse types of economic and political, spiritual and material activities become. The more favorable the conditions for the development of a person’s physical, intellectual, mental strength, his moral principles, the wider the scope for the development of individual qualities inherent in each individual person. In short, the more humane the living conditions, the more opportunities there are for the development of humanity in a person: reason, morality, creative powers.
Let us note, by the way, that within this indicator, which is complex in its structure, it is possible and necessary to single out one that essentially combines all the others. This, in my opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if in a given country it is 10-12 years less than in the group of developed countries, and besides, it shows a tendency to further decrease, the question of the degree of progressiveness of this country must be decided accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, “all progress is reactionary if man collapses.”
The level of humanism of a society as an integrative criterion (i.e., passing through and absorbing changes in literally all spheres of society’s life) criterion incorporates the criteria discussed above. Each subsequent formational and civilizational stage is more progressive in personal terms - it expands the range of rights and freedoms of the individual, entails the development of his needs and the improvement of his abilities. It is enough to compare in this regard the status of slave and serf, serf and wage worker under capitalism. At first, it may seem that the slaveholding formation, which marked the beginning of the era of exploitation of man by man, stands apart in this regard. But, as F. Engels explained, even for a slave, not to mention free people, slavery was progress in personal terms: if before a prisoner was killed or eaten, now he was left to live.
So, the content of social progress was, is and will be the “humanization of man,” achieved through the contradictory development of his natural and social forces, i.e., productive forces and the entire gamut of social relations. From the above, we can draw a conclusion about a universal criterion of social progress: what contributes to the rise of humanism is progressive . The world community's thoughts about the “limits of growth” have significantly updated the problem of criteria for social progress. Indeed, if in the social world around us not everything is as simple as it seemed and seems to progressists, then what are the most significant signs that can be used to judge the progress of social development as a whole, the progressiveness, conservatism or reactionary nature of certain phenomena?
Let us note right away that the question “how to measure” social progress has never received an unambiguous answer in the philosophical and sociological literature. This situation is largely explained by the complexity of society as a subject and object of progress, its diversity and quality. Hence the search for our own, local criterion for each sphere of public life. But at the same time, society is an integral organism and, as such, the main criterion of social progress must correspond to it. People, as G. V. Plekhanov noted, make not several stories, but one story of their own relationships. Our thinking is capable and must reflect this single historical practice in its integrity.
Conclusion
1) Society is a complex organism in which different “bodies” function (enterprises, associations of people, government institutions, etc.), various processes (economic, political, spiritual, etc.) occur simultaneously, and various human activities unfold. All these parts of one social organism, all these processes, various types of activities are interconnected and at the same time may not coincide in their development. Moreover, individual processes and changes occurring in different areas of society can be multidirectional, that is, progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another. Thus, it is impossible to find any general criterion by which one could judge the progress of a particular society. Like many processes in our lives, social progress, based on various criteria, can be characterized in different ways. Therefore, in my opinion, there is simply no general criterion.
2) Despite the inconsistency and ambiguity of many provisions of Aristotle’s socio-political concept, his proposed approaches to the analysis of the state, the method of political science and its vocabulary (including the history of the issue, statement of the problem, arguments for and against, etc.) , highlighting what is the subject of political reflection and reasoning still have a fairly noticeable impact on political research today. A reference to Aristotle is still a fairly weighty scientific argument confirming the truth of conclusions about political processes and phenomena. The concept of progress, as stated above, is based on some value or set of values. But the concept of progress has become so firmly entrenched in modern mass consciousness that we are faced with a situation where the very idea of progress - progress as such - acts as a value. Progress, therefore, by itself, regardless of any values, tries to fill life and history with meaning, and verdicts are made in its name. Progress can be thought of either as a desire for some goal, or as limitless movement and unfolding. It is obvious that progress without a basis in any other value that would serve as its goal is possible only as an endless ascent. Its paradox lies in the fact that movement without a goal, movement to nowhere, is, generally speaking, meaningless.
List of used literature
1. Philosophy: Textbook / Gubin V.D.; Sidorina T.Yu. - M. 2005
2. Philosophy: Textbook for students. universities / P.V. Alekseev; A.V.Panin. - 3rd ed. - M.: Prospekt, 2004 - 608 p.
3. Philosophy: Reader / K.H. Delokarov; S.B. Rotsinsky. – M.:RAGS, 2006.-768p.
4. Philosophy: Textbook / V.P. Kokhanovsky. – Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 2006.- 576 p.
5. Political sociology: Textbook / Yu.S. Bortsov; Yu.G.Volkov. – Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 2001.
6. Social philosophy: Textbook. / Ed. I. A. Gobozova. M.: publisher Savin, 2003.
7. Introduction to philosophy: Textbook for universities / Author. coll.: Frolov I.T. and others. 2nd ed., revised. and additional M: Republic, 2002.
47. Social progress. The contradictory nature of its content. Criteria for social progress. Humanism and culture
Progress in the general sense is development from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, from simple to complex.
Social progress is the gradual cultural and social development of humanity.
The idea of the progress of human society began to take shape in philosophy from ancient times and was based on the facts of man’s mental movement forward, which was expressed in man’s constant acquisition and accumulation of new knowledge, allowing him to increasingly reduce his dependence on nature.
Thus, the idea of social progress originated in philosophy on the basis of objective observations of socio-cultural transformations of human society.
Since philosophy considers the world as a whole, then, adding ethical aspects to the objective facts of socio-cultural progress, it came to the conclusion that the development and improvement of human morality is not the same unambiguous and indisputable fact as the development of knowledge, general culture, science, medicine , social guarantees of society, etc.
However, accepting, in general, the idea of social progress, that is, the idea that humanity, after all, moves forward in its development in all the main components of its existence, and in the moral sense too, philosophy, thereby, expresses his position of historical optimism and faith in man.
However, at the same time in philosophy there is no unified theory of social progress, since different philosophical movements have different understandings of the content of progress, its causal mechanism, and in general the criteria of progress as a fact of history. The main groups of theories of social progress can be classified as follows:
1. Theories of natural progress. This group of theories claims the natural progress of humanity, which occurs naturally due to natural circumstances.
The main factor of progress here is considered to be the natural ability of the human mind to increase and accumulate the amount of knowledge about nature and society. In these teachings, the human mind is endowed with unlimited power and, accordingly, progress is considered a historically endless and non-stop phenomenon.
2. Dialectical concepts of social progress. These teachings believe that progress is an internally natural phenomenon for society, inherent in it organically. In them, progress is the form and goal of the very existence of human society, and the dialectical concepts themselves are divided into idealistic and materialistic:
- idealistic dialectical concepts social progress are closer to theories about the natural course of progress in that connect the principle of progress with the principle of thinking (the Absolute, the Supreme Mind, the Absolute Idea, etc.).
Materialistic concepts of social progress (Marxism) connect progress with the internal laws of socio-economic processes in society.
3. Evolutionary theories of social progress.
These theories arose in attempts to place the idea of progress on a strictly scientific basis. The starting principle of these theories is the idea of the evolutionary nature of progress, that is, the presence in human history of certain constant facts of complication of cultural and social reality, which should be considered strictly as scientific facts - only from the outside of their indisputably observable phenomena, without giving any positive or negative ratings.
The ideal of the evolutionary approach is a system of natural science knowledge, where scientific facts are collected, but no ethical or emotional assessments are provided for them.
As a result of this natural scientific method of analyzing social progress, evolutionary theories identify two sides of the historical development of society as scientific facts:
Graduality and
The presence of a natural cause-and-effect pattern in processes.
Thus, evolutionary approach to the idea of progress
recognizes the existence of certain laws of social development, which, however, do not define anything other than the process of spontaneous and inexorable complication of the forms of social relations, which is accompanied by the effects of intensification, differentiation, integration, expansion of the set of functions, etc.
The whole variety of philosophical teachings about progress is generated by their differences in explaining the main question - why the development of society occurs precisely in a progressive direction, and not in all other possibilities: circular motion, lack of development, cyclical “progress-regression” development, flat development without qualitative growth, regressive movement, etc.?
All these development options are equally possible for human society, along with the progressive type of development, and so far no single reasons have been put forward by philosophy to explain the presence of progressive development in human history.
In addition, the very concept of progress, if applied not to the external indicators of human society, but to the internal state of a person, becomes even more controversial, since it is impossible to assert with historical certainty that a person at more developed socio-cultural stages of society becomes happier personally . In this sense, it is impossible to talk about progress as a factor that generally improves a person’s life. This applies to past history (it cannot be argued that the ancient Hellenes were less happy than the inhabitants of Europe in modern times, or that the population of Sumer was less satisfied with the course of their personal lives than modern Americans, etc.), and with particular force inherent in the modern stage of development of human society.
Current social progress has given rise to many factors that, on the contrary, complicate a person’s life, suppress him mentally and even create a threat to his existence. Many achievements of modern civilization are beginning to fit worse and worse into the psychophysiological capabilities of man. From here arise such factors of modern human life as an overabundance of stressful situations, neuropsychic traumatism, fear of life, loneliness, apathy towards spirituality, oversaturation of unnecessary information, a shift in life values to primitivism, pessimism, moral indifference, a general breakdown in the physical and psychological state, unprecedented in history of the level of alcoholism, drug addiction and spiritual oppression of people.
A paradox of modern civilization has arisen:
In everyday life for thousands of years, people did not at all set as their conscious goal to ensure some kind of social progress, they simply tried to satisfy their basic needs, both physiological and social. Each goal along this path was constantly pushed back, since each new level of need satisfaction was immediately assessed as insufficient and was replaced by a new goal. Thus, progress has always been largely predetermined by the biological and social nature of man, and according to the meaning of this process, it should have brought closer the moment when the surrounding life would become optimal for man from the point of view of his biological and social nature. But instead, a moment came when the level of development of society revealed the psychophysical underdevelopment of man for life in the circumstances that he himself created for himself.
Man has ceased to meet the requirements of modern life in his psychophysical capabilities, and human progress, at its current stage, has already caused global psychophysical trauma to humanity and continues to develop along the same main directions.
In addition, current scientific and technological progress has given rise to an ecological crisis situation in the modern world, the nature of which suggests a threat to the very existence of man on the planet. If the current growth trends continue in the conditions of a finite planet in terms of its resources, the next generations of humanity will reach the limits of the demographic and economic level, beyond which the collapse of human civilization will occur.
The current situation with ecology and human neuropsychic trauma has stimulated discussion of the problem of both progress itself and the problem of its criteria. Currently, based on the results of understanding these problems, the concept of a new understanding of culture arises, which requires understanding it not as a simple sum of human achievements in all areas of life, but as a phenomenon designed to purposefully serve a person and favor all aspects of his life.
Thus, the issue of the need to humanize culture is resolved, that is, the priority of man and his life in all assessments of the cultural state of society.
In the outline of these discussions it is natural the problem of criteria for social progress arises, since, as historical practice has shown, consideration of social progress simply by the fact of improvement and complication of socio-cultural circumstances of life does not give anything to resolve the main question - is the current process of its social development positive or not in its outcome for humanity?
The following are recognized as positive criteria for social progress today:
1. Economic criterion.
The development of society from the economic side must be accompanied by an increase in human living standards, the elimination of poverty, the elimination of hunger, mass epidemics, high social guarantees for old age, illness, disability, etc.
2. Level of humanization of society.
Society must grow:
the degree of various freedoms, the general security of a person, the level of access to education, to material goods, the ability to satisfy spiritual needs, respect for his rights, opportunities for recreation, etc.,
and go down:
the influence of life circumstances on a person’s psychophysical health, the degree of a person’s subordination to the rhythm of working life.
The general indicator of these social factors is the average human lifespan.
3. Progress in moral and spiritual development of the individual.
Society must become more and more moral, moral standards must be strengthened and improved, and each person must receive more and more time and opportunities for developing their abilities, for self-education, for creative activity and spiritual work.
Thus, the main criteria of progress have now shifted from production-economic, scientific-technical, socio-political factors towards humanism, that is, towards the priority of man and his social destiny.
Hence,
The main meaning of culture and the main criterion of progress is the humanism of the processes and results of social development.
Basic terms
HUMANISM- a system of views that expresses the principle of recognizing a person’s personality as the main value of existence.
CULTURE(in a broad sense) - the level of material and spiritual development of society.
SOCIAL PROGRESS- gradual cultural and social development of humanity.
PROGRESS- ascending development from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, from simple to more complex.
From the book Philosophy of Science and Technology: Lecture Notes author Tonkonogov A V7.6. Scientific and technological progress, public control and public administration Public administration is the organizing and regulating activities of various public and state branches of government acting on behalf of the basic laws of society (V.E.
From the book Fundamentals of Philosophy author Babaev YuriHistory as progress. The contradictory nature of social progress Progress is a characteristic of such a universal property of matter as movement, but in its application to social matter. One of the universal properties of matter, as shown earlier, is movement. IN
From the book Introduction to Philosophy author Frolov Ivan2. Social progress: civilizations and formations The emergence of the theory of social progress In contrast to primitive society, where extremely slow changes stretch over many generations, already in ancient civilizations social changes and development begin
From the book Social Philosophy author Krapivensky Solomon Eliazarovich4. Social progress Progress (from the Latin progressus - movement forward) is a direction of development that is characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect.C Merit for putting forward the idea and developing the theory of social
From the book Cheat Sheets on Philosophy author Nyukhtilin VictorCriteria for social progress The world community's thoughts about the “limits of growth” have significantly updated the problem of criteria for social progress. Indeed, if in the social world around us not everything is as simple as it seemed and seems to progressives,
From the book Risk Society. On the way to another modernity by Beck UlrichNational movements and social progress There is another large social group, the influence of which as a subject of social development became especially active in the last third of the 19th century. We mean nations. The movements they make, as well as the movements
From book 2. Subjective dialectics. author12. The philosophy of Marxism, the main stages of its development and its most prominent representatives. Basic provisions of the materialistic understanding of history. Social progress and its criteria Marxism is a dialectical-materialist philosophy, the foundations of which were laid by Karl Marx and
From book 4. Dialectics of social development. author Konstantinov Fedor Vasilievich43. Moral and aesthetic forms of social consciousness. Their role in the formation of the spiritual and intellectual content of the individual Morality is a concept that is synonymous with morality. Morality is a set of norms and rules of human behavior developed
From the book Subjective Dialectics author Konstantinov Fedor Vasilievich4. Political culture and technological development: the end of consent to progress? Modernization in the political system narrows the freedom of action of politics. Realized political utopias (democracy, social state) are constraining - legally, economically, socially.
From the book Dialectics of Social Development author Konstantinov Fedor Vasilievich From the book by Mirza-Fatali Akhundov author Mamedov Sheidabek FaradzhievichChapter XVIII. SOCIAL PROGRESS
From the author's book From the author's book2. The contradictory nature of the development of truth The main thesis of materialist dialectics in the doctrine of truth is the recognition of its objective nature. Objective truth is the content of human ideas that does not depend on the subject, i.e.
Studying history, we see how different aspects of social life change over time, one type of society replaces another.
Social changes
Various changes are constantly taking place in society. Some of them are being carried out before our eyes (a new president is elected, social programs to help families or the poor are introduced, legislation is changed).
Social changes are characterized by their direction, they can be both positive (positive changes for the better), they are called progress, and negative (negative changes for the worse) - regression.
We advise you to remember!
Social progress - consistent positive changes in society; the process of its ascent from one historical stage to another, the development of society from simple to complex, from less developed forms to more developed ones.
Social regression is the movement of society back to lower stages of development.
Let's look at a historical example. The Roman Empire developed progressively over hundreds of years. New buildings were erected, architecture, poetry and theater developed, legislation was improved, and new territories were conquered. But during the era of the Great Migration, barbarian nomadic tribes destroyed the Roman Empire. Livestock and poultry were grazed on the ruins of ancient palaces; aqueducts no longer supplied fresh water to the cities. Illiteracy reigned where arts and crafts had previously flourished. Progress gave way to regression.
Paths of social progress
Progress is made in different ways and ways. There are gradual and spasmodic types of social progress. The first is called reformist, the second - revolutionary.
We advise you to remember!
Reform is a partial gradual improvement in any area; transformation carried out by legislative means.
Revolution is a complete change in all or most aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing social system.
The first revolution in human history was the so-called Neolithic revolution, which represented a qualitative leap, a transition from an appropriating economy (hunting and gathering) to a producing economy (agriculture and cattle breeding). The Neolithic revolution began 10 thousand years ago. It was a global revolution - it swept the whole world.
The second global process was the industrial revolution of the 18th-19th centuries. It also played an outstanding role in human history, leading to the spread of machine production and the replacement of an agrarian society with an industrial one.
Global revolutions affect all spheres of society and many countries, and therefore lead to qualitative changes.
Revolutions taking place in individual countries also lead to reorganization in all spheres of people's lives. A similar thing happened to Russia after the October Revolution of 1917, when the Soviets of Workers' and Peasants' Deputies came to power. The authorities changed, entire social groups disappeared (for example, the nobility), but new ones appeared - the Soviet intelligentsia, collective farmers, party workers, etc.
Reforms are partial changes that affect not the whole of society, but certain areas of it.
Reforms, as a rule, do not affect all countries, but each one separately, since this is an internal matter of the state. Reforms are carried out by the government, are transparent, are planned in advance, the general population is involved in their discussion, and the progress of the reform is covered by the press.
Interesting Facts
One of the greatest reformers in history was the Byzantine emperor Justinian I (527-565). He established a commission to create a code of Roman law (in Latin - Corpus juris civilis) with the aim of replacing outdated laws. It was also necessary to eliminate contradictions in legislation. When the Justinian Code was created, all laws not included in it became invalid. Until now, Roman law underlies the civil law of most modern countries (including Russia).
Today, our country is undergoing an education reform, which began back in the 1990s and led to the emergence of new textbooks, the Unified State Examination system, and state educational standards.
Clever idea
“Progress is a way of human existence.”
- - Victor Hugo, French writer - -
The impact of technological progress on society
The basis for the development of society is technical progress - the improvement of tools and technology, as it changes production, quality and productivity of labor, affects people and the relationship between society and nature.
Technical progress has a long history of development. About 2 million years ago, the first tools appeared (remember what they were), from which technical progress began. Approximately 8-10 thousand years ago, our ancestors moved from gathering and hunting to agriculture and cattle breeding, and about 6 thousand years ago people began to live in cities, specialize in certain types of labor, and divided into social classes. In the second half of the 17th century, with the beginning of the industrial revolution, the era of industrial factories opened, and in the 20th century - computers, the Internet, thermonuclear energy, and space exploration. A modern personal computer is superior in performance to computer centers of the 80-90s of the last century.
What replaced the forge (1), plow (2), pen and inkwell (3)? Can we talk about social progress in these cases?
Perhaps no other society has valued innovation as highly as the modern one. In the 20th century, unique inventions were made: electricity, radio, television, cars, airplanes, nuclear energy, rocket science, computers, laser technology and robots. Each new invention, in turn, led to the creation of even more advanced generations of technology.
Technological progress also affected the social sphere. Technical devices make a person’s life much easier, help people solve everyday problems (cook food, clean the apartment, do laundry, etc.), and come to the aid of people with disabilities. The advent of the automobile radically changed ideas about the place of work and residence, and made it possible for a person to live many kilometers from his workplace. People have become more mobile, including teenagers, who, thanks to the Internet, began to communicate with their peers from geographically distant places.
Technological progress has changed the lives of millions of people, but at the same time it has created many problems. Active human intervention in nature has led to many negative consequences: many species of plants and animals are disappearing or are on the verge of extinction, forests are being cut down, industrial enterprises are polluting water, air and soil. The conveniences of city life are accompanied by air pollution, transport fatigue, etc.
Let's sum it up
Social progress is the movement of humanity from lower to higher levels. It has a global character, covering the whole world. On the contrary, regression is a temporary retreat from the conquered positions. Revolutions and reforms are two types of social progress. Revolutions can be global or limited to one or several countries. Reforms are carried out only in one society and are gradual.
Basic terms and concepts
Social progress, social regression, reforms, revolution, technical progress.
Test your knowledge
- Give examples of social change. Do changes in social life always lead to positive consequences? Justify your answer.
- Explain the meaning of the concepts: “social progress”, “social regression”, “reform”, “revolution”, “technical progress”.
- Select keywords that characterize social progress, social regression, revolutions, reforms.
- Give examples from history that illustrate different paths of social progress.
- How do you think wars influence the development of society? Do they serve a progressive or regressive role? Explain your answer.
Workshop
History shows that no society stands still, but is constantly changing . Social change is the transition of social systems, communities, institutions and organizations from one state to another. The process of social development is carried out on the basis of changes. The concept of “social development” specifies the concept of “social change”. Social development– irreversible, directed change in social systems. Development involves a transition from simple to complex, from lower to higher, etc. In turn, the concept of “social development” is clarified by such qualitative characteristics as “social progress” and “social regression”
Social progress- this is a direction of development of human society that is characterized by an irreversible change in humanity, as a result of which a transition is made from lower to higher, from a less perfect state to a more perfect one. If the sum of the positive consequences of large-scale changes in society exceeds the sum of the negative ones, then we speak of progress. Otherwise, regression occurs.
Regression– a type of development characterized by a transition from higher to lower.
Thus, progress is both local and global. Regression is only local.
Usually, social progress does not mean these or those progressive changes in individual social communities, layers and groups or individuals, but the upward development of the entire society as an integrity, the movement towards the perfection of all mankind.
The mechanism of social progress in all systems consists of the emergence of new needs in various spheres of social life and the search for opportunities to satisfy them. New needs arise as a result of human production activity; they are associated with the search and invention of new means of labor, communication, organization of social life, with the expansion and deepening of the scope of scientific knowledge, and the complication of the structure of human creative and consumer activity.
Very often, the emergence and satisfaction of social needs is carried out on the basis of an open conflict of interests of various social communities and social groups, as well as the subordination of the interests of some social communities and groups to others. In this case, social violence turns out to be an inevitable accompaniment of social progress. Social progress, as a consistent ascent to more complex forms of social life, is carried out as a result of the resolution of contradictions that unfold in the previous stages and phases of social development.
The source, the root cause of social progress, which determines the desires and actions of millions of people, are their own interests and needs. What are the human needs that determine social development? All needs are divided into two groups: natural and historical. Natural human needs are all social needs, the satisfaction of which is necessary for the preservation and reproduction of human life as a natural biological being. Natural human needs are limited by the biological structure of man. The historical needs of man are all social and spiritual needs, the satisfaction of which is necessary for the reproduction and development of man as a social being. None of the groups of needs can be satisfied outside of society, outside of the development of social material and spiritual production. In contrast to natural needs, human historical needs are generated by the course of social progress, are unlimited in development, due to which social and intellectual progress is unlimited.
However, social progress is not only an objective, but also a relative form of development. Where there are no opportunities for the development of new needs and their satisfaction, the line of social progress stops, periods of decline and stagnation arise. In the past, cases of social regression and the death of previously established cultures and civilization were often observed. Consequently, as practice shows, social progress in world history occurs in a zigzag manner.
The entire experience of the twentieth century refuted the one-factor approach to the development of modern society. The formation of a particular social structure is influenced by many factors: the progress of science and technology, the state of economic relations, the structure of the political system, the type of ideology, the level of spiritual culture, national character, the international environment or the existing world order and the role of the individual.
There are two types of social progress: gradual (reformist) and spasmodic (revolutionary).
Reform- partial improvement in any area of life, a series of gradual transformations that do not affect the foundations of the existing social system.
Revolution- a complex abrupt change in all or most aspects of social life, affecting the foundations of the existing system and representing a transition of society from one qualitative state to another.
The difference between reform and revolution is usually seen in the fact that reform is a change implemented on the basis of existing values in society. Revolution is a radical rejection of existing values in the name of reorientation to others.
One of the tools for the movement of society along the path of social progress based on a combination of reforms and revolution in modern Western sociology is recognized modernization. Translated from English, “modernization” means modernization. The essence of modernization is associated with the spread of social relations and the values of capitalism throughout the globe. Modernization- this is a revolutionary transition from pre-industrial to industrial or capitalist society, carried out through comprehensive reforms, it implies a fundamental change in social institutions and people's lifestyles, covering all spheres of society.
Sociologists distinguish two types of modernization: organic and inorganic. Organic modernization is the moment of the country’s own development and is prepared by the entire course of previous development. It occurs as a natural process of progressive development of social life during the transition from feudalism to capitalism. Such modernization begins with a change in public consciousness.
Inorganic modernization occurs as a response to an external challenge from more developed countries. It is a method of “catching up” development undertaken by the ruling circles of a particular country in order to overcome historical backwardness and avoid foreign dependence. Inorganic modernization begins with economics and politics. It is accomplished by borrowing foreign experience, acquiring advanced equipment and technology, inviting specialists, studying abroad, restructuring forms of government and norms of cultural life on the model of advanced countries.
In the history of social thought, three models of social change have been proposed: movement along a descending line, from peak to decline; movement in a closed circle - cycles; movement from higher to lower - progress. These three options have always been present in all theories of social change.
The simplest type of social change is linear, when the amount of change occurring is constant at any given time. The linear theory of social progress is based on the progress of the productive forces. The events of the last quarter of the twentieth century have shown that we will have to give up the idea that changes in productive forces and production relations are taken as the key and, in essence, the only source of development. The rise of productive forces does not guarantee progress. Life shows that an unlimited increase in the material means of life, taken as a blessing, turns out to have disastrous consequences for a person. For a long period, the understanding of social progress was associated with industrial development, with high rates of economic growth and the creation of a large machine industry. The conditions and forms of education for economic, political and social life are subordinated to the development of technical and economic parameters and the achievement of industrial technology. But in the last third of the twentieth century, the euphoria of industrial-technical optimism began to wane. Industrial development not only created a threat to social and cultural values, but also undermined its own foundation. In the West, people started talking about a crisis of industrialism, the signs of which were the destruction of the environment and the depletion of natural resources. The discrepancy between the level of scientific, technical and economic development and the level of satisfaction of human needs is becoming increasingly obvious. The very concept of social progress has changed. Its main criterion is to bring the social structure into conformity not so much with the requirements of technological development, but, first of all, with the natural nature of man.
Cyclic changes are characterized by a sequential progression of stages. According to this theory, social development does not proceed in a straight line, but rather in a circle. If in a directed process each subsequent phase differs from any other that preceded it in time, then in a cyclic process the state of the changing system at a later time will be the same as it was earlier, i.e. will be repeated exactly, but at a higher level.
In everyday social life, a lot is organized cyclically: for example, agricultural life - and in general the entire life of agrarian societies - is seasonal, cyclical in nature, since it is determined by natural cycles. Spring is sowing time, summer, autumn is harvest time, winter is pause, lack of work. The next year everything repeats itself. A clear example of the cyclical nature of social change is the change of generations of people. Each generation is born, goes through a period of social maturation, then a period of active activity, followed by a period of old age and the natural completion of the life cycle. Each generation is formed in specific social conditions, therefore it is not similar to previous generations and brings into life, into politics, economics, and culture something of its own, something new that has not yet been seen in social life.
Sociologists of different directions record the fact that many social institutions, communities, classes and even entire societies change according to a cyclical pattern - emergence, growth, flourishing, crisis and decline, the emergence of a new phenomenon. Long-term cyclical changes are associated with the rise and fall of historically specific civilizations. This is what Spengler and Toynbee mean when they talk about civilizational cycles.
About the development of cyclical ideas in the biblical book of Ecclesiastes it is said: “What was, that will be; and what has been done will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun.”
In the records of Herodotus (5th century BC) a scheme is given for applying the cycle to political regimes: monarchy - tyranny - oligarchy - democracy - ochlocracy. In the works of Polybius (200-118 BC), a similar idea is made that all states go through inevitable cycles of growth - zenith - decline.
Social processes can proceed in a spiral, where successive states, although fundamentally similar, are not identical. An upward spiral means repetition of a process at a relatively higher level, a downward spiral means repetition at a relatively lower level.
It is very important to understand the direction in which our society is moving, constantly changing and developing. This article is dedicated to this purpose. We will try to determine the criteria for social progress and answer a number of other questions. First of all, let's figure out what progress and regression are.
Consideration of concepts
Social progress is a direction of development that is characterized by a progressive movement from simple and lower forms of organization of society to more complex, higher ones. The opposite of this term is the concept of “regression”, that is, the reverse movement - a return to outdated relationships and structures, degradation, the direction of development from higher to lower.
The history of the formation of ideas about the measures of progress
The problem of criteria for social progress has long worried thinkers. The idea that changes in society are precisely a progressive process appeared in ancient times, but finally took shape in the works of M. Condorcet, A. Turgot and other French enlighteners. These thinkers saw the criteria for social progress in the development of reason and the spread of education. This optimistic view of the historical process gave way in the 19th century to other, more complex concepts. For example, Marxism sees progress in changing socio-economic formations from lower to higher. Some thinkers believed that the consequence of moving forward is the growing heterogeneity of society and the complication of its structure.
In modern science, historical progress is usually associated with a process such as modernization, that is, the transition of society from agrarian to industrial and further to post-industrial.
Scientists who do not share the idea of progress
Not everyone accepts the idea of progress. Some thinkers reject it in relation to social development - either predicting the “end of history”, or saying that societies develop independently of each other, multilinearly, in parallel (O. Spengler, N.Ya. Danilevsky, A. Toynbee), or considering history as a cycle with a series of recessions and ascents (G. Vico).
For example, Arthur Toynbee identified 21 civilizations, each of which has distinct phases of formation: emergence, growth, breakdown, decline and, finally, decay. Thus, he abandoned the thesis about the unity of the historical process.
O. Spengler wrote about the “decline of Europe.” “Anti-progressism” is especially vivid in the works of K. Popper. In his view, progress is a movement towards a specific goal, which is possible only for a specific person, but not for history as a whole. The latter can be considered both as a movement forward and as a regression.
Progress and regression are not mutually exclusive concepts
The progressive development of society, obviously, in certain periods does not exclude regression, return movements, civilizational dead ends, even breakdowns. And it is hardly possible to talk about a uniquely linear development of humanity, since both leaps forward and setbacks are clearly observed. Progress in a certain area, in addition, can be the cause of decline or regression in another. Thus, the development of technology, technology, and tools is a clear indication of progress in the economy, but it was precisely this that brought our world to the brink of a global environmental catastrophe, depleting the Earth’s natural reserves.
Society today is also accused of a family crisis, a decline in morality, and lack of spirituality. The price of progress is high: for example, the conveniences of city life are accompanied by various “urbanization diseases.” Sometimes the negative consequences of progress are so obvious that a natural question arises as to whether it can even be said that humanity is moving forward.
Criteria for social progress: history
The question of the measures of social development is also relevant. There is also no agreement in the scientific world here. French enlighteners saw such a criterion in the development of reason, in increasing the degree of rationality of social organization. Some other thinkers and scientists (for example, A. Saint-Simon) believed that the highest criterion of social progress is the state of morality in society, approaching early Christian ideals.
G. Hegel had a different opinion. He connected progress with freedom - the degree of its awareness by people. Marxism also proposed its own criterion of development: according to supporters of this concept, it consists in the growth of productive forces.
K. Marx, seeing the essence of development in man's increasing subordination of the forces of nature, reduced progress in general to a more specific one - in the production sphere. He considered only those social relations to be conducive to development, which at a given stage correspond to the level of productive forces, and also open up space for the improvement of the person himself (acting as an instrument of production).
Criteria for social development: modernity
Philosophy has subjected the criteria of social progress to careful analysis and revision. In modern social science, the applicability of many of them is disputed. The state of the economic foundation does not at all determine the nature of the development of other spheres of social life.
The goal, and not just a means of social progress, is considered to be the creation of the necessary conditions for the harmonious and comprehensive development of the individual. Consequently, the criterion of social progress is precisely the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to a person to maximize his potential. Based on the conditions created in society to satisfy the totality of the needs of the individual and his free development, the degree of progressiveness of a given system and the criteria of social progress should be assessed.
Let's summarize the information. The table below will help you understand the main criteria for social progress.
The table can be expanded to include the views of other thinkers.
There are two forms of progress in society. Let's look at them below.
Revolution
A revolution is a comprehensive or complete change in most or all aspects of society, affecting the foundations of the existing system. Until quite recently, it was regarded as a universal universal “law of transition” from one socio-economic formation to another. However, scientists could not detect any signs of a social revolution during the transition to a class system from a primitive communal one. Therefore, it was necessary to expand the concept so that it could be applied to any transition between formations, but this led to the destruction of the original semantic content of the term. And the mechanism of a real revolution could only be discovered in phenomena dating back to the era of modern times (that is, during the transition to capitalism from feudalism).
Revolution from the point of view of Marxism
Following the Marxist methodology, we can say that a social revolution means a radical social revolution that changes the structure of society and means a qualitative leap in progressive development. The deepest and most general reason for the emergence of a social revolution is the otherwise insoluble conflict between the productive forces, which are growing, and the system of social institutions and relations, which remain unchanged. The aggravation of political, economic and other contradictions in society against this background ultimately leads to revolution.
The latter is always an active political action on the part of the people; its main goal is the transfer of control of society into the hands of a new social class. The difference between revolution and evolution is that the first is considered concentrated in time, that is, it happens quickly, and the masses become its direct participants.
The dialectic of such concepts as revolution and reform seems very complex. The first, as a deeper action, most often absorbs the latter, thus the action “from below” is complemented by the activity “from above”.
Many modern scientists urge us to abandon the excessive exaggeration of the significance of social revolution in history, the idea that it is an inevitable pattern in solving historical problems, because it has not always been the dominant form determining social progress. Much more often, changes in the life of society occurred as a result of action “from above,” that is, reforms.
Reform
This reorganization, transformation, change in some aspect of social life, which does not destroy the existing foundations of the social structure, retains power in the hands of the ruling class. Thus, the understood path of step-by-step transformation of relations is contrasted with a revolution that completely sweeps away the old system and order. Marxism regarded the evolutionary process, which preserved the remnants of the past for a long time, as too painful and unacceptable for the people. Adherents of this concept believed that since reforms are carried out exclusively “from above” by forces that have power and do not want to give up it, their result will always be lower than expected: reforms are characterized by inconsistency and half-heartedness.
Underestimation of reforms
It was explained by the famous position formulated by V.I. Lenin, that reforms are “a by-product of the revolution.” Let us note: K. Marx already believed that reforms are never a consequence of the weakness of the strong, since they are brought to life precisely by the strength of the weak.
His Russian follower strengthened his denial of the possibility that the “tops” have their own incentives when starting reforms. IN AND. Lenin believed that reforms are a by-product of revolution because they represent unsuccessful attempts to dampen and weaken the revolutionary struggle. Even in cases where reforms were obviously not the result of popular protests, Soviet historians still explained them by the desire of the authorities to prevent encroachments on the existing system.
The “reform-revolution” relationship in modern social science
Over time, Russian scientists gradually freed themselves from the existing nihilism in relation to transformations through evolution, first recognizing the equivalence of revolutions and reforms, and then criticizing revolutions as a bloody, extremely ineffective path full of costs and leading to an inevitable dictatorship.
Now great reforms (that is, revolutions “from above”) are considered the same social anomalies as great revolutions. What they have in common is that these methods of resolving contradictions are opposed to the healthy, normal practice of gradual, continuous reform in a self-regulating society.
The “revolution-reform” dilemma is replaced by clarifying the relationship between reform and permanent regulation. In this context, both revolution and changes “from above” “treat” an advanced disease (the first with “surgical intervention”, the second with “therapeutic methods”), while early and constant prevention is perhaps necessary in order to ensure social progress.
Therefore, in social science today the emphasis is shifting from the “revolution-reform” antinomy to “innovation-reform”. Innovation means a one-time ordinary improvement associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of society in specific conditions. It is precisely this that can ensure the greatest social progress in the future.
The criteria for social progress discussed above are not unconditional. Modern science recognizes the priority of the humanities over others. However, a general criterion for social progress has not yet been established.