progress criteria. Social progress What is the universal criterion of social progress

Can't solve the test online?

Let us help you pass the test. We are familiar with the peculiarities of taking tests online in Distance Learning Systems (LMS) of more than 50 universities.

Order a consultation for 470 rubles and the online test will be passed successfully.

1. Criteria for determining the global problems of our time:
global (worldwide) scale
emergence in the modern era
the possibility of a solution only on the basis of international cooperation
connection with space phenomena
impossibility of solution at the present stage of technological development

2. Correspondence of the surname of the philosopher and the basic concept of his philosophical and historical concept
N. Ya. Danilevsky - cultural-historical type
O. Spengler - high culture
A. J. Toynbee - civilization

3. Modernization is ...
a set of economic, demographic, psychological and political changes undergone by a traditional society in the process of its transformation into a modern society
alternation of socio-economic formations, in which each new formation represents a higher level in comparison with the previous one
transition from systems with a predominance of natural determination to systems with a predominance of socio-historical determination, which is based on the development of productive forces
integration of society through "organic solidarity", which is based on the mutually beneficial and complementary contribution of all members of society

4. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the German sociologist M. Weber reduced the main content of progress to ...
the process of rationalization in the management of social processes
universalization of the religious and ethical values of Protestantism
democratization of public life
profit maximization by business entities

5. Modern concepts that deny the idea of social progress:
modernization theory
growth limit theory
religious providentialism
postmodernism
information society concept

6. The concept of "zero growth" involves ...
“freezing” of economic and demographic growth on the planet at the level of the early 1970s
the need to return to pre-industrial forms of technological and social organization
accelerated development of science and technology to solve emerging global problems

7. The main reason for the emergence of global problems of our time
military-political confrontation in the world
irrational use of natural resources
natural environmental disasters
acceleration of scientific and technological progress and irrational use of its achievements

8. The most universal measure of progress
transition from lower forms to higher
compliance with universal ethical standards
striving for eternal and unchanging ideals
increasing the level of organization of matter
improvement of productive forces

9. The concept of convergence involves ...
growth of the systemic organization of all spheres of public life
the coming merging of all religions into one single world religion
the formation of a single world state and government
rapprochement and, in the future, merging into a single socio-economic system of capitalism and socialism

10. Stages of human development in the concept of "three stages" of French scientists A. Saint-Simon and O. Comte:
religious, metaphysical (philosophical) and positive (scientific) thinking
traditional, industrial and post-industrial society
pre-class, class and classless society
primary, secondary and tertiary formation

11. The main unit of the historical process in the concept of N. Ya. Danilevsky
world civilization
ethnos
cultural-historical type
socio-economic formation
type of social integration

12. The systematic study of the problems of global development began at the initiative of ...
United Nations
Club of Rome
European Union
World Council of Churches

13. In the social philosophy of Marxism, the social progress of mankind over the millennia of its history is ...
alternation of socio-economic formations, with each new formation representing a higher level in comparison with the previous one
successive change of dominant local civilizations
progressive development of types of thinking
development of technological methods of production

14. The French sociologist E. Durkheim identified the idea of social progress with ...
triumph of this idea in the political life of developed countries
the integration of society through "organic solidarity", which is based on the mutually beneficial and complementary contribution of all members of society
formation of rationally organized management structures in all spheres of society
the decline of the authority of religion and the growth of atheistic sentiments

15. Global problems of our time arose in ... century
early XX
mid-twentieth
last decade of the twentieth
late twentieth

16. General trend of historical development
improvement of moral barriers for destructive human aggression
perfection of religion
the economic growth
transition from systems with a predominance of natural determination to systems with a predominance of socio-historical determination, which is based on the development of productive forces

Condorcet (like other French enlighteners) considered the development of the mind to be the criterion of progress. Utopian socialists put forward a moral criterion for progress. Saint-Simon believed, for example, that society should adopt a form of organization that would lead to the implementation of the moral principle that all people should treat each other as brothers. A contemporary of the utopian socialists, the 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 perfection of mankind are completely entangled in disputes about the criteria for progress. Some talk about the progress of mankind 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 offered his own solution to the problem: the criterion in establishing the historical progress of the human race can only be a gradual approach to legal device.

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, the progressive development of society takes place.

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

In our time, philosophers also hold different views on the criterion of social progress. Let's consider some of them.

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

This position is criticized from a different point of view. Just as it is impossible to find a universal criterion of progress only in social consciousness (in the development of reason, morality, consciousness of freedom), so it is impossible to find it only in the sphere of material production (technology, economic relations). History has given examples of countries where a high level of material production was combined with the degradation of spiritual culture. In order to overcome the one-sidedness of the criteria that reflect the state of only one sphere of social life, it is necessary to find a concept that would characterize the essence of human life and activity. In this capacity, philosophers propose the concept of freedom.

Freedom, as you already know, is characterized not only by knowledge (the absence of which makes a person subjectively not free), but also by the presence of conditions for its realization. It also requires a decision based on free choice. Finally, funds are also required, as well as actions aimed at implementing the decision taken. We also recall that the freedom of one person should not be achieved by infringing on the freedom of another person. Such restriction of freedom has a social and moral character.

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

So, according to this point of view, the criterion of social progress is the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to the individual, the degree of individual freedom guaranteed by society. The free development of a person in a free society also means the disclosure of his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. This statement brings us to another view of social progress.

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

Humanity, the recognition of man as the highest value, is expressed by the word "humanism". From what has been said above, we can draw a conclusion about the universal criterion of social progress: progressive is that which contributes to the rise of humanism.

Criteria of social progress.

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

A relatively small number of authors argue that the very formulation of the question of a single criterion of social progress is meaningless, since human society is a complex organism, the development of which is carried out along different lines, which makes it impossible to formulate a single criterion. The majority of 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 ...

1) What is religion in the broad and narrow sense of the word? Is it possible, in your opinion, to give such a definition of it, which will equally suit both people of faith and faith?

atheists? Why?

2) Describe the role of religion in the life of a person, society, state. What is the moral force of religion?

3) What is a world religion? What is the essence of the discussion about the number of world religions? What do you think, what criteria are used by those experts who name more than three world religions?

4) What role have world religions played and are playing in the history of mankind?

5) What role does the religious factor play in contemporary conflicts? Is it possible to say that often it is only a pretext for starting an armed confrontation?

1. Are the judgments correct?

A. Discovering new laws of nature, intervening more and more actively in the natural environment, a person clearly defines the consequences of his intervention,
B. The consequences of the industrial and post-industrial revolutions for nature are only positive
2. using such a criterion as the success of science and technology, you can show the progressive nature
1) the abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861,
2) Distribution of information technologies in society,
3) elimination of class privileges,
4) treaties on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.
3. The inclusion of "braking mechanisms", the inability of society to perceive the new, advanced, is called
1) progress, 2) regression, 3) stagnation, 4) stagnation.
4. Progress means
1) the decline of culture, 2) moving forward, 3) cyclical development, 4) a state of stability
5. The "Golden Age" called the ancient society
1) Plato, 2) Aristotle, 3) Lucretius car, 4) Hesiod
6. The French Enlighteners referred to the criteria of progress
1) the development of reason and morality, 2) the complication of legal institutions, 3) the development of productive forces, 4) the conquest of nature
7. Is it true?
A. The progressive development of society is always an irreversible movement forward.
B. Social progress is contradictory, does not exclude return movements and regression.
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are wrong
8. K. Popper believed that
A. The historical process is progressive.
B. Progress is only possible for the individual.
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are incorrect.
9. The criterion for the development of society is not
1) the level of development of science, 2) the degree of satisfaction of personal needs, 3) the religious preferences of society, 4) the state of the economy
10. The idea that society develops along the path of regression was defended by
1) Plato, 2) Aristotle, 3) Hesiod, 4) Condorcet
11. The highest criterion of social progress, according to Marx, is
1) the development of productive forces, 2) the moral, spiritual and moral state of society, 3) the degree of increase in human freedom, 4) the development of the human mind
12. What can be attributed to the causes of social change?
1) external factors, the influence of the environment, 2) contradictions that arise within society, 3) the desire of people for a new, more perfect one, 4) all of the above
13. What is the highest criterion of social progress?
1) the interests of the development of productive forces, 2) the moral, spiritual state of society, 3) a person, the quality of his life (progressive is what contributes to the rise of humanism), 4) all of the above
14. Is it true?
A. The development of science and technology is a universal criterion of social progress.
B. The development of humanism is the universal criterion of social progress.
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are wrong
15. The criterion of social progress can be considered
1) development of the mind, 2) development of production, science, technology, 3) development of morality, 4) all of the above
16. Insert a dusted word
Public...
A. Replacing obsolete forms of social organization with new ones
B. Movement from less perfect to more perfect
17. Are the judgments correct?
A. It is impossible to bring up a sense of responsibility
B. Responsibility is an exclusively internal quality and is not associated with external forms of influence on a person
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are wrong
18. Is it true?
A. Human freedom is synonymous with permissiveness
B. Human freedom is impossible in the conditions of social relations and interactions
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are wrong
19. Is it true?
A. Human freedom is manifested in a conscious choice when making decisions
B. The only restriction on a person's freedom is his moral principles.
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are wrong
20. Is it true?
A. Freedom is permissiveness, the ability to act according to only your desires
B. The freedom of a person in society implies the ability to make a conscious choice and take responsibility for it.
1) only A is true, 2) only B is true, 3) both judgments are correct, 4) both judgments are wrong

32. How does society affect nature and what are the anthropogenic pressures on it?

33. What typologies of society are accepted in science, what is a pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial society?

34. What is the manifestation of social and scientific and technological progress?

35. How would you characterize the global problems of mankind?

36. What is the world community?

37. How does a person become a personality?

38. What is socialization and education?

39. What human needs have you met?

40. How does a person cognize the world and himself?

41. What is the spiritual life of a person?

42. How are freedom and responsibility related?

43. How does a person manifest himself in a group?

44. What is interpersonal relationships and communication process?

45. How do conflicts arise and are resolved in society?

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

KYRGYZ-RUSSIAN SLAVIC UNIVERSITY

Faculty of Economics

by subject "Philosophy"

"Criteria of Social Progress".

Fulfilled Art. gr. M1-06: Khashimov N.R.

Lecturer: Denisova O. G.

Bishkek - 2007

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

1. Social progress. Progress and regress. ……………..four

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

3. Criteria for progress.

Criteria of social progress………………………..12

Conclusion…………………………………………………………..20

List of used literature…………………………….22

Introduction

The idea of social progress is a product of modern times. This means that it was at this time that it took root in the minds of people and began to form their worldview, the idea of the progressive, upward development of society. There was no such representation in antiquity. The ancient worldview, as is known, was of a cosmocentric nature. And this means that the man of antiquity was coordinated in relation to nature, the cosmos. Hellenic philosophy, as it were, inscribed a person in the cosmos, and the cosmos, in the view of ancient thinkers, was something abiding, 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 - such a movement in which something, being created and destroyed, invariably returns to itself. The idea of eternal return is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; we find it in Heraclitus, Empedocles, and the Stoics. In general, the movement in a circle was considered in antiquity as ideally correct, perfect. It seemed to perfect ancient thinkers because it has no beginning and end and occurs in one and the same place, showing, as it were, immobility and eternity.

The idea of social progress is established in the Age of Enlightenment. This epoch raises reason, knowledge, science, human freedom to the shield and evaluates history from this point of view, opposing itself to previous epochs, where, in the opinion of the enlighteners, ignorance and despotism prevailed. The Enlighteners 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 the modernity understood in this way, they considered the past of mankind. The opposition of modernity, interpreted as the advent of the era of reason, to the past of mankind, contained, of course, a gap between the present and the past, but as soon as an attempt was made to restore a historical connection between them on the basis of reason and knowledge, the idea of an upward movement in history immediately arose, about progress. The development and dissemination of knowledge was seen as a gradual and cumulative process. An indisputable model for such a reconstruction of the historical process was the accumulation of scientific knowledge that took place in modern times. The mental formation and development of the individual, the individual, also served as a model for them: being 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 faculties ...".

The idea of social progress is the idea of history, more precisely, the world history of mankind*. This idea is designed 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 some extent the line between society and nature. The naturalistic interpretation of progress was their way of imparting to progress an objective character...

1. PUBLIC PROGRESS

Progress (from lat. progressus- forward movement) is such a direction of development, which is characterized by a transition from the lower to the higher, from the less perfect to the 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 formation of capitalism and the maturation of European bourgeois revolutions served as the socio-economic basis for the very emergence of the idea of social progress. 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 the historical optimism inherent in progressive social forces.
Three characteristic features distinguished the original progressive concepts.

Firstly, it is idealism, i.e., an attempt to find the reasons for the progressive development of history in the spiritual beginning - in the infinite ability to improve the human intellect (the same Turgot and Condorcet) or in the spontaneous self-development of the absolute spirit (Hegel). Accordingly, the criterion of progress was also seen in the phenomena of a spiritual order, in the level of development of one or another form of social consciousness: science, morality, law, religion. By the way, progress was noted primarily 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 conceptions of social progress was the non-dialectical consideration of social life. In such cases, social progress is understood as a smooth evolutionary development, without revolutionary leaps, without backward movements, as a continuous ascent in a straight line (O. Comte, G. Spencer).

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

These shortcomings were largely overcome in the Marxist understanding of the essence of social progress, which includes the recognition of its inconsistency and, in particular, the fact that one and the same phenomenon and even a stage of historical development as a whole can be both progressive in one respect and regressive. , reactive in another. This, as we have seen, is one of the possible options for the state to influence the development of the economy.

Consequently, speaking of the progressive development of mankind, we have in mind the main, main direction of the historical process as a whole, its resultant in relation to the main stages of development. Primitive communal system, slave-owning society, feudalism, capitalism, the era of socialized social relations in the formational section of history; primitive pre-civilization, agricultural, industrial and information-computer waves in its civilizational section are the main "blocks" of historical progress, although in some of its specific parameters the subsequent formation and stage of civilization may be inferior to the previous ones. So, in a number of areas of spiritual culture, feudal society was inferior to slave-owning, which served as the basis for the enlighteners of the 18th century. look at the Middle Ages as a simple "break" in the course of history, not paying attention to the great successes made during the Middle Ages: the expansion of the cultural area of Europe, the formation there in the neighborhood of great viable nations, finally, the huge technical successes of the XIV- 15th century and creation of prerequisites for the emergence of experimental natural science.

If we try to define in general terms the reasons social progress, then they will be the needs of man, which are the product and expression of his nature as a living and no less as a social being. As already noted in Chapter Two, these needs are diverse in nature, nature, 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 incorporated 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, because 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 motion. Thinkers have long pondered the question: in what direction is it moving? Can this movement be likened, for example, to cyclical changes in nature: summer is followed by autumn, then winter, spring and again summer? And so for thousands and thousands of years. Or, perhaps, the life of society is similar to the life of a living being: the organism that was born grows up, becomes mature, then grows old and dies? Does the direction of the development of society depend on the conscious activity of people?

Progress and regress

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

Which path is society following: the path of progress or regression? What the answer to this question will be depends on how people think about the future: does it bring a better life or does it bode well?

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

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

The development of the idea of historical progress is connected with the achievements of science, crafts, arts, and the revival of social life in the Renaissance. One of the first to put forward the theory of social progress was the French philosopher Anne Robert Turgot(1727-1781). His contemporary French philosopher-enlightener 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 incessant renewal, in the infinity of ages the path along which he followed, the steps he took, striving for truth or happiness. Observations on what a person was and on

what it has now become will help us, wrote Condorcet, to find the means to ensure and hasten the new successes that its nature allows it to hope for.

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

19th and 20th centuries were marked by turbulent events that gave new "information for reflection" about the progress and regression in the life of society. In the XX century. Sociological theories appeared that abandoned the optimistic view of the development of society, characteristic of the ideas of progress. Instead, they offer theories of cyclical circulation, pessimistic ideas of the "end of history", global environmental, energy and nuclear disasters. One of the points of view on the issue of progress was put forward by the philosopher and sociologist Karl Popper(born in 1902), who wrote: “If we think that history is progressing or that we are forced to progress, then we are making the same mistake as those who believe that history has a meaning that can be in it open, not attached to it. After all, to progress means to move towards a certain goal that exists for us as human beings. For history, this is impossible. Only we human individuals can progress, and we can do so by defending and strengthening those democratic institutions on which freedom, and with it progress, depends. We will achieve great success in this if we are more aware of the fact that progress depends on us, on our vigilance, on our efforts, on the clarity of our concept regarding our goals and the realistic choice of such goals.

2. Social progress - idea and reality

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

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

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

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

The quality of predicting the consequences distinguishes reasonable behavior from unreasonable - human unreasonable or animal. The depth and volume of causal relationships considered by man are incommensurable with the capabilities of animals. How this separation came about is a separate question. Moreover, in the field of public relations, the justification of forecasts is poor.

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

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

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

Decreasing with increasing depth in time, the reliability of the forecast is not controlled by a person, which often leads to obvious losses. This gives rise to two extreme positions regarding the admissibility and usefulness of using a forecast in choosing the best next step. According to these positions in human society there are always two currents, two parties - "rationalists" and "traditionalists". "Rationalists" believe that (in a mild formulation) it is permissible to act on the basis of one's own forecast. "Traditionalists" argue that interfering with the "natural" (read "traditional") order is harmful. Convinced supporters of both positions can bring a sufficient number of historical facts to support their case.

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

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

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

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

Over the past ten years, Russian society has been on the downward section of the "saw of social development." The efficiency of the use of socialized resources is low. There is an open competition of ideas. "What to do?" - the main question. The social weight of the "rationalists" is rising. So far there is no clear choice of society. And if none of the ideas gets a decisive advantage, then people will entrust control to a specific person - a leader, a leader. This is an emergency exit, fascism, protection from chaos, a hopeless war of each against each.

In the event that any of the proposals manages to get enough massive support, the crisis will begin to crawl along the chosen path. At this point, the idea that received support is based on a close and, most likely, accurate forecast of the development of the situation. For some time, it is possible to solve the inevitable minor problems. Confidence in the correctness of the chosen path is growing. The steering wheel is getting tighter and tighter. The immutability of his position is defended by many people. Societal structures are increasingly better suited to the chosen movement. With dissidents do not stand on ceremony. The society finds itself on the ascending section of the "saw".

With the distance from the crisis point of choosing an idea, the natural inaccuracy of the forecast begins to appear. Further more. The steering wheel is fixed. At the helm by this time are no longer those "rationalists"-practitioners who took a risk, deciding on the sin of implementing what they thought up, but officials, whose position in society rests on the immutability of the path.

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

Society again finds itself on the falling part of the "saw of social development". Time passes. The sharpness of the emotions caused by the revelations of the deeds of the "rationalists" is being erased. Before people again there is a question: "What to do?" The cycle is repeated.

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

The initiators of competing versions of social order often declare their comparative "progressiveness". This quality, not having a clear definition, affects public opinion.

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

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

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

The social structure should support (at least not slow down) people's capacity building activities. People's assessment of its satisfaction can be based on this requirement.

3. Progress Criteria

mind. moral 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 perfection of mankind are completely confused in disputes about the criteria of progress. Some talk about the progress of mankind in the field morality, others are about progress science and technology, legal device.

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

In our time, philosophers also hold different views on the criterion of social progress. Let's consider some of them.

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

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

So, according to this point of view, criterion of socialprogress is a measure of the freedom that a society consists ofto provide the individual with a degree guaranteed by societyindividual freedom. disclosure his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. This statement brings us to another view of social progress.

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

Humanity, the recognition of man as the highest value, is expressed by the word "humanism". From the foregoing, we can conclude that there is a universal criterion for social progress: aboutwhat is aggressive is that which contributes to the elevation of humanism.

Criteria of social progress.

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

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

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

The dominant idea of infinite 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, in the final analysis, predetermines the change in all other aspects and spheres of social life. Among Marxists, V. I. Lenin insisted on this conclusion more than once, who as early as 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, achieved a higher productivity of social labor. .

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

It is noteworthy that the conclusion about the state and level of development of the productive forces as the general criterion of progress was shared by the opponents of Marxism, the technists, on the one hand, and the 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 after all, scientific knowledge acquires the highest meaning only when it is realized in practice, and above all in material production.

If we take the development of productive forces as the criterion of progress; evaluating them in dynamics, this presupposes a comparison no longer from the point of view of the greater or lesser development of the productive forces, but from the point of view of the course, the speed of their development. But in this case, the question arises, which period should be taken for comparison.

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

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

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

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

Let us note, by the way, that inside this indicator, which is complex in its structure, one can and should be singled out, which, in fact, combines all the others. That, in my opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if it in a given country 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 should be decided accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, "all progress is reactionary if a person collapses."

The level of society's humanism as an integrative (ie, passing through and absorbing changes literally in all spheres of society's life) criterion incorporates the criteria discussed above. Each subsequent formational and civilizational stage is more progressive in terms of personality - it expands the range of rights and freedoms of the individual, entails the development of his needs and the improvement of his abilities. It suffices to compare in this respect the status of a slave and a serf, a serf and a wage worker under capitalism. At first, it may seem that the slave-owning formation, which marked the beginning of the era of exploitation of man by man, stands apart in this respect. But, as F. Engels explained, even for a slave, not to mention the free ones, slavery was a personal progress: if before the 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, that is, the productive forces and the whole range of social relations. From the foregoing, we can conclude that there is a universal criterion for social progress: progressive is that which contributes to the elevation of humanism.

CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC PROGRESS

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

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

And yet the dominant idea of infinite 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, in the final analysis, predetermines the change in all other aspects and spheres of social life. Among Marxists, V. I. Lenin insisted on this conclusion more than once, who as early as 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, achieved a higher productivity of social labor. .

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

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

Such an integrative, and therefore the most important, criterion of progress is the level of humanization of society, that is, the position of the individual in it: the degree of its economic, political and social liberation; the level of satisfaction of its material and spiritual needs; the state of her psychophysical and social health. Let us note, by the way, that inside this indicator, which is complex in its structure, one can and should be singled out, which, in fact, combines all the others. That, in our opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if it in a given country 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 should be decided accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, "all progress is reactionary if a person collapses."

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

Conclusion

one). Society is a complex organism in which various “organs” function (enterprises, associations of people, state institutions, etc.), various processes (economic, political, spiritual, etc.) simultaneously occur, and various activities of people unfold. All these parts of one social organism, all these processes, various types of activity are interconnected and, at the same time, may not coincide in their development. Moreover, individual processes, changes taking place in different areas of society can be multidirectional, i.e., progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another. Thus, it is impossible to find any general criterion by which it would be possible to judge the progress of this or that society. Like many processes in our life, 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 the socio-political concept of Aristotle, the approaches he proposed to the analysis of the state, the method of political science and its lexicon (including the history of the issue, the formulation of the problem, the arguments for and against, etc.), the allocation what is the subject of political reflection and reasoning, have a fairly noticeable influence on political research today. The reference to Aristotle is still a fairly weighty scientific argument confirming the truth of the conclusions about political processes and phenomena.

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

List of used literature:

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

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

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

4. Article "The Concept of Social Progress in Social Philosophy"

In our time, philosophers also hold different views on the criterion of social progress. Let's consider some of them.

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

Questions to test knowledge

1. What is progress and regression?

2. What is the contradictory nature of progress?

3. Describe the criteria for progress.