What refers to the stage of the traditional development of society. Traditional Society

Introduction

1. The concept of society

2. Signs of society

3. Typology of society

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Throughout the history of sociology, one of the most important problems was a problem: what is society? Sociology of all times and peoples tried to answer questions: How is the existence of society? What is the source cell of society? What are the mechanisms of social integration, providing social order, contrary to the enormous diversity of the interests of individuals and social groups?

What lies in it?

In solving this issue, different approaches are found in sociology. The first approach is to be approved that the initial cell of society is the living existing people whose joint activity forms society.

Thus, from the point of view of this approach, the individual is an elementary unit of society.

Society is a combination of people working together and relationships.

But if the society consists of individuals, then the question arises, and should not be considered a society as a simple amount of individuals?

The formulation of the issue thus questioned the existence of such an independent social reality as society. Individuals really exist, and society is the fruit of the mindset of scientists: philosophers, sociologists, historians, etc.

If society is an objective reality, it should be spontaneously manifest as a steady, repeated, impaired phenomenon.

Therefore, in the interpretation of society, it is not enough to indicate that it consists of individuals, but it should be emphasized that their unity, community, solidarity, connection of people should be emphasized that the most important element of the Company's formation.

Society is a universal way to organize social connections, interaction and relations of people.

These relationships, the interaction and relationship of people are formed on a common basis. As such a basis in various schools of sociology, "interests", "needs", "motifs", "installation", "values", etc.

With all the difference in the approaches to the interpretation of the Company by the classics of sociology, the consideration of society as a holistic system of elements in a state of close relationship is considered. This approach to society is called systemic.

On the basis of the deterministic approach in Marxist sociology, the following definition of society was distributed.

Society is a historically established relatively stable system of connections, interactions and relations between people, based on a certain method of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material and spiritual benefits, supported by the power of political, moral, spiritual, social institutions, customs, traditions, norms, social institutions , political institutions and organizations.

society State Civilizational Formation

1. The concept of society

In science, it did not form a single definition of what society is. In a narrow sense, the Society understands:

A certain group of people who united to communicate and jointly implement any activity;

Specific stage in the historical development of any people or country.

In a broad sense, society is a part of the material world closely associated with it, which consists of individuals and includes ways of interaction between people and the forms of their association.

Human society is constantly changing. At the dawn of the story there was a society of primitive hunters and collectors. Later it was replaced by a slave-owned, then feudal and capitalist society. Human society develops from simple to complex. Within the same country, various types of society existed within different periods. For example, the history of Russia goes into the depths of centuries. Russia is the name of the country and the state, and Kievan Rus, the Moscow State, the Russian Empire, Soviet Russia and the modern Russian Federation - the names of not only different types of states that existed within one country, but also of various species of society.

A modern understanding of "society" was formed in European culture no earlier than the XVII-XVIII centuries. At the end of the XVIII century, the concept of "civil society" appeared. This concept included a description of the morals and customs of the entire people, self-government, participation in the political life of ordinary people, etc.

Previously, so-called commoners were not included in what was called "society." Thus, the concept of "society" was limited to the aristocracy, i.e. The minority of the population, which focused all wealth and power.

In order to correctly understand such a phenomenon as a society, it is advisable to distinguish between three similar concepts - a country, a state, society.

The country is part of the light or territory that has certain boundaries and uses state sovereignty. The state is the political organization of a given country, which includes a certain type of power regime, organs and the structure of the Board. Society is the social organization of this country, the basis of which is the social structure. Society is a social organization not only the country, but also nation, nation, tribe.

Society can be considered at different angles of view, for example, it can be reduced to the aggregate of all groups included in it, if we talk about the population. It can be considered that a social hierarchy is a rod of society, in which all people are built in terms of the volume of power and wealth. Upstairs will be the rich and all-word elite, in the middle - the middle class, and below is the poor majority or minority of society. Society to the aggregate of five fundamental institutions can be reduced: family, production, state, education (culture and science) and religion. Finally, all society can be divided into four main spheres - economic, political, social and cultural. The separation of society into four spheres is conditionally, but this approach helps to navigate to navigate the diversity of public phenomena.

Economic sphere includes four main activities: production, distribution, exchange and consumption. It is believed not only firms, enterprises, plants, banks, markets, but also streams of money and investment, trafficking of capital and other. In other words, what allows society the resources available at its disposal to run into production and create such a number of goods and services that satisfies the vital needs of people. No more than 50% of the population is directly involved in the economic life of society, which is called the economically active population: workers, employees, entrepreneurs, bankers, etc. Indirectly, 100% of people living in this territory are involved in it, since everyone is consumers of goods and services.

The political sphere includes the president and the presidential office, the government and the parliament, its office, local authorities, the army, the police, tax and customs services that all together make up the state, as well as political parties that are not included in it. The main objective of the state is to ensure social order in society, the settlement of conflicts between partners, for example, workers, trade unions and employers, the establishment of new laws and monitoring their strict implementation by all structures, preventing political coups, the protection of external borders and the country's sovereignty, tax collection and provision money institutions of social and cultural spheres, etc. The main question of the political sphere is to legitimize the ways of struggle for power and protection such when it got a class or group. The task of parties is to express the diverse political interests of various, often opposing groups of population through the channels established by law.

The spiritual sphere (culture, science, religion, education) includes universities and laboratories, museums and theaters, art galleries and research institutes, magazines and newspapers, cultural monuments, and national artistic treasures, religious communities, etc. Science is designed to open new knowledge in technical and humanitarian fields. Education transmits open scientists knowledge of the following generations in the most efficient way, for which schools and universities are opening, the latest programs and teaching techniques are being developed. Culture is designed to create artistic values, keep them in libraries, museums, exhibit in galleries. The culture should include a religion that performs the core of the spiritual culture of any society. Religion gives the meaning of human life and determines the main norms of morality.

Social sphere covers classes, social layers taken in their relations and interaction with each other. It is understood in two meanings - wide and narrow. The social sphere of society in a broad value is a combination of organizations and institutions responsible for the well-being of the population. In a narrow meaning - socially unprotected segments of the population and institutions serving them, as well as social protection and population authorities.

All four spheres of modern society are closely related to each other and affect each other.

In the description of society, scientists, primarily sociologists, operate with the concept of "Social Institute". This is a device of society created to meet its most important needs and a consolidated joint of social norms.

Today, the concept of "society" has become wider than a certain group of people. Indeed, under the society you can understand a separate country, and you can - all countries of the world. In this case, we must talk about the global community.

2. Signs of society

Topic: Traditional Society

Introduction ...................................................................................... ..3-4

1. Typology of societies in modern science ..................................5-7

2. The standard characteristic of the traditional society ........................ .8-10

3. Development of a traditional society .......................................... 11-15

4. Transformation of a traditional society ................................. 16-17

Conclusion .................................................................. ..18-19

Literature ......................................................................20

Introduction

The relevance of the problem of traditional society is dictated by global changes in the worldview of humanity. Civilizational studies today are particularly acute and problematic. The world fluctuates between prosperity and poverty, personality and digit, infinite and private. The person is still looking for a genuine, lost and intimate. There is a "tired" generation of meanings, self-attack and endless expectation: waiting for light from the West, good weather from the south, cheap goods from China and oil profits from the north. Modern society requires initiative young people who can find "themselves" and their place in life, restore Russian spiritual culture, morally persistent, socially adapted, capable of self-development and continuous self-improvement. The basic personality structures are laid in the first years of life. So, the family has a special responsibility to educate such qualities among the younger generation. And this problem becomes particularly relevant at this modern stage.

The human culture arising from the natural way, the "evolutionary" element includes an important element - a system of social relations based on solidarity and mutual execution. Many studies, and everyday experience - show that people became people precisely because they have overcome egoism and showed altruism far out beyond the scope of short-term rational calculations. And that the main motives of such behavior are irrational happostep and are associated with ideals and movements of the soul - we are visible at every step.

The culture of a traditional society is based on the concept of "people" - as an overnight community, which has historical memory and collective consciousness. A separate person, an element of such - the people and society, is a "cathedral personality", the focus of many human ties. It is always included in the solidarity groups (family, the village and church community, the labor collective, even if the piles of thieves - those operating according to the principle "one for all, all for one"). Accordingly, the prevailing relationships in a traditional society - the type of ministry, the execution of debt, love, care and coercion. There are acts of exchange, for the most part, not having the nature of free and equivalent sale and sale (exchange of equal value) - the market regulates only a small part of traditional public relations. Therefore, the overall, comprehensive metaphor of public life in a traditional society is "family", and not, for example, the "market". Modern scientists believe that 2/3 of the world's 2/3 of the world has a greater or lesser extent in their lifestyle features the features of traditional societies. What are traditional societies when they arose and what is their culture?

The purpose of this work is to: give overall characteristics, explore the development of a traditional society.

Based on the goal, the following tasks were delivered:

Consider various ways of social typology;

Characterize traditional society;

Give an idea of \u200b\u200bthe development of a traditional society;

Identify the problems of traditional society.

1. Typology of societies in modern science.

In modern sociology there are various ways of typology of societies, and all of them are legitimate from certain points of view.

There are also distinguished, for example, two main types of society: first, the pre-industrial society, or the so-called traditional, based on the peasant community. This type of society still covers most of Africa, a substantial part of Latin America, most of the East and dominated until the XIX century in Europe. Secondly, modern industrial and city society. It belongs to the so-called Euro-American society; And the rest of the world is gradually tightened to it.

Another division of societies is possible. We can share societies for political signs - to totalitarian and democratic. In the first societies, society itself does not act as an independent subject of public life, but serves the interests of the state. Second societies are characterized by the fact that, on the contrary, the state serves the interests of civil society, a separate personality and public associations, (at least ideally).

You can distinguish the types of societies for the dominant religion: Christian society, Islamic, Orthodox, etc. Finally, there are distinguished societies for the dominant language: English-speaking, Russian-speaking, French-speaking, etc. You can also distinguish between ethnic signs: single-alone, bietary, multinational.

One of the main types of societies is a formational approach.

According to the formation approach, the most important relations in society are property relations and class. The following types of social and economic formations can be distinguished: primitive-communal, slave-owned, feudal, capitalist and communist (includes two phases - socialism and communism).

None of the above-mentioned theoretical items based on the theory of formations are now indisputable. The theory of socio-economic formations is not only based on theoretical conclusions of the middle of the XIX century, but due to this can not explain many contradictions.

· Existence, along with zones of progressive (ascending) development zones of backwardness, stagnation and impasses;

· Transformation of the state - in one form or another - to an important factor in public production relations; modification and modification of classes;

· The emergence of a new hierarchy of values \u200b\u200bwith the priority of universal values \u200b\u200bover class.

The most modern is another division of society, which was nominated by the American sociologist Daniel Bella. It distinguishes three stages in the development of society. The first stage is pre-industrial, agricultural, conservative society, closed to extraneous influences based on natural production. The second stage is an industrial society, which is based on industrial production, developed market relations, democracy and openness. Finally, in the second half of the twentieth century, the third stage begins - the post-industrial society, for which the use of achievements of the scientific and technical revolution is characterized; Sometimes it is called information society, because the main thing is not to produce a certain material product, but the production and processing of information. The indicator of this stage is the distribution of computer equipment, the association of the whole society into a single information system in which ideas and thoughts are freely distributed. The lead in such a society is the requirement of compliance with the so-called human rights.

From this point of view, various parts of modern humanity are at various stages of development. So far, perhaps, half of humanity is at the first stage. And the other part is the second stage of development. And only a smaller part - Europe, the USA, Japan - entered the third stage of development. Russia is now in a state of transition from the second stage to the third.

2. General characteristics of traditional society

The traditional community focuses in its content a set of ideas about the pre-industrial stage of human development characteristic of traditional sociology and cultural studies. Unified theory of traditional society does not exist. Performances on traditional society are based, rather, on his understanding as an asymmetric modern society of a sociocultural model than to generalize the real facts of the lives of nations not engaged in industrial production. The domination of the natural economy is characteristic of the economy of traditional society. There are no product relationships at all, or are oriented to meet the needs of a few layer of social elite. The basic principle of organizing social relations is the rigid hierarchical stratification of society, as a rule, manifested in division into endogan castes. At the same time, the main form of organizing social relations for the overwhelming majority of the population is a relatively closed, isolated community. The latter circumstance was dictated by the dominance of collectivist social ideas, focused on strictly compliance with traditional behaviors and excluding individual personality freedom, as well as an understanding of its value. In aggregate with caste division, this feature almost completely eliminates the possibility of social mobility. Political power is monopolized as part of a separate group (caste, clan, family) and exists mainly in authoritarian forms. A characteristic feature of traditional society is either a complete absence of writing, or its existence in the form of privileges of individual groups (officials, priests). In this case, writing quite often develops in a language other than the spoken language of the overwhelming majority of the population (Latin in medieval Europe, Arabic - in the Middle East, Chinese writing - in the Far East). Therefore, the inter-flowable broadcast of culture is carried out in verbal, folk form, and the main institution of socialization is the family and community. The consequence of this was the emergency variability of the culture of the same ethnos, manifested in local and dialectic differences.

Traditional societies include ethnic communities for which community settlements are characterized, the preservation of blood-related links, mainly craft and agricultural forms of labor. The emergence of such societies goes back to the earliest stages of human development, to primitive culture.

Any society from the primitive community of hunters to an industrial coup of the late XVIII century can be called traditional society.

Traditional society is a society that is regulated by tradition. The preservation of traditions is in it a higher value than development. Public attributes in it is characterized (especially in the countries of the East) with a rigid vest hierarchy and the existence of sustainable social communities, a special way to regulate the life of society based on traditions, customs. This organization of the Company seeks to preserve the sociocultural foundations in a constant form. Traditional society is an agrarian society.

For traditional society, as a rule, are characteristic:

· Traditional economy - an economic system in which the use of natural resources is determined mainly by traditions. Traditional industries prevail - agriculture, resource mining, trade, construction, unconventional industries are practically not received;

· The predominance of agricultural mistake;

· Stability structure;

· Class organization;

· Low mobility;

· High mortality;

· High fertility;

· Low life expectancy.

The traditional person perceives the world and the head of the order of life as something inextricably-holistic, sacred and not subject to change. A person's place in society and its status is determined by the tradition (as a rule, on the right of birth).

In traditional society, collectivist installations prevail, individualism is not welcomed (since freedom of individual actions can lead to a violation of the commissioned order). In general, the traditional societies are characterized by primacy of collective interests over private, including primacy of the interests of existing hierarchical structures (states, clan, etc.). Not so much individual capacity as the place in the hierarchy (official, class, clan, etc.), which occupies a person is appreciated.

In traditional society, as a rule, relational relations are dominated, and not a market exchange, and elements of a market economy are toughly regulated. This is due to the fact that free market relations increase social mobility and change the social structure of society (in particular, the data is destroyed); The redistribution system can be regulated by tradition, and market prices - no; Forced redistribution prevents "unauthorized" enrichment, depletion of both individuals and classes. The persecution of economic benefits in a traditional society is often morally condemned, disinterested care is opposed.

In traditional society, most people live in a local community (for example, village), relationships with "big society" are rather weak. At the same time, relatives, on the contrary, are very strong.

The worldview of traditional society is due to tradition and authority.

3.Development of a traditional society

Economically, traditional society is based on agriculture. At the same time, such a society can be not only landowner, as a society of ancient Egypt, China or medieval Russia, but also based on cattle breeding, like all nomadic steppes of Eurasia (Turkic and Khazar Kaganati, the Empire of Genghis Khan, etc.). And even on fishing in solely rich in the coastal waters of southern Peru (in Decolumbovy America).

Characteristic of the pre-industrial traditional society is the domination of redistribution relations (i.e. distributions in accordance with the public position of each), which can be expressed in a wide variety of forms: centralized state economy of ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia, medieval China; Russian peasant community, where the redistribution is expressed in regular resellers of land in the number of consumers, etc. However, one should not think that the redistribution is the only possible way of economic life of a traditional society. It dominates, but the market in one form or another always exists, and in exceptional cases may even acquire a leading role (the most striking example is the economy of the ancient Mediterranean). But, as a rule, market relations are limited to a narrow circle of goods, most often of prestige items: medieval European aristocracy, getting everything you need in their estates, bought mainly decorations, spices, expensive weapon of thoroughbred horses, etc.

Socially, the traditional society is much more distinguished from modern to us. The most characteristic feature of this society is the rigid attachment of each person to the system of redistribution relations, affection is purely personal. This is manifested in the inclusion of each in any team that exercises this redistribution, and depending on each of the "older" (by age, origin, public situation) that are "at the boiler". Moreover, the transition from one team to another is extremely difficult, social mobility in this society is very low. At the same time, it is valuable not only the position of the class in the public hierarchy, but also the fact of belonging to it. Here you can bring specific examples - caste and class stratification systems.

Caste (as in the traditional Indian society, for example) is a closed group of people who occupy a strictly defined place in society. This place is outlined by many factors or signs, the main of which:

· Traditionally inherited profession, occupation;

· Endogamia, i.e. the duty to make marriages only inside your caste;

· Ritual purity (after contact with "lower" it is necessary to undergo a whole procedure for cleansing).

The estate is a public group with hereditary rights and responsibilities enshrined by customs and laws. The feudal society of medieval Europe, in particular, was divided into three main estates: the clergy (symbol - the book), the knighthood (symbol - sword) and the peasantry (symbol - plow). In Russia before the revolution of 1917 there were six estates. It is nobles, clergy, merchants, breasts, peasants, Cossacks.

The regulation of the class being was extremely rigid, up to small circumstances and minor details. So, according to the "pledged diploma of the city" of 1785, the Russian merchants of the first guild could ride the city in a carriage of a pair of horses, and the merchants of the second guild - only in the stroller Paro. The textual division of society, as, however, and the caste, was consecrated and secured by religion: everyone has its own fate, his goal, his own angle on this earth. Stay there, where God placed you, the elevation is the manifestation of pride, one of the seven (on the medieval classification) of mortal sins.

Another major criterion for social division can be called the community in the broadest sense of the word. It is understood not only by the peasant neighborhood community, but also a handicraft shop, a merchant guild in Europe or a merchant union in the east, monastic or knightly order, a Russian community monastery, thieves or Nishchenskii corporations. Ellinsky policy can be considered not as much as a state city as a civil community. A man outside the community is a rudder, rejected, suspicious, enemy. Therefore, expulsion from the community was one of the most terrible sentences in any of the agrarian societies. The man was born, lived and died tied to the place of residence, classes, surroundings, just repeating the lifestyle of his ancestors and being absolutely confident that his children and grandchildren would pass the same way.

Relationships and relationships between people in traditional society were pierced by personal dedication and addiction, which is understandable. With the level of technological development, only direct contacts, personal involvement, individual involvement could provide the movement of knowledge, skills, skills from the teacher to the student, from the master to the substruser. Movement This, we note, took the form of the transfer of secrets, secrets, recipes. There was even a certain social task. So, the oath, which in the Middle Ages symbolically ritually fastened the relationship between the vassals and senites, the participating parties participating in its own way, giving them the relationship with the shade of a simple patronage of the father of his son.

The political device of the overwhelming majority of pre-industrial societies is determined to a greater extent by tradition and custom, rather than writing law. The government could be justified by the origin, the scale of the controlled distribution (land, food, finally, the water in the East) and are supported by the divine sanction (which is why the role of sacralization is so high, and often a direct deification of the ruler's figure).

Most often, the state system of society was, of course, monarchical. And even in the republics of antiquity and the Middle Ages, real power, as a rule, belonged to representatives of a few noble childbirth and was based on these principles. As a rule, the traditional societies are characterized by the merger of the phenomena of power and property with the determining role of power, that is, which has greater power, possessed with real control over the essential part of the Society of Society. For typically pre-industrial society (with a rare exception) power - this property.

On the cultural life of traditional societies, it was the rationale for the authorities to tradition and the conditionality of all public relations, by considerable, communal and power structures. The traditional society is characterized by the fact that it could be called Herontorati: the older, the smarter than the oldest, the more perfect, the deeper, the true.

Traditional society is holistic. It is built or organized as a rigid integer. And not just as a whole, but as an obviously prevalent, dominant integer.

The team is a socio-ontological, not value-regulatory reality. The latter it becomes when it begins to be understood and taken as a common benefit. Being also huts in its essence, the overall benefit of the hierarchically completes the value system of traditional society. Along with other values, it ensures the unity of a person with other people, gives meaning to its individual existence, guarantees some psychological comfort.

In antiquity, the common benefit was identified with the needs and trends in the development of the policy. Polis is a city or society-state. Man and citizen in it coincided. The polis horizon of an ancient person was simultaneously political and ethical. Outside its limits, nothing interesting was supposed - one barbarism. Greek, a citizen of the Polis, perceived state goals as his own, saw his own good in the good state. With a policy, his existence he tied his hopes for justice, freedom, peace and happiness.

In the Middle Ages, God speaks as a common and highest good. He is the source of all the good, valuable and worthy of this world. In the image and likeness, his man was created. From God and all power on Earth. God is the ultimate goal of all human aspirations. The highest blessing, which is capable of a gyrome man, is love for God, the ministry of Christ. Christian love is a special love: God-fearing, suffering, ascetic-humble. In her selflessness, there is a lot of contempt for yourself, to worldly joy and amenities, achievements and successes. The human earthly life itself in its religious interpretation is deprived of any value and goal.

In pre-revolutionary Russia, with its community-collective lifestyle, the common benefit of the appearance of the Russian idea. The most popular formula has included three values: Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality.

The historical being of a traditional society is noticeable. The boundaries between the historical stages of the "traditional" development are barely distinguishable, there are no sharp shifts and radical shoes.

The productive forces of traditional society developed slowly, in the rhythm of cumulative evolutionism. There was no fact that economists are called deferred demand, i.e. The ability to produce not for the sake of pressing needs, but for the sake of the future. The traditional society took from nature exactly as much as necessary, and nothing moreover. Its economy could be called nature-saving.

4. Transformation of traditional society

Traditional society is extremely stable. As the famous demographer and sociologist Anatoly Vishnevsky writes, "everything is interconnected in it and is very difficult to withdraw or change any one element."

In antiquity, changes in traditional society occurred extremely slowly - over generations, almost imperceptibly for a separate person. The periods of accelerated development took place in traditional societies (a bright example - changes in the territory of Eurasia in the I millennium BC), but even at such periods of change were carried out slowly according to modern standards, and on their conclusion, the company again returned to a relatively static state With the predominance of cyclic dynamics.

At the same time, since ancient times there were societies that cannot be called quite traditional. The departure from the traditional society was associated, as a rule, with the development of trade. This category includes the Greek cities-states, medieval self-governed shopping cities, England and Holland of the XVI-XVII centuries. A mansion is the ancient Rome (to the III century n. Er) with his civil society.

Fast and irreversible transformation of traditional society began to occur only from the XVIII century as a result of the industrial revolution. To date, this process has captured almost the whole world.

Fast changes and a waste from traditions can be trained by a traditional person as a wreck of landmarks and values, loss of the meaning of life, etc. Since adaptation to new conditions and the change in the nature of the activity is not a traditional person's strategy, the transformation of society often leads to the marginalization of the population.

The most painful transformation of traditional society occurs in cases where dismantled traditions have a religious rationale. At the same time, resistance to changes can take forms of religious fundamentalism.

During the transformation of the traditional society, authoritarianism may increase in it (or in order to preserve traditions, or in order to overcome resistance to change).

The transformation of a traditional society is completed by a demographic transition. The generation, which grew up in adolescent families, has a psychology, distinguished from the psychology of a traditional person.

Opinions on the need to transform traditional society differ significantly. For example, Philosopher A. Dugin considers it necessary to abandon the principles of modern society and return to the "Golden Age" of traditionalism. Sociologist and demographer A. Vishnevsky argues that the traditional society "there is no chance", although it and "violently resist." According to the calculations of the Academician of the Raen Professor A. Nazaretyan, in order to completely abandon development and return society into a static state, the number of humanity needs to be reduced several hundred times.

Based on the work carried out, the following conclusions were made.

The following features are characteristic of traditional societies:

· Preferably an agricultural method of production, an understanding of land tenure not as property, but as land use. The type of relations between society and nature is not built on the principle of victory over it, but on the idea of \u200b\u200bmerging with her;

· The basis of the economic system - communal-state forms of ownership with the weak development of the Institute of Private Property. Preservation of a community lifestyle and community land use;

· The patronage system of distribution of the product of labor in the community (redistribution of land, mutual assistance in the form of gifts, marriage gifts, etc., consumption regulation);

· The level of social mobility is low, the boundaries between social communities (cests, estates) are resistant. Ethnic, clan, custom differentiation of societies, in contrast to the late industrial societies, having class division;

· Conservation in everyday life combinations of polytestic and monotheistic representations, the role of ancestors, orientation for the past;

· The main regulator of public life is the tradition, custom, following the standards of the life of the preceding generations. A huge role of ritual, etiquette. Of course, the "traditional society" significantly limits scientific and technological progress, has a pronounced trend towards stagnation, does not consider the autonomous development of a free personality as an important value. But Western civilization, having achieved impressive success, is currently faced with a number of complex problems: the ideas about the possibilities of unlimited industrial and scientific and technical growth were untenable; The balance of nature and society is broken; The pace of technological progress is unbearable and threatened with a global ecological catastrophe. Many scientists pay attention to the advantages of traditional thinking with his emphasis on adaptation to nature, the perception of the human person as part of the natural and social integer.

Only traditional life structure can be opposed to the aggressive influence of modern culture and exported from the west of a civilizational model. For Russia, there is no other way to exit the crisis in the spiritual moral sphere besides the revival of the original Russian civilization on the traditional values \u200b\u200bof domestic culture. And this is possible, subject to the restoration of the spiritual, moral and intellectual potential of the carrier of Russian culture - the Russian people

LITERATURE.

1. Irhin Yu.V. Tutorial "Sociology of Culture" 2006.

2. Nazarethyan A.P. Demographic utopia "Sustainable Development" Social Sciences and Modernity. 1996. number 2.

3. Mother M.E. Selected works on the mythology and ideology of ancient Egypt. -M., 1996.

4. Levikova S. I. West and East. Traditions and modernity. - M., 1993.

In the modern world, there are various types of societies that differ in between themselves in many respects, as an obvious (communication language, culture, geographical position, size, etc.), and hidden (the degree of social integration, the level of stability, etc.). Scientific classification implies the allocation of the most significant, typical signs that distinguish some signs from other and unifying societies of the same group. The complexity of social systems, referred to as societies, necessitates both the diversity of their specific manifestations and the absence of a single universal criterion, on the basis of which they could be classified.

In the mid-19th century, K. Marx proposed the typology of societies, in the foundation of which the method of production of material goods and production relations were laid - primarily property relationship. He divided all societies to 5 main types (according to the type of social and economic formations): primitive, slave-owned, feudal, capitalist and communist (initial phase - socialist society).

Other typology divides all societies to simple and complex. The criterion is the number of control levels and the degree of social differentiation (separation). Simple society -this society in which components are homogeneous, there are no rich and poor, managers and subordinates, structure and functions here are weakly differentiated and can easily interchange. These are primitive tribes, in some places that have surrendered so far.

Society -society with highly differentiated structures and functions interrelated and interdependent from each other, which necessitates their coordination.

TO. Popper distinguishes two types of societies: closed and open. The differences between them lies a number of factors, and, above all, the attitude of social control and freedom of the individual. For closed societystatic social structure, limited mobility, immunity to innovations, traditionalism, dogmatic authoritarian ideology, collectivism. To such a type of societies K. Popper attributed Sparta, Prussia, Tsarist Russia, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union of the Stalinist Epoch. Open Societyit is characterized by a dynamic social structure, high mobility, the ability to innovate, criticism, individualism and a democratic pluralistic ideology. Samples of open societies K. Popper considered the ancient Athens and modern Western democracy.

Sustainable and common is the division of societies to traditional, industrial and post-industrial, proposed by the American sociologist D. Bella, on the basis of changes in the technological basis - improving the means of production and knowledge.

Traditional (pre-industrial) Society -society with agricultural entry, with a predominance of natural economy, a classroom hierarchy, sedentary structures and traditionally based on the method of socio-cultural regulation. It is characterized by manual labor, the extremely low pace of development of production, which can satisfy the needs of people only at the minimum level. It is extremely inertial, therefore, a little bit of innovation. The behavior of individuals in such a society is regulated by customs, norms, social institutions. Customs, norms, institutions, consecrated by tradition, are considered unshakable, not allowing thoughts about their change. Performing its integrative function, culture and social institutions suppress any manifestation of individual freedom, which is a prerequisite for the gradual renewal of the Company.

The term industrial society introduced A. Saint-Simon, emphasizing his new technical basis. Industrial Society -(In modern sound) is a complex society, with industry-based method, with flexible, dynamic and modifying structures, a method of socio-cultural regulation, based on a combination of public freedom and the interests of society. For these societies, a developed division of labor is characterized by the development of mass communication, urbanization, etc.

Post-industrial society(Sometimes it is called information) - society developed on an information basis: mining (in traditional societies) and processing (in industrialized societies) products of nature are replaced by the acquisition and processing of information, as well as predominant development (instead of agriculture in traditional societies and industry in industrial ) Services services. As a result, the structure of employment is also changing, the ratio of various vocational qualification groups. According to forecasts, at the beginning of the 21st century, half of the labor force will be occupied in the field of information, a quarter - in the field of material production and a quarter - in the production of services, including information.

The change in the technological basis affects the organization of the entire system of social relations and relations. If in the industrial society the bulk class was workers, then in post-industrial - employees, managers. At the same time, the value of class differentiation weakens, instead of the status ("grainy") social structure forms a functional ("ready"). Instead of leadership, the Principle of Management becomes approval, and direct democracy and self-government are to replace representative democracy. As a result, instead of a hierarchy of structures, a new type of network organization focused on a quick change is created depending on the situation.

True, at the same time some sociologists pay attention to conflicting opportunities, on the one hand, providing a higher level of personality freedom in the information society, and on the other, to the emergence of new, more hidden and therefore, more dangerous forms of social control over it.

In conclusion, we note that, in addition to those considered, in modern sociology there are other classification of societies. It all depends on which criteria will be based on this classification.

Social structure of society "

Completed: 3rd year student

evening compartment

Capture G.I.

Lecturer: Vukolova TS

1. Introduction ............................................................ 3

2. The concept of the social structure of society ................... four

3. Social stratification .................................... ..6

4. Social mobility: .................................... 11

4.1. Group mobility .................................... .11

4.2. Individual mobility .............................13

5. Features of social stratification in Russia ....... ..15

5.1. Prospects for the formation of the middle class ......... 15

6. Conclusion ........................................................... 19

7. List of literature used .............................21

1. Introduction.

In the study of social phenomena and processes, sociology is based on the principles of historicism. This means that, firstly, all social phenomena and processes are considered as systems that have a certain internal structure; secondly, the process of their functioning and development is studied; Thirdly, specific changes and patterns of transition of them are detected from one qualitative state to another. The most common and complex social system is society. Society is a relatively sustainable system of relations and relationships of people supported by customs, traditions and laws based on a certain method of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material and spiritual benefits, which is supported in the process of historical development of humanity. The elements of such a complex social system are people whose social activity is due to a certain social status, which they occupy, social functions (roles), which they perform, social norms and values \u200b\u200badopted in this system, as well as individual qualities (social qualities of personality, motives , value orientations, interests, etc.).

Social structure means an objective division of society into separate layers, groups, various on their social status.

Any society seeks to preserve inequality, seeing a streaming beginning in it, without which the reproduction of social relations and the integration of the new one is impossible. This property is also inherent in society as a whole. To identify the basic principles of the hierarchical structure of society are the theory of stratification.

The inviolability of the hierarchical structure of society does not mean that changes do not occur inside it. At various stages, one and reduction of another layer is possible. These changes cannot be explained by natural population growth. It occurs either ascent, or a drop in significant groups. And even the relative sustainability of social layers does not exclude the migration of individual individuals vertically. These vertical movements, while maintaining the stratification structure, we will consider as social mobility.

2. The symbol of society

Interaction in society usually leads to the formation of new social relations. The latter can be represented as relatively sustainable and independent links between individuals and social groups.

In sociology, the concept of "social structure" and "social system" are closely related to each other. Social system is a combination of social phenomena and processes in relations and connections among themselves and forming some holistic social facility. Separate phenomena and processes act as system elements. The concept of "social structure of society" is part of the concept of social system and combines two components - social composition and social ties. Social composition is a set of elements that make up this structure. The second component serves as a set of links of these elements. Thus, the concept of social structure includes, on the one hand, the social composition, or a set of various types of social communities as the system-forming social elements of society, on the other - the social ties of the components of the elements differing in the latitude of the spread of their action, according to their value in the characterization of social The structure of society at a certain level of development.

The social structure of society means an objective division of society into separate layers, groups, various on their social status, by their relation to the method of production. This is a steady connection of the elements in the social system. The main elements of the social structure are such social communities, both classes and class-like groups, ethnic, professional, socio-demographic groups, socio-territorial community (city, country side, region). Each of these elements in turn is a complex social system with its subsystems and connections. The social structure of society reflects the features of the social relations of classes, professional, cultural, national-ethnic and demographic groups, which are determined by the place and the role of each of them in the system of economic relations. The social aspect of any generality concentrates in its relations and mediation with industrial and class relationships in society.

Social structure as a kind of framework of the entire system of social relations, that is, as a combination of economic, social and political institutions that organize social life. On the one hand, these institutions ask some network of role-playing positions and regulatory requirements in relation to specific members of society. On the other hand, they represent certain sufficiently sustainable ways of socialization of individuals.

The main principle of determining the social structure of society should be the search for real subjects of social processes.

Subjects can be individual individuals, and social groups of various sizes, allocated on different bases: youth, working class, religious sect, and so on.

From this point of view, the social structure of society can be represented as a more or less sustainable ratio of social layers and groups. To explore the diversity of hierarchically located social layers, the theory of social stratification is designed.

Initially, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe strata presentation of the social structure had a pronounced ideological tint and was intended to neutralize the Max idea of \u200b\u200bthe class idea of \u200b\u200bsociety and dominance in the history of class contradictions. But gradually the idea of \u200b\u200ballocating social layers as components of the society of elements was established in social science, for it really reflected the objective differences in different groups of the population within the framework of a separate class.

The theories of social stratification arose in opposition to the Marxist and Leninsky theory of classes and class struggles.

3.Social stratification

The term "stratification" comes from the Latin Stratum - layer, reservoir and facere - to do. Thus, social stratification is the definition of a vertical sequence of the position of social layers, layers in society, their hierarchy. Social stratification is a "differentiating ranking of individuals of this social system", it is "a way of consideration of individuals as occupying a lower or higher social place for each other in some socially important aspects." Thus, the social structure arises over the public division of labor, and social stratification is about the public allocation of labor results, i.e. social benefits.

Sociologists are united that the basis of the stratification structure is the natural and social inequality of people. However, the method of organizing inequality could be different. It was necessary to identify those bases that would define the appearance of the vertical structure of society.

So, for example, K.Marks introduced the only basis of the vertical separation of society - possessing property. Therefore, its stratification structure has actually cooled to two levels: class of owners (slave owners, feudal, bourgeoisie) and class, deprived of ownership of the means of production (slaves, proletarians) or having very limited rights (peasants). Attempts to present the intelligentsia and some other social groups as intermediate layers between the main classes left the impression of the overallity of the general scheme of the social hierarchy of the population.

M. Weber increases the number of criteria that determine affiliation to a particular strategy. In addition to economic - attitude to property and income level - it introduces such criteria as social prestige and belonging to certain political circles (parties). The prestige was understood by the acquisition of an individual from birth or thanks to the personal qualities of such a social status, which he allowed him to take a certain place in the social hierarchy.

The role of the status in the hierarchical structure of society is determined by such an important feature of social life as its regulatory and value regulation. Thanks to the latter, on the "upper steps" of the social staircase, only those whose status corresponds to those who have rooted in the massive consciousness of the views on the importance of its title, profession, as well as the norms and laws in society.

The selection of political criteria of stratification in M. Deeber looks insufficient. P. Sorokin speaks more clearly. It definitely indicates the inability to give a single totality of belonging criteria to any strategy and notes the presence of three stratification structures in society: economic, professional and political.

In the 30s-40s, an attempt was made in American sociology to overcome the multidimensionality of stratification by proposing individuals to determine their place in the social structure. But this kind of study was given another result: they showed that consciously or intuitive people feel, aware of the hierarchy of society, they feel the main parameters, the principles determining the position of the person in society.

So, society reproduces, organizes inequality to several criteria: in terms of wealth and income, in terms of social prestige, in terms of the level of possession of political power, as well as for some other criteria. It can be argued that all these types of hierarchies are meaningful to society, as they allow you to regulate both the reproduction of social connections, and to send personal aspirations, the ambitions of people for the acquisition of statuses for society.

The introduction of such a criterion as a level of income led to the fact that, in accordance with it, it was possible to distinguish formally infinite many layers of the population with different levels of well-being. And the appeal to the problem of socio-professional prestige gave the ground to make the stratification structure very similar to the social professional. So the division appeared on: 1) the highest class - professionals, administrators; 2) Middle Specialists; 3) commercial class; 4) small bourgeoisie; 5) technicians and workers carrying out management functions; 6) qualified workers; 7) Unqualified workers. And this is not the longest list of the main social sections of society. There was a risk of loss of a holistic vision of the stratification structure, which was increasingly replaced by the desire of researchers to distribute individuals on the "floors" of the social hierarchy.

In our opinion, when developing the most general idea of \u200b\u200bthe social hierarchy of society, the allocation of three main levels is sufficient: the highest, middle, lower. The distribution of the population for these levels is possible for all the bases of stratification, and the importance of each of them will be determined by dominant in society with values \u200b\u200band norms, social institutions and ideological installations. In modern Western society, the freedom, the degree of which is determined, alas, not only by political and legal acts, but also a purse thickness, providing wider access, for example, to education and, therefore, the prestigious status group, criteria are put forward to the fore providing this freedom: material independence, high income, etc.

As noted above, the root cause of the hierarchical structure of society is social inequality, generated by objective conditions of the life of individuals. But every society is striving for organizing its inequality, otherwise people driven by a sense of injustice, destroy everything in the righteous anger, everything is associated with the infringement of their interests.

The hierarchical system of modern society is deprived of the past stiffness. Formally, all citizens have equal rights, including the right to occupy any place in the social structure, rise to the top steps of the social staircase or to be "below." Radically increased social mobility, nevertheless did not lead to the "erosion" of the hierarchical system. Society still supports and protects its hierarchy.

It was noted that the profile of the vertical cut of society is not constant. K. Marks at one time suggested that his configuration would gradually change due to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few and significant impoverishment of the majority of the population. The result of this trend will be the emergence of a serious voltage between the upper and lower layers of the social hierarchy, which will inevitably fall into the struggle for the redistribution of national income. But the growth of wealth and the top of the top is inexpressible. There is a "saturation point", further which society cannot move without the risk of a large catastrophe. As you approach this point in society, processes to contain a detrimental tendency begin, either reforms for the redistribution of wealth through the taxation system are held, or the deep revolutionary processes are beginning to be involved in which broad social layers are involved.

The stability of society is related to the profile of social stratification. Excessive "pulling" of the latter is fraught with serious social cataclys, uprisings that are carrying chaos, violence that braking the development of society. The thickening of the stratification profile is primarily due to the "truncation" of the top of the cone - the phenomenon is repeated in the history of all societies. And it is important that it is not at the expense of uncontrolled natural processes, but through consciously pursued state policy.

The described process has the opposite direction. The sealing of the stratification profile should not be excessive. Inequality is not only an objective data of social life, but also an important source of social development. Equation in income in relation to property. The authorities deprive individuals of an important internal incentive to action, to self-realization, self-affirmation, and society is the only energy source of development.

The idea that the stability of the hierarchical structure of society depends on the specific weight and role of the middle layer or class is fruitful. By occupying an intermediate position, the middle class performs a peculiar binder between two poles of the social hierarchy, reducing their confrontation. The more (in quantitatively) the middle class, the more chances of influence the policy of the state, the process of forming the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof society, the worldview of citizens, avoiding the extremes inherent in opposite forces.

4.Social mobility

Social mobility is a mechanism of social stratification, which is associated with a change in the position of a person in the system of social statuses. If a person has a more prestigious status, the best, then we can say that ascending mobility took place. However, a person as a result of the loss of work, illness, etc. It can go to a low status group - at the same time, descending mobility works. In addition to vertical movements (descending and upward mobility), there are horizontal movements, which are made up of natural mobility (transition from one job to another without changing the status) and territorial mobility (moving from the city to the city).

4.1. Group Mobility

Group mobility brings large changes to the stratification structure, often affects the ratio of basic social reservoirs and, as a rule, is associated with the emergence of new groups, whose status ceases to correspond to the current hierarchy system. For example: by the middle of the twentieth century, the managers of large enterprises became such a group. It is no coincidence that the basis of the changed role of the managers in Western sociology is developing the concept of the "revolution of the Governors", according to which the administrative stratus begins to play a decisive role not only in the economy, but also in social life, complementing and even somewhere ousting the class of owners.

The vertical group movements are particularly intensively passing in the time of structural restructuring of the economy. The emergence of new prestigious, highly paid professional groups contributes to massive movement along the hierarchical staircase. The fall in the social status of the profession, the disappearance of some of them provoke not only movement down, but also the appearance of marginal layers, uniting people losing their usual position in society, losing the reached level of consumption. There is a "erosion" of sociocultural values \u200b\u200band the norms that previously fucking them and predetermined their sustainable place in the social hierarchy. During periods of acute social cataclysms, the fundamental change in social and political structures may occur almost complete update of the highest echelons of society.

Economic crises accompanied by a massive fall in the level of material well-being, an increase in unemployment, a sharp increase in income rupture, become the root cause of numerical growth of the most disadvantageous part of the population, which always constitutes the foundation of the pyramid of the social hierarchy. Under such conditions, the downlink movement covers no loners, but entire groups. The fall in the social group may be temporary, and may acquire a steady nature. In the first case, the position of the social group "straightens", it returns to the usual place as economic difficulties overcommodation. In the second - the descent turns out to be final. The group changes its social status and the difficult period of its adaptation to the new place in the social hierarchy begins.

So, mass group movements vertically are associated, firstly, with deep serious changes in the socio-economic structure of society that cause the emergence of new classes, social groups seeking to conquer their strength and influence in the social hierarchy. Secondly, with the change of ideological landmarks, system of values \u200b\u200band norms, political priorities. In this case, there is a movement "Top" of those political forces that could catch changes in the mindset, orientations and ideals of the population.

4.2Individual social mobility.

In a steadily developing society, moving vertical are not group, but an individual character. That is, they rise and fall on the steps of the social staircase are not economic, political or professional groups, and their individual representatives, more or less lucky, seeking to overcome the attraction of the usual sociocultural medium. The fact is that the individual who went to the difficult path "upstairs" is independently. And if successful will change not only its position in the vertical hierarchy, but also will change the social professional group. The circle of professions having a vertical structure, such as in the artistic world - stars with millions of states, and artists who are interrupted by random earnings; limited and has no fundamental importance for society as a whole. A worker who has successfully manifested himself in a political field and made a career, having reached a ministerial portfolio, rustles with his place in a social hierarchy and with his professional group. The ruined entrepreneur falls down, losing not only a prestigious place in society, but also the opportunity to do a familiar thing.

In society, social institutions regulate the movement along the vertical, the originality of culture, the lifestyle of each layer, allow you to check each promoter "for strength", for compliance with the norms, the principles of the strata in which it falls. Thus, the system of education ensures not only socialization of the person, its training, but also acts as a kind of "social elevator", which allows the most capable and gifted to climb the "higher floors" of the social hierarchy. Political parties and organizations form a political elite, the institution of property and inheritance strengthens the class of owners, the Institute of Marriage allows moving even in the absence of outstanding intellectual abilities.

However, the use of the driving force of a social institution for lifting "upstairs" is not always enough. To secure in a new strategy, it is necessary to take her lifestyle, organically fit into its sociocultural environment, to build your behavior in accordance with the issued standards and rules. A person is often forced to say goodbye to the old habits, to revise the whole system of values, at first control each of his act. Adaptation to the new sociocultural environment requires high psychological stress, which is fraught with loss of communication with its former social environment. A man may forever be an outcast in the social strate, where he sought, or in which he turned out to be the will of fate, if it comes to movement on the downward.

The phenomenon of finding a person as it were between two cultures associated with its movement in social space is called in sociology by marginalness.

Marginal, a marginal personality is an individual who has lost its former social status, devoid of opportunities to engage in familiar activities, and moreover, which has incapable to adapt to the new sociocultural environment of the strata, within which it is formally existed. Its individual system of values, formed in another cultural medium, was so stable that it is not amenable to displacing new norms, principles, rules.

In the presentation of many people, life success is associated with the achievement of the heights of the social hierarchy.

5. Social stratification in Russia.

"Blur" of the middle layer, possible during periods of economic crises, is fraught with serious shocks for society. Imparting under the conditions of liberalization of prices and falling the production of the bulk of the population of Russia sharply violated social equilibrium in society, led to the nomination to the first plan of the requirements of the Lumpen part of the population, which, as experience shows, carrying a large destructive charge, directed mainly to redistribution, and Not at the creation of national wealth.

5.1 Descriptions of the formation of the middle class.

What are the prospects for the formation of the middle class in our country today? In many ways, they depend on the successful adaptation of the population, the formation of productive models of socio-economic behavior, an adequate existing economic situation. The characteristics of the adaptation process are currently obvious. First of all, a significantly large orientation of the population on its own strength and opportunities comes to replace the previously hoping for the state. Rigidly given and organic types of socio-economic behavior are inferior to a variety of social type types. There are such universal regulators as money and legal standards for replacing the direct and direct authority and ideological control. New methods and standards of behavior are due to various sources of formation, although often they are not corrected by steady moral norms or legal sanctions.

Captivity of qualified personnel or demand only in the presence of necessary connections deforms the chain: Education - Qualification - revenues - long-term savings - the level of consumption that ensures the formation and development of the middle class. Education does not guarantee working with growth prospects. Work does not guarantee income: the salary of representatives of one profession in the private and public sectors differs an order of magnitude. Income does not guarantee status, since many high-income sources are illegal. And the inconsistency of the legislation, the imperfection of the tax system turns almost any enterprise in the offender and force the owners of enterprises in hiring workers to pay attention not only to their professional and business qualities, how many factors confirming their unconditional "reliability". Interestingly, the savings presence factor did not receive advantages in any group. Today, only one third of the population has a positively answered the question: "Do you have a certain margin of durability that will allow to hold out if the economic situation worsens?" Twice the longer number of respondents answered this question negatively.

As studies have shown, with increasing savings increase their share in cash currency. In responses obtained during the focused interviews, as the main reasons to reduce private investment potential, indicated by instability in the country and the unreliability of banks. Respondents believe that society did not leave the strip of instability, the sharp change in the principles of financial policies is not excluded. The lack of confidence in power and its financial institutions deprives the potential middle class of opportunity to build long-term welfare growth strategies and translates a significant part of possible savings in the consumption scaffolding in the literature, data indicate the limited scope of adaptation processes and the crisis phenomena in the process of adaptation, and in subjectively The worst position was generation of 40-50 - summer, i.e. People who are in active working age and through experience and qualifications with fairly high social ambitions. In this group, respondents are growing or disappointed in reforms or their rejection is strengthened. This generation, which is usually the core of the middle class - a layer of social stability, did not become such, but, on the contrary, turned into a large destabilizing group.

Weakly adapted layers in half cases consider their social status as an average, which primarily indicates the unrealizations of educational and vocational qualification potential in the process of adaptation: status positions formed at the same time are not confirmed by the practice of adaptation, but persist in the consciousness of respondents. For a "success group", rather, the understatement of social status is characterized (about 10% of respondents consider their social status as below average). In our opinion, the main reason for the understated social self-assessment here is the fact that the ways of adaptation (for example, sources of income forming "a decent financial situation") are not prestigious by the standards previously adopted in society.

Thus, the crisis character of adaptation says the imbalance of the relationship of status-role positions and social identity, which "pours" into unstable forms of social behavior. The impossibility of implementing the majority of the population of its socio-economic claims, increasing or at least maintaining social status will block progress in all other areas of transformations, create social stress.

It is impossible to bypass the attention and political self-identification of a potential middle class, which, in principle, should reflect its orientation to the stability of the political situation. Political self-identification is primarily in the delegation of powerful powers in the form of electoral behavior. Once in the interaction of various political parties and movements, the individual should make a "conscious choice" in favor of a political organization, to the greatest degree expressing his interests. Under conditions, when not "working" the traditional political scale of Western European type, and rational pragmatism is not supported institutionally, the task of searching for a "working" political identification indicator.

The results of our studies with certainty indicate the presence of a social base that supports pragmatist reformers who have real power levers. For this part of the population of the electorate, there is not so much an ideological context and populist rhetoric, as a guarantee of the stability and continuity of power, ensuring the preservation of the rules for which a significant part of the population has already learned to live.

This is an extremely important issue, for the success of reforms, the creation of a new democratic society with a market mechanism depends largely on the possibilities of forming the middle class. According to some reports, today about 15% employed in the national economy of the population can be attributed to this social category, but it is likely that his social maturation to the "critical mass" will require a lot of time. Already there has already been a tendency to form individual social layers attributable to the middle class - businessmen, entrepreneurs, managers, individual categories of scientific technical intelligentsia, highly qualified workers who are interested in the implementation of reforms. However, this tendency is very contradictory, because The general socio-political interests of various social layers that potentially forming the middle class are not supported by the processes of bringing them to such an important criterion as the level of income and prestige of professions.

6.Connect.

Based on all the above, we can say that the middle class in Russian society is not large enough and its border is strongly "blurred."

The appearance of the middle class is accompanied by a change in the entire social structure of society. Traditional classes and layers lose clear outlines, blur. A highly qualified worker can be simultaneously a representative and working class and middle class. For some signs, the spheres of life "stronger" can be his belonging to his class, to its strategy in it, and on other features - to the middle class. There is a second social structure, despite the fact that the first (traditional class) also has also not lost its value. Leaving aside the question of the functions of the middle class, we will stop on the obstacles to which the process of forming a middle class in Russia is encountered. These obstacles are:

The insufficiency of the layer of modern highly skilled workers, specialists, managers, etc., they are relatively small in Russia, the quality of the employee cannot significantly exceed the quality of the material and technical base on which it works;

Non-knowledge by society and the fact that there is due to the deep economic crisis accompanying the transition of the economy to market relations;

Low standard of living, income of those groups that could be in the future to compile the middle class;

The instability of the status of most social groups, including new, due not only to the crisis and transition, but also by the fact that the property is not provided while the system of social institutions ensuring its protection and normal functioning.

The formation of the middle class, apparently, the necessary stage of the development of a socially-oriented market economy. However, the period of its sufficiently certain existence in the social structure of post-industrial society can be quite small. In the event that the tendency to align the position of various classes, groups, the layers will be sufficiently strong, then the boundaries of the middle class will become gradually less clear.

Thus, the structural design of the middle class is possible in the presence of a consistent and complementary complex of internal and external factors. The development of autonomous activity, a clear outline of the circle of social interests, group identification, the formation of a system of socio-cultural values, norms and sanctions, and to the number of external - stabilization of socio-economic and political institutions and the ability of society to reproduce this stability, under which Understand not the conservation of the existing order, but the predictability and openness of the actions of power.

Social inequality and stratification

Performed student

2nd course of the Economic Faculty

Kulkova Oksana Aleksandrovna

Checked: ______________

ryazan

Introduction

1. The essence of social inequality and its causes.

2. System of social stratification. Basic class construction in industrial society.

3. Dynamics of social stratification in Russia

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The history of all sociology as science, as well as the history of its essential private discipline - the sociology of inequality, has one and a half century.

In all centuries, many scientists thought about the nature of relations between people, over the difficult fate of the majority of people, over the problem of oppressed and oppressors, on justice or injustice of inequality.

Ancient philosopher Plato reflected on the bundle of people on the rich and poor. He believed that the state represents two states. One is the poor, the other is rich, and they all live together, building each other all sorts of goats. Plato was "the first political ideologist, thinking in terms of classes," said Karl Popper. In such a society, people pursue fear and uncertainty. A healthy society must be different.

The essence of social inequality and its causes.

A variety of role relationships, positions lead to differences between people in each particular society. The problem comes down to somehow streamline these relationships between the categories of people differing in many aspects.

What is inequality? In the most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions under which they have unequal access to limited resources of material and spiritual consumption. To describe the inequality system between groups of people in sociology, the concept of "social stratification" is widely used.

When considering the problem of social inequality, it is quite acquitted to proceed from the theory of socio-economic inhomogeneity of labor. Performing qualitatively unequal types of labor, in varying degrees, satisfying public needs, people sometimes turn out to be occupied by economically inhomogeneous labor, for such types of labor have a different assessment of their public utility.

It is the socially economic inhomogeneity of labor not only the consequence of but also the reason for the assignment of the authorities, property, prestige and lack of all these signs of advanced in the public hierarchy. Each of the groups produces its values \u200b\u200band norms and rely on them if they are placed on a hierarchical principle, then they are social layers.

In social stratification tends to inherit positions. The principle of inheritance of positions leads to the fact that not all capable and educated individuals have equal chances to occupy power, possessing high principles and well-paid positions. There are two selection mechanisms here: unequal access to genuine quality education; The unequal opportunities for obtaining positions are equally prepared by individuals.

Social stratification has a traditional character. Since in the historical mobility of the form of its essence, that is, the inequality of the position of different groups of people is preserved throughout the history of civilization. Even in primitive societies, age and gender in combination with physical strength was an important stratification criterion.

Given the dissatisfaction with the members of the society of the existing system of distribution of power, property and conditions of individual development, it is still necessary to keep in mind the versatility of people inequality.

Stratification, like any other science, has its own forms. So far, we have talked about inequality without taking into account its form, while the intensity of stratification depends on the form. Theoretical capabilities fluctuate here from such extremes when any status is attributed to the same amount and other and third. There were no extreme forms of stratification in any historical object.

Social layers are comparable to society, the social distance between which is small, the mobility level is high, the lower layers make up a minority of members of society, the rapid technological growth is constantly increasing the "bar" of meaningful labor on the lower tiers of production positions, the social security of weak, among other things, It guarantees strong and advanced calm and the implementation of potencies. It is difficult to deny what society is, such an interlayer interaction is more likely in its ideal model than ordinary reality.

Most modern societies are far from this model. Or have the concentration of power and resources in numerically a small elite. The concentration of such status attributes as power, property and education prevents the social interaction between elite and other strata, leads to an excessive social distance between her and by the majority, which means that the middle class is not a few and the top of the connection with the rest of the groups. Obviously, such a social order contributes to destructive conflicts.

Social stratification system. Basic class construction in industrial society.

In his work, "the state" Plato argued that the correct state can be scientifically justified, and not to look for a touch, fear, believing and improvising.

Plato assumed that this new, scientifically designed society would not only carry out the principles of justice, but also to ensure social stability and internal discipline. It was this way that he represented a society led by the rulers.

Aristotle in "Politics" also considered the question of social inequality. He wrote that now in all states there are three elements: one class is very rich; The other is very poor; The third is medium. This third is the best, since its members under living conditions are most prepared to follow the rational principle. It is from the poor and rich, one grow criminals, and other fraudsters.

Realistically reflecting on the stability of the state, Aristotle noted that it is necessary to think about the poor, for the state where many poor people are excluded from the management, there will be inevitably many enemies. After all, poverty gives rise to a riot and crimes where there is no middle class and the poor, a huge majority, complications arise, and the state is doomed to death. Aristotle performed both against the power of the poor, deprived of property and against the egoistic rule of rich plutocracy. The best society is formed from the middle class, and the state where this class is numerous and stronger than both others, combined, is best managed, because there is a public equilibrium.

According to sociologists of all ideological directions, no one in the history of public thought is so definitely as K. Marx did not emphasize that the source of social development is the struggle between antagonistic public classes. According to Marx, classes arise and configure on the basis of various positions and various roles performed by individuals in the Company's production structure.

But K. Marx himself rightly noted that he does not belong to the merit of the opening of the existence of classes and their struggle among themselves. And indeed, from the time of Plato, but, of course, especially since the bourgeoisie to powerfully joined the XVIII century on the scene of history, many economists, philosophers, historians are firmly injected into the social science of Europe, the concept of social class (Adam Smith, Etienne Kondillak, Claude Saint - Simon, Francois Gizo, Auguste Mining and others).

However, no one before Marx gave such a deep substantiation of the class structure of society, deriving it from the fundamental analysis of the entire system of economic relations. No one before him gave such a comprehensive disclosure of class relations, the mechanism of operation in the capitalist society, which existed in his time. Therefore, in most modern work on the problems of social inequality, stratification and class differentiation, in equally supporters of Marxism, and the authors, distant from the positions of K. Marx, is given the analysis of its class theory.

Max Weber (1864-1920) was crucial for the folding of modern ideas about the essence, forms and functions of social inequality (1864-1920) - classic of world sociological theory. The ideological basis of Weber's looks is that the individual is a subject of social action.

In contrast to Marx Weber, in addition to the economic aspect of stratification, such as aspects as power and prestige took into account. Weber considered property, power and prestige as three separate, interacting factor underlying hierarchies in any society. Differences in the property generate economic classes; Differences related to power generate political parties, and prestigious differences give status groups, or strata. Hence, he formulated his idea of \u200b\u200bthe "three autonomous measurements of stratification." He emphasized that "classes", "status groups" and "party" - phenomena relating to the distribution of power within the community.

The main contradiction of Weber and Marx is that Verber class cannot be a subject of action, as it is not a community. In contrast, Marx Weber connected the concept of class only with capitalist society, where the most important regulator of relations is the market. Through it, people satisfy their needs in material benefits and services.

However, in the market, people occupy different positions or are in different "class situations". Here everyone is sold and buying. Some sell goods, services; Others - labor. The difference here is that some possess property, and others have no.

Weber has no clear class structure of the capitalist society, therefore, different interpreters of its work are given by inconsistent lists of classes.

Given its methodological principles and summarizing its historical, economic and sociological work, it is possible to recommend reconstructing Weber-based typology of classes during capitalism:

1. Work class, deprived of property. It offers its services on the market and differentiates in terms of qualifying.

2. Small bourgeoisie is a class of small businessmen and merchants.

3. Defacial property "White Collars": Technical Specialists and Intelligentsia.

4. Administrators and managers.

5. Owners who also strive through education to the advantages that intellectuals own.

5.1 class of owners, i.e. Those who receive rent from land ownership, mines.p.

5.2 "Commercial class", i.e. Entrepreneurs.

Weber argued that the owners are "positively privileged class." On another pole - "negatively privileged class", he included those who do not have any property or qualifications that can be offered in the market.

There are many stratification criteria for which any society can be divided. Each of them is associated with special methods of determination and reproduction of social inequality. The nature of social bundle and the method of its approval in its unity form what we call the stratification system.

When it comes to the main types of stratification systems, a description of custom, slave-owned, textural and class differentiation is usually given. In this case, it is customary to identify them with historical types of a social device, observed in the modern world or already irrevocably left in the past. We adhere to a somewhat different approach, considering that any specific society consists of combinations of various stratification systems and many of their transitional forms.

Therefore, we prefer to talk about "ideal types even when we use the elements of traditional terminology.

The following is nine types of stratification systems, which, in our opinion, can be used to describe any social organism, namely:

Physico - genetic;

Slave-owned;

Caste

Estate;

Etcaratic;

Socially professional;

Class;

Culturally symbolic;

Cultural - regulatory;

The first type of physico-genetic stratification system is based on the differentiation of social groups on the "natural" social - demographic signs. Here, the attitude towards a person or group is determined by the floor, age and the presence of certain physical qualities - forces, beauty, dexterity. Comprehensive, weaker, having physical disabilities are considered flawed and occupy a printed social situation.

Inequality in this case is approved by the existence of the threat of physical violence or its actual use, and then fixed in customs and rituals.

This "natural" stratification system dominated the primitive community, but continues to be reproduced to this day. It is especially strongly manifested in communities fighting for physical survival or expanding their living space. The greatest prestige here has the one who is able to carry out violence against nature and people or withstand such violence: a healthy young man - the breadwinner in the peasant community, living fruits of primitive manual labor; courageous warrior of the Spartan state; True Arian National - Socialist Hard, capable of producing healthy offspring.

The system ranking people by the ability to physically violence is a large product of the militarism of ancient and modern societies. Currently, although deprived of the former value, it is still supported by military, sports and sexually erotic propaganda. The second stratification system is slave-owned - just as based on direct violence. But the inequality of people here is determined not physical, but a military-physical coercion. Social groups differ in the presence or absence of civil rights and property rights. Specific social groups of these rights are deprived of perfectly and, moreover, on a par with things turned into an object of private property. Moreover, the position is most often transmitted by inheritance and thus fixed in generations. Examples of slave-owned systems are very diverse. This is an antique slavery, where the number of slaves sometimes exceeded the number of free citizens, and the Khopling in Russia, the times of the Russian truth, this is a plantation slavery in the south of the North American United States to the Civil War 1861 - 1865, this is finally the work of prisoners of war and deporte Persons on German private farms during World War II.

Methods of reproduction of the slave system are also characterized by a significant variety. Antique slavery was mainly due to the conquest. For early referring Rus, there was more debt, bonded slavery. The practice of selling their own children in the absence of opportunity to feed them existed, for example, in medieval China. There they also turned into slaves of various kinds of criminals (including political). This practice was practically reproduced many later in the Soviet Gulag (although private slavement was carried out here in hidden off-euridic forms).

The third type of stratification system is custom. It is based on ethnic differences, which, in turn, are fixed by religious order and religious rituals. Each caste is closed, as far as possible, an endogamous group, which is given a strictly defined place in the public hierarchy. This place appears as a result of the separation of the special functions of each caste in the labor separation system. There is a clear list of classes with which members of this caste can do: priests, military, agricultural. Since the position in the custom system is transmitted by inheritance, the possibilities of social mobility are extremely limited here.

And the stronger the caste is expressed, the more closed this society turns out. India is considered to be a classic example of society with the domination of the caste system (legally, this system has been canceled only in 1950). Today, although in a more smoothed form, the caste system is reproduced not only in India, but, for example, in a clan, strictly of the Central Asian states. The obvious features of the castea were approved in the middle of the twentieth century by the policies of fascist states (the Archesians assigned the position of the highest ethnic caste, designed to domination over the Slavs, Jews, etc.). The role of fastening theological doctrines in this case takes on the nationalist ideology.

The fourth type is represented by the estate stratification system. In this system, the Group differ in legal rights, which, in turn, are rigidly related to their responsibilities and are directly dependent on these duties. Moreover, the latter imply commitments to the state, enshrined in the legislative order. Some class are obliged to carry a coherent or official service, others - "Hard" in the form of filters or labor duties.

Examples of developed class systems are feudal Western European societies or feudal Russia. The estate, it is, first of all, legal, and not, say, ethnic - religious or economic division. It is also important that. That belonging to the estate is inherited, contributing to the relative closure of this system.

Some similarities with the estate system are observed in the fifth type of the ecratachic system (from French and Greek - "state power"). In it, differentiation between groups occurs, first of all, according to their position in the authority of state hierarchies (political, military, economic), in terms of the possibilities of mobilization and distribution of resources, as well as those who experience the prestige are connected here with formal ranks that these Groups occupy the relevant power hierarchies.

All other differences - demographic and religious - ethnic, economic and cultural plays a derivative role. The scale and nature of differentiation (the volume of power) in the ecratachic system are under the control of the state bureaucracy. At the same time, the hierarchy can be consolidated formally - legally - through the officials of the ranks, military charters, assigning categories to public institutions, and may remain outside the sphere of state legislation (a visual example is the Soviet partner system, the principles of which are not spelled in any laws). Formal freedom of members of society (except for dependence on the state), the lack of automatic inheritance of the powerful positions also distinguishes the etharatic system from the class system.

The statuctic system is detected with the greatest force than the more authoritarian nature takes the state rule. In ancient times, the asian despotism of Asian despotism (China, India, Cambodia), located, but not only in Asia (and for example, in Peru, Egypt), were bright in ancient times. In the twentieth century, it is actively asserted in the so-called socialist societies and, perhaps, even plays them a decisive role. It must be said that the allocation of a special ecratachic system is not yet traditionally for work on stratification typologies.

Therefore, we would like to pay attention to both the historical importance and the analytical role of this type of social differentiation.

Next follows the sixth, socially professional stratification system. Groups are divided into the content and conditions of their labor. A special role is fulfilled by qualification requirements for a particular professional role - possessing relevant experience, skills and skills. Approval and supporting hierarchical orders in this system is carried out using certificates (diplomas, discharges, licenses, patents), fixing the level of qualifications and the ability to perform certain types of activities. The effectiveness of qualifying certificates is supported by the power of the state or some other enough powerful corporation (professional workshop). Moreover, certificates are not transmitted by inheritance by inheritance, although exceptions in history are found.

Socially - professional division is one of the basic stratification systems, a variety of examples of which can be found in every society with an indefinite division of labor. This is a system of handicraft workshops of a medieval city and a discharge grid in the modern state industry, a system of certificates and diplomas for education, a system of scientific degrees and titles that open the way to more prestigious workplaces.

The seventh type is represented by a popular class system. A class approach is often opposed to stratification. But for us, class membership is only a particular case of social stratification. Of the many interpretations of the concept of "class" we will focus in this case on a more traditional - socio-economic. In this interpretation, classes are social groups of citizens free in political and legal relations. Differences between groups are primarily in the nature and sizes of property for the means of production and the product produced, as well as in the level of revenue and personal material well-being. Unlike many previous types, belonging to classes - bourgeois, proletaris, independent farmers, etc. - Not regulated by the highest authorities, it is not established legislatively and is not inherited. In its pure form, the class system does not contain any internal formal partitions (economic success automatically translates you into a higher group).

Economically egalitarian communities, where class differentiation is completely absent, the phenomenon is quite rare and unstable. But for the most part of human history, class members still bear the subordinate character. They overlook the foreground, perhaps only in bourgeois Western societies. And the highest heights class system reaches in the united Liberal spirit of the United States of America.

The eighth type is culturally symbolic. Differentiation arises here from the differences in access to socially significant information, unequal and opportunities to filter and interpret this information, the ability to be a carrier of sacred knowledge (mystical or scientific). In ancient times, this role was assigned to the priests, magicians and shamans, in the Middle Ages - the ministers of the Church, which make up the bulk of the literate population, the interpreters of the sacred texts, in a new time - scientists, technocrats and party ideologists, complaints with divine forces, on the possession of scientific truth on The expression of state interest always existed everywhere. And a higher position in this respect is occupied by those who have the best opportunities to manipulate the consciousness and actions of other members of society, who better than others can prove their rights to true understanding owns the best symbolic capital.

A somewhat simplifying picture, we can say that for pre-industrial societies is more characteristic of theocratic manipulation; for industrial - part-time; And for the post - industrial - technocratic.

The ninth type of stratification system should be called culturally regulatory. Here, differentiation is built on the differences in respect and prestige arising from the comparison of lifestyle and the norms of behavior, which should be given a person or group. Attitude towards physical and mental work, consumer tastes and habits, manners of communication and etiquette, a special language (professional terminology, a local dialect, criminal jargon) - all this falls into the basis of social division. Moreover, it is not only the distinction of "its" and "strangers", but also ranking groups ("noble - not noble", "decent not decent", "elite-ordinary people"). The concept of elites is surrounded by a certain mysterious floem. They say a lot about him, but often, do not discharge any clear denotatic boundaries.

Elite is not the category of policy only. In modern society, there are many elite-political, military, economic, professional. Somewhere these elites are intertwined, somewhere compete with each other. We can say that there is so much elite, how many areas of social life. But whatever the sphere we have taken, the elite is a minority, opposing the rest of society. Its middle and lower layers as some "mass". At the same time, the position of the elite as the highest estate or caste can be fixed by formal law or religious deposition, and can be achieved completely in an informal way.

Elitarist theories arose and formed largely as a reaction to radical and socialist exercises and were directed against various currents of socialism: Marxist, Anarcho - Sindicalist. Therefore, Marxists, in fact, were very skeptical about this theories, did not want to recognize them and apply them on the material of Western societies. For it would mean, firstly, the recognition that the lower layers are weak or not at all organized by the mass, which must be controlled, a mass that is not capable of self-organization and a revolutionary action, and secondly, recognition to some extent inevitability and "Naturalness" of such a sharp inequality. As a result, it would have to revise the views and the nature of the class struggle.

But the elitarist approach is sent against democratic parliamentarism. He is generally in nature with its anti-democratic. Democracy and accessories involves the rule of majority and universal equality of people as independent citizens, organized enough to implement their own goals and interests. And because of this democracy commemors, any attempts of elite rule are pretty cold.

Numerous approaches to the concept can be divided into two main groups of domineering and meritocratic. In accordance with the first, elite are those who possess the decisive authorities in this society, and in accordance with the second, those who have some special advantages and personal qualities, regardless of whether they have power or not.

In the latter case, the elite is distinguished by talents and merit. Sometimes the powerful and meritocratic approaches are conventionally denoted as "Lassuela Line" and "Pareto Line." (Although the first approach can be with no less successful named "Moska Line" or "Lini Mills".)

One group of ELITE researchers is understood as layers with the highest powerful positions or the highest formal authorities in organizations and institutes. Another group refers to the elite of charismatic personalities, va - inspired, capable of leadership, representatives of the creative minority.

In turn, the powerful approaches are divided into structural and functional. Choosing a simpler structural approach from an empirical point of view, consider the elite circle of persons who occupy the highest positions in the institutions under consideration (ministers, director, military leaders)

Those who stop at a functional approach set themselves a more difficult task: to allocate groups with real power in adopting socially important decisions (many representatives of these groups are understandable, may not be occupied by or prominent public posts, to remain in the "shadow") .

Let us dwell on the positions of the classics of the powerful and meritocratic approaches.

4. Social mobility.

The study of social mobility was started by P. Sokin, published in 1927 the book "Social Mobility, ITS Forms and Fluctuation".

He wrote: "Any transition of an individual or social object is understood under social mobility (values). In total, which is created or modified by human activity, from one social position to another. There are two main types of social mobility: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal social mobility, or movement, implies the transition of an individual or social object from one social group to another, located at the same level. The movement of a certain individual from Baptist to the Methodist religious group, from one citizenship to another, from one family (both husband and wife) to another during a divorce or repeated marriage, from one factory to another, while maintaining its professional status - All these are examples of horizontal social mobility. They are the movement of social facilities (radio, car, fashion, ideas of communism, Darwin theory) within one social formation, like moving from Iowa to California or from a certain place to any other. In all these cases, "Movement" can occur without any noticeable changes in the social position of the individual or social object in the vertical direction.

Under vertical social mobility, they are meant that relationships that arise when moving an individual or social object from one social formation to another. Depending on the movements, there are two types of vertical mobility: ascending and descending, i.e. Social lift and social descent. In accordance with the nature of the stratification, there are downward and upward flows of economic, political and professional mobility, not to mention other less important types. Ascending flows exist in two main forms: the penetration of the individual from the bottom layer into an existing higher formation; The creation of such individuals of the new group and the penetration of the entire group into a higher layer at a level with already existing groups of this formation. Accordingly, the downstream currents also have two forms: the first is in the fall of the individual with a higher source group, to which it has previously belonged; Another form is manifested in the degradation of the social group as a whole, in lowering its rank against the background of other groups or the destruction of its social unity. In the first case, the fall reminds us of a person who fell from the ship, in the second - immersion in the water itself with all passengers on board or wrecking the ship, when he is divided into smits.

Social mobility can be two types: Mobility as a voluntary movement or circulation of individuals within the social hierarchy; and mobility dictated by structural changes (such as industrialization and demographic factors). In urbanization and industrialization, there is a quantitative growth of professions and the corresponding changes in qualification requirements and training. As a consequence of industrialization, there is a relative increase in labor, employment in the category of "white collar", a decrease in the absolute number of agricultural workers. The degree of industrialization actually correlates with the level of mobility, as it leads to an increase in the number of professions of high status and to fall in employment in professional categories of the lowest rank.

It should be noted that many comparative studies have shown: influenced by the change in stratification systems. First of all, social differentiation increases. Advanced technology gives impetus to the emergence of a large number of new professions. Industrialization leads to more compliance with professionalism, preparation and reward. In other words, for individuals and groups, it becomes a typical tendency to relatively sustainable positions in the ranked stratification hierarchy. As a result, social mobility strengthens. Mobility level increases mainly due to the quantitative growth of professions in the middle of the stratification hierarchy, i.e. Due to forced mobility, although it is activated and voluntary, since a large weight acquires the orientation to achieve.

It is equally unless to significantly affect the level and nature of mobility system of public dispensing. Scientists have long paid attention to high-quality differences in this respect between public and closed-type societies. In open society there are no formal limitations of mobility and almost absent abnormal.

Closed society, a rigid structure preventing an increase in mobility, thereby opposed instability.

Social mobility would be more correct to call the opposite side of the same problem of inequality, because, as M. BYUTLEM noted, "social inequality is enhanced and legalized in the process of social mobility, the function of which is the removal of secure channels and the containment of discontent.

In the closed society, mobility up is limited not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively, therefore, the individuals who have reached the tops, but not receiving the share of social benefits, to which they expected, begin to consider the existing procedure as interference to achieving their legitimate goals and strive for radical changes. Among those who are directed down, in a closed society often, those who for education and abilities are often prepared for management than the bulk of the population - of which the leaders of the revolutionary movement are formed during the period when the contradictions of the Company lead to a conflict in classes in it .

In an open society, where few barriers preserving prevailing up, those who rise up, tend to move away from the political orientation of the class, which they crossed. Similarly, the behavior of those who reduce their position looks. Thus, those who rise to the highest stratum are less conservative than permanent members of the highest strata. On the other hand, "dropped down" are more left than stable member of the lowest strata. Consequently, the movement in general contributes to stability and at the same time the dynamism of an open society.

Dynamics of social stratification in Russia

The 9th years of the twentieth century, apparently, will be included in the history of Russia as the era of three revolutions, or perhaps the three stages of one revolution, harshly predetermining each other. The first, political, ended in August 1991; The second, economic, gives the first tangible fruits. However, in parallel with it, and overtaking it will be the third - the social revolution, which will become a reality very soon, but will finally change the appearance of Russia only at the outcome of the Millennium.

A similar arrangement of priorities is quite natural: politics and economics are topical topics, and the challenge of the day today is the task of "feed the people". There is nothing more obvious from the point of view of common sense. According to the assurances of some politicians, the government can quickly fully implement its declarations: stabilize the market, strengthen the financial system and balance the state budget. Sleep of reformers will be fulfilled: the people will be "fed" (that is, it will satisfy the critical minimum of their needs) and not waiver.

Obviously, however, that for this idyll, in all likelihood, the country will have to pay long and painfully. The blows of the ax, which are built by a light market tomorrow, inevitably communicate in our fate: the future has a brutally revenge for the lightweight, with which the problems of the present are solved.

The most terrible result of reforms will be a crushing blow on the social structure inherited from the Soviet era. This structure turned out to be so stable and shockproof, which sustained the fall of "real socialism" the fall of the ruled elite did not lead to any serious social conflict or catastrophes (as some sociologists warned) not least and because the most sharp bundle was carried out in the Soviet society is precisely on the basis of possession of power. The fall of the part-time elite was relatively mild, since other signs that settle the industrial type society (income, possession of property, education, profession, social prestige, etc.) in the Soviet society were not significant to the extent that with non-oreference causes hard conflict relationships social strata.

The durable grip of heterogeneous layers in the Soviet conditions took place not only due to the short social distance between them, but by virtue of such a phenomenon as a certain mutualistness of the statuses: the low salary and the absolute neglectedness of the intellectual depreciated its high educational rank and relative freedom in the eyes of the worker who had, At least a more solid income - that it did not allow a drastic misfortune to paint into open hatred. On the contrary, a representative of mental labor compensated for its humiliation of the consciousness of the prestige of higher education and the intellectual profession, career prospects and greater freedom of disposal by its working time.

In other words: the financial situation was not the dominant factor of the bundle, the counterweight served to him no less significant - out-economic - parameters.

This is the foundations of public integration today in our eyes the end is rapidly coming. The transition of control over the state from the state to citizens threatens to go on the worst version: the gigantic part of the national product is uncontrollabically incurred not even at the disposal, and in the legal property of new and old economic elites, and the disproportionally small flows through the fingers of the majority of the population. The level of income becomes the main parameter of the stratification, not balanced by any counterweight. The status statuses occurs in the level of income, and this means that a change in a highly integrated, sustainable social structure threatens to come the most unstable variety of class society.

Society of this type is doomed to constantly balance on the verge of social war. The sharper and one-dimensional social bundle, the higher the charge of negative public sentiment (hatred, envy, fear) experienced by various layers to each other, the deeper their mutual rejection. In this sense, the future of the social world in the country depends on whether the government will be able to prevent the monstrous imbalances in the process of spontaneous privatization in the process of spontaneous privatization in the distribution of former state ownership between different socio-economic groups.

In Western societies, the trend towards reducing the social distance takes place precisely because of the solid position and long-term growth of the middle class, which thus smoothes the sharpness of social bundle and is the main guarantor of stability. On the contrary, in the third world countries, a colossal income gap, in the level and style of consumption, in the very lifestyle between the upper and poorest layers of the population is colossal, and the share of medium layers is incomparable (with the West) is low.

The new stratification may be a social dynamite, which will explode society, because if it is not possible to provide the minimum required level of income, the volume and influence of the middle class, in the society, the most dangerous variety of social identification is inexped to stability - class. The beginning of this collapse of society on class identification will most likely not at the time, but after the stabilization of the market (and we will not forget, stabilization at a very low level). By this time, a huge number of people, losing hope for a change in the personal situation, the highly growing in the period of economic chaos and uncertainty, will understand that there is still no terrible tragedy in this life, - and the sobriety of disappointment is aware of the tough framework of their social rank .

In this situation, each of the main three classes will in its own way to carry a potential threat to stability. The highest class (major entrepreneurs and owners, the shareholders of monopolist enterprises associated with the bureaucratic bureaucracy and serving communication with the world market comprador bourgeois), concentrating enormous wealth in his hands, will be a red cloth for almost the whole society. Demonstrative consumption focused on Western consumer standards, from which today cannot refuse our nouveauch, will feed the restless rage of the lower layers.

On the other hand, the abyss that peshes between rich and middle classes will not allow the first to count on the parties that have a social base in the face of the latter.

The most active part of the poor class (workers of the broken and unprofitable enterprises, former collective farmers, and who have not become farmers, the unemployed, as well as the vast majority of people who have failed to rationally use the possibilities of the privatization era) - will be the supplier of "Mosts" for various kinds of revolutionary movements.

But don't even be all this - a large low-income layer in itself will create an intolerable load on the economy. High taxes needed by the poor (not helping the riot and blood), it is unlikely to become an incentive for the development of business activity. The government, forced to burden by them by other classes, does not lead to gratitude from the lower and becomes the enemy in the eyes of the highest and middle, on which the main severity of taxes.

The middle class is small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, a successful part of the intelligentsia, working profitable enterprises, new owners who won the privatization - in the situation of a sharp bundle will be tested double frustration: the fear of the furious lower class and hatred of the inaccessible to the highest. The most privatization of the possible results of privatization is the creation of a layer of "frustrated owners" - this potential base of fascism (which, by defining the Lipset Seimur, is the extremism of the middle class).

The fate of society in which the one-dimensional perspective of the assessment is dominant. The more the distribution of wealth coincides with the distribution of social prestige, the greater the likelihood of mutual rejection of the layers - the lowest, medium and higher, the closer and sharper the danger of disintegration with its varieties from the revolution to the Civil War.

Of course, there is no country in the world where the poor would not have a hostility to rich. But this natural dislike can be strengthened or weakened - depending on the factors rather a socio-cultural, rather than economic order. If representatives of the poor layers urged that they have no chance of encouraging their "non-universal" advantages to the society, this will lead not only to frightening moral degradation, but also to the explosive exacerbation of class hatred. On the contrary, where society, along with a commercial scale, cultivates any other (for example, ethical, cultural ..) - the social hatred of the poor to rich can be balanced by the desire of the first to moral (aesthetic, etc.) superiority over the second. Not having a chance of getting rich, he can achieve recognition and honor at all on another field.

Conclusion

Social policy is the policy of regulating the social sphere aimed at achieving welfare in society. The social sphere of social relations includes the forms of regulation of labor relations, the participation of workers in the management of the production process, collective agreements, the state system of social security and social services (unemployment benefits, pensions), participation of private capital in creating social funds, social infrastructure (education, Health, provision of housing, etc.), as well as the implementation of the principle of social justice.

Thus, the subject of social policy (social groups that have power in their hands in the social sphere), ensuring the achievement of welfare in society - the aggregate of the historically established forms of joint activities of people - implements the principle of social justice, which, as the most common, is the goal of the social sphere Public relations.

Social and class organization of the Company- The whole set of socio-class relations between individuals united in social classes, socio-class groups and in elementary professional, property and volume-legal groups and these individuals themselves. S.-K.O. Encompasses a wider range of social relations than the socio-class structure. The first includes not only stable, essential, non-random, regularly repeated, but also unstable, random, irregular relations.

For a long time, the complexity of studying social relations in the Soviet society, in addition to the gnoseological reasons, imposed a party approach to the study of all phenomena of public life, which prevailed before the loss of the Communist Party of the leading position in society. At the same time, it should be noted that the honor of domestic social scientists in the 1960-1980s, despite the ideological circumstances, impede the impartial analysis of the socio-class structure, they had a significant contribution to the development of ideas about the nature of social relations and structures. At the same time, many scientific problems associated with socio-class structuring in modern domestic (as well as foreign) literature are not disclosed at all. It should be noted that it is impossible to talk about any substantial separation of Western sociology from Patriotic. In modern overseas social science, there is a huge variety of mutually exclusive ideas about social and socio-class structures. Western authors traditionally invest in this concept very different meaning.

Some researchers consider social structure as a system of social inequality, others define it as a set of groups of associations and institutions, the third consider its status and roles system, reducing the analysis to the functional interdependence between them, etc. As the leading French sociologist P. Ansar writes in his book "Modern Sociology": "In general, from 1945 to the 1970s in France, Italy, as in Germany and the United States, many researchers in the field of public sciences, without connecting themselves dogmatically with separate The details of the Marx provisions were removed from them the most significant with the intention to overcome the boundaries of narrow economy (Sartre, 1960) or in order to undermine the authority of the functionalist conservative models (Mills, 1967; Habermas, 1968). " However, this author notes further, "1970-1980-E was marked by a departure from this meaningful side of Marxism in the public sciences, which was associated with various reasons in which historical events played not a latter role." To date, domestic social scientists for a number of substationary issues related to the study of social relations are ahead of Western. Therefore, highlighting the specifics of social relations, it is logical to refer to domestic developments.

Patriarch of Patriotic Sociology Rutkevich M.N. In substantiation of the expediency of the allocation of the socio-class structure in modern conditions for him (the work was published in 1979) put forward the following key arguments: first, the social structure of society, remaining class and in socialism, includes other types of social structures of this type. At the same time, the social and class structure should in no case be mixed with the national-ethical, socio-demographic, socio-territorial, professional and other types of social structure of this type. However, since the first is, in the opinion of this author, the most important of all listed species of social structure and imposes its imprint on any of them, it is often referred to as a social structure in the literature. Secondly, overcoming significant differences between two forms of socialist property - nationwide and collective farm cooperative - and at the same time between the working class and the collective farm peasantness, it does not exhaust the tasks of building a classless society. The term "socio-class structure" has the advantage, according to M.N. Rutkevich, which focuses on overcoming not only the differences between the two "friendly classes" of the Soviet society, but also a number of social differences as necessary for the "achievement of classotional society".

Close to this point of view and understanding of social and class differences set in the monograph "Problems of changing the social structure of the Soviet Society", where they are understood under them - "a category characterizing those phenomena in the system of public relations, which are eliminated during the transition to communism, which are Rudimiment Class antagonistic society. "

In the work "The Social Structure of the Socialist Society in the USSR" also states that "because there are often attempts to present the class structure of a socialist society in the USSR only as a division of society into two friendly class, not taking into account other persons who are inherited from class antagonism of society differences , the consumption of the term "socio-class structure" seems to be justified, which focuses on the exhaustion of the structure under consideration from the social structure of society in the general sense. "

For the given approach, which was quite typical at that time, the following errors are characterized: 1) the authors are not given a clear criterion for social and social and class structures, the ratio of these categories is not shown. Hence the socio-class, professional, demographic, property and other types of social structures are considered as one-order, which is methodologically incorrect, since the social and class structure includes a number of structures (professional, property, etc.), which these researchers put with it In one row as one-order categories. Based on the principles of a systematic approach, it should be recognized to be obviously erroneous recognition of single-order social phenomena, one of which is fully part of others. 2) the need to allocate the socio-class structure is associated with the ultimate goal of the development of socialism - the construction of a classified society. In this regard, the authors tried to consider the socio-class structure as a relic of capitalism (i.e., in any case, they try to appeal to the period either before or after socialism).

Today in the social sciences it became axiomatic as the inability to build a Marxist model of communism and the recognition of the fact that the society built in the USSR was not socialist. Naturally, in the light of these new theoretical settings for the postulates of the theory of "scientific communism" is obviously ridiculous. At that time, attempts were made to the honor of domestic social scientists (sometimes successful methodologically) to consider the real social structures of the Soviet society. It was noted that our society was developed on its own basis and its social structure was formed under the laws inherent solely to himself (Gerasimov N.V.). Accordingly, the conclusion was made that the socio-class structure is also formed under the laws inherent in the Soviet society. "However, the prevailing part of modern studies of the social structure of the Soviet Society - notes M.H. Titma, especially its socio-class structure, is devoted to the study of ways to achieve social one-sidedness. At the same time, the Axoma takes the fact of overcoming the socio-economic division of labor as the basis of movement in This direction. But in the nearest historical perspective it is difficult to expect a complete disappearance of even simple physical work. Especially unlawful to consider mental labor as a socio-homogeneous. "

Thus, already within the framework of the Marxist theory, Soviet social scientists realized the need to seek the differences between the concepts of "social structure" and "socio-class structure" in phenomena inherent in real society. In the domestic literature, if you leave the actual identification by some authors of social relations with public relations in general (Selunskaya V.M.), one can distinguish three main points of view on the specifics of social relations.

A number of researchers share the nominated M.N. Rutkevich's understanding of social relations as "equality and inequality of various groups of people and primarily public classes on their position in society." You should agree with A.K. White and V.M. Alekseeva, who believed that the specifics of social relations were not disclosed in the aforementioned point of view: "These types of relationships cover all social relations. Indeed, economic, political and spiritual and ideological relations are all relations between people, their communities represented by nations, classes , social groups, labor collectives. And the relationship of equality and inequality is also functioning in all public areas - equality and inequality economic, social, political and spiritual and ideological. " These authors believed that "the methodological criterion for the dissection of one or another type of social relations is the object, about which the relationships between people are developing." Last remark itself also does not cause objections today.

According to A.K. White and V.M. Alekseeva, social relations are "relations between people, their teams as carriers of qualitatively different types of labor, various labor functions." "And the social structure, - notes by A.K. White, is a variety of socio-labor subjects." A similar approach to this problem is also followed by R.I. Kosolapov, who writes that the social structure is based on the public division of labor. "Social structure is a natural reflection of the division of labor in the appearance of groups of people belonging to various specialized spheres of production and public life, in relations between these groups to each other ...". G.V. Mokrons also concluded that "the public division of labor and the social structure of society essentially coincide, because it is about the same thing - about the place of groups, classes in the system of production relations."

With this approach, the actual identification of social and labor relations is allowed, the minimization of the first labor division loses its meaning in the allocation of the category of "social relations" itself, because It can be completely replaced by the category "Public Separation of Labor". This leads to the fact that family, age, religious, political and many other relations fall out of social relations and only labor relations remain.

Other authors adhere to the views of V.P Tugarinov, according to which the region of social relations includes classes, estates, nations, nationality, profession, and categories, reflecting the various relationships between these human groups. The above point of view gives a fairly accurate idea of \u200b\u200bthe specifics of social relations. At the same time, with this approach, relations between individuals are excluded from social relations, which leads to an artificial narrowing of their field of activity. Supplementing the above list of relations between individuals, we will consider all subject-subject relationships as social relations. This point of view corresponds to the views on the specifics of social relations M. Weber ( cm.), which, considering all the variety of these relationships, has always meant "... only a certain type of behavior of individual people." He also noted that "social" we call such an action that, according to the intended acting person or acting persons, the meaning agrees with the action of other people or oriented to it. "

It should be noted that in social sciences for a long time coexist two approaches to the study of social structures. With one of them, only social strata is considered as the main components of this structure, which does not allow the researcher to disclose real socio-economic, political, ethnic and other public contradictions, as well as identify real, and not imaginary (abstract) trends in the development of society and factors, Their defining. With a second approach, classes are made by the main components of the social structure, and there are fundamentally different approaches within this direction.

Firstly, when adherents of class theory make the emphasis on the fact that the social structure is primarily connected with differentiation between individuals. In this case, it is primarily considered not the relationship of people's classes, and their professional position, not the incomes of people, but the distribution of income between the subjects, which allows to reveal social inequality. As a theoretical goal, the need for disclosure and explanation of historical forms and degrees of differentiation and the impact of the latter on social evolution is proclaimed. The obvious disadvantage of this narrow approach is a narrowing, which reduces its methodological importance, the content of the investigated "Social structure of society" only to differentiation between individuals. In fact, the named structure also includes demographic, moral and many other relations.

Secondly, when the researchers expand expand the concept of "class structure", actually leading speech "On the same hierarchies of social groups as representatives of the stratification approach" (Radaev V.V., Lashalatan O.I.).

Thirdly, when the researchers admit that the category "Social and class structure" is narrower, rather than the concept of "social structure" and that the first structure is fully included in the second (integration approach). At the same time, there is a real opportunity to distinguish the named structures, and give them clear, internally inconsistent definitions.

Any society is a complex social aggregate, consisting of a set of interacting entities that are disliked not directly on individuals, but by two or more social communities, which, in turn, are divided into individuals. The allocation of a social structure is based on the functional or causal relationship of interacting individuals. Depending on the degree of intensity of this connection, it is possible to exist a number of structures in the same totality of people.

The nature of such a connection will show the awardness and intersecting coexistence of social groups. "The degree of intensity of functional communication and its nature, - wrote Sorokin ( cm.) - Such is the basis of the possibility of coexistence of a number of collective unity in the same population. "Further, it indicates that the social variety of interaction processes or the nature of the relationship" entails a variety of collective unities formed by differently combined individuals - on the one hand, on the other hand - The belonging of each individual is not alone, but to a number of real aggregates. "All social groups depending on the number of their signs uniting them can be defined as elementary or cumulative (integral)." Under elementary or simple collective unity / social group. - S.S./, "Sorokin writes," I understand the real, and not an imaginary set of persons united in one interacting whole by any one sign, a fairly clear and certain, not concerned about other signs. "The profession, race may appear as such signs. , the volume of rights, language, territorial belonging, gender and others. "Under the cumulative group ... Of course, the combination of interacting individuals associated with one organized whole connections is not one, but a number of elementary groups" (Sorokin).

Accordingly, the social structure formed on the basis of social groups differentiated on one basis (a fairly clear and certain, not coordinated to other signs) can be determined by us as an elementary social structure (for example, a professional structure). The structure combining several elementary structures is cumulative, or integral, structure. As elements of such a structure, cumulative groups will be performed, which, in turn, disintegrate into elementary groups. The cumulative group, in particular, is the social class. Accordingly, characterizing the socio-class structure, we can talk about it as a cumulative, or integral, social structure. Under the class in modern science, the concept expresses the set of objects that satisfy any similar conditions or features is implied. There is nothing supernatural in this category, and since in social structures there are significant (in numbers and social status) Subject groups that unite individuals based on some similar signs, the most significant of them describe, using the concept of "social class".

Already in medieval Western Europe, the fathers of the Church attempt to the division of humanity to certain discharges (or classes) were taken. Initially, under discharge, they understood groups of people with homogeneous political, social and professional signs, charismatic and corporate communities. This "anthropological spiritualism", according to which division on the discharge occurred from top to bottom, depending on the set of perfections, predetermined by the Augustine exegesis of the three characters of the Bible - Moses, Daniel and Iow, embodying three types of human character: contemplative, religious and secular, caring only about Earth. With this approach, even feudal suzeranes did not have to count on any noticeable place in the hierarchy. Therefore, along with the traditional approach of 8 tbsp. "Sociological anthropology" arises, which offered a threefold division of society to: free, warriors and slaves. The named scheme, however, was not successful, since, first, in it, the activity of the clergy in society was ignored and, secondly, since the intermediate position of the warriors between the free and slaves was characteristic only for the Empire. French authors (Adalbert Laonsky and others) offered to divide society on "praying" (clerics), "warriors" and "unarmed people" (workers). The latter sociological scheme was then generally recognized. In the 17th century Science stated the presence of social classes (S. Fourier, A. Smith, physiocrats, O.Terry, etc.). In the subsequent period, the role and importance of these publications were described in the writings of A. Smith, D. Ricardo, Socialists-Utopistov, K. Marx ( cm.), M. Weber, P.A. Sorokina. Interesting considerations on the conflict of socio-class interest were expressed by Lenin ( cm.).

With all the differences in the views of these thinkers on social classes, their points of view were similar in terms of the methodology of class differentiation of society. They were unanimous in the fact that at the heart of the social and class bundle lies public division of labor ( cm.) and socio-economic inequality of individuals. By itself, this scientific approach has not lost its gnoseological significance today. As noted, there are significant differences in the interpretations of social classes and socio-class structures in modern Western social science. "Class concept, - P. Daddorf specified ( cm.) - One of the most visible illustrations of the inability of Western researchers to achieve at least the minimum of the consent of this circle of problems. "

However, with all the diversity of views on the socio-class structure, there are a number of dominant directions. This is explained by all the authors of Western concepts to one degree or another resorted to one of the two sources - to the works of M. Weber or P. Sorokina.

According to M. Weber, social classes - categories that differ in economic grounds, in other words, are groups of people in a similar economic situation, or possessing the same "life chances". This author offers a three-metered social structure model, which includes classes, status groups and batch. The largest number of Western sociological developments is devoted to Weber status groups, although different authors interpret them in different ways. So, R. Dawarendorf allocates classes based on the proximity or remoteness of certain groups to the system of power. There is also a sociological differentiation of social actors in a surrounding-legal criterion. At the same time, the approach is rightly emphasized by the importance of social differentiation, depending on the volume of power prerogatives, but such fundamental criteria of socio-class bundle are incorrectly ignored, as the property of economic benefits and other elements of economic relations.

In the period before the loss of the CPSS of the leading position in society, almost all Soviet scientists emphasized the use of Leninsky definition of classes as a general methodological parcel to determine the category "Social Class" and "Social and Class Relationships". As you know, under social classes V.I. Lenin understood "Large groups of people who differ in their place in a historically defined system of social production, by their relationship (mostly enshrined and decorated in laws) to the means of production, by their role in the public organization of labor, and, consequently, according to methods of obtaining and sizes of that The shares of public wealth, which they have. Classes are such groups of people, of whom one can appropriating the work of the other thanks to the difference of their place in a certain economy economy. " However, in the interpretation of the Leninsky definition of classes, with the interpretation of individual items, in assessing the place and role of class-forming signs, their coented, in the matter of the degree of applicability of the Leninsky criteria for that time a number of researchers managed to overcome the narrow framework of the dogmas of the Leninsky class theory of classes. Often the latter was replaced by the interpretations of social classes, based on the traditions of Russian and American sociological schools.

So, T.I. Zaslavskaya ( cm.), considering as criteria for the selection of classes: 1) attitude to the means of production; 2) a role in the public organization of labor and 3) the share of public wealth, notes that "the feature of the classes is that they differ simultaneously on all these criteria. But each of these criteria, regarded independently of others, also has a considerable socio-differentiating force and allows you to allocate groups, although not worn class character, but playing an important role in the social functioning of society. " The last statement is essentially lies in the context of the views of P.A. Sorokina. These groups allocated according to one of the criteria ("combined into one interacting as a single sign" - Sorokin) - are elementary collective units, and social classes act as cumulative (integral) groups.

To determine the essence of socio-class relations, it is necessary to consider social classes from two sides: 1) in terms of their place and functional role in society; 2) through the contradiction of socio-class interests. The essence of one of the parties to the socio-class relationship is to contradict the interests of primarily economic, certain social groups (which will sort out mainly from the possibility of one social groups to assign their work to others). The presence of a contradiction of interests (primarily economic) as a criterion for the allocation of social classes in itself does not cause disputes in the domestic social science (another matter, the availability of discrepancies in applying it to real social systems). When considering the same social classes on their place and the functional role in society, there is no conventional opinion in society. In many respects, it was predetermined by the existing time the fundamental installation on the direct use of Leninsky criteria in the consideration of social classes and groups in society.

This was due to: first, the lack of a clearly established look in modern economic science (and in general in social science) on what should be understood under "attitude to the means of production", under the "role in the public organization" and " obtaining and sizes of the share of public wealth, which they have. " In other words, in fact, the political economy was determined by the definition of one unknown (social class) through other unknowns (i.e., through the categories that there is no unequivocal and accurate representation). Secondly, there was a mutual inconsistency of the criteria for allocating social classes in V.I. Lenin. The definition of this PA could be used as a working definition of social classes on their place and the functional role in society. Sorokin. In his opinion, the social class "is cumulative, normal, solidarity, semi-closed, but with an approach to open, typical of our time, composed of the cumulation of three main groups: 1) professional; 2) property; 3) volumetric".

In other words, the social class can be identified as a solidarity of individuals similar to the profession, according to the property situation, in terms of the amount of rights, and, therefore, having identical professional-property and socio-legal interests. The professional structure necessitates the existence of professional groups united by the labor activity owning a complex of special theoretical knowledge and practical skills acquired as a result of special training, experience. The dismemberment of the profession is dealing with the formation of various groups in society, which are primarily separated by not the difference between mutual relations to each other, but the difference in their relationships to the object of activity. This kind of technical bundle can reach a huge number of species, subspecies, various small units, and among the infinite number of these divisions, social inequality is already formed. Profession is the usual long-term student of an individual who gives it a means of existence. This professional occupation is usually the main activity. In other words, "... the source of the income and the social function of the individual are connected with each other and form a profession in their totality" (Sorokin). This qualifying and professional differentiation will generate social inequality. It is different specialty, various qualifications in the labor process lead to social differences between individuals.

The basis of social classes is based on enlarged professional groups (genetic aspect). At the same time, representatives of the same profession can be included in the socio-class-differentiated society in various social and class education (functional aspect). The property structure (or grouping according to the degree of wealth and poverty), regardless of whether it is approaching in a given country to the type of more closed groups or less closed, causes the separation of the entire society into groups of rich and poor. Moreover, the wealth and poverty of the individual depends not quite from his will. "Members of the same property group ... Fatally become solidarity in many respects, members of various property groups - fatally antagonists" (Sorokin). The similarity of the property situation leads to a spontaneous organization of similar property individuals. Persons relating to one profession, depending on the magnitude of their income, can belong to various groups with opposite interests. The volume and legal structure (or grouping in terms of rights and obligations), not coinciding with the previous two structures, decays into two main groups: the preferred, which are the highest social rank, and deprived, giving lower social rank. Privileged are a solidar collective unity; The same unity is formed and "deprived" (Sorokin). At the same time, in any society with developed social structures, the real differentiation of individuals and groups, depending on the amount of their rights and duties, is much more complicated than the above.

Thus, as signs of social classes, it is allocated: 1) professional; 2) property; 3) volumetric. As soon as sustainable professional, property and volume-legal groups are formed in society; As soon as they acquire some strength (as a public combination), the interaction between society taken as a whole, and between individual social groups begins, and each Party affects the nature of the other. Previously, it was noted that a huge impact on individuals is provided by profession, property situation and scope. If belonging to each of these groups is very strongly determines the behavior of people, then this conditionability will be much stronger when the influence of all these three structures merges. Individuals united by all three ties will have similar economic interests, which acts as a material condition for their association in social classes, in order to more successfully implement and protect their interests. Public groups, sharply different from each other immediately in three listed features, will be repelled and opposed to much stronger than groups that are excellent only one sign.

At the same time, speaking of combining public groups into social classes, it is necessary to take into account the entire system of socio-economic relations as an exhaustive characteristic of the social class. So, Yu.S. Poles, emphasizing this, indicates that, "obviously, only the entire combination of production relations, developing in the process of production, sharing, distribution and consumption of material benefits, provides comprehensive political and economic characteristics of the class." Since all social groups in society interact with each other and at the same time strive to the most optimal realization of their interests (primarily economic), then the whole society should objectively disintegrate on some large groups of people opposing each other depending on the degree of coincidence (opposition) of them Interests (primarily economic). What will be predetermined by this coincidence (opposition)? In our opinion, this is all the same opportunity among the social groups to assign themselves the work of others (which depends on their place and the functional role). To protect their economic interests, a spontaneous association of those and others in social classes occurs. Such an association acts as an economic base of education of social classes.

Darendorf in the work "Class and class conflict in industrial society" (1957) wrote about this that "class is a category that is used in analyzing the dynamics of social conflict and its structural roots." At the same time, the social class is not only economic, but also a social, political and spiritual and ideological education. K. Marx in "Poverty of Philosophy" writes: "The economic conditions turned first a lot of population in workers. The dominance of capital has created the same position for this mass and common interests. Thus, this mass is already classes in relation to capital, but not for themselves It itself in the struggle ... This mass is paid, it is constituted as a class for himself. Its interests are protected by class interests. " It is clear from this quotation that in the process of the emergence and development of social classes, according to K. Marx, there is a form when people who are in a position determined above criteria (place and role in the system of functional labor relations, property relations, Management relations and special economic interests) are not yet associated with the internal relationship of conscious (ideological) relations, but only the bonding of subjective relations and objective dependencies that exist within the framework of production relations. Then we say that they form the "class in themselves", which, however, is not a simple aggregate, since the system of objective relationship is associated, but also does not represent the class "for itself", i.e. Does not have another well-developed consciousness of its class economic and political interests. Moreover, objective class interests are reflected in the subjective classes of consciousness by no means mirror. The awareness of your essential, true interests, without which the transformation of the "class class" in the "class for ourselves" is inevitably happening through the system of psychological installations, the previous historical experience. The social class can become a "class for himself", only working out its own ideology.

Based on all this and its organizational design occurs. We particularly note that under the influence of this Regulation of Marx on the "class for itself", M. Weber offered to distinguish between the Social and Class Structure of the "Class" and "Social Class". Under the class, this author understood the social community associated only by the similarity of economic interests, the "economic situation" of this category of subjects. The category "Social Class" M. Weber showed that the highest manifestation of class communion is a mobilizing and encouraging to collectively awareness of its class economic and political interests and goals.

Modern classic of French sociology P. Bourdieu ( cm.) also offered to distinguish between possible (logical) and real social classes. This author writes that on the basis of knowledge of economic and other relations, it is possible to "identify classes in the logical sense of the word, i.e. classes as a set of agents occupying a similar position, which are placed under similar conditions and are subordinated to similar conditioning, have every chance for Possessing similar dispositions and interests, and, therefore, to develop similar practices and occupying similar positions. " P. Bourdieu rightly believes that this class "on paper" has a theoretical existence, "he allows you to explain and anticipate the practices and properties of classified and ... behavior leading to the combination of them in a group / in a real social class. - S.S./ "." ... This is the only possible class, since it is a set of agents who objectively will have less resistance if they are necessary "mobilization" than any other set of agents. "Turn a logical class into a real social class, writes It further is possible only through the development of his members of the position, "occupied in the social space" / socio-class relationship. - S.S./. I. Kraus also writes: "Classes ... are conflict groups that, uniting, dispute the existing distribution of power, advantages and other possibilities ... Classes are formed when the totality of individuals determines their interests as similar to the interests of others from the same aggregate and how different and opposing Interests of another combination of persons. " This researcher emphasizes an important role in the process of forming a social class. The presence of the last one's own ideology.

Thus, objective class interests are reflected in the subjective class of consciousness by no means mirrored. The awareness of your essential, true interests, without which the transformation of the "class class" in the "class for ourselves" is inevitably happening through the system of psychological installations, the previous historical experience. The social class can become a "class for himself", only working out its own ideology. Based on all this and its organizational design occurs. Due to the noncompliance of all components of the socio-class structure of society only to social classes and elementary professional, property and legal groups, it is necessary, based on the goal of more or less adequate reflection in the theory of corporate social actors, introduce for a meaningful description of the named structure A number of categories, as well as supplement the above definition of the social class P.A. Sorokina.

Under the social class in modern science it is understood as a cumulative, normal, solidarity, half-closed, but with an approach to open, associated with positive socio-class complimentaryness, a group composed of a cumulation of three main groups: 1) professional; 2) property; 3) volumetric. The concept of complimentaryness of positive (negative) was introduced by L.N. Gumilev for the characteristics of the ethnosphere. Under it was understood "The feeling of subconscious mutual sympathy (antipathy) of the members of ethnic teams, which determines the division on" their "and" strangers ". Under social and class complimentality means a feeling of subconscious mutual sympathy (antipathy) of members of social classes, leading to the formation of a single ideology and determining the division on "their" and "strangers." Positive social-class complimentaryness is that (according to the terminology of P. Bourdieu) distinguishes the "real social class" from "possible (logical) class.

It seems that the introduction into the social philosophy of a number of concepts, which fix a certain stage of development of social and class community, is a "class-layer", "class-class", "Distaho-class", "syncretic class". It is also advisable to allocate socio-economic categories showing the intracelate differentiation of subjects: "Social and class group", "Marginal Social and Class Group" and "Custom Social Class Group". Why is promising to introduce the concept of "class-layer"? The fact is that in modern sociology, not only there are no clear criteria for the categories of categories "class" and "layer", but also, as fairly emphasizes O.I. Locking "For many authors, they are generally synonymous."

Today in social scientists is typical of the idea that any modern society consists of groups or many individuals who have or wearing certain characteristics. In this case, these characteristics are considered as a classification criteria, which may be one- or, more often, multidimensional (in our terminology are elementary or cumulative structures). With this approach, the researcher's attention is traditionally shifted from production to distribution, without understanding objective relations between them. This situation has led today to the fact that, as VV rightly, V.V. Radaev and O.I. Locking: "In a significant part of studies, the same signs are used to highlight and classes and layers." And hence the opinion is widespread among social scientists that the category of class is covered by inhomogeneous social constituents depending on the gnoseological context, which invest various scientists in this term. "The meaning is distinguished and the meaning is noted by OI. Lashatan - investing in various authors to the term" social layer ". Most of the sociologists denotes this term social differentiation within a hierarchically organized society. Often the content of the term does not differ from the content in the term invested in the term. "Class". In the same cases, when these concepts differ, the term "stratum" denote groups inside the "classes", highlighted on the same grounds as the "classes themselves". Therefore, in scientific plan Introduction to the turnover instead of the "layer "The concept of" class-layer ", which makes it possible to emphasize that the name of the social and class community is one of the stages of social class life and at the same time allows you to clearly allocate the specifics of this stage." Class-layer "is a community that differs from social The absence of positive complimentary class, i.e. close in essence to the "possible class" Bourdieu. The degree of generality of individuals, The components of the class-layer, the level of awareness of their common needs and interests (primarily economic), the degree of their cohesion and organization is less than that of representatives of the social class. For the characteristics of intracelate groups, the category "Social and Class Group" is used. Under these groups, such intracelate groups are understood that partially differ from each other one (or two) major cummulations: or professional, or property, or volume legal; For the rest of two (or one), fully coinciding with other subjects of this social class.

To analyze the process of evolution of the socio-class structure of society, the category of the social "dyskocho-class" is often used (from the Latin word - Distractor - tearing apart). Under this class, the cumulative, half-closed, but with the approach to the open, the group composed of the cumulation of the three main groups: 1) professional; 2) property; 3) volume and legal, and characterized by an increased degree of dismemberment and loyalty of internal structures. The Distaho-Class is a social class in the process of strengthening the autonomization of its intracelate (socio-class) groups leading in perspective to its decay into several new social classes. As a rule, the aforementioned socio-class community is characterized by an even less opportunity for joint action than the class-layer; There is no single ideological position in the subjects of its constituent components.

The recognition of the feasibility of use in modern social science category "Social Districted Class" demanded introduction to the scientific circulation of the concept "embryonic (syncretic) social class" (or for brevity - "syncretic class"). The named social community is a socio-class group included in the Distahogo-Class, in the process of its transformation into the actual social class. The syncretic class differs in a diagnosis, absentiance due to the initial underdevelopment of the state.

In recent years, in the philosophical and sociological literature, much attention is paid to such a phenomenon as marginality, which acts as one of the characteristics of the state of social, including socio-class, structures. The named concept is usually used "... to designate relatively sustainable social phenomena arising on the border/ Highlighting me. - S.S./ interactions of various cultures, social communities, structures, as a result of which a certain part of social actors are beyond their limits "(Popova I.P.). Despite the seeming simplicity of the definition of the named phenomenon and its more than a seventy-year-old scientific history, so far in the application Categories "Marginality" There are a large number of gnoseological difficulties. It is necessary to agree with I.P. Popova, which is the reason for the name of Trojak things: "First, in the practice of using the term itself several approaches (in sociology, social psychology, cultural studies, political science, and social psychology, cultural studies, Economics, etc.), which gives the concept enough common, interdisciplinary. Secondly, in the process of clarification and evolution of the concept in sociology, several values \u200b\u200baffected by various types of marginalness. In third, his fuzziness, uncertainty makes it difficult to measure the phenomenon itself, its analysis in the context of social processes. "Thus, in modern social science, it is advisable to say not about any abstract marginalness of a certain non-designated social phenomenon, but only about the marginalness of certain types of certain types (or classes) phenomena and relationships. Application of the concept of "marginal" when characterizing the components of the socio-class structure puts forward its attribute attributes such as "border guard", "intermediate", "ambiguity" and "uncertainty" (which emphasizes increased degree entropy of marginal socio-class subjects. In our opinion, the social and class organization and the structure of society cannot be described in modern system language, without the introduction of the category "Marginal Social Class Group" (or for brevity - "Marginal Group"), which is a socio Class group included in one social class, but for a number of signs as close to another social class. This group occupies a specific "border" position in the socio-class structure of society. The named group with a high degree of probability can be characterized as the entropy element at the group level.

Social class-class (or for brevity - class-class) is a semi-closed group, with an approach to closed; Access to it is limited, including customs and traditions, its representatives have inherited rights and responsibilities. An example of such socio-class communities can serve as the Japan of the second half of the 20th century. In this country, the system of inheritance of political power is widely developed, "when sons, daughters and grandchildren of high-generation politicians almost automatically occupy places in parliament from the same elected districts ( niseor sansay Guin).In the mid-1990s, these parliamentarians in the second or third generation occupied to a quarter of the seats in the lower and to one fifth - in the upper chamber of the Japanese parliament. If they add spouses, devices, nephews and other relatives to them, as well as former secretaries of the parliamentarians who went on parliamentarians, the scale of the phenomenon of inheritance will be even more impressive "(Kravtshevich AI) should also add that the Japanese Cabinet of Ministers ( The highest executive) is formed from existing parliamentarians from the ruling or ruling parties. However, the country's real management is not in the hands of ministers and their deputies (politicians chosen by the people), which traditionally change annually, and in the hands of a career bureaucracy. Last It is also today a class class. The system of consulting meetings under the authorities, "unites the collective experience of officialhood, business and academic circles, trade unions and consumers and designed to contribute to the achievement of public consensus against the policy received" (Kravtsovich A.I), in Large cases are the screen for giving The appropriate entourage of the decisions prepared by the bureaucracy.

Caste socio-class groups (or for brevity - "castes") - social and class groups occupying a certain (strictly ranked) place in the social hierarchy associated with rigidly fixed activities and limited in communicating with each other.

Thus, the social class is a real sociological category, which allows to allocate a group of individuals in social and socio-economic relations for a number of (socio-economic) signs as a large closed system with a certain dynamic behavior algorithm and a specific internal structure changing depending on From the stage of class development - on the degree of its "maturity" (class-layer, social dysfour class, etc.).

In modern social science, under the social class is a cumulative, normal, solidarity, half-closed, but with an approach to open, associated with positive socio-class complimentaryness, a group composed of a cumulation of three main groups: 1) professional; 2) property; 3) volumetric. Under social and class complimentality means a feeling of subconscious mutual sympathy (antipathy) of members of social classes, leading to the formation of a single ideology and determining the division on "their" and "strangers". In the process of its life activity, social classes and socio-class groups can be united in social and class groups ("social superclasses") with the aim of joint struggle for optimizing the conditions for the implementation of their socio-economic interests. At the same time, the main condition for these integration is the temporary coincidence of the interests of uniting subjects and the obvious contradiction of their socio-economic interests of other social classes. Such an association of certain socio-class subjects can occur on a certain historical gap, as a rule. It should also be noted that the potential possibility of the named association is largely determined by the moral relations of one or another society (customs, traditions, moral norms, ideals, etc.).

Based on the above, social and class relations can be defined in a narrow sense as a relationship between individuals included in specific cumulative (integral) groups - social classes. Accordingly, under socio-class relations in a broad sense, relations between people are common in elementary professional, property and lumeual groups and cumulative (integral) groups - socio-class groups and social classes.

The socio-class structure of the Company is a combination: 1) the most sustainable, significant, regularly repetitive social and class relations, which arise between individuals united in social classes, socio-class groups and in elementary professional, property and volume-legal groups; 2) these individuals themselves, combined into social classes and socio-class elementary public groups. In any real society exists, constantly reproducing or disappearing, a wide variety of socio-class relations. If you assume that in any society, all these relationships will be stable, essential, regularly repeating, that is, there will be no chaotic socio-class processes or phenomena, then there will be no dynamism in the named society and it will be doomed On stagnation.

As noted in the special literature (E.A. Sedov), for normal operation and more or less adequate response to the change in the surrounding socio-economic realities (that is, for the perception of information), chaotic processes should not only be present, but also to take a sufficiently significant share In the whole totality of socio-economic relations. At the same time, if these chaotic processes cross the definite limit, that is, if the presence of non-chaotic processes becomes not sufficient to maintain certain structures in society, then this society is dying. At the same time, the degradation of the socio-class structure occurs. Therefore, for the characteristics of real socio-class relations, it is necessary to use the concept of "socio-class organization of society", which covers a wider aspect of social relations than the socio-class structure. The first includes not only stable, essential, non-random, regularly repeated, but also unstable, random, irregular relations. Some changes in the socio-class organization of the Company will act as a specific social "embryo" of the evolution of the socio-class structure.

Thus, S.-K.O. Dynamic society is always a continuously changing social phenomenon, the dynamics of which it is impossible to fully describe the language of modern mathematics, even using "mathematical chaos" as a means. At the same time, it seems theoretically possible with a sufficient degree of likelihood to describe the socio-class organization of the Company for some time. To fix this state, it is legitimate to use the category "Social-class fractal". The title concept refers to a certain static social configuration, acting as if an instant statistical (mathematical) "snapshot" of the socio-class organization. Several simplified real being of the socio-class organization of the Company can be represented as an infinite number of continuously replacing each other of socio-class fractals. The category "Social and class structure of society", as noted above, does not describe the entire diversity of socio-class relations and does not carry evolutionary potential.

In other words, if you submit that all the diversity of socio-class relations in a certain socio-economic system has been reduced only to the most sustainable, significant, regularly repeated, i.e. to non-random deterministic relationships, then such a system could only exist with constant external conditions (stable natural climatic conditions, unchanged sources of raw materials, lack of scientific and technological progress or regression, frozen the demographic structure with a constant population, etc.), t .. It is in principle not life. In order to respond to a change in external conditions in the socio-economic system, entropy must be existed (entropy is a measure of the uncertainty of stochastic processes) socio-class relations.

All real, and not imaginary, socio-class relations are divided into two types: 1) stable, significant, regularly repeated - formative socio-class structure and are an expression of structural information in this case; 2) unstable, random, stochastic - which are the embodiment of entropy processes leading to the transformation of the socio-class structure and allowing the latter to adequately respond to the change in the socio-economic system. It is the combination of all these relationships (sustainable and unstable, statistical and stochastic, etc.) is described by the term "S.-k.O.". In S.-k.O. Of any real society, elements are not included in the socio-class structure - individuals that can be combined into certain, sufficiently stable groups. In turn, entropy elements will also be present in any social class - ensuring the possibility of its change, and structural information elements - ensuring the possibility of self-preservation. (The dysfour class is a class with maximum entropy, and the social class is a class with minimal entropy.) A valid level of diversity at the highest levels of the socio-class structure can be achieved due to its effective restriction at the lower levels.

Demographic processes in social context

1. Russia joined the third millennium not in the best demographic form. Unreasonably high mortality, low birth rate, population reduction, fading migration. All this is happening against the background of more general deep and painful economic and social change, and it is not surprising that public opinion is inclined to consider negative demographic trends as a direct consequence of these changes.

2. From whether such a look is fade or wrong, the understanding of not only the demographic present, but also the demographic future of Russia depends. If we are talking about a simple reaction to the economic and social crisis of the 90s, then we can hope that, as the demographic situation improves this crisis. If the main demographic trends have deeper causes and more long-standing origin, then may not have grounds for such optimism.

3. Although the author belongs to the number of demographers who consider demographic processes as relatively autonomous in relation to other social processes, it, of course, does not consider them absolutely independent of the social, economic or political context. Moreover, he believes that demographic trends in Russia should be considered in two contexts: domestic Russian and global. This applies to all the main demographic processes: mortality, fertility and migration.

4. Mortality trends in Russia with the greatest basis can be characterized as crisis, although they cannot be connected only with the events of the last 10-15 years, they are clearly traced at least from the mid-60s. The main reason is the preservation of conservative state-to-paternalistic plants, which very much limit the scope of individual activity and responsibility, including when it comes to protecting their own health and life. This is especially noticeable at the later stages of the modernization of mortality, when it depends more on individual behavior. Through earlier and very important stages, the process of extinction of generations in Russia of the twentieth century was quite successful. Nevertheless, the entire value system - and individual, and public - still remains largely archaic, predetermines such a distribution of priorities in which society, and every individual person sacrifice health and even life in the name of other people who are considered more important purposes, guard Health is invariably funded by the "residual principle", proper freedom of choosing a doctor, hospital, method of treatment, insurance, etc. is not ensured. All this led to the fact that for several decades ago, modernization changes have been blocked and the mortality situation has ceased to improve. In this, in fact, there is a long-term mortality crisis in Russia, the last decade did not bring fundamental changes.

5. Oddly enough, but frankly crisis, long-term trends in death, the Russian public opinion is much smaller than the birth trends, to give an unambiguous assessment of which is much more complicated. There is no doubt that, from the point of view of the domestic context, an extremely low birth rate, the main reason for the reduction of the population of Russia is extremely unfavorable for the country. However, in contrast to very high mortality, it does not constitute something exceptional, the similar birth rate is observed in many developed countries with completely different socio-economic conditions. This could be interpreted as a general crisis of all modern "post-industrial" civilization, the reasons for which cannot be found and eliminated in one country. However, with this approach, it is impossible not to see that the decline in fertility in post-industrial societies is associated with many changes that it is customary to interpret as positive attributes of modernization: almost complete elimination of child mortality, emancipation and self-realization of women growing specific investments in children, education growth, etc. . Given this, it may be not necessary to talk about the crisis, but on the internal contradictions of the modernization process, and may be that modernization objectively transfers the emphasis from quantitative on the qualitative characteristics of social life.

However, the decline in fertility should be considered in a wider, global context. In this reduction, you can see a systemic reaction to a global demographic crisis generated by the global demographic explosion and an increase in the load on limited resources of the planet. With this interpretation, a decline in the birth rate on a global scale below the level of simple reproduction for a sufficiently long period is benefit, and a decrease in fertility in Russia, as well as on the "West", is only an episode of such a global turn. Whatever it may be unpleasant to all developed countries, and for Russia with its huge territory - especially, nothing can be done about it, because the interests of the preservation of all mankind is higher than the interests of individual countries.

6. The relationship of internal migrations with the social context, mainly from domestic Russian, is obvious. For most of the twentieth century, multi-million dollar movements of the rural population in the city were one of the main tools and at the same time the results of modernization shifts that changed the appearance of the country. With these same shifts, in particular, with the industrial development of new regions, the creation of new cities, etc. Interdistrict, in particular, and inter-republican migrations of the Soviet period were connected. At the same time, external migration for most of this period was artificially blocked.

The political changes of the end of the century, the collapse of the USSR and the emergence of new Russia in the never existing borders have changed the general context very much and put forward external migration to the fore (especially since the potential of internal migrations by this time was largely exhausted).

The new domestic context in which now has to consider external migrations, contradictory. On the one hand, the explicit inconsistency of the declaration of the Russian population and the huge territory of the country (more than in the time of the USSR) makes the desired immigration, and this is a demographic process that is much easier to manage than mortality or fertility. On the other hand, every immigration generates economic, social, and sometimes political stresses, problems of intercultural interaction, etc., which is inevitably in Russia, where anti-immigrant, and sometimes frankly xenophobic sentiment. Therefore, it is not necessary to count on the too benevolent attitude of Russians to immigration in the near future.

But there is also a global context that is determined by the rapid increase in the number of residents in poor developing countries and increasing demographic pressure on developed countries. It manifests itself, in particular, in the growing legal and illegal migration to these countries, the search for political asylum in them, etc. The final result is formed under the influence of all components of both the domestic and world context, which makes this result difficult to predict.

7. Responding to a question made at the beginning of the report, it should be said that the main current demographic problems of Russia can hardly be associated with the economic and social development of the country in the last 10-15 years. Perhaps this period highlighted and aggravated some problems, but at its base they have long-standing historical and sociocultural roots. Moreover, most of these problems are immanent to the type of development that Russia has chosen not one decade and not even one century ago when she joined the way of catching upgrading. Any reasonable strategy of society should take into account the deep condition of the current Russian demographic trends, and not proceed from the illusory possibilities of their easy and rapid change.

Youth as a socio-demographic group.The controversy between scientists about the definition of youth, the criteria for the separation of it into an independent group, age borders have a long history. In this context, it is impossible to be considered, like some researchers, young people only as a demographic group, thereby emphasizing only its biologically defined features. After all, the category of age is biosocial. This is not just a biological "counter" of human life, the indicator of physiological and psychological identity changes, it affects the social status of the man-century, its place and role in the system of public division of labor, the fulfillment of them of op-radiated social roles, the availability of rights and obligations etc. Age changes the characteristics of personality activity, its performance, professional skills, creative potential, mobility. With age, the structure of needs for satisfying material and spiritual benefits is transformed. From this you can conclude that the age factor is undoubtedly a social phenomenon. In addition, the youth performs a specific social role in society, which is expressed in its social and innovation activities. No wonder sociologists, the concept of yuventization was introduced, which denotes such social changes and innovations, which are the result of the active activities of young people. This allows you to talk about young people not only as a demographic, but also as a social group. In this case, the resource of socio-innovative behavior and the group-forming factor is the "capital of dispositions" - the specific type of "cultural capital", which the Mo-Lodge has and thanks to which it differs from other social groups. It is he predetermines all the actually social functions of young people, determining its activities aimed at the preparation and inclusion in various spheres of public life, into a social mechanism, as well as a specific youth subculture, internal differentiation, which does not always coincide with the established forms of socially valuable differentiation. Thus, you can talk about young people as a socio-demographic group, because. What the individuals belonging to it have a general social characteristic and perform the necessary function of the system of society. And the main sign of the social group is precisely the implementation of a socially significant function.

The use of the proposed technique is possible in various spheres of human life in order to follow the optimization of identified disagreements. Its application will minimize the spread of unsuccessful socialization, reduce the massiveness of deviant forms, increase the effectiveness of educational and educational programs and events in various directions.

Literature

1. Burdy P. Beginning. - M.: Socio-Logos, 1994. - 288 p.

2. Burdy P. Social space and genesis of "Classes" // Policy Sociology / Sost., Society. ed.

ON THE. Shmatko. - M.: Socio-Logos, 1993. - 336 p.

3. Self-regulation and prediction of social behavior of the person / ed. V.A. Yadov. - L.: Science, 1979.

Mahiyanova Alina Vladimirovna, Candidate of Sociological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Sociology of the Kazan State Energy University, Kazan, E-mail: [Email Protected]

Makhiyanova Alina Vladimirovna, Candidate of Sociological Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Kazan State Power Engineering University, Kazan, E-mail: [Email Protected]

UDC 140.8 V.R. Feldman

Ideology in traditional society: essence, content, functions

The article discusses the role of religious ideology in the mechanisms of organization and self-organization of the traditional society, it also presents the author's concept of the essence and content of ideology. Keywords: ideology, tradition, traditional society, organization, self-organization.

IDEOLOGY IN TRADITIONAL SOCIETY: NATURE, CONTENT, FUNCTIONS

The article Considers The Role of Religious Ideology In The Mechanisms of Organization and Self-Organization of Traditional Society, It Also Presents The Author's Concept of Nature and Content of Ideology.

Key Words: Ideology, Tradition, TRADITIONAL SOCIETY, ORGANIZATION, SELF-ORGANIZATION.

The main mechanisms of the social organization and self-organization of a traditional society, as you know, was the power, religion, religious ideology and ethnocultural tradition. The ideology in the traditional society was inseparable from religion, it was included in its content in the form of qualitatively defined components with different functional orientation. There was a kind of religious cynical syncretism. Religious socio-political doctrines of traditional societies carried out the legitimization of the highest state power. They also, on the one hand, integrated society, acting as anti-satropine elements, performed the function of the social attractor, on the other hand, they were opposed to one public system of the other, with other axiological grounds of its historical being.

In the life of society, ideology exists and functions as a dialectic unity of entity and phenomenon. Ideology is a system of values \u200b\u200band ideals that perform in society the function of supporting the existing

the underlying political system, attaching the purpose and meaning of being both a separate person and a specific society, which are its spiritual mechanisms for organizing and self-organization playing the role of an attractor at the evolutionary stage of the development of society and in the synergistic processes of its system transformations.

The essence of ideology is the system of its fundamental values \u200b\u200bthat exhibit their essential content in the form of specific functions in the socio-historical process. The fundamental values \u200b\u200bof ideology include historically formed ideas about the relationship between power and society, their mutual rights and obligations, legitimacy and illegitimacy of state power, etc.

The traditional society at all stages of its historical being included the tradition, which, like the ideology, was a social attractor, one of the main mechanisms of his organization and self-organization.

The tradition, as is known, forms a set of material and spiritual values \u200b\u200bthat exist for a long time having a solid social base that perform various anti-satropy functions. Tradition is the attribute of society, one of the main conditions for its existence and development. Without tradition, qualitative changes, complexized open social systems are impossible. This also applies to economic, and to political systems, and to the forms of public consciousness. If tradition disappears, a qualitatively defined social system disappears.

In foreign sociology, as well as social and cultural anthropology, as a rule, when they talk about traditional society, they mean pre-industrial agricultural societies. These forms of society are characterized as possessing high structural stability and a method for regulating social relations and activities of people. Usually, traditional societies include societies with varying degrees of social differentiation. Traditional societies, as a rule, distinguished the enormous inertia once adopted cultural samples, customs, methods of action, labor skills. They dominated the prescribed behavioral models.

One of the theoretical models of the traditional society proposed an English sociologist E. Hyddens. The most important features of the traditional agricultural society, Giddenx refers the following: the presence of cities with a sharply pronounced inequality of wealth and power; writing; science and art; Developed government system. In traditional society, on hydrate, there is a simple division of labor in accordance with the human floor, the population is divided into classes, the dominant position occupies an aristocracy. Giddens believes that in a traditional agricultural society there were slavery and a professional army with tough discipline and good physical training. In our opinion, these social traits can be found in some ancient traditional societies, but in general this theoretical model can not be attributed to all social systems. In the ancient Greek democracies of the aristocracy did not occupy a dominant position. They also did not have professional armies. Specified logic in the description of the traditional agricultural society by E. Giddens, of course, there is, but still its structure, material and spiritual foundations of existence and development, organization mechanisms are presented in

significantly simplified form. One of the main disadvantages of the analysis of the traditional society implemented by Giddens is the lack of a description of the tradition, ideology, material, socio-psychological, ideological factors of its functioning and reproduction.

In the 90s. The last century in Russia in the field of socio-humanitarian knowledge and philosophy there was a transition from methodological monism to methodological pluralism. A civilization approach received widespread, some researchers in their works began to use the ideas of universal evolutionism N.N. Moiseeva, in scientific research received the dissemination of the concept and category of synergetics. In studies of socio-historical dynamics, scientists began to use the ideas of W. Wallelai-on. For example, N.N. Kordin uses the ideas of W. Vollerstain in his works, the power in the traditional society (the concept of "Headquarters"). Thus, in its studies, various wood forms are discussed as one of the main mechanisms of the organization of traditional nomadic societies of Central Asia. It shares the Headquarters in the degree of complexity.

In the works of N.N. Kraddin is a description of simple, complex and ultra-chosen leaders. On the first he refers the group of community settlements, hierarchically subordinate leaders. Simple chores can consist of several thousand people. The combination of several simple leaders leads to complex leaders, which, as Krav-Dean believes, tens of thousands of people could include. Ethnic heterogeneity, as well as the exclusion of managerial elite and a number of other social groups from direct management activities, was characterized by complex leaders.

N.N. Kradin characterizes ultra-sided chickens as a prototype of early state formations. It notes the presence of urban construction, culture of diplomacy, the monumental architecture of the burial structures, etc. in the ultra-chisted leaders.

T. Parsons associates with the traditional society following the features: unqualified, loose, the desired nature of roles, groups, social relations; An order based on inheritance by birth or kinship; particularism; collectivism (most importantly, to which groups

people are appreciated, not the one who they themselves); Emotionality (invasion of emotions on social life). This image of a traditional society seems to be quite convincing. In the Central Asian region of modern Russia, the listed features of the traditional society, for some exceptions and in different degrees of sustainability, complete implementation, are still manifested.

Important methodological importance for researchers of traditional societies have the works of those scientists, which contain the results of research of ideological mechanisms for organizing social systems. With them, as a rule, their sustainability and development are associated. Deep interest in the ideological mechanisms of society is manifested in the works of E. Shilza. He believes that any society has an axiological center, a central value system that performs the function of the socio-integrating mechanism. The central system of values \u200b\u200bis ideology, regardless of which it has a form on one or another phase of social development.

According to Schilza, the Axiological Center of the Company may exist and fulfill its functions of value orientation and integration only in the sacralized form of its own existence. He is convinced that in the modern industrial society, the axiological center is sacral, even if its ideological content is presented as completely free from the priesthood, dogma-zeeriness, eternal truth.

This conviction of Shilza seems quite reasonable. History shows that ideologies contain cults of the formed socio-political systems, the forms of the state, political regimes, social ideals. One of the specific features of ideology is its desire to idealize society, to present its exement in freedom from various imperfections, from the manifestations of dehumanization. This kind of attitude to the creation of an image of a society is nothing but the desire to form his cult, to give major social institutions the status of holiness. Note that the submission of shilza about ideology as a mechanism of a social organization is not free from contradictions. For example, he does not consider it possible to talk about the integrating role of state ideological mechanisms in the appendix to traditional, "limited" societies. Shilz believes that in such population societies of the population, they were far from direct impact on them

the central value system is that they focused mainly on their group values.

We believe that this conclusion of Shilza is associated with his rejection of the idea of \u200b\u200bthe development of weakly inferentiated societies. If we consider the traditional society in development, right up to the formation of various forms of statehood, then an increase in the organizing role of the central value system is striking. As is well known, in the imperial forms of the state, the central value system, which included those or other religious systems as a necessary element, was an effective mechanism for their organization and self-organization. It was characteristic of both the nomadic empires of Central Asia during the early Middle Ages, which is quite convincingly writes N.V. Abaev.

Another foreign researcher of the ideological mechanisms of organization and self-organization of society deserves attention. We mean R. Kulborn. He drew attention to the fact that at the stage of the transition of human society to civilization, when the first states arose, the issue of group self-discipline was updated. Without this it was impossible to maintain the relative stability of large polyethic social systems, the class structure of society. These tasks at that historical time, as Kul Born believes, decided not so much a state how many religious forms of ideology. He absolutely correctly noted that religion in the traditional society was such an worldview in which the being of social normative order was associated with the will of the supernatural spiritual principle, and this is nothing more than an ideological function, the function of supporting public order. R. Kulborne quite convincingly shows that already in the deep ancient times the priests carried out activities to maintain the sustainability of the Company, the imperatives of discipline and self-discipline were introduced into consciousness in the cultural relations. Moreover, priests set out complex religious ideas in the concepts that are quite accessible to the widespread masses. They often deliberately simplified religious teachings, subjected them vulgarization in order to make them universally understood.

Thus, in the traditional society, the religious form of ideology was one of the main mechanisms of his organization and self-organization, with it to a large extent

the sustainability of this historical form of society was associated, its being in its qualitative definiteness.

Literature

1. Hyddens E. Sociology. - Chelyabinsk: MPPO, 1991.

2. Kordin N.N. Empire Hunna. - M: Logos, 2002. - P. 248 -249.

3. Parsons T. Pattern variables // Uzkomka P. Sociology of social change. - M: Aspect-press, 1990.

4. Shils Edward. Center and Periphery: Essays in Macrosociology. - Chicago, 1975. - P. 4-7.

5. Abaev N.V. Some ideological and spiritual and cultural factors of organization and self-organization

"Nomadic" civilization // Bulletin of the Tuvinian state. un-ta. Ser. Social and humanitarian sciences. - 2009. - №1. -FROM. 5-6.

6. Coulborn R. Structure and Process In The Rise and Fall of Civilized Societies // Comparative Studies in Society and History.

1966. - № 4. - P. 400-417.

Feldman Vladimir Romanovich, Candidate of Political Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Philosophy of the Tuvinian State University, Kyzyl.

Feldman Vladimir Romanovich, Candidate Of Political Sciencees, Associate Professor, Head Of The Department of Philosophy, Tuva State University, Kyzyl.

A.S. Boubev

The concept of "ethnos" and "ethnicity"

The article discusses the problem of the relationship between the concepts of "ethnos" and "ethnicity". The author considers the forms of ethnic community, the ratio of the concepts of "people", "Ethnos", "Nation".

Keywords: people, nation, tribe, tribal associations, ethnicity, ethnic community, ethnos.

THE CONCEPT OF "ETHNOS" AND "ETHNICITY"

The ARTICLE DISCUSSES A PROBLEM OF CORRELATION BETWEEN THE CONCEPTS OF "ETHNICITY" AND ETHNICITY. The Author Considers Forms of Ethnic Community, The Correlation Between The Concepts of "People", "Ethnos", "Nation".

Key Words: People, Nation, Tribe, Tribal Associations, Ethnicity, Ethnic Community, Ethnos.

Increased interest in the problems of the ethnos and this is explained primarily to a significant increase in the role of ethnic relations in the public life of many states and peoples. Life itself refutes the statement that dominated from the beginning of the 20th century in public opinion and ethnological science, that the ethnicity factor will gradually lose its importance due to the processes of modernization. However, historical practice has shown that ethnicity not only did not lose their position in modern ethnic and cultural life, but also significantly increased them. Currently, ethnic problems exist in many regions of the world, including in the republics of the former Soviet Union.

Despite close attention to the modern ethnic processes of scientists, in domestic and world etiology there is still no generally accepted understanding of the essence of its basic concepts - "Ethnos" and "Ethnicity".

People inhabiting our planet form many diverse communities. Special place among them are common, name

mY in everyday Russian languages \u200b\u200b"nations", and in the scientific literature - "ethnic groups". The term "ethnos" is used in ethnological literature for quite a long time, but scientific understanding of it as a special concept for the designation of a special community of people occurred only in recent decades. This concept in modern ethnology is inextricably linked with the concept of ethnicity. In the 1960-1990s. In connection with this problem, a large number of scientific publications appeared in the world. Thanks to them, the term "ethnicity" firmly entrenched in the categorical apparatus of ethnology, political science, sociology and other social sciences.

Translated from the Greek concept "Ethnos" has many values, among which the crowd, a group of people, herd, people, tribe, pagans. These values \u200b\u200bunites only that they all make sense of the aggregate of something similar creatures. Already to V c. BC. The two main meaning of this term is allocated - the "tribe" and "people", and gradually the second pesys the first.

Entry in it is characterized by a rigid estate hierarchy, the existence of sustainable social communities (especially in the countries of the East), a special way of regulation life societies based on traditions, customs. This organization of the Company seeks to preserve the sociocultural foundations in a constant form. Traditional society - Agrarian society.

For traditional society, as a rule, are characteristic:
-Traditional economy
-Corporization of agricultural mistake;
-stability structure;
-conditional organization;
- low mobility;
-High mortality;
- High fertility;
- Lowest life expectancy.

The traditional person perceives the world and the head of the order of life as something inextricably-holistic, holistic, sacred and not subject to change. A person's place in society and its status is determined by the tradition (as a rule, on the right of birth).

In traditional society, collectivist installations prevailed, individualism is not welcomed (since freedom of individual actions can lead to a violation of the institution order tested by time). In general, the traditional societies are characterized by primacy of collective interests over private, including primacy of the interests of existing hierarchical structures (states, clan, etc.). Not so much individual capacity as the place in the hierarchy (official, class, clan, etc.), which occupies a person is appreciated.

In traditional society, as a rule, relational relations are dominated, and not a market exchange, and elements of a market economy are toughly regulated. This is due to the fact that free market relations increase social mobility and change the social structure of society (in particular, the data is destroyed); The redistribution system can be regulated by tradition, and market prices - no; Forced redistribution prevents the "unauthorized" enrichment / depletion of both individuals and classes. The persecution of economic benefits in a traditional society is often morally condemned, disinterested care is opposed.

In traditional society, most people live in a local community (for example, village), relationship with `big society`Pretty weak. At the same time, relatives, on the contrary, are very strong.
The worldview (ideology) of traditional society is due to tradition and authority.

Transformation of traditional society
Traditional society It is extremely stable. As the famous demographer and sociologist Anatoly Vishnevsky writes, `in it everything is interconnected and very difficult to withdraw or change any one element`.

In antiquity, changes in traditional society occurred extremely slowly - over generations, almost imperceptibly for a separate person. Express periods development There were also in traditional societies (a bright example - changes in the territory of Eurasia in the I millennium BC), but even at such periods of change were carried out slowly according to modern standards, and on their completion society It was again returned to a relatively static state with the predominance of cyclic dynamics.

At the same time, since ancient times there were societies that cannot be called quite traditional. The departure from the traditional society was associated, as a rule, with the development of trade. This category includes the Greek cities-states, medieval self-governed shopping cities, England and Holland of the XVI-XVII centuries. It is a mansion of ancient Rome (up to the III century n. Er) with his civil society.

Fast and irreversible transformation of traditional society began to occur only from the XVIII century as a result of the industrial revolution. To date, this process captured almost the whole world.

Fast changes and a waste from traditions can be trained by a traditional person as a wreck of landmarks and values, loss of the meaning of life, etc. Since adaptation to new conditions and the change in the nature of the activity is not a traditional person's strategy, the transformation of society often leads to the marginalization of the population.

The most painful transformation of traditional society occurs in cases where dismantled traditions have a religious rationale. At the same time, resistance to changes can take forms of religious fundamentalism.

During the transformation of the traditional society, authoritarianism may increase in it (or in order to preserve traditions, or in order to overcome resistance to change).

The transformation of a traditional society is completed by a demographic transition. The generation, which grew up in adolescent families, has a psychology, distinguished from the psychology of a traditional person.

Opinions about the need (and degree) of the transformation of traditional society differ significantly. For example, the philosopher A.Dugin considers it necessary to abandon the principles of modern society and return to the Golden Age` Traditionalism. Sociologist and demographer A.Vischnevsky argues that the traditional society `There is no chance of that, although it will be violently resisting`. According to the calculations of Academician of the Raen Professor A. Nazareyan, in order to completely abandon development and return society In a static state, the number of humanity needs to be reduced several hundred times.