Social Studies in the cultural system. Social institutions of culture

Introduction

1. Definition of the concept of "culture"

2. Interaction of culture and society

3. Culture spiritual and material

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

We are people - we live in constant communication with yourself like. This is called a scientific term - society. The whole history of mankind is the emergence, development and destruction of societies of various species. However, all societies can find permanent properties and signs, without which no association of people is impossible. Society as a whole and individual components of its groups have specific cultures. The relevance of this topic is due to the fact that culture affects the course of the history of mankind, where it interacts with society, with society.

Culture is a product of creative and creative human activity. Many researchers believe that culture originated primarily under the influence of public queries and needs. The society needed the consolidation and transfer of spiritual values, which outside the public forms of human life could die along with the author of these values. Society, therefore, the process of creating values \u200b\u200bhas given a steady and continuity. In society it became possible to accumulate values, the culture began to acquire the cumulative nature of development. In addition, the Company has created opportunities for publiclying and using values, which led to the possibility of faster understanding and testing by other members of society.

Thus, culture helps people live in their natural and social environment, to preserve the unity of society when interacting with other societies, carry out production activities and reproduction of people.

The purpose of this abstract is the analysis of culture and society, as well as their interaction.

The work consists of introduction, three chapters, conclusion and literature of the references. Total work out of 20 pages.

1. Determination of the concept of "culture"

Culture arose as a result of long historical development and exists in society, transmitting generation to generation. The term "Cultura" leads its origin from the Latin verb colo, which means "processing", "cultivate the soil". Initially, the word "culture" indicated the process of humanity to nature as a habitat. However, gradually, like many other words of the language, it changed its meaning.

In the present language, the concept of "culture" is used mainly in wide and narrow values. In a narrow sense, speaking of culture, usually imply the areas of creative activity that are associated with art. In the wide sense of the culture of society, it is customary to be called a set of forms and results of human activity, entrenched in public practice and transmitted from generation to generation using certain iconic systems (linguistic and non-language), as well as by learning and imitate, i.e. Culture is an exceptionally human, socially social mechanism for its origin and appointment. It is legitimate to say that culture is a universal form of human communications, its functioning ensures the continuity of the development of society, the interaction of individual subsystems, institutions, elements of society. The emergence and development of the human personality, the existence of society is impossible outside the cultural context.

In the history of social thought there were various, often opposing points of view on culture. A part of the philosophers called the culture tools for people challenge, so the German philosopher F. Nitsche, proclaimed the thesis that the person in nature is an anticultural creature, and the culture itself is evil, which is created to suppress and enslave a person. Another point of view was adhered to those scientists who called the culture to the means of refining a person, turning it into a civilized member of society. Stages of the development of culture were considered by them as the steps of the progressive development of humanity.

In the XIX and the first half of the XX centuries. The culture was determined mainly through the difference of the results of human activity from purely natural phenomena, that is, they gave a "definition through denial". With this approach, the concept of "culture" was practically merged with the concept of "society". Therefore, it is impossible to bring some finished, the universal definition of culture, because this concept is hidden truly the immense world of human activity, searches, passions, etc. Decades of research and discussions greatly advanced the understanding of the essence of cultural phenomena, modern cultureologists have already more than five hundred definitions. In general, most authors include culture all types of human conversion activities, as well as the results of activity - a set of material and spiritual values \u200b\u200bcreated by man. This thought can be explained by the example. Say, the tree growing in the forest remains part of nature. But if it is grown (or transplanted) man in the park, garden, forest belt, etc. - This is an object of culture, the "second nature", created by a person for any of its human goals: to strengthen the soil, create a recreation area, get the fruit, decorate the landscape, etc. There is also countless products from the tree, which from ancient times creates a person - all of them, of course, the creation of a person, i.e. Culture items. Thus, in the concept of "culture", a certain human, public, and not a natural, not biological principle is laid. Culture is the result of human activity, society, the aggregate of all that was created by a person, society, and not by nature. Therefore, culture is considered the most important, essential characteristic of a person and society. However, despite the various assessments of the impact of culture on the lives of people, almost all thinkers recognized that:

1) spiritual culture plays an important role in the life of society, being a means of accumulation, storage, transfer of experience accumulated by humanity;

2) Culture is a special human form of being, which has its own spatial-temporary borders;

3) Culture serves as one of the most important characteristics of the vital activity of both a separate personality and a particular society as a whole.

If you analyze the most common approaches to the definition of culture adopted in modern science, the following components can be distinguished: culture is:

The experience of society and the components of its social groups accumulated as a result of activities to meet the needs and adaptation to the environment and social environment;

This is not any experience, but only one that becomes the property of the whole group or the whole society. The experience that the individual has not shared with members of his group is not part of the culture;

It is an experience that is transmitted through the language, and not through biological mechanisms (gene pool);

Finally, only that experience enters the cultural baggage, which does not remain within one generation, and is transmitted from generation to generation.

In this way, culture - This is a group experience of a society or group that is transmitted from generation to generation through language.

Culture as a concept is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Culture concept

Basic elements of culture (Fig. 2) are:

Figure 2 - Structural Elements of Culture

Values - The convictions divided in society (group) regarding the goals to which people should strive, and the fundamental means of their achievement (terminal and instrumental).

Social norms - Standards (Rules), regulating behavior in the social situation.

Samples of behavior - Sustainable complexes of behavioral acts, which are accepted to demonstrate in any society in response to a standard social incentive and / or social situation.

Knowledge - ideas about the properties of nature and society and patterns that manage them functioning in this society or the social group.

Skills - Practical techniques to manipulate natural and social objects common in this society (group).

Symbols - Signs in which the relationship between them and the values \u200b\u200bdisplayed is conditional. The symbols of each particular culture belong to various signs, allowing to classify the phenomena of nature and society, as well as the alphabet of writing.

Artifacts - The set of items produced under any culture and reflecting its norms, the values \u200b\u200bcontained in it the knowledge achieved technological techniques that serve as symbols of this culture.

The mechanism of broadcasting culture , transferring its norms and values \u200b\u200bfrom generation to generation, is language . In most modern societies, culture exists in the following basic forms (Fig. 3):

Figure 3 - Forms of Culture

1) high, or elite culture - elegant art, classical music and literature, created and consumed by the elite;

2) Folk culture - fairy tales, songs, folklore, myths, traditions, customs;

3) Mass culture - culture that has developed with the development of media, created for mass and consumed by the mass. There is a point of view that the mass culture is the product itself. Owners of the media only study the needs of the masses and give what they want the masses. The boundaries between them are very permeable and conditional.

In sociology as a science on society (Auguste Cont) and his insutu (Herbert Spencer), the relationship between society and culture is being studied. In the XIX century The Company was understood by undifferentiated as integrity, the integration of which depends primarily from cultural factors. According to O. Conte, society in general by the cultural system. People incorporated into this system are related primarily to non-natural, but cultural relations: a common political structure, a business organization, language, religion, customs, knowledge, art, etc. Any human group here is a culture product, and the types of cultural activities Acquire a type of special interrelated functions of society. Hence, sociology as a science of society is simultaneously science on culture. The concept of society in this case is identical to the concept of culture.

Spencer, as well as O. Cont, considers cultural phenomena with integral elements of society. However, in its theory of institutes, he is trying to establish a certain relationship between the public organization as such and cultural phenomena. In Spencership Sociology, the Institute is primarily a guarantor of the integrity of a public organization, preserving it and development. However, some institutions serve directly conservation and develop certain categories of cultural phenomena. So, religion retain and develop church institutions, organized religious associations. Arts, literature and science support and develop specific institutions, professional groups and associations.

This position in a certain extent contradicts the views of O. Conte relative to the determining role of cultural factors in the integration of society, the understanding of society as an exclusively cultural system. In Spencer, the principal sign of society as the system is the cooperation of individuals and groups. This means that the integration of society is based primarily on a public organization as such, and not on cultural factors. Although the British sociologist postulates the last as integral elements of society, but the origins of the conceptual branch of society and a public organization from cultural phenomena, culture as a whole are traced in its theory. This is especially noticeable when Spencer emphasizes the role of social institutions, organized by groups of society in maintaining and developing certain cultural phenomena.

In the 70s of the XIX century, when the main sociological works of Spencer, his compatriot Anthropologist and the historian of culture BB were published. Tyllor issues his capital labor "Primitive Culture" (1871), where it formulates not only the first definition of culture, but also the program "Science of Culture". Contrary to the approach of Spencer to society as integrity, including culture, E.B. Tyallor appeals exclusively to cultural phenomena (myths, customs, beliefs, arts, habits, etc.), that is, what we call spiritual culture (in their subsequent works of Spencer calls culture and technique, which is an element of material culture). By B.B. Tyllor, a culture researcher must decompose the culture on parts, elements and classify them into the relevant groups. Therefore, in its definition of culture, attention is emphasized primarily on the enumeration of the elements from which culture consists. The latter is "complex integrity." However, decomposing it into parts, elements, the British anthropologist is trying to understand not the evolution of culture as a whole, but the evolution of its various elements, which is not the same.

Concentrating on individual cultural phenomena, homogeneous and comparative elements, Tyllor opened the way to use new research techniques, such as statistical methods, promoted at the time Lambert Adolf Ketle, oriented supporters of evolutionism (primarily in anthropology) on research not public evolution as a whole, And the evolution of the family, religion, morality and the like. Later, all this gave the ground to criticize evolutionism and "science of culture" E.B. Tyllor for pulling out the facts from the context, ignoring the integrity, of which they pull out certain individual fragments. However, the program provisions of "science on culture" were used in the formation of the foundations of American cultural anthropology.

Excessive autonomization of cultural phenomena, dependencies from society and its structures, the French sociological school led by Bimil Durkheim could not accept. Supporters of this school all cultural phenomena interpreted as a public organization products, as social phenomena, are authorized by society. From here the most important task of sociology was considered to study the nature of social phenomena, as well as ways to impose consent to the society with the Company. The unity of the Company is held on recognized and supported by the society principles and norms that regulate not only actions, but also experience and presenting its members.

Comparative studies of religion, rights, morality, politics, economics, knowledge, language, etc., were carried out by B. Durkheim and his followers, were primarily oriented - in the spirit of sociologist - on evidence that all these phenomena from these industries are parts of a holistic organized life of society, and therefore depend on the public organization as a whole. Created by B. Durkheim The sociological concept of religion led him to the theory according to which religion is not in itself a special cultural product. Not only religion, morality and politics, but also knowledge, individual theories, the main logical principles and categories were explained exclusively as public products.

Such a tough dependence of cultural phenomena from the public organization was questioned. In particular, supporters of sociologism criticized for the exaggeration of the role of group factors in society and the underestimation of individual. In addition, B. Durkheim and his followers themselves were convinced that social phenomena could not be limited only by one human group and thereby unambiguously state their dependence on any group organization. In this regard, in 1913, B. Durkheim and Marseil Moss in the French magazine "Sociological Yearbook", emphasized that "political and legal institutions, phenomena of public morphology are parts of a device inherent in each people. In contrast to them myths, legends, money , Trade, elegant arts, instruments, language, words, scientific knowledge and literary forms have wonderful character ... They exist not only in the form of isolated facts, but also more complex systems are not limited to a certain political organism ... ". French sociologists offer to call the facts of facts characterized by internal unity and their way of being, civilization. Consequently, the fact that in the English-language scientific literature on the initiative of BB Tyllor (who himself borrowed the term "culture" from German works) was called culture, in French was called civilization. Further development of world science mitigates this terminological discrepancy, but now it is still preserved.

In Germany, a significant contribution to the understanding of the essence of culture was made by an outstanding representative of German enlightenment Y.G. Gerder. In his opinion, society is not qualitatively different from the rest of the world and is subject to the same laws. For a separate individual, it is a "natural state", because from the moment of birth it is necessarily included in a specific community: family, tribe, people, and the like. People, Y.G. Gerder, is an essential human community. This is not so much a community living on a certain territory and adheres to certain laws, how many historically established cultural community, which is implemented primarily in the language. Every people, the thinker believes, says how thinks and thinks as talking. So, the language is the main factor in the identity of the people, it reflects the nature of the people, its tradition.

Political organization Y.G. Herder considered a secondary factor, determined by cultural factors. The essence of the state is the existence of not sovereign power, but the human community, which creates such a political organization that it needs. The state of the state depends on the cohesion of the human community, when the latter is weakened, even the strongest government is powerless. Good laws are not the laws for which the state apparatus is, and those that are the foundation of which are folk customs.

Reflections Y.G. Gerder about culture concentrated mainly on: a) studying the difference in nature from all that surrounded by a person is a product of his own activity; b) tracking the historical and spatial differentiation of an artificial medium created by a person. At the same time, everything created by man, his artificial environment and is actually a culture opposing nature in general. Next, the neocantians (Rickert and others) emphasize that culture always embodies any human values, nature does not have. This was seen the main difference between culture from nature. Human communities were understood primarily as cultural communities.

According to Wilhelm Diltea, the author of the fundamental work "Introduction to the Science of Spirit" (1883). Nature alien to man. She is for people, emphasized the philosopher, "something external, and not internal. Our world is society." The initial concept for Diltea serves life, closely communicates in his philosophy of life with the concept of experience, that is, with the inner world of human individuals as "psychological integrity." Life in the process of its flow produces relatively steel structures of the interaction of people in shape, on the one hand, cultural systems (religion, art, philosophy, science, right, economy, language, education, etc.), and on the other - external public organizations (family, state, church, corporation, etc.).

All cultural systems and external public organizations, considers Dilites, are given in the movement of individuals, grow from a living human psyche, and therefore they can only be understood on its soil. At the same time, the experiences of individuals cannot be understandable to us if they are divorced from cultural systems and external public organizations.

The culture as a whole as the objectification of life is genetically associated with the inner world of man, but this does not mean that the knowledge of this world is limited to psychology. Each individual thinks, is experiencing and operates always within a certain community, so it can only be understood within its limits. We all emphasize the philosopher, live and rotate in the atmosphere of community constantly surrounds us. This is our historic house, everything that is in it has its meaning and meaning. We understand them seeking to understand. From here the main task of the humanities, according to V. Dilthem, hermeneutic interpretation - a method of understanding the cultural creations, read their hidden meaning: by cognition of culture, its objective structures is possible not only to penetrate into the deep structures of the inner world of a person, but also self-knowledge. In the most objective world of culture, the "dependence between parts and the whole" is preserved. Due to this dependence, the part receives its value from the whole, and the whole is obliged to their meaning parts.

Scientific views of V.Diltia played an important role in the course of the so-called antipositivistic fracture in the sociological scientists in Germany at the turn of the XIX and XX centuries. His concept of "Sciences about Spirit" came out with the fundamental difference in the indicated sciences from natural science both on the subject and method. The subject sphere of sociogumanic sciences covers "individuals, families, associations, peoples, epochs, historical movements, and evolutionary trends" Public organizations, cultural systems, other fragments of humanity to humanity as such. "In the world of history, the faster values \u200b\u200bare dominant than the reasons for the will of the will, The need for. Cognition requires the use of the appropriate method, namely, the method of understanding, which is fundamentally different, according to V. Dieltem, from the method of explanation characteristic of natural science.

Such an interpretation of the specifics of sociogumanic sciences affected the further development of not only philosophy, but also sociology. For the latter, the most significant were Dildaivski ideas related to understanding the problems of understanding, worldview, communications of the face and culture, etc., all of them, and otherwise received their further development primarily in the systems of the humanistic sociology of George Zimmel and Max Weber. A characteristic feature of this sociology is that it was interpreted exclusively as a "science of social interaction" (social interaction). On the social interaction can only be said when individuals that act take into account the actions of others and try to influence them.

In this sense, sociology is no longer science of society in a broad sense, which was characteristic of the concepts of O. Kont, Spencer and E. Durkheim. As part of humanistic sociology, it can be about society in a narrow sense. Zimmel The concept of society as a whole was problematic, instead of society - even in its narrow sense - it mainly speaks about the forms of socialization, that is, about the forms of interaction of people who are produced and functioning on the basis of their mutual orientations. This not only limited to the subject of research of sociology, it was focused on the study of the proceduralness rather, and not the structures of public life.

About culture, in the city of Zimmel, it is said when certain forms are produced, in which articles of art, religion, science, technology, right and much more are reflected and embodied. They cover the course of life and fill its content and meaning. And although these forms grow "from the life process, they do not participate in his rhythm, which does not know peace, its takeoffs and falls, in continuous resumption, continuous divisions and return to unity ... They acquire fixed identity, their own logic and regularity; This only acquired rigidity inevitably separates them from spiritual dynamics, which created them and provided them with independence. " In general, the culture, says the city of Zimmel, describing the tension between the original life and structurally fixed forms.

The most serious problem here is the problem associated with the desire of the individual "to protect the independence and the peculiarity of personal existence from the pressure of society, the historical heritage, the external culture and technology of life."

At the same time, the objectification of culture caused by the growing division of labor and the specialization of all public sectors and aspects, steadily leads to the separation of culture from life, and the objectified, "crystallized" culture suppresses life impulses. The embodiment of constancy, cultural forms enter the conflict with the dynamic nature of life. As a result, the flow of life "wear out" outdated forms and replaces them with new ones; This process is continuously reproduced in constant alternation of cultural forms. So, in the city of Zimmel, the tensions between life and culture does not disappear; Life, although she strives for this, which is not capable of carrying out of culture, and culture does not have time for the dynamics of life. So the gap between the objectivated (objective) and individual (subjective) culture occurs. If the first in the historical plan is enriched, then the second, on the contrary, can be simplified and induced compared to objective.

Subjective culture of Zimmel considers the "dominant ultimate goal" of human activity. On the way to achieving a perfect subjective culture, a person is forced to use objective culture as a necessary tool. At the same time, it also needs ideas and values \u200b\u200bthat help her navigate in society. Unfortunately, a sociologist is stated, this kind of "value crystallization" is not enough common culture. From here - the chance of "ideological unity" of the transitional cultural era, which has developed at the turn of the XIX and XX centuries.

Since everything created by a person or human society was called in the German humanistic culture, the city and the city of the Society are, of course, the product of culture. So, any phenomena of public life can be represented as social forms, and as a cultural meaning. It is not by chance that such phenomena as loyalty, gratitude, tact, shame, modesty, jealousy, rivalry, coquetry, a German sociologist calls the most important "socio-cultural forms of relations." All for G.Zimmel with specific socialization, in which you can analytically allocate both social (participants and forms of interaction) and cultural (context, subject and results of interaction) aspects.

Both aspects can be relatively autonomous sources of sociological and cultural knowledge. At the same time, the social aspect of the interaction, if you tear it from its cultural aspect, it is impossible to adequately explain.

A similar position adheres to M. Weber. He believes that the real history and history of ideas are characterized by the growing heterogeneization and the differentiation of the main samples of culture and society associated with this process, in the new time culture consciously taken into account the Company's task as a whole or to a lesser extent of its "cultural zgurtuvan". A variety of cultural meanings, rivalry of value ideas and meanings require constant attention to themselves from the Company, which, using its institutions, seeks to control them, adjust, store, distribute and the like. In this regard, there is a need for systematic and continuous reproduction of various groups of cultural elite (writers, artists, scientists, etc.) professionally engaged in cultural activities.

Culture for M. Weber is the "final fragment ... the world infinity, which, from the point of view of a person, makes sense and meaning." Of the infinite and immense wealth of being are allocated, therefore, those dimensions that a person makes out in the "World of Culture". All the phenomena of this world are somehow formed by people. This means that anthropogenic "cultural reality" is reproduced every time with volitional actions.

The "quality" of cultural phenomena is closely related to the production of "values", "values" and "meanings", without them specifically human intentions cannot be implemented. According to Weber, "people of culture" gifted by talent and will, and it gives them the opportunity to "consciously defend a certain position in relation to the world and to have the meaning." Only when the world granted meaning, he is perceived as a "world of culture". In this sense, culture is a central dimension of the human existence and semantic interpretation of life. It, therefore, not only has instrumental meaning, value and value, and is the world of self-sufficient anthropomorphic values \u200b\u200band values. Accordingly, the concept of culture appears to be a "valuable concept." In general, the idea, the concept and reality of culture, according to M. Weber, is always valuable filled. He emphasizes that "empirical reality for us" culture ", because we compare it with value ideas ... Culture covers those - and only those components of reality, which, thanks to the attribution of value, become significant for us."

In the interpretation of M. Weber, the concept of culture is inherent in three essential signs. First, it is used in relation to all without exception of life spheres. In this regard, he often speaks of "political culture", "world culture", "religious culture", "ancient culture" and others. Secondly, M. Weber emphasizes human predetermines of all cultural achievements. In his opinion, the world of culture is the result of the activity of not one individual, but many, and even all individuals. Thus, the overall set of cultural achievements is not only anthropogenic, but also sociomorphic. And finally, thirdly, emphasizes M. Weber, in public life is a sphere where cultural and social directly merge. However, the culture plays a leading role in determining the modalities of social life. In this sense, "social phenomena" can be considered the fundamental components of "cultural life". The social world is thus merged with the cultural world, as a result of which the only "socio-cultural life" comes to the researcher. Various specific manifestations of "socio-cultural life" form an object of sociological science.

The German sociologist has repeatedly emphasized that social science always seeks to study the processes in their "high-quality color." And then "socio-cultural life" becomes the subject of sociologists of culture. The main task of this Sociology M. Weber considered the search for answers to the following questions: people in their human relations enjoy the cultural means; The value ideas of meaningful and with which they act with the radius of exposure; changes as a result of this occur; Which fundamental and repeating socio-cultural "constellations" can be found in all this?

In his historical movement, human society, according to M. Weber, is becoming more transparent, that is, understandable, affordable knowledge. All this is due to the growing rationalization of social life, liberating it from "Marie" of traditional values. Sociology of culture In this case, is intended to carry out a fairly responsible mission: with the help of its conceptual for this, language forms, classifications, etc. contribute to the understanding of society.

According to F. Knownetsky, sociology develops an inherent view of the culture only. In the work of "culture science" (1952), he writes: "Sociologists should not only show that the constant existence of peculiar cultural systems depends on an acceleratively ordered social interaction, but also that relations between peculiar cultural systems are the links of indirect, established due to social relations; Any cultural interaction of any generality depends in the end of the public organization. "

The classification of cultural systems (technical, economic, social, legal, religious, symbolic, aesthetic, educational, religious, symbolic, aesthetic, cognitive, and etc.) is simultaneously classified by culture sciences. Sociology, although proclaimed by the science of culture, is engaged only by specific cultural phenomena. According to F. Knownetsky, these are various social systems (social actions, social relations, social persons, social groups, social roles). The task of sociology, the scientist believes, is the study of precisely social systems.

At the same time, American anthropologists offered a wide interpretation of culture, insisting on studying it as integrity. So, A.L. Krereter in his work "Essence of Culture" (1952) noted: "No one of the modern anthropologists would have to allocate a family, a family group, a local community or any other social grouping in order to oppose their culture, and then take out for her Limits. On the contrary, they are such social structures and functioning of them for the anthropologist of one of the parts or segments of culture ... "Since the research interest of anthropologists was concentrated mainly on the integrity and principal linity of cultures of primitive, complementary and weakly differentiated societies, while the differences in parts or segments of these cultures It seemed something secondary. The culture as a whole arose more significant than society; It was interpreted only as a part or segment of culture.

True, British anthropologist Alfred Radcliffe Brown expressed a completely different opinion on this. In his opinion, "culture is integrity to be so far, since it is associated with a clearly deliberate social structure." At the same time, under the "social structure", the scientist understood the "actual existing network of social relations" in society. In this regard, he insisted that not culture, but "the social structure is the foundation of any social life."

It should be noted that this idea was distributed not only in British anthropology. It served as a rising thesis and for the so-called structural sociology, in which the social structure was viewed as a fundamental factor of public life.

Cultural ideas, symbols, values \u200b\u200bwere interpreted as secondary, auxiliary phenomena derived from the social structure.

Indeed, in complex modern societies, social and cultural aspects of public life are closely intertwined and interrelated. However, it clearly follows from this that the subject of sociology cannot be reduced only to a social aspect. Otherwise, such public artifacts such as science, religion, technology, art and others remain for the "scene", without which social life is impossible. Therefore, P. Sorokin considers this position inadmissible.

According to the sociologist, the only disagreement between social and culturally related to the fact "that the term" social "means focusing on the aggregate of interacting people and their relationship, while" cultural "means focusing on the values, values \u200b\u200band norms, as well as on their material Media ... ". At the same time, the indivisible unity of both aspects gives the basis of P. Sokin to characterize phenomena of public life as socio-cultural phenomena. So, the process of human interaction arises by socio-cultural phenomenon due to the fact that it takes part in it:

1) Thinking people as subjects of interaction; 2) values, values \u200b\u200band norms, thanks to which individuals interact, realizing them and exchanging them; 3) Actions and material artifacts as engines, thanks to which intangible values, values \u200b\u200band norms are objectified and socialized.

Socio-cultural interaction as a subject of sociology has, according to P. Sorokina, three such aspects: 1) a person as a subject of interaction;

2) society as a totality of persons who interact; 3) Culture as a set of values, values \u200b\u200band norms, which have persons, interact, and the set of media that objectifies, socialize and disclose these values. None of these three aspects (personality, society and culture) cannot exist outside others. This sociocultural order is indivisible, and no one can create a special science on the basis of only one aspect, such as social, ignoring cultural and personal aspects. So, sociology should pay attention to all three aspects of sociocultural phenomena, remaining, however, generalizable science, considers the sociocultural system as a whole.

The subject sphere of sociology turns out to be quite broad, coinciding in practice with the entire sphere of the oversporting, and its task is to study the general, specifically "supergicial" elements of all classes of phenomena. This P. Sorokin, in essence, determines the new paradigm in sociology. His approach to society and culture takes into account the tendency to culturerant worms "dissolve" society in culture and the tendency of sociologists to turn the culture into one of the components of the social system. He is trying to combine these two trends. In CulturansPologists P. Sorokin occupies the concept of "supergicial" to designate the specifics of the human world, but sociologiza content of this concept and prefers the use of the concept of "sociocultural". In his models, culture and society appear two indivisible aspects of the same reality, and not two different realities, of which one can "absorb" another. In accordance with this, "social" and "cultural" cannot be two ontologically differentiated realities, but are two aspects of the same reality. There is no clear demarcation line between society and culture, Sorokin approves. Both are integrated into one reality - sociocultural, and therefore their distinction can be only analytic.

Subsequently, this idea received a comprehensive justification in the works of T. Parsons, R. Mrthon, Daniela Bella, and others. In the concept of T. Parsons, in which the central theoretical category is social action, the social system, the cultural system and the personality system are analyzed, which are interpreted as Subsystems of a more general action system.

In the context of culture, the action is considered in the aspect of their meaning or meaning. Actually, culture presents an ordered system of values, symbols and values, on the basis of which social interaction may occur. The essence of culture, on T. Parsons, determines three main points: "First, culture is transmitted, it is an inheritance or a social tradition, secondly, this is what learn, thirdly, it is generally accepted. Consequently, culture, On the one hand, it is a product, and on the other - the determinant of human interaction systems. "

In his writings, Parsons has repeatedly returned to the definition of the relationship between society and culture, social system and the cultural system. Its development in this area, of course, inherit the traditions of American cultural anthropology, ideas M. Weber, E. Durkheim, P. Sorokina, Bronislav Malinovsky. Continuing the classic line in sociology, T. Parsons is confident that society cannot be understood and explained by tearing it from culture.

In modern sociology, the category of culture belongs to the fundamental one. It is considered important enough to analyze social life. At the same time, the culture itself is impossible to understand and explain out of her correlation with society. As part of the last culture, a number of essential functions implements, without which the modern society cannot do. These include primarily functions:

Identification - the statement of a group affiliation of a person;

Orientation - the direction of man's aspirations on the value-semantic content of public phenomena;

Adaptation - adaptations to the public changing medium;

Socialization - the choice of a person of certain social roles that give her the opportunity to realize their interests;

Integration - ensuring a variety of social groups the possibility of coexistence within a certain society;

Communication is to ensure the interaction of social groups on the basis of the use of generally accepted symbols, algorithms, information and communication languages.

If we agree that culture is a way of human activity, the society is a field of public relations, where this activity takes place and this activity occurs. With the help of the culture, society creates a field for social activities, causes their limits, sets the nature and methods of these actions. So, culture and society do not correlate as part and the whole, segment and totality. These are two interrelated, complementary aspects of public life, their specificity is that the social aspect reflects social life from the point of view of samples and methods of interaction between people, combining them into groups and associations, and a cultural aspect - from values, standards and norms, due to which people interact and understand each other.

In modern sociology, the tendency to use the concept of culture in a narrow sense is rather noticeable. For example, Neil Smamzer in his textbook on general sociology determines the culture as a certain combination of values, norms and standards of behavior. It is how such a culture can perform regulatory functions, manage the actions of people, their relationship, attitude to society, nature. An similar position is occupied by Anthony Hyddens. In the light of this trend, culture acts as a totality of samples, norms and values \u200b\u200bthat characterize the level and direction of human activity and the interaction of people. From these positions, the culture is a way of regulation, preservation, reproduction and development of human life, individual and social.

Basic concepts and terms of the section

Accounting - The process of mutual influence of cultures, when technologies, samples, values \u200b\u200bof someone else's culture are absorbed in the process of intercultural contacts, in turn and adapt to new requirements.

Anthropology cultural - the area of \u200b\u200bsocial studies, which concentrates attention to the study of samples of life as primitive, up--written and modern human societies. Trying to answer the question of the essence of the culture, the influence of it on the human person, samples of human adaptation to the environment, the influence of culture on the biological evolution and the like. It uses the data of archeology, ethnography, sociology, cultural studies, psychology, linguistics and other sciences for this.

Artifact - Object created as a result of people's activities.

Sample - Cultural education, determines how the individual must respond to a situation that is important for himself and his environment to behave in accordance with expectations and not to get into conflict with other members of the Group (Ya. Schanisky). Most often a repeating way of behavior in certain situations.

Deculture - Loss of the main (essential) part of the native (domestic) culture.

Ethnocentrism - The practice of assessing other cultures, taking into account the value of its own culture based on confidence in the advantages of her over any other cultures.

Inultation - The process of development (study) of culture with a specific community or society.

Counterculture - Subculture, values \u200b\u200band norms of which contradict the values \u200b\u200band norms of dominant culture.

Culture - 1) Everything created by mankind in the past, the present and what will be done in the future in the spiritual, social and material spheres (anthropological understanding) 2) a specific, genetically inherited set of methods, forms and orientations of the activities of people, their interaction between themselves and with the environment Habitations produced to maintain the structures and processes of public life (generalocial understanding) 3) is characteristic of a certain group or community a system of collectively accepted values, samples and norms of behavior, activities and communication (volatosocyological understanding).

Elite culture - A combination of artifacts related to classical samples of art, music, literature and consumed mainly by the cultural elite of society.

Mass culture - A combination of artifacts (artistic, musical, visual, etc.), which are standardized, are replicated and distributed in society with the help of media communication (television, radio, press, cinema).

National culture - A combination of the original achievements of a certain people in which its historical symbols, values \u200b\u200band traditions are embodied.

Norma - rules of behavior, expectations and standards, regulating people's interaction (N.Smelerzer).

Ritual - sample behavior in relation to sacred and supernatural *

Symbol - image, concept, action or subject, replaces another image, concept, action or subject and reflects its meaning.

Subculture - The system of values \u200b\u200band norms, distinguishes the culture of a certain group from the values \u200b\u200band the norms of the dominant culture.

Values - The conviction that is divided by the team regarding the goals to which people should strive and the main means of reaching them (terminal and instrumental values).

Civilization - 1) World civilizations - stage in the history of mankind, is characterized by a certain level of needs, abilities, knowledge, skills and interests of a person, technological and economic method of production, a device of political and social relations, the level of development of spiritual reproduction; 2) Local civilizations reflect the cultural and historical, ethnic, religious, economic and geographical features of a separate country, a group of countries, ethnic groups associated with the common fate, reflecting anyway with a rhythm of public progress (Yu.V. Yakovets).

Vitani I. Society, Culture, Sociology. - M.: Progress, 1984. - 287 p.

Voitovich CO. The world of social relations in Ukrainian culture: a historical and sociological study. - M.: INT-T Sociology HAH of Ukraine, 1994. - 145 p.

The history of Ukrainian culture / Ed. I. Kripyankiavich. - M.: Enlightenment, 1994. - 656 p.

Cultural revival in Ukraine. - Lviv: Asterisk, 1993. - 221 p.

Forest V. "Culture" and "Civilization": Conceptual-semantic analysis // Philosophical and sociological thought. - 1993. - № 1. - P. 19-44.

Marcaryan E. S. Theory of Culture and Modern Science. - m .: Thought, 1983. - 284 p.

Mol A. Socyodynamics of culture. - M.: Progress, 1973. - 406 p.

Political culture of the population of Ukraine (results of sociological research). - K.: Science, Thought, 1993. - 134 p.

Popovich M. Sketch of the history of the culture of Ukraine. - M.: Artek, 1998. - 728 p.

Sorokin P. A. Man. Civilization. Society. - M.: Policy, 1992. - 543 p.

Tyllor E. B. Primitive culture. - M.: Policy, 1989. - 573 p.

Yakovets Yu. V. History of civilizations. - M.: Varudelin, 1995. - 461 p.

Kloskowska A. Sociologia Kultury. - Warszawa: Pwn, 1981. - 608 s.

Kroeberax. Istota kultury. - Warszawa: Pwn, 1973. - 693 s.

The understanding of society and its ratio with culture is better achieved from the systemic analysis of being.

Human society- This is a real and specific environment for the functioning and development of culture.

Society and culture actively interact with each other. The Company makes certain requirements for culture, culture in turn affects the life of society and the direction of its development.

For a long time, the relationship between society and the culture was built so that the society opposed the dominant party. The nature of culture directly depended on the social system, which was ruled by it (imperatively, repressively or liberally, but no less strongly).

Many researchers believe that culture originated primarily under the influence of social needs.

It is the society that creates opportunities for the use of cultural values, contributes to the proceedings of culture. Outside social forms of life, these features in the development of culture would be impossible.

In the XX century The ratio of forces of the two sides of the sociocultural sphere has changed radically: now social relations have become dependent on the state of material and spiritual culture. The defining factor in the fate of mankind is not the structure of society, but the degree of cultural development: reaching a certain level, it entailed a radical reorganization of society, the entire social management system, opened a new way to establishing positive social interactions - dialogue.

Its purpose is not only the exchange of social information between representatives of various societies and cultures, but also the achievement of their unity.

In the interaction of society and culture there is not only close relationship, there are differences. Society and culture differ in ways of exposure to humans and adapting a person to them.

Society- This is a system of relations and ways of objective impact on a person. The inner life of a person is not filled with social requirements.

Forms of social regulation are accepted as certain rules necessary for existence in society. But in order to meet the social requirements, cultural prerequisites are needed, which depend on the degree of development of the cultural world of man.

The following situation is also possible in the interaction of society and culture: society can be less dynamic and open than culture. Then society can reject the values \u200b\u200boffered by the culture. An inverse situation is possible when social changes may be ahead of cultural development. But the most optimally balanced change in society and culture.

Society, culture and man inextricably, organically interconnected. Neither society nor a person can exist outside the culture, the role of which has always been and remains fundamental. Nevertheless, the assessment of this role has undergone a noticeable evolution.

Until recently, a high assessment of the role and value of culture did not cause doubts. Of course, in the past there were crisis periods in the history of one or another society, when an existing lifestyle was questioned. Thus, in ancient Greece, the Philosophical School of Kinikov arose, which spoke from the standpoint of complete denial of generally accepted values, norms and rules of conduct, which was the first form of cynicism. However, this kind of phenomena was after all the exception, and in general the culture was perceived positively.

Criticism of culture

The situation began to change significantly in the XVIII century, when there was a steady tendency of a critical attitude to culture. The origins of this tendency stood French philosopher J.-Zh. Rousseau, who put forward the idea of \u200b\u200bthe moral superiority of a "natural person", not spoiled by culture and civilization. He also proclaimed the slogan about "return to nature."

For other reasons, but even more critically assessed Western culture F. Nietzsche. He explained his attitude in the fact that in modern culture it is dominated by science and technique, not leaving places for art. He stated: "In order not to die from science, we have art." At the beginning of the XX century. Austrian psychologist 3. Freud finds new foundations for criticism of culture. He looks at the life of a person through the prism of two main, in his opinion, instincts - sexual (instinct of Eros, or continuing life) and devastating (instinct of Tanatos, or death). Culture, according to the concept of Freud, its norms, restrictions and prohibitions suppresses sexual instinct and therefore deserves a critical assessment.

In the 1960-70s. in the west wide scale acquired Movement of counterculture, uniting the radical layers of youth and student in their ranks, based on the ideas of Rousseau, Nietzsche, Freud and his followers, especially on the ideas of philosopher Markuse. The movement opposed the propagating values \u200b\u200bof mass culture and mass society, against the fetishization of science and technology, as well as against the main ideals and values \u200b\u200bof the traditional bourgeois culture. One of the main goals of the movement was proclaimed the "sexual revolution", from which the "new sensuality" should arise as the basis of a truly free person and society.

Sharply negative attitude to culture demonstrate some totalitarian. As an example, this regard can be indicated on fascism. A wide fame acquired a phrase of one of the heroes of the Nazi writer of the post, which stated: "When I hear the word" culture ", I grab at my gun." To justify such a position, a familiar reference is usually used that culture allegedly suppresses healthy human instincts.

The main functions of culture

Despite the examples of critical attitudes towards culture, it plays a huge positive role. Culture performs several vital, without which the very existence of a person and society is impossible. The main one is socialization function, or human activity, i.e. Formation and education of a person. As the selection of a person from the kingdom of nature, together with the occurrence of all new elements of culture, and the reproduction of a person occurs through culture. Outside culture, without her development, the newborn cannot become a person.

Confirmation of this may be the cases known in literature when the child was lost his parents in the forest and has grown and lived in a hundred beasts. Even if it was then found, these several years were enough to be lost for society: the child found could no longer master the human language or other elements of culture. Only through the culture, a person seizes all the accumulated social experience and becomes a full member of society. Here, traditions, customs, skills, skills, rituals, rites, etc., which form collective social experience and lifestyle are playing a special role. Culture really acts as "Social heredity", Which is transmitted to man and the value of which is not less than biological heredity.

The second function of culture, closely associated with the first, is cognitive, informational. Culture is able to accumulate a variety of knowledge, information and information about the world and transmit them from generation to generation. She acts as a social and intellectual memory of mankind.

No less important is Regulatory, or Regulatory, function Cultures with which it installs, organizes and regulates relations between people. This function is carried out primarily through the system of norms, rules and laws of morality, as well as rules, the compliance with the necessary conditions for the normal existence of society.

With already named closely intertwined Communicative function,which is carried out primarily with the help of a language that is the main means of communication of people. Along with the natural language, all areas of culture - science, art, technique - have their own specific languages, without which it is impossible to master the entire culture in general. Knowledge of foreign languages \u200b\u200bopens access to other national cultures and all world culture.

Another function - value or Axiological- It is also of great importance. It contributes to the formation of valuable needs and orientation in humans, allows him to distinguish between good and bad, good and evil, beautiful and ugly. The criterion of such differences and estimates are primarily moral and aesthetic values.

Special allocation deserves Creative, innovative function Cultures, which finds an expression in creating new values \u200b\u200band knowledge, norms and rules, customs and traditions, as well as in critical rethinking, reforming and updating already existing culture.

Finally, the gaming, entertaining, or compensatory function Culture, which is associated with the restoration of human physical and spiritual forces, leisure, psychological discharge, etc.

All the named and other culture functions can be reduced to two: the functions of accumulation and transmission of experience, or adaptation (adaptation) and a critical creative function. They are also closely, inextricably linked, since the accumulation includes a critical selection from all the most valuable and useful and useful, and the transfer and experience of experience occurs not passively and mechanically, but they suggest a critical, creative attitude again. In turn, the creative function means first of all the improvement of all the mechanisms of culture, which inevitably leads to the creation of something new.

It is impossible to recognize the reasonable judgments that the culture is only traditions, conservatism, conformism, stereotypes, the repetition of it already known that it prevents creativity, searching for a new, etc. Traditions in culture do not exclude updates and creativity. A bright example of this is a Russian iconopalis, which rested on a solid tradition and strict canons, and yet all the great icon paints - Andrei Rublev, Feofan Greek, Daniel Black. Dionysius - have a unique creative face.

The thesis is so unreasonable. That culture suppresses healthy human instincts. This is confirmed by the prohibition of incest, or inlets. It is believed that it was the first in the history of mankind a clear watershed between nature and culture. However, being a purely cultural phenomenon, this prohibition is an immutable condition for reproduction and survival of people. The most ancient tribes that did not take this ban, they ordered themselves to degenerate and extinct. The same can be said about the rules of hygiene, which are inherently cultural, but protecting human health.

Culture - an integral human property

However, ideas about who should be considered a cultural person can be different. The ancient Romans called the cultural one who knows how to choose decent fellow travelers among people, things and thoughts - both in the past and in the present. German philosopher Hegel believed that a cultural person is able to do everything that others do.

History shows that all outstanding personalities were high-cultural people. Many of them were universal personalities: their knowledge was encyclopedic, and everyone made them differed exceptional skill and perfection. As an example, first of all, Leonardo da Vinci, who was at the same time a great scientist, an engineer and a brilliant artist of the Renaissance era. Today, becoming a versatile person is very difficult and, apparently, it is impossible, since the volume of knowledge is too unmanaged. At the same time, it is possible to be Cultural man Unusually increased. The main characteristics of such a person remain the same: knowledge and competence, the volume and depth of which should be significant, and the skills marked with high qualifications and skill. It is necessary to add moral and aesthetic education, compliance with the generally accepted behaviors and the creation of its own "imaginary museum", in which the best works of all world art would be present. Today, a cultural person should know foreign languages \u200b\u200band own a computer.

Culture and society are very close, but non-identical systems that are relatively autonomous and develop in their laws.

Types of society and culture

Modern Western sociologist Per Monson allocated four main approaches to the understanding of society.

First approach It comes from the primacy of society towards a separate individual. Society is understood as a system that rises above individuals and cannot be explained by their thoughts and actions, as the whole does not boil down to the sum of its parts: individuals come and go, born and die, and society continues to exist. This tradition originates in the concept of E. Durkheim and even earlier - in the views of O. Kont. Of the modern trends, it is primarily a school of structural and functional analysis (T. Parsons) and the theory of conflict (L. Koz. R. D. Darendorf).

Second approach, on the contrary, mixes the spotlight towards the personality, arguing that without the study of the inner world of a person, his incentive motives and meanings cannot be created by explanatory sociological theory. This tradition is associated with the name of the German sociologist M. Weber. Among the modern theories corresponding to this approach can be called: Symbolic interactionism (BBS) and ethnomethodology (Garfinkel, A. Sikurel).

Third approach It focuses on the study of the mechanism of the process of interaction between society and the individual, occupying an average position between the two first approaches. An early P. Sorokin is considered one of the founders of this tradition, and among modern sociological concepts, the theory of action should be called, or the theory of exchange (J. Homan).

Fourth approach - Marxist. According to the type of explanation of social phenomena, it looks like the first approach. However, there is a fundamental difference: in the direction of the Marxist tradition, the active intervention of sociology is supposed to transform and change the surrounding world, while the three first traditions consider the role of sociology rather as a recommendation.

The dispute between the representatives of these approaches is to understand the Society: as a nadyndividual objective social structure or as the human world of life filled with culture.

If they proceed from the system approach laid in the works of E. Durkheim, society should be considered not just as a totality of people, but also an objectively existing set of conditions for their joint existence. Social life is a reality of a special kind, different from natural reality and not coordinated to it, social reality, and collective views are the most important part of this reality. They are the foundation of culture that is interpreted as a way to organize public life, society - as a social organism. Like any organisms that are complex systems, society has integrative properties. which are inherent in the whole social whole, but absent from its individual elements. Among the most important properties is the ability to historically long-term autonomous existence, based on the fact that only society is associated with the change of generations. Thanks to this, societies are self-sufficient systems providing supporting and improving their lifestyles. The method of implementing this self-sufficiency is culture, and its inter-flowable broadcast allows society to reproduce itself.

Humanity has never been a single social team. Different groups (populations) of people exist in a variety of local social groups (ethnic groups, classes, social layers, etc.). The foundation of these local groups serve cultures that are the basis for integrating people into similar teams. Therefore, there is neither society in general, nor culture in general - these are abstractions. Really on our planet existed local cultures and societies. Cultures in relation to these societies (social groups) fulfill the tasks of integration, consolidation and organization of people; regulation of the practice of their joint livelihoods with the help of norms and values; ensuring knowledge of the environment and storage meaningful to the survival of people's information; implementation of communication between people, for which they produce special languages \u200b\u200band ways to exchange information; Development of mechanisms of reproduction of society as social integrity.

In historical development, several types of society and related cultures are distinguished.

First type - Primitive society and culture. It is characterized by syncretism - non-reported individual from the main social structure, which was blood. All social regulation mechanisms are traditions and customs, rites and rituals - found a justification in the myth, which was the form and method of existence of primitive culture. His rigid structure did not allow deviations. Therefore, even in the absence of special controlling social structures, all rules and norms were observed very accurately. At primitive society and culture adjoins Archaic Society and Culture - Modern peoples living at the level of the Stone Age (about 600 tribes today are known).

Second Type Societies are associated with the processes of social bundle and division of labor, which led to the formation

states where hierarchical relations between people were legalized. The birth of the state occurred in the countries of the Ancient East. With all the diversity of its forms - oriental despoty, monarchies, tyranny, etc. They all allocated the Supreme Ruler, whose studies were all other members of society. In such societies, regulation of relations, as a rule, was built on violence. As part of this type of society, it is necessary to allocate Pre-industrial society and culture, where the currently ideological and political and confessional forms of life support were dominated, and the violence used was a religious justification. Another form has become Industrial Society and CultureWhere national-state education and specialized social groups in society played a leading role, and violence was economic.

Third type Societies originated in ancient Greece and Rome, but received widespread since the new time, especially in the XX century. With democracy forming civil society, people are aware of themselves free citizens who make certain forms of organization of their lives and activities. It is the society of this type that the highest form of manifestation of economic, political and legal culture is characterized, ideologically informed philosophy, science, art. In such a society, citizens have equal rights based on the principle of cooperation, communication, trade exchange and dialogue. Of course, it is also an ideal, and in real practice I do not do without violence, but the goal has already been delivered. In many ways, it became possible with the formation of a new post-industrial type society with the processes of globalization and the formation of a mass culture.

Social institutions of culture

Real connections of society and culture are provided by social institutions of culture. The concept of "Social Institute" is borrowed by culturalology from sociology and jurisprudence and is used in several senses:

• a steady complex of formal and informal rules, principles, installations governing various spheres of human activity and organizing them into a single system;
• the community of people playing certain social roles and organized through social norms and goals;
• the system of institutions through which certain aspects of human activity are conserved and reproduced.

In various types of cultures, social institutions are formed differently, nevertheless, several general principles of their appearance can be distinguished. First, awareness of the need for this form of cultural activity is required. Many peoples and cultures did without museums, libraries, archives, concert halls, etc. Exactly because there was no appropriate need. Empting needs leads to the disappearance of the cultural institute associated with it. So, today the number of churches per capita is much less than in the XIX century, when the majority of people visited the service weekly.

Secondly, socially significant goals should be delivered, forming the motives of visiting relevant institutions in most people in this culture. At the same time, norms and rules will gradually appear that will regulate this type of cultural activity. The result will be the creation of a system of statuses and roles, the development of standards of activity, which will be approved by a majority of the population (or at least the authorities of society).

Social institutions of culture perform a number in society functions:

• regulation of the activities of members of society; on the creation of conditions for cultural activities;
• inultation and socialization - the introduction of people to the norms and values \u200b\u200bof their culture and society;
• preservation of phenomena and forms of cultural activities, their reproduction.

Allocate five mains human needs and related cultural institutions:

• the need for reproduction of the kind is the Institute of Family and Marriage; about the need for security and social order - political institutions, the state;
• the need for existence - Economic institutions, production;
• the need to gain knowledge, in the inculturation and socialization of the younger generation, training of personnel - institutions of education and education in a broad sense, including science;
• the need to solve spiritual problems, meaning of life is the Institute of Religion.

The main institutions contain non-core, which are also called social practitioners or customs. Each main institution has its own systems of accused practices, methods, procedures, mechanisms. For example, economic institutions cannot do without such mechanisms as converting currency, private property protection, professional selection, alignment and labor assessment workers, marketing, market, etc. Inside the Institute of Family and Marriage are institutions of motherhood and paternity, tribal revenge, witness, inheritance of the social status of parents, etc. Unlike the main institution, the most unfounded performs a specialized task, serving a specific custom or satisfying non-informal CPS. "

Custom search

EGE

The concept of culture. Forms and varieties of culture

OGE

Sphere of spiritual culture and its features

Catalog of materials

Lectures Schemes and tables Videos Check yourself!
Lectures

The meaning of the concept of "culture".

Culture - (from the Latin verb Colo), which means "processing", "cultivate the soil". Later, another meaning appeared - to improve, read. Cicero became the author of Cultura Animi metaphor, i.e. "Culture (improvement) of the soul", "spiritual culture".
In modern language, the concept of culture is used in:
Wide sense - a collection of species and results of the conversion activities of a person and society transmitted from generation to generation with the help of language and non-language iconic systems, as well as by learning and imitation
Narrow sense - The sphere of life of society, where the spiritual efforts of humanity are concentrated, the achievements of the mind, the manifestation of feelings and creative activity
Since culture is the result of the creative, creative activity of a person, accumulated and transmitted from generation to generation experience, his assessment and understanding is what it allocates a person from nature, drives it along the path of development. , for healthy public and personal development it is necessary that a certain cultural environment will be formed, which will include a number of elements:
Labor culture - The ability of a person to show their creative abilities with maximum efficiency in organizing and implementing their work professional activities.
Culture of life - The set of households, their aesthetics, as well as the relationship between people in the field of domestic relations.
Culture of communication - Human attitude of a person to a person, including compliance with the norms of courtesy, conditional and generally accepted ways to express a good attitude to each other, forms of greetings, gratitude, apologies, rules of behavior in public places, etc. Important elements of this culture are tactfulness, the ability to understand the feelings and mood of those around people, put themselves in their place, to present the possible consequences of their actions, the manifestation of accuracy and obligation.
Culture of behavior - A combination of forms of everyday human behavior, in which the moral and aesthetic norms of this behavior are found.
Education culture - The ability of a person to organize the process of education and self-education to obtain knowledge and skills in various ways.
Culture Thinking - The ability of individual thinking to self-development and the ability to go beyond the forms and canons of thinking in the individual.
Speech and language culture - The level of speech development, degree of ownership of the norms of the language, expressiveness of speech, the ability to own semantic shades of various concepts, the use of a large vocabulary, emotionality and harmony of speech, possession of bright images, persuasiveness.
Culture feelings - The degree of emotional spirituality of a person, his ability to feel and capture the feelings of other people, tactful attitude towards their own and other senses.
Power culture - awareness of the need for food to continue life, the allocation of necessary food for life and health, understanding the need for healthy nutrition and the ability to organize their food.

Forms and varieties of culture.

Criteria classification
1. By the nature of the satisfied needs: - distinguish material and spiritual culture. The main foundation of the delimitation of material and spiritual crops is the nature of the needs (material or spiritual) society and a person satisfied by the values \u200b\u200bmade.
Material - All that is created in the process of material production: technique, material values, production
Spiritual - A combination of spiritual values \u200b\u200band creative activities for their production, development and application. (religion, art, moral, science, worldview)
2. due to religion: - religious and secular;
3. Regional feature: - Culture of the East and West;
4. On the national basis: - Russian, French, etc.;
5. By belonging to the historical type of society: - culture of traditional, industrial, post-industrial society;
6. Due to the connection with the territory: - rural and urban culture;
7. On the sphere of society or the type of activity: - culture production, political, economic, pedagogical, environmental, artistic, etc.;
8. In terms of skill and type of audience: - elitar (high), folk, mass
Elite culture - (from Franz. ELITE is the best, selected) - phenomenon, opposed by mass culture. Created in terms of a narrow circle of consumers prepared for the perception of complex on the form and content of works (literature: Joyce, Proust, Kafka; Painting: Chagall, Picasso; Cinema: Kosarova, Bergman, Tarkovsky; Music: Schnitka, Gubaidullina). Under the elite culture, the culture of the spiritual elite of society was understood for a long time (people with a high level of intelligence and cultural queries). It was believed that these cultural values \u200b\u200bare not available for comprehension by the majority of the population. From the middle of the xx century. Elite culture is defined as creative, i.e. That part of the culture in which new cultural values \u200b\u200bare being created. Of these cultural values \u200b\u200bcreated, only 1/3 of public recognition reaches. From this point of view, elite culture is the highest and main part of the culture, which determines its development.
Signs of elite culture:
1) high level (content complexity);
2) receiving commercial benefits is not an indispensable purpose;
3) the preparedness of the audience to perception;
4) a narrow circle of creators and audience;
5) a narrow circle of creators and audience;
Mass culture (pop culture) - oriented primarily on commercial success and mass demand. She satisfies the unassuming tastes of the masses, and its products are hives, the life of which is often very short.
Signs of mass culture:
1) accessibility;
2) Integrand (appeal to such parties to life and emotions that cause constant interest and understand most people);
3) seriality, replicability;
4) the passivity of perception;
5) Commercial character.
"Screen Culture" - folded on the basis of computer synthesis with video equipment. Personal contacts and reading books go to the background.

Folk culture - The most sustainable part of the national culture, the source of development and the storage of traditions. This is a culture created by the people and extensive in the folk masses. Popular culture is usually anonymous. Folk culture can be divided into two types - popular and folklore. Popular culture describes today's life, morals, customs, songs, dancing people, and the folklore past.
People's, or national, culture involves the absence of personalized authorship, is created by all people. It includes myths, legends, dancing, tales, epos, fairy tales, songs, proverbs, sayings, symbols, rituals, rites and canons.
Subculture and counterculture
Subculture - Part of the total culture, the system of values \u200b\u200binherent in a great social group. In any society, there are many subgroups that have their own special cultural values \u200b\u200band traditions. The system of norms and values \u200b\u200bthat distinguish the group from the rest of society is called subculture. One of the subcultures common in the modern world is a youth, distinguished by its own language (Slang) and behavior features.
Counterculture - 1) subculture, which is not just different from the dominant culture, but opposes, is with her in conflict, seeks to displace it; 2) The system of values \u200b\u200bof the asocial groups ("new left", hippie, hipsters, yippy, etc.). Within the framework of elite culture there is its own "counterculture" - avant-garde.

Interaction of crops

Dialogue of crops - 1) continuity, interpenetration and interaction of various cultures of all times and all nations, enrichment and development on this basis of national cultures and universal culture; 2) the same thing that accumulation.
Accounting - (eng. Acculturation, from Lat. AD - K, and Cultura - Education, Development) - 1) In a narrow sense: the processes of mutual influence of cultures, as a result of which the culture of one people completely or partially perceives the culture of another people, usually more developed; 2) in a broad sense: the process of interaction of crops, cultural synthesis.
Cultural contact - a prerequisite for the interaction of intercultural, involving sustainable contact in the social space of two or more cultures. Cultural contact is necessary, but insufficient condition for the interaction of cultures. The process of interaction implies a fairly high degree of grindiness and intensity of cultural contact.
Cultural diffusion - (from Latin Diffusio - distribution, spreading, dispersion) - mutual penetration (borrowing) of cultural traits and complexes from one society to another in their contact (cultural contact). Channels of cultural diffusion: migration, tourism, missionaries, trade, war, scientific conferences, trade exhibitions and fairs, sharing by students and specialists, etc.
Globalization of culture - Accelerating the integration of nations into the global system due to the development of modern vehicles and economic relations, the formation of transnational corporations and the world market, thanks to the impact on people of the media. Globalization of culture has 1) positive (communication, expansion of cultural contacts in the modern world) and 2) Negative parties. Excessively active borrowing is dangerous loss of cultural identity. The younger generation takes each other's fashion, habits, addiction, customs, as a result of which they become similar, and often just faceless. The possibility of loss of cultural identity lies in the growing threat of assimilation - the absorption of small culture from the side of a larger, dissolution of the cultural characteristics of the national minority in the culture of a large nation, forgetting a deceic culture in mass emigration to another country and obtaining citizenship.

Functions of culture

Culture performs a number of very important functions in human and society. Firstly, culture is the environment in which occur socialization and education of man. Only through the culture, a person masters the accumulated social experience and becomes a member of society. Culture Therefore, it really acts as "social heredity", which is no less important than biological heredity.
Secondly, important regulatory Culture function. Culture regulates relations between people through a system of norms of relationships between people, the principles of morality.
This is connected and value Culture function. Mastering the culture, man acquires orientation, which allows him to distinguish well and evil, beautiful and ugly, high and vulgar, etc. The criterion for this is primarily moral and aesthetic values \u200b\u200baccumulated by culture.
It is also important, especially in modern society, Entertaining or compensatory Culture function. In many types of culture, primarily in art, there is an element of the game, communication, psychological discharge, aesthetic pleasure.
Another approach to the classification of cultural functions is presented in the table "The main functions of culture"