Social development and social progress. social progress. The problem of his criteria

When asked, provide examples of any 3 criteria for social progress. In each case, first specify the criterion, and then accept the author's barefoot the best answer is Social progress is a directed process that steadily brings the system closer and closer to the more desirable, better condition(according to most researchers - to the realization of certain ethical values: happiness, freedom, prosperity, knowledge).
The idea of progress lies in the fundamental feature of human existence - the contradiction between reality and desires, life and dreams. The concept of progress softens the resulting tension, giving rise to hope for better world in the future and assuring that his arrival is guaranteed or at least possible
1. Humanization of production, creation of technical, organizational and economic conditions at enterprises, for a more complete return of workers.
Without creating such conditions, it is impossible to introduce modern complex technologies, ensure their operation, and produce high-quality products. The humanization of production requires constant improvement of working conditions and safety, creation of a favorable, socially psychological climate in a team that makes it possible to reveal the creative potential of a person. As experience shows, accounting for ergonomic requirements in the production process ensures an increase in employee satisfaction with its conditions, an improvement in product quality and labor productivity by 8-10 percent. Thus, intellectualization turns out to increase the creative potential of employees, the practical return from the acquired knowledge, and the achievement of high results in the final activity.
2. Comprehensive accounting of labor and entrepreneurial activity, a departure from the principles of leveling.
This criterion covers those needs of people that are formed under the influence of the market environment - self-realization in work, entrepreneurial activity, ways of receiving income from independent participation in market relations.
Indicators of social progress specify the general criterion community development. it is advisable to raise them to the following directions:
living conditions, social structure of the population, lifestyle;
division of the totality of living conditions in accordance with the spheres of development of society into economic, political, spiritual and demographic;
separation of specific indicators of social development for different levels - country, region, workforce.
Each group of indicators has specific forms of expression. For example, in the area household services performance is measured by profitability, expressed in cost form. In the sectors of social infrastructure (education, culture, healthcare), results can be measured both in value and in form.
As for the specific criteria for social progress, there are also lengthy discussions on this issue between representatives of different sociological schools and trends. Perhaps the most preferable are the positions of those authors who seek to give the criteria of social progress a humanistic meaning. The fact is that it is not enough to talk about social changes, including social development, only as about objectively occurring processes, “processes in themselves”, in philosophical terms. No less important are their other aspects - their appeal to a person, groups, society as a whole. After all, the task is not only to fix the very fact of social changes and social development, to determine their types, to identify the driving forces. It is equally important to understand their humanistic, human meaning - they lead to the well-being of a person, his prosperity or to a decrease in the level and deterioration of the quality of his life.
The sociologist must strive to find more or less objective indicators for evaluating social change, qualifying it as progress or regression. Thus, the Institute of Socio-Political Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences has developed a detailed “System of Social Indicators Russian Society". It is divided into four groups according to the spheres of public relations: social, socio-political,

The concept of "social progress" is closely related to the concept of "social development". social progress implies such an orientation of social development, which is characterized by a transition from lower to higher forms, from less perfect to more perfect. In general, social progress is understood as the improvement of the social structure of society and the improvement of human living conditions.

Sociology has traditionally used the two most general criteria to determine the progressiveness of a particular society: 1) the level of labor productivity and the well-being of the population; 2) the degree of freedom of the individual. However, in modern conditions According to a number of sociologists, these criteria of social progress need to be clarified and supplemented.

The first criterion of social progress as a whole continues to retain its significance as an indicator reflecting the state of the economic and social spheres of society's life. Although it is necessary to take into account the fundamental changes that occur in these areas. So, as the formation and development of post industrial society the role of intellectual labor is growing significantly, as well as various kinds activities in the field of social security and service. If in an industrial society the main indicator of the well-being of the population is the level of consumption, then in a post-industrial society it is the quality of life, measured by services in the field of healthcare, education, education, culture, sports, etc. With a change in the ratio of physical and mental labor, the proportions of areas of employment, indicators of the well-being of the population, the problem of deriving an average socio-economic criterion for determining the progressiveness of society becomes more complicated. This requires the development of special systems of social indicators that can serve as a basis for assessing the state of a particular society. Such work is currently being carried out by Russian sociologists, in particular, at the Institute for Socio-Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

The second criterion - the degree of freedom of the individual - for a long time was considered as a comprehensive reflection of the progressiveness of socio-political changes in society. However, modern sociological research show that a person today needs not only freedom, but also responsibility. In this regard, the second criterion of progress, according to some domestic sociologists, can be defined as the level of development of socio-political means that ensure the satisfaction of the needs of members of society in freedom and responsibility.

Finally, Russian sociologists are increasingly expressing a point of view about the need for a criterion that would reflect the spiritual, moral, value-motivational aspects of the economic and socio-political activities of people. As a result, sociology today reveals the third general criterion of social progress - the level of morality in society. According to some sociologists, it is this indicator that can become an integral criterion of social progress.

Of course, the selection of these criteria by no means exhausts the variety of approaches to the problem of assessing social progress. In world sociology, other criteria for the progressiveness of society have also been put forward, such as the level of knowledge, the degree of differentiation and integration of society, the nature and level of social solidarity, the growth of productive forces and the degree of liberation of man from the action of the elemental forces of nature and society, etc. Currently, more and more attention focus on the development of specific indicators social progress, such as the level of development of production, the nature of the distribution of goods and services, the degree of development of science and informatization, the parameters of the standard of living, average life expectancy, the completeness of the realization of social and political rights and individual freedoms, etc.

In general, the leading trend is the desire to give the criteria of social progress a humanistic meaning. Noting the contradictory nature of the formation of modern civilization, sociologists believe that the prospects for its development will be positive only if at its center in the 21st century. There will be people, not cars. Progressive changes can be recognized as those that contribute to true harmony between the individual, society and nature.

The subject of social progress is closely related to the issue of social change.

One of the first scientific concepts of social development as a consistent advancement of societies on ascending levels of progress, which is determined by the growth of knowledge, belongs to A. Saint-Simon.

His ideas were developed by the founder of sociology O. Comte. Comte's law of the intellectual evolution of mankind directly indicates the direction and criterion of social progress - the degree of advancement to the highest in his concept, the scientific (positive) stage of development. H. Spencer, sharing the idea of the non-linear nature of evolution, proposed to measure social progress by the achieved degree of complexity of societies. social evolution similar to biological and leads gradually to the fact that the world is getting better. In the theory of K. Marx, the issue of social progress was solved almost unambiguously. Achieving the highest stage of human development - building a classless communist society, where the free labor of free people will rule - is inevitable, although remote in time.

If O. Comte, G. Spencer and E. Durkheim constructed the concept of progress in the form of a two-way process of differentiation and integration, regardless of its beneficial consequences, then L. Ward, N. Mikhailovsky and others believed that progress consists in increasing human happiness or reducing human suffering. In one of his first works, P. Sorokin pointed out that both of these currents are insufficient and they need to be synthesized. Otherwise, the theory of progress runs the risk of giving the formula of stagnation instead of the formula of progress.

Most proponents of social evolutionism are convinced of the existence of intellectual and technological progress, but opinions differ about moral progress. Those who believe that moral progress exists belong to the current of evolutionary ethics. They proceed from the fact that the very existence of morality as the basis for the interaction and mutual assistance of people is already the most important factor in the survival of society. Moral evolution does not cancel the struggle for existence, but humanizes it, forcing us to find ever softer ways of struggle.

Among evolutionists long time the idea of unidirectional evolution for all societies dominated, when each of them goes through successively the same stages of development on the way to progress. In the twentieth century this view was recognized as untenable on the basis of anthropological research. It turned out that not only non-Western, but also many European countries developed not according to one, but according to different scenarios, including different quantity and sequence of steps.

On a new basis, the evolutionary approach was revived in last years: evolution is not unidirectional, but can go in many directions. According to the theory of evolutionary changes of the structural functionalist T. Parsons, societies tend to become more and more differentiated in their structures and functions, and new structures should be more functionally adapted than the former ones.

The position of supporters of the cyclical development of societies differs significantly. First World War and periodic economic crises raised doubts about the general progressive development of mankind. Thus, the German scientist Oswald Spengler in his book "The Decline of Europe" (1918) substantiated the periodization of the development and decline of cultures by analogy with the stages life cycle man, including sunset and death. In his opinion, each of the eight cultures he studied existed for about 1000 years. Therefore, if we consider that Western European culture was born about 900 years ago, then its end is already close.

The English historian Arnold Toynbee also believed that the development of civilizations takes place along one path, improving and moving towards decline along similar stages. Emerging as a response to some challenge of natural or human factors, a civilization flourishes as long as its elite is able to provide counteraction to this challenge. Otherwise, there is a split and disintegration of civilization and, as a result of the growth of internal conflicts, a movement towards decline.

The cyclical theories should also include the sociocultural dynamics of P. Sorokin, which contains a very pessimistic assessment of the prospects for the development of modern Western society.

Another example of cyclical theories is the concept of "world-economy" by I. Wallerstein, according to which the countries of the third world will not be able to repeat the path traveled by the states - leaders of the modern economy; capitalist world-economy, which originated more than 500 years ago, in 1967-1973. entered the inevitable final phase of the life cycle - the phase of the crisis.

As for specific criteria for social progress, there are also lengthy discussions on this issue between representatives of different sociological schools and trends. Perhaps the most preferable are the positions of those authors who seek to give the criteria of social progress a humanistic meaning. The point is that it is not enough to talk about social changes, including social development, only as about objectively occurring processes, “processes in themselves”, in philosophical terms. No less important are their other aspects - their appeal to a person, groups, society as a whole. After all, the task is not only to fix the very fact of social changes and social development, to determine their types, to identify the driving forces. It is equally important to understand their humanistic, human meaning - they lead to the well-being of a person, his prosperity or to a decrease in the level and deterioration of the quality of his life.

The sociologist must strive to find more or less objective indicators for evaluating social change, qualifying it as progress or regression. As a rule, in such situations, a special system of social indicators is developed, which can serve as the basis for evaluation. For example, the Institute for Socio-Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences has developed a comprehensive "System of Social Indicators of Russian Society". It is divided into four groups according to the spheres of social relations: social, socio-political, socio-economic and spiritual-moral. In each of the areas, the indicators are divided into three groups according to the types of measurement: social conditions as objective data that determine the “background” of development public relations; social indicators as quantitative characteristics of social relations, recorded by statistical methods, and, finally, social indicators as quality characteristics public relations fixed sociological methods. The imposition of indicators on the spheres of public relations makes it possible to single out 12 measuring subsystems that act as basic foundation system order.

The criteria for progressive processes include qualitative improvement of the main factors of social change:

Environment;

Population structures;

Economic factor;

Improving the level and quality of human life;

The degree of dissemination of innovations in all spheres of society;

Improving the socio-cultural conditions of human life, etc.
In addition to those mentioned, one could point to many other criteria for social progress. But, as many authors emphasize, the main and universal integrative criterion of progress is related to its humanistic meaning.

Philosophy and futorology.

FUTUROLOGY (lat. futurun - future and Greek logos - teaching, word) - ideas about the future of mankind, a field of knowledge covering prospects social processes. The term “F.” was proposed in 1943 by the German sociologist O. Flechtheim, referring to a kind of supra-class “philosophy of the future” that opposes ideology and utopia. From the beginning of the 60s. this concept has spread in the West in the sense of the history of the future", "the science of the future", designed to reveal the prognostic (predictive) functions of all scientific disciplines. Since the prospects of social processes are studied by many. sciences, the term "F.", due to its ambiguity and uncertainty, since the late 60s has been supplanted by the concept of "study of the future", which covers the theory and practice of forecasting. Apologetic, reformist, left-radical, and other currents stand out in bourgeois philosophy. In the 60s. the first to put forward a post-industrial society "theory dominated (Bell, G. Kahn, Aron, B. de Jouvenel). The reformists spoke from the standpoint of the theory of convergence (F. Baade, F. Polak, I. Gal-tung), civilization" in the face of the scientific and technological revolution (A. Waskow and others). From the end of the 60s. bourgeois philosophy is going through a crisis, in the course of which a trend first emerged that proved the inevitability of a “global catastrophe” given the existing trends in social development, and then, from the end of the 1970s, a trend advocating the need for a transition to “ new civilization", built on the principles of bourgeois humanism. The leading influence in the bourgeois philology of the 70s was acquired by the Club of Rome, on the initiative of which the so-called Global modeling of the prospects of mankind based on the use of a opposes the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of the future of mankind, scientific forecasting, which is based on the provisions of dialectical and historical materialism, the theory of scientific communism.

social development- such a change in society that leads to the emergence of new social relations, social institutions, norms and values. It is characterized by irreversibility, direction and regularity.

Sociologists solve the problem of the causes and factors of social development in different ways. The conflictological direction notes the decisive role of social conflict in the development of society. Modern conflictologists see the role of conflict in opposing the conservation and stagnation of society, which contributes to its renewal.

Marxist sociology also belongs to this trend, considering the conflict between productive forces and production relations, between opposing classes, between old and new ideology, the main source of social change.

A different point of view is held by supporters of structural functionalism, who believe that social development is due to the internal interaction of closely related elements of the social system (social change - as a "moving equilibrium"). Based on legal norms, it is necessary to streamline relations in society and prevent social conflicts, and if they arise, resolve them without disintegrating the social system.

concept "social progress" reflects such an orientation of social development, when there is a transition from lower to higher forms, from less perfect to more perfect. Social progress is understood as the improvement of the social structure of society and the improvement of human living conditions.

Sociologists have traditionally used two criteria for the progress of society: 1) the level of labor productivity and welfare of the population; 2) the degree of freedom of the individual. In modern conditions, these criteria require clarification.

As regards the first criterion, now consumption level(criterion of progress for an industrial society) complemented by quality of life related to services in the field of health, education, leisure, sports, etc. Sociologists are working to create an average socio-economic criterion for assessing modern complex societies.

The second criterion is degree of individual freedom- it is proposed to supplement the criterion of responsibility development (creation for this purpose of certain socio-political conditions in society).

The third criterion of social progress should be, according to some domestic sociologists, level of morality in society. It is he who is offered as integral.

In world sociology, different criteria for progress have been put forward: the level of knowledge, the degree of differentiation and integration of society, the nature and level of social solidarity, the growth of productive forces and the degree of liberation of man from the action of the elemental forces of nature, etc. In our time, the criteria for progress are the level of development of production, the degree of development science and informatization, the parameters of the standard of living, the level of average life expectancy, the completeness of the realization of social and political rights and freedoms of the individual. However, the main trend is the desire to give the criteria of social progress humanistic meaning.

Questions for self-control:

1. How is the concept of "society" defined from the standpoint of the theory of social groups, institutional approach, "network theory"?

2. Define the concept of "society" in line with the domestic scientific tradition.

3. What are the main characteristics of modern society.

4. What typologies of society do you know?

5. How does an industrial society differ from a traditional one?

6. What thinkers developed the theory of industrial society?

7. Why is the post-industrial society called "informational"?

8. What type of society exists in modern Russia?

9. Name the main subsystems of society.

10. What functions does the economic subsystem perform?

11. What is the role of cultural norms and values in the modernization of society?

12. What is the contradictory nature of globalization processes?

13. How to soften Negative consequences globalization?

14. Define the concept of "social progress".

15. What criteria of social progress do you know?

Progress is seen as synonymous with development. If the sum of the positive consequences of large-scale changes in society exceeds the sum of the negative ones, then we speak of the progress of society. If the sum of negative changes exceeds the sum of positive ones, then it is considered that there is a regression.

However, the concept of "social progress" is most often used to assess the direction of social development. Social progress in this sense is the global, world-historical process of the ascent of human society from the lowest levels to the highest (from the state of savagery to the heights of civilization with a civilizational approach and from a primitive communal formation to a communist one with a formational approach).

Objective indicators of social progress are associated with the improvement of tools of labor - other means of production, constantly increasing the productive power of man as a generic being.

In this case, the concept of "social regression" cannot be considered as fully correlative with the concept of "social progress". The fact is that most sociologists believe that regression can only be inherent in certain areas. public life. It can cover individual spheres of public life: industrial, political, etc., hit individual states, entire civilizations and formations. But covering individual social structures of society, regress cannot spread to society as a whole, since society as a whole, humanity in its movement, despite all the zigzags, declines and destructive moments, continues to develop in an ascending line. In other words, society always has room for improvement, and no ideal state of it can be considered as its final goal.

The first criterion of social progress as a whole continues to retain its significance as an indicator reflecting the state of the economic and social spheres of society's life. Although it is necessary to take into account the fundamental changes that occur in these areas. Thus, with the formation and development of post-industrial society, the role of intellectual labor, as well as various types of activities in the field of social security and services, increases significantly. If in an industrial society the main indicator of the well-being of the population is the level of consumption, then in a post-industrial society it is the quality of life, measured by services in the field of healthcare, education, education, culture, sports, etc. With a change in the ratio of physical and mental labor, the proportions of employment areas, indicators well-being of the population, the problem of deriving an average socio-economic criterion for determining the progressiveness of society becomes more complicated. This requires the development of special systems of social indicators that can serve as a basis for assessing the state of a particular society. Such work is currently being carried out by Russian sociologists, in particular, at the Institute for Socio-Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

The second criterion - the degree of freedom of the individual - for a long time was considered as a comprehensive reflection of the progressiveness of socio-political changes in society. However, modern sociological studies show that a person today needs not only freedom, but also responsibility. In this regard, the second criterion of progress, according to some domestic sociologists, can be defined as the level of development of socio-political means that ensure the satisfaction of the needs of members of society for freedom and responsibility.

In his first major work, Escape from Freedom (1941), Fromm considered the phenomenon of totalitarianism within the framework of the problem of freedom. He distinguishes between "freedom from" (negative) and "freedom to" (positive). reverse side"freedom from" is loneliness and alienation. Such freedom is a burden for man. Fromm described three typical neurotic mechanisms of "escape" (psychological defense) from negative freedom. These are the authoritarian, conformist, and destructive varieties of the neurotic character. The first is expressed in the masochistic passion for subordinating oneself to others or in the sadistic passion for subordinating others to oneself. The second consists in the rejection of one's individuality and the desire to be "like everyone else." The third - in an irresistible craving for violence, rigidity, destruction.

The main idea of Fromm's book is the duality of freedom for modern man: he freed himself from the former power and turned into an "individual", but at the same time he became isolated and powerless, became an instrument of external goals. Such a state undermines the human personality. Positive freedom means the full realization of the individual's abilities, makes it possible to live actively and spontaneously. Freedom has reached a critical point where it can turn into its opposite. The future of democracy depends on the realization of individualism. Freedom can only win if democracy develops into a society in which the individual, his development and happiness become the goal and meaning. The problem that society is facing today is the organization of social and economic forces in such a way that man becomes their master. The solution, according to Fromm, is to preserve the achievements of modern democracy and its progress towards the development of freedom, initiative and spontaneity of the individual; and not only for personal purposes, but above all in his work.

Globalization: essence, causes, forms, consequences. Theories of globalization. Anti-globalism: causes of occurrence, social composition of participants. The transition of an industrial and technogenic civilization into an information one. Signs of the information society.

Globalization. It is the most important factor determining the appearance of the world cultural and historical process in present stage. Despite the fact that globalization is primarily understood as globalization in the economy, it also affects the social sphere, politics, culture, etc. Globalization is a trend and processes, the main feature of which is the linking of various countries into a single world entity in the economic, political, social and cultural fields. The globalization of the world is manifested in the achievement of such a high level of integration of the world community, in which the development of each country, each people increasingly depends on the state and change of the world as a whole. The sources of globalization are scientific and technical progress and the information revolution, the development market economy and free trade, as well as the hegemonic policy of developed countries in the struggle for world domination in order to realize their geopolitical interests.

The main causes of globalization:

The transition from an industrial society to an information society, to high technology

Use of new communication technologies: Internet, satellite TV

The transition from alternative choice ("either/or") to a variety of choice

The transition from the centralization of the economy to its decentralization

Transition from the national economy to the world

Globalization can be traced in the trend of increasing the openness and interdependence of economies, the economic and technological convergence of countries, the intensification of integration processes, and the development of intercontinental integration. And also globalization is also the formation of a single world production based on the placement of various components of the production and marketing process in different countries and the intensification of the planetary activity of economic global complexes. It also manifests itself through the formation of new economic entities (TNCs, regional associations, international organizations) and new forms of market behavior (global strategies, methods of combating competition, global networks, associations). The international movement of cyclical fluctuations in the economy, exchange, currency, financial crises, the convergence of interest rates, domestic and world prices are also manifestations of globalization. Including the unification of doing business, the formation of a new system of global governance, an increase in the number of supranational structures for regulating the world economy, the information and cultural convergence of peoples, the spread of common living standards, the unification of morals, values, life, principles and norms of behavior, the universalization of culture. Globalization is also the formation of specific interests, the imbalance in the world ecosystem and the sharpening of global problems.

Positive consequences of globalization processes

It is difficult to overestimate the positive significance of globalization: the possibilities of mankind are immeasurably multiplied, all aspects of its life activity are taken into account more fully, and conditions are created for harmonization. The globalization of the world economy creates a serious basis for solving the universal problems of mankind.

The positive consequences (advantages) of globalization processes include:

1. Globalization promotes deepening of specialization and international division labor. Under its conditions, funds and resources are distributed more efficiently, which ultimately contributes to raising the average standard of living and expanding life prospects population (at lower costs).

2. An important advantage globalization processes is economies of scale, which can potentially lead to cost reduction and price reduction, and, consequently, to sustainable economic growth.

3. The benefits of globalization are also related to the benefits of free trade on a mutually beneficial basis that satisfies all parties.

4. Globalization, by increasing competition, stimulates further development new technologies and their dissemination among countries. Under its conditions, the growth rate of direct investment far exceeds the growth rate of world trade, which is the most important factor in the transfer of industrial technologies, the formation of transnational companies, which has a direct impact on national economies. The advantages of globalization are determined by the economic benefits that are obtained from the use of advanced scientific, technical, technological and qualification levels of foreign countries leading in the relevant fields in other countries, in these cases, the introduction of new solutions occurs in a short time and at relatively lower costs.

5. Globalization contributes to the intensification of international competition. It is sometimes argued that globalization is leading to perfect competition. In fact, we should rather talk about new competitive areas and tougher competition in traditional markets, which is becoming beyond the power of an individual state or corporation. After all, strong external competitors unlimited in their actions join internal competitors. Globalization processes in the world economy are beneficial, first of all, to consumers, as competition gives them a choice and reduces prices.

6. Globalization can lead to higher productivity as a result of global rationalization of production and the spread of advanced technologies, as well as competitive pressures for continuous innovation on a global scale.

7. Globalization enables countries to mobilize more financial resources as investors can use a wider range of financial instruments in more markets.

8. Globalization creates a serious basis for solving the universal problems of mankind, primarily environmental ones, which is due to the unification of the efforts of the world community, the consolidation of resources, and the coordination of actions in various fields.

The end result of globalization, as many experts hope, should be a general increase in prosperity in the world.

Globalization leads to a deepening of heterogeneity, to the emergence of a new model of the world - the world of 20:80, a one-fifth society. 80% of all resources are controlled by the so-called "golden billion", which covers only a fifth of the world's population (including the United States and Western European countries - 70% of the world's resources). The prosperous 20% of countries manage 84.7% of the world's GNP, their citizens account for 84.2% of world trade and 85.5% of domestic savings. Since 1960, the gap between the richest and poorest countries has more than doubled, statistically proving the failure of any promise of fairness in aid to developing countries. Developed countries, using openness and globalization to their advantage, seek to consolidate the existing status quo. Great concern is caused by the desire of the United States to strengthen the unipolarity of the world. It is not surprising that in Arab world, for example, globalization is associated with the "Americanization" of the world system, "new colonialism". The interdependence inherent in world development at the beginning and in the middle of the 20th century is being replaced by the one-sided dependence of the “third world” on the “first”.

The heterogeneity of the world is also evident in the following data: only 358 billionaires own the same wealth as 2.5 billion people combined, almost half of the world's population.

Data are given that only 14.5% of those living in the Western world ultimately benefit from globalization.

As problems that can potentially cause negative consequences from globalization processes in all countries, we can name:

§ uneven distribution of benefits from globalization in the context of individual sectors of the national economy;

§ possible deindustrialization national economies;

§ the possibility of transferring control over the economy selected countries from sovereign governments to other hands, including stronger states, TNCs or international organizations;

§ possible destabilization of the financial sector, potential regional or global instability due to the interdependence of national economies at the global level. Local economic fluctuations or crises in one country can have regional or even global consequences.

Globalization is a complex process, the nature and consequences of which require deep study. It should be noted that some experts are skeptical about the concept of "globalization" and deny the objectivity of this process1. However, most scientists strive to develop a systematic and theoretically based scientific understanding of it. There are different approaches to understanding the nature of globalization and its essence, as well as different assessments of its impact on human society. in modern scientific literature.

Theory of world systems. World-systems theory began in the 1970s. in the works of I. Wallerstein3, devoted to the study of historically established socio-economic systems. Supporters of this theory argue that the modern world system goes beyond the boundaries of any political and legal entity (the state), it relies on a single division of labor, while allowing the coexistence of diverse cultural systems. The main connections between its parts are of an economic nature. The modern world system is considered capitalist in its socio-economic nature: its driving force is the accumulation of private capital based on exploitation; it is characterized by commercialization (commodification), i.e. the tendency to turn goods and services, as well as land and labor, into commodities for sale.

World systems theory emphasizes that the capitalist world system is characterized by cyclical crises. They occur as a result of the fact that after periods of innovation and expansion, shrinking profits and depleted markets lead to recession and stagnation (lack of development).

World systems theorists see main feature capitalist world economy is that it does not have a single political center, which gave it the opportunity for constant expansion (expansion). The modern world system dates back to the 15th century. During this period, the crisis of feudalism in Western Europe led to technological innovation and the rise of market institutions. The progress of production and the growth of prerequisites for trade with distant territories stimulated Europeans to go to other parts. the globe. Military superiority and vehicles allowed them to establish economic ties with other regions, which contributed to the accumulation of wealth in the "European core".

Theory world culture 5. In contrast to the theory of world systems, the theory of world culture (world culture theory) is not yet an established scientific school, although the name of its founder, the American sociologist R. Robertson, is associated with the emergence of the term “globalization”. Nevertheless, this theory contains several fundamental principles that unite a number of scientists. First, in exploring the nature of globalization, it gives priority to culture. Secondly, the main question in this theory is the question of how an individual and national identity can survive in the conditions of the formation of a global culture.

World culture theory provides a specific explanation of globalization that focuses on the question of how participants in the process understand and value life in the global village. In this sense, globalization is seen as the "densification" of the world, the development of awareness of global interdependence and understanding of the world as a whole.

This theory studies how humanity is moving towards unity, how national cultures are integrated in a globalizing world, how the economic, political and cultural influence of Western society on other societies is carried out. The authors of this theory attribute the beginning of globalization to the period of the birth of modern Europe that began in the 15th century. since the emergence of ideas about national societies, about individuals and their sovereignty, about humanism. However, the main features of the modern world community were formed in the 1870s-1920s. At present, world culture includes global concepts of the proper organization of the national society, the problems of personal rights and the individual, the involvement of non-European societies in international relationships, strengthening the ideas of humanism.

The theory of global capitalism. A number of modern scientists can be attributed to the supporters of the theory of global capitalism (global capitalism theory). They point to the sources of globalization in the depths of the capitalist system itself, which contains transnational mechanisms in the economic, political, cultural and ideological fields. The main institutions in the economy are TNCs representing the global business elite; in the political field - the capitalist transnational class (global political elite); in the cultural-ideological - the ideology of consumerism and transnational neoliberalism, promoted by the global cultural elite, represented by the means mass media and elitist social movements.

Proponents of the theory of global capitalism refer to the economic forces of globalization not only global TNCs with transnational capital, but also international organizations, which has international capital (for example, the World Bank, IMF), as well as state-owned TNCs based on state capital. To the global political elite they include the UN, non-governmental organizations, global business organizations, WTO, political parties, and integration groups(for example, the EU), which are seen as emerging transnational states.

Each of these theories of globalization has its own advantages and disadvantages. World system theory prioritizes the economic dimension of globalization but underestimates the importance of political and cultural factors. The theory of world culture, on the contrary, gives priority to the cultural factors of globalization, the theory of world government - political and legal, underestimating the role economic factors. The theory of global capitalism, despite the fact that it seeks to include economic, political and cultural-ideological aspects, is also one-sided, as it focuses on only one single political and economic system - the capitalist one.

Anti-globalism is a social and political movement directed against certain aspects of the globalization process in its modern form, in particular against the dominance of global transnational corporations and trade and government organizations such as the World trade Organization(WTO).

The main reason for the creation of the anti-globalization movement is the global establishment of commodity-money relations and the global market with its extremely cruel regulation rules, undermining moral standards human behavior, the reduction of man to an economic animal. The reason for the creation of the movement was also the creation of a social, economic and political space, and the vast majority of humanity was deprived of their democratic rights, freedoms, the opportunity to participate in decision-making and the right to a normal human life. As a result of the creation of these global spaces, the gap between the rich and the poor is sharply widening, and the global division of labor undermines the opportunities for obtaining modern education knowledge and, with the exception of a small proportion of intellectuals from these countries, deprives them of the possibility of equal access to the benefits of world civilization.

Representatives of anti-globalists are completely different activists belonging to different strata of society, having different religious views and life principles, namely: feminists, enemies of genetic engineering, fighters against poverty, pacifists, anarchists, socialists, fighters for the preservation of the environment of normal life, representatives of a number of religious currents, etc. Also, businessmen and economists, who consider excessive centralization of power and money dangerous, have joined the anti-globalization trend, for example, the well-known financier George Soros, former high-ranking official of the World Bank Joseph Stieglitz, former US presidential candidate Ralph Neider, and others.

Anti-globalism has a growing mass movement and, as a rule, a youth character. To implement their ideas, they mainly resort to mass protests and demonstrations, formulating a number of principles - slogans that are accepted by all participants in this movement: "Planet Earth is not for sale", "People and the planet, not profit", etc. .

The concept of post-industrial society. According to this concept, the scientific revolution makes social revolution redundant. Against "one-sided determinism" - the development of society towards one source. Monism materialistic understanding stories. The legitimacy of the Marxist analysis of societies, development only through the prism of property and the allocation of feudalism, capitalism and socialism. B. opposes his interpretation world history through the prism of technology and knowledge (pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial societies). Post-industrial society, originally a technocratic utopia (Technocracy), then as a new stage of an antagonistic society, then characterized by a reorientation of the economy and culture towards cultural needs, new principle management (meritocracy), which allows eliminating bureaucracy and technocracy (due to the election of persons to leadership positions depending on their merits and abilities). The book "The Formation of a Post-Industrial Society" (1973) B. substantiated the forecast of the transformation of capitalism under the influence of scientific and technological revolution into a new social system, free from social antagonisms and class struggle. Against the idea of society as an integral system of relations. Neither a Marxist integrity of society or techno-economic determinism, nor a functionalist one based on prevailing values. From his point of view, society consists of three spheres independent of each other: social structure (primarily technical and economic), political. systems and cultures. These areas are governed by conflicting "axial principles": economics - efficiency, watered. system - the principle of equality, culture - the principle of self-realization of the individual. For modern capitalism, B. believes, is characterized by the disunity of these areas, the loss of the former unity of the economy and culture. In this he sees the source of contradictions in Western society. "The Contradictions of Capitalism in the Sphere of Culture" (1976). In its content, culture deals with existential situations of death, tragedy, duty, love, and so on. Culture changes differently than the techno-economic sphere. It is alien to the postulate, linear changes, the new does not replace the old (as happens in the field of technical progress), but the content of the cultural repository expands. The modern capitalist economy and avant-gardism, as a form of culture, the common source of which is the denial of the past, dynamism, the desire for novelty. However, these spheres of society are characterized by different "axial principles" (in the technical and economic sphere, the personality and its "roles", and in culture the formation of a whole personality), which leads to an acute conflict between economic system capitalism and its modernist culture. In addition, the bureaucratic system in the economy comes into conflict with the principles of equality and democracy in politics. In the essay "The Return of the Sacred? An Argument for the Future of Religion" (1980). Criticism of secularization in modern sociology. Based on its methodological premise (“changes in the sphere of culture develop in a different way than in social sphere"), in it (secularization) two sides should be distinguished: a change in institutions (churches) and a change in ideas (religious doctrines). Changing religion at two levels -social structure and culture, the diverse structure of religion as a social phenomenon. "secularization" only leads to a change in institutions (reducing the influence of the church), and a change in ideas is "profanity". Thus, changing religion to social level is described by the concepts of "sacred and secular", and at the cultural level - "holy and profane".

SIGNS OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY

Awareness by society of the priority of information over another product of human activity.

The fundamental basis of all areas of human activity (economic, industrial, political, educational, scientific, creative, cultural, etc.) is information.

Information is a product of the activity of modern man.

Information in its pure form (in itself) is the subject of purchase and sale.

Equal opportunities in access to information for all segments of the population.

Security of the information society, information.

Protection of intellectual property.

Interaction of all structures of the state and states among themselves on the basis of ICT.

Control information society from the state, public organizations.