Ideals and life values ​​of people in the state. What values ​​and ideals exist in the modern world? Ideals in modern society

Two types of civilizations - open societies and closed societies - have not only different, but, one might say, diametrically opposed value systems.

The universal values ​​that characterize not only modern, but also any era, fall into two sets of opposing values: the values ​​of an open society and the values ​​of a closed society. The values ​​of intermediate societies, those that lie between individualistic and collectivistic societies, tend to be some combination of the values ​​of these polar societies. If, say, in an open society, freedom is the opportunity to do what the individual chooses and that does not interfere with the corresponding freedom of other people, then in a closed society freedom is a conscious necessity, namely the need to do what is necessary to realize the main goal of this society .

Marx once remarked that human anatomy is the key to understanding the anatomy of apes. A higher stage of development of a phenomenon allows us to more clearly understand the previous stages of its development. In this sense, the history of the last century is the key to understanding all human history.

The following discussion concentrates primarily on modern post-capitalism and modern extreme or totalitarian socialism in its communist and national socialist variants. The analysis concerns both the material and spiritual aspects of life in post-capitalist and socialist societies, since the dynamics of the development of individual societies is determined primarily by the interaction of these two sides. Societies lying between post-capitalism and socialism and gravitating towards one of these poles will not be specifically considered.

20th century society - this is a society split into two opposing systems - post-capitalism and socialism, between which there are many countries, with one force or another gravitating towards one of these two poles.

It should be noted that the concept of “socialism” is used in two different senses. Firstly, by socialism we mean a concept that sets the global goal of overthrowing capitalism, building in the foreseeable future a perfect society that will complete the history of mankind, and requiring the mobilization of all resources available to society to achieve this goal. Secondly, socialism is a real society trying to realize socialist ideals. Socialism in the first sense is theoretical socialism. Socialism in the second sense is practical, or real, socialism. The divergence between socialist theory and socialist practice is, as the history of the last century has demonstrated, radical. If theoretical socialism depicts an almost heavenly life that is about to come on earth thanks to the selfless efforts of society, then socialist practice represents a real hell, in the fire of which tens of millions of innocent victims are burning.

Socialism existed in two main forms - in the form of left-wing socialism, or communism, and in the form of right-wing socialism, or National Socialism. By the middle of the century, National Socialism, which had launched a war for its world domination, was defeated. By the end of the century, communism, which also sought to assert its power on a global scale, collapsed under the weight of insoluble problems it had generated.

Post-capitalist and socialist societies are fundamentally different. At the same time, there are certain similarities between these two extreme types of social structure. This is exactly the similarity about which they say: extremes meet.

The essence of the similarities between post-capitalism and socialism comes down to the following:

• - each of these societies tends to imagine itself as the only successfully developing civilization, and in the industrial era, when humanity begins to gain greater unity, as the vanguard of all humanity;
• - each of them considers scientific and technological domination over the world and the ever-increasing exploitation of the environment to be its highest meaning;
• - these societies deny the idea of ​​equality of different cultures and their diversity that cannot be reduced to a common denominator;
• - these societies consider their task in relation to other cultures to be to spur their forward movement in the direction of goals that seem obvious to them;
• - the cult of analytical thought and utilitarian reason plays an exceptional role in these societies;
• - these societies neglect non-technical criteria for determining the level of development of a particular society or people;
• - a simplified concept of development makes these societies skeptical about the culture of the past, about the uniqueness of the existence of other peoples, about all customs and traditions except their own;
• - these societies tend to neglect national differences, focusing their attention on activities that are, in essence, international;
• - these societies largely lose the ability to doubt themselves, they remain deaf to criticism from the outside;
• - culture in the ethnic sense, which includes obligatory adherence to an unshakable tradition, is sacrificed by them to culture, understood primarily as artistic and literary creativity;
• - these societies deny that different forms of organization of human life and different systems of symbolic understanding of existence are worthy of equal respect.

To sum up the general characteristics of the two poles of modern society, we can say that the first entry of industrial collectivism onto the world stage was unsuccessful. National Socialism suffered a crushing military defeat; its leaders either committed suicide or were hanged by the verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal. In most developed countries, National Socialist ideology is now prohibited. Socialism of the communist type has achieved more: it has embraced almost a third of humanity and occupied almost half of the earth's surface. But his success turned out to be temporary: already in the 1970s. it became clear that this form of socialism was doomed to destruction.

The departure from the historical arena of the two leading forms of socialism inspired many with the conviction that socialism is a historically accidental phenomenon, some kind of unfortunate deviation from the main path of history, and that now socialist collectivism, a thing of the past, can now be safely forgotten.

Such a belief is only an illusion, and a dangerous illusion at that. Post-industrial collectivism is unlikely to return on a large scale in the form of old socialism (National Socialism or Communism). But it cannot be ruled out that post-industrial collectivism will return in some new, as yet unknown form.

Collectivism is generated not by mythical universal historical laws, but by the changing circumstances of real human history. The source of collectivism is not theories invented by eminent thinkers and then set in motion by the broad masses. Theories are secondary, and the main source of collectivism is, to put it in the most general way, need. The extreme degree of aggravation of social problems and the lack of other means to solve them, except for the consolidation of the entire society to overcome the current situation, force the introduction of centralized management first of the economy, and then of other spheres of life, to neglect individual rights and freedoms, to use violence to achieve a global goal, etc. d.

A typical example of this kind of need is war, which forces even democratic states to impose restrictions on freedom, democracy, competition, partially nationalize property, etc. The communist and national socialist varieties of economics, management and way of life are the product of critical situations. These are powerful but dangerous drugs used to counteract a “disease” that seems hopeless. In conditions of “illness” they are sometimes useful and help restore normal “health”. Once "health" improves, such medicine not only ceases to be necessary, but even becomes harmful to society. Usually it is gradually abolished and replaced by the normal rhythm of social, cultural and individual life, free from extreme regulation. But as the experience of the last century shows, this does not always happen.

Thus, the sharp weakening of post-industrial collectivism does not mean that in the event of the onset of new deep social crises, it will not return to the historical stage in some updated form. Discussion of the core values ​​of collectivism is not a matter of purely historical interest.

So, the “modern era” refers to the society of the late 19th - early 21st centuries. Modern society is not only the present, but also the recent past and the historically foreseeable future.

Let us first consider such values ​​of an open society as civil society, democracy, freedom, human rights, etc. We can say that these are the fundamental values ​​of such a society. It is necessary, however, to take into account that the values ​​of each society form a complex system, which, like a network, entangles the entire society and in which only in abstraction can higher and lower values ​​be distinguished.

Currently, Russia is in the process of transition from a closed, collectivist society to an open, individualistic one. It is natural, therefore, that the discussion of the values ​​of the modern era begins with the values ​​of an open society.

Civil society is a sphere of spontaneous self-expression of free individuals and their voluntary associations, protected by laws from direct interference and arbitrary regulation by government authorities.

Civil society includes the entire set of non-political relations in society, namely economic, social, family, spiritual, moral, national, religious, etc. Being a counterbalance to the state, civil society as a set of various and fairly strong non-governmental institutions plays the role of a peacemaker and arbiter between the main interest groups and restrains the state’s desire to dominate and atomize society.

The term “civil society” was first used in the 16th century. in a commentary on Aristotle’s Politics, where civil society was contrasted with “political society,” that is, the world of professional politics. According to the tradition originating from Marx, civil society is opposed to the state. Since the 1970s. The term "civil society" becomes one of the most popular in debates about the differences between capitalism and socialism.

In a capitalist society, the state does not interfere in the private lives of people, does not impose a single ideology and a single system of values ​​on them. The diverse interests of people are realized through their joint actions, for the organization of which people enter into voluntary associations and associations that are not accountable to the state. Non-governmental and non-governmental organizations that reflect the interests of people are not included in official statistics and are difficult to count. According to some data, in the United States alone, the activities of hundreds of thousands of similar organizations are financed from more than 25 thousand charitable foundations. In Norway, there is one non-governmental organization for every 6 people.

Cicero also said that “a people is not just a group of people united in one way or another; a people appears where people are united by agreement on rights and laws, and by the desire to promote mutual benefit.”

Civic associations promote among their members a spirit of cooperation, solidarity and commitment to the group. Individuals who voluntarily join a group with a wide range of goals and preferences among its members not only acquire cooperation skills and a sense of civic responsibility for collective endeavors, but also involuntarily learn self-discipline, tolerance, and respect for the opinions of others.

The state always strives to subjugate citizens, narrow the scope of their unregulated activities, and divide them. Civil society, being a counterweight to the state, seeks to limit its activities to the political sphere, leaving all other areas of life to the free choice of individuals. Civil society does not allow the state to expand the scope of its activities and extend it to the moral, spiritual, religious, national and other relations of people. The absorption of civil society by the state is one of the characteristic features of totalitarianism.

Marxism dreamed of freeing man from the dichotomy between political and economic concerns, of erasing the line between the political, moral man and the economic, egoistic man. Since this facet is an integral feature of civil society, Marxism assessed the latter as a deception. The variety of institutions of civil society, opposing the state, balancing it and at the same time being under the control and patronage of the state, is, from the perspective of Marxism, only a facade hiding oppression and violence. Worse, this façade reinforces oppression. The state protecting civil society, and civil society being a counterbalance to the state, are all unnecessary.

The communist state, which carried out a radical restructuring of the economic, social and spiritual life of society, did not assume either the separation of economics and politics, or the autonomy and sovereignty of its individuals. This state has deprived civil society of all its functions and absorbed it. For many decades, civil society ceased to be a counterweight to the state, which gained full control over all aspects of the life of communist society. The formation of civil society in modern Russia is the basis and guarantee of the irreversibility of democratic transformations. Only in civil society do conditions exist that force people to accept the social order voluntarily, without fear.

Civil society and the state must be in constant dynamic balance. The sharp weakening, in fact, the destruction of civil society has led in the recent past to the hypertrophied growth of the state, which has become totalitarian. The weakening of the state in the current conditions leads to the growth of civil society, the emergence of elements of anarchy in it and a decline in its controllability.

To describe the interaction between civil society and the state, it is advisable to use the previously introduced distinction between communitarian and structural social relations. The first are relationships between people who are equal in everything, the second are relationships based on positions, statuses and roles, which openly presuppose the inequality of individuals.

Social life is a process involving the sequential experience of commune (community) and structure, equality and inequality. Structural relationships can be interpreted as relationships of power or coercion if power is defined as the ability of one individual to exert pressure on another and change his behavior. Structurality, or power, is dispersed throughout society, and not concentrated within the ruling elite, ruling class, etc. The relationship of coercion or pressure takes place not only between leaders and their subordinates, but also in all those cases where, in one or another In another form, the inequality of individuals is revealed, starting with the inequality of their statuses and ending with the inequality of their opportunities to follow fashion.

Communitarian relations are especially clearly manifested in situations of transition: movement in space (transport passengers), change of job (community of the unemployed), elections of government bodies (community of voters), radical social reforms and revolutions (society as a whole), etc. Communitarian relations are characteristic for religious communities, whose members, preparing for the transition to another world, are equal and voluntarily submit to spiritual mentors. Communitarian relations exist in cells of civil society (unions, associations, clubs), in political parties, etc. In the case of particularly distinct communitarian relations, reminiscent of genuine friendship or love, individuals act as integral individuals, in everything or almost everything equal to each other. “Only in love and through love can you understand another person” - this means that the prerequisite for deep understanding is purely communitarian relationships between people who come into contact with each other.

Structurality is anti-communitarianism, inequality of individuals, the diversity of their classifications and oppositions according to status, role, position, property, gender, clothing, etc.

Communitarian relationships are sometimes called ties horizontal in nature, and structural relations - connections vertical in nature. The fundamental contrast between horizontal and vertical connections is quite obvious.

Communitarian relations only rarely appear in their pure form. They are usually intertwined with structural relationships. For example, in a family where all its members are generally equal, there are at the same time children and parents.

Communitarian relations express the deep essence of man - the unity of all people, their tribal community. In a certain sense, they are more fundamental than structural relationships: the president of the company, his wife and his driver are, first of all, people, creatures belonging to the same biological species, and only then, on this basis, are different people, differing in their positions, roles and statuses. Communitarian relations express an essential and generic connection between people, without which no society is conceivable.

Social life is always a complex dynamic of equality and inequality, communitarian and structural relations. If some of them receive a clear advantage over others, the society can be said to be unhealthy. Exaggeration of structure leads to the fact that communitarian relations are manifested from the outside and against the “law”. The exaggeration of the role of communitarian relations in egalitarian political movements, as a rule, is soon replaced by despotism, bureaucratization, or other types of structural tightening. A typical example in this regard was communist society. It sought to make communitarian relations dominant and gradually displace structural relations from all or almost all spheres of life (the withering away of the state, law, centralized economy and management, the transformation of society into a system of self-governing communities, or communes). In reality, the attempt to create a “community of equals” led to despotism, unambiguous hierarchies and structural rigidity.

Society represents, as it were, two “models” of human interconnectedness, overlapping and alternating. The first is a model of society as a structural, differentiated and often hierarchical system of political, legal and economic structures with many types of assessments dividing people on the basis of “more” or “less”. The second model, especially clearly distinguishable in transitional periods (elections, revolutions, etc.), is society as a non-structural or rudimentary structural undifferentiated community of equal individuals subordinate to the supreme power of ritual “leaders”.

One of the main sources of structuring society is the state; The main source of communitarian social relations is civil society.

ABSTRACT

discipline: Culturology

Ideals in modern society

• INTRODUCTION
• 1. Ideals and values: a historical overview
• 2. Cultural space of the 60s and modern Russia
• Conclusion
• List of used literature
• INTRODUCTION
• A fundamental characteristic of the human environment in modern society is social change. For an ordinary person - a subject of social cognition - the instability of society is perceived, first of all, as the uncertainty of the existing situation. Therefore, a twofold process is observed in relations with the future. On the one hand, in a situation of instability and uncertainty about the future, which exists even among wealthy segments of the population, a person tries to find something that will give him confidence, support in possible changes in the future. Some people try to secure a future for themselves through property, others try to build on higher ideals. Many people perceive education as a kind of guarantee that increases security in changing social circumstances and promotes confidence in the future.
• Morality is a way of regulating people's behavior. Other methods of regulation are custom and law. Morality includes moral feelings, norms, commandments, principles, ideas about good and evil, honor, dignity, justice, happiness, etc. Based on this, a person evaluates his goals, motives, feelings, actions, thoughts. Everything in the world around us can be subject to moral evaluation. Including the world itself, its structure, as well as society or its individual institutions, actions, thoughts, feelings of other people, etc. A person can subject even God and his actions to a moral assessment. This is discussed, for example, in the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov", in the section on the Grand Inquisitor.
• Morality is, therefore, a way of understanding and assessing reality that can judge everything and can pass a verdict on any event, phenomenon of the external world and the internal world. But in order to judge and pass a sentence, one must, firstly, have the right to do so, and, secondly, have evaluation criteria, ideas about what is moral and what is immoral.
• In modern Russian society, there is a sense of spiritual discomfort, largely due to the moral conflict of generations. Modern youth cannot accept the lifestyle and style of thinking idealized by their elders, while the older generation is convinced that it was better before, and that modern society is unspiritual and doomed to decay. What gives the right to such a moral assessment? Is there any sound grain in it? This work is devoted to the analysis of the problem of ideals in modern society and its applicability to the modern situation in Russia.
• 1. Ideals and Values: A Historical Review
• Moral evaluation is based on the idea of ​​how things “ought to be”, i.e. an idea of ​​a certain proper world order, which does not yet exist, but which nevertheless should exist, an ideal world order. From the point of view of moral consciousness, the world should be kind, honest, fair, humane. If he is not like that, so much the worse for the world, it means that he has not yet grown up, has not matured, has not fully realized the potential inherent in him. Moral consciousness “knows” how the world should be and thereby, as it were, pushes reality to move in this direction. Those. moral consciousness believes that the world can and should be made more perfect. The current state of the world does not suit him, it is basically immoral, there is no morality in it yet and it needs to be introduced there.
• In nature, everyone strives to survive and competes with others for the benefits of life. Mutual assistance and cooperation are rare phenomena here. In society, on the contrary, life is impossible without mutual assistance and cooperation. In nature the weak perish, in society the weak are helped. This is the main difference between a person and an animal. And this is something new that a person brings into this world. But man is not “ready” for this world; he grows out of the kingdom of nature and in him the natural and human principles compete all the time. Morality is the expression of the human in man.
• A true person is one who is able to live for others, help others, even sacrifice himself for others. Self-sacrifice is the highest manifestation of morality, embodied in the image of the God-man, Christ, who for a long time remained an unattainable ideal and role model for people. Since biblical times, man began to realize his duality: man-beast began to turn into man-god. God is not in heaven, he is in everyone’s soul and everyone is capable of being god, i.e. to sacrifice something for the sake of others, to give others a part of oneself.
• The most important condition for morality is human freedom. Freedom means independence, autonomy of a person from the outside world. Of course, man is not God, he is a material being, he lives in the world, he must eat, drink, survive. And yet, thanks to consciousness, a person gains freedom; he is not determined by the external world, although he depends on it. A person defines himself, creates himself, decides what he should be like. If a person says: “What can I do? Nothing depends on me,” he himself chose lack of freedom, his dependence.
• Conscience is indisputable evidence that a person is free. If there is no freedom, then there is nothing to judge: an animal that kills a person is not judged, a car is not judged. A person is judged and, above all, he is judged by his own conscience, unless he has yet turned into an animal, although this is also not uncommon. According to the Bible, even God considers a person free, who endowed him with free will. Man has long understood that freedom is both happiness and a burden. Freedom, identical to reason, distinguishes man from animals and gives him the joy of knowledge and creativity. But, at the same time, freedom means heavy responsibility for oneself and one’s actions, for the world as a whole.
• Man, as a being capable of creativity, is similar to God or nature as a whole, that creative force that creates the world. This means that he is capable of either improving this world, making it better, or destroying it. In any case, he is responsible for his actions, for his actions, large and small. Every action changes something in this world, and if a person does not think about it, does not track the consequences of his actions, then he has not yet become a human being, a rational being, he is still on his way and it is unknown where this path will lead.
• Is there one morality or many? Maybe everyone has their own morals? The answer to this question is not so simple. It is obvious that in a society there are always several codes of conduct practiced in different social groups.
• The regulation of relationships in society is largely determined by moral traditions, which include a system of moral values ​​and ideals. A significant place in the emergence and evolution of these ideals belongs to philosophical and religious systems.
• In ancient philosophy, man recognizes himself as a cosmic being and tries to comprehend his place in space. The search for truth is the search for an answer to the question of how the world works and how I myself work, what is good, what is good. Traditional ideas about good and evil are rethought, true good is highlighted in contrast to what is not true good, but is only considered as such. If ordinary consciousness considered wealth and power, as well as the pleasures they bring, to be good, philosophy highlighted the true good - wisdom, courage, moderation, justice.
• In the era of Christianity, a significant shift in moral consciousness occurs. There were also general moral principles formulated by Christianity, which, however, were not particularly practiced in ordinary life, even among the clergy. But this in no way devalues ​​the importance of Christian morality, in which important universal moral principles and commandments were formulated.
• With its negative attitude towards property in any form (“do not store up treasures on earth”), Christian morality contrasted itself with the dominant type of moral consciousness in the Roman Empire. The main idea in it is the idea of ​​spiritual equality - the equality of all before God.
• Christian ethics readily accepted everything acceptable to it from earlier ethical systems. Thus, the well-known moral rule “Do not do to a person what you do not wish for yourself,” the authorship of which is attributed to Confucius and the Jewish sages, entered the canon of Christian ethics along with the commandments of the Sermon on the Mount.
• Early Christian ethics laid the foundations of humanism, preaching philanthropy, selflessness, mercy, and non-resistance to evil through violence. The latter implied resistance without harming another, a moral confrontation. However, this in no way meant a renunciation of one’s beliefs. In the same sense, the question of the moral right to condemnation was posed: “Do not judge, lest you be judged” must be understood as “Do not condemn, do not pass judgment, for you yourself are not sinless,” but stop the one committing evil, stop the spread of evil.
• Christian ethics proclaims the commandment of kindness and love for the enemy, the principle of universal love: “You have heard that it was said: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thy enemy.” But I say to you: love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you... for if you love those who love, what is your reward?”
• In modern times, in the 16th-17th centuries, significant changes took place in society, which could not but affect morality. Protestantism proclaimed that the main duty of a believer before God is hard work in his profession, and success in business is evidence of God's chosenness. Thus, the Protestant Church gave its flock the go-ahead: “Get rich!” If earlier Christianity claimed that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven, now it is the other way around - the rich become God's chosen ones, and the poor become God's rejected.
• With the development of capitalism, industry and science develop, and the worldview changes. The world is losing its aura of divinity. God generally became superfluous in this world, he prevented man from feeling like a full-fledged master of the world, and soon Nietzsche proclaimed the death of God. “God is dead. Who killed him? You and I,” says Nietzsche. Man, freed from God, decided to become God himself. Only this deity turned out to be quite ugly. It decided that the main goal was to consume as much and as variedly as possible and created a consumer society for a certain part of humanity. True, for this it was necessary to destroy a significant part of the forests, pollute the water and atmosphere, and turn vast territories into landfills. It was also necessary to create mountains of weapons to defend against those who did not fall into the consumer society.
• Modern morality has again become semi-pagan, reminiscent of pre-Christian ones. It is based on the belief that you only live once, so you have to take everything from life. Just as Callicles once argued in a conversation with Socrates that happiness lies in satisfying all one’s desires, so now this is becoming the main principle of life. True, some intellectuals did not agree with this and began to create a new morality. Back in the 19th century. an ethic of nonviolence emerged.
• It so happened that it was the 20th century, which cannot be called the century of humanism and mercy, that gave rise to ideas that are in direct contradiction with the prevailing practice of solving all problems and conflicts from a position of strength. Quiet, persistent resistance turned out to be brought to life - disagreement, disobedience, non-retribution of evil for evil. A person, placed in a hopeless situation, humiliated and powerless, finds a non-violent means of struggle and liberation (primarily internal). He, as it were, accepts responsibility for the evil done by others, takes on someone else’s sin and atones for it with his non-giving of evil.
• Marxism advocates the gradual establishment of true social justice. The most important aspect of the understanding of justice is the equality of people in relation to the means of production. It is recognized that under socialism there are still differences in the qualifications of labor and in the distribution of consumer goods. Marxism adheres to the thesis that only under communism should there be a complete coincidence of justice and social equality of people.
• Despite the fact that in Russia Marxism gave rise to a totalitarian regime that denied virtually all fundamental human values ​​(although proclaiming them as its main goal), Soviet society was a society where culture, primarily spiritual, was assigned a high status
• 2. Cultural space of the 60s and modern Russia
• The 60s became the heyday of Russian Soviet culture; in any case, these years are often idealized in the memories of people who now talk about the decline of culture. In order to reconstruct the spiritual picture of the era of the 60s, the “Sixties” competition “Looking at myself as in a mirror of the era” was held. From people who lived and developed under the shadow of the “thaw” one could expect detailed and extensive characteristics of the era, detailed and extensive characteristics of the era, descriptions of ideals and aspirations.
• This is what the era of the 60s looks like in the descriptions of educated participants in the competition: “for some time we believed that we were free and could live according to our conscience, be ourselves,” “everyone breathed freely,” “we began to talk a lot about a new life, many publications appeared”; “The 60s were the most interesting and eventful: we listened to our sixties poets, read (usually secretly) “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”; “The 60s were a time when everyone squinted from the sun, as Zhvanetsky said”; “I consider myself one of the sixties - those whose ideological formation on the basis of communist ideology took place after the death of Stalin, who experienced the cleansing influence of the 20th Congress”; “we felt with our skin the spiritual growth of society, despised everyday life, and strived for interesting work”; “at this time the exploration of space and virgin lands was taking place”; “a significant event - Khrushchev’s report - comprehension has begun”; “moral code of the builder of communism”, “national state power”, “worship of science”.
• Among poorly educated competition participants, direct assessments of the 60s era are very rare. We can say that in fact they do not single out this time as a special era and do not explain their participation in the competition from this point of view. In those cases when characteristics of this time do appear in their descriptions, they are specific and “material”, and the era of the 60s is defined primarily as the time of Khrushchev’s reforms (“shortages of bread”, “instead of the usual crops in the fields there is corn” , “the housewives parted with their cows”...). In other words, they do not record the 60s at all as a “thaw”, as the liberation of the country and the individual, as a softening of the regime and a change in ideology.
• The concept of cultural capital, as applied to the realities of life of a Soviet person, can be considered not only as the presence of higher levels of education and corresponding status among the narrator’s parents, but also as the presence of a full and loving family, as well as the talent, skill, and hard work of his parents (what in Russian culture is designated by the word “nuggets”). This was especially evident in the life stories of the “peasant” generation, which realized the potential for democratization of social relations that had accumulated long before the revolution.
• For educated participants in the “sixties” competition, their belonging to the educated strata of society in the second generation, the presence of their parents’ education, which gave them the status of an employee in Soviet society, becomes essential in determining cultural capital. And if the parents are educated people in this sense (there are also people of noble origin, of whom, naturally, there are very few, and “modest Soviet employees” of proletarian or peasant origin), then the cultural capital of the family, as the descriptions testify, necessarily affects the biography of the children .
• A generalized picture of the biographies of those who belong to the educated strata of society in the first generation, and those whose parents already possessed cultural capital to one degree or another, is as follows. The first are characterized by a stormy (student) youth with poetry reading, theaters, scarce books and cultural enthusiasm (that is, with the myths of their youth), which with the beginning of family life generally fades away and becomes a pleasant memory. Their involvement in the cultural codes of Soviet ideology, as a rule, was supported by active participation in public work associated with party membership. And in those cases when they are disappointed in the past, they define themselves as “naive simpletons”, “hard workers, trusting by nature, who worked conscientiously in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.”
• This shows that the ideals and culture of the sixties were still not a widespread phenomenon, but rather the mindset of the elite. At the same time, in the post-Soviet period this mindset changed dramatically, and the mindset of the elite also changed. At the same time, value conflict is constantly present in modern society. This is - in general terms - a conflict between Soviet spiritual culture and modern material culture.
• Recently, among the post-Soviet intellectual elite, discussions about the “end of the Russian intelligentsia”, that “the intelligentsia is leaving” have become popular. This refers not only to the “brain drain” abroad, but, mainly, to the transformation of the Russian intellectual into a Western European intellectual. The tragedy of this transformation is that a unique ethical and cultural type is being lost - “an educated person with a sick conscience” (M.S. Kagan). The place of a reverent, free-thinking and selfless altruist who reveres Culture is taken by calculating egoistic acquirers who neglect national and universal cultural values. In this regard, the revival of Russian culture, rooted in its Golden and Silver Ages, becomes doubtful. How justified are these fears?
• The cradle and abode of the Russian intelligentsia in the 19th and 20th centuries. there was Russian literature. Russia, unlike European countries, was characterized by literary-centrism of public consciousness, which lies in the fact that fiction and journalism (and not religion, philosophy or science) served as the main source of socially recognized ideas, ideals, and poets, writers, writers and critics acted as masters of thought, authoritative judges, apostles and prophets. Russian literature raised the Russian intelligentsia, and the Russian intelligentsia raised Russian literature. Since literature is one of the communicative channels of book culture, we can conclude that there is a dialectical cause-and-effect relationship between “book communication and the Russian intelligentsia.”
• In order for the reproduction of the Russian intelligentsia to be interrupted, it is necessary to deprive it of nutritious soil, i.e. It is necessary for Russian literature that fosters moral sensitivity to “go away.” Currently, there is a crisis in Russian literature: the mass reader prefers entertaining bestsellers (most often by foreign authors) or does not read at all; books are becoming more expensive and circulations are decreasing; Among modern writers there are practically no names left that are attractive to young people. Surveys of St. Petersburg students showed that less than 10% have a “thirst for reading,” while the rest are indifferent to classics and modern fiction. Hence the narrow cultural outlook, often - elementary ignorance: to the question “What did Pushkin die from?”, one can hear “from cholera.” Thus, the indispensable condition for the “departure” of the Russian intelligentsia from the new century is fulfilled: book communication is of little demand by the younger generation.
• We are witnessing a natural change from book communication to electronic (television and computer) communication. Back in the middle of the 20th century. they started talking about an “information crisis” caused by the contradiction between book flows and funds and the individual capabilities of their perception. The result is the death of knowledge, we do not know what we know. The collections of Russian literature are constantly growing and becoming more and more vast and inaccessible. It turns out to be a paradox: there are more and more books, but fewer and fewer readers.
• The steady decline in interest in literature, fiction and journalistic, creates the impression that post-Soviet students have decided to “write off” burdensome and archaic book communication into the archives of history in the name of multimedia communication. There is no reason to hope that classical Russian literature will take the form of multimedia messages: it is not adapted for this. This means that its inherent ethical potential will be lost. There is no doubt that electronic communication will develop its own ethics and its educational impact will be no less than Chekhov’s stories or Dostoevsky’s novels, but it will not be intellectual ethics.
• Without touching on the social, economic, and political arguments used by the authors of now very widespread publications about the end of the Russian intelligentsia, using only the communicative mechanism of its reproduction, we can come to the following conclusion: there is no reason to hope for the revival of “educated people with a sick conscience.” Generation of educated Russian people of the 21st century. will be “educated” differently than their parents - the Soviet intelligentsia of the “disillusioned” generation, and the ideal of an altruist reverent for Culture will attract few.
• O. Toffler, developing his theory of three waves in macrohistory, believes that the personality of the second wave was formed in accordance with Protestant ethics. At the same time, the Protestant ethic was not typical for Russia. We can say that during the Soviet period there was an ethics of the Soviet person and, accordingly, modern youth, denying the ideals and ethics of the previous generation, remains inextricably linked genetically with previous generations. Toffler himself hopes for the replacement of Protestant ethics with a new, informational one. In light of the new cultural dynamics in Russia, one can express the hope that in our country this process will be more dynamic and easier than in the West, and opinion poll data confirm this.
• By analyzing data from sociological surveys, one can try to determine what personality traits are characteristic of modern youth in connection with the transition to an information society, which is based on information and communication. Based on surveys conducted at MIREA in 2003-2005, the following can be noted. The very possibility of communication is a value for today’s youth, so they try to keep up with modern innovations and innovations. Higher education is still of little help in this area, even in the field of information technology, so young people are actively engaged in self-education.
• At the same time, education is not a value in itself, as it was for the generation of the Soviet period. It is a means of achieving social status and material well-being. The ability to communicate using all modern means of communication is a value, with all this there is a tendency to unite in groups based on interests. Such bright individualization, which Toffler speaks of, is not observed. It is still difficult to talk about such a trait as consumption orientation, since in Soviet society this trait was poorly expressed. In general, the high interest in new computer technologies and selfless enthusiasm allow us to hope that the information society in Russia will nevertheless become a reality for the majority of the population when today’s youth grow up a little.
• Conclusion
• The crisis in which Russia finds itself today is much more severe than an ordinary financial crisis or a traditional industrial depression. The country has not just been set back several decades; All the efforts made over the last century to ensure Russia's status as a great power were rendered worthless. The country is copying the worst examples of Asian corrupt capitalism.
• The society of modern Russia is going through difficult times: old ideals have been overthrown and new ones have not been found. The resulting value-semantic vacuum is rapidly being filled with artifacts of Western culture, which have covered almost all spheres of social and spiritual life, from forms of leisure time, manner of communication to ethical and aesthetic values, ideological guidelines.
• According to Toffler, information civilization gives rise to a new type of people who create a new information society. Toffler calls this human type the “third wave,” just as he considers the agrarian society the “first wave” and the industrial society the “second wave.” Moreover, each wave creates its own special type of personality, which has a corresponding character and ethics. Thus, the “second wave” according to Toffler is characterized by the Protestant ethic, and such features as subjectivity and individualism, the ability for abstract thinking, empathy and imagination.
• “The third wave does not create some ideal superman, some kind of heroic species living among us, but fundamentally changes the character traits inherent in the entire society. What is being created is not a new person, but a new social character. Therefore, our task is to look not for the mythical “man,” but for those character traits that are most likely to be valued by the civilization of tomorrow.” Toffler believes that “education will also change. Many children will study outside of the classroom." Toffler believes that “Third Wave civilization may favor very different character traits in young people, such as independence from the opinions of peers, less consumption orientation, and less hedonistic self-focus.”
• Perhaps the changes that our country is now experiencing will lead to the formation of a new type of Russian intellectual - an information intelligentsia that, without repeating the mistakes of the “disappointed” generation, will overcome Western individualism, based on the rich Russian cultural traditions.
• Listusedliterature
• 1. Alekseeva L. History of dissent in the USSR: The newest period. Vilnius-Moscow: News, 1992.
• 2. Akhiezer A.S. Russia as a big society // Questions of Philosophy. 1993. N 1. P.3-19.
• 3. Berto D., Malysheva M. Cultural model of the Russian masses and the forced transition to the market // Biographical method: History, methodology and practice. M.: Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1994. P.94-146.
• 4. Weil P., Genis A. Land of Words // New World. 1991. N 4. P.239-251.
• 5. Gozman L., Etkind A. From the cult of power to the power of people. Psychology of political consciousness // Neva. 1989. N 7.
• 6. Levada Yu.A. The problem of the intelligentsia in modern Russia // Where is Russia going?.. Alternatives for social development. (International Symposium December 17-19, 1993). M., 1994. P.208-214.
• 7. Soviet common man. The experience of a social portrait at the turn of the 90s. M.: World Ocean, 1993
• 8. Toffler O. The Third Wave. - M., Science: 2001.
• 9. Tsvetaeva N.N. Biographical discourse of the Soviet era // Sociological Journal. 1999. N 1/2.

In the structure of morality, it is customary to distinguish between the elements that form it. Morality includes moral practice (expressed in behavior), moral attitudes, and moral consciousness.

Moral norms, moral principles, moral ideals and values ​​are all elements of moral consciousness.
Moral norms are social norms that regulate a person’s behavior in society, his attitude towards other people, towards society and towards himself. Their implementation is ensured by the power of public opinion, internal conviction based on the ideas accepted in a given society about good and evil, justice and injustice, virtue and vice, due and condemned.
Moral norms determine the content of behavior, how it is customary to act in a certain situation, that is, the morals inherent in a given society or social group. They differ from other norms operating in society and performing regulatory functions (economic, political, legal, aesthetic) in the way they regulate people’s actions. Morals are daily reproduced in the life of society by the power of tradition, the authority and power of a generally recognized and supported discipline, public opinion, and the conviction of members of society about proper behavior under certain conditions. In contrast to simple customs and habits, when people act in the same way in similar situations (birthday celebrations, weddings, farewell to the army, various rituals, habit of certain work activities, etc.), moral norms are not simply fulfilled due to the established generally accepted order, but find ideological justification in a person’s ideas about proper or inappropriate behavior, both in general and in a specific life situation.

The formulation of moral norms as reasonable, appropriate and approved rules of behavior is based on real principles, ideals, concepts of good and evil, etc., operating in society.
The fulfillment of moral norms is ensured by the authority and strength of public opinion, the subject’s consciousness of what is worthy or unworthy, moral or immoral, which determines the nature of moral sanctions.
A moral norm is, in principle, designed for voluntary fulfillment. But its violation entails moral sanctions, consisting of a negative assessment and condemnation of a person’s behavior, and directed spiritual influence. They mean a moral prohibition to commit similar acts in the future, addressed both to a specific person and to everyone around him. Moral sanction reinforces the moral requirements contained in moral norms and principles.
Violation of moral norms may entail, in addition to moral sanctions, sanctions of a different kind (disciplinary or provided for by the norms of public organizations). For example, if a serviceman lied to his commander, then this dishonest act will be followed by an appropriate reaction in accordance with the degree of its severity on the basis of military regulations.

Moral norms can be expressed both in a negative, prohibitive form (for example, the Mosaic Laws - the Ten Commandments formulated in the Bible) and in a positive form (be honest, help your neighbor, respect your elders, take care of honor from a young age, etc.). Moral principles are one of the forms of expression of moral requirements, in the most general form revealing the content of morality existing in a particular society. They express fundamental requirements concerning the moral essence of a person, the nature of relationships between people, determine the general direction of human activity and underlie private, specific norms of behavior. In this regard, they serve as criteria of morality.
If a moral norm prescribes what specific actions a person should perform and how to behave in typical situations, then the moral principle gives a person a general direction of activity.
Moral principles include such general principles of morality as
humanism - recognition of man as the highest value;

altruism - selfless service to one's neighbor;

mercy - compassionate and active love, expressed in readiness to help everyone in need;

collectivism - a conscious desire to promote the common good;

rejection of individualism - opposition of the individual to society, every

sociality, and egoism - preference for one’s own interests over the interests of all others.
In addition to the principles that characterize the essence of a particular morality, there are values ​​- these are patterns of behavior and attitudes, recognized as a guideline, which are established in norms. When they say “be honest,” they mean that honesty is a value. Human values ​​have a hierarchy, i.e. There are lower and higher level values. In relation to all these levels, the supreme regulator is the concept of higher values ​​(value orientations) of morality (freedom, meaning of life, happiness).

Moral ideals are concepts of moral consciousness in which the moral demands placed on people are expressed in the form of an image of a morally perfect personality, an idea of ​​a person who embodies the highest moral qualities.

The moral ideal was understood differently at different times, in different societies and teachings. If Aristotle saw the moral ideal in a person who considers the highest virtue to be self-sufficient, detached from the worries and anxieties of practical activity, the contemplation of truth, then Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) characterized the moral ideal as a guide for our actions, “the divine man within us,” with which we compare ourselves and improve, but never being able to become on the same level as him. The moral ideal is defined in its own way by various religious teachings, political movements, and philosophers. The moral ideal accepted by a person indicates the ultimate goal of self-education. The moral ideal accepted by public moral consciousness determines the purpose of education and influences the content of moral principles and norms. We can also talk about a public moral ideal as an image of a perfect society built on the requirements of the highest justice and humanism.

Values

And

ideals

Goals and objectives of the lesson:

• Introduce students to the concepts of ideal and value;
• Form the concept of conflict of values;
• Foster respect for elders, a sense of duty and honor.

• “A GOOD PERSON IS NOT THE ONE WHO CAN DO GOOD, BUT ONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW TO DO EVIL”

V.O.KLUCHEVSKY

• “An EVIL PERSON HARMS HIMSELF BEFORE HURTING ANOTHER”

AUGUSTINE

Parable "island of spiritual values"

• Once upon a time, there was an island on Earth where all spiritual values ​​lived. But one day they noticed how the island began to go under water. All the valuables boarded their ships and sailed away. Only Love remained on the island.
• She waited until the last minute, but when there was nothing left to wait, she also wanted to sail away from the island.
• Then she called Wealth and asked to join him on the ship, but Wealth replied: “There are a lot of jewelry and gold on my ship, there is no place for you here.” When the ship of Sadness sailed past, she asked to come to her, but she answered her: “Sorry, Love, I’m so sad that I need to always be alone.” Then Love saw the ship of Pride and asked for her help, but she said that Love would disrupt the harmony on her ship. Joy floated nearby, but she was so busy having fun that she didn’t even hear about the calls of Love. Then Love completely despaired.
• But suddenly she heard a voice somewhere behind: “Come on, Love, I’ll take you with me.” Love turned around and saw the old man. He took her to land, and when the old man sailed away, Love realized that she had forgotten to ask his name. Then she turned to Knowledge:
• - Tell me, Knowledge, who saved me? Who was this old man?
• Knowledge looked at Love:
• - It was Time.
• - Time? - asked Lyubov. - But why did it save me?
• Knowledge looked at Love once more, then into the distance where the elder sailed:
• - Because only Time knows how important Love is in life.

I .

• Morality

3. Etiquette.

A) The doctrine of morality and ethics

B) The norms that society has established.

C) Standards established by the state.

D) Rules of behavior for people in society

II . Match the terms and concepts:

A) Conducts serious research, expanding ideas about the world.

B) Understands the basics of science.

C) He understands not only the basics of science, but also literature and art.

1. Literate person

2. Enlightened person

3. Learned man

Answers to the test:

I . A-4, B-1, B-2, D-3.

II . A-3, B-1, B-2.

What is an ideal?

Ideal - a model, something perfect, the highest goal of aspirations.

Idealist

Idealization - representing someone or

something better than it really is.

Materialist - a person striving for material gain.

What are values?

Values - this is the positive significance of something that is not questioned.

Moral values ​​serve as an ideal for all people.

Seven fundamental values: Truth, Goodness, Benefit, Dominion, Justice, Freedom, Beauty.

Highlight those provisions that are

valuable to you in life.

Homemade

animals

Faithful friends

Good studies

attitude

teachers

Sports

Respect

Visit

theaters and museums

Pocket

money for expenses

Understanding

parents

Write down what you can never forgive

a person you are friends with or respect.

Explain why. Complete the list.

Greed

Coarseness

Weakness of character

meanness

Betrayal

Indicate what you never allow yourself to do

communicating with the person you love and value.

Explain why. Add your options.

Look untidy

Tell a lie

The most important value for any person is life.

but sometimes people risk it.

Read the texts and determine in the name of what values

people risked their lives.

In 1941 to the front

thousands of volunteers

to fight

with fascist troops,

attacked our country.

During an epidemic

typhus doctor helped

sick, although I knew

what is this disease.

Suggest

situation.

Two climbing friends

fell into a landslide in the mountains

stones. One is serious

suffered, and the second one saved him,

risking his own life.

The “golden” rule of morality:

"Treat people like this

as you want,

to be treated

Ideal- the highest example of something, worthy of respect, admiration, study, imitation. Ideal from the French word (idealis - view, image, idea). An ideal is the highest degree of positive quality in culture and art.

Ethical ideals manifest themselves in various phenomena of social life. Ideals can be spiritual and material, subjective and objective, synthetic, man-made and natural, etc.

The concept of the ideal first arose in Christian morality as a result of the realization discrepancies between what should be and what is :
human dignity and real living conditions;
the appearance of earthly man and the image of Jesus Christ.
Christian morality as an ideal affirmed the image of a martyr, an ascetic.
I. Kant wrote: “An ideal is something to which one must strive and which one will never achieve,” it is “a necessary guide for the human mind.” Ideal , according to Kant, unchanged for all times, divorced from real life. The ideal of freedom is freedom of spirit.
V.F. Hegel claimed that ideal:
is the opposite (?) of reality;
develops through this contradiction;
is realized in the fruits of the activity of the world mind.
A. Feuerbach believed that ideal is a “whole, comprehensive, perfect, educated person.”
Utopian socialists believed ideal the human right to free development, which is possible only as a result of the elimination of class inequality.
K. Marx and F. Engels determined moral ideal as a component of the social ideal “the liberation of the oppressed class by revolutionary means.” The founders of Marxism believed that the ideal reflects the developing reality: “History cannot reach its final conclusion in some ideal state... it is... a movement... with which reality must be consistent ".
Ideal is a value and imperative representation (affirms the unconditional, positive content of actions), determining the content of good and evil, due, etc.
Modern ethics considers the ideal from the standpoint anthropocentrism. Moral ideal - This:
universal, absolute, moral idea of ​​the good, the due;
an image of perfect relationships between people;
the structure of a society that ensures perfect relationships between people (social ideal);
the highest example of a moral personality.
Personal moral ideal of a person - this desire for happiness, life satisfaction. It must have social significance. Aspects of personal ideal:
sensory-emotional (ideas about personal happiness);
understanding the purpose and meaning of life;
motives of activity;
attitude towards other people.
Content ideal is determined by the social environment. The formation of an ideal is the process of transforming the environment into the inner world of an individual. IN basis The ideal may be an individual moral program, a positive example, etc.

Basic ideal functions:
determining the purpose of human moral activity;
encouraging a person to act morally;
unification of what should be and what is;
determination of a person's moral character.
A moral ideal can be based on a social ideal. Social ideal:
determines the way of life and activities of society;
includes moral attitudes;
morally guides society

Moral- there is an acceptance of responsibility for one’s actions. Since, as follows from the definition, morality is based on free will, only a free being can be moral. Unlike morality , which is an external requirement for the behavior of an individual, along with the law, morality is the internal attitude of the individual to act in accordance with his conscience.

Moral (moral) values - this is what the ancient Greeks called “ethical virtues.” The ancient sages considered prudence, benevolence, courage, and justice to be the main virtues. In Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the highest moral values ​​are associated with faith in God and zealous reverence for him. Honesty, loyalty, respect for elders, hard work, and patriotism are revered as moral values ​​among all nations. And although in life people do not always show such qualities, they are highly valued by people, and those who possess them are respected. These values, presented in their impeccable, absolutely complete and perfect expression, act as ethical ideals.

• Forward >

For several years now, discussions have been going on in our country about how to make Russia the most advanced country in the modern world. A number of authors emphasize the importance

the latest scientific developments and domestic achievements in fundamental sciences. Others point to the geopolitical and climatic features of Russia, which require large additional costs for heat supply and laying other communications, covering significant distances, processing primary raw materials, etc. Still others rely on the special national spirit of the people, who can overcome any difficulties. Still others believe that the West will provide significant assistance in the technological and economic development of the country, guided by considerations of geopolitical stability.

What do you think about these positions? Which of the following is more consistent with common sense? Which ones are initially unrealistic?

carried out through the transmission from generation to generation of unchanged
values. Activities, their means and ends have existed for centuries
as sustainable traditions, patterns and social norms.
In modern conditions, the need for qualitatively different
ways of preparing and integrating the individual into society.”
What type of society does the author mean by “modern conditions”?
Based on the knowledge of the social science course and personal social experience,
give two explanations of the author's point of view why in modern
world, “the need for qualitatively different ways of preparing and
inclusion of the individual in society."

There are different meanings of the concept "society". Society in a broad sense is understood

1) the entire population of the Earth
2) the whole world in the diversity of its forms and manifestations
3) unity of living and inanimate nature
4) a certain stage of historical development

The concept of “personality” is used to characterize
1) human activity
2) the unique identity of a person
3) a set of socially significant human qualities
4) a person as an individual representative of the human race

Grandma explains how to properly prepare delicious borscht. What form of communication does this example illustrate?
1) exchange of views
3) transfer of experience
2) exchange of information
4) expression of experiences

Are the following statements about the relationship between society and nature true?
A. The existence of society largely depends on the state of nature.
B. Society always has a negative impact on the natural environment.
1) only A is correct
3) both judgments are correct
2) only B is correct
4) both judgments are incorrect

Purposeful cognitive activity of a person to obtain
knowledge and skills is called
1) creativity
3) socialization
2) education
4) labor

Are the following judgments about the role of science in the modern world true?
A. Science explains the laws of development of the surrounding world.
B. Science reveals possible prospects for the development of society.
1) only A is correct
3) both judgments are correct
2) only B is correct
4) both judgments are incorrect
Labor productivity is called
1) the amount of products produced per unit of time
2) the difference between the company’s revenue and total costs
3) dividing the production process into a number of separate stages
4) the process of production of goods and services

Citizen V., who returned from vacation, discovered that monthly prices for
Basic consumer goods increased. She subsequently noted
further rise in prices. Manifestations of what economic phenomenon did you note?
citizen V.?
1) competition
2) inflation
3) offers
4) demand

In country Z there is commodity production and money circulation. Which
additional information will allow us to conclude that the economy
country Z is of a command (planned) nature?
1) Retired employees receive an old-age pension.
2) Most workers work in industrial enterprises.
3) The state acts as a monopolist in hiring labor.
4) The state exercises control over the money supply.

Are the following statements about wages correct?
A. An employee’s salary depends solely on his personal qualities.
B. There are various forms of remuneration for workers.
1) only A is correct
3) both judgments are correct
2) only B is correct
4) both judgments are incorrect

socio-political organizations and movements d) all of the above 89. Assignment Mark the correct answer The form of organization of political power in society that has sovereignty and exercises control with the help of special bodies is: a) political system b) political regime c) state 90. Assignment Mark the correct answer In the broadest sense, power is: a) the right to do something on behalf of the state b) the art of living together c) the ability of an individual or group of people to control, influence other people 91. Assignment Mark the correct answer Mark which type power refers to the power of the minister: a) executive b) legislative c) judicial 92. Assignment Mark the correct answer Recognition by society or its majority of the existing power characterizes it: a) legality b) legitimacy c) statism 93. Assignment Mark the correct answer Which Which of the following characteristics is not mandatory for the state? a) public power b) constant government control over the daily lives of people c) the presence of a certain territory d) the sovereignty and independence of the country in the international arena 94. Assignment Mark the correct answer Which of the following features is not a feature of a presidential republic? a) the president is the head of state b) the president is elected by popular vote c) the head of government becomes the leader of the party that wins the elections 95. Assignment Mark the correct answer According to the Constitution, the Russian Federation is: a) a democratic state b) a federal state c) a rule of law d) a presidential state republic 96. Assignment Mark the correct answer What is the rule of law? a) a state in which a constitution exists and actually operates b) a state whose main principle is the rule of law (law) c) a state with a republican form of government 97. Assignment Mark the correct answer The signs of a rule of law state are: a) separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial b) equality of all before the law c) the institution of presidential power d) mutual responsibility of the state and citizens 98. Assignment Mark the correct answer The set of political institutions, social structures, norms, values, as well as their interactions, in which political power is exercised and political influence is: a) political regime b) political system c) state 99. Assignment Mark the correct answer The main functions of political parties are: a) organizing the electoral process b) ensuring communication between civil society and the state c) selecting candidates and nominating political figures d) all of the above 100. Assignment Mark the correct answer The system of ways and methods of exercising power is : a) political regime b) political system c) state 101. Assignment Mark the correct answer Political scientists distinguish the following types of political regimes: a) democratic b) authoritarian c) totalitarian d) all of the above 102. Assignment Mark the correct answer Which document is recognized in modern world "an international standard of human rights and freedoms?" a) Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia b) Universal Declaration of Human Rights c) Declaration of Principles of International Law

11. A holistic idea of ​​nature, society, man, which is expressed in the system of values ​​and ideals of the individual, social

groups, societies are

1) nature-centrism 2) science-centrism 3) worldview 4) sociocentrism

12 . The process of mastering knowledge and skills, ways of behavior is called:

1) education 2) adaptation 3) socialization 4) modernization

13 . The form of interaction with the surrounding world inherent only to humans is

1) need 2) activity 3) goal 4) program

14 . A person’s definition of himself as an individual capable of making independent decisions and entering into certain relationships with other people and nature:

1) socialization 2) education 3) self-realization 4) self-awareness

15. The form of interaction with the surrounding world inherent only to humans is

1) need 2) activity 3) goal 4) program.

16 .The term "society" Not includes the concept:

1) A form of unification of people

2) Parts of the material world

3) Natural habitat

4) Ways of interaction between people

17 .The transition from slash-and-burn to arable farming is an example of the relationship:

1) Society and nature

2) Societies and cultures

3) Economics and religion

4) Civilizations and formation

18. All examples, with the exception of two, relate to the concept of “social needs”. Provide additional examples.

Creation of cultural values, labor activity, communication, social activity,

participation in the game, sleep.

19. Complete the sentences:

1) According to the need for reproduction of the species, a social

institute -….

2) Man is a product of biological, cultural and social….

3) That which is most dear is sacred both for one person and for all humanity

- This … .

4) In accordance with social needs, social... have developed.

5) The origin of man is called….

6) Perfection, the highest goal of human aspiration is... .

20. Spiritual and physical in man:

1) Precede each other

2) Connected to each other

3) Oppose each other

4) Independent of each other

21. A distinctive feature of a person is

1)Satisfy your needs

2) Adaptation to the environment

3) Understanding the world and oneself

4)Use of tools

22 .Gennady has the knowledge and ability to protect personal rights, respects the rights of others, strictly fulfills his duties, and complies with the laws of the country. What qualities does Gennady have?

1) Citizenship

2) Conscience

3) Patriotism

4) Responsibility

23 .Are the following judgments about the social principle in man true?

A. The social principle in man precedes the biological one.

B. The social principle in man is opposite to the biological one

1) only A is correct

2) only B is correct

3) both judgments are correct

4) both judgments are incorrect

24.Are the following judgments about spirituality true?

A. Spirituality is the highest level of development and self-regulation of a mature personality.

B. Spirituality is the morally oriented will and mind of a person.

1) only A is correct

2) only B is correct

3) both judgments are correct

4) both judgments are incorrect

25 .Read the text below, each position of which is numbered.

1. Avicenna, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin - these are a few names of child prodigies whose genius has revealed itself to its full potential over the years. 2. Ufologists consider the appearance of child prodigies to be the intervention of aliens. 3. According to biophysicists, prodigies are “made” by geomagnetic waves that affect the fetus. 4. The Earth’s geomagnetic field varies and its intensity depends on the Sun and other planets.

Determine which provisions of the text are: 1) Factual in nature 2) evaluative in nature

Under the position number, write down the letter indicating its nature.

26 .Read the text below, in which a number of words are missing. Select from the list provided the words that need to be inserted in place of the gaps:

“Society, state and culture are the means of organizing human__________(A), thanks to which coordination between the actions of individual people is achieved/ Coordination__________________(B) of people simultaneously creates society and is created by it. People unite in order to achieve the things facing them __________ (C) Some researchers have even expressed the opinion that the ability to create associations is a special form of a person’s _____________ (D) to a dangerous ____________ (E). If animals change the form of their body or ________(E), then the person combines his efforts with the efforts of other people.” The words in the list are given in the nominative case. Each word or phrase can be used only once. Choose one word after another, mentally filling in each gap. Please note that there are more words in the list than you will need to fill in the blanks.”

1) Environment

2) Culture

4) Activities

5) Interaction

6) Behavior

7) Tools

8) Device

9) Generation

27 . You are asked to prepare a detailed answer to the problem “Social Progress”. Compose complex plan, according to which you will cover this topic.

>> Ideal and values

23. Ideal and values

What's happened ideal?

In our behavior, we consciously or unconsciously follow some ideals, most often without even knowing it.

Ideal (from French ideal)- a model, something perfect, the highest goal of aspirations. It denotes something that seems worthy of imitation. People's ideals may be different. One person considers the ideal to be a respectable businessman driving a Mercedes (he is strict, businesslike, wealthy). And the other is attracted by the romance of long roads. He wants to explore the world, visit different countries, cross the Arctic Ocean or desert.

We advise you to remember

Perfect- something perfect, corresponding to the ideal.

Idealist- a selfless person striving for lofty goals.

Idealization- presenting someone or something better than he (it) really is; endowment with qualities corresponding to the ideal.

People who put material values ​​first, such as a luxurious mansion or a car, are called materialists.

And the other person is called an idealist. Idealists are usually people who put spiritual values ​​and ideals (goodness, justice, honesty) first. Moreover, in every person there are both
beginnings: material and ideal.

The word “ideal” comes from concepts that you have probably encountered more than once.

Heroes have always been the bearers and embodiment of the ideal. That is why they served as role models, inspiring people to high moral actions. The images of the heroes embody bright, memorable manifestations of moral fortitude, courage, and the greatness of the human spirit. Heroes
poets sing, their image is captured in immortal works by great artists and sculptors.

People strive for the ideal all their lives. We compare our actions and deeds with him.

Perhaps the most surprising thing is that we want to see not only ourselves, but also others, especially those close to us, as ideal.

Let's try to think about who and why can become an ideal for others.

You've probably heard young fans say about some popular singer: “She's my ideal!” But what does this mean? Girls like the singer’s appearance, her manner of holding herself, speaking, and laughing. I like the success that the singer has achieved. But the fans know nothing about the singer’s views on life, how she communicates with her family and friends. We are talking only about external imitation.

Each generation has its own ideals. They are often associated with events that the entire society is experiencing at this time. The military generation admired their exploits during battles and their steadfast behavior in captivity of their enemies.

New times and modern youth already have other role models that are closer and more understandable to them.

What are values?

What are values? These are those objects and phenomena (material and spiritual) that are most important for a person in life.

There are values ​​that are important at all times. They can be called universal. Such values ​​include truth, freedom, justice, beauty, goodness, and benefit.

The enduring values ​​of family life are considered to be loyalty and constancy, love for children combined with exactingness and respect for people.

But sometimes a person has a conflict of values. Imagine this situation. A friend asked me to come support him at a sports competition, and at school by tomorrow I need to prepare a serious message, for which there are no materials at home. And the student faces a difficult choice: go to the competition to support a friend or go to the library to prepare a message? Any decision is unpleasant, because you want to be both a good friend and a successful student. In life you will have to learn to make many choices.
situations.

What values ​​are today's teenagers guided by?

When scientists found out what books 10-13 year old teenagers read, what heroes they imitate and admire, it turned out that fictional heroes, who are characterized by a sense of collectivism and community with other people, hold the lead. Each of them acted out of a moral imperative to care for those around them. The characters in the works could not remain indifferent to the pain and suffering of other people; they felt responsible for them. But for students, the first place was not fairy-tale heroes or movie characters, like teenagers, but real people who achieved success through hard work and outstanding abilities.

It is difficult to determine the values ​​of teenagers. Some data suggests that they are mainly focused on material benefits, without tormenting themselves with questions about the meaning of life. However, on the other hand, teenagers are interested in the life of their family, religion, and are not indifferent to the pain and suffering of other people.

Science has established that there are three stages of human moral development.

The first stage is when a person does not commit bad deeds because he is afraid of punishment. If a person thinks that he can be caught stealing, then he is unlikely to steal.

The second stage is when a person values ​​the opinion of the group in which he is located. A person does not steal, fearing expulsion from the group.

In the third stage, behavior is determined by principles that apply regardless of the authority of the group. They are based on justice, mutual assistance and equality of human rights, respect for his dignity as an individual. A person does not steal because he respects other people. Behavior that corresponds to such principles is considered correct.

This scientific theory is based on the belief that people have certain stages of moral development. But it turns out that most people rarely progress beyond the second level. Criminals stop at the first one.

The principles of morality tell us what our relationships with people should be, how we should treat people. The simplest way to express them is this: treat people the way you want to be treated. This is a form of equality between people.

Let's sum it up

People's behavior is influenced by ideals and values. Ideals are role models, something perfect. The ideal can be real people or fictional characters, social ideas and values. Values ​​are all objects and phenomena (spiritual and material) that are important to a person in his life. There are universal human values ​​that have always been considered important.

Test your knowledge

1. What do the concepts mean: “ideal”, “idealist”, “idealization”?
2. List the character traits that you think an ideal person should have. Justify your choice.
3. How do you understand the expression “Every time has its heroes”?
4. Do you know any works of art that depict heroes and show lofty ideals? Name them.
5. Describe a situation that reflects a conflict of values.
6. Come up with sentences (phrases) with the words: “benefit”, “justice”, “beauty”, “freedom”, “honor”, ​​“responsibility”.

Workshop

1. The basis of the culture of Japan and China is children's respect for their parents.

It includes officially recognized duties, such as respect for parents, unquestioning obedience to them, caring for father and mother.

The observance of this cultural value has so restructured social relations that the Chinese and Japanese peoples today perhaps surpass all others in respect for elders.

What is the situation with this cultural value in our country, in Russian society? Conduct your own mini-research (use materials from print, radio, television, and your observations).

2. Complete the test task.

A. What would you not be able to forgive the person you are friends with?
1) Rudeness;
2) betrayal;
3) cowardice, greed;
4) weakness of character;
5) rudeness;
6) other.

B. What will you never allow yourself to do when communicating with a loved one and dear to you?
1) Look untidy;

2) tell a lie;
3) make a mistake or be embarrassed;
4) raise your voice;
5) other.

Find out what is valuable to you in communicating with loved ones.

Kravchenko A.I., Pevtsova E.A., Social studies: Textbook for 6th grade of educational institutions. - 12th ed. - M.: LLC "TID "Russian Word - RS", 2009. - 184 p.

Lesson content lesson notes supporting frame lesson presentation acceleration methods interactive technologies Practice tasks and exercises self-test workshops, trainings, cases, quests homework discussion questions rhetorical questions from students Illustrations audio, video clips and multimedia photographs, pictures, graphics, tables, diagrams, humor, anecdotes, jokes, comics, parables, sayings, crosswords, quotes Add-ons abstracts articles tricks for the curious cribs textbooks basic and additional dictionary of terms other Improving textbooks and lessonscorrecting errors in the textbook updating a fragment in a textbook, elements of innovation in the lesson, replacing outdated knowledge with new ones Only for teachers perfect lessons calendar plan for the year; methodological recommendations; discussion program Integrated Lessons

ABSTRACT

discipline: Culturology

Ideals in modern society

Introduction

2. Cultural space of the 60s and modern Russia

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

A fundamental characteristic of the human environment in modern society is social change. For an ordinary person, a subject of social cognition, the instability of society is perceived, first of all, as the uncertainty of the existing situation. Therefore, a twofold process is observed in relations with the future. On the one hand, in a situation of instability and uncertainty about the future, which exists even among wealthy segments of the population, a person tries to find something that will give him confidence, support in possible changes in the future. Some people try to secure a future for themselves through property, others try to build on higher ideals. Many people perceive education as a kind of guarantee that increases security in changing social circumstances and promotes confidence in the future.

Morality is a way of regulating people's behavior. Other ways of regulation are custom and law. Morality includes moral feelings, norms, commandments, principles, ideas about good and evil, honor, dignity, justice, happiness, etc. Based on this, a person evaluates his goals, motives, feelings, actions, thoughts. Everything in the world around us can be subject to moral evaluation. Including the world itself, its structure, as well as society or its individual institutions, actions, thoughts, feelings of other people, etc. A person can subject even God and his actions to a moral assessment. This is discussed, for example, in the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov", in the section on the Grand Inquisitor.

Morality is, therefore, a way of understanding and assessing reality that can judge everything and can pass a verdict on any event, phenomenon of the external world and the internal world. But in order to judge and pass a sentence, one must, firstly, have the right to do so, and, secondly, have evaluation criteria, ideas about what is moral and what is immoral.

In modern Russian society, there is a sense of spiritual discomfort, largely due to the moral conflict of generations. Modern youth cannot accept the lifestyle and style of thinking idealized by their elders, while the older generation is convinced that it was better before, that modern society is unspiritual and doomed to decay. What gives the right to such a moral assessment? Is there any sound grain in it? This work is devoted to the analysis of the problem of ideals in modern society and its applicability to the modern situation in Russia.

1. Ideals and values: a historical overview

Moral evaluation is based on the idea of ​​how things “ought to be”, i.e. an idea of ​​a certain proper world order, which does not yet exist, but which nevertheless should exist, an ideal world order. From the point of view of moral consciousness, the world should be kind, honest, fair, humane. If he is not like that, so much the worse for the world, it means that he has not yet grown up, has not matured, has not fully realized the potential inherent in him. Moral consciousness “knows” how the world should be and thereby, as it were, pushes reality to move in this direction. Those. moral consciousness believes that the world can and should be made more perfect. The current state of the world does not suit him, it is basically immoral, there is no morality in it yet and it needs to be introduced there.

In nature, everyone strives to survive and competes with others for the benefits of life. Mutual assistance and cooperation are rare phenomena here. In society, on the contrary, life is impossible without mutual assistance and cooperation. In nature the weak perish, in society the weak are helped. This is the main difference between a person and an animal. And this is something new that a person brings into this world. But man is not “ready” for this world; he grows out of the kingdom of nature and in him the natural and human principles compete all the time. Morality is the expression of humanity in man.

A true person is one who is able to live for others, help others, even sacrifice himself for others. Self-sacrifice is the highest manifestation of morality, embodied in the image of the God-man, Christ, who for a long time remained an unattainable ideal and role model for people. Since biblical times, man began to realize his duality: man-beast began to turn into man-god. God is not in heaven, he is in everyone’s soul and everyone is capable of being god, i.e. to sacrifice something for the sake of others, to give others a part of oneself.

The most important condition for morality is human freedom. Freedom means independence, autonomy of a person from the outside world. Of course, man is not God, he is a material being, he lives in the world, he must eat, drink, survive. And yet, thanks to consciousness, a person gains freedom; he is not determined by the external world, although he depends on it. A person defines himself, creates himself, decides what he should be like. If a person says: “What can I do? Nothing depends on me,” he himself chose lack of freedom, his dependence.

Conscience is indisputable evidence that a person is free. If there is no freedom, then there is nothing to judge: an animal that kills a person is not judged, a car is not judged. A person is judged and, above all, he is judged by his own conscience, unless he has yet turned into an animal, although this is also not uncommon. According to the Bible, even God considers a person free, who endowed him with free will. Man has long understood that freedom is both happiness and burden. Freedom, identical to reason, distinguishes man from animals and gives him the joy of knowledge and creativity. But, at the same time, freedom comes with heavy responsibility for oneself and one’s actions, for the world as a whole.

Man, as a being capable of creativity, is similar to God or nature as a whole, that creative force that creates the world. This means that he is capable of either improving this world, making it better, or destroying it. In any case, he is responsible for his actions, for his actions, large and small. Every action changes something in this world, and if a person does not think about it, does not track the consequences of his actions, then he has not yet become a human being, a rational being, he is still on his way and it is unknown where this path will lead.

Is there one morality or many? Maybe everyone has their own morals? The answer to this question is not so simple. It is obvious that in a society there are always several codes of conduct practiced in different social groups.

The regulation of relationships in society is largely determined by moral traditions, which include a system of moral values ​​and ideals. A significant place in the emergence and evolution of these ideals belongs to philosophical and religious systems.

In ancient philosophy, man recognizes himself as a cosmic being and tries to comprehend his place in space. The search for truth is the search for an answer to the question of how the world works and how I myself work, what is good, what is good. Traditional ideas about good and evil are rethought, true good is highlighted in contrast to what is not true good, but is only considered as such. If ordinary consciousness considered wealth and power, as well as the pleasures they bring, to be good, philosophy identified the true good as wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice.

In the era of Christianity, a significant shift in moral consciousness occurs. There were also general moral principles formulated by Christianity, which, however, were not particularly practiced in ordinary life, even among the clergy. But this in no way devalues ​​the importance of Christian morality, in which important universal moral principles and commandments were formulated.

With its negative attitude towards property in any form (“do not store up treasures on earth”), Christian morality contrasted itself with the dominant type of moral consciousness in the Roman Empire. The main idea in it is the idea of ​​spiritual equality - the equality of all before God.

Christian ethics readily accepted everything acceptable to it from earlier ethical systems. Thus, the well-known moral rule “Do not do to a person what you do not wish for yourself,” the authorship of which is attributed to Confucius and the Jewish sages, entered the canon of Christian ethics along with the commandments of the Sermon on the Mount.

Early Christian ethics laid the foundations of humanism, preaching philanthropy, selflessness, mercy, and non-resistance to evil through violence. The latter implied resistance without harming another, a moral confrontation. However, this in no way meant abandoning his beliefs. In the same sense, the question of the moral right to condemnation was posed: “Do not judge, lest you be judged” must be understood as “Do not condemn, do not pass judgment, for you yourself are not sinless,” but stop the one committing evil, stop the spread of evil.

Christian ethics proclaims the commandment of kindness and love for the enemy, the principle of universal love: “You have heard that it was said: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thy enemy.” But I say to you: love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you... for if you love those who love, what is your reward?”

In modern times, in the 16th-17th centuries, significant changes took place in society, which could not but affect morality. Protestantism proclaimed that the believer's main duty to God is to

ABSTRACT

discipline: Culturology

Ideals in modern society

Introduction

1. Ideals and values: a historical overview

2. Cultural space of the 60s and modern Russia

Conclusion

List of used literature

A fundamental characteristic of the human environment in modern society is social change. For an ordinary person - a subject of social cognition - the instability of society is perceived, first of all, as the uncertainty of the existing situation. Therefore, a twofold process is observed in relations with the future. On the one hand, in a situation of instability and uncertainty about the future, which exists even among wealthy segments of the population, a person tries to find something that will give him confidence, support in possible changes in the future. Some people try to secure a future for themselves through property, others try to build on higher ideals. Many people perceive education as a kind of guarantee that increases security in changing social circumstances and promotes confidence in the future.

Morality is a way of regulating people's behavior. Other methods of regulation are custom and law. Morality includes moral feelings, norms, commandments, principles, ideas about good and evil, honor, dignity, justice, happiness, etc. Based on this, a person evaluates his goals, motives, feelings, actions, thoughts. Everything in the world around us can be subject to moral evaluation. Including the world itself, its structure, as well as society or its individual institutions, actions, thoughts, feelings of other people, etc. A person can subject even God and his actions to a moral assessment. This is discussed, for example, in the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov", in the section on the Grand Inquisitor.

Morality is, therefore, a way of understanding and assessing reality that can judge everything and can pass a verdict on any event, phenomenon of the external world and the internal world. But in order to judge and pass a sentence, one must, firstly, have the right to do so, and, secondly, have evaluation criteria, ideas about what is moral and what is immoral.

In modern Russian society, there is a sense of spiritual discomfort, largely due to the moral conflict of generations. Modern youth cannot accept the lifestyle and style of thinking idealized by their elders, while the older generation is convinced that it was better before, and that modern society is unspiritual and doomed to decay. What gives the right to such a moral assessment? Is there any sound grain in it? This work is devoted to the analysis of the problem of ideals in modern society and its applicability to the modern situation in Russia.

Moral evaluation is based on the idea of ​​how things “ought to be”, i.e. an idea of ​​a certain proper world order, which does not yet exist, but which nevertheless should exist, an ideal world order. From the point of view of moral consciousness, the world should be kind, honest, fair, humane. If he is not like that, so much the worse for the world, it means that he has not yet grown up, has not matured, has not fully realized the potential inherent in him. Moral consciousness “knows” how the world should be and thereby, as it were, pushes reality to move in this direction. Those. moral consciousness believes that the world can and should be made more perfect. The current state of the world does not suit him, it is basically immoral, there is no morality in it yet and it needs to be introduced there.

In nature, everyone strives to survive and competes with others for the benefits of life. Mutual assistance and cooperation are rare phenomena here. In society, on the contrary, life is impossible without mutual assistance and cooperation. In nature the weak perish, in society the weak are helped. This is the main difference between a person and an animal. And this is something new that a person brings into this world. But man is not “ready” for this world; he grows out of the kingdom of nature and in him the natural and human principles compete all the time. Morality is the expression of humanity in a person.

A true person is one who is able to live for others, help others, even sacrifice himself for others. Self-sacrifice is the highest manifestation of morality, embodied in the image of the God-man, Christ, who for a long time remained an unattainable ideal and role model for people. Since biblical times, man began to realize his duality: man-beast began to turn into man-god. God is not in heaven, he is in everyone’s soul and everyone is capable of being god, i.e. to sacrifice something for the sake of others, to give others a part of oneself.

The most important condition for morality is human freedom. Freedom means independence, autonomy of a person from the outside world. Of course, man is not God, he is a material being, he lives in the world, he must eat, drink, survive. And yet, thanks to consciousness, a person gains freedom; he is not determined by the external world, although he depends on it. A person defines himself, creates himself, decides what he should be like. If a person says: “What can I do? Nothing depends on me,” he himself chose lack of freedom, his dependence.

Conscience is indisputable evidence that a person is free. If there is no freedom, then there is nothing to judge: an animal that kills a person is not judged, a car is not judged. A person is judged and, above all, he is judged by his own conscience, unless he has yet turned into an animal, although this is also not uncommon. According to the Bible, even God considers a person free, who endowed him with free will. Man has long understood that freedom is both happiness and a burden. Freedom, identical to reason, distinguishes man from animals and gives him the joy of knowledge and creativity. But, at the same time, freedom means heavy responsibility for oneself and one’s actions, for the world as a whole.

Man, as a being capable of creativity, is similar to God or nature as a whole, that creative force that creates the world. This means that he is capable of either improving this world, making it better, or destroying it. In any case, he is responsible for his actions, for his actions, large and small. Every action changes something in this world, and if a person does not think about it, does not track the consequences of his actions, then he has not yet become a human being, a rational being, he is still on his way and it is unknown where this path will lead.

Is there one morality or many? Maybe everyone has their own morals? The answer to this question is not so simple. It is obvious that in a society there are always several codes of conduct practiced in different social groups.

The regulation of relationships in society is largely determined by moral traditions, which include a system of moral values ​​and ideals. A significant place in the emergence and evolution of these ideals belongs to philosophical and religious systems.

In ancient philosophy, man recognizes himself as a cosmic being and tries to comprehend his place in space. The search for truth is the search for an answer to the question of how the world works and how I myself work, what is good, what is good. Traditional ideas about good and evil are rethought, true good is highlighted in contrast to what is not true good, but is only considered as such. If ordinary consciousness considered wealth and power, as well as the pleasures they bring, to be good, philosophy highlighted the true good - wisdom, courage, moderation, justice.

In the era of Christianity, a significant shift in moral consciousness occurs. There were also general moral principles formulated by Christianity, which, however, were not particularly practiced in ordinary life, even among the clergy. But this in no way devalues ​​the importance of Christian morality, in which important universal moral principles and commandments were formulated.

With its negative attitude towards property in any form (“do not store up treasures on earth”), Christian morality contrasted itself with the dominant type of moral consciousness in the Roman Empire. The main idea in it is the idea of ​​spiritual equality - the equality of all before God.

Christian ethics readily accepted everything acceptable to it from earlier ethical systems. Thus, the well-known moral rule “Do not do to a person what you do not wish for yourself,” the authorship of which is attributed to Confucius and the Jewish sages, entered the canon of Christian ethics along with the commandments of the Sermon on the Mount.

Early Christian ethics laid the foundations of humanism, preaching philanthropy, selflessness, mercy, and non-resistance to evil through violence. The latter implied resistance without harming another, a moral confrontation. However, this in no way meant abandoning his beliefs. In the same sense, the question of the moral right to condemnation was posed: “Do not judge, lest you be judged” must be understood as “Do not condemn, do not pass judgment, for you yourself are not sinless,” but stop the one committing evil, stop the spread of evil.

Christian ethics proclaims the commandment of kindness and love for the enemy, the principle of universal love: “You have heard that it was said: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thy enemy.” But I say to you: love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you... for if you love those who love, what is your reward?”

In modern times, in the 16th-17th centuries, significant changes took place in society, which could not but affect morality. Protestantism proclaimed that the main duty of a believer before God is hard work in his profession, and success in business is evidence of God's chosenness. Thus, the Protestant Church gave its flock the go-ahead: “Get rich!” If earlier Christianity claimed that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven, now it is the other way around - the rich become God's chosen ones, and the poor become God's rejected.

With the development of capitalism, industry and science develop, and the worldview changes. The world is losing its aura of divinity. God generally became superfluous in this world, he prevented man from feeling like a full-fledged master of the world, and soon Nietzsche proclaimed the death of God. “God is dead. Who killed him? You and I,” says Nietzsche. Man, freed from God, decided to become God himself. Only this deity turned out to be quite ugly. It decided that the main goal was to consume as much and as variedly as possible and created a consumer society for a certain part of humanity. True, for this it was necessary to destroy a significant part of the forests, pollute the water and atmosphere, and turn vast territories into landfills. It was also necessary to create mountains of weapons to defend against those who did not fall into the consumer society.

Modern morality has again become semi-pagan, reminiscent of pre-Christian ones. It is based on the belief that you only live once, so you have to take everything from life. Just as Callicles once argued in a conversation with Socrates that happiness lies in satisfying all one’s desires, so now this is becoming the main principle of life. True, some intellectuals did not agree with this and began to create a new morality. Back in the 19th century. an ethic of nonviolence emerged.

It so happened that it was the 20th century, which cannot be called the century of humanism and mercy, that gave rise to ideas that are in direct contradiction with the prevailing practice of solving all problems and conflicts from a position of strength. Quiet, persistent resistance turned out to be brought to life - disagreement, disobedience, non-retribution of evil for evil. A person, placed in a hopeless situation, humiliated and powerless, finds a non-violent means of struggle and liberation (primarily internal). He, as it were, accepts responsibility for the evil done by others, takes on someone else’s sin and atones for it with his non-giving of evil.

Marxism advocates the gradual establishment of true social justice. The most important aspect of the understanding of justice is the equality of people in relation to the means of production. It is recognized that under socialism there are still differences in the qualifications of labor and in the distribution of consumer goods. Marxism adheres to the thesis that only under communism should there be a complete coincidence of justice and social equality of people.

Despite the fact that in Russia Marxism gave rise to a totalitarian regime that denied virtually all fundamental human values ​​(although proclaiming them as its main goal), Soviet society was a society where culture, primarily spiritual, was assigned a high status

The 60s became the heyday of Russian Soviet culture; in any case, these years are often idealized in the memories of people who now talk about the decline of culture. In order to reconstruct the spiritual picture of the era of the 60s, the “Sixties” competition “Looking at myself as in a mirror of the era” was held. From people who lived and developed under the shadow of the “thaw” one could expect detailed and extensive characteristics of the era, detailed and extensive characteristics of the era, descriptions of ideals and aspirations.

This is what the era of the 60s looks like in the descriptions of educated participants in the competition: “for some time we believed that we were free and could live according to our conscience, be ourselves,” “everyone breathed freely,” “we began to talk a lot about a new life, many publications appeared”; “The 60s were the most interesting and eventful: we listened to our sixties poets, read (usually secretly) “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”; “The 60s were the time when everyone squinted in the sun, as Zhvanetsky said”; “I consider myself one of the sixties - those whose ideological formation on the basis of communist ideology took place after the death of Stalin, who experienced the cleansing influence of the 20th Congress”; “we felt with our skin the spiritual growth of society, despised everyday life, and strived for interesting work”; “at this time the exploration of space and virgin lands was taking place”; “a significant event - Khrushchev’s report - comprehension has begun”; “moral code of the builder of communism”, “national state power”, “worship of science”.

Among poorly educated competition participants, direct assessments of the 60s era are very rare. We can say that in fact they do not single out this time as a special era and do not explain their participation in the competition from this point of view. In those cases when characteristics of this time do appear in their descriptions, they are specific and “material”, and the era of the 60s is defined primarily as the time of Khrushchev’s reforms (“shortages of bread”, “instead of the usual crops in the fields there is corn” , “the housewives parted with their cows”...). In other words, they do not record the 60s at all as a “thaw”, as the liberation of the country and the individual, as a softening of the regime and a change in ideology.

The concept of cultural capital, as applied to the realities of life of a Soviet person, can be considered not only as the presence of higher levels of education and corresponding status among the narrator’s parents, but also as the presence of a full and loving family, as well as the talent, skill, and hard work of his parents (what in Russian culture is designated by the word “nuggets”). This was especially evident in the life stories of the “peasant” generation, which realized the potential for democratization of social relations that had accumulated long before the revolution.

For educated participants in the “sixties” competition, their belonging to the educated strata of society in the second generation, the presence of their parents’ education, which gave them the status of an employee in Soviet society, becomes essential in determining cultural capital. And if the parents are educated people in this sense (there are also people of noble origin, of whom, naturally, there are very few, and “modest Soviet employees” of proletarian or peasant origin), then the cultural capital of the family, as the descriptions testify, necessarily affects the biography of the children .

A generalized picture of the biographies of those who belong to the educated strata of society in the first generation, and those whose parents already possessed cultural capital to one degree or another, is as follows. The first are characterized by a stormy (student) youth with poetry reading, theaters, scarce books and cultural enthusiasm (that is, with the myths of their youth), which with the beginning of family life generally fades away and becomes a pleasant memory. Their involvement in the cultural codes of Soviet ideology, as a rule, was supported by active participation in public work associated with party membership. And in those cases when they are disappointed in the past, they define themselves as “naive simpletons”, “hard workers, trusting by nature, who worked conscientiously in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.”

This shows that the ideals and culture of the sixties were still not a widespread phenomenon, but rather the mindset of the elite. However, in the post-Soviet period, this mentality changed dramatically, and the mindset of the elite also changed. However, value conflict is constantly present in modern society. This is - in general terms - a conflict between Soviet spiritual culture and modern material culture.

Recently, among the post-Soviet intellectual elite, discussions about the “end of the Russian intelligentsia”, that “the intelligentsia is leaving” have become popular. This refers not only to the “brain drain” abroad, but, mainly, to the transformation of the Russian intellectual into a Western European intellectual. The tragedy of this transformation is that a unique ethical and cultural type is being lost - “an educated person with a sick conscience” (M.S. Kagan). The place of a reverent, free-thinking and selfless altruist who reveres Culture is taken by calculating egoistic acquirers who neglect national and universal cultural values. In this regard, the revival of Russian culture, rooted in its Golden and Silver Ages, becomes doubtful. How justified are these fears?

The cradle and abode of the Russian intelligentsia in the 19th and 20th centuries. there was Russian literature. Russia, unlike European countries, was characterized by literary-centrism of public consciousness, which lies in the fact that fiction and journalism (and not religion, philosophy or science) served as the main source of socially recognized ideas, ideals, and poets, writers, writers and critics acted as masters of thought, authoritative judges, apostles and prophets. Russian literature raised the Russian intelligentsia, and the Russian intelligentsia raised Russian literature. Since literature is one of the communicative channels of book culture, we can conclude that there is a dialectical cause-and-effect relationship between “book communication and the Russian intelligentsia.”

In order for the reproduction of the Russian intelligentsia to be interrupted, it is necessary to deprive it of nutritious soil, i.e. It is necessary for Russian literature that fosters moral sensitivity to “go away.” Currently, there is a crisis in Russian literature: the mass reader prefers entertaining bestsellers (most often by foreign authors) or does not read at all; books are becoming more expensive and circulations are decreasing; Among modern writers there are practically no names left that are attractive to young people. Surveys of St. Petersburg students showed that less than 10% have a “thirst for reading,” while the rest are indifferent to classics and modern fiction. Hence the narrow cultural outlook, often - elementary ignorance: when asked “Why did Pushkin die?”, one can hear “from cholera.” Thus, the indispensable condition for the “departure” of the Russian intelligentsia from the new century is fulfilled: book communication is of little demand by the younger generation.

We are witnessing a natural change from book communication to electronic (television and computer) communication. Back in the middle of the 20th century. they started talking about an “information crisis” caused by the contradiction between book flows and funds and the individual capabilities of their perception. The result is the death of knowledge; we do not know what we know. The collections of Russian literature are constantly growing and becoming more and more vast and inaccessible. It turns out to be a paradox: there are more and more books, but fewer and fewer readers.

The steady decline in interest in literature, fiction and journalistic, creates the impression that post-Soviet students have decided to “write off” burdensome and archaic book communication into the archives of history in the name of multimedia communication. There is no reason to hope that classical Russian literature will take the form of multimedia messages: it is not adapted for this. This means that its inherent ethical potential will be lost. There is no doubt that electronic communication will develop its own ethics and its educational impact will be no less than Chekhov’s stories or Dostoevsky’s novels, but it will not be intellectual ethics.

Without touching on the social, economic, and political arguments used by the authors of now very widespread publications about the end of the Russian intelligentsia, using only the communicative mechanism of its reproduction, we can come to the following conclusion: there is no reason to hope for the revival of “educated people with a sick conscience.” Generation of educated Russian people of the 21st century. will be “educated” differently than their parents - the Soviet intelligentsia of the “disillusioned” generation, and the ideal of an altruist reverent for Culture will attract few.

O. Toffler, developing his theory of three waves in macrohistory, believes that the personality of the second wave was formed in accordance with Protestant ethics. However, Protestant ethics were not typical for Russia. We can say that during the Soviet period there was an ethics of the Soviet person and, accordingly, modern youth, denying the ideals and ethics of the previous generation, remains inextricably linked genetically with previous generations. Toffler himself hopes for the replacement of Protestant ethics with a new, informational one. In light of the new cultural dynamics in Russia, one can express the hope that in our country this process will be more dynamic and easier than in the West, and opinion poll data confirm this.

By analyzing data from sociological surveys, one can try to determine what personality traits are characteristic of modern youth in connection with the transition to an information society, which is based on information and communication. Based on surveys conducted at MIREA in 2003-2005, the following can be noted. The very possibility of communication is a value for today’s youth, so they try to keep up with modern innovations and innovations. Higher education is still of little help in this area, even in the field of information technology, so young people are actively engaged in self-education.

However, education is not a value in itself, as it was for the generation of the Soviet period. It is a means of achieving social status and material well-being. The ability to communicate using all modern means of communication is a value, and there is a tendency to form groups based on interests. Such vivid individualization, which Toffler speaks of, is not observed. It is still difficult to talk about such a trait as consumption orientation, since in Soviet society this trait was poorly expressed. In general, the high interest in new computer technologies and selfless enthusiasm allow us to hope that the information society in Russia will nevertheless become a reality for the majority of the population when today’s youth grow up a little.

The crisis in which Russia finds itself today is much more severe than an ordinary financial crisis or a traditional industrial depression. The country has not just been set back several decades; All the efforts made over the last century to ensure Russia's status as a great power were rendered worthless. The country is copying the worst examples of Asian corrupt capitalism.

The society of modern Russia is going through difficult times: old ideals have been overthrown and new ones have not been found. The resulting value-semantic vacuum is rapidly being filled with artifacts of Western culture, which have covered almost all spheres of social and spiritual life, from forms of leisure time, manner of communication to ethical and aesthetic values, ideological guidelines.

According to Toffler, information civilization gives rise to a new type of people who create a new information society. Toffler calls this human type the “third wave,” just as he considers the agrarian society the “first wave” and the industrial society the “second wave.” Moreover, each wave creates its own special type of personality, which has a corresponding character and ethics. Thus, the “second wave” according to Toffler is characterized by the Protestant ethic, and such features as subjectivity and individualism, the ability for abstract thinking, empathy and imagination.

“The third wave does not create some ideal superman, some kind of heroic species living among us, but fundamentally changes the character traits inherent in the entire society. What is being created is not a new person, but a new social character. Therefore, our task is to look not for the mythical “man,” but for those character traits that are most likely to be valued by the civilization of tomorrow.” Toffler believes that “education will also change. Many children will study outside of the classroom." Toffler believes that “Third Wave civilization may favor very different character traits in young people, such as independence from the opinions of peers, less consumption orientation, and less hedonistic self-focus.”

Perhaps the changes that our country is now experiencing will lead to the formation of a new type of Russian intellectual - an information intelligentsia, which, without repeating the mistakes of the “disappointed” generation, will overcome Western individualism, based on the rich Russian cultural traditions.

1. Alekseeva L. History of dissent in the USSR: The newest period. Vilnius-Moscow: News, 1992.

2. Akhiezer A.S. Russia as a big society // Questions of Philosophy. 1993. N 1. P.3-19.

3. Berto D., Malysheva M. Cultural model of the Russian masses and the forced transition to the market // Biographical method: History, methodology and practice. M.: Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1994. P.94-146.

4. Weil P., Genis A. Land of Words // New World. 1991. N 4. P.239-251.

5. Gozman L., Etkind A. From the cult of power to the power of people. Psychology of political consciousness // Neva. 1989. N 7.

6. Levada Yu.A. The problem of the intelligentsia in modern Russia // Where is Russia going?.. Alternatives for social development. (International Symposium December 17-19, 1993). M., 1994. P.208-214.

7. Soviet common man. The experience of a social portrait at the turn of the 90s. M.: World Ocean, 1993

8. Toffler O. The Third Wave. – M., Science: 2001.

9. Tsvetaeva N.N. Biographical discourse of the Soviet era // Sociological Journal. 1999. N 1/2.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Return