Social changes and development of society. Change in the modern world

Never before have changes in the life of society and the individual occurred so rapidly! Moral standards, relationships between people, family traditions change, educational standards. New professions are emerging social institutions, political parties. Every day a person is bombarded with a huge flow of information. Not everyone can withstand the frantic pace of life. Many people are in a constant state of stress and feel fear or confusion about the future.

But life cannot be stopped. Development and transformation are integral characteristics of any society.

Concept and main reasons

Due to its abstract nature, there is no single definition of this concept in science. In a general sense, social change refers to changes that occur over a short or long period of time in social structures and society as a whole.

Highlight following reasons transformations in modern times:

Changes in the political, cultural, and social life of society can be realized gradually, smoothly, sometimes even imperceptibly for the average person, which makes it possible to characterize the ongoing changes as evolutionary.

Rapid transformation, leading to qualitative changes in one or more spheres of society, are called revolutionary.

Modern science, in addition to evolutionary and revolutionary, highlights cyclical changes in society, in which social phenomena(processes) are repeated at other times and under different conditions.

Views of scientists

The main reason Scientists represented the changes taking place in society in different ways.

O. Comte saw it in the progress of the human mind, in the transition from a military society to an industrial one.

G. Spencer He considered the fundamental condition for transformation to be the complication of the structure of society, the growth of self-awareness and personal freedom.

K. Marx assigned the main role in the transformation of society to the productive forces.

The main reason for social change is M. Weber- social structures necessary for social development. When creating these structures, each person relies on his own moral and political attitudes, as well as religious views.

It was religion that Weber assigned a key role in the progress of mankind and recognized it driving force in the development of society.

Having subjected a deep analysis to the main world religions (Confucianism, Buddhism, Judaism), Weber came to the conclusion that it is beliefs that leave an imprint on the methods of farming, the structure of society, and the development of civilization as a whole. For example, immersion in one’s own feelings and the desire to acquire spiritual experience, characteristic of Confucianism and Buddhism, hinder the advancement of capitalism in the East.

The sociologist also sees the reasons for the rapid development of Western society in religious views and personal characteristics, characteristic of Europeans: rationality of thinking, penchant for bureaucracy.

The change in the structure of society and the emergence of new social institutions in Weber's sociology is associated with the concept of charisma. It is this quality, inherent in some public leaders and generals, that distinguishes an outstanding personality from ordinary people. The owner of charisma is credited with exceptional, superhuman abilities (Buddha, Christ). A charismatic leader, according to the scientist, can make changes even to a stable social structure devoid of dynamism.

Factors promoting social change

With all their diversity, the main factors of social change can be combined into the following groups: social, economic, political, technological.

The characteristics of each group are presented in the table.

Table. Factors of change in society

What social changes are taking place in modern society

Transformation in one area of social life entails changes in other areas. Transformations are taking place in the political (election of new government leaders, change of forms of government), cultural (revival of customs, rethinking of history), social sphere (emergence of new social groups, professions).

In modern society, close political and economic ties between states, the creation of a single information field. World powers are becoming interconnected and interdependent. This process is called globalization. It has both positive (technological growth, creation of new jobs, free access to information) and negative ( ecological problems, unprecedented increase in migration flows, uneven economic development states) parties.

In modern Russia

Considering the transformations taking place in our country, we must not forget that Russian Federation is not an isolated state. All processes characteristic of the world community also affect Russia.

Over the past few decades, serious changes have occurred both in the structure of society and in the worldview of Russians.

Many sociologists, characterizing trends in changes in the lives of Russians, special meaning given to the process of computerization and the use of the Internet. The following main aspects are highlighted:

automation of some stages labor process , i.e., some of the functions previously performed by people are now performed by mechanisms;
the ability to quickly obtain diverse information. Optimistic researchers believe that access to the Internet will lead to an increase in population literacy. Unfortunately, having knowledge does not always mean its correct application;
changing forms and methods of communication between people. Friendly conversations are increasingly taking place through messaging via mobile applications or messages by email. To convey emotions, interlocutors use the language of ideograms and emoticons;
creation of information computer databases. Personal information provided by a person for one purpose (purchase online, payment for goods by bank card etc.) could potentially be used for other purposes. Some researchers see this as a danger of unauthorized surveillance of private life citizens.

A person living in constantly changing circumstances is forced to develop new qualities that help him adapt to the world around him. To feel comfortable and successfully adapt to any situation without being subject to constant stress, you need to have not only knowledge and skills, but also flexibility of thinking, mobility and the ability to critically evaluate incoming information.

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution

higher professional education

RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PUBLIC SERVICE

UNDER THE PRESIDENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

NIZHNY NOVGOROD INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

Faculty of State and Municipal Administration

Department of Informatics and Information Technologies

Essay

FOR THE DISCIPLINE "Philosophy"

"SOCIAL CHANGES IN THE MODERN WORLD"

Direction of training /

Specialty: Applied

Informatics

Completed by: student IK-712

Telitsyn Dmitry Vladimirovich

Scientific adviser:

Candidate of Historical Sciences

Mustafin Irshat Rifatovich

Nizhny Novgorod

Introduction

1. Social changes: essence, causes, factors

2. Models of social change

3. Main trends of modern world development

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

If there are no changes in society, then it dies and begins to stagnate (rot). Society is a living, dynamic system, subject to the influence of both internal and external forces. The structural elements of society (social groups, social institutions, communities) enter into various complex interactions. This constant interaction naturally leads to changes in society, which can occur both at the micro level, that is, due to the influence of the role of an individual, and at the macro level.

Social change, as noted by sociologists A.A. Radugin and K.A. Radugin, this is the transition of social systems, communities, institutions and organizations from one state to another. The concept of "social change" is general character and can be specified by the concept of “development”, which in a narrow sense means an irreversible change in objects, involves a transition from simple to complex, from lower to higher. This is a movement of society that is not associated with any changes, but with deep ones that change the structure of society, leading to the emergence of new social relations, institutions, norms and values. However, in everyday speech, as a rule, the concept of “development” is used as a synonym for the concept of “change”. And in this case, we can say that the concept of “development” is used not in a narrow, but in a broad sense.

Social changes occurring in a society may include population growth, changes in relations between social groups, in the electoral system, in individual rights, etc. Changes may relate to the field of inventions, to the rules of the Russian language, moral standards, etc.

In this regard, the purpose of this work is to examine the processes of social change. This will be achieved through revealing their essence, causes, factors, studying models of social change, as well as comparing the main trends of modern world development.

1. Social changes: essence, causes, factors

Social change– one of the most general and broad sociological concepts. Depending on the research paradigm, social change is understood as the transition of a social object from one state to another, a change in socio-economic formation, a significant modification in social organization society, its institutions and social structure, changing established social patterns of behavior, updating and increasing the diversity of institutional forms, etc.

In sociology, from the beginning of its emergence, as a rule, two types of social changes are distinguished and studied - evolutionary and revolutionary. In classical sociology until the beginning. In the 20th century, both of these approaches were based on the recognition of the objectivity of social knowledge, which corresponded to the general scientific paradigm of the 18th–19th centuries, according to which scientific knowledge is based on objective reality. The laws of the latter, it was believed, could and should be understood, discovered and used for practical use. The only difference was that thinkers who were adherents of evolutionism believed that objective knowledge about the nature of social reality helps to intelligently navigate social actions, and that social nature should not be violated; and supporters of revolutionary changes, on the contrary, proceeded from the concept of the need to reorganize the world in accordance with its internal laws. Hence, there are two approaches to the analysis and essence of social changes - evolutionary, carried out “without violence”, or revolutionary, in which social actors reorganize the social order.

The evolutionary approach has its origins and methodological support in the studies of Charles Darwin. The main problem of evolutionism in sociology was the identification of the determining factor of social change. O. Comte saw the progress of knowledge as such a decisive link. The development of knowledge from its theological, mystified form to a positive form determines the transition of man from a military society based on submission to deified heroes and leaders, to an industrial society, which is carried out thanks to the human mind.

Spencer saw the essence of evolution and social changes in society in its complication, the strengthening of its differentiation, which is accompanied by the growth of integration processes that restore unity social organism at each new stage of its development. Social progress is accompanied by the complication of society, leading to an increase in the independence of citizens, to an increase in the freedom of individuals, to a more complete service of their interests by society.

E. Durkheim viewed the process of social change as a transition from mechanical solidarity, based on the underdevelopment and similarity of individuals and their social functions, to organic solidarity, arising on the basis of the division of labor and social differentiation, which leads to the integration of people into a single society and is the highest moral principle of society.

K. Marx considered the determining factor of social change to be the productive forces of society, the growth of which leads to a change in the method of production, which, being the basis for the development of the entire society, ensures a change in the socio-economic formation. On the one hand, according to K. Marx’s “materialist understanding of history,” productive forces develop objectively and evolutionarily, increasing man’s power over nature. On the other hand, in the course of their development, new classes are formed, whose interests come into conflict with the interests of the ruling classes, which determine the nature of existing production relations. Thus, a conflict arises within the mode of production formed by the unity of productive forces and production relations. The progress of society is possible only on the basis of a radical renewal of the method of production, and new economic and political structures can appear only as a result of a social revolution carried out by new classes against the old, dominant ones. Therefore, social revolutions, according to K. Marx, are the locomotives of history, ensuring the renewal and acceleration of the development of society. Marx's approach thus presents both evolutionary and revolutionary approaches to the analysis of social change.

M. Weber, who was opposed to the idea that social sciences could discover the laws of social development in a similar way to the natural sciences, nevertheless believed that it was possible to make generalizations and formulate trends characterizing social changes. Weber saw their driving force in the fact that man, relying on various religious, political, moral values, creates certain social structures that facilitate social development, as has always happened in the West, or complicate this development, which Weber considered characteristic of Eastern countries.

Representatives of the evolutionary approach, they believed their schemes to be true in relation to all societies that pass (or should pass) the same path from an initial, less developed state to a more developed, modern one. Therefore, these classical sociological theories are considered as theories of modernity, for which the obvious premise is that in the process of social change, the standards of modernity will sooner or later be accepted by all modernizing countries.

Evolutionary concepts of social change have played a positive role in understanding the various reasons that determine the development of society.

At the same time, these concepts (with the possible exception of Marxism) could not sufficiently explain crises, backward movements and the collapse of social structures. Evolutionism also could not explain social processes and phenomena that arise in a compressed historical period of time (change of governments, increase in crime, deviations in the behavior of individuals, etc.), since it proceeded from considering society from a large historical perspective.

The limitations of classical evolutionism in the twentieth century were overcome by searching for new approaches to social change, among which the theories of cyclical development (O. Spengler, A. Toynbee) and the theory of social change by T. Parsons stood out. In essence, they developed and enriched the ideas of the evolutionary approach to social change, complementing them with new analytical schemes coming from related and other sciences.

In theories of cyclical development, the evolution of society was considered not as a linear movement towards a more perfect state of society, but as a kind of closed cycle of rise, prosperity and decline, repeating again after its completion. Cyclic concepts of the development of society consider social changes by analogy with a pendulum, when a society, thrown out of balance under the influence of some factors, makes oscillatory movements from one point to another, freezing in the middle and thereby restoring its stability.

This approach in Russia was developed by A.S. Akhiezer in the concept of sociocultural dynamics, in which its history is presented as a constant oscillation of a “split society” between the poles of two opposing ideals – veche (conciliar, liberal) and authoritarian (absolutist, totalitarian). The split between them makes mediation impossible, but sets a cyclical inversion development. During each historical cycle, a transition occurs between two extreme points of inversion - from the veche ideal (conciliarity) to authoritarianism (absolutism) and the reverse inversion. Development is a search for a constant compromise between these poles, more successful during the period of country development and less successful during periods of disaster.

The theory of social change by T. Parsons is built on the basis of a theory based on a mental model of the structures of society and its changes according to the principle of a cybernetic hierarchy of various systems - organisms and individuals as stages of increasing complexity. According to Parsons, the truly profound changes are those that affect the cultural system. Economic and political revolutions that do not affect the level of culture in society do not therefore change society itself at its core.

Society as a social system has stability and the ability to reproduce itself, which is manifested in the stability of its main structural elements (adaptation). If the balance of forces, the elements that maintain balance, is disrupted, but the configuration itself social system in general, its basic structural elements remain unchanged, then the lost balance is quickly restored. That is, the changes remain internal (for example, the growth of influence of a social group, the emergence of a new composition government agencies etc.), and the system, while integrating new formations, remains generally unchanged.

The second type of social change is a change in structure when the system is unable to restore balance due to strong pressure from within and without. To preserve the integrity of the social system, modification of social subsystems and their structural elements occurs ( social roles, institutions, organizations).

More generally social development Parsons reduces society to four mechanisms of evolution. The first is differentiation associated with the increasing complexity of the structure of society. The second is adaptation (adaptive elevation), which means new way correlation with environment(For example, new technology or new ways of communication). The third mechanism involves increasing the volume of membership in society (inclusion). Previous criteria for membership in society (class, gender, ethnicity) lose their meaning in an evolving society. The fourth is a generalization of values. In a changing society, values and norms remain less and less acceptable to different groups. Ideas about universal human rights and ideals, independent of the type of social system (for example, the UN Declaration of Human Rights, international forces, etc.), are beginning to spread more and more widely in society.

IN sociological research violent and voluntary, reversible and irreversible changes are considered. Changes can be planned or unforeseen, conscious or unconscious. It is advisable to distinguish organized changes from spontaneous changes that arose under the influence of self-organization processes. When constructing global theories, sociologists try to identify one or two leading (main) causes of social change. However, building realistic models of social processes requires, as a rule, a multi-casual approach and taking into account a network of interrelated causes. Let us list the main types of causes of social change.

1. Natural causes - depletion of resources, pollution of the environment, disasters.

2. Demographic reasons - population fluctuations, overpopulation, migration, the process of generational change.

3. Changes in the sphere of culture, economics, scientific and technological progress.

4. Socio-political reasons - conflicts, wars, revolutions, reforms.

5. Social and psychological reasons - addiction, satiation, thirst for novelty, increased aggressiveness, etc.

Listed causes of social change can be both internal and external in relation to a given social system. P. Sorokin believed that the main reasons for social changes are precisely internal, immanent reasons. The principle of immanent changes formulated by him states: “After the emergence of a sociocultural system, its natural, “normal” development, forms and phases life path determined mainly by the system itself...” External circumstances can slow down or speed up internal system processes, they can finally destroy it, but they are not able to change the development program embedded in the system. The system self-determines its evolution, which, according to Sorokin, is equivalent to free development*. The influence of external forces must be taken into account, but their influence is not able to change the sequence of phases of system development.

Studying social object in statics, we assume that its observed characteristics, both qualitative and quantitative, practically do not change over a certain short period of time (more precisely, the changes that have occurred can be neglected). Formally, we can say that in static models there is no time.

In dynamic models, time is present explicitly. The researcher is interested in changes over time in quantitative and qualitative variables, as well as constant parameters that do not change during the observation period.

Description of the dynamics of an object involves the use of the concept of process. Let us give the classic definition of the sociocultural process, due to P.A. Sorokin: “A process is understood as any type of movement, modification, transformation, alternation or “evolution”, in short, any change in a given object being studied over a certain time, be it a change in its place in space or a modification of its quantitative or qualitative characteristics.”

2. Models of social change

A sociologist, observing the characteristics of a particular social process that interest him (his forms, types), can visually imagine the flow of the process in the form of a graph. Typically, in such cases, two-dimensional graphs are used, and time is usually plotted along the abscissa axis, and the values of a variable, characteristic, indicator, indicator or factor that describes the behavior of a given system are plotted along the ordinate axis. In Fig. Figure 5.1 shows an example of a linear dependence of the indicator S on time t.

The graph shown in Fig. 5.1, demonstrates the trajectory L1 of a linear, uniform increase in the value of the indicator S with increasing time t. The trajectory of straight line L2 reflects the process of a uniform decrease, a decrease in the indicator S. For simplicity, in subsequent figures we will depict only growth processes, implying that decline trajectories can be easily constructed by analogy.

It is clear that a linear increase or decrease in the value of any indicator cannot last indefinitely. (For example, for many indicators, negative values do not make sense.) It follows that beyond the time interval under consideration, the process should slow down or speed up and the trajectory should cease to be linear and acquire a more complex, non-linear character. In linear models, the speed (rate of change) remains constant, while the speed of nonlinear processes varies.

A deep analysis of sociocultural processes involves studying not only changes in absolute values this indicator, but also monitoring the rate of change. (It is necessary to study not only the function S(t), but also its derivative.).

We have implicitly assumed that S is a quantitative variable, which is not necessarily the case. Many variables characterizing the course of social processes are qualitative, but their trajectories can also be depicted graphically. Moreover, many quantitative variables have a qualitative component. Even official statistics may contain information derived from expert assessments.

A typical graph reflecting the alternation of different stages, stages, phases of development of a social system is shown in Fig. 5.2.

Growth processes in sociocultural systems do not have to obey only a linear relationship. The growth trajectory can be described by an exponential curve of type e (Fig. 5.3), or a quadratic curve (Fig. 5.4). Significantly slower growth of the S indicator is often reflected by a logarithmic trajectory (Fig. 5.5). Of course, the value of the indicator does not always increase monotonically. During the process, a short-term decline is also possible. In Fig. Figure 5.6 shows a cubic model of such a trajectory (S(t) = a/ + a/+ + a,* + U4).

Most real processes cannot grow indefinitely. The limited availability of resources inhibits growth and prevents it from exceeding certain thresholds. The presence of growth limits or saturation points is usually described by two types of models:

a) saturation without inflection points (Fig. 5.7).

Such trajectories can have a function of the type S = A – e~1 or S = aq – 1 / t (hyperbola);

b) saturation with the daughter of an inflection (Fig. 5.8). This type of curve is called logistic or S-shaped. A function of the type S = D, / (1+e) has a similar trajectory. As will be seen from the further presentation, the course of many sociocultural processes is well described by the logistic curve. Such processes grow very slowly at first. Then growth accelerates, for example under the influence of a positive circuit feedback. But after passing the inflection point, the growth rate begins to slow down. Under the influence of a negative feedback loop, the process first slows down and then stabilizes without passing the maximum possible value A.

As already mentioned, the most popular form of sociocultural processes is a straight line, reflecting linear ideas about the course of social time. However, thinkers of all times were also attracted by the cyclical model of social time, which assumes the periodic repetition of certain phases of development, a recurrent return to the original return to the original state. The simplest cyclic type trajectory in the form of a sinusoidal curve with a horizontal trend is shown in Fig. 5.9, and with a linearly increasing trend - in Fig. 5.10. The cyclical trajectory of a quantitative variable does not necessarily exactly correspond to the graph of a mathematical sine wave - the period and amplitude of the oscillations can change over time.

Naturally, it is simply inappropriate to talk about exact following of a sinusoid in the case of a qualitative variable. It is the qualitative variables that are usually kept in mind when considering the development of a process in a spiral. It is known that the image of a spiral has great generative power and greatly promotes insight, due to which it often appears in the works of social scientists as one of the basic metaphors for social change. As a geometric object, a spiral is depicted in three-dimensional space, one coordinate of which is time t, and the other two coordinates correspond to two indicators S1 and S2, characterizing the evolution of the observed system V. Moreover, it must be taken into account that the spiral reflects the dynamics of the interaction of precisely two interrelated factors.

An example of a spiral M shown in Fig. 5. 11 shows that in the simplest case the spiral can be represented as a line wound around a cylinder (shown as a dashed line). It is clear that the cylinder is not necessarily horizontal; it can also be inclined.

To more clearly imagine the progress of changes in the values of factors S1 and S2, let us project the spiral first onto the plane (S1; t), and then onto the plane (S2; t). We obtain two trajectories of sinusoidal type F1 and F2. If we try to depict them on the same graph with a common time axis, we will immediately notice that the phases of oscillations of factors S1 and S2 do not coincide (Fig. 5.12). To visualize the relationship between factors S1 and S2, let’s project a spiral onto the plane (S1; S2). Obviously, in this case we get the circle shown in Fig. 5.13.

In the figure, the spiral movement becomes a clockwise circular movement (in in this case time t can be considered as a parameter*). Alternation of phases of change in factors S1 and S2 when moving through sectors AB; Sun; CD; DA of the circle is presented in table. 5.2.

* The simplest helix in space can be represented in parametric form: x = acost; y = asint; r = ct.

Table 5.2. Phase rotation

	Phase change

As we see, in the case under consideration, the alternation of phases of development of the system as a whole and its individual indicators is not synchronous.

It is even more difficult to analyze the dynamics of sociocultural processes that are chaotic in nature. An example of such a process is shown in Fig. 5.14. The dynamics of chaotic processes are extremely confusing and difficult to predict. Slow, uniform growth is replaced by “big leaps”; the amplitude and period of oscillations change in the most bizarre way. For such processes, it is possible to identify only the most general trends, as is customary in global theories of social evolution.

3. Main trends of modern world development

Humanity has always been concerned about the mysterious and unknown flow of time, about the course of evolution of humanity, the world, the Universe. State, country, civilization - all of them are subject to theories, concepts that determine the type, periodization, and which quite clearly predict the final extinction or a new round in the development of society.

Currently, the concepts of social revolutions and reforms, as well as social progress, are distinguished.

When considering the issue of social revolutions and reforms, it is necessary to take it as an axiom that truth is always concrete. Therefore, neither reform nor revolution can be absolutized. Both social revolution and social reform, although different, are interconnected aspects of social development. Both of these forms lose meaning without each other. Both are known to history. We know great revolutions well, but there were also great, wonderful reforms. For example, the reforms of the ancient ruler Solon, reforms carried out under the leadership of American President Roosevelt, reforms initiated at the beginning of the twentieth century by Russian minister P.A. Stolypin, reforms implemented in the 20-30s of the twentieth century by Turkish President Ataturk.

In a modern democratic state, where there is a civil society, great opportunities open up to prevent social conflicts, resolve them in a timely manner, preventing the disintegration of society and social cataclysm. Revolutionary political and social explosions are most often the result of the inability of power structures and socio-political forces to carry out overdue radical reforms and social transformations.

As for the theory of social progress, classical ideas about it consider it as a gradual movement of humanity to ever higher levels of civilization. Moreover, the movement is inevitable and continues despite all the vicissitudes of history, deviations, and accidents. Complete prosperity of society, the achievement of this state in all structures of society - this is the goal of the progressive movement.

Social sciences have criticized the optimistic idea of linear progressive development of humanity, which underlies the paradigm of sociocultural progress. The twentieth century, with its unprecedented catastrophes - political, environmental, military, gave rise to doubts and disappointment in the theory of progress. The idea of a crisis, which has gripped the minds of millions of people and has become the leitmotif of public opinion, helps to consolidate pessimistic forecasts for the future of humanity. If earlier the crisis situation was considered as a temporary phenomenon, now crisis processes are spoken and written about as a norm. Crises have become “normalized”; sociologists, political scientists, cultural scientists are discovering crises everywhere and in everything. Faith in progress is lost, optimistic reasoning about social evolution and reasoning is not justified.

But can it be said that the idea of progress, the only alternative to which can only be universal despair, has exhausted its purpose, because “no idea has been important or as important as the theory of progress” (R. Nisbet) for three millennia? What arguments do critics of linear, progressive theories of development have? First, the facts contradict existence. Any universal and eternal linear trends, universal stages of evolution that apply to all of humanity, to any communities and countries. Indeed, research by historians, archaeologists, and ethnographers has shown that most human societies existed and disappeared in the initial stages of development. And today there are societies that still remain at the earliest stages of evolution. Only a few peoples were able to create great civilizations. Secondly, the simplified scheme: the ancient world - the Middle Ages - Modern times was criticized. In the same way, the Marxist theory of “socio-economic formations” was reinterpreted, which sought to accommodate the complex, contradictory rhythm of different cultures within the framework of a single scheme. In addition, in the twentieth century there came a full realization that the events that were of decisive importance for Europe were not at all such for other nations. For example, the fall of the Roman Empire, which meant the end ancient history and the beginning of the Middle Ages for European peoples, did not have such meaning for the population of Japan, India, and China. The same can be said about the Battle of Kulikovo, which was important primarily for the peoples of Russia. The stages of the history of various civilizations, as can be seen, do not fit into the concept of Eurocentrism, which emphasizes the presence of different historical periods and cultures, the presence of cultural pluralism in the world.

So, the very concept of progress has changed. “The progress of mankind,” as N. Danilevsky wrote, “consists not in going in one direction, but in the fact that the entire field that makes up the field of historical activity proceeds in different directions.”

Conclusion

Thus, each sociocultural system has its own life cycle, which can be divided into a number of stages, phases of development. The alternation of phases of system development is sometimes called system time. It is clear that phase is a qualitative unit of time measurement. The number of phases and their duration depend on the chosen typology and the researcher’s objectives. However, even a quantitative variable—calendar time—acquires qualitative characteristics in social processes. The so-called social time is a form of organization of social experience; it can speed up and slow down, depend on the direction to the future or to the past. One time is equivalent to money, the other requires killing.

The choice of the required pace of social change remains a little-studied problem; the pace of change can be accelerated and slowed down, made uneven and concentrated.

As for further world development, this issue is perceived ambiguously in modern world. So, according to some scientists, progress is constantly taking place in society, a kind of linear advancement forward and upward, and not backward and downward. The question is: what more? But no, civilization, having only just arisen, can sink into oblivion, regardless of any conditions. Thus, the concept of constant progress is not a suitable solution for this equation.

If we consider the entire world history as an alternation of revolutions and reforms, then we can also trace positive trends, so vividly and colorfully described by historians.

Bibliography

1. Akhiezer A.S. Russia: criticism of historical experience (Sociocultural dynamics of Russia). T. 1, from past to future. Novosibirsk, 1997.

Akhiezer A.S. Russia: criticism of historical experience (Sociocultural dynamics of Russia). T. 1, from past to future. Novosibirsk, 1997. p. 112-114.

Eisenstadt S. Revolution and transformation in society. M., 1999. p. 63-67.

Kirdina S.G. Social changes. Sociological Encyclopedia, vol. 2, 2003, p. 68.

Sztompka P. Sociology of social changes. M., 1996. p. 43.

The transition of social systems, their elements and structures, connections and interactions from one state to another is understood. The most important factors of social change are:

habitat changes;
dynamics of population size and structure;
tensions and conflicts over resources or values;
discoveries and inventions;
transfer or penetration of cultural patterns of other cultures.

According to their nature and degree of influence on society, social changes are divided into evolutionary and revolutionary. Under evolutionary refers to gradual, smooth, partial changes in society, which can cover all spheres of life - economic, political, social, spiritual and cultural. Evolutionary changes often take the form social reforms, which involve carrying out various activities to transform certain aspects of public life.

Evolutionary concepts explain social changes in society endogenous or exogenous reasons. According to the first point of view, processes occurring in society are considered by analogy with biological organizations.

Exogenous the approach is presented primarily by theory diffusion. those. "leakage" of cultural patterns from one society to another, which becomes possible thanks to the penetration external influences(conquest, trade, migration, colonization, imitation, etc.). Any culture in society is influenced by other cultures, including the cultures of conquered peoples. This counter the process of mutual influence and interpenetration of cultures is called in sociology acculturation.

Revolutionary refers to relatively rapid (compared to social evolution), comprehensive, fundamental changes in society. Revolutionary transformations are of a spasmodic nature and represent a transition of society from one qualitative state to another.

It should be noted that the attitude of sociology and other social sciences to the social revolution is ambiguous. For example, Marxists viewed revolution as a natural and progressive phenomenon in the history of mankind, considering it “the locomotive of history,” “the highest act of politics,” “the holiday of the oppressed and exploited,” etc.

Among the non-Marxist theories it is necessary to highlight theory of social revolution. In his opinion, the damage caused to society by revolutions always turns out to be greater than the probable benefit, since revolution is a painful process that results in total social disorganization. According to Vilfredo Pareto's theory of elite circulation, a revolutionary situation is created by the degradation of elites, which have been in power for too long and do not ensure normal circulation - replacement with a new elite. Relative deprivation theory Theda lappa explains the emergence of social tension in society by the gap between the level of people’s demands and the possibilities of achieving what they want, which leads to the emergence social movements. And finally, modernization theory considers revolution as a crisis that arises when the processes of political and cultural modernization of society are carried out in different areas life activity unevenly.

In recent years, sociologists have paid increasing attention to cyclical social changes. Cycles are a certain set of phenomena, processes, the sequence of which represents a circulation over a period of time. The final phase of the cycle seems to repeat the initial one, only under different conditions and at a different level.

Among the cyclic processes, changes in pendulum type, wave movements And spiral. The former are considered the simplest form of cyclical change. An example is the periodic change in power between conservatives and liberals in some European countries. An example of wave processes is the cycle of technogenic innovations, which reaches its wave peak and then declines, as if fading. The most complex of cyclical social changes is the spiral type, since it involves change according to the formula: “repetition of the old at a qualitatively new level” and characterizes the social continuity of different generations.

In addition to cyclical changes occurring within one social system, sociologists and cultural scientists identify cyclical processes that span entire cultures and civilizations. One of these most integral theories of social life is cyclic theory, created by a Russian sociologist N.Ya. Danilevsky. He divided all the cultures of the world into “non-historical” ones, i.e. unable to be genuine subjects of the historical process, to create a “original civilization”, and “historical”, i.e. creating special, unique cultural and historical types.

In his classic work "Russia and Europe" Danilevsky, using historical and civilizational approaches to the analysis of social life, identified 13 cultural and historical types of society: Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Greek, Roman, Muslim, European, Slavic, etc. The basis for identifying “original civilizations” is a peculiar combination of four main elements in them: religion, culture , political and socio-economic structure. Moreover, each of these civilizations goes through four main phases in its development, which, relatively speaking, can be called origin, formation, flourishing and decline.

The German sociologist argued similarly Oswald Spengler. which is in progress "The Decline of Europe" identified eight specific cultures in the history of mankind: Egyptian, Babylonian, Indian, Chinese, Greco-Roman, Arab, Western European, Mayan and the emerging Russian-Siberian. In his understanding, the life cycle of each culture goes through two stages: ascending (“culture”) And descending (“civilization”) branches of society development.

Later his English follower Arnold Toynbee in his book "Comprehension of History" The cyclic model of the historical process has been somewhat modernized. Unlike Spengler with his “patchwork quilt of individual cultures,” Toynbee believes that world religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam) unite the development of individual civilizations into a single process. He connects the dynamics of the historical process with the action of the “law of challenge and response,” according to which society develops due to the fact that it is able to adequately respond to the challenges of emerging historical situations. Toynbee is an opponent of technical determinism and sees the development of society in the progress of culture.

Cyclic theories also include sociocultural dynamics of P. Sorokin, which gives a very pessimistic forecast for the development of modern Western society.

Another example of cyclic theories is concept of “world-economy” I.Wallerstein(b. 1930), according to which, in particular:

Third world countries will not be able to repeat the path taken by the states that are the leaders of the modern economy:
capitalist world-economy, born around 1450, 1967-1973. entered the inevitable final phase of the economic cycle - the crisis phase.

Currently, sociologists are criticizing ideas about the unilinear nature of social processes, emphasizing that society can change in the most unexpected ways. And this happens in the case when the previous mechanisms no longer allow the social system to restore its balance, and the innovative activity of the masses does not fit within the framework of institutional restrictions, and then society is faced with a choice further option of its development. This branching or bifurcation associated with the chaotic state of society is called social bifurcation, meaning the unpredictability of social development.

In modern Russian sociology, the point of view is increasingly gaining ground, according to which the historical process in general and the transition of society from one state to another in particular always presupposes multivariate, alternative social development.

Types of social changes in society

Sociology highlights the social and cultural changes occurring in modern societies.

Social changes include shifts in social structure:

the emergence of new social groups, layers and classes;
reduction in the number, location and role of the “old layers” (for example, collective farmers);
changes in the area social connections(the nature of relationships and interactions, power relations, leadership in connection with the emergence of a multi-party system);
changes in telecommunications ( mobile connection, Internet);
changes in citizen activity (for example, in connection with the recognition of private property rights and freedom of enterprise).

We observe a special group of changes in the political field:

change in the role of the representative institution ( State Duma) and the government of the Russian Federation;
the formation of a multi-party system and the removal of a single party from the leadership of the country;
official recognition of ideological pluralism by the Constitution.

Social change also includes cultural change. Among them:

changes in the field of material and intangible values (ideas, beliefs, skills, intellectual production);
changes in the field of social norms - political and legal (revival of ancient traditions, customs, adoption of new legislation);
changes in the field of communications (creation of new terms, phrases, etc.).

Social development of society

The concepts “ ” and “ ” are closely related to the problems of social change. Social development is understood as such a change in society that leads to the emergence of new social relations, institutions, norms and values.

Social development has three characteristic features:
irreversibility, meaning the constancy of the processes of accumulation of quantitative and qualitative changes;
directionality - those lines on which this accumulation occurs; pattern - not random, but necessary process

accumulation of such changes.

Social progress presupposes a direction of social development that is characterized by a transition from lower to higher forms, from less perfect to more perfect. In general, social progress refers to the improvement of the social structure of society and the improvement of human living conditions. A process opposite to progress , is regression, it means return to the previous level of development of society. If progress seen as global process characterizing the movement of humanity throughout social development, then affecting a particular society in a historically short period of time.

In sociology, to determine the progressiveness of a particular society, two most general criteria were usually used:

level of labor productivity and welfare of the population;
degree of personal freedom. But in Lately Russian sociologists are increasingly expressing their point of view on the need for a criterion that would reflect the spiritual, moral, value and motivational aspects of people’s economic and socio-political activities. As a result, today in sociology it has emerged the third criterion of social progress is the level of morality in society, which could become an integrative criterion of social progress.

To conclude this question, we note that modern theories progress draw attention to the fact that to save civilization, a human revolution is necessary in the form of a change in man’s attitude towards himself and others, the formation cultural universalism(N. Berdyaev, E. Fromm, K. Jaspers, etc.). The prospects for the development of modern civilization will be positive only if the focus in the 21st century. It won't be cars, but people. Promising changes can be recognized as those that promote true harmony between the individual, society and nature.

Social change is one of the most general and broad sociological concepts. Depending on the research paradigm, social change is understood as the transition of a social object from one state to another, a change in socio-economic formation, a significant modification in the social organization of society, its institutions and social structure, a change in established social patterns of behavior, renewal and growth in the diversity of institutional forms and etc.

In sociology, from the beginning of its emergence, as a rule, two types of social changes are distinguished and studied - evolutionary and revolutionary. In classical sociology until the beginning. In the 20th century, both of these approaches were based on the recognition of the objectivity of social knowledge, which corresponded to the general scientific paradigm of the 18th-19th centuries, according to which scientific knowledge is based on objective reality. The laws of the latter, it was believed, could and should be understood, discovered and used for practical use. The only difference was that thinkers who were adherents of evolutionism believed that objective knowledge about the nature of social reality helps to intelligently navigate social actions, and that social nature should not be violated; and supporters of revolutionary changes, on the contrary, proceeded from the concept of the need to reorganize the world in accordance with its internal laws. Hence, there are two approaches to the analysis and essence of social changes - evolutionary, carried out “without violence”, or revolutionary, in which social actors reorganize the social order.

Spencer saw the essence of evolution and social changes in society in its complication, the strengthening of its differentiation, which is accompanied by the growth of integration processes that restore the unity of the social organism at each new stage of its development. Social progress is accompanied by the complication of society, leading to an increase in the independence of citizens, to an increase in the freedom of individuals, to a more complete service of their interests by society.

M. Weber, who was opposed to the idea that social sciences could discover the laws of social development in a similar way to the natural sciences, nevertheless believed that it was possible to make generalizations and formulate trends characterizing social changes. Weber saw their driving force in the fact that a person, relying on various religious, political, moral values, creates certain social structures that facilitate social development, as has always happened in the West, or complicate this development, which Weber considered characteristic of the countries of the East.

Evolutionary concepts of social change have played a positive role in understanding the various reasons that determine the development of society.

At the same time, these concepts (with the possible exception of Marxism) could not sufficiently explain the crises, backward movements and collapse of social structures. Evolutionism also could not explain social processes and phenomena that arise in a compressed historical period of time (change of governments, increase in crime, deviations in the behavior of individuals, etc.), since it proceeded from considering society from a large historical perspective.

This approach in Russia was developed by A.S. Akhiezer in the concept of sociocultural dynamics, in which its history is presented as a constant oscillation of a “split society” between the poles of two opposing ideals - veche (conciliar, liberal) and authoritarian (absolutist, totalitarian). The split between them makes mediation impossible, but sets a cyclical inversion development. During each historical cycle, a transition occurs between two extreme points of inversion - from the veche ideal (conciliarity) to authoritarianism (absolutism) and the reverse inversion. Development is a search for a constant compromise between these poles, more successful during the period of country development and less successful during periods of disaster.

Society as a social system has stability and the ability to reproduce itself, which is manifested in the stability of its main structural elements (adaptation). If the balance of forces and elements that maintain balance is disrupted, but the very configuration of the social system as a whole, its basic structural elements remain unchanged, then the lost balance is quickly restored. That is, the changes remain internal (for example, the growth of influence of a social group, the emergence of a new composition of government bodies, etc.), and the system, while integrating new entities, remains generally unchanged.

The second type of social change is a change in structure when the system is unable to restore balance due to strong pressure from within and without. To preserve the integrity of the social system, modification of social subsystems and their structural elements (social roles, institutions, organizations) occurs.

More generally, Parsons reduces the social development of society to four mechanisms of evolution. The first is differentiation associated with the increasing complexity of the structure of society. The second is adaptation (adaptive elevation), which is understood as a new way of relating to the environment (for example, new technology or new methods of communication). The third mechanism involves increasing the volume of membership in society (inclusion). Previous criteria for membership in society (class, gender, ethnicity) lose their meaning in an evolving society. The fourth is a generalization of values. In a changing society, values and norms remain less and less acceptable for different groups. Ideas about universal human rights and ideals, independent of the type of social system (for example, the UN Declaration of Human Rights, international forces, etc.), are beginning to spread more and more widely in society.

Sociological studies examine forced and voluntary, reversible and irreversible changes. Changes can be planned or unforeseen, conscious or unconscious. It is advisable to distinguish organized changes from spontaneous changes that arose under the influence of self-organization processes. When constructing global theories, sociologists try to identify one or two leading (main) causes of social change. However, building realistic models of social processes requires, as a rule, a multi-casual approach and taking into account a network of interrelated causes. Let us list the main types of causes of social change.

1. Natural causes - depletion of resources, pollution of the environment, disasters.
2. Demographic reasons - population fluctuations, overpopulation, migration, the process of generational change.
3. Changes in the sphere of culture, economics, scientific and technological progress.
4. Socio-political reasons - conflicts, wars, revolutions, reforms.
5. Social and psychological reasons - addiction, satiation, thirst for novelty, increased aggressiveness, etc.

The listed reasons for social changes can be both internal and external in relation to a given social system. P. Sorokin believed that the main reasons for social changes are precisely internal, immanent reasons. The principle of immanent changes formulated by him states: “After the emergence of a sociocultural system, its natural, “normal” development, forms and phases of the life path are determined mainly by the system itself...”. External circumstances can slow down or speed up internal system processes, they can finally destroy it, but they are not able to change the development program embedded in the system. The system self-determines its evolution, which, according to Sorokin, is equivalent to free development*. The influence of external forces must be taken into account, but their influence is not able to change the sequence of phases of system development.

When studying a social object statically, we assume that its observed characteristics, both qualitative and quantitative, practically do not change over a certain short period of time (more precisely, the changes that have occurred can be neglected). Formally, we can say that in static models there is no time.

Social change is a fundamental social process that causes dramatic changes in public health. Although social changes are realized in the structural elements of society, the changes are based on cultural transformations in the spiritual life of society.

Over the past three centuries, the world has seen only one direction of social change - Westernization, i.e. the assimilation by societies undergoing change of values and patterns of social behavior originally inherent in Western societies. Social change is an objective process; the will of individual individuals, including political leaders, can only slow it down or speed it up, and distort the flow to one degree or another.

The impact of social change on the health of any society is universally damaging. Examples from many societies, including Russia, clearly demonstrate the damaging effects of Westernization on public health. This:

- a decrease in population as a result of a decrease in the average age of survival (mortality), a decrease in the birth rate and an increase in interstate migration;
- an increase in general and neuropsychiatric morbidity, a change in its structure towards the predominance of diseases with more severe courses and outcomes, primarily psychosomatic diseases;
- an increase in infectious morbidity due to the collapse of the system of control over infectious diseases and intrastate migration;
- an increase in occupational morbidity and industrial injuries due to decreased attention to labor protection and safety due to the need to reduce production costs and the consent of people to work in harmful and dangerous conditions;
- the emergence of significant marginalized social groups - refugees, homeless, unemployed;
- growth of all types of social deviations: crime, alcoholism, drug addiction, prostitution, suicide - and morbidity and mortality for related reasons (murder; deaths from acute alcohol poisoning, drug overdose; sexually transmitted and injection diseases);
- economic (material) deprivation large groups of the population, leading to impoverishment associated with a lack of funds for nutritious food, clothing, medicine, personal hygiene products, and payment for housing;
- the inability of control institutions to neutralize the negative impact of social changes on public health in their fields of activity (economics, law, industry, etc.).

Factors acting on the health of the population in the context of sociocultural transformation of society cause in large masses of the population a condition called stress of social change. It is possible to distinguish moral, psychological and economic components.

Periods of sociocultural transformation are characterized by a loss of the regulatory significance of social norms (anomie according to E. Durkheim). Previous social norms are losing their adaptive function, and new ones have not yet been formed or assimilated (not internalized) by the majority of members of society. According to M. Opler, there is a parallelism between sociodynamic processes in society and psychodynamic processes in the individual psyche. Hence, rapid social changes lead to a state of demoralization among large sections of the population.

It has been shown that social catastrophes such as wars have less demoralizing effects than social changes. This is due to the fact that social changes are characterized by a sharp property stratification of the population, while in conditions of social disasters the phenomenon of “shared grief” arises. The vast majority of people have a negative attitude towards social change - the “conservative syndrome” - and not only because of the threat to their socio-professional and material status, but also because of the violation of the sense of historical and cultural continuity - site. Therefore, the formation in the process of primary socialization of readiness to live in conditions of change is important factor resistance to the damaging effects of the stress of social change. The orientation towards stability inherent in the Russian culture of education, in contrast to the American orientation towards change, is emphasized by T. Parsons.

Perceived economic situation in itself serves as the main, internal source of change for society and is manifested in the political pressure exerted by society on the government. According to B. Strumpel's model, under the influence of such pressure, governments begin economic reforms. Since such reforms always require structural macroeconomic changes, including the redistribution of society's resources from the sphere of consumption to the sphere of production, a high level of economic stress of the population arises - site. People can either agree or disagree to endure economic stress, which determines the success of reforms. Unsuccessful economic reforms further increase levels of economic stress.

Social changes are reflected in the social structure of society as follows. Some representatives of high-status groups maintain and strengthen their positions. In addition to them, some previously low-status minority groups - religious and/or national - are also represented in the elite. Material difficulties, as studies show, are experienced most severely, in terms of health, by representatives of the upper classes, since, unlike representatives of the lower classes, they do not have the skills to live in poverty.

The distribution of intrafamily roles is changing in the direction of abolitionism, i.e. liberation of women from unskilled domestic work and equal distribution of power functions in the family group. The social prestige of representatives of the older age group is declining, as younger generations lose the value of life and social experience acquired in other social conditions.

Social changes are most clearly manifested in territorial communities, since they are the main type of social communities where changes are realized. Social organizations are undergoing profound transformations; Even relatively small sociocultural changes require extremely pronounced changes in organizations.

Despite these severe population effects of social change, historical analysis shows a remarkably rapid recovery in population size and health after the implementation of socially necessary changes. In the last decade, specialists World Organization health officials talk about the possibility of avoiding negative consequences Westernization on public health through acculturation, i.e. a balanced combination of elements of Western and own (native) culture.