Modern trends in the development of sociology. Fundamental questions and main theoretical directions in sociology

The most widespread trend in Western sociology in the first half of the 20th century was behaviorism (from English behavior - behavior). Its general methodological principles lie in the philosophy of positivism, according to which science should describe only the directly observable. It is not consciousness that is not directly observable that is subject to research, but behavior that is accessible to observation.

The method turned out to be very convenient, since its technical side was simple and boiled down to fixing and describing behavior, and the results of the observation made it possible to penetrate into the essence of the process directly hidden from the observer. Positive traits methods were quickly discovered and behaviorism became the property of not only psychology but also sociology.

From the point of view of theoretical sociology, behaviorism is very weak. First, he is incapable of constructing any general social construction; secondly, it is focused on facts and ignores motivations. In essence, behaviorism is a return to the former positivism, only under different logical and epistemological conditions. After Weber and Durkheim, a return to an exclusive description of the causal process, albeit based on direct observation was, from the point of view of pure theorizing, a certain step backwards.

From the point of view of applied sociology, behaviorism gave carte blanche to the development of empirical research methods. The weakness of theorizing, from the point of view of generalizing theories, was compensated by the development of many special procedures aimed at collecting and processing specific facts. This side of behaviorism was crucial to its spread, especially in the United States.

However, since the mid-1950s, the situation has changed. Theoretical sociology is beginning to experience its new upsurge, expressed in the emergence of a number of scientific directions, extremely broadly embracing the entire social. problems.

One of such directions in the development of theoretical sociology in the second half of the twentieth century was systems approach to the analysis of society, developed by the famous American sociologist T. Parsons (1902-1979).

Parsons is the author of a large number of scientific works, the most significant of which are The Structure of Social Action (1937) and The Social System (1951). It was in them that the theory of a systematic approach was given, which made him a world-famous sociologist.

Parsons's turn to a systems approach was logical, since sociology was oversaturated with the unsystematized empiricism of behaviorism. Science demanded a synthesis and a general theory.

Parsons creates a "general system of action" that seeks to cover all social phenomena. It is based on systems theory developed by biology and cybernetics.

According to Parsons, social action is a combination of four elements: 1. Actor (from Latin akt - action) - an acting subject or group; 2. The situation with which the actor enters into a relationship. This may be material production, the natural environment or other actors; 3. Meaning, born from the contact of the actor with the elements of the situation; 4. Rules, norms and values, with the help of which the actor is guided in his actions and gives them purposefulness.

"Social action", consisting of the four elements listed above, acts as an elementary cell of society, from the totality of which it is necessary to build a building of a theoretical structure. It was in this direction that P. Sorokin went, integrating the interacting actors into simple, cumulative and compound groups.

Parsons does it differently. He says that "social action" has the features of a system and should be presented as a system. In this case, the relation of the actor to the social situation will be called a "system of action". "System of action" has the qualities of a system and has the following functions: 1 adaptation. This function is aimed at establishing relationships between the system of action and the environment; 2 goal achievement. This function serves to determine the goal and mobilize the system's own internal energy; 3. integration. Its functional duty is to stabilize the system, coordinate relations between internal parts; 4. latency. This function is aimed at preserving the actors' norms and values.

The totality of social being is expressed by Parsons in the “general system of action”, which, as we said, has the same systemic functions: adaptation, goal achievement, integration and latency. However, for society as a whole, each of these functions carries a different burden. So, in society, the function of adaptation corresponds to a biological organism, the function of goal achievement - an individualized personality, the function of latency - culture, the function of integration - a social system.

Thus, society, considered as a system, consists of independent and interacting elements. It has a biological organism; taken in the abstract, it has the role of adaptation, adaptation to environment. It has a personality that sets goals and mobilizes internal energy. Society has a culture designed to preserve values ​​and norms. Finally, it has a social system, expressed in a whole complex of institutions and functions aimed at stabilizing society and coordinating the actions of its constituent parts.

The "general system of action" is subdivided into "subsystems of action". They are the biological organism separately, the personality separately, the culture separately, and the social culture separately. This means that each of the independent subsystems within itself is also a system and, in turn, a systematic approach can be applied to it using all the same functions.

Sociology studies the “social system” subsystem, while the other three subsystems are the lot of other sciences, however, the presence of a “general system of action” does not allow the sociologist to ignore either the biological organism with its psychophysiological manifestations, or the individual personality, or culture.

The subsystem "social system" studied by sociology can be represented within the framework of this discipline as an independent system containing a well-known complex of four functions. In this case, the subsystems of the "social system" will be: 1. The economic subsystem with the function of adaptation, realized through the production and circulation of goods; 2. Political subsystem with the function of achieving goals by means of mobilizing actors; 3. The subsystem of socialization, in which the function of latency is realized thanks to the institution of the family and education; 4. A subsystem of institutions of law with the function of integration, the establishment and preservation of solidarity.

The listed subsystems "social systems" are in system dependence, between them there is a constant interchange.

On the whole, Parsons' study of the systemic aspects of social existence is of great importance, and the "general theory of action" remains an unsurpassed example of theoretical sociology.

The most prominent theorist structural functionalism in sociology is an American sociologist R. Merton (1910), student of P. Sorokin. It was through his efforts that structural functionalism became synonymous with sociology for many years.

Merton built his concept on the criticism of the canonical version of structural functionalism, who considered society as a self-regulating and self-sufficient system, all parts of which are integrated into an integral organism and function with the necessity of the latter.

First of all, Merton criticizes the postulate of the functional unity of society, according to which the deliberate socially significant actions of individuals lead to adequate planned results. In reality, there is no strict correspondence between motives and intentions, on the one hand, and the objective consequences of an action, on the other, therefore, to reflect the real state of affairs, Merton introduces two new concepts: latent and explicit functions.

By an explicit function, he understands the objective consequence of an act, deliberately caused and recognized by the actor as such. Whereas a latent function is an unrecognized and unintended consequence of an act. For example, increasing soil fertility through agricultural influence is an explicit function, while the magical ritual of conjuring a sacrificial lamb, aimed at the same result, acts as a latent function. Another example comes from the sociology of science. The desire of a young scientist to recognize his own scientific works is a latent function of the institute of science, because directly, in the nearest way, the motivation of its activity is aimed at achieving ordinary, everyday, sometimes selfish goals, but indirectly, in a long chain of relationships, it leads to the true goal of science - the production of knowledge.

Another postulate criticized by Merton is universal functionalism - the desire to consider any subdivision of the social system in terms of the usefulness of an action for society. This trend is fully consistent with the organic point of view, according to which any organ is necessary in the body and, accordingly, no social education can be superfluous in the social system. The task of the sociologist, in this case, is to determine the functional affiliation of a given social element.

Merton is against the identification of social being and utility. He is also against the rigid functional dependence of one part of the social system on another and the recognition of their harmonious functioning for the benefit of the whole. Real life is much more complicated. To display it, he introduces the concept of dysfunction, which shows the possibility of a negative impact of one structure on another. Moreover, dysfunctional consequences deserve attention along with functional ones.

On the example of analysis political system USA Merton shows the effectiveness of the principle of dysfunction. Dysfunctional is the phenomenon of political racketeering and the boss. In a number of districts with a compact population of individual national minorities, political support is received not by state political structures with their abstract slogans about justice, but by criminal clans that provide real help on the ground. In the same way, the mafia provides patronage to promising young people who have not managed to integrate into official institutions society. From here, the structuring function of the boss becomes apparent, which consists in organizing, centralizing and maintaining the developed elements of power in a normal working condition. Although the boss decentralizes political power, appropriating part of its functions, on the other hand, he collects what the government could not keep for itself and what it is not capable of completely disposing of. Hence, the outwardly dysfunctional orientation of the shadow economy plays a completely functional role in modern society. This moment, noticed by Merton, had a fruitful continuation with other theorists, who showed that such seemingly asocial phenomena as social conflicts, have in fact a structure-forming role.

Merton opposes the postulate of necessity. He does not agree that any particular social institution is necessary to satisfy a certain existing need. He has the same role different systems different structures can play. It gives scope for the variability of social structures. Just as the same element can have many functions, so one function can be performed by various alternative elements. In this way, we are talking not about the strict determination of functions and structures, but about structural alternatives.

Theory of communicative action associated with the name of the German sociologist J. Habermas (1929). He is the author of a number of scientific works on social philosophy and sociology, the largest of which is the two-volume Theory of Communicative Action, published in 1981 and which has earned the author fame as a classic of modern theoretical sociology.

The starting point of the sociological theory of Habermas is the concept of "life world". The life world is the world in which our social relationships exist: work, family, friends. The life world is a sphere of direct mutual understanding of people, based on a common belief in the inviolability of its existence, which does not require any changes.

The life world is opposed by the "systemic world" - a world consisting of anonymous and business relationships that take place in the economic market and in state institutions. The systemic world historically and logically originates from the lifeworld, is based on it, but in modern conditions the systemic world has become extremely important and threatens to destroy the lifeworld.

These two worlds have a qualitative sign of difference, which is reduced to the concept of rationality. Communicative rationality corresponds to the life world, instrumental rationality corresponds to the system mine.

Communicative rationality is the action of the mind, aimed at understanding the social process as such. It is focused in its actions on a person with his natural needs.

The trouble with communicative rationality is that, through the market and the growth of statehood, it increasingly contributes to the formation of instrumental rationality.

The new instrumental rationality represents the dominance of the cognitive-instrumental mind. In its perspective, the subject relates to the object not just from the point of view of knowledge, but instrumentally, i.e. its relationship is a finely adjusted set of actions to achieve a specific goal. In real life, instrumental rationality has penetrated to a greater extent into the sphere of politics and economics, transforming them into a kind of mechanism that functions contrary to the immediate interests of specific individuals.

The change in the types of rationalization occurs against the general background social evolution. Habermas defines social evolution in terms of the development of human cognitive abilities. Cognitive abilities include both cognitive and production activities. The presence of the second component makes Habermas related to Marx, but if the latter's production activity completely exhausts the construction of social organization, then in Habermas a significant role is given to the elements of reason.

In the process of social evolution cognitive abilities go through five consecutive stages. The first stage is mythopoetic. Here, a person does not yet separate himself from the surrounding world, identifies himself, poetizes and mythologises it. The second stage is cosmological. During this period, a person begins to find a difference between himself and the world around him, but he continues to construct his own social structures, like mythical structures. At the third, religious stage, a person's social actions and his understanding of social processes are based on a religious worldview. The fourth, metaphysical stage, is characterized by the fact that a person critically evaluates all previous social experience and approaches the creation of his own social structures. Finally, the fifth stage is the modern one. Its distinguishing feature is the presence of a conflict between communicative and instrumental rationality, or two ways of socially constructing the world.

In the above interpretation of the evolutionary process, an obvious borrowing from Comte's periodization of the progress of the human mind is striking, supplemented, however, by two more stages. It is also necessary to replace that Habermas's cognitive abilities have socially forming qualities. The reason for social evolution is that the cognizing mind singles out at each new stage of development more and more social structures, reflexive, and thereby constitutes them. This shows similarities with the social theory of Marx, with the limitation that the latter, in principle, did not give any priority to the mental abilities of a person in the process of the development of societies, but completely relied on the sphere of the impersonal production process.

According to Habermas, the problem modern world consists in the fact that instrumental behavior intrudes into the realm of the life-world. Instrumental rationality is subject to predominant evolutionary development, it is this rationality that institutionalizes new social relations. The disadvantage of modern society is not in rationalization as such, but in the inability of communicative rationalization to institutionalize areas of social interaction that relate to communicative behavior.

As a practical implementation of his ideas, Habermas sees the achievement of a common understanding that will arise as a result of rational criticism. Work in this direction has already begun by the author himself as a critique of a number of sociological theories. However, public discussion must go beyond scientific research. This should be a public discourse in which all members of society could take part in order to overcome partial, group and individual disunity in the process of general discussion.

The goal of public discourse is to draw into it ever larger masses of people, literally the whole of humanity, which, armed with rational criticism, will come to a consensus of mutual understanding, regardless of the political power and economic domination that exists in the world.

Such a process will be the realization of communicative rationalization, the construction and institutionalization of new forms of communication, free from instrumentalism. Public discourse takes on an active character in the sense that it is aimed at creating new social relations. Hence, the search for consent is at the same time a socioforming, socially constructive action.

Symbolic interactionism (from the English interaction - interaction) is today one of the promising areas in sociology and social psychology, analyzing predominantly symbolic aspects of social interactions. Its founders were the Americans D. Mead (1863-1931), C. Cooley (1864-1929), G. Blumer (1900-1987).

G. Blumer most clearly formulated the main provisions of symbolic interactionism in his work “The Society of Symbolic Interaction”: 1. human activity is carried out in relation to objects on the basis of the values ​​that a person himself attaches to them; 2. meanings themselves are the product of social interaction or interaction between individuals; 3. Meanings are changed and applied through interpretation, a process used by each individual in relation to the signs (symbols) surrounding him.

It is fundamental that interactionists give preference to the individual, seeing in him a constructive content. The individual is in constant relationship with the outside world. In the process of these relations, he gives them meaning or meaning, he himself creates objects. The world becomes an object for the individual, and an object not in the sense of an independent, outsider for the individual. physical object with its own characteristics, an object brought about by the individual. Hence, interactionists argue that the individual creates his objects on the basis of the meanings he assigns to them. By itself, outside the individual, the object has no meaning. The individual must receive it through individual or collective interpretation.

There is no social construct gravitating over the individual with laws operating outside and in addition to the individual. There is a constant interaction of individuals - interaction.

Its boundaries coincide with the outlines of a group that equally interprets the meanings assigned to similar objects.

Interactionists put the language factor at the basis of social interaction: “all people are created in conversations,” they say, if there is no language communication, then there is no person. Language is the first and main factor of human interaction, all other forms of communication occur already on its basis. Language has a symbolic character and therefore is capable of generating the same reactions. When communicating, individuals seem to exchange symbols. Communication itself is an exchange of mutually intelligible and mutually accepted symbols, with the aim of achieving practical results in joint activities.

Language symbols evoke the same reaction in me as they do in other individuals, says the interactionist. This comes from the fact that the development of language is a long group process, similar to the development of a special way of communication between two lovers, when they assign certain symbols, understandable only to them, to specific objects. Such an interpretation of events and phenomena is nothing more than objectifying the surrounding world, understanding them, giving them meaning and, ultimately, constructing a social habitat.

At the same time, it should be noted that the words themselves have no meaning, they are not given to a person from above. A separate individual, outside of society, cannot give them any meaning or invent new words. The meaning and meaning of words are created only when two or more individuals engage in verbal communication. Language is rooted in elementary, need-driven behavior, the social elements of which are presented as necessary by the interacting individual.

One of the directions of symbolic interactionism is the development of role theory. According to her, the interaction of individuals in society is built on the analogy of roles, where roles are ways of our behavior in specific situations. They are similar to the plays that we play and play the main roles in them. And our real life, say the interactionists, there is a combination of roles as if we are directors, producers, and actors at the same time. We use the subject environment as props and guard the places of our private scenes. Hence, interactionists describe all aspects of life in theatrical terms: the stage, the actor, the wings, and the whole approach is called dramatic.

In conclusion, it is necessary to characterize the place of symbolic interactionism among other areas of modern sociology. This paradigm was born as an opposition to rigid sociological determinism, pressure social structure, structural-functional correlation. She focused on specific research, working with everyday life, development of observation methods and description tools. Symbolic interactionism moves away from the analysis of questions of the structure, organization and institutions of society, focusing all attention on the interpersonal aspects of interaction.

So, the picture of the emergence, formation and development of sociology presented by us within the framework of theoretical knowledge and social culture of modern industrial society has given a bright variety of concepts and methods that are combined into various areas of sociological science. Our task is to deeply assimilate the knowledge accumulated by sociology about society and form on its basis a certain level of socio-professional thinking, the ability to use the main methods of sociological analysis in one's activity, which will be the subject of subsequent topics of the course.

Questions for self-examination

1. How can one explain that the first philosophical systems appeared several millennia ago, while sociology as a science dates back to the middle of the 19th century?

2. When did sociology as a science emerge?

3. What does positivism mean in sociology?

4. What are the main provisions of the sociological theory of O. Comte?

5. What are the main provisions of the sociological theory of G. Spencer, E. Durkheim, K. Marx, M. Weber?

6. What are the reasons for the emergence of sociology in Russia?

7. What are the specifics of the development of sociology in Russia?

8. List the stages of institutionalization of sociology.

9. List and describe the main methodological trends in Russian sociology.

10. Describe the sociological theories of N.K. Mikhailovsky, L.I. Mechnikov, P.A. Sorokin, N.I. Bukharin, V.M. Bekhterev.

11. What are the main directions of development of modern sociology?

Literature

Aron R. Stages of development of sociological thought. M., 1993.

American sociological thought. Ed. Dobrenkov. M.: MSU, 1994.

Barazgova E.S. American sociology. Tradition and modernity. Yekaterinburg, 1997.

Gaidenko P.P., Davydov Yu.N. History and rationality. Sociology of M. Weber and the Weber Renaissance. M., 1991.

Hoffman A.B. Seven lectures on the history of sociology. M., 1995.

Gromov M., Matskevich A., Semenov V. Western theoretical sociology. St. Petersburg, 1997.

History of theoretical sociology in four volumes, v.1-3. M.: Kanon, 1997.

History of sociology in Western Europe and USA. Moscow: Nauka, 1993.

Kukushkina E.N. Russian sociology of the XIX-XX centuries. M. MGU. 1993

Kultygin V.P. Early German classical sociology. M., 1991.

Kultygin V.P. French classical sociology of the 19th - early 20th centuries. M., 1991.

Malyavin S.N. Introduction to theoretical sociology. SPb. 1997.

Medushevsky A.N. History of Russian sociology. M.1993.

Monson P. Contemporary Western Sociology: Theories, Traditions, Perspectives. St. Petersburg, 1992.

Novikova S.S. History of sociology in Russia. Moscow - Voronezh. 1996.

Essays on the history of theoretical sociology of the twentieth century. M., 1994.

Problems of theoretical sociology. St. Petersburg, 1994.

Russian sociology. SPb. 1993.

Empirical sociology (mid-twentieth century), prominent representatives - U. Thomas and F. Znaniecki, gained fame thanks to the work "The Polish Peasant in Europe and America", studying the problem of social adaptation of immigrants created a biographical method.

Symbolic interactionism, C. Cooley and J. Mead. The subject of study is social interaction. The main characteristic of social interaction is the use of symbols, arising from the need to coordinate the behavior of people and from the ability of a person to create symbols. C. Cooley - the theory of "mirror self".

Industrial sociology. E. Mayo - the author of the doctrine " human relations”, after conducting an experimental analysis of industrial relations at an electrical plant, revealed the factor of “group pressure” that affects the productivity of workers.

Phenomenological sociology: (50s of the XX century) A. Schutz (theory). Its founder is an Austrian and then an American sociologist Alfred Schutz. From the point of view of the sociological phenomenological concept, social reality - intersubjective world, those. a world created in the process of interaction and mutual influence of many subjects among themselves. The subject of phenomenology is everyday thinking and action, ideas about the world and man, accepted in everyday life and serving as a guide for people.

Ethnomethodology: G. Garfinkel (applied sociology). The name of this direction is integrated from two terms: ethno + methodology. Thus, ethnomethodology universalizes the methods of ethnography and ways of organizing the daily life of people in primitive societies and cultures. The method of analysis is the study of the "background expectations" of people, patterns of action coming from the moral order, taken for granted. They are revealed through the creation of unusual conditions for the subjects of analysis. Motivation for activity is born in the daily experience of the individual.

Structural functionalism (2nd half of the 20th century), T. Parsons, creator of the theory of the social system, and R. Merton (author of TSU, the concepts of "function", "dysfunction", etc.). Relations between people are determined by functions, all forms of culture have functional properties, and institutions are functionally determined. Functions are observable consequences that serve to self-regulate the system or its adaptation to the external environment. Explicit function - formal actions realized by the participant. Latent function - unconscious. Dysfunctions are as natural as functions.

Conflictology, In the 60s of the XX century. the sociological theory of conflict gained wide popularity, which was built in the works of L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf, O. Gouldner, G. Collins, as opposed to the predominance of structural functionalism with its emphasis on the interpretation of society as a controlled system based on consensus values ​​and the integrated role of common values. However, the theoretical origins of this theory are rooted in the concepts of K. Marx and G. Simmel.

Lewis Coser: He believed that the conflict is a struggle for values ​​and claims to a certain status, power and resources, a struggle in which the goals of the opponents are to neutralize, damage or destroy the rival.

Conclusion: So, in modern sociology there are five main paradigms - initial conceptual schemes, explanatory models, which differ depending on how theorists understand social reality.

1. Social Fact Paradigm reduces social reality to two groups of social facts - social structures and social institutions, which are considered as real things. Its emergence is associated with the name of E. Durkheim. Within its framework, two opposite theoretical directions are distinguished - functionalism and the theory of conflict. Such well-known sociologists as P. Sorokin, T. Parsons, R. Merton, R. Dahrendorf belong to this direction.

2. The paradigm of social definitions arose thanks to the work of M. Weber. Social reality is seen here through the way people understand social facts. This paradigm includes symbolic interactionism, phenomenological sociology and ethnomethodology (A. Schutz, G. Mead, G. Garfinkel, T. Lukman).

3. Social Behavior Paradigm draws on the psychological orientation of American sociology and is expressed in behavioral sociology and social exchange theory. The most famous representative of the first is the psychologist B. Skinner, the second - J. Homans. In this paradigm, human behavior is understood as an appropriate response to certain external stimuli. Particular attention is paid to the problem of rewarding expected and punishing undesirable social behavior.

4. Paradigm of psychological determinism arose on the basis of the teachings of Z. Freud. Social reality is viewed through the prism of the conflict between the individual and society. The most famous representatives are the neo-Freudians E. Fromm and D. Riesman, the Freudo-Marxists G. Marcuse and F. Reich.

5. The paradigm of socio-historical determinism connected with the works of the classics of Marxism. In this paradigm, social reality is viewed as a set of relations between people, which develops in the process of their joint activities. The main attention is paid to social structures, which, interacting with each other, give rise to a social process. The actual elimination of the real person from the explanatory scheme, the attribution of the leading role in social development to production and economic factors give grounds to define this paradigm more precisely as economic determinism.

Lecture №4 Topic: 3. Society, social institutions and interactions.

Target classes: to give an idea of ​​the multidimensional nature of the social nature of society and social cognition, to determine the qualitative characteristics of social systems, 1 to reveal the essence of the institutional nature of society, their impact on the structuring and stable development of society .

1 Society as a social system.

2 .Social institutions: concept, functions, features. Influence social institutions for the modernization of Kazakhstani society.

Basic concepts.

The concept of society and a systematic approach. Principles of a functional approach to the analysis of society and social determinism (G. Spencer, R. Merton, T. Parsons). Society as a communicative and self-referential system: N. Luhmann. The concept of "life world" J. Habermas. The concepts of "synergy", "fluctuation" (G. Haken, A. Prigogine).

Social institutions: concept, functions, features. Theoretical approaches to the analysis of social institutions. Types and structure of institutions

Abstracts

1. Society as a social system

The human community is a societal system consisting of a set of social systems. Society is education, which, as a social system, has the following features: independence, integrity, self-regulation, self-reproduction, self-development, sustainability, adaptability. Elements of the social system of society: social ties and relationships, norms, social communities, groups, statuses and roles, social institutions, organizations.

The levels of society form:

1) statuses and roles that define the structure of social interactions. Status - the position of the individual in the social structure of society; role - a pattern of behavior associated with status

2) Social institutions - a set of statuses and roles necessary to meet any needs;

3) Normative order, implemented through culture and political power. A social norm is generally accepted rules that express the requirements of society for individuals.

In sociology, society is considered from the point of view of its main social characteristics. The concept of "system" means an integral complex of interrelated elements that are in functional relationships with each other. The concept of "integrity" of society means the derivative properties of elements from the systemic qualities of the system itself.

According to the social composition, the socio-demographic, socio-professional, socio-territorial, socio-ethnic structure of society is distinguished. Levels of social organization of society:

Individuals, communities, groups. Community - a set of people united on the basis of the similarity of living conditions, the unity of cultural values, norms, self-identification. A social group is a set of interacting people perceived by others as a kind of community.

Social institutions and organizations. Institutions are a historically established, stable form of organization social activities people in order to meet the specific needs of people on the basis of a certain system of statuses, roles, values, norms. Organization is a way of ordering and regulating the activities of individuals and groups for effective implementation. common task; a group of people focused on achieving a fixed goal, the implementation of which requires joint efforts.

hierarchy of social positions - statuses, and social functions- the roles they play.

a set of norms and values ​​that determine the nature and content of the activity (behavior) of the elements of this system.

Social actions, interactions, connections and relationships.

The main features of society in classical sociology according to E. Shils:

society is not part of a larger social system;

has a permanent territory, which he considers his own;

has its own control system;

has its own name and history;

exists longer than the average life span of an individual;

united by a common system of values, norms, traditions, which are part of the original culture;

replenished mainly by the children of those people who are already its recognized representatives.

In sociology, modern interpretations of society include a functional approach, which is presented in the theory of the action of the social system by T. Parsons. His theoretical approach draws attention to the problems of integrity, organization and functioning of social systems. The functioning of society is the process of recreating structures, functional connections, the ability of the system to maintain interaction with the environment.

R. Merton made significant changes to the theory of systems functioning:

1) functions of the same type can be characteristic of different structures;

2) structures of the same type may have different functional properties;

3) dysfunction is as natural as function;

4) functional phenomena in one system may be dysfunctional in another.

According to the basic idea of ​​systems theory, a complex whole consists of many elements that are united by various relationships and separated from what surrounds them by some kind of boundaries. At the macro level, systems can be considered - global society (humanity), at the middle level (meso level) - national states and regional political or military unions, at the micro level - local associations, associations, firms, families, companies of friends, etc. Representatives of the school of systems theory, in particular Talcott Parsons (1902-1979), considered the concept of "system" not only key, but also universal.

System-functional analysis of society. In sociology, the system-functional analysis of society is conceptually presented in the theory of the social system by T. Parsons, which, in turn, developed the provisions of the organic model of society by O. Comte and G. Spencer. T. Parsons in the works "The Structure of Social Action" 1937. and "System modern societies» 1951 defines society as a new kind of social system, as a system of relations between people, the connecting beginning of which are norms and values. He considers society in two aspects: 1) as a structure; 2) as a set of people's actions. Its main parts are 1. subjects of action - actors; and 2. situational environment of actors, determined from 4 factors: a) nature or biological organism; b) personality system; c) culture; d) social system or society.

In his opinion, society as a system can function if the following requirements (functions) are met: 1) it must have the ability to adapt to changing conditions, be able to organize and distribute internal resources; 2) must be goal-oriented, capable of setting the main tasks and goals and achieving them; 3) must maintain stability on the basis of common norms and values ​​that are assimilated by individuals and relieve tension in the system; 4) have the ability to integrate, to be included in the system of new generations. Hence the 4 functions of social systems - adaptation, goal achievement, motivation, integration - support for the integrity and coherence of the system, its stabilization. The cultural system occupies a special place, being a regulator in relation to society, the individual and nature, and a factor in streamlining people's activities.

Modern interpretations of society: N. Luhmann, P. Bourdieu. N. Luhmann, a representative of postmodern sociology (1927-1999), interprets society in system theory (“Society, interaction solidarity”) as a complex system that has the ability to relate not only to the outside world, but also to itself. It is the capacity for symbolic self-description. Society is able to distinguish itself from the external environment and reproduce the border. It is a self-reproducing and self-referential system. Self-referentiality is the inclusion of oneself in the subject of consideration. Society is relatively autonomous, because can organize itself and build its own order and build its own structures by its own system processes. In the process of development, the social system is going through a range of stages - segmentation, stratification, functionalization. The elements of the system are information, differences that are important for the development of the system, thanks to which the process of communication between its various parts is carried out. Communication creates a social reality, and within its subsystems each of them is a special communicative system with a special code, which is relevant only for its functioning. For politics it is power, for law it is law, for science it is truth, for economics it is money, and so on. Communication systems are operationally closed to themselves, to their own code. The result is integrative-disintegrative changes.

P . Bourdieu considers society as a set of relations that develop into various fields, each of which has specific types of power. He introduced the concept of "habitus" - a structured social relationship, a system of long-term group and individual attitudes, functioning as a matrix for setting goals, solving problems of action. Habitus, structuring thinking and behavior, reproduces the socio-cultural rules, lifestyles of various groups.

Conclusion: Society - a historically developing integral system of relations and interactions between people and communities, emerging in the process of their joint activities.

2.Social institution: concept, structure and typology. One of the most important elements of a social system is social institutions. The author of the term is G. Spencer. A contribution to the theoretical study of social institutions, their roles and structures was made by O. Comte, G. Spencer, T. Parsons, R. Merton.

Social institution -it is a historically established, stable form of organizing people's activities in order to meet specific needs based on a certain system of statuses, roles, values ​​and norms.

We have already told you that institutions set patterns for our actions and shape our expectations. The development of society largely goes through the development of social institutions. The wider the institutionalization of spheres of activity in the system of social relations, the more opportunities a society has for successful functioning and development. The variety of social institutions and their development is a criterion for the maturity of society and its ability to satisfy the diverse needs of society. social institution–it is an organized system of connections and social norms that combines significant social values ​​and procedures that meet the basic needs of society. This is a stable set of formal and informal rules, norms, and attitudes that regulate human activity and organize them into a system of roles and statuses that form a social system. Social institutions are social facts, "things" that cannot be ignored, transformed on a whim, and removed. They encourage us as long as we follow their instructions. When an individual goes beyond their limits, society has an arsenal of control and coercion bodies. Any sphere of human activity - economics, politics, sports, etc. - is organized according to certain rules, the observance of which is controlled. Institutions ensure the predictability of people's actions and behavior, the stability and stability of social ties and the structure of society.

The structure of social institutions is formed from its purpose and function, a network of statuses and roles, and social norms. The concept of “function” of an institution determines the realization of that social need and the purpose for which it was created. The expected and necessary functions that are included in the intentions and are realized by the participants of the institute are called explicit in sociology by R. Merton. They are fixed in codes, charters, constitutions, fixed in roles and statuses. The procedures for their implementation are formalized and controlled by society (elections, constituent assemblies, etc.). They provide a public benefit. Latent functions are called unintended and unconscious consequences of social actions that provide individual benefits.

The explicit functions of social institutions include:

1. adaptive - ensuring the adaptability of society to changing conditions of the internal and external environment (natural, social, historical);

2. Socializing - the formation and development of the individual, the assimilation of social values, norms and roles by her, the realization of her social status;

3. definition, consolidation and reproduction of connections and relationships - standardization of social behavior through a system of rules and norms, making it predictable, and social control over their maintenance.

4. regulatory - regulation of connections and relationships through the formation of values, norms and patterns of behavior;

5. integration - ensuring the solidarity and cohesion of society, increasing the volume and frequency of contacts through the processes of mutual responsibility and interdependence of individuals, groups, communities through the impact of norms, sanctions and a system of roles. Sanctions are a system of rewards and punishments for maintaining certain norms.

6. communicative - the dissemination and development of information within the institution and in interaction between institutions in order to manage and monitor compliance with the norms.

7. broadcasting - the transfer of social experience.

Statuses– social positions of individuals in the social structure of society.Roles–patterns of behavior that have become entrenched, established as appropriate for people of a given status in a given society; status-oriented patterns of behavior. For a family, these are the statuses of father, mother, child. Political roles – legislator, subject of law, etc. Economic - employer, employee, consumer, seller, owner. The functions of institutions can be realized through the formation of their status-role structure.

Values- abstract ideas about right and wrong, proper and improper, social ideals of society. They are the basis of social evaluations. Norms are a way of fixing values. Social norms are the requirements, expectations, prescriptions and wishes of appropriate behavior that regulate interactions between people.. They streamline behavior, regulate and standardize relations, assert obligatory values, ethics of actions, form the ethical basis for motivating people's activities. They serve as a standard of action, regulate socialization, integrate society, and provide social control. Their violation, as well as maintenance, are regulated by the application of sanctions. For example, legal norms are formalized laws, religious norms are religious dogma, ethical norms are moral prescriptions.

Institutions also have physical and symbolic elements. For a family, for example, this is a house (a physical element) and a ring, a marriage contract. Each institution has specific features as well as common features: attitudes, patterns of behavior, symbolic and cultural features, ideology, utilitarian cultural traits, codes.

Depending on the methods of regulation of activities, formal and informal institutions are distinguished. Interactions in formal institutions are carried out on the basis of formal rules (military regulations, the Constitution) and functions, formalized control over their observance. In informal institutions there is no strict regulation (friendship), but the level of social control is higher.

The basis for the emergence of the institution is a social need, without which the normal sustainable functioning of society is impossible. Institutions are a mechanism that provides conditions, methods, forms of their "unconditional" implementation. Outwardly, institutions look like a set of institutions, organizations that have certain means and carry out specific activities for their implementation. The internal side of the institution is a set of expediently oriented standards of behavior and activity. The concept of “function of an institution” determines the realization of the need for which it was created. Expected and necessary functions are named explicit in sociology by R. Merton. They are fixed in codes, charters, constitutions, programs, fixed in roles and statuses. The procedures for its implementation are formalized, controlled by society (meetings, elections, etc.).

Factors for the effective functioning of institutions (Y. Shchepansky):

Clear definition of goals, objectives and scope of functions;

Rational division of labor and rational organization within the institution

The degree of depersonalization of actions and objectification of functions, roles performed by individuals on behalf of society, the compliance of the behavior of members of the institution with general norms

Recognition and prestige of the institution in the eyes of groups, communities and society

Conflict-free inclusion of the institution in society.

Institutions are indicators of social stability and the level of development of society. If the functions of institutions are clear, accessible, clear and specific, then this is an indicator of the stability of the institution. Obscurity, vagueness, impracticability of pointers - her instability. Dysfunctions of S.I.: 1. lack of qualified personnel, resources, organizational leapfrog; 2. ambiguity of goals, uncertainty of functions; 3. drop in authority, prestige function; 4. personalization of its functioning.

Sources of development of S.I.:

endogenous - reorganization, in-depth specialization of functions, institutions, internal differentiation. Lead to an increase and complexity of control patterns;

exogenous - the impact of culture, or the activities of subjects.

N. Luhmann singled out the segmentation of its institutions as a trend in the development of modern society - the process of multiplying the number of institutions caused by the specialization of its functions.

institutionalization- a process when a certain social need is recognized and special norms of behavior are established in society for its implementation, personnel are trained, resources are allocated.

The well-known social researcher G. Lenski identified a number of key social needs that give rise to institutionalization processes:

1) the need for communication (language, education, communication, transport);

2) the need for the production of products and services;

3) the need for the distribution of benefits (and privileges);

4) the need for the safety of citizens, the protection of their lives and well-being;

5) the need to maintain a system of inequality (placement of social groups according to positions, statuses depending on various criteria);

6) the need for social control over the behavior of members of society (religion, morality, law, the penitentiary system).

The formation of a social institution implies a sequence of institutionalization and the need for special conditions:

1) the emergence of a certain need, the satisfaction of which requires joint organized actions, realized by many individuals - this is the main prerequisite for the emergence of a new institution;

2) formation of a system of goals, functions, actions that realize this need;

3) In order for an institution to fulfill its purpose, it must have resources (material, labor, organizational), which must be steadily replenished.

4) For the self-reproduction of an institution, a special cultural environment is also necessary, i.e. a system of signs, actions, rules of conduct that distinguish people belonging to this institution.

institutionalization–it is the process of emergence, formation and development of a social institution; the process of defining and fixing norms, rules and roles, bringing them into a system that is able to act in the direction of satisfying a certain social need. The process consists of the following steps:

1. the emergence of a need, the satisfaction of which requires joint organized efforts;

2. formation of common goals, a system of functions and actions that realize this need

3. the emergence of norms and rules in the course of spontaneous social interaction, carried out by trial and error;

4. emergence of procedures related to norms and rules;

5. institutionalization of norms, rules, procedures, their adoption and practical application;

6. establishing a system of sanctions to maintain norms and rules;

7. creation of a system of statuses and roles. The end of the institutionalization process is the creation of a clear status-role structure in accordance with the norms and rules.

An important component of institutionalization is the creation of a material, financial and resource (organizational, labor) base for the implementation of the institution's goal, which should be steadily replenished. For the self-reproduction of an institution, a special cultural environment is also necessary, i.e. a system of signs, actions, rules of conduct that distinguish the people of this institution.

Any sphere of human activity - economics, politics, sports, etc., is organized according to certain rules, the observance of which is controlled. The institutions cover all spheres of society's activities. The main types of institutions include the following:

1.Economic institutions - they provide a set of production, distribution and exchange of social wealth. For example: business associations, property, labor.

2. political institutions - ensure the reproduction of laws, rules, standards, certain forms political power stabilize social class structures. For example: the state, parties, authorities, socio-political organizations.

3. family - ensures the reproduction, education and socialization of individuals.

4. education - socialization of individuals to basic values ​​and practices.

5. religion - satisfaction of the spiritual needs of individuals

6. sociocultural - the reproduction of culture and institutions, the socialization of individuals in a certain subculture.

An important category associated with the dynamics of society is social action. In sociology, unlike psychology, subjects of social action act not only and not so much individuals (if an individual is recognized as the subject of action, then only as a representative of a large social group), as social groups and communities (nation, family, work team, group of adolescents, personality), but, for example, subjects of political action - citizens, political parties, lobby groups, pressure groups, political elite, the state, various branches of government, etc., and at the global level - in the world community - national states, international organizations, such as the UN, NATO, transnational corporations, etc. . The subjects of social action are also called actors.

Conclusion. Social institutions are forms of realization of social needs and arise as a result of the interaction of people, these are also the types of relationships demanded by society. Institutions are an indicator of social development. Their functional characteristics reflect the degree of institutionalization of social phenomena, organizations and the level of social stability. Modern society is characterized by the growth and complexity of the system of institutions.

Lecture number 5. Social groups and communities.

Social groups and their role in public life

Typology of social groups. primary and secondary groups.

The sphere of collective behavior. Collective behavior according to G. Bloomer

Purpose: to reveal the role of social groups in public life, to consider their typology, influence on people's behavior.

Basic concepts. Social group, primary group, small group, secondary group, reference group, labor collective, family. Outgroup, ingroup, crowd, group dynamics, collective consciousness. Weight. collective behavior.

1.Social groups and their role in public life

Social group -is a set of individuals interacting in a certain way based on the shared expectations of each member of the group regarding others. E. Giddens: Concept social group should be distinguished from two other closely related concepts - unit and social category.social group is a number of people interacting with each other on a regular basis. Such regularity leads to the rallying of those taking part in the interaction into a separate whole with certain common social characteristics. Members of the group expect certain forms of behavior from each other that are not required from non-members. Groups can vary in size, from intimate ones such as families to larger groups such as sports clubs. Unit(social aggregate) is a set of people who happen to be in the same place at the same time, but do not have any definite connections with each other. Passengers at the airport, spectators at the movies, students waiting in line to enroll in a course are all examples of aggregates.

Signs of groups: organization, stability, existing internal structure.

Group types. Outgroups are usually perceived as stereotypes. A social stereotype is a shared image of another group or category of people. Reference e groups. They mean a real or conditional social entity, with which the individual relates himself as a standard and to the norms of opinion, the values ​​and assessments of which he is guided in his behavior and self-esteem. Another type of small groups that are important for the behavior of the individual is the so-called. reference groups. The term was introduced by the American researcher G. Hyman. Each individual necessarily has one or more reference groups for himself, the ideals and values ​​of which he accepts. They serve for him as a kind of standard, a model for comparison and evaluation of his own behavior. The reference group may consist of very specific people, whose opinion and assessment a person especially values. This group does not include all people from the immediate environment, even in primary groups, but only a narrow circle of "significant others". Thus, the concept of a reference group makes it possible to clarify the complex mechanism of the relationship of an individual with a social group. The traditional approach, emphasizing the decisive role of social norms and values ​​of the social system for explaining the behavior of the individual, is not always effective. Accounting for the influence of the reference group on the individual's behavior makes it possible to explain possible deviations in his behavior from the requirements of the normative system of the group in which he is located. The reference group acts as a standard by which an individual can evaluate himself and others.

Informal groups, which are a variety of small groups, often emerge spontaneously, especially within large formal organizations. As the name implies, informal groups are characterized by friendly, intimate, trusting relationships. The decisive role in their formation belongs to the likes and dislikes of people, the commonality of their interests, outlook on life, attitude.

primary and secondary groups. The American sociologist Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929) used the term primary group to denote a small association of people bound by bonds of an emotional nature.

Primary groups are understood as groups in which each member of the group sees the other as a person and individuality (family, friendly company). In secondary groups, social contacts are impersonal. Personal contacts are not required, but all are functional (foreman and worker, student and teacher). The opinion of the primary group is very important for the self-assessment of the individual, understanding his real status in society. If we keep in mind the role of primary groups in the life of society as a whole, then here we can note two of their most important functions. Firstly, the unique value in the socialization of the individual and, secondly, as the most important means of social control. Entirely, sharing the norms and values ​​of the primary groups, the individual at the same time is very sensitive to the opinions, assessments and perceptions of people from his immediate environment regarding his own behavior. These people become for him "significant others", against whom he compares his daily activities and at the same time falls under informal social control by the primary group.

According to the views of C. Cooley, the opposite of the primary group are secondary groups, in which there are no close intimate and trusting relationships. In the secondary groups, among which he attributed large social groups, organizations and institutions, formal-role, official relations predominate. secondary group represents a number of people who meet regularly, but whose relationships are mostly impersonal. Individuals in secondary groups do not have close ties to each other, and usually come together for specific practical purposes. Committees and clubs are good examples of secondary groups.

Small groups- it elementary particle society. In it, social relations appear in the form of direct, personal contacts. Small groups can be either primary or secondary. The opposite of small groups are large groups, such as social strata, classes, organizations, enterprises, territorial settlements (city, village), national-ethnic groups, states, associations of states.

The formation of a group is influenced, firstly, by its size, or number. The minimum number - two people, or a dyad (for example, a family of 2 people, mother and daughter, son and father), makes it possible to jointly act and solve the simplest problems. In the primary group, the individual fully reveals himself in an intimate-confiding relationship. Psychologists call this phenomenon “representation of consciousness”, thus emphasizing that the individual reveals his innermost thoughts and desires in personal communication. Communication and life activity in the primary groups allow you to relieve stress and tension, anxieties, anxiety that modern people suffer from excessive socio-psychological overload at work.

Small groups are relatively independent subjects of social relations. On the one hand, they reflect in themselves those social relations in which they are organically included, and refract them into peculiar intra-group relations, on the other hand, a network of emotional, psychological relations arises on the basis of personal contacts between members of the group.

The sphere of collective behavior. Collective behavior according to G. Bloomer

Society is based on the constant activity of social actors and their joint actions, manifested in different forms collective behavior, such as crowds, gatherings, panic moods, manias, dance crazes, panic, moods, manias, spontaneous mass movements, mass behavior, public opinion, propaganda, hobbies, social movements, revolutions, reforms.

According to Bloomer, collective behavior is based on common meanings, expectations, formed by meaningful symbols that are shared by a group of individuals: “the vast majority of collective behavior of people is explained by their common expectations and understanding,” the sociologist notes. When significant symbols are destroyed, spontaneous interactions arise - rallies, panic over the exchange of banknotes, the passions of a crowd of fans, etc.

Spontaneous collective behavior arises in conditions of violation of established meanings, habitual significant symbols that regulate established, constantly ongoing social activities. Then there is a certain form of social interaction, which is called a circular reaction. The excitation of one individual is transmitted to another, acquiring a circular form, while they tend to intensify and thus social anxiety arises. It is found in labor conflicts, political protests; may be limited to small people, but may also cover vast regions: 1) people feel a strong urge to act, but do not have clear goals, which leads to erratic behavior; 2) there are fears, increased aggressiveness, rumors and exaggerations spread; 3) there is irritability and increased suggestibility, behavior is deprived of its usual consistency and stability, which contributes to responses to various new symbols and meanings, stimuli and ideas. Social anxiety, on the one hand, testifies to the collapse of established meanings, the collapse of the usual life structure, and on the other hand, to the potential for the perception of new symbols and meanings. In the absence of stable connections and expectations, and with one-sided interactions, groups arise in groups called quasigroups s.

They can turn into social groups if, in the course of constant interaction, the degree of social control between its members increases. This requires some degree of cooperation and solidarity. It is the control over the activities of the collective that defines it as a social group, because activity of people in this case is coordinated. Solidarity is essential in a group. Only if it is present, members of the group can say "WE", stable bonds are formed in the group and the boundaries of social control. The higher the level of control, the faster the quasi-group turns into a social group.

Quasigroups have the following distinguishing features:

The spontaneity of education;

Instability of interaction;

Lack of diversity in relationships (this is either the reception or transmission of information);

The short duration of joint actions.

Quasi-groups either quickly disintegrate or turn into groups. Types of quasigroups:

1) Audience I am a social community of people united by interaction with a communicator (an individual or a group that owns information and brings it to this community).

2) Crowd is a temporary meeting of people united in a closed physical space by a common interest. His social structure: the leader and everyone else. Crowd Characteristics:

suggestibility (people in a crowd are more likely to accept the feelings and actions of the majority);

anonymity (members of the crowd do not stand out and do not perceive themselves as separate individuals);

Spontaneity (the behavior of people in a crowd depends solely on emotions);

Invulnerability (because people in the crowd are anonymous, they begin to feel out of social control, such as football fans after a match).

Types of crowds are subdivided depending on the way they form and behave:

a) a random crowd;

b) conditioned crowd (theater, stadium);

c) expressive crowd (dances, religious gatherings);

d) the acting crowd (the whole complex of crowd action) is the most destructive in relation to society.

Social circles are social communities created for the purpose of exchanging information between its members. The main function of social circles is to exchange views, news, and arguments.

Conclusion: Society in its concrete life reality acts as a set of many different groups. Each person is social insofar as he is a member of various social groups and performs various functions in them. A group is a collection of people who are united on the basis of joint activities, common goals. It has its own system of life orientations, norms of behavior, morality, culture and psychology, thanks to which the individual develops a special sense of belonging to this group “we are a group”.

Lesson number 6: Personality in the system of social interaction (socialization of personality).

Target: to give an idea of ​​the patterns of social behavior and activities of individuals, to reveal the influence of social factors on the formation and development of personality.

1. Concept, structure, types and theories of personality.

2 Socialization of the individual

Basic concepts: Personality, individual, person. Sociological interpretation of personality. The theory of "mirror I" Ch. Cooley D. Mead. Personality concepts. Personality structure: values, norms, needs, motives, interests, statuses, roles, behavior. Socialization: concept, types, stages, factors, institutions. The concepts of "resocialization", "desocialization", "globalization". Stages and institutions of socialization. Primary and secondary socialization. Factors of socialization: social environment, formal and informal institutions, objective and subjective.

1. Concept, structure, types and theories of personality.

Personality is one of the main concepts in sociology. It emphasizes the unnatural, social essence of a person and denotes the totality of social qualities and the social essence of a person. What are the social qualities of a person? This is a set of social properties and personality traits, interconnected and determined by the type of social interaction with other people in specific socio-historical conditions and circumstances. Personality is a relatively stable and holistic system of social qualities that characterize a given individual acquired and developed by him in the process of interaction with other people and are a product of social development. . The structure of the personality is the ratio of certain areas of the individual, formed and manifested in activity - need-motivational, status-role, value-normative.

Types of needs:

1) vital, organic needs of a living organism;

2) social;

3) spiritual (creative, cognitive, moral).

An important social characteristic of a personality is its interests. They act as a constant incentive mechanism for the cognition and activity of the individual, pushing the individual to a deeper acquaintance with new facts, events, theories in any sphere of reality, to transform the latter in accordance with their needs, goals, ideas.

Status- the position of the individual in the social structure, determined by various characteristics (professional, demographic, etc.). Each individual has his own status set. Robert Merton introduced a special concept into sociology - « status set », used to denote the totality of the statuses of a given individual. The status set is the whole set of statuses that characterize this person in the variety of his interactions with other personalities in terms of fulfilling his rights and obligations. Types of statuses (T. Parsons): 1) main - defining style, way of life, singled out by an individual as the main status in life;

2) the main one - allocated from the individual by others as the main one. They differ as: personal - achieved by an individual in a small group; prescribed - given from birth; attainable - acquired through personal efforts and luck; mixed - status, where the features of achieved and prescribed statuses are mixed; 3) minor - episodically performed status.

Role is a status-oriented behavior model; system of prescriptions dependent on status. In the structure of the role, there are (Cooley, Mead) - expected behavior and performance. In case of discrepancy between status and role prescriptions, a role conflict arises. The reasons are insufficient role training or inconsistency of the internal attitudes of the personality with the requirements of the role. Types - inter-role or intra-role conflicts.

Social value is an object that can satisfy a social/individual need; significant social goals and ideas. Formed based on needs and interests. Types - social, spiritual, material, political, etc. Values ​​are the basis of social assessments. A way of fixing values ​​is norms. Norms are rules of conduct, expectations and standards that govern interactions between people. How many types of activities, so many types of norms.

Theories of personality. The behavioral concept of personality considers personality as a system of reactions to various stimuli (J. Homans, B. Skinner), where a person is a reactive being exposed to the influence of the external environment. Z. Freud's concept: considers a personal conflict as a struggle between a person's internal needs and the possibility of their implementation in a socially acceptable form. The model of coordinating instinct and will determines the type of personality. Personality is a system of needs, society is a system of control. In the structure of the personality, he singled out the unconscious layer - IT, ID (instincts, desires), Consciousness-I and Super-I (norms of society), Super-Ego. Identification takes place not with the "favorable", but with the beloved, which gives rise to aggression towards strangers. Sigmund Freud in his works puts forward the theory that a child becomes an autonomous being in the event that he succeeds in learning to balance the demands of the environment and the powerful drives of the subconscious. Our capacity for self-awareness develops painfully, by suppressing unconscious impulses.

Dispositional theory of personality - W. Thomas, F. Znanetsky, V.A. Poisons. Disposition - the predisposition of the individual to a certain perception of the conditions of activity and to behavior in these conditions. According to J. G. Mead, the child becomes aware of himself as a separate being by observing how others behave towards him. Later, by participating in games and learning the rules of the game, the child comes to understand the "generalized other" - common values ​​and cultural norms.

V dramatic model, used by Goffman, social life is seen as a play performed by actors on a stage or on many stages, since how we act is determined by the role currently being played. People are extremely receptive to how others see them, in many ways they try to manage the impression that they want to produce on others, and to achieve the desired reactions. While this is sometimes done consciously, we usually manage the impression we are trying to make on others unconsciously. Almost anyone will dress and behave differently at a business meeting than they would at a football game they came to relax with friends.

Personality types: Kardiner: basic personality - a type that meets the basic conditions for the development of society; modal - typical, a person with common features for a given society; normative - the standard, the ideal of society. Theoretical type - aimed at the knowledge of reality; aesthetic - absolutizing the individual with its individual characteristics; economic - seeks to achieve the greatest result at the lowest cost; political - striving for power, domination and influence; social - the meaning of life for him in communication; religious - each phenomenon correlates with the general meaning of life and the world. R. Dahrendorf - "working man" in a traditional society; "consumer" of modern mass society, "universal" - capable of various types of activities, "Soviet" - dependent on the state.

2. Socialization of the individual.

Socialization- the process of mastering by the individual the norms, values, standards of behavior of the society surrounding him. A very significant beginning through which the socialization of the individual is carried out is its identification.Identity- this is such a social quality that is the result of a conscious and emotional self-identification of an individual with other people, a social community or an ideal through a selective and internally coordinated movement of information flows about himself as a unity of personal and at the same time social, interacting with other personalities and communities. Identity acts as a manifestation and result of identification - the process of identifying oneself with a certain ethnic, political, territorial, linguistic, religious, etc. group.

Sociology attaches great importance to the factors and agents of socialization. Agents socialization are people who teach others the norms: nannies, teachers, etc.

Socialization agents are structural groups or environments in which

the most important processes of socialization. In all cultures, the main agent of socialization

the child is the family. In addition, the agents of socialization are peer groups, the school and the media.

In all cultures family is the main socializing agent for the child. However, in the later stages of life, many other agents of socialization come into play. Another important agent of socialization is peer group, a friendly group of children of about the same age. In some cultures, especially in smaller traditional societies, peer groups are formalized according to age gradation. Each generation has certain rights and responsibilities, they change as they grow older. Relationships with peers often remain important throughout a person's life. This is especially true for settlements with low mobility, where individuals can be members of the same informal group or have the same group of friends for almost their entire lives. Even when this is not the case, peer relationships seem to have a significant impact beyond childhood and adolescence. Informal groups of people of the same age at work, and in other situations, usually turn out to be very important in shaping the attitudes and habits of the individual. Peer groups are often formed at school, and the age-based grade system reinforces their influence. Formal schooling reduces the influence that the family and peer group have in the process of socialization. To educate means to consciously teach skills and values. In addition, the school educates in a less visible way, forming attitudes and norms through the “hidden program”.

The most important factors of socialization are: 1) biological(in particular, the biological heredity of the individual); 2) psychological(influence on the process of socialization of temperament, character, abilities of an emerging personality, etc.); 3) social(economic, political, in particular, state structure, cultural).

Types of socialization- 1) primary (carried out in childhood, in a small group); 2) secondary (in adulthood, when the individual is able to independently assess the content of socialization). Resocialization- the process when an individual re-learns the content of socialization. In some situations, adults may experience resocialization, i.e., the destruction of previously accepted values ​​and behavior patterns of the individual, followed by the assimilation of values ​​that are radically different from the previous ones. One such situation is being in carceral organizations: clinics for the mentally ill, prisons, barracks, in any place separated from the outside world, where people are subject to new harsh rules and requirements. Changes in worldview in situations of extreme tension can be quite dramatic. The study of such critical situations gives us the opportunity to more deeply understand the processes of socialization that take place under normal conditions. Resocialization begins at the moment when the individual begins to model new behavioral traits in himself, modeled on the basis of the person.

Desocialization- the process of loss by an individual of social skills and norms of behavior.

J. Piaget came to the conclusion that a person goes through several stages of cognitive development, i.e. learning to think about to himself and his environment. At each stage, new skills are acquired, which, in turn, depend on the successful completion of the previous stage.

First stage - sensorimotor- lasts from birth to two years. Until about four months old, the infant is not able to separate himself from his environment. For example, a child does not understand that the walls of his crib are shaking from the fact that he is shaking them himself. The baby does not distinguish objects from people and is completely unaware that anything can exist outside of his field of vision. As evidenced by the works we have reviewed earlier, children gradually learn to distinguish people from objects, discovering that both exist independently of their direct perception by the children themselves. Piaget calls this stage sensorimotor, because babies learn primarily through touching, manipulating, and physically exploring their environment. The main achievement of this stage is the understanding of the child that the world has different and stable properties.

The next phase, called preoperative stage, is one of those to which Piaget devoted most of his research. This stage lasts from two to seven years of age, when children acquire language and acquire the ability to use words to represent objects and images in a symbolic way. For example, a four-year-old child may spread his arms to convey the idea of ​​an “airplane”. Piaget calls this stage the preoperational stage because children are not yet able to use their developing mental abilities systematically. At this stage, children egocentric. Piaget's use of this concept does not refer to egoism, but rather to the child's desire to interpret the world solely in terms of his own position. He does not understand, for example, that others see things from a different perspective than his own. Holding a book in front of him, the child can ask about the picture in it, not imagining that the person sitting opposite can only see the back of the book.

At the preoperational stage, children are not able to maintain a coherent conversation with each other. In egocentric speech, what each child says is more or less independent of what the previous one said. Children talk together, but not one another in the same way as adults. At this stage of development, children do not yet understand the general categories of thinking, such as randomness, speed, weight, or number. Watching how liquid is poured from a high and narrow vessel into a low and wide one, the child does not understand that the volume of water has remained the same. It seems to him that there is less water, because the level has become lower.

Third stage, period specific operations lasts from seven to eleven years. Children in this phase master abstract logical concepts. They are able to perceive such an idea as an accident without much difficulty. A child at this age understands the fallacy of the idea that a wide vessel contains less water than a narrow one, despite the fact that the water levels are different. It is capable of performing mathematical operations of multiplication, division and subtraction. At this stage, children are less egocentric. If at the pre-operational stage a girl is asked: “How many sisters do you have?”, she will be able to correctly answer “one”. But if you ask, “How many sisters does your sister have?”, she will most likely answer “None,” because she cannot perceive herself from her sister’s point of view. At the stage of concrete operations, the child is able to easily answer such questions correctly.

The period from eleven to fifteen is, according to Piaget, the period formal operations. During adolescence, the child acquires the ability to understand extremely abstract and hypothetical ideas. When faced with a problem, children at this stage are able to go through all the possible solutions and evaluate them theoretically in order to get an answer. At the stage of formal operations, a teenager is also able to understand tasks “with a catch”. To the question “What creature is a dog and a poodle at the same time?” he may not give the correct answer (“poodle”), but he will understand why this answer is correct and appreciate the humor.

According to Piaget, the first three stages of development are universal, but not all adults reach the stage of formal operations. The development of formal-operational thinking partly depends on the level of education. Adults without a sufficient level of education, as a rule, continue to think in more concrete terms and retain a significant amount of egocentrism.

Conclusion: Personality - social entity a person, the totality of all his social qualities, manifested in social experience (psychological characteristics that are significant for society). Personality is the subject and product of social relations, socialization. In the process of socialization, people learn cultural norms and master social roles, i.e., acquire their social "I".

Lecture number 7. Topic: Social inequality and social mobility. Social structure and social stratification

Target: reveal the essence and nature of social inequality, consider the historical types and causes of stratification, give an idea of ​​the dynamics of stratification processes in Kazakhstan.

1. Social inequality: concept, theory.

2. Stratification: typology.

3. Social mobility.

Basic concepts.

The concept of the social structure of society. Study methodology: theories of P. Sorokin, M. Weber. Theories of social stratification. Types and criteria of stratification. The theory of the middle class. social groups. Socio-demographic, settlement structures. Classes and strata in Kazakhstan. Sociology of entrepreneurship. Trends in the development of the social structure of Kazakhstan. The market and the formation of class stratification. Problems of the formation of the middle class in Kazakhstan. Poverty. Standard of living.

1. Social inequality: concept, theory.

Inequality exists in human societies of all types. Even in the most primitive cultures, where property differences between people are almost non-existent, there is an inequality between individuals, men and women, young and old. A person may have a high status because, for example, he behaves bravely in hunting, or because he (or she) has, in the opinion of other members of the tribe, the ability to communicate with the spirits of his ancestors. Describing social inequality, sociologists talk about social stratification. Stratification can be defined as structured differences between groups of people. For greater clarity, stratification can be represented as a kind of geological layers. Societies are also made up of strata arranged in a hierarchical order, with the privileged near the top and the unprivileged at the bottom.

The source of the formation of stratification is the social redistribution of the results of labor, social benefits. Stratification- it hierarchically organized structure of social inequality.

Theory of Karl Marx

Marx was born in Germany but spent most of his life in the UK. His ideas have always been controversial, but their importance is recognized throughout the world. Many authors (including Max Weber), rejecting the political views of Marx, largely repelled from his ideas.

Most of Marx's works are connected with the theme of stratification and, above all, with the concept of social class, although, oddly enough, he did not give a systematic analysis of this concept. The manuscript that Marx worked on until his death (later published as part of his major work Capital) breaks off at the question: “What makes up a class?” Thus, the Marxist understanding of class must be reconstructed from its heritage as a whole. Because his many references to class are not always consistent, scholars are constantly debating what Marx really meant. However, the main provisions of his concept are clear enough.

The interests of small businesses and owners or managers of large corporations also differ significantly. For Marx, a class is a group of people who are in the same relation to means of production, by which they ensure their existence. Before the emergence of modern industry, the main means of production were land and tools used in agriculture and cattle breeding. The main classes of pre-industrial societies were the owners of the land (the aristocracy, the small estate nobility and slave owners), and those who directly worked on it (free peasants and slaves). In modern industrial societies, factories, offices, industrial equipment, and the capital needed to acquire them are becoming more important. The two main classes now are those who own such means of production, i.e. the industrialists or capitalists, and those who make a living by selling their labor - working class, or, to use Marx's own somewhat archaic term, "the proletariat."

According to Marx, relations between classes have the character of exploitation. In feudal societies, exploitation often took the form of direct production by peasants for aristocrats. The serfs were obliged to give part of the harvest to their overlords or work out a certain number of days on the master's field every month in order to provide for the masters and their entourage. In modern capitalist society, the source of exploitation is not so obvious, and Marx devotes considerable attention to clarifying its nature. During the working day, according to Marx, workers produce more than their employers need to pay them. This surplus value and there is the desired source of profit, which the capitalists can use for their own needs. For example, a group of workers in a garment factory can make a hundred suits a day. The sale of half of them gives the entrepreneur sufficient funds to pay the wages of the workers. Income from the sale of the rest of the clothing is withdrawn as profit.

Marx was shocked by the inequality generated by the capitalist system. Although in earlier times aristocrats also lived in luxury and peasants in poverty, agricultural societies were generally not rich. Even if there were no aristocracy, the standard of living would remain low. With modern industry, material goods began to be produced on a scale that was previously unimaginable. However, workers have almost no access to the fruits of their labour. They are still in poverty, while the wealth of the owners is growing. Moreover, with the advent of modern factories and the mechanization of production, work often acquires a monotonous routine character, which has an extremely depressing effect on the worker. Work. serving as a source of wealth, often exhausts the worker physically and dulls him - and in this respect it is no better than manual labor in former factories, when day after day in the same room it was necessary to do the same operations over and over again.

Marx speaks of only two main social classes: the class of owners of the means of production and the class of those who have no property. However, he understands that real-life class systems are much more complex than the model he proposed. According to Marx, in addition to the two main classes, there are so-called transition classes. These are the class groups that have survived from the old production systems and that may still exist for a very long time after the old systems have collapsed. For example, in some modern Western societies (such as France, Spain or Italy for most of this century), a significant part of the population is the peasantry, whose work has hardly changed since feudal times.

Marx pays great attention to stratification within classes. Here are some examples of such a bundle:

In the upper class environment, a conflict often arises between financial capital (bankers) and industrialists.

in the interests of big business, is not always beneficial to small.

Within the working class there are people who remain unemployed for a long time, and their living conditions are much worse than those of most other workers. As a rule, these groups consist mainly of representatives of ethnic minorities.

The Marxist concept of class points to economic inequality, which is an objective factor in social organization. Class affiliation is determined not by people's perception of their social position, but by objective conditions that allow some groups to receive preferential access to material goods compared to others.

Weber's approach to the topic of stratification is based on the analysis of Marx's ideas, which he developed and modified. There are two major differences between the two theories. First, Weber, while agreeing with Marx's notion of the relation of class to objective economic conditions, believes that class formation is influenced by many more factors than Marx could see. According to Weber, the division into classes is determined not only by the presence or absence of control over the means of production, but also by economic differences that are not directly related to property. Among these determining factors, first of all, are skills and qualifications that affect the ability of a given person to perform a particular job. People belonging to the categories of professionals and managers also work for hire, but they earn more, their working conditions are better than those of workers. Qualification certificates, academic degrees, titles, diplomas and professional training received put them in a better position in the labor market compared to those who do not have the appropriate diplomas. Similarly, among workers, experienced and well-trained workers earn more than low-skilled or unskilled workers.

Secondly, in addition to class, Weber identifies two more important aspects of stratification. He named one status, to another - the consignment. In fact, Weber adapted the concept of a status group, drawn by him from the analysis of medieval estates (in German, both concepts are denoted by the same word -Stand).

M. Weber identified three signs of inequality - wealth, power, prestige. Wealth is the totality of income and potentially liquid values. Power is the ability to achieve a goal despite the resistance of others. Prestige is the degree of respect for status in public opinion. He defined the concept of "class" - "a set of status groups that occupy similar market positions and have similar life chances."

concept status associated with varying degrees of social prestige of the respective social groups. The distinguishing features of a particular status may change regardless of class division; while social prestige can be both positive and negative. Positively privileged status groups include people with high prestige within this social system. For example, doctors and lawyers have high prestige in English society. Negatively privileged status groups are pariah groups. It is they who become victims of discrimination that closes for them the opportunities available to other groups. In medieval Europe, such pariahs were Jews who were forbidden to engage in certain activities and, in particular, to hold public office.

The possession of wealth is usually associated with high status, but there are many exceptions, as evidenced, for example, by the existing term “noble poverty”. In the UK, people from aristocratic families continue to enjoy honor and respect, even after losing all their wealth. On the contrary, the “new rich” are often treated with disdain by members of the traditional upper class.

If class affiliation is an objective characteristic, then status, on the contrary, depends on people's subjective assessments of social differences. Classes are associated with economic factors - property and income, status is determined by various lifestyles relevant groups.

In modern societies, Weber points out, parties are becoming an important instrument of power, which influence stratification, regardless of class and status. A “party” is defined as a group of people who work together because they have common origins, goals and interests. Marx explained the emergence of various statuses and parties using the concept of class. However, Weber believes that neither the formation of status nor the emergence of parties can be explained only from the point of view of the class approach, although a certain influence of classes is obvious here. In turn, both status and party affiliation can have a very significant effect on the economic conditions of life of individuals and groups, and hence classes. Parties may appeal to emotions that run counter to class distinctions, for example, they may be based on religious affiliation or nationalist ideas. A Marxist may try to explain the conflict between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in terms of class struggle, since there are more Catholics among the workers. However, a follower of Weber will find this explanation unsatisfactory, since many Protestants also come from the working class. The parties to which these people belong reflect both class and religious differences.

Weber's work on stratification shows that other types of stratification significantly affect people's lives, in addition to class.

A special theoretical explanation based on the analysis of vast empirical material was given by P.A. Sorokin (1889-1968). Labor - "Social stratification and mobility", 1927. P.A. Sorokin considered the world as a social space filled with social connections and relationships of people, which form a multidimensional coordinate system that determines the social position of any person. It distinguishes two coordinate axes - the X-axis (measurement of horizontal mobility), the Y-axis (measurement of vertical mobility). Stratification describes the stratification of people into classes and hierarchical ranks due to the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, power and influence. Stratification, in his opinion, is an objective phenomenon in the life of society, generated by anthropological and social factors: the division of labor, power relations and the institution of leadership, cultural norms, the scientist believed. Universal forms of stratification - economic, political, professional. Stratification measurements - income, own, power,education, qualification, prestige.Strata- the social stratum of people who have objectively similar indicators on 4 scales of stratification. The concept of "stratum" came from geology, where it refers to the vertical arrangement of layers of various rocks. P. A. Sorokin singled out 3 criteria for stratification: 1) income level; 2) political status - access to power; 3) professional roles. For economic stratification, two phenomena are important, which Sorokin called fluctuations:

enrichment and impoverishment of a group or society;

decrease or increase in the height of the economic pyramid.

Fluctuations (oscillations) occur cyclically (for enrichment, impoverishment follows). Small cycles - 3-5 years; 7-8 years; 10-12 years old. Large cycles - 40-60 years, 500 years. Comparing the development of societies over 500 years on vast empirical materials, he found that there is no stable trend in the fluctuations in the height of the economic pyramid, the difference between the incomes of different strata of society has either increased or decreased over the past 500 years. Periodic fluctuations are 50, 100 and 150 years. World prices also fluctuate in history, which contributes to the redistribution of national income in favor of different strata. Another of his conclusions: when the stratification profile is excessively stretched, this means the appearance of excessive social stratification. The stratification profile is a graphic expression of the distribution of the upper, middle and lower classes. It looks like rhombuses - in rich European countries, pyramids - poor. When the stratification reaches its peak (80%), a social catastrophe follows - a revolutionary leveling fever.

Functionalism, developing the ideas of P. Sorokin, defined stratification as a differentiation of social roles and positions in society and an evolutionary universal - T. Parsons, K. Davis, W. Moore, E. Shils. T. Parsons identified universal criteria for stratification:

1) quality, i.e. prescribing a certain position to the individual - responsibility, competence;

2) performance - assessment of the activity of the individual in comparison with the activities of others, role characteristics;

3) possession of resources - material, cultural, etc. Both Sorokin and the functionalists positively assess the functional significance of stratification for society.

K. Davis, W. Moore believe that stratification is necessary for society to motivate individuals to move up and occupy key positions in management, to fulfill their functional duties. The importance of the functions performed serves as the basis for material and moral incentives. The most valuable positions are located at the top and should be filled by the most qualified, capable people. This is facilitated by the mechanism of upward mobility. In societies where there is no such mechanism, instability arises. Economic inequality and social hierarchy are functional, as they contribute to the concentration of resources and large investments in the economy, professional competition, and an increase in the quality of goods and services. The negative consequences of stratification are social tension, blocking the promotion of talented representatives of the lower classes by the elites.

L. Warner in the 40s 20th century singled out such parameters as income, prestige, professions, education, ethnicity and classified American society into 6 classes. B. Barber stratified by indicators: 1) prestige, profession, power and might; 2) income level; 3) level of education; 4) degree of religiosity; 5) the situation of relatives; 6) ethnicity.

Eric Olin Wright: class theory. The position of the American sociologist Eric Olin Wright is largely based on the teachings of Marx, but also includes a number of Weber's ideas. According to Wright's concept, there are three types of control over economic resources in modern capitalist production, which makes it possible to identify the main existing classes.

1. Control over investments or financial capital.

2. Control over the physical means of production (land, factories, offices).

3. Control over labor force and power.

That part of the population that belongs to the capitalist class controls at least one of these three components of the production system. Representatives of the working class are deprived of the ability to control anything. However, in addition to these most important classes, there are groups whose position is uncertain. For such people, says Wright, it is characteristic contradictory class position, since they are able to influence some aspects of production, but lack control over the rest. For example, white-collar knowledge workers sell their labor to entrepreneurs in the same way as ordinary (204) workers. But at the same time, they can control their working conditions to a greater extent than workers. Wright calls the class position of such workers "contradictory" because they are neither capitalists nor workers in class, but have features similar to each of these classes.

Frank Parkiy. The approach proposed by the British author Frank Parkin is based more on the teachings of Weber than Marx. Parkin, like Weber, agrees with Marx that the class structure is based on ownership of the means of production, but property, according to Parkin, is only one of the social barriers that can be monopolized by a minority and used to achieve power. The erection of social barriers can be defined as the process by which groups try to secure exclusive control over resources by restricting access to them. In addition to wealth and ownership of the means of production, according to Weber, status differences, such as ethnicity, language or religion, can be used to create social barriers.

Two types of processes underlie the formation of social barriers. The first is the strategy exceptions, with which groups manage to isolate strangers, blocking their access to valuable resources. Thus, for example, white labor unions in the United States used to exclude blacks from their ranks, thus seeking to secure their own privileges. To the second type usurpation - include attempts by less privileged strata to acquire resources previously owned by others; such was the struggle of the Negroes for equal rights in the trade unions.

In some circumstances, both strategies may be used simultaneously. Unions, for example, can act as usurpers of employers (by going on strike to increase their share of the firm's income), while at the same time they can exclude members of ethnic minorities from their ranks. Parkin call it double barrier.

Conflictologists, following Marx, believe that the class nature of political power determines the existing system of stratification (R. Dahrendorf). A class in the Marxist interpretation is “a large social group of people who own or do not own the means of production, occupy a certain place in the system of social division of labor and are characterized by a specific way of earning income.” The basis of social differentiation is the distribution of power and "authority". Actions for their redistribution causes an acute conflict at the macro and micro levels. A. Touraine considers that all previous stratification criteria are obsolete and highlights access to information as the main one. In empirical sociology, stratification is measured: 1) by the method of "class identification"; 2) reputation assessment method; 3) by socio-class socio-economic status (prestige of the profession, level of education and level of income.)

2. Stratification: typology.

E. Giddens distinguishes four main systems of stratification: slaveholding, caste, estate and class. Sometimes they coexist, for example, slavery and class in ancient Greece and Rome, as well as in the southern states of the United States before civil war. The basis of the system of slavery is the right to citizenship. Slaves had no citizenship and were forced to perform non-prestigious labor. (Dr. Rome, Greece). The caste type was based on tradition, consecrated by religion. Transfers from caste to another caste were forbidden, changes are possible only in the "after life" (Indian society). Estate type - the period of feudalism. The basis of differentiation is the legal consolidation by the state of the scope of rights and obligations for the estates, which are inherited. The upper classes - the nobility, the clergy. The lowest - artisans, merchants, peasants.

The class type appears with the development of capitalism and the growing role of economic stratification.

In the 1960s, John Goldthorpe and his colleagues made a famous study of the bourgeoisization hypothesis. The materials of the study, based on surveys of workers in the automobile and chemical enterprises of Luton, were published in 3 volumes. It is often cited as a study of the "wealthy worker". A total of 229 workers were interviewed, and 54 white-collar workers were taken for comparison. Many workers came to Luton in search of high-paying jobs, and compared to others, they actually received a lot more than the bulk of the lower white-collar workers.

The results of the study, according to the authors, were completely unambiguous - the thesis of bourgeoisization turned out to be false. No transition of these workers into the middle class was observed. All of them adhered to an “instrumental” (as defined by Goldthorpe and his group) attitude to work, considering it as a means subordinated to the only goal - to earn good money. Their work was mostly monotonous and uninteresting, and they did not put their soul into it at all. In their spare time with the middle class, they did not unite and did not burn with the desire to climb up the class ladder. Money was earned, as a rule, for the purpose of acquiring some specific goods or property.

Sociologists also distinguish the presence in the history of societies of physical-genetic and etacratic types of stratification, based on natural physical inclinations and political stratification (the basis of differentiation is position in the power hierarchy). Cultural-symbolic system of social stratification - a type of stratification system in which the basis of differentiation is sacred knowledge, information. The cultural-normative system of social stratification is a stratification system in which differentiation is based on norms of behavior, styles. Stratification by gender and age exists in all societies.

3. Social mobility.

In studying stratification, we must take into account not only the differences between possible economic or professional positions, but also what happens to people who occupy these positions. Term social mobility denotes the movement of individuals or groups through socio-economic positions. Vertical mobility means moving up or down the socioeconomic scale. Those who acquire new property, whose income and status rise, are said to be characterized by social advancement, upward mobility, but of those whose position changes in the opposite direction, downward mobility. In modern societies, it is also common horizontal mobility, which means geographical movement between districts, cities, etc. Vertical and horizontal mobility are often combined. For example, a person who is in the service of a company is transferred to a higher position in a branch of the company located in another city or even country.

There are two ways to study social mobility. First of all, we can watch someone's career - to see how much a person has moved up or down the social scale during his professional life. This is commonly referred to as intragenerational mobility, i.e. mobility within a generation. On the other hand, we can analyze how often children follow the example of their parents or grandfathers in choosing a profession. Mobility across generations is called intergenerational mobility. Mobility channels (Sorokin) - army, school, church, marriage, political and professional organizations, property.

Many people believe that anyone can reach the top if they work hard; The numbers, however, show that very few succeed. Why is it so difficult? In a way, the answer is simple. Even in the most dynamic society, where everyone has an equal chance of reaching the top positions, only a minority can really do it. The socio-economic order of society resembles a pyramid, where the number of top positions associated with power, wealth or influence is relatively small.

Conclusion: As in most traditional societies, so in modern industrialized countries, stratification is seen in terms of wealth, property, characterized by access to material goods and cultural values.

The structure of inequality reflects the social disposition in which different subjects occupy certain (in relation to other subjects) positions. Inequality is an objective and naturally formed fact of the social life of societies. Social mobility is the transition from one social position to another social object, value.

Lecture number 8. Culture as a factor of social change

A study of the history of sociology leads to the conclusion that sociological thought fundamentally tries to answer two fundamental questions (or two main scientific problems):

1. How is society possible? What makes a society coherent, stable whole? How is social order possible?

2. What is the nature of the relationship between society as an ordered structure or system, and the individuals acting in it?

The very nature of the questions reflects the fundamental dualism of man's attitude to reality. On the one hand, every person is free, at any moment, in principle, he can act in a different way than he did before. But, on the other hand, people quite strongly feel the dependence on their social position, on the prevailing circumstances. The problem in general is to understand how individuals and social institutions interact and relate to each other.

The answer to the first fundamental question makes it possible to single out at least two trends in sociology.

Supporters of the structural-functional approach believe that society develops into a stable integrity automatically, thanks to the process of self-regulation (like biological organisms), when its various parts (economy, state, family, school, etc.) perform complementary functions and thereby contribute to social integration. The functional explanation was most fully developed by the American sociologist T. Parsons and his followers.

Other sociologists are working in what has come to be known as conflict theory (or power theory). This trend is associated primarily with the name of the German sociologist and philosopher K. Marx and his followers. According to this approach, the natural state of society is the conflict between different people, groups and organizations, each of which seeks power. In this struggle, the privileged minority, which controls the most important resources of society, is most likely to organize and equip society in accordance with their interests.

The answer to the second fundamental question also allows us to distinguish two different trends in sociology.

Some sociologists - supporters of the so-called structural (or structuralist) approach - believe that the behavior of an individual and a group is explained by social circumstances and the social structure in which they are located, behavior is a product and derivative of the social system. The main provisions of the structural direction were most clearly formulated by the French sociologist E. Durkheim.

Other sociologists - supporters of the so-called theory of action - believe that the social system, the social world is created by people living in this world. It is a mistake to view society as a rigid external structure. Society arises from the actions of individuals, acting individuals endow their actions with meaning, strive for a certain goal. And although these actions are socially conditioned, they do not become rigidly programmed from this. Human behavior is a creative process, based on how people interpret and direct the social circumstances at hand. Accordingly, it is necessary to understand, to grasp the meaning of human actions. This direction in sociology (sometimes called understanding sociology) is based on the ideas of the German sociologists M. Weber and G. Simmel.

Understanding sociology is represented by a number of theories that describe how people come into contact with reality and define it. Thus, in the theory called symbolic interactionism (D. Mead, G. Bloomer), one of the key concepts is the concept of "situation definition". Its proponents emphasize the meaning that individuals entering into interaction (interaction) put into their actions.

The theoretical concept, called ethnomethodology (G. Garfinkel), proceeds from the fact that social life is based on unconscious rules. The sociologist must try to discover these invisible rules by deliberately breaking them, but in such a way that the "victim" is not made aware of it.

In the so-called dramatic concept (E. Hoffmann), developed within the framework of understanding sociology, the metaphor of the theater, the social teamwork of people, is the base; society is presented as a huge theater. Human teamwork, according to Hoffmann, manifests itself as one large symbolic joint action, and society as a series of situations in which people interact, impress and explain themselves to themselves and others.

The considered theoretical models interpret social actions and social relations in different ways. Thus, sociology appears as a polyparadigmatic science. This means that modern sociology offers many explanations for the same social processes, while maintaining not only tolerance for the views and conclusions of various research schools and directions, but also supporting the desire of sociologists to find a harmonious combination of different approaches, conclusions, interpretations regarding individual phenomena. or events.

Control questions

1. Sociology as a science emerges...

A) in the III century;

B) at the end of the 16th century;

C) in the middle of the 19th century;

D) at the beginning of the 20th century.

2. Who is the founder of sociology?

A) M. Weber;

B) Auguste Comte;

C) K. Marx;

D) Aristotle.

3. Sociology studies...

A) a person

B) Society as an integral system;

C) labor processes;

D) Individual properties of people.

4. Understanding sociology is called ...

A) the theory of social action;

B) Theory of power;

B) Psychoanalytic sociology;

D) Sociology of mass communications.

5. The object of sociology is ...

A) social space - that part of social reality where social phenomena exist and social processes take place;

B) a set of individuals living in the same territory;

The French sociologist Claude Levi-Strauss is considered one of the founders of modern structuralism. He specialized in the study of primitive American societies in the Amazon. The method that he uses in his research is to analyze the structures of thought and social relations: the rules of marriage, degrees of kinship, mythologies, totems (prohibitions), rituals, masks, norms for the exchange of goods, information, etc. Classifying these structures, he determines the place of each in the social structure of society. Thus, it becomes possible to compare different societies according to their social structures.

However, R. Merton's social structure has a more complex structure than the social structure of K. Levi-Strauss. First, it is multidimensional and multilevel and includes different types interactions: statuses and roles, role and status attitudes, norms, values, institutions, organizations, group interests. Secondly, the social structure, according to Merton, is not balanced, but asymmetric and provides for contradictions, deviations from the norm of individual elements, parts, tensions, conflicts, ambivalence. Merton notes that the complexity and ambivalence of the social structure of society, the contradictions of interests and values ​​of individual parts give rise to social conflicts.

Symbolic interactionism- this is the interaction of individuals with the help of symbols, this is the understanding of society as the sum of the interactions of interacting individuals.

C. Cooley considered the interaction of people to be derived from their ideas about each other. A society consisting of the sum of personal and group interactions will not be a social reality, but, as it were, a set of ideas about this reality, that is, about people, their connections, objects of the real world, etc.

These ideas were developed by G. Bloomer (1900-?). He argued that the individual, endowing the surrounding people and objects with meaning, thus creates the world. For him, the world is what he imagines it to be. It follows that social action is more a construction than a reaction, a response to the stimuli of the external world.

Society for H. Bloomer is not an objective real structure where a person should know his place (as in T. Parsons, for example), but a constant process of interactions between constructively creative individuals. These individuals, interacting, create situations. It is on how they interpret these situations that their individual or collective actions depend (and not on the fact that some external social forces cause certain behavior of individuals).

As we can see, in symbolic interactionism the personality is not only not lost, but moreover, it acquires self-contained meaning. The world created by people's ideas, interaction based on symbols is subjective. And the social action of the individual depends entirely on his ideas about the real world, and not on the actual state of affairs.

Among the modern representatives of interactionism, the most famous are C. Morris, I. Hoffman, M. Buber.

Phenomenology

The foundations of the phenomenological vision of the world were laid by the German philosopher Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), who, on the one hand, considered the world as a subjective process that affects the individual, causing her "stream of consciousness"; on the other hand, Husserl's slogan "Back to the objects themselves!" meant the separation of the consciousness of the individual from the objective world, and the objects of this world - from the causal and functional relationships between them. Such a “pure” consciousness (that is, not connected with previous experience, interpretation of subject relations, ideological attitudes) creates a purely semantic field with "pure" objects (i.e., the connections of consciousness with the object are semantic, but not causal and not functional). Therefore, the knowledge of the objective world is not aimed at the perception of the properties and functions of the object being known, but at the process of perception itself. It follows from this that it does not matter to the researcher whether the world really exists and what he perceives: objective objects or unreal images, mirages, hallucinations. The main thing is that the subject should feel the "weaving of experiences in the unity of the flow" of the world and consciousness.

Husserl called this method of cognition "methodological reduction", or "bracketing", which in English means "bracketing". In this case, the question is put in brackets: “Does a person or the surrounding world really exist?” Getting rid of this intractable question, Husserl focuses on studying the connection of consciousness with surrounding objects.

The stream of subjective consciousness in everyday life comes into contact with the objective world. The points of contact are the phenomena. Unlike the phenomenon, which indicates the essence hiding behind it, the phenomenon is self-sufficient, although not always visible to the "naked" eye. Phenomena are revealed for the individual in the process of reflection, i.e. a special type of experience aimed at maintaining the connection between consciousness and the objective world.

Thus, Husserl denied the objectivist view of the world, but at the same time did not reduce it to purely subjective sensations. He tried to find an answer to the question: “How does a particular subject see subjectively, and how does the real world, acting on all subjects, appear objectively?”

The founder of sociological phenomenology was the Austrian sociologist Alfred Schutz, who emigrated in 1939 to the USA.

Psychological direction

In the first third of the XX century. The Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud (1856-1839) created his theory of psychoanalysis. He partially transferred his psychological ideas to sociology. According to Freud, human social behavior is determined by unconscious sexual impulses (libido) and the interaction of motivating unconscious impulses caused by these impulses and embedded in human consciousness through the socialization of behavioral norms.

The nature of society, according to Freud, is determined by the struggle of the life instinct (Eros) and the death instinct (Thanatos), as well as the struggle of individuals with existing social relations. The struggle between unconscious and conscious instincts determines the collision of individuals and groups, the functioning of organizations and institutions. This struggle, the source of which is sexual instincts, as well as non-sexual feelings (love, friendship, which ultimately also have a sexual nature) and interests (labor, social), is the driving force of society.

Views 3. Freud was developed (and modified) by Erich Fromm (1900-1980), a representative of the so-called Frankfurt School, one of the founders of neo-Freudianism. Sociology E. Fromm combines the views of 3. Freud, K. Marx and M. Scheler. According to From, the history of human society is the formation and development of human personalities in a hostile environment that suppresses the personality of a social structure. The links between the psyche of people and the social structure are social characters, i.e., a set of certain traits developed on the basis of the human psyche under the influence of the social environment (compare with 3. Freud). Fromm typologizes social characters into hoarding, exploitative, passive, market (compare with M. Scheler).

Fromm defines contemporary society as alien to man, alienating him from "human" relations through "machinization", "robotization", "computerization" (compare with K. Marx). Fromm considered the society of "humanistic communitarian socialism" to be ideal.

Among other modern representatives of the psychological direction in sociology, A. Adler, G. Sullivan, M. Mead, G. Marcuse and others are best known.

Action theory

At the center of Parsons' concept is the phenomenon of human action, by which he understands social behavior that is internally motivated, oriented towards an external goal and subject to normative regulators. Each action has its own internal structure, consists of a number of elements and at the same time represents a social integrity in relation to the external social environment. The action is not only immersed in the situation, but also directed to the future. It is subject not only to the biophysical needs of the human body, but also to the value orientations of a person as a person. Human actions, as a rule, are not chaotic, not chaotic, but directed, organized, framed by the influence of internal and external social factors. Three systems - personal, cultural and social - participate in this design. The value orientation of human actions is determined by the need to navigate in the problematic Spaces of alternative factors and states. Parsons identifies several varieties of such key alternatives: 1) affectivity - neutrality (submit to a natural impulse or resist temptation); 2) selfishness - collectivism (pursuing only one's own personal interests or focusing on the interests of the community); 3) universalism - particularism (correlate their actions with universal norms or insist on their right to deviate from general standards);

4) achieved - attributed (based on real results or allow myth-making in relation to them);

5) specificity - diffuseness (focus on the main thing or allow dispersion of one's attention, energy, strength). For each specific type of action, a person is forced to choose between all these possibilities, which involves significant moral and psychological stress, testing his mind, will, character, moral qualities.

Sociology in Russia

Stages of development of sociology:

2. Institutionalization, i.e. recognition from the state and society, the creation of departments and departments, scientific institutions for the training of specialists and scientific and pedagogical personnel, the foundation of scientific journals, societies, etc. This stage lasted from the mid-90s of the XIX century to the mid-20s of the XX century.

At this stage, Russian sociology developed in close contact with European.

3. "Black period" (mid-1920-mid-1980s). Sociology was supplanted by scientific communism and Marxist-Leninist philosophy, and labeled as "bourgeois science".

4.Modern stage (mid-1980s-present). Stage of rapid development of sociology.

Representatives: P.A. Lavrov, N.K. Mikhailovsky, S.N. Yuzhakov.

Introduction

The development of sociology is a complex and multifaceted process. Sociological science in Russia has passed more than a century. For a long time, sociology was banned. It took a lot of effort for sociology to begin its revival and take its rightful place in the system of social sciences.

Sociology in the 21st century is going through difficult times that prevent it from further development. The state of deep crisis in which science finds itself confronts it with a choice that will determine the future fate of sociology. The choice of the path of development of the domestic science of society, the path of rethinking the accumulated and the cultivation of the new.

Today, it is planned to overcome the theoretical and methodological crisis in which domestic sociological science has been in the last decade. Departments and faculties of sociology have been opened in all major Russian universities, which are engaged not only in the training of highly qualified personnel and research, which are quite traditional in their approaches and issues, but also attempts to develop new non-classical concepts and directions. The expansion of sociology that took place in the 20th century continues to this day. Today, there are quite a few specialized areas: the sociology of everyday life, the sociology of personality, the sociology of the family, youth, culture, and others.

An object term paper- scientific achievements of Russian sociology in the 2000s.

The subject of the research is the scientific achievements of Russian sociology in the context of research problems and institutional development.

The aim is to study scientific achievements Russian sociology in the 2000s. research and institutional nature.

Work tasks:

1. To identify the problems and trends in the development of Russian sociology on the threshold of the 21st century.

2. Consider the main directions of modern sociology.

3. To study the development of sociology in Russia on the example of Moscow and St. Petersburg and regional sociological schools.

Chapter 1 Russian Sociology on the Threshold of the 21st Century

Problems and trends in the development of sociology

Over the past twenty years, the development of Russian sociology has largely synchronized with European and world sociology and, in doing so, has acquired not only pluses, but also minuses. To the latter, they added their own.

The journal "Sociological Research" highlighted the paradoxical fact of Russia's ability to "step on the same rake" over and over again and at the same time show little interest in the causes of the cataclysms that occurred.

Among sociologists, the question arises: is sociology really developing, that is, moving forward, progressing? The World Professional Forum talks about sociology in motion and sociology at the crossroads in a global era: old problems, new perspectives. In the sociological community, the opinion has been firmly established that modern sociology is in a prolonged crisis, as evidenced by the arguments of many famous sociologists.

As Andrey Alexandrovich Davydov said: “Modern sociology has degenerated into a specific intellectual discourse, far from the cognitive tasks of the scientific discipline and effective practical applications, based largely on social philosophy and the humanitarian paradigm, dogmatic admiration for the works of the classics of sociology, scholastic speculative speculations around content of fundamental sociological terms, sociological method and theoretical activity, arbitrary "author's" explanation of social phenomena and processes, "separation" of scattered empirical studies from theory, "diluted" by methods of mathematical statistics and weakly receptive to the achievements of other scientific disciplines useful for sociology.

Let us consider other signs that indicate that sociology is in a deep crisis. First, sociological theory is increasingly closed in on itself. Meanwhile, science becomes a science only when it can explain and predict the processes taking place in society, analyze various sociological categories and definitions. In essence, the appeal to the problems of society is the meaning of the existence of sociology. It arose from social needs, won recognition for its contribution to the solution specific problems individuals, groups, societies. The current calls for a greater public role for sociology are related to the specific situation at the intersection of public demands and the work of sociologists.

Secondly, modern sociological theory is not always able to explain and analyze the causes of the processes taking place in the country. Qualitative research methods (for example, focus groups) are becoming increasingly popular among scientists. However, they do not always justify the hopes placed on them.

Thirdly, there was a division of sociology. On the one hand, academic science, whose representatives teach their courses at universities, publish monographs. On the other hand, on “businessmen from sociology” who use sociological methods(first of all - mass surveys of the population) as a means of earning.

It is difficult to disagree with the opinion of Zh. T. Toshchenko, who believes that the crisis of the conceptual apparatus is the personification of the crisis and disintegration of sociology.

Recently, theoretical sociology in our country has been developing largely due to the perception of Western sociological theories, both the most modern and those that have long since become classical.

It's time to choose a path and move forward. Copying Western models is an erroneous path, leading to the loss of original Russian science and its lagging behind the West. Understanding the theories of Western scientists can only be achieved if you have your own theoretical base.

To realize the accumulated potential, it is necessary to consolidate the sociological community, create conditions for the further dynamic development of sociological science, and strengthen its influence on social progress and the formation of civil society.

In the 21st century, the "double" lag of sociology must be eliminated. First, from technical and natural sciences which in the past century developed faster than the social sciences. Secondly, from the rapidly emerging social realities. These realities give rise to the need for new social concepts, new social theories. A further delay of sociology in responding to these challenges may have the most severe social consequences.

Thus, we can conclude that sociology as a science is a kind of outsider among the "community" of world sciences in a number of ways. But even this crisis, in which Russian sociology finds itself, does not mean that this is a state of impasse, on the contrary, it is a state of rethinking. Rethinking the ideas of the past and through this - the cultivation of the new.

The main directions of modern Russian sociology

The 20th century saw the expansion of sociology. Several specialized areas have emerged from it. Today there are quite a lot of such areas: the sociology of law, the sociology of the family, the sociology of youth, personality, culture, etc. We will consider some of them.

Political sociology is one of the ways to study a person in the political space, in the political environment, which includes the interaction of the social and the political, studies the phenomena political life not only as permanent institutional values, but as a process and result of their transformation from a social substance into a political one. Among sociologists, one can name the names of well-known scientists who actively preach this science and use its main approaches in their research. In Moscow they are: M. K. Gorshkov, A. A. Degtyarev, V. O. Rukavishnikov, Zh. T. Toshchenko and others. Semenov and others. The subject field of political sociology is being developed quite intensively at the Altai, Volgograd, Voronezh, Rostov, Ural and other universities. Leading higher educational institutions train specialists in this area with the award of degree candidate and doctor of sociological sciences.

The arrangement of the problems that make up the "skeleton" of political sociology ensures its integrity and stability. Firstly, these are the classical sources of this branch of knowledge both abroad and in Russia; second, a sociological interpretation of human participation in the exercise of power functions; thirdly, the dynamics of interaction between parties and power structures; fourthly, - equilibrium as a dynamic value, denoting that any new state of equilibrium is the result of the successful implementation of their powers by power structures.

Sociology of education. During the formation of the sociology of education in the first decades of the 20th century, it was not entirely clear: does the new branch belong to sociology, or does it belong to pedagogy, psychology? At the heart of the crisis of the industry was insufficient attention to its own subject and categorical apparatus, central problems, integration and development of the industry. The same thing is observed now in the Russian sociology of education.

The development of the Russian sociology of education takes place in difficult conditions. Awareness of these complexities is the prerequisite that it will finally find its own ground, realize itself and its purpose in the system of social knowledge and society, and, therefore, be able to respond to the challenges of the current stage of development of Russia and global development.

Sociology of youth. In the sociology of youth given Special attention social development of young people in a risk society (Yu. G. Volkov, T. E. Petrova, V. I. Chuprov, etc.). These features are determined by the state of social uncertainty, which manifests itself in inadequate reflection of young people on social changes. From what structures and relations are reproduced and updated by the younger generation, its own development and the development of society depend. However, in a risk society, development processes are spontaneous and often occur in conditions of dysfunctions of social institutions. Obviously, the main direction of youth policy should be its spiritual development. Empirical studies show social politics"patching holes" and the lack of a concept of personality formation on a national scale, which lead to an increase in crime and the emergence of risk groups among young people, the devaluation of labor and professional values ​​in favor of career values ​​as a way to achieve life goals.

In the sociology and demography of the family, attention is drawn to the theoretical concepts and paradigms of Russian demography (V. M. Medkov), the formation of demographic theory and the development of sociological studies of demographic behavior (N. V. Zvereva). The family is seen as a developing object social protection and as a factor in the reproduction of social identity; analyzes the adaptive potential of the family and the problems of maladjustment in the transition period, the influence of the media on the formation of the image of the family in public opinion.

In accordance with social challenges, the positions of the sociology of regional development (V.V. Zyryanov, I.P. Ryazantsev, etc.), gender and sociogender relations (T.A. Gurko, E.L. Omelchenko, etc.), deviant behavior (A. I. Dolgova, N. F. Kuznetsova and others), health care, agrarian, social sphere, which includes the sociology of social work, conflictology.

There has been increased attention to the dynamics of social differentiation – the social stratification of modern Russian society (Z. T. Golenkova) and the development of approaches to the study of the social structure of Russian society (T. I. Zaslavskaya, N. E. Tikhonova). New branches of sociological knowledge emerged, such as the sociology of global processes, tolerance and intolerance, etc. The science of social anthropology received a new impetus for development - anthropological problems are recognized as an organic part of Russian sociological knowledge. An analysis of these issues by leading scientists showed that it is necessary to correct the paradigm of cognition of social anthropology, which has studied the “process of social life” so far, along the vector “from society to culture, from it to man” (F. I. Minyushev). Anthropological analysis allows us to reveal the essence of modern social processes in the Russian society, which are actively developing under the influence of global changes.

Based on the foregoing, we can draw a completely justified conclusion: Russian sociology knows all its problems that hinder qualitative development, and if sociologists know their problems, then they definitely know the ways to solve them.