“The direction of development, which is characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, is called progress in science (a word of Latin origin, meaning literally “forward movement”). The concept of progress is opposed to the concept of regression. Regression is characterized by movement from higher to lower, degradation processes, return to obsolete forms and structures. Progress in one area public life not necessarily complemented by progress in other areas. What is considered progressive today may turn out to be a disaster tomorrow - this is its contradiction. Progress in the life of one country does not necessarily entail progress in other countries and regions. What is progressive for one person may not be progressive for another.

One of the first to put forward the theory of social progress was the French philosopher Anne Robert Turgot (1727-1781). His contemporary, the French philosopher and enlightener Jacques Antoine Condorcet (1743-1794), presented the criteria for social progress in this way: history, he wrote, presents a picture of continuous change, a picture of the progress of the human mind, the path of social progress.

Hegel considered progress not only as a principle of reason, but also as a principle of world events. This belief in progress was also accepted by K. Marx, who believed that humanity was moving towards ever greater mastery of nature, the development of production and of man himself. 19th and 20th centuries were marked by turbulent events that gave new information about the progress and regression in the life of society.

Utopian socialists put forward a moral criterion for progress. Saint-Simon believed, for example, that society should adopt a form of organization that would lead to the implementation of the moral principle that all people should treat each other as brothers. A contemporary of the utopian socialists, the German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling (1775-1854) wrote that the solution of the question of historical progress is complicated by the fact that supporters and opponents of faith in the improvement of mankind are completely entangled in disputes about the criteria of progress. The progress of science and technology, which, as Schelling wrote, from a historical point of view, is rather a regression. Schelling proposed his own solution to the problem: the criterion for establishing the historical progress of the human race can only be a gradual approach to the legal order. Another point of view on social progress belongs to G. Hegel. He saw the criterion of progress in the consciousness of freedom. As the consciousness of freedom grows, the progressive development of society takes place.

In the XX century. Sociological theories appeared that abandoned the optimistic view of the development of society, characteristic of the ideas of progress. Instead, they offer theories of cyclical circulation, pessimistic ideas of the "end of history", global environmental, energy and nuclear disasters.

Theories of cyclicity also had a certain positive value. They made it possible to streamline the chronology (lists of 30 dynasties of the Ancient, Middle and New Kingdoms in Egypt), identify certain trends in the change of political forms of government (Aristotle's study of the history of 158 Greek policies), draw parallels between history different peoples and epochs, etc. Thus, the theories of cyclicity contributed to the formation of the comparative historical method in social science.

Historical doom or, as the researchers write, "the decline of Europe" is perceived as the death of the "Christian civilization of the West" with all its cultural and technological achievements.

(L. N. Bogolyubov)

The problem of progress is one of the most complex in philosophy; for many centuries it has attracted the attention of human thought. Progress- this is development, which is accompanied by an increase in the level of organization of an object or system, a transition from less perfect to more perfect, from lower to higher. The opposite of progress regression- development, accompanied by a decrease in the level of organization of an object or system, a transition from more perfect to less perfect, from higher to lower.

Philosophical interpretations of the idea of ​​progress are largely related to the values ​​on which philosophers rely, therefore, in the history of philosophy, directly opposite opinions regarding the content, nature and conditions of progress are found.

The idea of ​​progress appeared in ancient philosophy. The Greeks spoke of the possibility of progress in intellectual sphere and associated it with an increase in knowledge. Intellectual progress was inevitably accompanied by moral progress, since in the ancient worldview, knowledge of the good guarantees adherence to it. At the same time, concepts appeared in Antiquity that denied progress in society. So, for example, the historian Hesiod represented history as a downward movement. The golden age, where piety and high morality reigned, but, alas, was left behind in his opinion. Then came the Silver Age, in which the decline of morality and piety began. Now is the time of the Iron Age - the time of the complete collapse of morality. In ancient philosophy, there was no idea of ​​a linear development of society; for Greek philosophers, the time of the cosmos is cyclical, therefore, the progressive or regressive development of history was conceived in the tails of a closed cosmic cycle, which had to inevitably be replaced by a new one, and history had to start again.

The idea of ​​the linear development of history was first clearly expressed in medieval philosophy. According to the Christian worldview, history is a line, the beginning of which is the fall of the first people, and the end is the second coming of Christ, the Last Judgment and the coming of the Kingdom of God on Earth. The idea of ​​progress in all subsequent Western European philosophy is based on the Christian concept of the linearity of the historical process.

The Enlightenment affirmed faith in progress akin to faith in God. Most philosophers of that time positively assessed progress and associated it with the development of the mind. In the worldview of the enlighteners, as well as in the medieval view of history, the development of society has its crown, only now it is not the Kingdom of God, but the Kingdom of Reason. Achieving the Kingdom of God is possible through a righteous life, and the Kingdom of Reason is created by people with the help of enlightenment.

Philosophy at the end of the 19th century criticizes the ideas of the Enlightenment, including the idea of ​​progress. An increasing number of philosophers are inclined to think about the illusory nature of progress and the meaninglessness of this idea. Criticism of progress is justified. In the XVIII-XIX centuries. the progress of technology and science was seen as the only way to a better future. But progressive illusions quickly dissipated, disappointment in progress is primarily due to disappointment in the possibilities of science and technology, with the help of which it was not possible to solve the humanitarian problems of mankind.

Disappointment in progress prompted philosophers to create non-linear concepts of social development. Yes, in late XIX v. Friedrich Nietzsche insisted on the falsity of the very idea of ​​progress, arguing that progress is an illusion, a delusion of the mind, that history cannot develop linearly, since its goal is not at the end, but in the best, most perfect samples. According to Nietzsche, it is wrong to assume that the subsequent stages of culture are more valuable than the previous ones, and that there is no progress in the world of culture and spiritual values, this world is completed at every moment of time. To explain how history happens, Nietzsche proposed the idea of ​​eternal return.

Oswald Spengler also denies the concept of historical progress and proposes a cyclical conception of history. He replaces the idea of ​​historical regularity with the idea of ​​fate, and the idea of ​​progress with the idea of ​​a cycle. History does not develop linearly, it is a series of independent, unique and closed cultures. Every culture – an organism that has an individual destiny and soul, going through periods of emergence, flourishing and dying. The soul of culture is expressed in symbols, thanks to which this culture can be comprehended. For example, Spengler calls ancient culture the culture of Apollo, the main idea of ​​this culture is form, balance, harmony, and the main symbol is a statue. Western European culture Spengler calls the culture of Faust, its main idea is infinity, the main architectural form is the Gothic cathedral, and most importantly scientific achievement- mathematics. All these ideas, images and forms express the soul of Western man and the essence of Faustian culture. According to Spengler, there have been eight independent cultures in history." Arabic, Mayan, Babylonian, Indian, Egyptian, ancient, Chinese, Western European. All of them are equal, none of the cultures can be preferred to another.

Arnold Toynbee in his concept of the historical cycle, he distinguishes not eight, but 21 cultural-historical units. In modern times, in his opinion, Indian, Chinese, Islamic, Russian and Western civilizations coexist. Each civilization is an integral system, all elements of which are interconnected. Civilization goes through the stages of emergence, breakdown, decay and death, and then is replaced by another. The same fate awaits and all modern civilizations. According to Toynbee, civilization is a challenge thrown by the divine mind to different peoples, a specific response to these challenges determines the content of the historical process.

Despite criticism of the idea of ​​progress, modern philosophy retains theories that adhere to it. For instance, Karl Jaspers adhered to the linear concept of history, which develops progressively. Jaspers emphasized the unity of mankind and the resulting community historical path. The main historical question is the question of whether a single faith for all peoples is possible. Such a unifying faith, according to the German philosopher, should be a philosophical faith. Philosophical faith is different from religious faith. If religion declares faith a revelation, then in philosophy faith exists in union with knowledge, representing a special act of will. Philosophical faith cannot become a dogma, since it is an awareness of being and its origins, it seeks to understand itself. It is the philosophical faith, according to Karl Jaspers, that can unite humanity. Each historical era is unique, but in different cultures it is possible to form situations that are close in spirit, which become prerequisites for similar historical processes. According to Jaspers, around the 800s. BC. simultaneously in India, China, Greece and Persia, spiritual movements are being formed that have determined the face of modern humanity. At this time, philosophy arises, and with it the phenomenon of philosophical faith. Jaspers calls this historical moment the "Axial Age". After it, the history of mankind acquires unity, and local cultures merge into a single historical process.

In the concepts defending the progressive nature of history, one of the main ones is the theme of the criteria of progress. One and the same society, depending on the chosen criterion, can be considered as progressive or regressive. Jean Jacques Rousseau put forward the thesis that the progress of sciences and arts brings irreparable harm to man, destroys the harmony and integrity of his natural existence, thereby the French educator emphasized the contradictory nature of progress. Society – a complex system, therefore, a complex criterion is used to determine the progressive or regressive nature of social development. Each of the social subsystems requires its own criterion. So, in the economic sphere, the criterion of the level of development of productive forces is used, in the political sphere - the degree of freedom of the individual, in the social sphere - the level of harmonization of relations between man and society, the degree of consistency of their interests, in the spiritual sphere - the possibility of self-realization of a person, the degree of spirituality and humanism of society. But none of these criteria is sufficient, and progress in some social subsystems does not automatically lead to progress in others.

• See paragraph 6.5.
• See paragraphs 7.7 and 7.9.
• See paragraph 6.2.

"Normal" social development is a constant break with the past, violent transformations and shifts. Social contradictions, conflicts, confrontation of any kind - a source social development .

Issues revolution is central to Marx's theory of social change. social revolution in his interpretation, it is not just a transition from one, less progressive social formation to another, more progressive, not only a profound qualitative transformation of social relations, but also certain way such a transformation; it fast, sharp, conflict and total shift in social relations. Marx considered this method of social change to be historically inevitable and desirable, since it allows accelerating social progress. This is the meaning of his famous thesis: "Revolutions are the locomotives of history".

In addition to the social, Marx considered economic, industrial and political revolution, bringing the social revolution closer to the first, then to the second, then to the third. But he links the social revolution especially closely with the political revolution, that is, with the conquest state power progressive class and the establishment of its revolutionary dictatorship to suppress other, reactionary classes.

Social and political reforms introduce themselves to Marx artificial a brake on social development, the result of forced concessions and (or) deceit on the part of the ruling classes, or the weakness and indecision of the oppressed classes. His ideal of social development in the "prehistory" of society, which is built on private property and the exploitation of man by man, is "continuous revolution", the constant revolutionization of society for the speedy onset of "true" history, communism.

Sociology of M. Weber: the theory of social cognition; the theory of social action and the theory of society; development theory; theory of capitalism. (Zborovsky)

Max Weber (1864-1920) - German sociologist, social philosopher and historian; the founder of understanding sociology and the theory of social action - was born in Erfurt. His father was a lawyer, coming from a family of industrialists and merchants who were engaged in the textile business in Westphalia. Mother was a highly educated and cultured woman, she dealt with religious and social issues a lot.

Main works:“Economy and Society” and “Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism”, “Critical Studies in the Logic of the Sciences of Culture”, “On Some Categories of “Understanding” Sociology”, “Objectivity of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge”, “Politics as recognition and profession”, “Protestant sects and the spirit of capitalism”, “The meaning of “freedom from evaluation” in sociological and economic science”.

Theory of social action

The concept of "social action" in Weber's interpretation is derived from action in general, which is understood as such human behavior in the course of which the acting individual associates with it or, more precisely, puts into it a subjective meaning. Therefore, action is a person's understanding of his own behavior.

This judgment is immediately followed by an explanation of what a social action is: "We call "social" an action that, according to the supposed actor or actors, meaning correlates with the action of other people and focuses on it” [Weber. 1990].

social action includes two points: a) the subjective motivation of the individual (individuals, groups of people); b) orientation to others (the other), which Weber calls "expectation" and without which the action cannot be considered as social. Its main subject is the individual. Sociology can consider collectives (groups) only as derivatives of the individuals that make them up. They (collectives, groups) are not independent realities, but rather ways of organizing the actions of individual individuals.

Weber's social action comes in four types: goal-oriented, value-rational, affective, and traditional.

A goal-oriented action is an action based on the expectation of a certain behavior of objects of the external world and other people and the use of this expectation as "conditions" or "means" to achieve one's rationally set and thought-out goal"

Value-rational action is based "on the belief in the unconditional - aesthetic, religious or any other - self-sufficient value of a certain behavior as such, regardless of what it leads to"

An affective action is an action conditioned by affects or
emotional state individual. According to Weber, affective action
action "is on the border and often beyond what is "meaningful", especially
knowingly oriented; it can be unhindered reacting
to a completely unusual irritation"

A traditional action is an action based on a long habit. Weber writes: “Most of the habitual everyday behavior of people is close to this type, which occupies a certain place in the systematization of behavior ...”

Understanding sociology

M. Weber, and after him his followers and researchers, defines his sociology as understanding.

as a specific object of understanding sociology, Weber proclaims not internal state or the external relation of man as such, taken in itself, but his action. An action is always an understandable (or understood) attitude towards certain objects, an attitude that is characterized by the fact that it presupposes the presence of a certain subjective meaning.

Revealing the main features of understanding sociology, Weber dwells on three of them, characterizing the existence of an explainable human behavior and the meaning attached to it. In this regard, he writes: “Specifically important for understanding sociology is, first of all, behavior that, firstly, according to the subjectively assumed meaning of the actor, is correlated with the behavior of other people, secondly, is also determined by this meaningful behavior of his and, thirdly , perhaps, on the basis of this (subjectively) supposed meaning, is clearly explained"

In Weber's understanding sociology, the problem of value and evaluation occupies an important place.

As you can see, understanding in the sociology of M. Weber is closely connected with the category of the ideal type, which acts as the base for the entire system of scientific concepts that the scientist operates with. The ideal type is a manifestation of a kind of "interest of the era", a mental construction, a kind of theoretical scheme, which, strictly speaking, is not extracted from empirical reality. Therefore, it is no coincidence that Weber calls the ideal type a utopia. He points out: “In its content, this construction has the character of a utopia obtained by mentally strengthening certain elements of reality”

Ideal-typical constructions are of particular importance for empirical science, and this circumstance is specifically emphasized by Weber. He points to the need to renounce the ideal-type claim to perform the function of duty, just as empirical sociology renounces this. “Empirical science cannot teach anyone what he should do, it only indicates what he can, and under certain circumstances, what he wants to do”

"The "ideal type" in our understanding ... is something, in contrast to the evaluative judgment, completely indifferent and has nothing to do with any other, not purely logical "perfection""

The doctrine of the types of domination

M. Weber made a great contribution to the development of the sociology of management and the sociology of power and did this primarily through the development of the doctrine of the content and types of domination. By dominance, he understood the mutual expectation: those who give orders - that their orders will be carried out and they will be obeyed; those who obey, that the orders will have a character corresponding to their expectations. Hence, all the arguments of the scientist about domination are arguments about legitimate domination, ge. one that is recognized by controlled individuals.

Weber speaks of three types of legitimate domination, distinguished in accordance with the three main motives for obedience. First motive- the interests of those who obey, i.e. their rational considerations. This is the basis of the “legal” type of domination called by Weber, which can be found in developed bourgeois states - England, France, the USA, etc. The purest type of legal domination is bureaucracy. Weber was the first scientific literature developed this concept. He considered bureaucratic management as domination through knowledge, which was its (management's) specifically rational character. The second type of legitimate domination is based on a different motivation for obedience - faith not only in legality, but even in the sacredness of long-standing orders and authorities. It is based on everyday mores, habits of certain behavior. Weber calls this type traditional domination. The purest type of such domination (the ideal type according to Weber) is patriarchal (“lord” - “subjects” - “servants”).

The third type of dominance has an affective basis of motivation, he received from Weber the name charismatic. The German sociologist's concept of charisma is very broad. He wrote: ““Charisma” should be called the quality of a person, recognized as extraordinary, thanks to which she is evaluated as gifted with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically special powers and properties that are inaccessible to other people.

The three types of domination roughly correspond to three of the four types of social action. The legal type of domination correlates with purposeful rational action, the traditional type with traditional action, the charismatic type with affective action.

Key words: progress, regression, extensive and intensive development, revolution, evolution, inconsistency of progress.

Society never stands still. In the world it is impossible to single out a single object that would be in absolute rest. This also applies to social actors, the whole society. The ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus said about development: "Everything flows, everything changes. You cannot enter the same river twice - the waters are not the same, and the person is already different."

Some people spend most his life, pretending not to. Far from taking it, he puts in a thousand efforts to change this and that, for a multi-year career in search of the ideal that he has in mind, and which almost never adapts to reality, to what is.

Few women can have a perfect body all their lives; in fact, even the models themselves. And even more: there are those who, instead of focusing on their obsession with getting perfect body, crave ideal life: an ideal home, an ideal husband, and some dreamy ones.

Society is also changing. In terms of the direction of change, we can distinguish:

Progress - development from less perfect to more perfect, complication, improvement;

Regression - transition from more perfect to less perfect, simplification, deterioration.

Social progress is contradictory. Thus, progress in one area can turn into regression in another. For example, the progress of nuclear physics led to the creation of nuclear weapons. The degree of defense capability of states has increased. But the world has become more vulnerable - nuclear weapon may end up in the hands of terrorists, etc. Social progress does not lead to improvements in all spheres of life, it is not always beneficial to everyone. Progress is non-linear. In certain periods of social development, stagnation and crises are possible. community development is carried out in a spiral - progress is followed by periods of regression, but in general, progress is ahead of and erases the negative effect of stagnant stages.

In fact, there is no such thing as absolute perfection. Life is about moments, moments to enjoy maximum happiness, when self-acceptance is the first step we must overcome. Those who understand that the greatest attraction is sometimes in imperfection. If you're wondering why, the answer is simple: every little imperfection makes us unique and unrepeatable, and that's where the magic is.

Having accepted yourself in each of our nuances, with our shortcomings and our perfections, first of all, you will find a balance with yourself. Subsequently, the balance will come with the world itself and with others. Those who do not accept themselves develop a sense of insecurity about their identity. In fact, there are many people who, having received it through exercise, restrictive diets, and even going through the operating room, find that it is still not accepted. It should also be noted that sometimes this need for "self-improvement" has been instilled since childhood. Having a strict mother or a serious father forces us to end up showing that self-doubt where we believe perfection might be our only answer.

• Uncertainty creates dissatisfaction in turn.
• No one is happier to have a perfect body.

This moment should appear after adolescence and the arrival of the first youth, when our body has matured.

Difficult for scientific understanding are the criteria for progress. So, in politics, they can be the development of democracy, increasing the transparency of political processes (elections, decision-making by the authorities), the development of civil society and the rule of law. In the economy, the criteria for progress can be recognized as the development of production, the purchasing power of the population, and an increase in human well-being. The criteria for progress in the social sphere include an increase in average life expectancy, the state of health of the population, an increase in the general level of education of members of society, etc. It is more difficult with criteria in the spiritual sphere. The cultures of different peoples are simply incomparable. Is it possible to say that European culture more developed than the eastern one (or vice versa)? Of course not. Cultures are different. Nevertheless, the level of development of science and education can be assessed. It is obvious that, for example, in ancient times, where the school course was 1-3 years and involved the study of elementary mathematical operations and literacy, education was less developed than today. At present, education, in fact, lasts a person's entire life - even after graduating from a university, he continues to engage in self-education, improves his qualifications.

Hence the great adventure of our lives. Where only the most favorable in emotional matters, in and in self-esteem, will promote their life path with great honesty, open to everything their life has to offer, because in turn they have a lot to give in their life.

What does it mean to be more human? It is clear that we are all human, that we are all born, we develop, and we try to learn from all the aspects that surround us. In order to reach this important level, with which you need to connect with everyone around you, you must, first of all, contact us: accept us.

In terms of speed, development happens:

Evolutionary - slow, smooth, gradual changes;

Revolutionary - rapid, spasmodic development.

Evolutionary development is more preferable, since it does not lead to instability in society, does not break rapidly established forms of social relations. "The slower you go, the further you will be" is an expression that is also fair in relation to social progress.

Acceptance is not limited to the fact that we are happy with our body, with our appearance. Thus, acceptance of every aspect of our life, ours and our present is inferior.

• Acceptance also accepts our past, our triumphs, but also our mistakes.
• It is necessary to accept failures, integrating them to receive learning.

A Valencian physicist named Vicent Martinez Sancho has patented what appears to be an indecipherable cryptographic system. Building a strong and cryptosystem-proof cryptosystem is a terribly difficult task, and a field in which even the best of them have failed.

According to the criterion of the basis of development (reasons, essence), we can distinguish:

Extensive - quantitative development, in breadth, by increasing something. For example, extensive development will be the improvement of students' knowledge at school by increasing the number of lessons;

Intensive - development due to qualitative changes and improvements. Example: Improving student achievement through the use of better teaching technologies.

So, one of two things: either Professor Martinez is an absolute genius in this field, or he fell into the same trap as many before them. There is already open debate about the superior Cryptopolis network, but without even going into technical details, the patent examination shows, at least in my opinion, that there is a lot of noise and a few nuts.

There are shortcomings, errors and misinterpretations only in the previous description, which makes cryptography in general. For example, he claims that asymmetric encryption can be broken by brute force. "Brute force" is how cryptologists should say "let's try all the keys". In the case of public key systems, the way to attack them is usually to try to solve the mathematical problem on which they base their security. But no one tries to destroy the system by trying to use all possible keys.

Indicate the correct definition of the concept of "development"

Development is:

a) quantitative change of the object;

b) any movement;

c) progressive change;

d) moving in a circle;

e) movement from less perfect to more perfect;

f) irreversible qualitative changes in the system;

g) recurring quantitative and qualitative changes in phenomena;

h) identical to any change

Development is irreversible qualitative changes in the system (option e)

Development is an irreversible, directed, regular change in matter and consciousness, their universal property; as a result of development, a new qualitative state of the object arises - its composition or structure. Development is a universal principle of explaining nature, society and knowledge as historical events.

There are two forms of development between which there is a dialectical relationship: evolutionary, associated with gradual quantitative changes in the object (evolution), and revolutionary, characterized by qualitative changes in the structure of the object (revolution). Allocate a progressive, ascending line of development (progress) and a regressive, descending line (regression). Progress is a directed development, which is characterized by a transition from the lower to the higher, from the less perfect to the more perfect.

Development, as it were, repeats the stages already passed, but repeats them differently, on a higher base, so to speak, in a spiral, and not in a straight line; spasmodic, catastrophic, revolutionary transformation of quantity into quality.

The main feature that distinguishes development from other dynamic processes, for example, from the growth process, is the qualitative change in time of the variables characterizing the state of the developing system (for the growth process, one usually speaks only of the quantitative change of these variables). Moreover, the qualitative change is of a spasmodic nature. A gradual monotonous change in some parameter for a noticeable time is accompanied by a corresponding gradual change in the state of the system, but at a certain moment there is a break in gradualness: the state of the system changes abruptly, the system moves to a new qualitative level, quantity turns into quality. Then everything is repeated anew, but at a new qualitative level.

Literature

1. Alekseev P.V. Philosophy. Textbook. - M.: TEIS, 1996. - 580 p.

2. Borisenko E.N. Social responsibility of small business. - M. "Klistar", 2002. - 93p.

3. Borisov E.F. Economic theory: Textbook. - M.: TK Velby, Prospect Publishing House, 2005. - 544 p.

4. Gainutdinov R.I. Social responsibility of Russian business // Jurisprudence. -2006. - No. 4.

5. Kapelyushnikov R. Philosophy of the market F. Hayek // Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. 1989. No. 12.

6. Lukashevich V.V. Pronina E.I. Philosophy of Economics: textbook. - M.: Publishing House of MGUP, 1998. - 68s.

7. Osipov Yu.M. Philosophy of economy: textbook. - M.: Economist, 2005. - 320s.

8. Fundamentals of modern philosophy: Textbook / Ed. M.N. Rosenko. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house "Lan", 1999. - 295 p.

9. Pompeev Yu.A. History and philosophy of domestic entrepreneurship. - St. Petersburg. Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 2007 - 272p.

10. Entrepreneurship: Textbook / Ed. M.G. Lapusty. - M.: INFRA - M, 2002. - 520s.

11. Ruzavin G.I., Martynov V.T. The course of the market economy / Ed. G.I. Ruzavin - M .: Banks and exchanges, UNITI, 1994.- 319s

12. Samsin A.I. Fundamentals of philosophy of economics. Tutorial for universities. - M.: UNITI - DANA, 2003. - 271s.

13. Philosophy: Textbook / Ed. IN AND. Kirillov. - M.: Jurist, 2001. - 376 p.

14. Philosophy: Textbook for universities / Ed. Lavrinenko V.N. - M.: Culture and sport, UNITI, 1998. - 584 p.

15. Philosophical Dictionary / Ed. M.T. Frolova. - M.: Politizdat, 1991. - 560 p.