Thus, in the process of transformation of Russia, two value systems collided - the liberal one, which replaced the socialist one, and the traditional one, which had developed over many centuries and generations. Outwardly, the choice seems simple: either individual rights and freedoms, or traditional values, when the idea of communalism and emphasized anti-individualism comes to the fore.
However, such straightforwardness distorts and overly ideologizes the real meaning of this value confrontation and is fraught with a loss of continuity. In a liberal society, its own “community” is formed and functions, just as in a traditional society, bright individuals appear, internal freedom is preserved, initiative and initiative are valued and encouraged in their own way.
Of course, in their ideological and cultural preferences, both types of society differ significantly and noticeably from each other, but in the sphere of everyday values - family, security, justice, well-being, etc. - they have a lot of similarities and things in common. If traditionalism is usually reproached for conservatism, statism and paternalism, then on the same basis liberalism should be charged with destructive anthropocentrism and the replacement of rivalry with soulless competition.
In our opinion, a value split is dangerous in that, by constantly stimulating the growth of a person’s uncomfortable state, it can lead to such social consequences that will practically destroy all the achievements of modernization. Being the core of thoughts, actions, creativity of people, social groups, society as a whole, the conflict of values as a phenomenon of social pathology forces people to maneuver, which leads to internal vacillations, to the struggle of both society and the individual with himself, to the constant reproduction of instability and, in ultimately, to the emergence of a desire to overcome the state of such a split.
The reason for the split in modern Russian society can be associated, first of all, with the unpreparedness Russian society to innovation. The formation of a new type of society necessarily requires the development of new ideals, models of behavior, rules of communication, different motivation for work, etc. by each member of society. Not all Russians found such a task beyond their capabilities. This became the reason for the split between those who are capable of innovative behavior and those who cannot master it.
Another reason that creates a split is social differentiation. Russians were not prepared for the fact that the former “equality in poverty” was destroyed and gave way to a division into “rich” and “poor.” Social stratification has led to the fact that the previously uniform scale of values for all members of society, illuminated by ideology, no longer appears to be a monolith, and the first positions of numerous “ladders” of social preferences are occupied by unequal values.
The situation of split is also generated by the situation in the field of ideology. After the collapse of communist ideology, which permeated all levels and structures of Soviet society, many group micro-ideologies arose, insufficiently substantiated, internally unbalanced, but thanks to their leaders, quite convincing and shared by part of society. There is a constant clash of some political ideas with others, some social programs with the opposite. To an ordinary person It is quite difficult to understand the nuances of the differences between them.
Another reason contributing to the reproduction of the split is the cultural heterogeneity of the reaction to modernization. Today the discrepancy between social change, occurring in Russian society, and an assessment at the cultural level of their future significance. These discrepancies are due to the sociocultural heterogeneity of society, in which today differences in economic, political, national, and cultural interests are officially recognized at the constitutional level. Accordingly, they speak out different points views on the nature of the current sociocultural situation in Russia. For example, Russia is understood as a “split society” (A. Akhiezer) or a “crisis society” (N. Lapin), in which a stagnant contradiction between culture and the nature of social relations blocks the mechanisms of social development. According to A. Akhiezer, the brake is a split in public consciousness, blocking the transition of society to a state of more efficient reproduction and survival. Thus, the authors agree in diagnosing society, in determining the limits of social transformations, to which they include value limitations of social consciousness, and the insufficient prevalence of liberal innovative values.
Following the methodology of sociocultural analysis, understanding and overcoming the schism, A. Akhiezer believes, must first of all be achieved in culture, in the growing reflection of history, for a schism is a state of public consciousness that is unable to comprehend the integrity, in this case, the history of Russia.
The conflict of values in Russia was also connected with the fact that there was a destruction of the traditional scheme of socialization, which was always based on three foundations - family, teacher and social ideals. The family as a social institution is called upon to play a vital role in the formation of the child’s personal qualities, the foundations of morality, ideas about norms and rules of behavior. But the family in modern Russia can no longer give children full socialization, moral lessons and healthy life, not only because many families are heavily infected with anomie and “deviant” behavior, but also because even cultured and morally healthy parents have lost clear guidelines regarding values and standards to which we should strive.
Mainly for the same reasons, there was a strong degradation of the school as a carrier of positive values, an agent of socialization. The teacher also transformed in society. The nature of his behavior in society and at school has changed. He ceased to combine himself as a teacher and an educator. The teacher has ceased to be a comrade, friend, adviser, he has turned either into an indifferent contemplator, indifferent to his work, or into a cruel tyrant, deliberately using an authoritarian way of controlling his students. A poor teacher is no longer an authority for many schoolchildren. Naturally, such a teacher and the values he instilled met resistance among teenagers; they were learned in a painful way or were not learned at all, which led to conflicts in the “teacher-student” system.
It is also necessary to take into account that, next to state educational institutions, private ones have also become widespread - gymnasiums, lyceums, colleges, etc., which promise higher social statuses and roles in various fields life of society. The process of socialization cannot fail to take into account this reality of separating children through various educational systems into opposite social poles. Therefore, in general, socialization in childhood and school age, i.e. during the most important period in the formation of a person’s personality, it contains deep contradictions and dysfunctionality, laying the foundations for the deviant behavior of a huge number of people.
The crisis of family and teaching is accompanied by a crisis of former social ideals. It did not come with the beginning of market reforms. Its influence was felt even before the era of glasnost. In order for a social system to continue to exist for some time, it is required that each generation inherits at least part of certain socio-cultural attitudes adopted by the older generation, otherwise the “connection of times” will be broken. In other words, in order to overcome the split, it is necessary that in modern Russian society the sociocultural values and norms shared by the majority of members of society, and first of all, by the younger generation, are reproduced.
The marginalization of the transitional time could not be compensated for. Therefore, in the sphere of moral culture, the role of religion has increased significantly. In spiritual culture, the source of replenishment of values was pre-revolutionary works, creations of foreign compatriots, traditional culture. The put forward liberal-democratic ideologemes did not correspond to real economic and social relations, as well as to the “crisis of consciousness” of the intellectual elite, deprived of the usual ways of social self-affirmation. In fact, in Russian culture the unified field of moral guidelines turned out to be destroyed. Ideas about what is good and bad, what is desirable and undesirable, moral and immoral, fair and unfair, and many others, are extremely fragmented and most often reflect purely group interests. As a result, solidarity, consolidation, unity of goals, mutual trust, open dialogue found themselves in deep decline. Everywhere and at all levels the principle “everyone survives alone” prevailed. In sociology, such a state of the social system is designated by the concept of “anomie.” Anomie is disintegration moral values, confusion of value orientations, the onset of a value vacuum. Anomie is incompatible with the forward movement of society.
The country experienced a crisis of national spirit and self-awareness: the old one collapsed; communist system of values and, not having time to assert itself, its liberal alternative is called into question. Society found itself in a state of anomie, mismatch and loss of value guidelines, and psychologically - confusion and depression in the face of the failure of two social experiments - communist and liberalist. The twice interrupted and broken connection of times over the course of one century put society and the individual in a bewildered position in relation to their past, present and future. Frustration, existential vacuum, loss of meaning in life have become typical states of mass and individual consciousness. Protagoras said that man is the measure of all things. The world is stable if this measure is strong, the world is shaky if it turns out that this measure is unstable. The loss of value guidelines led to the emergence of a marginal “split” personality, whose thoughts and actions, whose decisions were based on aggression, were characterized by disorganization. The reproduction of the “split man” continues today.
The “divided man” of modern Russia, who, on the one hand, wants to live in a society professing traditional values, and at the same time benefit from the achievements of modern science and technology, is main problem in the process of reforming Russian society. This person still doubts the value of the individual and relies on the power of an archaic, almost tribal “we”, on the power of authority. Existing in a situation of a value split, a cultural breakdown, such a person masters a contradictory culture, forms a tense conflict inner world. Hence, this conflict permeates all levels of Russian society, breaking the emerging positive changes.
The radical economic measures of the 90s to bring Russia out of the crisis had to correspond to a system of values different from the then dominant system, capable of neutralizing anomie and consolidating society.
It is important to note that sociocultural values could not and should not have been introduced by government decree. However, to believe that they could arise solely by themselves in the fabric of society - in the family, school, church, media, culture, public opinion etc. - also wrong. There should have been a counter-movement between government and society, but this did not happen. The moral side of Russian reforms was ignored by both the authorities and leaders social movements, creative intelligentsia. In this case, it is appropriate to once again draw attention to the fact that the Russian intelligentsia, which has always been considered as a guide moral consciousness, did not fully fulfill its historical role. As the humanitarian-politicized elite of the intelligentsia lost their monopoly on the development of value systems, entrepreneurs and bankers put forward their values, and they selected from the symbolic values those that corresponded to their worldview and interests. In key areas of ideological discussions of the 90s, there has been a movement towards a synthesis of liberal-democratic and traditionalist values and attitudes, while radical value orientations are gradually being pushed to the periphery of public consciousness.
At the beginning of the new century, a synthesized system began to prevail in Russian society, including elements of various ideas - from liberal to nationalist. Their coexistence does not reflect ideological clashes between irreconcilable opponents or an attempt to synthesize opposing principles, but rather the incompleteness of the processes of formation of new value and political-ideological guidelines in the mass consciousness, in the perception of Russian authorities and the elite in general. Successive modernizations carried out over two centuries could not establish Western values in Russia - individualism, private property, and the Protestant work ethic. The most active resistance to reforms was provided by traditionalist consciousness and such features as collectivism, corporatism, the desire for equalization, condemnation of wealth, etc.
Modernization in Russia has a deep specificity associated with the fact that society has “split” and become polarized; value diversity turned not only into a conflict of values, but into a conflicting clash of civilizational types. The civilizational dualism of Russian society (a split in civilizational preferences between the modernization elite and the rest of the population) gave rise to contradictions that stopped the progress of modernization.
Currently, man is formally declared as the highest value of modern Russian society. Freedom, security and justice are also recognized as basic values, but these highest values are not fully realized for both objective and subjective reasons. It can be argued that socio-economic processes in Russia should have led and led to the formal recognition of human value. But they also led to the situational formation of interests in a person that do not coincide with the interests of the state and society. Under the influence of the egoization of the individual and his appropriation of greater freedom, the hierarchy of the value system inevitably had to change and has changed towards the priority of personal values, while socially significant values are gradually losing their significance both for society and for the individual.
For the individual, private values, such as material success, freedom, justice and others, come first in importance, and social reality gives rise to a tendency towards a perverted, egotistical understanding of these values. As K fears. G. Volkov, Russia is threatened by the development of a phenomenon known in the West as hyper-individualization. Hyper-individualists recognize only the independence of the individual and strongly reject the concept of social responsibility, which can ultimately lead to the collapse of society.
The priorities of society's development are shifted: the market has a dominant, self-sufficient importance, while a person is considered only as its element, completely subordinate to its needs. The social cost of reforms, the goal of which is actually to build market economy without taking into account the interests of the individual, for the majority of the population is extremely high, since in reality there is a depreciation in the public consciousness of the highest value - the value of a person. The possibility of such a development of events in Russia as a result of the fall of Soviet power was foreseen back in 1937 by N.A. Berdyaev.
The loss of values and ideals is accompanied by an increase in utilitarianism in relation to society and the individual, their subordination to the laws of the market, and their transformation into commodities. In this regard, modern Russian society can be characterized as a society of gradual egoization and alienation of the individual, resulting in social apathy, indifference, a kind of “omnivorousness”, which are gradually transformed into cynicism, cruelty and unprincipledness towards everyone except oneself and one’s closest significant environment.
With the market orientation of society, a person increasingly views his capabilities, abilities and qualities as a product that has a certain price on the market and is subject to sale. The focus on “market”, market-oriented qualities of the individual, its socio-economic, but not personal and moral significance, increasingly leads to the fact that success, understood mainly as material success, is considered as the only worthy, socially and personally significant goal of life activity. which, at any cost, the individual tends to consider himself as a value. Another consequence of this process may be the formation of a personality that is not harmoniously developed, but specialized.
This process is, unfortunately, natural and inevitable in the conditions of modern Russia. Therefore, personal success, measured by the material standard of living, has practically become an end in itself, pushing the moral and spiritual foundations of the individual to the margins of public attention. The economic success of an individual, determined by his ability to adapt to the changing demands of the market, naturally leads to a decrease in the importance of not only professional, but also moral attitudes and value orientations, which are transformed in such a way as to receive the highest rating in the labor market and ensure material well-being in the near future.
The ongoing differentiation of the population according to material, social, spiritual and moral characteristics, which increasingly alienates people from each other and atomizes society, cannot but affect the real morals of social work specialists. The spiritual, truly human, values of Russians have been replaced by material ones, implying only material enrichment and carnal pleasures. Moreover, the achievement of this enrichment and pleasure is allowed by any means, which are mainly of an immoral nature.
As a result of this, society, unfortunately, is gradually sliding down to the level of “situational morality”, the motto of which is: what is moral is what is economically useful in a given situation, since it is the economic potential and status of the individual that largely determine at present his status in society, the possibility of obtaining benefits for myself. According to R. G. Apresyan, the basis of morality is the need for unity with other people." The tendency to identify benefit and morality gradually leads to the fact that one of the main questions of philosophical ethics - the question of the relationship and correspondence of goals and means - is resolved on level of ordinary consciousness in the form of permissiveness in relation to means, if only the goal suits the individual, it seems to him situationally justified and personally significant. As a result, in Russian society there is a tendency towards the destruction of moral principles, an increase in immorality and permissiveness in thinking and behavior.
No less dangerous is the tendency towards devaluation in the public and individual consciousness of socially significant values - collectivism, solidarity, unity. The value of labor has decreased significantly, giving way to the value of material success, regardless of labor activity. There is an alienation of mass consciousness from traditional Russian values and guidelines - the ideas of unity, conciliarity, collectivism, solidarity, moral purity, altruism and social optimism, which have always dominated the Russian national mentality. At the same time, there is an attempt to replace them with really existing market-type values - selfishness, pragmatism, social and moral cynicism, and lack of spirituality. This process can have the most negative consequences for Russia, since it can lead to the loss of national identity in mentality, spirituality and culture, and the final collapse of society. It can have irreversible consequences for an individual: even in late XIX century, F. Nietzsche noted that the loss of the value of collectivism can lead to the loss of the value of the individual.
As is known, the formation of spiritual culture and morality is a long process, spanning millennia, while the cultural and moral degradation of a nation under certain conditions can occur quite quickly, and, starting from a certain moment, the process of demoralization can acquire an avalanche-like character, capturing more and more new and new social strata and groups, depriving them of moral principles, ideals and values and instead establishing indifference, lack of spirituality, cruelty, social and moral nihilism in individual and mass consciousness. The vast majority of people alive today perceive as value only that which better helps them “outperform” their competitors. Any means suitable for this seems to have an illusory value in itself.
Analysis of trends in the development of value orientations of the population allows us to conclude that value orientations representatives various groups populations are shifting towards individual-personal ones. This is largely facilitated by the deep crisis in the economy, social life and spiritual sphere, as well as the activities of the majority of official media, calling on the population to rely only on themselves and take care only of themselves, without expecting any help from the state.
At the same time, although the egoization of Russians is gradually occurring, it is of a situationally forced nature and is regarded by the citizens themselves more as a necessary measure to ensure survival in the absence of assistance and effective social and economic policy from the state, rather than indicating an essential attraction to individualism. It can be assumed that the egoization of the population in Russia is a kind of defensive reaction, with the help of which citizens, without relying on state help, hope to ensure their individual survival in the difficult conditions of radical reforms and the associated crisis. Thus, the insufficient protection of citizens by the state is compensated by such “forms of self-defense” as egoization and alienation.
No less dangerous is the tendency towards polarization of morality. The differentiation of the living conditions of Russians leads not so much to the emergence of natural differences in the field of morality, but to the polarization of moral attitudes inherent in different social groups, and this polarization occurs in accordance with the division of society along income and property lines. At the same time, two economically opposite “poles” - the super-rich and the super-poor - are distinguished by the greatest lack of principles and cynicism in moral terms, and in this matter, two economically opposite “poles” are closed. The middle social strata show moderation in matters of morality and relative adherence to its positive norms.
The polarization of the moral attitudes of social groups depending on the level and quality of life indicates the absence of the possibility, or at least the difficulty, of organizing their joint social creativity. It not only does not prevent, but also contributes to the further disintegration of society into hostile groups, the reign of anarchy, immorality, and arbitrariness in society. For the super-rich, in the context of primitive capital accumulation, morality is a hindrance that can lead to a reduction in profits if it is given too much attention. For the ultra-poor, morality can cause humiliation and death. These polar groups, in peculiar extreme circumstances, are subject to a process of demoralization in to the greatest extent and consider it possible for themselves not to follow the prescriptions of morality: compassion, care for others, moderation are naturally considered by them, in the spirit of the philosophy of F. Nietzsche, as herd virtues.”
The experience of analyzing social development leads to the conclusion that in the mentality of citizens belonging to the intermediate (relatively stable and wealthy) strata of the population of modern Russia, adherence to collectivist-socialist and Orthodox values, interconnected - sovereignty, paternalism, collectivism, equality and justice, which does not fit into the framework of traditional Western ideology, but at the same time is fully consistent with traditional national mentality Russians. The “non-market nature” of Russians as a nation, noted by the overwhelming majority of experts, makes it impossible for the majority to actively appropriate market values, although it does determine the objective situational need to be guided by them in everyday activities and relationships.
Therefore, in modern Russia there is a kind of internal distancing from the imposed norms and values of the market model, which indicates the preservation in the mentality of Russians of a deep, ineradicable commitment to traditional values. Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that at present there is a tendency towards distancing from the cult of war and violence, a return to traditional tolerance, mutual support and creative altruism, although still very little. This can be explained by the deep, not always clearly realized connection of Russians with national culture, a unique way of perceiving the world, which determines a certain way of thinking and acting and makes it unacceptable for the majority of the population to act in accordance with the norms of a culture and morality that is alien to it.
Thus, in the public consciousness of the population of modern Russia, there are opposite trends: on the one hand, the desire to preserve the integrity of the traditional system of values and the foundations of morality (ethos, which includes humanism, compassion, collectivism, justice, freedom, equality, etc.), and on the other hand, a situationally conditioned tendency to reassess values and to free oneself from the need to comply with basic moral norms (a variable part of the ethical system based on individualism and selfishness, equality, unconditional freedom).
The presence of these two trends leads to the fact that the interests of the individual take priority over the interests of the group, community, society, since the “poles” of society are most active in the formation of the hierarchy of values, imposing their attitudes on more “moderate” social groups. Freeing himself from moral shackles, a person, as it seems to him, receives the necessary “freedom”, by choosing which, he not only acquires what he wants in the form of material success, but also feels fulfilled as a value. On the other hand, at the same time, the value of security necessary for the survival and relatively stable existence of the majority of Russians increases. This part of Russians is ready to give up part of their freedom in exchange for guaranteed security.
The presence of this trend can serve as definite evidence of the dehumanization of social relations. The priority of the interests of the individual presupposes an awareness of the value of the individual himself and, of course, is associated with respect for his rights, honor and dignity. However, in a crisis society, the priority of the interests of the individual and his freedom in the absence of proper security and social justice lead to the fact that a person’s needs can be satisfied most often by infringing on the interests of other individuals, since equality of opportunity for an individual to realize his rights is still really absent. This determines alienation, leading to polarization and atomization of society, isolation and loneliness of people, and the absence of a single constructive platform for joint social creativity. The low level of state responsibility for citizens entails a decrease in their social activity.
All this, unfortunately, leads to the conclusion that the real content of consciousness as an individual in general, as well as the everyday and professional consciousness of a specialist in the field of social work, may differ significantly from the ideal model. At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, during the period of change from the industrial world civilization to the post-industrial one, our country is experiencing one of the deepest crises in the history of mankind. system crisis values, their radical revision. No wonder WHAT values n moral principles implemented in activities can significantly differ from humanistic and professional significant. Specialist, influencing society, he himself largely degree is his product. Subjectivity and subjectivity specialist can determine that his perception of the profession and social being will generally be biased. This point of view he can trans lyrate into society.
The activities of social institutions designed to promote the formation of an individual’s opinions and attitudes on various issues, and thereby the formation of his ways of life, take place in society as a constant factor. However, unfortunately, its effectiveness is low. In our country, according to A. A. Vostil, the process of socialization of the individual has been destroyed, and at present all conditions have been created for the prosperity of persons with sociocultural pathology."
At the same time, there may be counteraction to the influence of the “market” on the consciousness of the individual. This counteraction can be provided by the education system in general and social education in particular. The process of formation of personality in general and of a specialist in the field of social work should be considered as the most important component of his professional training and his formation as a person.
In this regard, one of the problems of social work deontology is determining the level and quality of influence of the above elements and structures of social consciousness on the content of the duty and responsibility of a social worker. The individual consciousness of a specialist cannot help but experience processes in the spiritual and social spheres society, which together lead to the degradation of the ethical consciousness of the individual. The task of deontology in this aspect may be to justify the need for a social worker to fulfill his duty to society, despite the fact that in the modern situation society may seem to be an antagonist of an individual.
- Culture and civilization - page 2
- Culture and civilization - page 3
- Typology of cultures and civilizations - page 2
- Typology of cultures and civilizations - page 3
- general characteristics primitiveness
- Periodization of primitive history
- Material culture and social relations
- Spiritual culture
- The emergence of mythology, art and scientific knowledge
- Formation of religious ideas
- The East as a sociocultural and civilizational phenomenon
- Pre-Axial Cultures of the Ancient East
- Early state in the East
- Art culture
- Culture Ancient India
- Worldview and religious beliefs
- Art culture
- Culture Ancient China
- Level of development of material civilization
- The state and the genesis of social connections
- Worldview and religious beliefs
- Art culture
- General characteristics and main stages of development
- Ancient polis as a unique phenomenon
- The worldview of man in ancient society
- Art culture
- General characteristics of the European Middle Ages
- Material culture, economy and living conditions in the Middle Ages
- Social and political systems of the Middle Ages
- Medieval pictures of the world, value systems, human ideals
- Medieval pictures of the world, value systems, human ideals - page 2
- Medieval pictures of the world, value systems, human ideals - page 3
- Artistic culture and art of the Middle Ages
- Artistic culture and art of the Middle Ages - page 2
- General characteristics of Arab-Muslim civilization
- Economic development
- Socio-political relations
- Features of Islam as a world religion
- Art culture
- Artistic culture - page 2
- Artistic culture - page 3
- Byzantine picture of the world
- General characteristics of Byzantine civilization
- Social and political systems of Byzantium
- Byzantine picture of the world
- Byzantine picture of the world - page 2
- Artistic culture and art of Byzantium
- Artistic culture and art of Byzantium - page 2
- General characteristics of medieval Rus'
- Economy. Social class structure
- Economy. Social class structure - page 2
- Evolution of the political system
- Evolution of the political system - page 2
- Evolution of the political system - page 3
- The value system of medieval Rus'. Spiritual culture
- The value system of medieval Rus'. Spiritual culture - page 2
- The value system of medieval Rus'. Spiritual culture - page 3
- The value system of medieval Rus'. Spiritual culture - page 4
- Artistic culture and art
- Artistic culture and art - page 2
- Artistic culture and art - page 3
- Artistic culture and art - page 4
- Content of the concept and periodization of the era
- Economic, social and political preconditions European Renaissance
- Changes in the worldview of citizens
- Renaissance content
- Humanism - the ideology of the Renaissance
- Titanism and its “other” side
- Renaissance Art
- General characteristics of the New Age
- Lifestyle and material civilization of modern times
- Social and political systems of modern times
- Pictures of the world of modern times
- Artistic styles in modern art
- General information
- Characteristics of the main stages
- Economy. Social composition. Evolution of the political system
- Social composition of Russian society
- Evolution of the political system
-
- The value system of Russian society - page 2
- Evolution of spiritual culture
- The relationship between provincial and metropolitan culture
- Culture Don Cossacks
- Development of socio-political thought and awakening of civic consciousness
- The emergence of protective, liberal and socialist traditions
- Two lines in the history of Russian culture of the 19th century.
- The role of literature in the spiritual life of Russian society
- Artistic culture of modern times
- Artistic culture of the New Age - page 2
- Artistic culture of modern times - page 3
- General characteristics of the period
- Choosing the path of social development. Programs political parties and movements
- Liberal alternative to transform Russia
- Social-democratic alternative to transforming Russia
- Revaluation traditional system values in the public consciousness
- silver Age– Renaissance of Russian culture
- General characteristics of the period
- General characteristics of the period - page 2
- The evolution of the value system in Western culture XX century
- Main trends in the development of Western art
- Problems of the history of Soviet society and culture
- The formation of the Soviet system (1917–1930s)
- Economy
- Social structure. Social consciousness
- Culture
- Soviet society during the years of war and peace. Crisis and collapse of the Soviet system (40-80s)
- Ideology. Politic system
- Economic development of Soviet society
- Social relations. Social consciousness. System of values
- Cultural life
- Political and socio-economic development of modern Russia
- Political and socio-economic development of modern Russia - page 2
- Social consciousness in the 90s: main development trends
- Social consciousness in the 90s: main development trends - page 2
- Development of culture
The value system of Russian society
Radical changes in all spheres of life in the modern era also affected the value system of Russian society. The most important factor What influenced these changes was the formation of technogenic civilization, bourgeois social relations, and rationalistic thinking.
Despite the split that occurred in Russian society under Peter I between the higher and lower classes, it retained traditional value ideas and way of life. One of the main values in the life of the upper and lower classes is family and family traditions. The authority of the family in Russian society was unusually high. A person who did not want to start a family in adulthood aroused suspicion.
Only two reasons could justify such a decision - illness and the desire to enter a monastery. Russian proverbs and sayings speak eloquently about the importance of family in a person’s life: “An unmarried person is not a person”, “In a family the porridge is thicker”, “A family in a heap is not afraid of a cloud”, etc. The family was the custodian and transmitter from generation to generation life experience, morality, children were raised and educated here.
Thus, in a noble estate they preserved portraits of grandfathers and great-grandfathers, stories and legends about them, their things - grandfather’s favorite chair, mother’s favorite cup, etc. In Russian novels, this feature of estate life appears as an integral feature of it.
In peasant life, also permeated with the poetry of tradition, the very concept of home had, first of all, the meaning of deep connections, and not just living space: a father’s house, a home. Hence the respect for everything that makes up a home. Tradition even provided for different types of behavior in different parts of the house (what is allowed near the stove, what is not allowed in the red corner, etc.), preserving the memory of elders is also a peasant tradition.
From the elderly they passed on to to the younger generation icons, things and books. Such a peasant-noble perception of life could not do without some idealization - after all, memory preserved the best everywhere.
Ritual traditions associated with church and calendar holidays were repeated practically without changes in various social strata of Russian society. The words could be attributed not only to the Larins:
They kept life peaceful
Habits of peaceful old times;
At their Shrovetide
There were Russian pancakes.
The Russian family remained patriarchal, for a long time guided by “Domostroy” - an ancient set of everyday rules and instructions.
Thus, the higher and lower classes, separated from each other in their historical existence, nevertheless had the same moral values.
Meanwhile, the most important socio-economic transformations taking place in Russia, characterized by the establishment of competition in the economy, liberalism in political life, the affirmation of the ideas of free thought and enlightenment, contributed to the spread of new European socio-cultural values, which essentially did not take root among the masses - only the elite could master them.
The working masses (the so-called “soil”) adhered to the traditions of pre-Petrine antiquity. They protected the original ideological dogmas associated with Orthodoxy and autocracy, deeply rooted traditions, political and social institutions.
Such values could not contribute to modernization or even intensive sociodynamics of the country. Collectivism remained the defining feature of social consciousness in the “soil” layers. It was the main moral value in the peasant, urban settlement and Cossack communities. Collectivism helped to collectively endure the trials of difficult times and was the main factor of social protection.
Thus, the life of the Cossacks was based on community organization and the principles of military democracy: collective decision-making in the Cossack circle, election of atamans, collective forms of ownership. The harsh and cruel living conditions of the Cossacks contributed to the creation of a certain value system.
The pre-revolutionary historian E. Savelyev, who described the history of the Don Cossacks, drew attention to the fact that “the Cossacks were a straightforward and knightly proud people, they did not like unnecessary words and matters in the Circle were resolved quickly and fairly.” Cunning and intelligence, perseverance and the ability to endure severe hardships, merciless revenge on the enemy, and cheerful disposition distinguished the Cossacks.
They stood firmly for each other - “all for one and one for all,” for their Cossack brotherhood; were incorruptible; betrayal, cowardice, and theft were not forgiven. During campaigns, border towns and cordons, the Cossacks led a single life and strictly observed chastity.
A textbook example is Stepan Razin, who ordered a Cossack and a woman to be thrown into the Volga for violating chastity, and when he himself was reminded of the same, he threw a captive Persian princess into the water. It's the high ones moral qualities contributed to the constantly high combat readiness of the Cossack army.
From the opinions expressed about the value system in the “soil” structure of Russian society, it is clear how the people’s worldview was little affected by the grandiose changes that New era took place in the state. To a much greater extent, the changes affected the literate and active part of the Russian population, which V. Klyuchevsky called “civilization.”
Here new classes of society were formed, entrepreneurship developed and market relations, a professional intelligentsia appeared. The intelligentsia was represented by the clergy and nobility, commoners and serfs (actors, musicians, architects, etc.).
In the ranks of the intelligentsia, rationalism, an optimistic outlook, and faith in the possibility of improving the world were established as a style of thinking. The worldview was freed from the spiritual power of the church.
Peter I abolished the patriarchate and placed a synod, essentially a college of officials, at the head of the church, thereby subordinating the church to the state. Further weakening of the church occurred in the 60s of the 18th century, when Catherine II, who strengthened the foundations of a secular absolutist state, confiscated most of the land holdings that belonged to the church and monasteries. Of the 954 monasteries that existed at that time, only 385 survived secularization.
The destruction of the closed Orthodox world was largely due to the Russian enlightenment. F. Prokopovich, V. Tatishchev, A. Kantemir, M. Lomonosov, D. Anichkov, S. Desnitsky, A. Radishchev developed ideas about the independence of nature and man from divine predestination, the need to separate the spheres of influence of religion and science, etc. .
In the 19th century The ideas of free thought and sharp criticism of religion were put forward by many Decembrists, as well as revolutionary democrats V. Belinsky, A. Herzen, N. Chernyshevsky, N. Dobrolyubov. They tried to create a general atheistic concept that would illuminate the origins of religion and its social functions, especially Orthodoxy.
In the value system of Russian society, changes in the personal and public life of classes played a large role. According to D.S. Likhachev, under Peter I, “the awareness of the transition forced us to change the system of signs”: put on European dress, new uniforms, “scrape off” beards, reform all state terminology in the European way, recognize the European.
Pages: 1 2
Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications
Federal Communications Agency
Siberian State University of Telecommunications and Informatics
Department of Sociology, Political Science and Psychology
Home written work
Topic: “Values in modern Russian society”
Is done by a student
Checked
Introduction 3
Values in modern Russia: results of expert research 4
Dominant values 6
Material well-being 6
“I” value (individualism) 7
Career (self-realization) 7
Stability 8
Freedom 9
Respect for elders 9
God (belief in God) 10
Patriotism 10
Duty and Honor 11
Anti-values 12
“Ideal” consolidating values 13
Conclusions: key trends in the development of the Russian value doctrine 14
Conclusion 15
References 16
Introduction
Value is a characteristic feature of human life. Over the course of many centuries, people have developed the ability to identify objects and phenomena in the world around them that meet their needs and to which they treat in a special way: they value and protect them, and focus on them in their life activities. In everyday usage, “value” is understood as one or another value of some object (thing, state, action), its dignity with a plus or minus sign, something desirable or harmful, in other words, good or bad.
No society can do without values; as for individuals, they have a choice whether to share these values or not. Some are committed to the values of collectivism, while others are committed to the values of individualism. For some, the highest value is money, for others - moral integrity, for others - a political career.
Currently, the problem of value is of great importance. This is explained by the fact that the process of renewal of all spheres of public life has brought to life many new, both positive and negative phenomena. Developing scientific and technological progress, industrialization and informatization of all spheres modern society- all this gives rise to an increase in negative attitudes towards history, culture, traditions and leads to the devaluation of values in the modern world.
The shortage of spiritual values is felt today in all spheres. Many of our ideals have changed dramatically during the changes. The spiritual balance was disrupted, and a destructive stream of indifference, cynicism, disbelief, envy, and hypocrisy rushed into the resulting void.
The purpose of my work is to study these changes and identify new, modern values of Russian society.
Values in modern Russia: results of expert research
During the period from July 15 to September 10, 2007, specialists from the Pitirim Sorokin Foundation conducted a study “Values in modern Russia.” It became the first stage of a large-scale project of the same name, aimed at promoting the development of a value base capable of consolidating various groups of Russian society.
The relevance of the study is due to the obvious demand of society for a new understanding of the value foundation. Various state and social institutions respond to such a request by intensifying the discussion of this topic, but it is not accompanied by a study of the fundamental foundations on which the expected correction of the value doctrine of society should take place. How do Russians understand the concept of “value”? What moral standards are capable of consolidating society? What ideology should these values serve to form? The initiators of the research project will try to find answers to these and other questions.
The purpose of the first – this – stage of work was to study the value trends of Russian society. In particular, the following tasks were proposed for solution:
To study opinions about the key values that dominate Russian society at the present stage.
Determine the vector for correcting axiological preferences of various religious, ethnic and age groups Russians.
To record the understanding of different audiences of the concept of “national ideology”, as well as experts’ forecasts regarding the development of the national idea of Russia.
Determine the value priorities of Russian youth, associated political preferences and electoral plans.
The research was conducted through an expert survey and focus groups with various youth audiences.
According to the surveyed social scientists, the Russian value system is still chaotic, undergoing transformation, and has not yet fully formed in its new capacity.
The reasons for such a long registration process are “ numerous disasters that befell Russia in the last century"and reflected on the collective consciousness of the population. Experts believe that " people have still not recovered from the feeling of the ground being pulled out from under their feet“According to social scientists, there is no single value system in Russia today.
However, many value subsystems coexist in the country, spontaneously formed in accordance with the interests and needs of certain social groups.
Some experts called the modern value picture of Russia “ situation of valuable debris", When " different parts of society making use of their wreckage».
Dominant values
Among the axiological attitudes characteristic of modern Russian society, the study participants - experts and actors of youth focus groups - indicated the following values (ranked according to the principle of descending significance):
Stability.
Respect for elders.
God (belief in God).
Patriotism.
Duty and honor.
Material well-being.
The value of “I” (individualism).
Career (self-realization).
Material well-being
The priority of the values of material well-being and consumer wealth (in common parlance - mercantilism) for most of modern Russian society is noted by many experts. First of all, these values are highlighted by the interviewed social scientists who have the opportunity, in the course of their professional activities, to monitor the dynamics of social demands. They note that consumer orientation is unconventional for Russia, since it began to form only in the 90s, when the “idealistic” generations left socially active life.
Analyzing the reasons for the dominance of consumer orientation as a value, experts pointed out the massive propaganda of the consumer lifestyle and the urbanization of the country as such.
The value of "I" (individualism)
The respondents believe that it is precisely in the individual’s concentration on his own needs and, accordingly, “ in the perception of the surrounding world through an egocentric prism“is the essence of individualism as a value.
This situation, experts believe, is a consequence of the introduction of the idea of a consumer society, when an exaggerated focus on wealth focuses a person only on personal interests. Individualism is a response to the empty niche of “common” values, the Soviet system of which was destroyed and a new one was not created.
The dominance of individualist values, according to a number of respondents, limits the socio-psychological wealth and cultural prospects of the country.
Career (self-realization)
A peculiar conversion of the individualistic priorities of modern Russian society is the presentation by experts of self-realization as an important value, which primarily means a successful career. According to the majority of respondents, it is precisely this that gives Russians, especially young people, “ feeling of worth in the eyes of others", indicates " compliance with public standards", gives the feeling that " you have achieved something in life" Self-realization was identified as a dominant value at the current stage by both experts and youth representatives who participated in focus groups.
Family
The basic nature of the value of family was noted by all study participants without exception.
However, the nature of loyalty to family values varied among a number of expert groups. A significant portion of respondents confidently insist that the family in Russia has been and remains a key element of the social system.
Supporters of this position note that in the new Russia the trend of growing importance of the family is intensifying and insist on the need for systematic work to introduce family values into the public consciousness.
For another number of experts, the appeal to the family as a value is external - inertial - in nature: this value is indicated as fundamental, but subsequent discussions about it demonstrate a peripheral attitude to the institution of family in reality.
Separately, it is worth highlighting the position of young people regarding the family: an unexpected result of the study was the fact that, despite the erosion of the institution of family in a modern globalized society, the vast majority of the young audience states the importance of the family and points to the importance of preserving and protecting the family institution.
Stability
The overwhelming number of respondents - experts and participants in youth focus groups - noted stability, which means the absence of socio-political and economic cataclysms, as a basic value for them.
Young people associate the likelihood of their success in life with stability. Middle-aged and older experts explain the desire for stability as fatigue from the “era of change.”
The desire of society for stability, experts note, has socio-psychological and pragmatic aspects. Firstly, the correction of the circumstances of existence from extreme to comfortable requires the instinct of psychological self-preservation of society. Secondly, Russians associate the prospects for a personal and national economic breakthrough with stability.
Liberty
During the study, freedom as a basic socially significant value was noted mainly by representatives of the youth audience. At the same time, it is worth pointing out the semantic dichotomy of the value of freedom, which emerged in connection with which youth groups spoke out on this issue.
Basic national values - basic moral values, priority moral guidelines that exist in the cultural, family, socio-historical, religious traditions of a multinational people Russian Federation, passed on from generation to generation and ensuring the successful development of the country in modern conditions;
Patriotism as one of the manifestations of a person’s spiritual maturity, expressed in love for Russia, the people, small homeland, in a conscious desire to serve the Fatherland.
Labor and creativity as distinctive features of a spiritually and morally developed personality.
Family as the basis of spiritual and moral development and education of the individual, the guarantee of the continuity of the cultural and moral traditions of the peoples of Russia from generation to generation and the vitality of Russian society.
Nature as one of the most important foundations for a healthy and harmonious life of a person and society.
A healthy lifestyle in the unity of components: physical, mental, spiritual and social-moral health.
Basic national values are derived from the national life of Russia in all its historical and cultural completeness and ethnic diversity. In the sphere of national life, one can highlight the sources of morality and humanity, that is, those areas of social relations, activity and consciousness, the reliance on which allows a person to resist destructive influences and productively develop his consciousness, life, and the very system of social relations.
Traditional sources of morality are: Russia, the multinational people of the Russian Federation, civil society, family, work, art, science, religion, nature, humanity.
According to traditional sources of morality, basic national values are determined, each of which is revealed in a system of moral values (ideas):
- * patriotism - love for Russia, for one’s people, for one’s small Motherland, service to the Fatherland;
- * social solidarity - personal and national freedom, trust in people, institutions of the state and civil society, justice, mercy, honor, dignity;
- * citizenship - service to the Fatherland, rule of law, civil society, law and order, multicultural world, freedom of conscience and religion;
- * family - love and loyalty, health, prosperity, respect for parents, care for elders and younger ones, care for procreation;
- * labor and creativity - respect for work, creativity and creation, determination and perseverance;
- * science - the value of knowledge, the pursuit of truth, the scientific picture of the world;
- *traditional Russian religions- ideas about faith, spirituality, religious life of a person, the value of a religious worldview, tolerance, formed on the basis of interfaith dialogue;
- * art and literature - beauty, harmony, the spiritual world of man, moral choice, meaning of life, aesthetic development, ethical development;
- * nature - evolution, motherland, protected nature, planet Earth, environmental consciousness;
- * humanity - world peace, diversity of cultures and peoples, human progress, international cooperation.
Basic national values underlie the holistic space of spiritual and moral development and education of schoolchildren, i.e. the way of life school life, which determines the classroom, extracurricular and extracurricular activities of students. To organize such a space and its full functioning requires the concerted efforts of all social actors involved in education: families, public organizations, including children’s and youth movements and organizations, institutions additional education, culture and sports, media, traditional Russian religious associations. The leading, content-determining role in creating the way of school life belongs to the subjects of the educational process.
The system of basic national values underlies the idea of one nation and the readiness of the main social forces for civil consolidation based on common values and social meanings in solving national problems, including the upbringing of children and youth.
Achieving civil agreement on basic national values will strengthen the unity of the Russian educational space, giving it openness, dialogue, cultural and social dynamism.
Civil consent on basic national values has nothing to do with the uniformity of the values of the nation and the nation itself, spiritual and social unification. The unity of the nation is achieved through a basic value consensus in the constant dialogue of various social forces and is supported by their openness to each other, readiness to jointly solve national problems, including the spiritual and moral education of children and youth as the basis for the development of our country.
In the course "Mathematics" in accordance with the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard significant place devoted to the development of a sense of belonging to one’s homeland, people, history and pride in them; awareness of the importance of work, through familiarization with the world of professions; awareness of the value of the family as the basis for spiritual and moral development and education of the individual; caring attitude towards the environment; healthy and safe lifestyle. Both textual and illustrative material contribute to achieving this goal.
I would like to pay special attention to text problems. The plot content of word problems, associated, as a rule, with the life of a family, class, school, events in a country, city or village, introduces children to different aspects of the surrounding reality; promotes their spiritual and moral development and education: forms a sense of pride in their homeland, respect for family values, respect for the environment, nature, and spiritual values; develops interest in activities in various clubs and sports sections; creates an attitude towards a healthy lifestyle. The development of patriotism, a sense of pride in one’s Motherland, the history of Russia, awareness of the role home country such illustrations and text material (2) contribute to global development: information from the history of our country and its achievements in modern stage development (for example, in grade 3 it is proposed to determine the age of Moscow and the Russian fleet.