IDEAL SOCIAL
- English ideal, social; German Ideal, soziales. The idea of the perfect state of social objects, reflecting the most significant values of a given culture, which are a criterion for assessing reality and a guideline for the activity of an individual, social. groups, classes, society.
Antinazi. Encyclopedia of Sociology, 2009
See what “SOCIAL IDEAL” is in other dictionaries:
IDEAL SOCIAL- English ideal, social; German Ideal, soziales. The idea of the perfect state of social objects, reflecting the most significant values of a given culture, which are a criterion for assessing reality and a guideline for the activity of an individual, social. groups, classes... Dictionary in Sociology
This term has other meanings, see Ideal (meanings). Ideal (Latin idealis from Greek ἰδέα image, idea) highest value, the best, completed state of a particular phenomenon, an example of personal qualities, ... ... Wikipedia
IDEAL- (Greek idea, idea). 1. The moral concept of moral consciousness, in which the moral demands placed on people are expressed in the form of an image of a morally perfect personality, an idea of a person who embodies everything... ... Ethics Dictionary
SOCIAL UTOPISM is a special type of consciousness that arose on the basis of a special understanding and application utopian ideas and searches. Social utopianism and utopia have common roots: the incompleteness of history, the unacceptability existing world and the desire for... Philosophical Encyclopedia
Main article: Soviet image life “Apartment, dacha, car” is a triad that characterizes the consumer ideal that developed in Soviet society in the 1960s-1980s (in the comic form “Dachka, car and dog”). ... Wikipedia
A complex of social ideas focused on achieving a certain (abstract) social ideal, subordination social life lofty goals, as a rule, far from the real utilitarian needs of the functioning of social... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia
Hellenistic ideology and culture in the 2nd - 1st centuries. BC e.- Social crisis and political decline of the Hellenistic states of the 2nd and 1st centuries. BC e. was reflected in various ideological trends of this time. The development of slavery, which entailed a decline in the standard of living of the poor free population,... ... World history. Encyclopedia
RSFSR. I. General information The RSFSR was founded on October 25 (November 7), 1917. It borders on the north-west with Norway and Finland, on the west with Poland, on the south-east with China, the MPR and the DPRK, as well as on the union republics that are part of the USSR: to W. from... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
Forms of government, political regimes and systems Anarchy Aristocracy Bureaucracy Gerontocracy Demarchy Democracy Imitation democracy Liberal democracy ... Wikipedia
- á The correct emphasis must be placed on the term in this article. This article follows... Wikipedia
Books
- Freedom and responsibility. Fundamentals of organic worldview. Articles on solidarism, S. A. Levitsky. Sergei Aleksandrovich Levitsky (1908 - 1983) - a prominent philosopher of the Russian diaspora, student and follower of N. O. Lossky. This edition includes his first book - `Basics of Organic...
Socio-historical development - an extremely complex, multilateral process that takes place over a fairly long period of time historical period and presupposing economic, political-legal, spiritual-moral, intellectual and many other components that form a certain integrity.
Typically, sociologists focus on the socio-historical development of a particular social entity. Such a social subject can be an individual, a specific society (for example, Russian) or a group of societies (European, Latin American societies), a social group, a nation, a social institution (education system, family), a social organization or any combination thereof (political parties, national economic enterprises, commercial and industrial companies). Finally, such a subject may be certain trends relating to all of humanity as a social subject.
0Type of society- it is a system of certain structural units - social communities, groups, institutions, etc., interconnected and interacting with each other on the basis of some common social ideals, values, and norms.
There are different classifications of types of societies. The most elementary classification is the division of societies into simple And complex
Currently in the domestic scientific literature concept of civilization usually used in three meanings:
§ a fairly high stage of the sociocultural level of a particular society, following barbarism;
§ sociocultural type (Japanese, Chinese, European, Russian and other civilizations);
§ highest modern level socio-economic, technological, cultural and political development (contradictions of modern civilization).
To better understand the society that surrounds us and in which we live, let us trace the development of societies from the very beginning of their existence.
Simplest societies were called hunter-gatherer societies. Here men hunted animals and women collected edible plants. Apart from this, there was only this basic division of the group by gender. Although male hunters enjoyed authority in these groups, female gatherers brought more food to the group, perhaps 4/5 of all food obtained.
Hunter-gatherer societies were small and usually consisted of 25-40 people. They led nomadic image life, moving from place to place as food supplies dwindle. These groups were, as a rule, peaceful and shared food among themselves, which was a necessary condition for survival.
Hunter-gatherer societies are the most egalitarian of all societies. Since food obtained by hunting and gathering spoils quickly, people cannot stock up, so no one can become richer than another. There are no rulers, and many decisions are made jointly.
Second Social Revolution, much more sudden and significant than the first, occurred approximately 5-6 thousand years ago and was associated with the invention of the plow. This invention led to the emergence of a new type of society. The new society - agrarian - was based on extensive agriculture, in which the soil was cultivated with a horse-drawn plow
The Industrial Revolution, like the Agrarian Revolution, was also driven by invention. It began in Britain, where the steam engine was first used in 1765
The new source of energy gave rise to an industrial society, which sociologist Herbert Bloomer defined as a society in which fuel-powered machines replace human or animal power.
The problem of the ideal in philosophy is constructed as a problem social ideal. Any other variants of axiology (cognitive ideal, religious), even if they are abstracted from any references to social interactions, are derived from this construction. Therefore, what makes sense for philosophy is not a universal ideal, but a universal social ideal (a normative reflection of society in general).
IDEAL SOCIAL English. ideal, social; him. Ideal, soziales. Representation of the perfect state of social objects, reflecting the most significant values of a given culture, which are a criterion for assessing reality and a guideline for the activity of an individual, social. groups, classes, society.
Social ideal - an idea of the perfect state of society (desired, proper). It can be present both in a group (culture, nation, denomination, party, etc.) and in an individual. Born from their most significant values. Serves as an evaluation criterion (see Evaluation in philosophy) reality and a reference point for activities
As the last one, I.S. should ideally (Ideal Social Ideal) satisfy the requirements: 1) Universal recognition (both by other groups and subjects hypothetically capable of assessing being: flora and fauna, laws of nature, God) 2) Eternity 3) Achievability (availability of resources and public forces) Describe the ideal S.I. now it does not seem possible due to both the state of knowledge (1) and the mind as a whole (2). It is extremely rare to see S.I. postulating the second condition along with the third. However, a person is quite capable of putting forward potentially ideal S.I. and estimate their height
The actual progress of the peasantry's development of vast territories in the outskirts undoubtedly contributed to the popularity of stories about the extraordinary abundance of new lands and favorable social conditions on them.
The socio-utopian views of the peasants extended far beyond the boundaries of their community. They were expressed in the existence of various rumors about the promised lands; the formation of legends based on these rumors and the appearance of written texts; in the practice of resettlement in search of these lands and even in the creation of peasant communities, whose life was an attempt to realize the peasant social-utopian ideal. The existence of such communities, in turn, fueled stories and legends about lands and villages with ideal social order, exceptional natural wealth and economic prosperity.
The actual progress of the peasantry's development of vast territories in the outskirts undoubtedly contributed to the popularity of stories about the extraordinary abundance of new lands and favorable social conditions on them. Characteristic in this regard is what happened to modern ideas about the so-called Belovodye. At first it was considered legendary, but in the course of further research by historians it turned into very real peasant settlements of the 18th century in the valleys of Bukhtarma, Uimon and other rivers in Altai, the history of which can be fully traced from written sources. But the existence of the real Belovodye did not exclude the independent later development of the legend according to the laws folklore genre. Masons (that’s what the local peasants called the fugitives who settled in the mountains, since Altai, like many other mountains, was popularly called “Stone”) Bukhtarma and Uimon are at the same time the prototype folk legend about the promised land and an actual attempt to realize the peasant social-utopian ideal.
For about half a century - from the 40s to the early 90s of the 18th century, in the most inaccessible mountain valleys of Altai, there were settlements of fugitives that were governed outside state power. In September 1791, Catherine II issued a decree, announced to the “masons” in July 1792, according to which they were accepted into Russian citizenship, their “guilts” being forgiven. For several decades, self-government operated in these communities and peasant ideas about social justice were implemented. The population of the free communities of Bukhtarma and Uimon was formed from peasants (mostly schismatics) and fugitive factory workers (also, as a rule, recent peasants). They were engaged in arable farming, fishing and secretly maintained relations, including economic ones, with the peasantry of the adjacent territories. S.I. Gulyaev, who collected information about “Belovodye” not only from “oral stories of some masons,” but also from documents from the archives of the Zmeinogorsk mining office and the Ust-Kamenogorsk commandant’s office, wrote about them: “Bound by the same participation, the same way of life, The masons, alienated from society, formed a kind of brotherhood, despite their different beliefs. They saved many good qualities Russian people: they were reliable comrades, made mutual benefits to each other, and especially helped all the poor with supplies, seeds for sowing, agricultural tools, clothing and other things.”
To resolve fundamentally important issues, a meeting of all free villages was held. The final word remained with the “old men”. “Another year ago,” testified the artisan Fyodor Sizikov, interrogated by the authorities in 1790, after eight years of living among the “masons,” “the fugitive people living in those villages at a meeting intended to choose from themselves... one person who would, quietly having made his way to Barnaul, he came to the head of the factories to ask for their forgiveness for their crimes and, so that they would not be taken out of the places there, putting them in the proper payment of taxes. But in the end the old people said, although they would forgive us, they would take us back to our former places and assign us to positions, and therefore they remained as before.”
As needed, meetings of individual villages or groups of villages were convened. This is, in particular, how the trial was carried out. “If anyone is convicted of crimes, then residents from several villages called by the plaintiff will gather in the village to his house, and, having dealt with it in proportion to the crime, they will inflict punishment” (from the interrogation protocol of F. Sizikov). The highest punishment was forced expulsion from the community.
T. S. Mamsik, who studied the social life of the Bukhtarma villages in the 18th century based on the testimony of their residents preserved in the archive, notes that “hiring among the “masons” was not of an entrepreneurial nature.” New fugitives who arrived “to the stone” felt the support of the old-timers: they were accepted into someone’s hut, where often one of the recently arrived “comrades” lived. The next summer, the stranger helped the owner of the house sow bread and received seeds from him for sowing on his own. In the fourth summer, the newly settled person became an independent owner and, in turn, hired one of the new fugitives, supplying him with seeds, etc. “Partnerships” were in use - associations “on shares of two or more able-bodied people for agricultural or fishing activities. Sometimes the “comrades” jointly built a new hut. The community of “masons”, which arose as a result of voluntary resettlement, included family and kinship communities, partnerships for farming or certain branches of it, and religious associations. The existence of this community was perceived by the peasantry itself as the realization of some. social and religious-moral ideals. This was only a certain stage in the socio-economic development of the territorial community in the conditions of the development of the outskirts, in temporary isolation from the feudal state, but the peasantry absolutized it as an ideal. Despite its small scale, this phenomenon left a noticeable mark on. public consciousness peasants and in the subsequent period formed the basis for the movement of a number of groups of settlers in search of the legendary country “Belovodye” - a peasant utopia (Chistov, 1967, 239-277; Pokrovsky, 1974, 323-337; Mamsik, 1975; Mamsik, 1978, 85-115 ; Mamsik, 1982).
A clearly expressed tendency to realize the peasant social-utopian ideal on the basis of Christian ideology in its Old Believer version can be traced in the history of the Vygoretsky (Vygoleksinsky) hostel, which arose at the end of the 17th century in the Olonets province. Vyg’s organization, along with the usual monastic structure, adopted the traditions of the state village community and “secular” peasant monasteries. In the 18th century, their own charters and council resolutions on statutory issues were created - more than 60 documents in total. They attempt to combine democracy with the tasks of division of labor in the economic-religious community.
Only the dress was the personal property of the members of the hostel; as an exception, some were left with other things, but they were inherited by the community. The extensive economy of the Vygoretsky hostel and the monasteries that gravitated towards it was based on the cooperative labor of its members. All economic and administrative management was elective. The most important matters were subject to conciliar discussion. Initially, the ideology of the Old Believer peasant community on Vyga was based on eschatological motives (that is, the expectation of the imminent end of the world), but later these motives weakened, and there was a departure from asceticism in everyday life, from monastic forms of community life. The Vygoleksinsky world, having been included by the state in the taxation system, is gradually entering the normal track of socio-economic relations of the entire region.
A similar path, but with certain differences, is followed by the peasantry in two types of Old Believer hermitages: hermitages-villages, where families lived, and hermitages with a communal charter with separate stays for men and women. The leaders and ideologists of the movement made maximum demands on the ordinary Old Believer peasant (they are set out, in particular, in the “Announcement of the Desert Deanery,” 1737): a combination of hard agricultural labor with an ascetic lifestyle. The most enduring part of the statutes turned out to be that which did not infringe upon the interests of the peasant family.
As a reaction to the secularization of the monasteries, a new direction is born - the radical Philippian consent, reviving for some time the socio-utopian and religious ideals of the early Vyg. From the polemical messages exchanged between different sections of the Old Believers in the 18th century, it is clear that the principles of community of estates and artel labor were not in doubt on either side.
Attempts to proclaim and partially implement social ideals in the settlements of Old Believer peasants of various persuasions also took place in other regions of the country - in Yaroslavl, Pskov, Kostroma, Saratov and other provinces. Information about these phenomena was widely dispersed among non-Old Believer peasants. Modern research confirm the idea of the famous historian of the 19th century A.P. Shchapov about the manifestation in the schismatic movement of many features characteristic of traditional peasant consciousness and life in general. This similarity was the basis for a certain popularity of the social-utopian ideal of the Old Believers, its sound in peasant legends and programs of peasant movements.
At the initial stages of their existence, some communities of sectarians were also associated with the socio-ethical ideals of the peasantry: Doukhobors, Molokans, Khlysty. However, false mysticism, fanaticism, alienation from the church and the rest of the mass of Orthodox peasants, as a rule, negated the positive aspects in their ideology. (Abramov, 366-378; Lyubomirov; Kuandykov - 1983; Kuandykov - 1984; Melnikov, 210, 240-241; Klibanov, 180, 199-201; 212; 262-284; Pokrovsky - 1973, 393-406; Ryndzyunsky; Koretsky ; Shchapov, 77, 119, 120).
An organic part of the socio-utopian ideas of the peasantry was the ideal of a just monarch who could bring the order on earth into conformity with divine truth. If in the social organization of their daily life, in the lower, so to speak, authorities, the peasants clearly preferred democratic forms - this is evidenced, as we have seen, by the ubiquity of the community and the flexible diversity of its types, then in relation to the highest authority of governing the entire state, they remained monarchists. Just as the ideals of justice in the distribution of property and labor responsibilities found expression in the existence of some peasant communities that tried to remain outside the states for a limited time, so the ideas about good kings gave rise to imposture in real life.
This phenomenon was possible due to the widespread dissemination among peasants of ideas associated with the expectation of the arrival or return to power of a sovereign who, in their opinion, was unfairly pushed aside in one way or another from the throne, possessing the ideal qualities of a ruler and intending to take into account the interests of the people. Impostors, who appeared not only during peasant wars, but also in private manifestations of social protest (in the 30-50s of the 18th century, for example, there were about a dozen of them), were met with a gullible attitude from part of the peasantry.
In the 30-50s of the 18th century, the names of Peter II and Ivan Antonovich served as a kind of symbols of a good sovereign among the peasants. They are replaced by the image of Peter III, who eclipsed his predecessors and found supreme expression in the peasant war E.I. Pugacheva. The peasantry could not know anything about the personality of the real Peter III, who ruled for only six months. At the same time, there was a certain awareness of the laws, combined with the peasants’ own interpretation of them. The Manifesto of February 18, 1762 on noble freedom was interpreted as the first part of a legislative act, which was to be followed by the liberation of the peasants from the landowners. They also knew the decree allowing Old Believers who fled to Poland or other foreign lands to return to Russia and settle in the places allocated to them. At the same time, the authorities were ordered not to interfere with them “in the administration of the law according to their custom and old printed books.” Finally, the destruction of the Secret Chancellery could not but find sympathy among the peasantry. All this, as well as the unclear circumstances of the death of Peter III, served as the basis for the formation of his positive image in the views of peasants (Sivkov, 88-135; Chistov - 1967, 91-236; Kurmacheva, 114, 193; Peasantry of Siberia, 444-452).
In all spheres of society, we can observe constant changes, for example, changes in social structure, social relationships, culture, collective behavior. Social changes may include population growth, increased wealth, increased educational levels, etc. If in a certain system new constituent elements appear or elements of previously existing relations disappear, then we say that this system undergoes changes.
Social change can also be defined as a change in the way society is organized. Change in social organization is a universal phenomenon, although it occurs at different rates. For example, modernization, which has its own characteristics in each country. Modernization here refers to a complex set of changes occurring in almost every part of society in the process of its industrialization. Modernization includes constant changes in the economy, politics, education, traditions and religious life society. Some of these areas change earlier than others, but all of them are subject to change to some extent.
Social development in sociology refers to changes leading to differentiation and enrichment of the constituent elements of the system. Here we mean empirically proven facts of changes that cause constant enrichment and differentiation of the structure of organizing relations between people, constant enrichment of cultural systems, enrichment of science, technology, institutions, expansion of opportunities to satisfy personal and social needs.
If the development occurring in a certain system brings it closer to a certain ideal, assessed positively, then we say that development is progress. If changes occurring in a system lead to the disappearance and impoverishment of its constituent elements or the relationships existing between them, then the system undergoes regression. In modern sociology, instead of the term progress, the concept of “change” is increasingly used. According to many scientists, the term “progress” expresses a value opinion. Progress means change in a desired direction. But in whose values can this desirability be measured? For example, what changes do the construction of nuclear power plants represent - progress or regression?
It should be noted that in sociology there is a view that development and progress are one and the same. This view is derived from the evolutionary theories of the 19th century, which argued that any social development by nature is also progress, because it is improvement, because an enriched system, being more differentiated, is at the same time a more perfect system. However, according to J. Szczepanski, when speaking about improvement, we mean, first of all, an increase in ethical value. The development of groups and communities has several aspects: enrichment of the number of elements - when we talk about the quantitative development of a group, differentiation of relationships - what we call the development of an organization; increasing the efficiency of actions - what we call the development of functions; increasing the satisfaction of organizational members with participation in social life, an aspect of the feeling of “happiness” that is difficult to measure.
The moral development of groups can be measured by the degree of conformity of their social life with the moral standards recognized within them, but can also be measured by the degree of "happiness" achieved by their members.
In any case, they prefer to talk about development specifically and accept a definition that does not include any assessment, but allows the level of development to be measured by objective criteria and quantitative measures.
The term “progress” is proposed to be left to determine the degree of achievement of the accepted ideal.
A social ideal is a model of a perfect state of society, an idea of perfect social relations. The ideal sets the final goals of activity, determines the immediate goals and means of their implementation. Being a value guide, it thereby performs a regulatory function, which consists in ordering and maintaining the relative stability and dynamism of social relations, in accordance with the image of the desired and perfect reality as the highest goal.
Most often, during the relatively stable development of society, the ideal regulates the activities of people and public relations not directly, but indirectly, through the system of existing norms, acting as a systemic principle of their hierarchy.
The ideal, as a value guide and criterion for assessing reality, as a regulator of social relations, is an educational force. Along with principles and beliefs, it acts as a component of a worldview and influences the formation of a person’s life position and the meaning of his life.
A social ideal inspires people to change the social system and becomes an important component of social movements.
Sociology views the social ideal as a reflection of trends in social development, as an active force that organizes the activities of people.
Ideals that gravitate towards the sphere of public consciousness stimulate social activity. Ideals are directed to the future; when addressing them, the contradictions of actual relations are removed, the ideal expresses the ultimate goal of social activity, social processes are presented here in the form of a desired state, the means of achieving which may not yet be fully determined.
In its entirety - with justification and in all the richness of its content - the social ideal can only be acquired through theoretical activity. Both the development of an ideal and its assimilation presuppose a certain level of theoretical thinking.
The sociological approach to the ideal involves making clear distinctions between the desired, the actual and the possible. The stronger the desire to achieve the ideal, the more realistic the thinking of a statesman and political figure should be, the more attention should be paid to the study of the practice of economic and social relations, the actual capabilities of society, the real state of mass consciousness of social groups and the motives of their activities and behavior.
Focusing only on the ideal often leads to a certain distortion of reality; seeing the present through the prism of the future often leads to the fact that the actual development of relationships is adjusted to a given ideal, because There is a constant desire to bring this ideal closer; real contradictions, negative phenomena, and undesirable consequences of the actions taken are often ignored.
The other extreme of practical thinking is a refusal or underestimation of the ideal, seeing only momentary interests, the ability to grasp the interests of currently functioning institutions, institutions, social groups without analyzing and assessing the prospects for their development given in the ideal. Both extremes lead to the same result - voluntarism and subjectivism in practice, to the refusal of third-party analysis of objective trends in the development of the interests and needs of society as a whole and its individual groups.
Ideals encounter resistance from reality, so they are not fully realized. Some of this ideal is put into practice, some are modified, some are eliminated as an element of utopia, and some are postponed for a more distant future.
This collision of ideal with reality reveals an important feature of human existence: a person cannot live without an ideal, a goal; critical attitude to the present. But a person cannot live by ideals alone. His deeds and actions are motivated by real interests; he must constantly adjust his actions to the available means of translating the ideal into reality.
The social ideal in all the multiplicity and complexity of its essence and form can be traced throughout the development of mankind. Moreover, the social ideal can be analyzed not only as an abstract theoretical doctrine. It is most interesting to consider the social ideal based on specific historical material (for example, the ancient ideal of the “golden age”, the early Christian ideal, the ideal of enlightenment, the communist ideal).
The traditional view that developed in our social science was that there was only one true communist ideal, which was based on a strict theory of scientific development. All other ideals were considered utopian.
Many were impressed by a certain ideal of future equality and abundance. Moreover, in the minds of each person this ideal acquired individual characteristics. Social practice proves that the social ideal can change depending on many circumstances. It may not necessarily amount to a society of equality. Many people, having observed the negative consequences of egalitarianism in practice, want to live in a society of extreme stability and a relatively fair hierarchy.
Currently, according to sociological research, Russian society does not have any dominant idea about the desired path social development. Having lost faith in socialism, the overwhelming majority of people never accepted any other social ideal.
At the same time, in the West there is a constant search for a social ideal capable of mobilizing human energy.
Neoconservatives and social democrats present their vision of the social ideal. According to the “new right” (1), representing the first direction, in a market society, where the entire value system is focused on economic growth and the continuous satisfaction of ever-increasing material needs, a market mentality has formed. Man has turned into a selfish and irresponsible subject who can only put forward new socio-economic demands, unable to control himself and manage the situation. “A person lacks neither incentive to live nor ideals for which to die.” The “new right” sees a way out of the social crisis in the restructuring of social consciousness, in the targeted self-education of the individual based on the renewal of ethical forms. The “new right” proposes to recreate an ideal capable of ensuring the spiritual renewal of the West on the basis of conservatism, understood as a return to the origins of European culture. The conservative position consists in the desire, based on all the best that happened in the past, to create a new situation. It's about about the establishment of a harmonious order, which is possible on a strict social hierarchy. An organized society is necessarily organic; it maintains a harmonious balance of all social forces, taking into account their diversity. The “aristocracy of spirit and character” is entrusted with the task of creating a new, “strict” ethics capable of giving existence a lost meaning. We are talking about restoring the hierarchy, about creating favorable conditions for the emergence of a “spiritual type of personality” that embodies aristocratic principles. The non-conservative social ideal is called the "scientific society."
Social democrats, justifying from various points of view the need to promote a social ideal in modern conditions associate it with the concept of “democratic socialism”. Democratic socialism usually means a continuous process of reformist social changes, as a result of which modern capitalist society acquires a new quality. At the same time, Social Democrats never tire of emphasizing that such a society cannot be created in one country or several countries, but arises only as a mass phenomenon, as a new, highest moral stage in the development of human civilization. Democracy acts as a universal means of realizing the social democratic social ideal.
In modern conditions, a new type of civilization appears as a social ideal, designed to save humanity; to ensure harmony with nature, social justice, equality in all spheres of human life.
Thus, world social practice shows that society cannot develop successfully without defining the basic principles of social structure.
100 RUR bonus for first order
Select job type Thesis Coursework Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test Monograph Problem Solving Business Plan Answers to Questions Creative work Essay Drawing Works Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Master's thesis Laboratory work Online help
Find out the price
Culture and social ideal
I would like to remind you that we are developing a philosophical understanding of culture. Any activity that resists the elements is cultural. After all, even culture can be destroyed in a barbaric manner, or it can be destroyed culturally - systematically, organizedly, prudently. The Nazi Wehrmacht planned to destroy Slavic culture, but not culture in general. There was even an expression “ cultural policy in the conquered eastern territories,” which was to be carried out by Himmler’s department.
Culture is not “good” or “bad.” It cultivates certain qualities in a person, but the culture itself depends on the person: if he is “good,” then the culture will be the same. The life of a culture is ensured by a hierarchy of values (we talked about them in topic 3). But it depends on us whether we prefer this hierarchy or choose some other one. All this is connected with the ideals that dominate society and which people share or renounce. Next we will consider the nature of the ideal and its role in culture.
Here it is useful to highlight the following questions:
- the determining role of the ideal in culture;
- the creative nature of the ideal;
- change of social ideals as a change of cultures,
In our official historical science, the view of history as a change of formations and classes has long dominated; society was seen only as a socio-economic structure. It was a history of events and names. But in parallel there was a different story, a different idea of it. What was at work here was not societies or classes, but people with their daily concerns, needs, goals and hopes. Many of the goals were not realized, hopes remained fruitless, but they continued to live and were revived in other generations. This was also history, but as if its internal plan, which official science did not want to notice,
Meanwhile, Marx also warned about the danger and unscientificness of contrasting society, as an abstraction, with the individual1. A view of history in which kings and leaders, estates and classes operate, in which one type of production is replaced by another, is an incomplete view. It is also necessary, but history is not limited to events and names of heroes. Even the same events and names can be assessed differently in historical science and in the opinion of ordinary people.
V. Soloukhin drew attention to the different attitudes of the people towards the leaders of the peasant wars - Razin and Pugachev. It is expressed in the fact that the name of Razin has been preserved in people’s memory to this day - it can be heard in a song, but you can only learn about Pugachev from books, but they seemed to be doing one thing. But Razin promised freedom, and although he never brought freedom to the people, the promised freedom turned out to be more attractive than actual slavery,
Or another example, in any history textbook it is written that there was no slavery as such in Russia, but real life and its awareness by people indicate otherwise. Take, for example, Lermontov’s sorrowful lines, which assess life:
...The country of slaves, the country of masters
And you, blue uniforms,
And you, their devoted people...
If people in Russia lived with consciousness and... feeling of their slavery, then no matter how much slavery was officially denied, it can be argued that it was a fact of life.
Thus, not everything in history “lies on the surface”; much of it is hidden in the consciousness and psyche of people, in everyday habits, in judgments that determine people’s behavior and the development of society as a whole. This also follows from our understanding of culture, which is a kind of clothing of people - if one can judge by it, then only, as they say, at first glance. And to truly penetrate history, it is necessary to take into account people’s own understanding of their lives, the values and guidelines that guide them.
French philosopher and social psychologist L. Lévy-Bruhl introduced the concept of “metality” into scientific circulation. It means a spiritual, personal slice of history, knowledge of which is necessary for a deeper understanding of it. History or society then appears from the side of spiritual culture, about the practical role which we have already spoken about. At the same time, it is considered “primarily as the intellectual “equipment” that everyone has individual at one time or another, and also as a structure of knowledge that he possesses as a member of a certain social group”1, That is, culture against the general background of history is a system of people’s life orientation..
