Progress in development. Social development and social progress of society

It is very important to understand in which direction our society is moving, constantly changing and developing. This article is dedicated to this purpose. We will try to determine the criteria for social progress and answer a number of other questions. First of all, let's figure out what progress and regression are.

Consideration of concepts

Social progress is a direction of development that is characterized by a progressive movement from simple and lower forms of organization of society to more complex, higher ones. The opposite of this term is the concept of “regression”, that is, the reverse movement - a return to outdated relationships and structures, degradation, the direction of development from higher to lower.

The history of the formation of ideas about the measures of progress

The problem of criteria for social progress has long worried thinkers. The idea that changes in society are precisely a progressive process appeared in ancient times, but finally took shape in the works of M. Condorcet, A. Turgot and other French enlighteners. These thinkers saw the criteria for social progress in the development of reason and the spread of education. This optimistic view of the historical process gave way in the 19th century to other, more complex concepts. For example, Marxism sees progress in changing socio-economic formations from lower to higher. Some thinkers believed that the consequence of moving forward is the growth of heterogeneity of society, the complication of its structure.

In modern science, historical progress is usually associated with a process such as modernization, that is, the transition of society from agrarian to industrial and further to post-industrial.

Scientists who do not share the idea of progress

Not everyone accepts the idea of progress. Some thinkers reject it in relation to social development - either predicting the “end of history”, or saying that societies develop independently of each other, multilinearly, in parallel (O. Spengler, N.Ya. Danilevsky, A. Toynbee), or considering history as a cycle with a series of recessions and ascents (G. Vico).

For example, Arthur Toynbee identified 21 civilizations, each of which has distinct phases of formation: emergence, growth, breakdown, decline and, finally, decay. Thus, he abandoned the thesis about the unity of the historical process.

O. Spengler wrote about the “decline of Europe.” “Anti-progressism” is especially vivid in the works of K. Popper. In his view, progress is a movement towards a specific goal, which is possible only for a specific person, but not for history as a whole. The latter can be considered both as a movement forward and as a regression.

Progress and regression are not mutually exclusive concepts

The progressive development of society, obviously, in certain periods does not exclude regression, return movements, civilizational dead ends, even breakdowns. And it is hardly possible to talk about an unambiguously linear development of humanity, since both leaps forward and setbacks are clearly observed. Progress in a certain area, in addition, can be the cause of decline or regression in another. Thus, the development of technology, technology, and tools is a clear indication of progress in the economy, but it was precisely this that brought our world to the brink of a global environmental catastrophe, depleting the Earth’s natural reserves.

Society today is also accused of a family crisis, a decline in morality, and lack of spirituality. The price of progress is high: for example, the conveniences of city life are accompanied by various “urbanization diseases.” Sometimes the negative consequences of progress are so obvious that a natural question arises as to whether it can even be said that humanity is moving forward.

Criteria for social progress: history

The question of the measures of social development is also relevant. There is also no agreement in the scientific world here. French enlighteners saw such a criterion in the development of reason, in increasing the degree of rationality of social organization. Some other thinkers and scientists (for example, A. Saint-Simon) believed that the highest criterion of social progress is the state of morality in society, approaching early Christian ideals.

G. Hegel had a different opinion. He connected progress with freedom - the degree of its awareness by people. Marxism also proposed its own criterion of development: according to supporters of this concept, it consists in the growth of productive forces.

K. Marx, seeing the essence of development in man's increasing subordination of the forces of nature, reduced progress in general to a more specific one - in the production sphere. He considered only those social relations to be conducive to development, which at a given stage correspond to the level of productive forces, and also open up space for the improvement of the person himself (acting as an instrument of production).

Criteria for social development: modernity

Philosophy has subjected the criteria of social progress to careful analysis and revision. In modern social science, the applicability of many of them is disputed. The state of the economic foundation does not at all determine the nature of the development of other spheres of social life.

The goal, and not just a means of social progress, is considered to be the creation of the necessary conditions for the harmonious and comprehensive development of the individual. Consequently, the criterion of social progress is precisely the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to a person to maximize his potential. Based on the conditions created in society to satisfy the totality of the needs of the individual and his free development, the degree of progressiveness of a given system and the criteria of social progress should be assessed.

Let's summarize the information. The table below will help you understand the main criteria for social progress.

The table can be expanded to include the views of other thinkers.

There are two forms of progress in society. Let's look at them below.

Revolution

A revolution is a comprehensive or complete change in most or all aspects of society, affecting the foundations of the existing system. Until quite recently, it was regarded as a universal universal “law of transition” from one socio-economic formation to another. However, scientists could not detect any signs of a social revolution during the transition to a class system from a primitive communal one. Therefore, it was necessary to expand the concept so that it could be applied to any transition between formations, but this led to the destruction of the original semantic content of the term. And the mechanism of a real revolution could only be discovered in phenomena dating back to the era of modern times (that is, during the transition to capitalism from feudalism).

Revolution from the point of view of Marxism

Following the Marxist methodology, we can say that a social revolution means a radical social revolution that changes the structure of society and means a qualitative leap in progressive development. The deepest and most general reason for the emergence of a social revolution is the otherwise insoluble conflict between the productive forces, which are growing, and the system of social institutions and relations, which remain unchanged. The aggravation of political, economic and other contradictions in society against this background ultimately leads to revolution.

The latter is always an active political action on the part of the people; its main goal is the transfer of control of society into the hands of a new social class. The difference between revolution and evolution is that the first is considered concentrated in time, that is, it happens quickly, and the masses become its direct participants.

The dialectic of such concepts as revolution and reform seems very complex. The first, as a deeper action, most often absorbs the latter, thus the action “from below” is complemented by the activity “from above”.

Many modern scientists urge us to abandon the excessive exaggeration of the significance of social revolution in history, the idea that it is an inevitable pattern in solving historical problems, because it has not always been the dominant form determining social progress. Much more often, changes in the life of society occurred as a result of action “from above,” that is, reforms.

Reform

This reorganization, transformation, change in some aspect of social life, which does not destroy the existing foundations of the social structure, retains power in the hands of the ruling class. Thus, the understood path of step-by-step transformation of relations is contrasted with a revolution that completely sweeps away the old system and order. Marxism regarded the evolutionary process, which preserved the remnants of the past for a long time, as too painful and unacceptable for the people. Adherents of this concept believed that since reforms are carried out exclusively “from above” by forces that have power and do not want to give up it, their result will always be lower than expected: reforms are characterized by inconsistency and half-heartedness.

Underestimation of reforms

It was explained by the famous position formulated by V.I. Lenin - that reforms are “a by-product of the revolution.” Let us note: K. Marx already believed that reforms are never a consequence of the weakness of the strong, since they are brought to life precisely by the strength of the weak.

His Russian follower strengthened his denial of the possibility that the “tops” have their own incentives when starting reforms. IN AND. Lenin believed that reforms are a by-product of revolution because they represent unsuccessful attempts to dampen and weaken the revolutionary struggle. Even in cases where reforms were obviously not the result of popular protests, Soviet historians still explained them by the desire of the authorities to prevent encroachments on the existing system.

The “reform-revolution” relationship in modern social science

Over time, Russian scientists gradually freed themselves from the existing nihilism in relation to transformations through evolution, first recognizing the equivalence of revolutions and reforms, and then criticizing revolutions as a bloody, extremely ineffective path full of costs and leading to an inevitable dictatorship.

Now great reforms (that is, revolutions “from above”) are considered the same social anomalies as great revolutions. What they have in common is that these methods of resolving contradictions are opposed to the healthy, normal practice of gradual, continuous reform in a self-regulating society.

The “revolution-reform” dilemma is replaced by clarifying the relationship between reform and permanent regulation. In this context, both revolution and changes “from above” “treat” an advanced disease (the first with “surgical intervention”, the second with “therapeutic methods”), while early and constant prevention is perhaps necessary in order to ensure social progress.

Therefore, in social science today the emphasis is shifting from the “revolution-reform” antinomy to “innovation-reform”. Innovation means a one-time ordinary improvement associated with an increase in the adaptive capabilities of society in specific conditions. It is precisely this that can ensure the greatest social progress in the future.

The criteria for social progress discussed above are not unconditional. Modern science recognizes the priority of the humanities over others. However, a general criterion for social progress has not yet been established.

The contradictory nature of its content. Criteria for social progress. Humanism and culture.

Progress in the general sense is development from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, from simple to complex.
Social progress is the gradual cultural and social development of humanity.
The idea of the progress of human society began to take shape in philosophy from ancient times and was based on the facts of man’s mental movement forward, which was expressed in man’s constant acquisition and accumulation of new knowledge, allowing him to increasingly reduce his dependence on nature.
Thus, the idea of social progress originated in philosophy on the basis of objective observations of socio-cultural transformations of human society.
Since philosophy considers the world as a whole, then, adding ethical aspects to the objective facts of socio-cultural progress, it came to the conclusion that the development and improvement of human morality is not the same unambiguous and indisputable fact as the development of knowledge, general culture, science, medicine , social guarantees of society, etc.
However, accepting, in general, the idea of social progress, that is, the idea that humanity, after all, moves forward in its development in all the main components of its existence, and in the moral sense too, philosophy, thereby, expresses his position of historical optimism and faith in man.
However, at the same time, there is no unified theory of social progress in philosophy, since different philosophical movements have different understandings of the content of progress, its causal mechanism, and in general the criteria of progress as a fact of history. The main groups of theories of social progress can be classified as follows:
1. Theories of natural progress. This group of theories claims the natural progress of humanity, which occurs naturally due to natural circumstances.
The main factor of progress here is considered to be the natural ability of the human mind to increase and accumulate the amount of knowledge about nature and society. In these teachings, the human mind is endowed with unlimited power and, accordingly, progress is considered a historically endless and non-stop phenomenon.
2.Dialectical concepts of social progress. These teachings consider progress to be an internally natural phenomenon for society, inherent to it organically. In them, progress is the form and goal of the very existence of human society, and the dialectical concepts themselves are divided into idealistic and materialistic:
-idealistic dialectical concepts of social progress come closer to theories about the natural course of progress in that they connect the principle of progress with the principle of thinking (the Absolute, the Supreme Mind, the Absolute Idea, etc.).
-materialist concepts of social progress (Marxism) connect progress with the internal laws of socio-economic processes in society.
3.Evolutionary theories of social progress.
These theories arose in attempts to place the idea of progress on a strictly scientific basis. The starting principle of these theories is the idea of the evolutionary nature of progress, that is, the presence in human history of certain constant facts of complication of cultural and social reality, which should be considered strictly as scientific facts - only from the outside of their indisputably observable phenomena, without giving any positive or negative ratings.
The ideal of the evolutionary approach is a system of natural science knowledge, where scientific facts are collected, but no ethical or emotional assessments are provided for them.
As a result of this natural science method of analyzing social progress, evolutionary theories identify two sides of the historical development of society as scientific facts:
-graduality and
-the presence of a natural cause-and-effect pattern in processes.
Thus, the evolutionary approach to the idea of progress
recognizes the existence of certain laws of social development, which, however, do not define anything other than the process of spontaneous and inexorable complication of the forms of social relations, which is accompanied by the effects of intensification, differentiation, integration, expansion of the set of functions, etc.

The whole variety of philosophical teachings about progress is generated by their differences in explaining the main question - why the development of society occurs precisely in a progressive direction, and not in all other possibilities: circular motion, lack of development, cyclical “progress-regression” development, flat development without qualitative growth, regressive movement, etc.?
All these development options are equally possible for human society, along with the progressive type of development, and so far no single reasons have been put forward by philosophy to explain the presence of progressive development in human history.
In addition, the very concept of progress, if applied not to the external indicators of human society, but to the internal state of a person, becomes even more controversial, since it is impossible to assert with historical certainty that a person at more developed socio-cultural stages of society becomes happier personally . In this sense, it is impossible to talk about progress as a factor that generally improves a person’s life. This applies to past history (it cannot be argued that the ancient Hellenes were less happy than the inhabitants of Europe in modern times, or that the population of Sumer was less satisfied with the course of their personal lives than modern Americans, etc.), and with particular force inherent in the modern stage of development of human society.
Current social progress has given rise to many factors that, on the contrary, complicate a person’s life, suppress him mentally and even create a threat to his existence. Many achievements of modern civilization are beginning to fit worse and worse into the psychophysiological capabilities of man. From here arise such factors of modern human life as an overabundance of stressful situations, neuropsychic traumatism, fear of life, loneliness, apathy towards spirituality, oversaturation of unnecessary information, a shift in life values to primitivism, pessimism, moral indifference, a general breakdown in the physical and psychological state, unprecedented in history of the level of alcoholism, drug addiction and spiritual oppression of people.
A paradox of modern civilization has arisen:
In everyday life for thousands of years, people did not at all set as their conscious goal to ensure some kind of social progress, they simply tried to satisfy their basic needs, both physiological and social. Each goal along this path was constantly pushed back, since each new level of need satisfaction was immediately assessed as insufficient and was replaced by a new goal. Thus, progress has always been largely predetermined by the biological and social nature of man, and according to the meaning of this process, it should have brought closer the moment when the surrounding life would become optimal for man from the point of view of his biological and social nature. But instead, a moment came when the level of development of society revealed the psychophysical underdevelopment of man for life in the circumstances that he himself created for himself.
Man has ceased to meet the requirements of modern life in his psychophysical capabilities, and human progress, at its current stage, has already caused global psychophysical trauma to humanity and continues to develop along the same main directions.
In addition, current scientific and technological progress has given rise to an ecological crisis situation in the modern world, the nature of which suggests a threat to the very existence of man on the planet. If the current growth trends continue in the conditions of a finite planet in terms of its resources, the next generations of humanity will reach the limits of the demographic and economic level, beyond which the collapse of human civilization will occur.
The current situation with ecology and human neuropsychic trauma has stimulated discussion of the problem of both progress itself and the problem of its criteria. Currently, based on the results of understanding these problems, a concept has emerged for a new understanding of culture, which requires understanding it not as a simple sum of human achievements in all areas of life, but as a phenomenon designed to purposefully serve a person and favor all aspects of his life.
Thus, the issue of the need to humanize culture is resolved, that is, the priority of man and his life in all assessments of the cultural state of society.
In the context of these discussions, the problem of criteria for social progress naturally arises, since, as historical practice has shown, consideration of social progress simply by the fact of improvement and complication of socio-cultural circumstances of life does not give anything to resolve the main question - whether the current outcome for humanity is positive or not the process of its social development?
The following are recognized as positive criteria for social progress today:
1.Economic criterion.
The development of society from the economic side must be accompanied by an increase in human living standards, the elimination of poverty, the elimination of hunger, mass epidemics, high social guarantees for old age, illness, disability, etc.
2. Level of humanization of society.
Society must grow:
the degree of various freedoms, the general security of a person, the level of access to education, to material goods, the ability to satisfy spiritual needs, respect for his rights, opportunities for recreation, etc.,
and go down:
the influence of life circumstances on a person’s psychophysical health, the degree of a person’s subordination to the rhythm of working life.
The average life expectancy of a person is taken as a general indicator of these social factors.
3. Progress in the moral and spiritual development of the individual.
Society must become more and more moral, moral standards must be strengthened and improved, and each person must receive more and more time and opportunities for developing their abilities, for self-education, for creative activity and spiritual work.
Thus, the main criteria of progress have now shifted from production-economic, scientific-technical, socio-political factors towards humanism, that is, towards the priority of man and his social destiny.
Hence,
The main meaning of culture and the main criterion of progress is the humanism of the processes and results of social development.

Basic terms

HUMANISM is a system of views that expresses the principle of recognizing the human personality as the main value of existence.
CULTURE (in a broad sense) - the level of material and spiritual development of society.
SOCIAL PROGRESS - the gradual cultural and social development of humanity.
PROGRESS - upward development from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, from simple to more complex.

Lecture, abstract. 47. Social progress. - concept and types. Classification, essence and features.

Similar works:

4.08.2009/abstract

The essence of the concept of “life world” in the teachings of E. Husserl. Evaluation of the “life world” by the philosopher’s students. Use of the concept of "lifeworld" by modern social sciences. Phenomenology of the political world and sociology, historical phenomenology.

9.12.2003/abstract

The concept of society. Essential features of society. The leading subject of society's activities is man. Public relations. Basic approaches to explaining connections and patterns. The main stages of development of society. The structure of modern society.

08/19/2010/abstract

Characteristics of providentialism, religious and non-religious ideas of the destiny of humanity. The study of universal human ideals and criteria for progress. Analysis of the problem of social foresight. Essay on future trends in the cyclical dynamics of society.

02.02.2009/course work

The essence of the state and forms of government: monarchy, aristocracy, polity. Aristotle's doctrine of the state, the ideal state. Society and public relations. Man as a biological and social being, characteristics that distinguish him from animals.

Progress(movement forward, success) is a type or direction of development characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. We can talk about progress in relation to the system as a whole, to its individual elements, to the structure and other parameters of the developing object.

The idea that changes in the world occur in a certain direction arose in ancient times. However, for most ancient authors, the development of history is a simple sequence of events, a cyclical cycle repeating the same stages (Plato, Aristotle), a process moving in a certain direction, towards some as yet unknown goal.

The philosophy of the bourgeoisie, which reflected the real acceleration of social development, is filled with the confidence that it is progress, for example, that determines the breakdown of feudal relations.

Progress is not some independent entity or unknown goal of historical development. The concept of progress makes sense only in relation to a specific historical process or phenomenon.

The criteria for social progress are:

Development of the productive forces of society, including the person himself;

Progress of science and technology;

An increase in the degree of human freedom that society can provide to an individual;

The level of education;

Health status;

Environmental situation, etc.

The opposite in meaning and content to the concept of “progress” is the concept "regression"(in Latin – regressus – return, moving backward), i.e. a type of development characterized by a transition from higher to lower, characterized by processes of degradation, a decrease in the level of management organization, loss of the ability to perform certain functions (conquest by barbarian tribes of the Roman Empire).

Stagnation- 1) periods in the development of society when there is no obvious improvement, forward dynamics, but there is also no reverse movement; 2) a delay in the forward development of society and even a temporary stop. Stagnation is a serious symptom of the “disease” of society, the emergence of mechanisms to inhibit the new, advanced. At this time, society rejects the new and resists renewal (USSR in the 70s - 90s)

Separately, neither progress, nor regression, nor stagnation exist. Alternately replacing each other, intertwining, they complement the picture of social development.

The concept of scientific and technological revolution is associated with the concept of progress - Scientific and technological revolution– a radical, qualitative transformation of the productive forces based on the transformation of science into a leading factor in the development of social production, a direct productive force.

Results and social consequences of scientific and technological revolution:

Rising consumer standards in society;

Improving working conditions;

Increasing requirements for the level of education, qualifications, culture, organization, and responsibility of employees;

Improving the interaction of science with technology and production;

Widespread use of computers, etc.

6. Processes of globalization and the formation of a united humanity. Global problems of our time.

Globalization of society is the process of uniting people and transforming society on a planetary scale. Moreover, the word “globalization” implies a transition to “worldliness”, globality. That is, towards a more interconnected world system in which interdependent channels of communication transcend traditional boundaries.

The concept of “globalization” also presupposes humanity’s awareness of its unity within one planet, the existence of common global problems and basic norms of behavior common to the whole world.

Globalization of society is a complex and diverse process of development of the world community, not only in economics and geopolitics, but also in psychology and culture, for example, such as national identity and spiritual values.

The most important characteristic of the process of globalization of society is international integration– the unification of humanity on a global scale into a single social organism (integration is the combination of various elements into a single whole). Therefore, the globalization of society presupposes not only a transition to a universal market and international division of labor, but also to general legal norms, to uniform standards in the field of justice and public administration.

The peculiarities of integration processes, covering various spheres of people’s lives, manifest themselves most deeply and acutely in the so-called global problems of our time.

Global problems of our time- difficulties that affect the vital interests of all humanity and require, for their solution, urgent coordinated international actions on the scale of the world community, on which the existence of humanity depends.

Features of global problems:

1) have a planetary, global character, affecting the interests of all peoples of the world and states;

2) threaten degradation and death of all humanity;

3) need urgent and effective solutions;

4) require collective efforts of all states, joint actions of peoples.

Humanity, developing along the path of progress, gradually accumulated material and spiritual resources to satisfy its needs, but it never managed to completely get rid of hunger, poverty and illiteracy. The severity of these problems was felt by each nation in its own way, and the ways to solve them had never before gone beyond the borders of individual states.

Global problems were the result, on the one hand, of the enormous scale of human activity, radically changing nature, society, and people’s way of life; on the other hand, a person’s inability to rationally manage this powerful force.

Global problems:

1) Ecological problem.

Economic activity in a number of countries today is so powerfully developed that it affects the environmental situation not only within a particular country, but also far beyond its borders. Most scientists consider human activity to be the main cause of global climate change.

Constant development of industry, transport, agriculture, etc. requires a sharp increase in energy costs and entails an ever-increasing burden on nature. Currently, as a result of intense human activity, even climate change is occurring.

Compared to the beginning of the last century, the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by 30%, and 10% of this increase has occurred in the last 30 years. An increase in its concentration leads to the so-called greenhouse effect, which results in warming of the climate of the entire planet.

As a result of human activity, warming has occurred within 0.5 degrees. However, if the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles compared to its level in the pre-industrial era, i.e. increase by another 70%, then very drastic changes will occur in the life of the Earth. First of all, the average temperature will increase by 2-4 degrees, and at the poles by 6-8 degrees, which, in turn, will cause irreversible processes:

Ice melting;

Rising sea level by one meter;

Flooding of many coastal areas;

Changes in moisture exchange on the Earth's surface;

Reduced precipitation;

Change in wind direction.

Global climate change is putting a number of species of living creatures inhabiting the Earth on the brink of extinction. Scientists expect that in the near future, southern Europe will become drier, while the northern part of the continent will become wetter and warmer. As a result, periods of abnormal heat, droughts, as well as heavy rainfall and floods will increase, and the risk of infectious diseases will increase, including in Russia, which will lead to significant destruction and the need for large-scale relocation of people. Scientists have calculated that if the air temperature on Earth rises by 2C, then water resources in South Africa and the Mediterranean will decrease by 20-30%. Up to 10 million people living in coastal areas will be at risk of flooding each year.

15-40% of terrestrial animal species will become extinct. Irreversible melting of the Greenland ice sheet will begin, which could lead to a rise in sea levels of up to 7 m.

2) The problem of war and peace.

Nuclear charges are stored in the arsenals of different countries, the total power of which is several million times greater than the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. These weapons can destroy all life on Earth many dozens of times. But today even “conventional” means of warfare are quite capable of causing global damage to both humanity and nature.

3) Overcoming backwardness.

We are talking about comprehensive backwardness: in the standard of living, the development of education, science and technology, etc. There are many countries in which there is appalling poverty among the lower strata of the population.

Reasons for the backwardness of developing countries:

1. These are agricultural countries. They account for over 90% of the world's rural population, but they cannot even feed themselves because their population growth exceeds the increase in food production.

2. Another reason is the need to master new technologies, develop industry, the service sector, which requires participation in world trade. However, it distorts the economies of these countries.

3. The use of traditional energy sources (physical strength of animals, burning wood, and various types of organic matter), which, due to their low efficiency, do not significantly increase labor productivity in industry, transport, services, and agriculture.

4. Complete dependence on the world market and its conditions. Despite the fact that some of these countries have huge oil reserves, they are not able to completely control the state of affairs in the world oil market and regulate the situation in their favor.

5. The debt of developing countries to developed countries is growing rapidly, which also serves as an obstacle to overcoming their backwardness.

6. Today, the development of productive forces and the socio-cultural environment of society is impossible without increasing the level of education of the entire people, without mastering modern achievements of science and technology. However, the necessary attention to them requires large expenditures and, of course, presupposes the availability of teaching, scientific and technical personnel. Developing countries, in conditions of poverty, cannot adequately address these problems.

Political instability, caused primarily by the low level of economic development, constantly creates the risk of military conflicts in these regions.

Poverty and a low level of culture inevitably lead to uncontrolled population growth.

4) Demographic problem

Population growth in developed countries is insignificant, but in developing countries it is extremely high. The vast majority of the population of developing countries does not have normal living conditions.

The economies of developing countries lag far behind the level of production of developed countries, and it is not yet possible to close the gap. The situation in agriculture is very difficult.

The housing problem is also acute: the majority of the population of developing countries live in virtually unsanitary conditions, 250 million people live in slums, 1.5 billion people are deprived of basic medical care. About 2 billion people do not have access to safe water. Over 500 million people suffer from malnutrition, and 30-40 million die from hunger every year.

5) Fight against terrorism.

Bombings of embassies, hostage-taking, murders of political figures, ordinary people, including children - all this and much more interferes with the stable development of world processes, puts the world on the brink of local wars, which can develop into large-scale wars.

All societies are in constant development, in the process of change and transition from one state to another. At the same time, sociologists distinguish two directions and three main forms of social movement. Let's look at the essence first progressive and regressive directions.

Progress(from Latin progressus – movement forward, success) means development with an upward tendency, movement from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. It leads to positive changes in society and manifests itself, for example, in the improvement of means of production and labor, in the development of the social division of labor and the growth of its productivity, in new achievements in science and culture, improvement in people’s living conditions, their comprehensive development, etc.

Regression(from Latin regressus - reverse movement), on the contrary, implies development with a downward tendency, movement backward, transition from higher to lower, which leads to negative consequences. It can manifest itself, say, in a decrease in production efficiency and the level of people’s well-being, in the spread of smoking, drunkenness, drug addiction in society, deterioration in public health, an increase in mortality, a drop in the level of spirituality and morality of people, etc.

Which path is society taking: the path of progress or regression? People's idea of the future depends on the answer to this question: does it bring a better life or does it not promise anything good?

Ancient Greek poet Hesiod (8th-7th centuries BC) wrote about five stages in the life of mankind.

The first stage was "golden age", when people lived easily and carelessly.

Second - "silver Age"- the beginning of the decline of morality and piety. Descending lower and lower, people found themselves in "Iron Age" when evil and violence reign everywhere, justice is trampled underfoot.

How did Hesiod see the path of humanity: progressive or regressive?

Unlike Hesiod, ancient philosophers

Plato and Aristotle viewed history as a cyclical cycle, repeating the same stages.

The development of the idea of historical progress is associated with the achievements of science, crafts, arts, and the revitalization of public life during the Renaissance.

One of the first to put forward the theory of social progress was the French philosopher Anne Robbert Turgot (1727-1781).

His contemporary, French philosopher-enlightenment Jacques Antoine Condorcet (1743-1794) sees historical progress as a path of social progress, at the center of which is the upward development of the human mind.

K. Marx believed that humanity was moving toward greater mastery of nature, the development of production and man himself.

Let us recall the facts from the history of the 19th-20th centuries. Revolutions were often followed by counter-revolutions, reforms by counter-reforms, radical changes in the political system by the restoration of the old order.

Think about what examples from national or world history can illustrate this idea.

If we tried to depict the progress of mankind graphically, we would end up with not a straight line, but a broken line, reflecting ups and downs. There have been periods in the history of different countries when reaction triumphed, when the progressive forces of society were persecuted. For example, what disasters did fascism bring to Europe: the death of millions, the enslavement of many peoples, the destruction of cultural centers, bonfires from the books of the greatest thinkers and artists, the cult of brute force.

Individual changes occurring in different areas of society can be multidirectional, i.e. progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another.

Thus, throughout history, the progress of technology can be clearly traced: from stone tools to iron ones, from hand tools to machines, etc. But the progress of technology and the development of industry led to the destruction of nature.

Thus, progress in one area was accompanied by regression in another. The progress of science and technology has had mixed consequences. The use of computer technology has not only expanded the possibilities of work, but has led to new diseases associated with prolonged work at the display: visual impairment, etc.

The growth of large cities, the complication of production and the rhythms of everyday life have increased the load on the human body and created stress. Modern history, like the past, is perceived as the result of the creativity of people, where both progress and regression take place.

Humanity as a whole is characterized by upward development. Evidence of global social progress, in particular, can be not only an increase in material well-being and social security of people, but also a weakening of confrontation (confrontation – from Latin con – against + irons – front – confrontation, confrontation) between classes and peoples of different countries, the desire for peace and cooperation of an increasing number of earthlings, the establishment of political democracy, the development of universal morality and a genuine humanistic culture, of everything human in man, finally.

Further, scientists believe that an important sign of social progress is the growing tendency towards human liberation - liberation (a) from state suppression, (b) from the dictates of the collective, (c) from any exploitation, (d) from the enclosure of living space, (e) from fear for your safety and future. In other words, a trend towards expanding and increasingly effective protection of the civil rights and freedoms of people throughout the world.

In terms of the degree to which citizens' rights and freedoms are ensured, the modern world presents a very motley picture. Thus, according to the estimates of the American organization in support of democracy in the world community, Freedom House (English: Freedom House, founded in 1941), which annually publishes a “freedom map” of the world, from 191 countries of the planet in 1997.

– 79 were completely free;

– partially free (which includes Russia) – 59;

– unfree – 53. Among the latter, the 17 most unfree states (the “worst of the worst” category) are highlighted – such as Afghanistan, Burma, Iraq, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and others. The geography of the spread of freedom across the globe is curious: its main centers are concentrated in Western Europe and North America. At the same time, out of 53 African countries, only 9 are recognized as free, and among Arab countries - not a single one.

Progress can also be seen in human relationships themselves. More and more people understand that they must learn to live together and abide by the laws of society, must respect other people's living standards and be able to seek compromises (compromise - from Latin compromissum - agreement based on mutual concessions), must suppress their own aggressiveness, appreciate and protect nature and everything that previous generations have created. These are encouraging signs that humanity is steadily moving towards relationships of solidarity, harmony and goodness.

Regression is often local in nature, i.e. it concerns either individual societies or spheres of life, or individual periods. For example, while Norway, Finland and Japan (our neighbors) and other Western countries were confidently climbing the steps of progress and prosperity, the Soviet Union and its “comrades in socialist misfortune” [Bulgaria, East Germany, Poland, Romania , Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and others] regressed, sliding uncontrollably in the 1970s and 80s. into the abyss of collapse and crisis. Moreover, progress and regression are often intricately intertwined.

So, in Russia in the 1990s, both of them clearly take place. A decline in production, a break in previous economic ties between factories, a decline in the standard of living of many people and an increase in crime are obvious “marks” of regression. But there is also the opposite - signs of progress: the liberation of society from Soviet totalitarianism and the dictatorship of the CPSU, the beginning of the movement towards the market and democracy, the expansion of the rights and freedoms of citizens, significant freedom of the media, the transition from the Cold War to peaceful cooperation with the West, etc.

Questions and tasks

1. Define progress and regression.

2. How was the path of humanity viewed in ancient times?

3. What changed about this during the Renaissance?

4. Given the ambiguity of change, is it possible to talk about social progress as a whole?

5. Think about the questions posed in one of the philosophical books: is it progress to replace an arrow with a firearm, or a flintlock with a machine gun? Can the replacement of hot tongs with electric current be considered progress? Justify your answer.

6. Which of the following can be attributed to the contradictions of social progress:

A) the development of technology leads to the emergence of both means of creation and means of destruction;

B) the development of production leads to a change in the social status of the worker;

C) the development of scientific knowledge leads to a change in a person’s ideas about the world;

D) human culture undergoes changes under the influence of production.

the progressive development and movement of society, characterizing the transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. The concept of social progress applies not only to the system as a whole, but also to its individual elements. In philosophy, the idea of public (social) progress arose by analogy with the idea of the development of nature. In the history of mankind, the idea of progress took shape in the 17th century, which was associated with the development of science and technology, accompanied by the recognition of the legislative power of reason. However, social progress was viewed and assessed differently. Some thinkers recognized social progress, seeing its criterion in the growth of science and reason (J. Condorcet, C. Saint-Simon), the rooting of the ideals of truth and justice in society (N.K. Mikhailovsky, P.L. Lavrov); others rejected the idea of progress, considering it false (F. Nietzsche, S.L. Frank).

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Social progress

progressive development of society from lower to higher levels. O.p. manifests itself in the growth of the material capabilities of society, the humanization of social relations, and the improvement of man. Idea O.p. was first expressed in the 18th century by J. Condorcet and A. Turgot and became widespread in European social thought of the 19th century under the conditions of the rapid development of capitalism. A progressive character is inherent in the concepts of society of Hegel and Marx. The criteria of social progress characterize progressive processes in the main spheres of society: economic, political, social and spiritual. To the economic criteria of O.p. include the level of development of the productive forces of society and the degree of compliance of production relations with the needs of the development of productive forces. Political criteria O.p. are the degree of involvement of the masses in historical transformations, the degree of participation of the masses in political life and management of society, the degree of liberation of the masses from exploitation and social inequality, the degree of political protection of fundamental human rights. Social criterion O.P. is the quality of life of people, which is characterized by the achieved level of material security, accessibility of healthcare and education, environmental safety, social security, the degree of employment of the active population, the level of social justice and humaneness of society. Spiritual criteria of O.P. are the level of education and culture of the masses and the degree of comprehensiveness and harmonious development of the individual. It should be noted that among famous philosophers there are not only supporters, but also many critics of the idea of progress: F. Nietzsche, O. Spengler, K. Popper, etc.