home Homemade instrument

Should the criteria for progress be universal? Criteria for social progress. Integrative indicators of the progressive development of modern society

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND YOUTH POLICY OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

KYRGYZ-RUSSIAN SLAVIC UNIVERSITY

Faculty of Economics

by subject "Philosophy"

"Criteria of social progress".

Completed Art. gr. M1-06: Khashimov N. R.

Teacher: Denisova O. G.

Bishkek - 2007

Introduction. …………………………………………………………………………………3

1. Social progress. Progress and regression. ……………..4

2. Social progress - idea and reality……………...8

3. Progress criteria.

Criteria for social progress………………………..12

Conclusion………………………………………………………..20

List of references…………………………….22

Introduction

The idea of social progress is a product of the New Age. This means that it was at this time that the idea of the progressive, upward development of society took root in people’s minds and began to shape their worldview. There was no such idea in antiquity. The ancient worldview, as is known, was cosmocentric in nature. This means that the man of antiquity was coordinated in relation to nature and the cosmos. Hellenic philosophy seemed to fit man into the cosmos, and the cosmos, in the minds of ancient thinkers, was something permanent, eternal and beautiful in its orderliness. And man had to find his place in this eternal cosmos, and not in history. The ancient worldview was also characterized by the idea of an eternal cycle - a movement in which something, being created and destroyed, invariably returns to itself. The idea of eternal recurrence is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; we find it in Heraclitus, Empedocles, and the Stoics. In general, movement in a circle was considered in antiquity as ideally correct and perfect. It seemed perfect to ancient thinkers because it has no beginning and end and occurs in the same place, representing, as it were, immobility and eternity.

The idea of social progress was established during the Enlightenment. This era raises the shield of reason, knowledge, science, human freedom and from this angle evaluates history, contrasting itself with previous eras, where, in the opinion of the enlighteners, ignorance and despotism prevailed. The Enlightenmentists in a certain way understood the era of their time (as the era of “enlightenment”), its role and significance for man, and through the prism of so-understood modernity they viewed the past of mankind. The contrast between modernity, interpreted as the advent of the era of reason, and the past of humanity contained, of course, a gap between the present and the past, but as soon as an attempt was made to restore the historical connection between them on the basis of reason and knowledge, the idea of an upward movement in history immediately arose, about progress. The development and dissemination of knowledge was considered as a gradual and cumulative process. The accumulation of scientific knowledge that occurred in modern times served as an indisputable model for such a reconstruction of the historical process for the enlighteners. The mental formation and development of an individual, an individual, also served as a model for them: when transferred to humanity as a whole, it gave the historical progress of the human mind. Thus, Condorcet in his “Sketch of a historical picture of the progress of the human mind” says that “this progress is subject to the same general laws that are observed in the development of our individual abilities...”.

The idea of social progress is the idea of history, more precisely, the world history of mankind *. This idea is meant to tie the story together, give it direction and meaning. But many Enlightenment thinkers, substantiating the idea of progress, sought to consider it as a natural law, blurring to one degree or another the line between society and nature. The naturalistic interpretation of progress was their way of imparting an objective character to progress...

1. SOCIAL PROGRESS

Progress (from lat. progressus- movement forward) is a direction of development that is characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect. The credit for putting forward the idea and developing the theory of social progress belongs to the philosophers of the second half of the 18th century, and the socio-economic basis for the very emergence of the idea of social progress was the formation of capitalism and the maturation of European bourgeois revolutions. By the way, both creators of the initial concepts of social progress - Turgot and Condorcet - were active public figures in pre-revolutionary and revolutionary France. And this is quite understandable: the idea of social progress, the recognition of the fact that humanity as a whole, in the main, is moving forward, is an expression of historical optimism characteristic of advanced social forces.
Three characteristic features distinguished the original progressivist concepts.

Firstly, this is idealism, i.e. an attempt to find the reasons for the progressive development of history in the spiritual beginning - in the endless ability to improve the human intellect (the same Turgot and Condorcet) or in the spontaneous self-development of the absolute spirit (Hegel). Accordingly, the criterion of progress was also seen in phenomena of a spiritual order, in the level of development of one or another form of social consciousness: science, morality, law, religion. By the way, progress was noticed primarily in the field of scientific knowledge (F. Bacon, R. Descartes), and then the corresponding idea was extended to social relations in general.

Secondly, a significant shortcoming of many early concepts of social progress was the non-dialectical consideration of social life. In such cases, social progress is understood as a smooth evolutionary development, without revolutionary leaps, without backward movements, as a continuous ascent in a straight line (O. Comte, G. Spencer).

Thirdly, upward development in form was limited to the achievement of any one favored social system. This rejection of the idea of unlimited progress was very clearly reflected in Hegel’s statements. He proclaimed the Christian-German world, which affirmed freedom and equality in their traditional interpretation, as the pinnacle and completion of world progress.

These shortcomings were largely overcome in the Marxist understanding of the essence of social progress, which includes the recognition of its inconsistency and, in particular, the fact that the same phenomenon and even the stage of historical development as a whole can be both progressive in one respect and regressive , reactionary in another. This is precisely, as we have seen, one of the possible options for the state’s influence on economic development.

Consequently, when speaking about the progressive development of mankind, we mean the main, main direction of the historical process as a whole, its resultant in relation to the main stages of development. Primitive communal system, slave society, feudalism, capitalism, the era of socialized social relations in the formational cross-section of history; primitive pre-civilization, agricultural, industrial and information-computer waves in its civilizational cross-section act as the main “blocks” of historical progress, although in some of its specific parameters the subsequent formation and stage of civilization may be inferior to the previous ones. Thus, in a number of areas of spiritual culture, feudal society was inferior to slave society, which served as the basis for the enlighteners of the 18th century. look at the Middle Ages as a mere “break” in the course of history, without paying attention to the great strides made during the Middle Ages: the expansion of the cultural area of Europe, the formation there of great viable nations in proximity to each other, and finally, the enormous technical successes of the 14th century. XV centuries and the creation of prerequisites for the emergence of experimental natural science.

If we try to define in general terms causes social progress, then they will be the needs of man, which are the generation and expression of his nature as a living and no less as a social being. As already noted in Chapter Two, these needs are diverse in nature, character, duration of action, but in any case they determine the motives of human activity. In everyday life for thousands of years, people did not at all set as their conscious goal to ensure social progress, and social progress itself is by no means some kind of idea (“program”) initially laid down in the course of history, the implementation of which constitutes its innermost meaning. In the process of real life, people are driven by needs generated by their biological and social nature; and in the course of realizing their vital needs, people change the conditions of their existence and themselves, for each satisfied need gives rise to a new one, and its satisfaction, in turn, requires new actions, the consequence of which is the development of society.

As you know, society is in constant flux. Thinkers have long pondered the question: in what direction is it moving? Can this movement be likened, for example, to cyclical changes in nature: after summer comes autumn, then winter, spring and summer again? And so it goes for thousands and thousands of years. Or maybe the life of society is similar to the life of a living being: an organism that is born grows up, becomes mature, then grows old and dies? Does the direction of development of society depend on the conscious activity of people?

Progress and regression

The direction of development, which is characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from less perfect to more perfect, is called in science progress(a word of Latin origin meaning literally moving forward). The concept of progress is opposite to the concept regression. Regression is characterized by movement from higher to lower, processes of degradation, and a return to obsolete forms and structures.

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(VIII-VII centuries BC) wrote about five stages in the life of mankind. The first stage was the “golden age”, when people lived easily and carelessly, the second was the “silver age”, when the decline of morality and piety began. So, sinking lower and lower, people found themselves in the “Iron Age”, when evil and violence reign everywhere, and justice is trampled under foot. It is probably not difficult for you to determine how Hesiod saw the path of humanity: progressive or regressive?

Unlike Hesiod, the 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 Robert Turgot(1727-1781). His contemporary, French philosopher-enlightenment Jacques Antoine Condorcet(1743-1794) wrote that history presents a picture of continuous change, a picture of the progress of the human mind. Observation of this historical picture shows in the modifications of the human race, in its continuous renewal, in the infinity of centuries, the path it followed, the steps it took, striving for truth or happiness. Observations of what man was and of

what he has now become will help us, wrote Condorcet, to find means to ensure and accelerate the new successes for which his nature allows him to hope.

So, Condorcet sees the historical process as a path of social progress, at the center of which is the upward development of the human mind. Hegel considered progress not only a principle of reason, but also a principle of world events. This belief in progress was also adopted by K-Marx, who believed that humanity was moving toward greater mastery of nature, the development of production and man himself.

XIX and XX centuries were marked by turbulent events that gave new “information for thought” about progress and regression in the life of society. In the 20th century sociological theories appeared that abandoned the optimistic view of the development of society characteristic of the ideas of progress. Instead, theories of cyclical circulation, pessimistic ideas of the “end of history”, global environmental, energy and nuclear catastrophes are proposed. One of the points of view on the issue of progress was put forward by the philosopher and sociologist Karl Popper(b. 1902), who wrote: “If we think that history is progressing or that we are forced to progress, then we are making the same mistake as those who believe that history has the meaning that it may have open, not attached to it. After all, to progress means to move towards a certain goal that exists for us as human beings. This is impossible for history. Only we, human individuals, can progress, and we can do this by protecting and strengthening those democratic institutions on which freedom, and with it progress, depends. We will achieve greater success in this if we become more deeply aware of the fact that progress depends on us, on our vigilance, on our efforts, on the clarity of our concept regarding our goals and the realistic choice of such goals."

2. Social progress - idea and reality

The degree of satisfaction with the social order can be considered the most important sociological characteristic. But real customers are not interested in this characteristic of our society.

What kind of social structure do citizens need? This is where we have, especially lately, unusual ambiguity.

The search for stable criteria for matching the social order with the aspirations of people, step by step, narrows the range of possible solutions. The only reductionist option left is to find a natural scientific basis for deriving criteria for assessing the social structure.

Social self-organization is the result of the behavior of reasonable people. And people's muscles are controlled by their brain. The most plausible model of brain function today is the idea of a behavior-optimizing brain. The human brain selects the best next step from a set of possible options based on the prediction of the consequences.

The quality of predicting consequences distinguishes reasonable behavior from unreasonable behavior - human unreasonable or animal. The depth and scope of cause-and-effect relationships taken into account by humans are incommensurate with the capabilities of animals. How this separation occurred is a separate question. Moreover, in the field of public relations the accuracy of forecasts is poor.

From the idea of biological species as self-organizing systems, competing in conditions of limited resources and being in a random flow of destructive external influences, the range of powers of which is unlimited, and the frequency of occurrence decreases with increasing power, it follows that the target function of the optimization problem solved by the brain is to maximize the mass of matter, organized into structures specific to a particular biological species. If biological species enter into competition, then, other things being equal, the one whose brain deviates from maximizing the mass of the species will lose.

Man survived biological competition, which means that the human brain initially maximized the mass of the “human” species.

The ability to predict the development of the situation led to a change in the objective function. A certain functional is maximized depending on the number and the degree of protection from destructive external influences, the value of which increases with the growth of each of the arguments. Let's call this functionality the potential of humanity.

The reliability of the forecast, which decreases with increasing depth in time, is not controlled by humans, which often leads to obvious losses. This gives rise to two extreme positions regarding the admissibility and usefulness of using a forecast in choosing the best next step. According to these positions, there are always two currents, two parties in human society - “rationalists” and “traditionalists”. “Rationalists” believe that (to put it mildly) it is permissible to act based on one’s own forecast. “Traditionalists” argue that interference with the “natural” (read “traditional”) order is harmful. Convinced supporters of both positions can cite a sufficient number of historical facts to support their case.

The noted feature of human psychology gives rise to a specific wave process at the level of human society, the “saw of social development.”

As the starting point of our consideration, let us take the socio-political crisis - a well-known state of human society.

The main goal achieved by uniting people into social structures is to gain in the degree of protection from destructive external influences by socializing part of their resources. Therefore, the main function of public structures is to ensure the effective use of socialized resources. The organization of society must be adequate to the chosen method of using resources.

A socio-political crisis develops when a discrepancy between the organization of society and the preferred method of using socialized resources is discovered.

Over the past ten years, Russian society has been on the downward section of the “saw of social development.” The efficiency of using socialized resources is low. There is an open competition of ideas. "What to do?" - the main question. The social weight of “rationalists” is increasing. There is no clear choice for society yet. And if none of the ideas receives a decisive advantage, then people will entrust control to a specific person - a leader, a leader. This is an emergency exit, fascism, protection from chaos, a hopeless war of everyone with everyone.

If any of the proposals manages to gain sufficient mass support, a crawl out of the crisis along the chosen path will begin. At this point, the idea that has received support is based on a close and, most likely, accurate forecast of the development of the situation. For some time, it is possible to solve the inevitable minor problems that arise. Confidence in the correctness of the chosen path increases. The steering wheel becomes more and more firmly fixed. The permanence of his position is defended by many people. Social structures are becoming better suited to the chosen movement. Dissidents are not treated on ceremony. Society finds itself on the ascending section of the saw.

As we move away from the crisis point of choosing an idea, the natural inaccuracy of the forecast begins to appear. Further more. And the steering wheel is fixed. By this time, those at the helm are no longer those practical “rationalists” who took risks, deciding to commit the sin of implementing what they had dreamed up, but officials whose position in society rests on the unchanged path.

Crisis phenomena are growing in society. This is the top of the saw tooth. The efficiency of using socialized resources is falling. "Stop experimenting on us!" - this is how public opinion becomes. This is where “traditionalists” enter the political scene. They convincingly prove that the chosen path was wrong from the very beginning. Everything would be fine if people did not listen to these adventurers - “rationalists”. We need to go back. But for some reason, not to the cave state, but one “saw” step. “Traditionalists”, with mass support, form the social structures of the transition period. "Rationalists" are rejected. And the crisis continues to grow, because “traditionalists” count on the natural “recovery” of society, without reasonable intervention.

Society again finds itself on the downward part of the “saw of social development.” Time passes. The acuteness of emotions caused by the revelations of the actions of the “rationalists” is erased. People are again faced with the question: “What to do?” The cycle repeats.

The proposed qualitative model describes the processes of social self-organization in societies of different numbers of people. The specific dynamics of structures can be traced in the history of countries, corporations, and small groups. The fundamental reasons for structural changes may be different, but the implementation of changes is always mediated by the rational behavior of people. This mediation disrupts the mechanical correspondence between the base and the superstructure. In the degree of satisfaction with the social order, the most important role is played by people's assessment of the effectiveness of the use of socialized resources. This estimate depends on many factors, and sudden changes can occur without actual significant changes in the effectiveness itself.

The initiators of competing variants of social order often declare their comparative “progressiveness.” This quality, without having a clear definition, influences public opinion.

The ability to compare options for a social structure according to their “progressiveness” presupposes a certain ordering of these options with the formation of a certain trajectory of the progressive movement of humanity towards a bright future. Despite historical experience, scientific forecasts, prospects drawn by world religions, the idea of world progress generated by the technological achievements of the late 19th - mid-20th centuries occupies an important place in the everyday consciousness of people and influences their assessments.

As a real filler for the concept of “progress,” we can take the growth of humanity’s potential (functional based on the number of people and the degree of their protection from destructive external influences) as a result of human activity. At the same time, two processes are going on in parallel: the growth of humanity’s potential and the growing likelihood of encountering increasingly powerful (and rarer) external influences of various natures. This competition with time is reflected in people's minds as a contradiction between the assessment of the achieved potential and the idea of the required level of potential.

In relation to the social order, the definition of the quality of “progressiveness” is not applicable. Here there is only a basis for assessing the adequacy of the social structure to the chosen path of capacity building and the technological level of the economy. And this adequacy does not at all imply a one-to-one correspondence.

The social structure must ensure (at least not inhibit) people's capacity-building activities. People's assessment of its satisfaction may be based on this requirement.

3. Progress criteria

mind. moral Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling(1775-1854) wrote that the solution to the question of historical progress is complicated by the fact that supporters and opponents of the belief in the perfectibility of mankind are completely entangled in disputes about the criteria of progress. Some talk about the progress of mankind in the field morality, others are about progress science and technology, legal device.

Another point of view on social progress belongs to G. Hegel. He saw the criterion of progress in consciousnessfreedom.

In our time, philosophers also hold different views on the criterion of social progress. Let's look at some of them.

One of the current points of view is that the highest and universal objective criterion of social progress is development of productive forces, includingdevelopment of man himself. It is argued that the direction of the historical process is determined by the growth and improvement of the productive forces of society, including the means of labor, the degree of man’s mastery of the forces of nature, and the possibility of using them as the basis of human life. The origins of all human life activities lie in social production. According to this criterion, those social relations are recognized as progressive, which correspond to the level of productive forces and open up the greatest scope for their development, for the growth of labor productivity, for human development. Man is here considered as the main thing in the productive forces, therefore their development is understood from this point of view as the development of the wealth of human nature.

This position has been criticized from another point of view. Just as it is impossible to find a universal criterion of progress only in social consciousness (in the development of reason, morality, consciousness of freedom), so it cannot be found only in the sphere of material production (technology, economic relations). History has provided examples of countries where a high level of material production was combined with the degradation of spiritual culture. In order to overcome the one-sidedness of criteria that reflect the state of only one sphere of social life, it is necessary to find a concept that would characterize the essence of human life and activity. In this capacity, philosophers propose the concept freedom.

Freedom, as you already know, is characterized not only by knowledge (the absence of which makes a person subjectively unfree), but also by the presence of conditions for its implementation. A decision made on the basis of free choice is also necessary. Finally, funds are also required, as well as actions aimed at implementing the decision made. Let us also recall that the freedom of one person should not be achieved by infringing on the freedom of another person. This restriction of freedom is of a social and moral nature.

The meaning of human life lies in self-realization, self-realization of the individual. So, Liberty acts as a necessary condition for self-realization. In fact, self-realization is possible if a person has knowledge about his abilities, the opportunities that society gives him, about the methods of activity in which he can realize himself. The wider the opportunities created by society, the freer a person is, the more options for activities in which his potential will be revealed. But in the process of multifaceted activity, the multilateral development of the person himself also occurs, and the spiritual wealth of the individual grows.

So, according to this point of view, criterion of socialprogress is the measure of freedom that society is able toto provide the individual with a degree guaranteed by societyindividual freedom. disclosure his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. This statement brings us to consider another perspective on social progress.

As we have seen, we cannot limit ourselves to characterizing man as an active being. He is also a rational and social being. Only with this in mind can we talk about the human in man, about humanity. But the development of human qualities depends on people's living conditions. The more fully a person’s various needs for food, clothing, housing, transport services, and his needs in the spiritual field are satisfied, the more moral the relations between people become, the more accessible to a person the most diverse types of economic and political, spiritual and material activities become. The more favorable the conditions for the development of a person’s physical, intellectual, mental strength, his moral principles, the wider the scope for the development of individual qualities inherent in each individual person. In short, the more humane the living conditions, the more opportunities there are for the development of humanity in a person: reason, morality, creative powers.

Humanity, the recognition of man as the highest value, is expressed by the word “humanism”. From the above we can conclude about the universal criterion of social progress: aboutWhat is progressive is that which contributes to the rise of humanism.

Criteria for social progress.

In the extensive literature devoted to social progress, there is currently no single answer to the main question: what is the general sociological criterion of social progress?

A relatively small number of authors argue that the very formulation of the question of a single criterion for social progress is meaningless, since human society is a complex organism, the development of which takes place along different lines, which makes it impossible to formulate a single criterion. Most authors consider it possible to formulate a single general sociological criterion of social progress. However, even with the very formulation of such a criterion, there are significant discrepancies.

Condorcet (like other French educators) considered development to be the criterion of progress mind. Utopian socialists put forward moral criterion of progress. Saint-Simon believed, for example, that society should adopt a form of organization that would lead to the implementation of the moral principle: all people should treat each other as brothers. Contemporary of the utopian socialists, German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling(1775-1854) wrote that the solution to the question of historical progress is complicated by the fact that supporters and opponents of the belief in the perfectibility of mankind are completely entangled in disputes about the criteria of progress. Some talk about the progress of mankind in the field morality, others are about progress science and technology, which, as Schelling wrote, from a historical point of view is rather a regression, and proposed his solution to the problem: the criterion in establishing the historical progress of the human race can only be a gradual approach to legal device. Another point of view on social progress belongs to G. Hegel. He saw the criterion of progress in consciousness of freedom. As the consciousness of freedom grows, society develops progressively.

As we see, the question of the criterion of progress occupied the great minds of modern times, but they did not find a solution. The disadvantage of all attempts to overcome this task was that in all cases only one line (or one side, or one sphere) of social development was considered as a criterion. Reason, morality, science, technology, legal order, and the consciousness of freedom - all these are very important indicators, but not universal, not covering human life and society as a whole.

The prevailing idea of limitless progress inevitably led to what seemed to be the only possible solution to the problem; the main, if not the only, criterion of social progress can only be the development of material production, which ultimately predetermines changes in all other aspects and spheres of social life. Among Marxists, V.I. Lenin more than once insisted on this conclusion, who back in 1908 called for considering the interests of the development of productive forces as the highest criterion of progress. After October, Lenin returned to this definition and emphasized that the state of the productive forces is the main criterion for all social development, since each subsequent socio-economic formation finally defeated the previous one precisely because it opened up more scope for the development of productive forces and achieved higher productivity of social labor .

A serious argument in favor of this position is that the history of mankind itself begins with the manufacture of tools and exists thanks to the continuity in the development of productive forces.

It is noteworthy that the conclusion about the state and level of development of the productive forces as the general criterion of progress was shared by opponents of Marxism - technicalists, on the one hand, and scientists, on the other. A legitimate question arises: how could the concepts of Marxism (i.e., materialism) and scientism (i.e., idealism) converge at one point? The logic of this convergence is as follows. The scientist discovers social progress, first of all, in the development of scientific knowledge, but scientific knowledge acquires its highest meaning only when it is realized in practice, and above all in material production.

If we take the development of production forces as a criterion of progress; assessing them in dynamics, this presupposes a comparison no longer from the point of view of greater or lesser development of production forces, but from the point of view of the course and speed of their development. But in this case the question arises, what period should be taken for comparison.

Some philosophers believe that all difficulties will be overcome if we take the method of production of material goods as a general sociological criterion of social progress. A strong argument in favor of this position is that the foundation of social progress is the development of a method
production as a whole, that by taking into account the state and growth of production forces, as well as the nature of production relations, it is possible to show much more fully the progressive nature of one formation in relation to another.

Without denying that the transition from one mode of production to another, more progressive one, underlies progress in a number of other areas, opponents of this point of view almost always note that the main question remains unresolved: how to determine the very progressiveness of this new production method.

Fairly believing that human society is, first of all, a developing community of people, another group of philosophers puts forward the development of man himself as a general sociological criterion for social progress. It is indisputable that the course of human history really testifies to the development of the people who make up human society, their social and individual strengths, abilities, and inclinations. The advantage of this approach is that it allows us to measure social progress by the progressive development of the subjects of historical creativity themselves - people.

The most important criterion for progress is the level of humanism of society, i.e. the position of the individual in it: the degree of his economic, political and social liberation; the level of satisfaction of her material and spiritual needs; the state of her psychophysical and social health. According to this point of view, the criterion of social progress is the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to the individual, the degree of individual freedom guaranteed by society. The free development of man in a free society also means disclosure his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral. The development of human qualities depends on people's living conditions. The more fully a person’s various needs for food, clothing, housing, transport services, and his requests in the spiritual field are satisfied, the more moral the relations between people become, the more accessible to a person the most diverse types of economic and political, spiritual and material activities become. The more favorable the conditions for the development of a person’s physical, intellectual, mental strength, his moral principles, the wider the scope for the development of individual qualities inherent in each individual person. In short, the more humane the living conditions, the more opportunities there are for the development of humanity in a person: reason, morality, creative powers.

Let us note, by the way, that within this indicator, which is complex in its structure, it is possible and necessary to single out one that essentially combines all the others. This, in my opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if in a given country it is 10-12 years less than in the group of developed countries, and besides, it shows a tendency to further decrease, the question of the degree of progressiveness of this country must be decided accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, “all progress is reactionary if man collapses.”

The level of humanism of a society as an integrative criterion (i.e., passing through and absorbing changes in literally all spheres of society’s life) criterion incorporates the criteria discussed above. Each subsequent formational and civilizational stage is more progressive in personal terms - it expands the range of rights and freedoms of the individual, entails the development of his needs and the improvement of his abilities. It is enough to compare in this regard the status of slave and serf, serf and wage worker under capitalism. At first, it may seem that the slaveholding formation, which marked the beginning of the era of exploitation of man by man, stands apart in this regard. But, as F. Engels explained, even for a slave, not to mention free people, slavery was progress in personal terms: if before a prisoner was killed or eaten, now he was left to live.

So, the content of social progress was, is and will be the “humanization of man,” achieved through the contradictory development of his natural and social forces, i.e., productive forces and the entire gamut of social relations. From the above we can conclude about the universal criterion of social progress: Progressive is that which contributes to the rise of humanism.

CRITERIA FOR SOCIAL PROGRESS

The world community's thoughts about the “limits of growth” have significantly updated the problem of criteria for social progress. Indeed, if in the social world around us not everything is as simple as it seemed and seems to progressists, then what are the most significant signs that can be used to judge the progress of social development as a whole, the progressiveness, conservatism or reactionary nature of certain phenomena?

Let us note right away that the question “how to measure” social progress has never received an unambiguous answer in the philosophical and sociological literature. This situation is largely explained by the complexity of society as a subject and object of progress, its diversity and quality. Hence the search for our own, local criterion for each sphere of public life. But at the same time, society is an integral organism and, as such, the main criterion of social progress must correspond to it. People, as G. V. Plekhanov noted, make not several stories, but one story of their own relationships. Our thinking is capable and must reflect this single historical practice in its integrity.

And yet, the prevailing idea of limitless progress inevitably led to what seemed to be the only possible solution to the problem; the main, if not the only, criterion of social progress can only be the development of material production, which ultimately predetermines changes in all other aspects and spheres of social life. Among Marxists, V.I. Lenin more than once insisted on this conclusion, who back in 1908 called for considering the interests of the development of productive forces as the highest criterion of progress. After October, Lenin returned to this definition and emphasized that the state of the productive forces is the main criterion for all social development, since each subsequent socio-economic formation finally defeated the previous one precisely because it opened up more scope for the development of productive forces and achieved higher productivity of social labor .

It is noteworthy that the conclusion about the state and level of development of the productive forces as the general criterion of progress was shared by opponents of Marxism - technicalists, on the one hand, and scientists, on the other. The position of the latter obviously needs some comments, because a legitimate question arises: how could the concepts of Marxism (i.e., materialism) and scientism (i.e., idealism) converge at one point? The logic of this convergence is as follows. The scientist discovers social progress primarily in the development of scientific knowledge, but scientific knowledge acquires its highest meaning only when it is realized in practice, and above all in material production.

In the process of the ideological confrontation between the two systems, which was just receding into the past, technologists used the thesis of productive forces as the general criterion of social progress to prove the superiority of the West, which was and is ahead in this indicator. Then their opponents made a significant amendment to their own concept: this highest general sociological criterion cannot be taken in isolation from the nature of the production relations prevailing in a given society. After all, it is important not only the total amount of material goods produced in the country, but also how evenly and fairly they are distributed among the population, how this social organization promotes or inhibits the rational use of productive forces and their further development. And although the amendment is truly significant, it does not take the criterion accepted as the main one beyond the limits of one - economic - sphere of social reality, does not make it truly integrative, that is, passing through and absorbing changes in literally all spheres of life society.

Such an integrative, and therefore the most important, criterion of progress is the level of humanization of society, that is, the position of the individual in it: the degree of his economic, political and social liberation; the level of satisfaction of her material and spiritual needs; the state of her psychophysical and social health. Let us note, by the way, that within this indicator, which is complex in its structure, it is possible and necessary to single out one that essentially combines all the others. This, in our opinion, is the average life expectancy. And if in a given country it is 10-12 years less than in the group of developed countries, and besides, it shows a tendency to further decrease, the question of the degree of progressiveness of this country must be decided accordingly. For, as one of the famous poets said, “all progress is reactionary if man collapses.”

The level of humanization of society as an integrative criterion absorbs the criteria discussed above in a subtracted form. Each subsequent formational and civilizational stage is more progressive in personal terms - it expands the range of rights and freedoms of the individual, entails the development of his needs and the improvement of his abilities. It is enough to compare in this regard the status of slave and serf, serf and wage worker under capitalism. At first, it may seem that the slaveholding formation, which marked the beginning of the era of exploitation of man by man, stands apart in this regard. But, as F. Engels explained, even for a slave, not to mention free people, slavery was progress in personal terms: if before a prisoner was killed or eaten, now he was left to live.

Conclusion

1). Society is a complex organism in which different “bodies” function (enterprises, associations of people, government institutions, etc.), various processes (economic, political, spiritual, etc.) occur simultaneously, and various human activities unfold. All these parts of one social organism, all these processes, various types of activities are interconnected and at the same time may not coincide in their development. Moreover, individual processes and changes occurring in different areas of society can be multidirectional, that is, progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another. Thus, it is impossible to find any general criterion by which one could judge the progress of a particular society. Like many processes in our lives, social progress, based on various criteria, can be characterized in different ways. Therefore, in my opinion, there is simply no general criterion.

2). Despite the inconsistency and ambiguity of many provisions of Aristotle’s socio-political concept, the approaches he proposed to the analysis of the state, the method of political science and its vocabulary (including the history of the issue, statement of the problem, arguments for and against, etc.), highlighting what is the subject of political thought and reasoning still have a fairly noticeable influence on political research today. A reference to Aristotle is still a fairly weighty scientific argument confirming the truth of conclusions about political processes and phenomena.

The concept of progress, as stated above, is based on some kind of value or set of values. But the concept of progress has become so firmly entrenched in modern mass consciousness that we are faced with a situation where the very idea of progress - progress as such - acts as a value. Progress in this way, by itself, regardless of any values, tries to fill life and history with meaning, and verdicts are passed in its name. Progress can be thought of either as a desire for some goal, or as limitless movement and unfolding. It is obvious that progress without a basis in any other value that would serve as its goal is possible only as an endless ascent. Its paradox lies in the fact that movement without a goal, movement to nowhere, is, generally speaking, meaningless.

List of used literature:

1. Gubin V.D., Sidorina T.Yu., Philosophy, Moscow Gardarina 2005

2. Volchek E.Z., Philosophy, Minsk 1995.

3. Frolov N.V., Introduction to Philosophy, Moscow 1989.

4. Article “The Concept of Social Progress in Social Philosophy”

What is progress? The idea of regression

Progress(from Latin: “moving forward”) is a direction of development characterized by a transition from lower to higher.

Regression- movement from higher to lower, processes of degradation, return to obsolete forms and structures.

Humanity as a whole has never regressed, but its forward movement could be delayed and even stopped for a while, which is called stagnation.

Characteristics of progress

1. Inconsistency

2. Specific historical character

3. Multidimensionality

4. Nonlinear nature

5. Relativity of progress

Social progress- a global, world-historical process of the ascent of human societies from primitive states (savagery) to the heights of a civilized state, based on the highest scientific, technical, political, legal, moral and ethical achievements.

Areas of progress: economic progress, social (social progress), scientific and technological progress.

Forms of social progress:

1. Reformist (evolutionary), i.e. gradual

2. Revolutionary, i.e. spasmodic

Reforms can be economic, political, social.

There are short-term revolutions (the French Revolution of 1848, the February Revolution of 1917 in Russia, etc.) and long-term ones (“Neolithic Revolution”, “Industrial Revolution”)

The inconsistency of progress

What is the inconsistency of progress?

1) If you depict the progress of humanity graphically, you will get not an ascending straight line, but a broken line, reflecting the ups and downs, ebbs and flows in the struggle of social forces, accelerated movement forward and giant leaps back.

2) Society is a complex organism in which different “bodies” function (enterprises, associations of people, government institutions, etc.), and various processes (economic, political, spiritual, etc.) occur simultaneously. These parts of one social organism, these processes, various types of activity are interconnected and at the same time may not coincide in their development. Moreover, individual processes and changes occurring in different areas of society can be multidirectional, that is, progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another.

Throughout history, the progress of technology is clearly visible: from stone tools to iron ones, from hand tools to machines, from the use of the muscular power of humans and animals to steam engines, electric generators, nuclear power plants, from transportation by pack animals to cars, high-speed trains, airplanes, spaceships, from wooden abacus with dominoes to powerful computers.

But the progress of technology, the development of industry, chemicalization and other changes in the field of production have led to the destruction of nature, to irreparable damage to the human environment, and to the undermining of the natural foundations of the existence of society. Thus, progress in one area was accompanied by regression in another.

3) The progress of science and technology has had ambiguous consequences. Discoveries in the field of nuclear physics made it possible not only to obtain a new source of energy, but also to create powerful atomic weapons. The use of computer technology has not only unusually expanded the possibilities of creative work, but also caused new diseases associated with long-term, continuous work at the display: visual impairment, mental disorders associated with additional mental stress.

The growth of large cities, the complication of production, the acceleration of the rhythm of life - all this has increased the load on the human body, created stress and, as a consequence, pathologies of the nervous system and vascular diseases. Along with the greatest achievements of the human spirit, the world is experiencing an erosion of cultural and spiritual values, drug addiction, alcoholism, and crime are spreading.

4) Humanity has to pay a high price for progress. The conveniences of city life are paid for by the “diseases of urbanization”: traffic fatigue, polluted air, street noise and their consequences - stress, respiratory diseases, etc.; Convenience of traveling in a car - due to congestion of city highways and traffic jams.

The idea of the cycle

The circulation of historical theory– various concepts according to which society as a whole or its individual spheres move in their development in a vicious circle from barbarism to civilization and to a new barbarism.

Progress criteria

Progress criteria

1) French enlighteners (Condorcet): development of the mind.

2) Utopian socialists (Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen): society must adopt a form of organization that would lead to the implementation of the moral principle: all people should treat each other as brothers.

3) Schelling (1775 – 1854): gradual approach to a legal structure.

4) Hegel (1770 – 1831): as the consciousness of freedom grows, society develops progressively.

6) Marxism:

The highest and universal objective criterion of social progress is the development of productive forces, including the development of man himself. The direction of the historical process is determined by the growth and improvement of the productive forces of society, including the means of labor, the degree of man's mastery of the forces of nature, and the possibility of using them as the basis of human life. The origins of all human life activities lie in social production.

According to this criterion, those social relations are recognized as progressive, which correspond to the level of productive forces and open up the greatest scope for their development, the growth of labor productivity, and human development. Man is considered as the main thing in the productive forces, therefore their development is understood from this point of view and as the development of the wealth of human nature.

Just as it is impossible to find a general, universal criterion of progress only in social consciousness (in the development of reason, morality, consciousness of freedom), so it cannot be found in the sphere of material production (technology, economic relations). History has provided examples of countries where a high level of material production was combined with the degradation of spiritual culture.

Conclusion: The disadvantage of all attempts to solve this problem was that in all cases only one line (or one side, or one sphere) of social development was considered as a criterion. Reason, morality, science, technology, legal order, and the consciousness of freedom - all these are very important indicators, but not universal, not covering human life and society as a whole.

Universal criterion of progress

The criterion of social progress is the measure of freedom that society is able to provide to the individual, the degree of individual freedom guaranteed by society. The free development of a person in a free society also means the revelation of his truly human qualities - intellectual, creative, moral.

The development of human qualities depends on people's living conditions. The more fully the various needs of a person for food, clothing, housing, transport services, and in the spiritual field are satisfied, the more moral the relations between people become, the more accessible to a person the most diverse types of economic and political, spiritual and material activities become. The more favorable the conditions for the development of a person’s physical, intellectual, mental strength, his moral qualities, the wider the scope for the development of individual properties inherent in each individual person. The more humane the living conditions, the more opportunities there are for the development of humanity in a person: reason, morality, creative powers.

Humanity, the recognition of man as the highest value, is expressed by the word “humanism”. From the above, we can draw a conclusion about a universal criterion of social progress: that which contributes to the rise of humanism is progressive.

Integrative indicators of the progressive development of modern society

Integrative indicators of the progressive development of modern society:

1. average life expectancy;

2. child and maternal mortality;

3. level of education;

4. development of various spheres of culture;

5. interest in spiritual values;

6. health status;

7. feeling of satisfaction with life;

7. degree of respect for human rights;

Lesson 36-37

Social studies, profile level

/ The problem of social progress /

D.Z: § 15, ?? (p.154), tasks (p.154-156)

contribute to the formation of an understanding of progress and regression in the development of society;
develop in students the ability to carry out a comprehensive search, systematize social information on a topic, compare, analyze, draw conclusions, rationally solve cognitive and problem tasks;
carry out individual and group educational research on social issues;
contribute to the development of students' scientific position.

Universal learning activities

Know: features of social progress, analyze its criteria, show the diversity and unevenness of social development processes. The inconsistency of progress.
Be able to: carry out a comprehensive search, systematize information on a topic, draw conclusions, solve cognitive and problematic tasks.

social progress;
regression;
progress criteria ;
multivariate social development;
historical alternative;
progress criterion

Learning new material

Progress and regression.
The inconsistency of progress.
Progress criteria.
.
Diversity and unevenness of social development processes.

Remember. What meaning does science give to the concept of “society”? How does the linear-stage approach to understanding society differ from the local-civilizational approach?

“Progress” (lat.) - “movement from lower to higher”

Social progress is understood as the development of humanity towards a better, more perfect state.

The reasons for social progress are needs, during the implementation of which people change the conditions of existence and themselves.
For regression and are characterized by: movement from higher to lower, the process of degradation, a return to obsolete forms and structures.

PROGRESS AND REGRESSION

X. Ortega y Gasset wrote about the idea of progress: “Because people allowed this idea to cloud their reason, they let go of the reins of history, lost vigilance and dexterity, and life slipped out of their hands, ceased to obey them.”

Ways of social development

PROGRESS

revolution

evolution

Evolution:

This is one of the forms of movement, development in nature and society, based on continuous, gradual qualitative change.
The characteristic features of evolution are: gradualism, continuity, natural validity of changes, functional integrity of change processes, organic nature of development processes.

Revolution

This is one of the forms of movement, development in nature and society, based on a radical, sharp, abrupt transition from one qualitative state to another.
The main features of the revolution are: the speed of change, the inorganic nature of development processes, accompanied by disruption.

Poster from the Great October Revolution

Socialist revolution

Reforms

– This is a subjective process aimed at qualitative change, transformation, reorganization of the economic, political, social and spiritual spheres of society.

The main contradictions of progress:

The progress of mankind does not look like an ascending straight line, but like a broken line, which reflects ups and downs , periods positive changes and backward movements .
Individual changes simultaneously occurring in society can be multidirectional: progress in one area may be accompanied by regression in another .
Progressive shifts in one area or another often had, along with positive , also negative consequences for society.
Accelerated progress often paid off at too high a price when sacrificed to progress entire generations of people were sacrificed .

The process of historical development of society is contradictory: both progressive and regressive changes can be found in it. "width="640"

CONTRADICTION OF PROGRESS

= The process of historical development of society is contradictory: both progressive and regressive changes can be found in it.

PROGRESS CRITERIA

UNIVERSAL CRITERION

SOCIAL PROGRESS IS HUMANISM.

A. Condorcet (the criterion of progress is the development of the mind).

A. Saint-Simon (society must adopt a form of organization that would lead to implementation moral principle: all people should treat each other as brothers).

F.V. Schelling(the criterion for establishing the historical progress of the human race can only be a gradual approach to a legal structure).

G. Hegel (the criterion of progress is the consciousness of freedom).

Progress criteria. Philosophers

Criteria for social progress.

Before XVII – XVIII centuries - growth of science and reason.
I. Kant - replacing the despotism of nature with the dictates of reason.
Philosophers XIX V. - morality in one form or another.
K Marx - human freedom, the most important indicator of which is the level of development of the productive forces.
Modern social scientific thought - quality of life.

DIVERSITY OF PATHS AND FORMS OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

Historical experience shows that under certain conditions, various options for solving pressing problems are possible, a choice of methods, forms, and paths for further development is possible, i.e. historical alternative.

DIVERSITY OF PATHS AND FORMS OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

The historical process, in which general trends manifest themselves - the unity of diverse social development, creates the possibility of choice, on which the uniqueness of the paths and forms of further movement of a given country depends.

This speaks about historical responsibility those who make this choice

check yourself

1) What does the word “progress” mean?

2) How can we explain the diversity of views on progress?

3) What is the contradictory nature of social progress?

4) What criteria for progress have been put forward in the past? What are their limitations?

5) What criterion of progress can be considered universal? What are its advantages?

6) Why are the paths and forms of social development diverse?

7) What is the meaning of the expression “unity of diverse social development”?

reflection

What did you learn?
How?
What have you learned?
What difficulties did you experience?
Was the lesson interesting?

Sources

Sorokina E.N. Lesson developments in social studies. Profile level: 10th grade. - M.: VAKO, 2008.
Baranov P.A. Social studies: a complete reference book for preparing for the Unified State Exam / P.A. Baranov, A.V. Vorontsov, S. V. Shevchenko; edited by P.A. Baranova. - M.: AST: Astrel, 2009.

Social progress - this is a global historical process of development of society from lower to higher, from a primitive, wild state to a higher, civilized one. This process occurs thanks to the development of scientific and technical, social and political, moral and cultural achievements.

First theory of progress described by the famous French publicist Abbé Saint-Pierre in his book “Remarks on the Continuous Progress of Universal Reason” in 1737. According to his theory, progress is inherent in every person by God and this process is inevitable, like natural phenomena. Further progress research as a social phenomenon continued and deepened.

Progress criteria.

Progress criteria are the main parameters of its characteristics:

social;
economic;
spiritual;
scientific and technical.

Social criterion - this is the level of social development. It implies the level of people's freedoms, quality of life, the degree of difference between rich and poor, the presence of a middle class, etc. The main engines of social development are revolutions and reforms. That is, a radical complete change in all layers of social life and its gradual change, transformation. Different political schools have different views on these engines. For example, everyone knows that Lenin preferred revolution.

Economic criterion - this is the growth of GDP, trade and banking, and other parameters of economic development. The economic criterion is the most important, as it affects the others. It's hard to think about creativity or spiritual self-education when there is nothing to eat.

Spiritual criterion - Moral development is one of the most controversial, as different models of society evaluate differently. For example, unlike European countries, Arab countries do not consider tolerance towards sexual minorities to be spiritual progress, and even vice versa - regression. However, there are generally accepted parameters by which spiritual progress can be judged. For example, condemnation of murder and violence is characteristic of all modern states.

Scientific and technical criterion - this is the presence of new products, scientific discoveries, inventions, advanced technologies, in short - innovations. Most often, progress refers to this criterion in the first place.

Alternative theories.

Progress concept has been criticized since the 19th century. A number of philosophers and historians deny progress as a social phenomenon completely. J. Vico views the history of society as a cyclical development with ups and downs. A. Toynbee gives as an example the history of various civilizations, each of which has phases of emergence, growth, decline and decay (Maya, Roman Empire, etc.).

In my opinion, these disputes are related to different understandings of the determining progress as such, as well as with different understandings of its social significance.

However, without social progress we would not have society in its modern form with its achievements and morals.

Topic: Progress and its criteria.

Since ancient times, thinkers have pondered the question in which direction society is developing. In this lesson, an attempt was made to analyze the basic concepts of “social progress”, “regression”, “multivariate social development”, “criteria of progress”, etc. through the broader concept of “movement”.

Society is dynamic; which path is humanity taking: the path of progress or regression? People's idea of the future depends on what the answer to this question is: whether it brings people a better life or does not promise anything good.

The unity of the historical process can be traced in historical development. But at the same time, the specific paths of development of individual countries and peoples are diverse. The path of denying the unity of history can lead to complete isolation, separation from the outside world. The diversity of development cannot be denied either. Each nation has its own history, its own language, its own culture.

The progress of mankind does not look like an ascending line, but like a broken curve: upswings were followed by downturns, prosperity followed by decline, reforms were followed by counter-reforms. Progressive changes in a particular area can have both positive and negative consequences for society.

To evaluate these contradictory processes, criteria of social progress are needed. This is an increase in human freedom in relation to nature, and the level of real opportunities for the comprehensive development of man, and an increase in human happiness and goodness.

How does society develop?

This question has interested humanity since ancient times.

For analysis, the teacher offers the views of someancient thinkers.

The ancient Greek poet Hesiod (8th–7th centuries BC) wrote that humanity moved from the best “golden” age first to the “silver” age, and then to the “iron” age, which brought wars, where evil reigned everywhere, violence, justice is violated.
The ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle viewed history as a cyclical cycle, repeating the same stages.
The representative of the optimistic approach was Democritus, who divided history into qualitatively different periods: past, present and future. The transition from one period to another, in his opinion, is characterized by the growth of culture and the improvement of people's lives.

Analyzing statements of ancient thinkers, students say that one can agree with the presented views of all philosophers. Indeed, there have been times in history when empires collapsed and civilizations perished. At the same time, arguments were made that the histories of local civilizations to some extent repeat each other. They also agree with the point of view. Democritus, that since ancient times, culture has been developing and human living conditions are improving.

How to understand the movement of the historical process?

For this there is the concept of “social progress”.

What do you know about social progress?

Students, based on their experience, note thatsocial progress is a direction of development characterized by a transition from lower to higher, from simple to complex. And, conversely, regression is characterized by a backward movement, a return to obsolete forms and structures, and degradation.

Next, students give examples from history. They draw attention to the fact that humanity initially lived in a primitive society, then states with their own laws gradually formed, the Middle Ages, the Modern Age, etc. It turns out that humanity goes through the same stages of economic, social, and cultural development. Despite their differences, peoples are united in their desire for happiness and a better life. Only the speed of development among peoples is different. There are countries that have taken the lead, and there are lagging countries that are catching up with more developed countries.History acts as a single process of continuous development.This similarity showsunity of the historical process.

But at the same time, some students give examples that there is no unity in the historical process, and the history of different states breaks up into many of their own paths of development, which are not similar to other countries. The Russians, the Chinese, the British, the French go their own way... Each nation has its own history, culture, language, and natural conditions. In these examples we observediversity of historical development.

This means that historical development combines both unity and diversity. But diversity occurs within the framework of a universal and unified historical process. Consequently, various options for solving pressing problems are possible, i.e. there is a historical alternative.

Comment on what are the ways to deny the unity of history and the diversity of development. What consequences await a country that chooses one of these paths?

So, social development includes:

unity of the historical process,
variety of ways and forms of human development,
features of historical development,
features of cultural development,
uneven development.

Does this mean that each country is predetermined by its own development option and that it is the only possible one?

– No, there are different options for solving problems (historical alternative). For example, in 1917–1918. Russia faced an alternative: either a democratic republic or a republic of Soviets led by the Bolsheviks.

Thus, the historical process, in which general trends manifest themselves - the unity of diverse social development, creates the possibility of choice, on which the uniqueness of the paths and forms of further movement of a given country depends.

Who makes the choice on how the country will develop?

– Depending on historical conditions, these can be government officials, elites, and the masses.

After identifying subjective experience, we move directly to updating knowledge.

Is there progressive development?

Students are given a presentation prepared in advance by a student in the class. You need to look at it carefully and make a table during the presentation. After answering the question:Which thinker do you agree with and why?

Thinkers of the past and present on the understanding of progress and regression.

When discussing the views of scientists, students are asked to represent the course of history graphically. Different diagrams are depicted on the board.

For each of these graphs, examples from historical development are given.

Questions for the diagrams.

What conclusions did you draw from working on these graphs?
Show specific examples of the pros and cons of the social process.

You are convinced that social progress is a complex and contradictory phenomenon. It is easy to notice that almost any phenomenon in the life of society has a downside and can be ambiguously assessed from the standpoint of social progress.

With such ambiguity of change, is it possible to talk about social progress as a whole?

6. To do this, it is necessary to establish what is the general criterion of social progress. Which changes in society should be considered progressive and which should not.

The question of the criteria for progress occupied the great minds of scientists and philosophers of different eras.

A. Condorcet and other educators considered the development of the human mind to be a criterion of progress.
Utopian socialists – the principle of the brotherhood of man.
F. Schelling spoke about the gradual approach of humanity to a legal state structure.
G. Hegel considered the consciousness of freedom to be the criterion of progress.
A. Voznesensky noted that “all progress is reactionary if man collapses.”

Now that we have outlined the different views on the criteria of historical progress, consider, which perspective gives you a more reliable way to evaluate changes occurring in society.

Ultimately, students come to the conclusion that progressive development can be considered such living conditions that create as many opportunities as possible for the development of the person himself: freedom, reason, morality, creativity.

Man, his life, freedom are recognized as the highest value. In this case, we are talking about a universal criterionsocial progress: progressive is what contributes to the rise of humanity and humanism.

Appendix 3, last slide.

Tasks.

Try to evaluate the reforms of the 60s and 70s from the standpoint of the universal criterion of progress. XIX century in Russia. Can they be called progressive? And the politics of the 80s. XX century? Give reasons for your position.
Think about whether the activities of Peter I, Napoleon Bonaparte, P.A. Stolypin are progressive. Give reasons for your assessment.
To which of the points of view on progress presented in the document does the position of the Florentine historian Guicciardini (1483–1540) belong: “The affairs of the past illuminate the future, for the world has always been the same: everything that is and will be, already happened in another time, the former returns, only under different names and in a different color; but not everyone recognizes it, but only the wise who carefully observes and ponders it”?
Some scholars studying modern social development have drawn attention to phenomena that they call the “barbarization” of society. They included a decline in the level of culture, in particular language, a weakening of moral regulators, legal nihilism, an increase in crime, drug addiction and other similar processes. How would you rate these phenomena? What is their impact on society? Do these trends determine the nature of the development of society in the foreseeable future? Give reasons for your answer.
Soviet philosopher M. Mamardashvili (1930–1990) wrote: “The final meaning of the universe or the final meaning of history is part of human destiny. And human destiny is the following: to be fulfilled as a Human. Become Human." How is this philosopher’s thought connected with the ideas of progress?
We carry out the task C5 . What meaning do social scientists put into the concept of “criterion of progress”? Drawing on the knowledge of the social science course, compose two sentences: one sentence revealing the features of progress, and one sentence containing information about the criterion(s) for determining progress.

First, let's not make the most common mistake associated with this task. What is required from us is not two sentences, but a CONCEPT and 2 SENTENCES (three in total!). So, we remembered the concept of progress - the progressive development of society, its movement forward. Let's choose a synonym for the wordcriterion - measure, yardstick. Respectively:

Further, let us remember that progress and regression for each society manifest themselves in different and contradictory ways. We answer the first question, retain the beginning of its formulation (we write what they want to see from us!):

1. A feature of progress is its inconsistency; all criteria for progress are subjective.

And we remember that although the degree of development of a society can be measured in different ways (there are many approaches - the level of development of science, technology and technology, the degree of democracy, a generally accepted single criterion is the humanity of society. So:

2. The universal criterion for determining progress is the degree of humanity of society, the ability to provide maximum conditions for development to each person.

So this is what our response looks like:

C5. The “criterion of progress” is a measure by which the degree of development of society is judged.

A feature of progress is its inconsistency; all criteria for progress are subjective.

The universal criterion for determining progress is the degree of humaneness of society, the ability to provide maximum conditions for development to each person.