for universal characteristics of human behaviour, i.e. for that what unites rather than disconnects the peoples in the world, is actualized with new power. In this case, the quintessence of achievements of sociology and psychology will give a possibility to approach to the solution of this task.
Characteristic of the social is its existence in a complicated structure which
develops permanently under the action of various factors (socio-economic,
political, cultural, psychological, demographic, etc.).
The notion of “structure” is central for many branches of knowledge, therefore it is one of the most used terms of everyday language. At the same time, real is the problem of definition of this notion in such a way that it would be employed in various branches of the social reality, irrespective of their scales.
The famous Polish sociologist P. Sztompka stated that the notion of “structure” should reflect the idea of dependence between elements, idea of regularity, conformity to natural laws, and stability, idea of fundamental measure, and idea of determining31. Structure is the hidden network of stable regular ties between elements in a certain branch of the reality which influences significantly the development of phenomena in the sphere of observations.
In the circle of empiric sociology, the notion of structure is mainly used as the synonym of the statistic distribution of the data of observations or as a configuration of statistic correlations, but really it is considerably wider.
P. Sztompka considered four processes of the creation of social structures:
the institutionalization of a social structure (appearance of social norms and values), articulation of the ideal social structure (appearance of beliefs, looks,
myths, and stereotypes), expanse of a social structure (expansion of the network
of social contacts and communications), crystallization of the structures of social
interests (appearance of a hierarchy on the basis of differentiation of the access to material goods, power, and prestigious status).
In the context of our general idea, we can add that there exists the correlation between the processes of formation of a social structure of the society and the personal development which is revealed by structural-functional analysis.
The field of realization of the social focuses on the interaction and coexistence of the individual and the public. The individual and the public can be considered as dual characteristics of the social which appear in turn in the foreground. The classical sociology omits the consideration of individually unique properties and features of a person which are intrinsic to him/her as a subject of development of the society. In sociology, a person is not only a part of a small contact group, but also is a typical representative of a big social group which bears norms, traditions, values, visions, and relations intrinsic to this group.
Integration of an individual to a society is realized through the socialization,
i.e., the process of formation of a person and mastering of the values, norms,
aims, and standards of behaviour incident to society to which an individual
belongs.
On other hand, the individual is more changeable as compared with the
public. The limits of stability of the former do not cross the lifespans of age
cohorts. At the same time, significant historical periods of the social are composed, as it were, (like a nested Russian doll) from the periods of development of generations playing simultaneously the roles of “keepers” and “builders” of the past, present, and future societies.
The famous German philosopher O. Spengler put the rhetorical question in his classical work “Decline of Europe”: Do the features intrinsic to the individual life lie in the basis of any historical process? The answer to this question leads us to the construction of a refined concept of socio-historical development which allows one to overcome a present paradigmatic crisis of the system of social sciences in general and sociology in particular. At the same time, a reasonable question arises: why must a new approach or a new system of historical periodization or, in other words, classification be created if such systems already exist in the sufficient amount? The main arguments for the benefit of a new approach consist of its empiric origin ensured by the application of a complex of societal indices, the high heuristic potential, and the significantly higher degree of prognostication, which is very important for the elaboration of efficient strategies of the social development which would include the consideration of negative consequences of the use of various social-engineering technologies.
As was stated by S. Moscovici, there exists neither a culture, nor a history
in which the society planned by the people was not transformed into a real
society which is adequate for the majority of its members. Without this point,
the society would remain to be stillborn. Moreover, the majority of futurological
approaches does not carry out a constructive approach, but only gives a sociophilosophical explanation of the reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment