Features of the modern value system of Russian society. Social values in modern Russia Moral and meaningful values
11.4. The value system of Russian society
Radical changes in all spheres of life in the era of the New Age also affected the value system of Russian society. The most important factor that influenced these changes was the formation of technogenic civilization, bourgeois social relations, and rationalistic thinking.
Despite the split that occurred in Russian society under Peter I between the upper and lower classes, it retained traditional value ideas and a way of life. One of the main such values in the life of the upper and lower classes is the family and family traditions. The authority of the family in Russian society was unusually high. A man who did not want to start a family in adulthood aroused suspicion. Only two reasons could justify such a decision - illness and the desire to enter a monastery. Russian proverbs and sayings speak eloquently about the importance of the family in a person’s life: “Not married is not a person”, “In the family and porridge is thicker”, “A family in a heap is not afraid of a cloud”, etc. The family was the custodian and transmitter of life experience, morality from generation to generation, the upbringing and education of children took place here. So, in the noble estate, portraits of grandfathers and great-grandfathers, stories and legends about them, their things - grandfather's favorite chair, mother's favorite cup, etc. were kept. In Russian novels, this feature of estate life appears as its integral feature.
In peasant life, also permeated with the poetry of traditions, the very concept of a house had, first of all, the meaning of deep ties, and not just living space: a father's house, a home. Hence the respect for everything that the house makes up. The tradition even provided for different types of behavior in different parts of the house (what is possible at the stove, what is not in the red corner, etc.), the preservation of the memory of the elders is also a peasant tradition. Icons, things and books passed from the old people to the younger generation. Such a peasant-noble perception of life could not do without some idealization - after all, memory preserved the best everywhere. Ritual traditions associated with church and calendar holidays were repeated almost unchanged in various social strata of Russian society. Not only to the Larins could be attributed the words:
They kept in a peaceful life
Habits of peaceful antiquity;
They have oily Shrovetide
There were Russian pancakes.
The Russian family remained patriarchal, for a long time guided by the "Domostroy" - an old set of everyday rules and instructions.
Thus, the upper and lower classes, cut off from each other in their historical existence, nevertheless had the same moral values.
Meanwhile, the most important socio-economic transformations taking place in Russia, characterized by the establishment of competition in the economy, liberalism in political life, the establishment of the ideas of free thought and enlightenment, contributed to the spread of new European socio-cultural values, which, in fact, did not take root among the masses - only the elite could master them.
The working masses (the so-called "soil") adhered to the traditions of pre-Petrine antiquity. They guarded the original ideological dogmas associated with Orthodoxy and autocracy, deeply rooted traditions, political and social institutions. Such values could not contribute to the modernization or even intensive sociodynamics of the country. Collectivism remained the defining feature of social consciousness in the "soil" layers. He was the main moral value in the peasant, urban township and Cossack communities. Collectivism helped jointly endure the trials of difficult times, was the main factor in social protection. Thus, the life of the Cossacks was based on community organization and the principles of military democracy: collective decision-making in the Cossack circle, election of atamans, collective forms of ownership*. The harsh and cruel conditions of the existence of the Cossacks contributed to the creation of a certain system values.
* There were 12 Cossack regions in the Russian Empire. The Russian phenomenon of the Cossacks is characterized by ambiguity, the presence of controversial issues. The Cossacks lived in the newly developed territories of Russia, on its outskirts. In the pre-Petrine era, they independently fought against the powerful Ottoman Empire, the Crimean Khanate and the Kingdom of Poland, protecting the Russian borders from devastating raids. Subsequently, the Cossacks participated in the wars of the Russian Empire.
The pre-revolutionary historian E. Savelyev, who described the history of the Don Cossacks, drew attention to the fact that “the Cossacks were a straightforward and chivalrous people, they did not like unnecessary words, and they decided matters in the Circle quickly and fairly.” Cunning and intelligence, steadfastness and the ability to endure severe hardships, merciless revenge on the enemy, cheerfulness of character distinguished the Cossacks. They firmly stood for each other - "all for one and one for all", for their Cossack brotherhood; were incorruptible; betrayal, cowardice, theft were not forgiven. In campaigns, border towns and cordons, the Cossacks led a single life and strictly observed chastity. A textbook example is Stepan Razin, who ordered a Cossack and a woman to be thrown into the Volga for violating chastity, and when he himself was reminded of the same, he threw a captive Persian princess into the water. It was high moral qualities that contributed to the constantly high combat readiness of the Cossack army.
From the judgments made about the system of values in the "soil" way of Russian society, it can be seen how the people's worldview was little affected by the grandiose changes that took place in the state in the New Era. To a much greater extent, the changes affected the literate and active part of the population of Russia, which V. Klyuchevsky called "civilization". New classes of society were formed here, entrepreneurship developed and market relations developed, professional intelligentsia appeared. The intelligentsia was represented by the clergy and nobility, commoners and serfs (actors, musicians, architects, etc.). In the ranks of the intelligentsia, rationalism, an optimistic worldview, and belief in the possibility of improving the world were affirmed as a style of thinking. The worldview was freed from the spiritual power of the church.
Peter I abolished the patriarchate and put a synod at the head of the church, in fact a board of officials, thereby subordinating the church to the state. Further weakening of the church occurred in the 60s of the 18th century, when Catherine II, who strengthened the foundations of the secular absolutist state, confiscated most of the land holdings belonging to the church and monasteries. Of the 954 monasteries that existed at that time, only 385 survived the secularization.
The destruction of the closed Orthodox world was largely due to Russian enlightenment. F. Prokopovich, V. Tatishchev, A. Kantemir, M. Lomonosov, D. Anichkov, S. Desnitsky, A. Radishchev developed ideas about the independence of nature and man from divine predestination, the need to separate the spheres of influence of religion and science, etc. . In the 19th century the ideas of free thought, sharp criticism of religion were put forward by many Decembrists, as well as revolutionary democrats V. Belinsky, A. Herzen, N. Chernyshevsky, N. Dobrolyubov. They tried to create a general atheistic concept, highlighting the origin of religion, its social functions, especially Orthodoxy.
Changes in the personal and social life of the estates played an important role in the value system of Russian society. According to D.S. Likhachev, under Peter I, “the awareness of the transition forced us to change the system of signs”: put on a European dress, new uniforms, “scrape off” beards, reform all state terminology in a European way, recognize European.
One of the features of the personality of a nobleman was the ability to communicate, which suggested for him wide friendly ties. At the same time, assemblies and secular clubs (English, etc.) were of considerable importance, which introduced a woman into the public life of Russia. After the "terem", closed world, in which even a high-ranking woman lived in the Middle Ages, a new type of woman appeared - educated, following European standards of life. 18th and 19th centuries give many such examples: E. Dashkova - the first president of the first Russian Academy of Sciences, E. Rostopchina - a writer, M. Volkonskaya and other wives of the Decembrists.
The life of the nobility necessarily included dinners and balls, reading books and playing music, enjoying works of art. A daily walk in the park entered the life of the nobility not only in the village, but also in the city*. At the end of the XVIII century. such a socio-cultural phenomenon as a noble estate arose, with which an extensive layer of national culture is associated, which goes beyond its noble part.
* Quoted. By: Polikarpov V.S. History of morals in Russia. Rostov-on-D.: Phoenix, 1995. S. 196.
The inconsistency of the era was manifested in the "sublime" achievements of the noble "estate culture" and the presence of serf customs. Humanity and nobility coexisted with the landlord's "hardness of heart". However, in general, for the Russian nobles of the XVIII-XIX centuries. characteristic was the rejection of landlord arbitrariness, cruelty, class arrogance, arrogance. In this milieu a brilliant and enlightened stratum of the intelligentsia arose. Members of it led a secluded life, observing a certain moral distance in relation to the provincial and district administrations, the policy of oppression of the common people.
This generation of intelligentsia had a huge impact on the development of national culture. It was then that education, the talent of scientists and literary success became the main criteria for the honor and dignity of a nobleman. “Educated circles represented among us then among the Russian people oases in which the best mental and cultural forces were concentrated - artificial centers, with their own special atmosphere, in which elegant, deeply enlightened and moral personalities were developed,” wrote K.D. Kavelin*.
* Quoted. Quoted from: Russian society of the 30s of the XIX century. People and ideas. Memoirs of contemporaries. M., 1989. S. 145.
Feelings of citizenship, love for the Fatherland, the need to improve a person (improve the breed) were preached here. It was believed that the love of knowledge, science, theater would contribute to the improvement of morals. Literature played the most important role in shaping the value system of the Russian intelligentsia. She played the role of models and samples, forms of life behavior of the individual. A.S. Pushkin, N.I. Turgenev, N.V. Gogol, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, A.P. Chekhov and many other writers and poets created images - mirrors, allowing you to compare your own actions and actions with them. It is interesting that the Russian bureaucracy, being an important factor in state life, left almost no trace in the spiritual life of Russia: it did not create its own culture, or its own ethics, or even its own ideology. The value system of this part of Russian society was accurately expressed by Kapnist in the comedy Yabeda:
Take it, there is no science here;
Take what you can take.
What are our hands tied to?
How not to take?
The advanced intelligentsia was united by the rejection of Russian reality, its despotic mores, arbitrariness, lawlessness. In the 19th century a radical intelligentsia appeared, proclaiming the need to change the social system in Russia. This part of the intelligentsia was distinguished by the presence of ideas of social restructuring, a heightened sense of responsibility for the fate of the people. In highlighting a special cultural-historical and psychological type of a noble revolutionary, an important role was played by the sharpness and directness of their judgments, "indecent" from the point of view of secular norms; energy, enterprise, firmness aimed at practical changes; sincerity and honesty; the cult of fiery friendship and brotherhood; responsibility before history; poetry of freedom. Dual behavior, insincerity in relations with political opponents, violence as a way of life for a revolutionary appeared later (in the 60s-80s of the 19th century). So, for the populist revolutionaries, life in a double world has become the norm.
Members of the organization "Narodnaya Volya" A. Zhelyabov, S. Perovskaya, N. Kibalchich and others became supporters of terrorist activities. To an even greater extent, violence was established among the Marxist intellectuals, who associated the progress of mankind, the realization of the age-old aspirations of the people for equality and justice, with the forcible introduction of socialism.
Among the new Russian bourgeoisie, the value orientations of the bourgeois way of life were affirmed. Here appeared the desire for European education, upbringing, patronage and charity, which did not at all correspond to the mores of the merchant class, vividly described by A. Ostrovsky in his plays. The dynasties of the Demidovs, Shchukins, Tretyakovs, Morozovs, Soldatenkovs had a huge impact on the cultural life of Russia. Large manufacturers and merchants showed great interest in urban life and helped her with significant donations. Examples of such an educated merchant class in Rostov-on-Don were the Gairobetovs, Sadomtsevs, Yashchenkos, Litvinovs, Krechetovs, and others. The theater developed here thanks to the merchants Gairobetov and Asmolov. The construction of one of the most beautiful buildings in the city, the Alexander Nevsky Church, became the life work of the merchant Ilyin. Merchant charity in the field of health care and social charity was of no less importance.
Thus, under the influence of Western European ideas, a new worldview, lifestyle, and mores were formed that changed the system of values of the Russian elite. However, as a result of all the transformations in the era of the New Age, Russia did not become Europe, it, according to the figurative expression of G.V. Plekhanov, "had a European head and an Asian body." The combination of European and traditional values led to the emergence of the problem of "intelligentsia and the people" - an eternal Russian problem.
Thus, in the process of transformation of Russia, two systems of values collided - the liberal one, which replaced the socialist one, and the traditional one, which has developed over many centuries and generational change. Outwardly, the choice seems to be simple: either the rights and freedoms of the individual, or traditional values, when the idea of communality, emphasized anti-individualism, comes to the fore.
However, such straightforwardness distorts and excessively ideologizes the real meaning of this value confrontation and is fraught with the loss of continuity. In a liberal society, its own "community" is formed and functions, just as bright individuals appear in a traditional society, internal freedom is preserved, initiative and initiative are valued and encouraged in their own way.
Of course, in their ideological and cultural preferences, both types of society differ significantly and noticeably from each other, but in the sphere of everyday values - family, security, justice, well-being, etc. They have a lot in common and similar. If traditionalism is usually reproached with conservatism, etatism and paternalism, then on the same basis liberalism should be charged with destructive anthropocentrism and the substitution of rivalry for soulless competition.
In our opinion, a split in values is dangerous because, by constantly stimulating the growth of an uncomfortable state in a person, it can lead to such social consequences that will practically destroy all the achievements of modernization. Being the core of thoughts, actions, creativity of people, social groups, society as a whole, the conflict of values as a phenomenon of social pathology makes people maneuver, which leads to internal vacillations, to the struggle of both society and the individual with himself, to the constant reproduction of instability and, in in the end, to the emergence of a desire to overcome the state of such a split.
The reason for the split in modern Russian society can be associated, first of all, with the unpreparedness of Russian society for innovation. The formation of a new type of society necessarily requires the development by each member of society of new ideals, behavior patterns, rules of communication, other labor motivation, etc. Not all Russians were up to such a task. This was the reason for the split into those who are capable of innovative behavior and those who cannot master it.
Another reason for the split is social differentiation. The Russians turned out to be unprepared for the fact that the former "equality in poverty" was destroyed and gave way to a division into "rich" and "poor." Social stratification has led to the fact that the previously uniform scale of values for all members of society, illuminated by ideology, no longer seems to be a monolith, and the first positions of numerous “ladders” of social preferences are occupied by unequal values.
The situation in the field of ideology also generates a split situation. After the collapse of the communist ideology that permeated all levels and structures of Soviet society, many group micro-ideologies arose, insufficiently substantiated, internally unbalanced, but thanks to their leaders quite convincing and shared by a part of society. There is a constant clash of some political ideas with others, some social programs with the opposite. It is quite difficult for an ordinary person to understand the nuances of the differences between them.
Another reason contributing to the reproduction of the split is the cultural heterogeneity of the response to modernization. Today, the discrepancy between the social changes taking place in Russian society and the assessment at the cultural level of their long-term significance is quite obvious. These discrepancies are due to the socio-cultural heterogeneity of society, in which today, at the level of the constitution, differences in economic, political, national, and cultural interests are officially recognized. Accordingly, different points of view are expressed on the nature of the current socio-cultural situation in Russia. For example, Russia is understood as a "split society" (A. Akhiezer) or a "crisis society" (N. Lapin), in which a stagnant contradiction between culture and the nature of social relations blocks the mechanisms of social development. According to A. Akhiezer, the brake is a split in the public consciousness, blocking the transition of society to a state of more efficient reproduction and survival. Thus, the authors converge in the diagnosis of society, in determining the limits of social transformations, to which they include the value restrictions of public consciousness, the lack of prevalence of liberal innovative values.
Following the methodology of sociocultural analysis, understanding and overcoming the split, A. Akhiezer believes, first of all, should be achieved in culture, in the growth of reflection of history, because split is a state of public consciousness that is unable to comprehend the integrity, in this case, the history of Russia.
The conflict of values in Russia also turned out to be connected with the destruction of the traditional scheme of socialization, which was always based on three foundations - family, teacher and social ideals. The family as a social institution is called upon to play a crucial role in shaping the child's personal qualities, the foundations of morality, ideas about the norms and rules of behavior. But the family in modern Russia can no longer give children full-fledged socialization, lessons in morality and a healthy life, not only because many families are heavily infected with anomie and "deviant" behavior, but also because even cultured and morally healthy parents have lost clear guidelines regarding values. and standards to be aspired to.
Basically, for the same reasons, there was a strong degradation of the school as a carrier of positive values, an agent of socialization. Transformed in society and the teacher. The nature of his behavior in society and at school has changed. He ceased to combine in himself a teacher and an educator. The teacher has ceased to be a comrade, friend, adviser, he has become either an indifferent contemplative, indifferent to his work, or a cruel tyrant, deliberately using an authoritarian way to control his students. A poor teacher is no longer an authority for many students. Naturally, such a teacher and the values instilled by him met with resistance among adolescents, they were learned in a painful way or not learned at all, which led to conflicts in the "teacher-student" system.
It should also be taken into account that next to state educational institutions, private schools, lyceums, colleges, etc., have also become widespread, which promise higher social statuses and roles in various spheres of society. The process of socialization cannot but take into account this reality of breeding children through various educational systems to opposite social poles. Therefore, in general, socialization in childhood and school age, i.e. in the most important period of the formation of a person's personality, contains deep contradictions and dysfunctionality, laying the foundations for the deviant behavior of a huge number of people.
The crisis of the family and teachers is accompanied by the crisis of former social ideals. It did not come with the start of market reforms. His influence was felt even before the era of glasnost. In order for the social system to continue to exist for some time, it is required that each generation inherit at least part of certain socio-cultural attitudes adopted by the older generation, otherwise the "connection of times" will break. In other words, in order to overcome the split, it is necessary that in modern Russian society the socio-cultural values and norms shared by the majority of members of society, and first of all, by the younger generation, be reproduced.
The marginalization of the transition period could not but be compensated. Therefore, the role of religion has significantly increased in the sphere of moral culture. In spiritual culture, pre-revolutionary works, creations of foreign compatriots, and traditional culture became a source of replenishment of values. The liberal-democratic ideologemes put forward did not correspond to real economic and social relations, as well as to the "crisis of consciousness" of the intellectual elite, devoid of the usual ways of social self-affirmation. In fact, the unified field of moral guidelines turned out to be destroyed in Russian culture. Ideas about what is good and bad, what is desirable and undesirable, moral and immoral, fair and unfair, and many others, are extremely fragmented and most often reflect purely group interests. As a result, solidarity, consolidation, unity of purpose, mutual trust, and open dialogue have fallen into deep decline. Everywhere and at all levels, the principle "everyone survives alone" has prevailed. In sociology, such a state of the social system is denoted by the concept of "anomie". Anomie is the disintegration of moral values, the confusion of value orientations, the onset of a value vacuum. Anomie is incompatible with the progressive movement of society.
The country experienced a crisis of national spirit and self-consciousness: the former collapsed; the communist system of values and, not having time to assert itself, its liberal alternative was called into question. Society found itself in a state of anomie, mismatch and loss of value orientations, and psychologically - confusion and depression in the face of the failure of two social experiments - communist and liberalist. Twice interrupted and broken connection of times over the course of one century has put society and the individual in a perplexed position in relation to their past, present and future. Frustration, existential vacuum, loss of the meaning of life have become typical states of mass and individual consciousness. Protagoras said that man is the measure of all things. The world is stable if this measure is solid, the world is shaky if it turns out that this measure is unstable. The loss of value orientations led to the emergence of a marginal "split" personality, thoughts, actions, decisions which were based on aggression, were characterized by disorganization. The reproduction of the "split man" continues today.
The "split man" of modern Russia, who, on the one hand, wants to live in a society professing traditional values, and at the same time enjoy the achievements of modern science and technology, is the main problem in the process of reforming Russian society. This person still doubts the value of the individual and relies on the strength of an archaic, almost tribal "we", on the strength of authority. Existing in a situation of a value split, a fracture of cultures, such a person masters a contradictory culture, forms a tense conflicting inner world. Hence, this conflict permeates all levels of Russian society, breaking the emerging positive developments.
The radical economic measures of the 1990s to bring Russia out of the crisis had to correspond to a different system of values compared to the then dominant one, capable of neutralizing anomie and consolidating society.
It is important to note that socio-cultural values could not and should not have been introduced by government decree. However, to believe that they could arise solely by themselves in the fabric of society - in the family, school, church, media, culture, public opinion, etc. - is also erroneous. There should have been a counter movement of power and society, but this did not happen. The moral side of the Russian reforms was ignored by both the authorities and the leaders of social movements, the creative intelligentsia. In this case, it is appropriate to once again draw attention to the fact that the Russian intelligentsia, always regarded as a conductor of moral consciousness, has not fully fulfilled its historical role. As the humanitarian-politicized elite of the intelligentsia lost its monopoly on the development of value systems, entrepreneurs and bankers put forward their own values, and they selected from the values-symbols those that corresponded to their worldview and interests. In the key areas of ideological discussions of the 1990s, there has been a movement towards the synthesis of liberal-democratic and traditionalist values and attitudes, while radical value orientations are gradually being pushed to the periphery of public consciousness.
At the beginning of the new century, a synthesized system began to prevail in Russian society, including elements of various ideas - from liberal to nationalist. Their coexistence does not reflect the ideological clashes of irreconcilable opponents and not an attempt to synthesize the opposing principles, but rather the incompleteness of the processes of forming new value and political-ideological guidelines in the mass consciousness, in the perception of the Russian authorities and the elite as a whole. The successive modernizations carried out over the course of two centuries failed to establish Western values in Russia - individualism, private property, and the Protestant work ethic. The most active resistance to the reforms was provided by the traditionalist consciousness and its features such as collectivism, corporatism, the desire for equalization, the condemnation of wealth, etc.
Modernization in Russia has a deep specificity, connected with the fact that society has "split", polarized; value diversity turned not only into a conflict of values, but into a conflict clash of civilizational types. The civilizational dualism of Russian society (a split according to civilizational preferences between the modernization elite and the rest of the population) gave rise to contradictions that stopped the progress of modernization.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Introduction
Values of modern Russian society
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
Values are generalized ideas of people about the goals and means of achieving them, about the norms of their behavior, embodying historical experience and expressing in a concentrated way the meaning of the culture of a particular ethnic group and of all mankind.
Value in general and sociological value in particular have not been adequately studied in Russian sociological science. It is enough to get acquainted with the content of textbooks and manuals on sociology published at the end of the twentieth century and in recent years to be convinced of this. At the same time, the problem is relevant, socially and epistemologically significant both for sociology and for a number of social sciences and humanities - history, anthropology, social philosophy, social psychology, state studies, philosophical axiology and a number of others.
The relevance of the topic is presented in the following main provisions:
Understanding values as a set of ideals, principles, moral norms, which represent priority knowledge in people's lives, have, both for a separate society, say, for Russian society, and for the universal level, a very specific humanitarian value. Therefore, the problem deserves a comprehensive study.
Values unite people on the basis of their universal significance; knowledge of the patterns of their integrative and consolidating nature is quite justified and productive.
Social values that are included in the subject field of problems of sociology, such as moral values, ideological values, religious values, economic values, national and ethical, etc., are of paramount importance for studying and taking into account also because they act as a measure of social assessments and criterial characteristics.
Elucidation of the role of social values is also significant for us, students, future specialists who will carry out social roles in social reality in the future - in a work collective, city, region, etc.
Values of modern Russian society
value society norm humanity
The changes that have taken place over the past ten years in the sphere of state structure and the political organization of Russian society can be called revolutionary. The most important component of the transformation taking place in Russia is the change in the outlook of the population. It is traditionally believed that mass consciousness is the most inertial sphere in comparison with the political and socio-economic sphere. Nevertheless, during periods of abrupt, revolutionary transformations, the system of value orientations can also be subject to very significant shifts. It can be argued that institutional transformations in all other areas are irreversible only when they are accepted by the society and fixed in the new system of values that this society is guided by. And in this regard, changes in the worldview of the population can serve as one of the most important indicators of the reality and effectiveness of social transformation as a whole.
In Russia, as a result of a change in the social structure during the transition from an administrative-command system to a system based on market relations, there was a rapid disintegration of social groups and institutions, the loss of personal identification with the former social structures. There is a loosening of the normative-value systems of the old consciousness under the influence of propaganda of ideas and principles of new political thinking.
People's lives are individualized, their actions are less regulated from the outside. In modern literature, many authors talk about the crisis of values in Russian society. Values in post-communist Russia really contradict each other. The unwillingness to live in the old way is combined with disappointment in the new ideals, which turned out to be either unattainable or false for many. Nostalgia for a gigantic country coexists with various manifestations of xenophobia and isolationism. Getting used to freedom and private initiative is accompanied by a reluctance to take responsibility for the consequences of their own economic and financial decisions. The desire to defend the newly acquired freedom of private life from uninvited intrusions, including from the "watchful eye" of the state, is combined with a craving for a "strong hand." This is only a cursory list of those real contradictions that do not allow us to unambiguously assess Russia's place in the modern world.
Assuming consideration of the process of development in Russia of new value orientations, it would not be superfluous to first pay attention to the very "soil" on which the seeds of a democratic social order fell. In other words, what the current hierarchy of values has become under the influence of the changed political and economic situation largely depends on the general worldview attitudes that have historically developed in Russia. The dispute about the eastern or western nature of spirituality in Russia has been going on for more than one century. It is clear that the uniqueness of the country does not allow it to be attributed to any one type of civilization. Russia is constantly trying to enter the European community, but these attempts are often hindered by the "eastern genes" of the empire, and sometimes by the consequences of its own historical fate.
What characterizes the value consciousness of Russians? What changes have taken place in it in recent years? What was the old hierarchy of values transformed into? Based on the data obtained in the course of several empirical studies on this issue, it is possible to identify the structure and dynamics of values in Russian society.
An analysis of Russians' answers to questions about traditional, "common human" values reveals the following hierarchy of Russians' priorities (as their importance decreases):
family - 97% and 95% of all respondents in 1995 and 1999, respectively;
The family, providing its members with physical, economic and social security, at the same time acts as the most important tool for the socialization of the individual. Thanks to it, cultural, ethnic, moral values are broadcast. At the same time, the family, remaining the most stable and conservative element of society, develops along with it. The family, therefore, is in motion, changing not only under the influence of external conditions, but also due to the internal processes of its development. Therefore, all the social problems of modernity in one way or another affect the family, are refracted in its value orientations, which are currently characterized by an increase in complexity, diversity, and inconsistency.
work - 84% (1995) and 83% (1999);
friends, acquaintances - 79% (1995) and 81% (1999);
free time - 71% (1995) and 68% (1999);
religion - 41% (1995) and 43% (1999);
politics - 28% (1995) and 38% (1999). 1)
The very high and stable commitment of the population to such traditional values for any modern society as family, human communication, and free time draws attention. Let us immediately pay attention to the stability with which these basic "nuclear" values are reproduced. The four-year interval did not have a significant impact on attitudes towards family, work, friends, free time, religion. At the same time, interest in a more superficial, "external" sphere of life - politics, has increased by more than a third. It is quite understandable that for the majority of the population in today's crisis socio-economic situation, work is of great importance: it is the main source of material well-being and the opportunity to realize interests in other areas. Somewhat unexpected, at first glance, is only the mutual position in the hierarchy of values of religion and politics: after all, over the course of more than seven decades of Soviet history, atheism and "political literacy" were actively cultivated in the country. Yes, and the last decade of Russian history was marked, above all, by turbulent political events and passions. Therefore, some growth of interest in politics and political life is not surprising.
Previously, the qualities that were desirable for the social system were, as it were, predetermined by communist ideology. Now, in the conditions of the liquidation of the monopoly of one worldview, a “programmed” person is being replaced by a “self-organizing” person, freely choosing his political and ideological orientations. It can be assumed that the ideas of political democracy of the rule of law, freedom of choice, and democratic culture are not popular among Russians. First of all, because in the minds of Russians the injustice of today's social structure, associated with the growth of differentiation, is activated. Recognition of private property as a value may have nothing to do with its recognition as an object and basis of labor activity: in the eyes of many, private property is only an additional source (real or symbolic) of consumer goods.
Today, in the minds of Russians, first of all, those values that are somehow connected with the activities of the state are actualized. The first among them is legality. The demand for legality is the demand for stable rules of the game, for reliable guarantees that changes will not be accompanied by a massive ejection of people from their usual life niches. Legality is understood by Russians not in a general legal, but in a specific human sense, as a vital need for the state to establish such an order in society that actually ensures the safety of individuals (hence the high rating of the word “security” as the main need of the vital type). There is every reason to assume that in the minds of the majority of Russians, despite all the ideological shifts that have taken place in recent years, the correlation of the law with the usual functions of the former state as a guarantor of public order and a distributor of basic goods still prevails. A private person, who was formed in the Soviet era, sees in another private person (or organization) a competitor not in production, but exclusively in consumption. In a society where all sources and functions of development were concentrated in the hands of the state, in a society that was trying to develop technologically without the institution of private property, such a result was inevitable. At present, one of the main values of Russians is an orientation towards private life, the well-being of the family, and prosperity. In a crisis society, the family has become for the majority of Russians the center of attraction for their mental and physical strength.
The concept of security, like no other, perhaps, captures the continuity with the consciousness of the “traditionally Soviet” type and at the same time carries an alternative to it. In it one can see nostalgic memories of the lost orderliness (traces of "defensive consciousness"), but at the same time - the ideas of the security of the individual, who felt the taste of freedom, security in the broadest sense of the word, including from the arbitrariness of the state. But if security and freedom cannot become complementary, then the idea of security, with increasing interest in it, may well be combined in Russian society with a demand for a new ideologized lack of freedom of the “National Socialist” kind.
So, the value "core" of Russian society is made up of such values as legality, security, family, prosperity. The family can be attributed to interactionist values, the other three - to the vital, the simplest, significant for the preservation and continuation of life. These values perform an integrating function.
Values are the deep foundations of society, so how homogeneous or, if you like, unidirectional they will become in the future, how harmoniously the values of different groups can be combined, will largely determine the success of the development of our society as a whole.
As already noted, fundamental transformations in society are impossible, incomplete without a change in the value consciousness of people who make up this society. It is extremely important to study and fully monitor the process of transforming the hierarchy of needs and attitudes, without which it is impossible to truly understand and manage the processes of social development.
Conclusion
The most significant values are: the life and dignity of a person, his moral qualities, the moral characteristics of a person’s activities and actions, the content of various forms of moral consciousness - norms, principles, ideals, ethical concepts (good, evil, justice, happiness), moral characteristics of social institutions, groups, collectives, classes, social movements and similar social segments.
Among the sociological consideration of values, an important place also belongs to religious values. Faith in God, striving for the absolute, discipline as integrity, high spiritual qualities cultivated by religions are so sociologically significant that these provisions are not disputed by any sociological doctrine.
The considered ideas and values (humanism, human rights and freedoms, the ecological idea, the idea of social progress and the unity of human civilization) act as guidelines in the formation of the state ideology of Russia, which is becoming an integral part of the post-industrial society. The synthesis of traditional values, the heritage of the Soviet system and the values of the post-industrial society is a real prerequisite for the formation of a kind of matrix of the integrative state ideology of Russia.
Bibliography
1. http://revolution.allbest.ru/sociology/00000562_0.html
2. http://www.unn.ru/rus/f14/k2/students/hopes/21.htm
3. http://revolution.allbest.ru/sociology/00191219_0.html
4. http://www.spishy.ru/referats/18/9467
Hosted on Allbest.ru
Similar Documents
Analytical study of income distribution among the country's population. Characteristics of one of the indicators characterizing the standard of living - the general level of unemployment. Moral degradation of modern Russian society, its main values.
abstract, added 11/01/2013
Fundamental universal and moral values, guidelines and norms of modern society. Value orientations of mass culture. Mass consumer society as a new historical type of socialization. The degree of reasonable restriction of needs.
abstract, added 06/28/2013
The role of social institutions in maintaining the integrity and reproduction of modern society. Corporate experience in implementing the principles of social responsibility. Problems of formation and institutionalization of subjects of modern Russian society.
abstract, added 01/04/2016
The place of students in the social structure of society. Genesis of youth as a social group. The concept of value and value orientations. Factors that determine student perceptions. The main groups of value orientations of Russian students.
test, added 05/27/2008
The concept of the social structure of society. Changes in the social structure of Russian society in the transition period. The social structure of modern Russian society. Sociological studies of the structure of Russian society at the present stage.
abstract, added 11/21/2008
abstract, added 09/19/2011
The current situation of the development of society. The idea of an ideal person as a characteristic of the inner world of a person. Moral and spiritual values as qualities that characterize the ideal person. Formation of a democratic educational environment.
abstract, added 08/12/2013
The main problems of modern Russian society. Stratification models of Russian society. Wealth and poverty in the views of Russians. Elite and sub-elite groups. Study of social differentiation among young people in the city of Tyumen.
term paper, added 01/26/2016
Relations of property and power. Intense struggle of political parties and groups. Economic potential of different social groups. The social structure of Russian society as a system of groups and layers. Social stratification of Russian society.
abstract, added 03/31/2007
Definition of the concept and essence, structure and classification of values. The study of the features of the change in the values of modern Russian society. Acquaintance with the main causes and consequences of the crisis of consciousness. The problem of dissonance of youth values.
The transformation of Russian society could not but affect the system of values and values of Russians. Today much is said and written about the destruction of the system of values traditional for Russian culture, the Westernization of public consciousness.
It is the values that ensure the integration of society, helping individuals to make a socially approved choice of their behavior in vital situations.
Today's youth aged 15 to 17 are children born during a period of radical socio-political and economic change ("children of change"). The period of their upbringing in the life of their parents coincided with the requirements strictly dictated by reality to develop new life strategies for adapting, and sometimes even surviving, in a dynamically changing life reality. Basic values are considered to be those that form the basis of a person's value consciousness and implicitly influence his actions in various areas of life. They are formed during the period of the so-called primary socialization of the individual by the age of 18-20, and then remain quite stable, undergoing changes only during the crisis periods of a person’s life and his social environment.
What characterizes the value consciousness of today's "children of change"? It was proposed to name the five most significant life values for them. The group of preferred values included the following criteria: health (87.3%), family (69.7%), communication with friends (65.8%), money, material goods (64.9%) and love (42.4%). ). The level below the average (shared by 20 to 40% of respondents) formed such values as independence, freedom, work to their liking, self-realization. The lowest status (less than 20%) was given to such values as personal security, prestige, fame, creativity, communication with nature.
At the same time, young people understand that in modern conditions a person's position in society is determined precisely by a person's personal achievements in education, professional activity (38.1% of respondents), as well as his personal qualities - intelligence, strength, attractiveness, etc. (29% of respondents). And such qualities as the social status of the family, possession of material resources are not of great importance.
The structure of the basic values of our respondents is quite consistent with their ideas about the main criteria for success in life. So, among the three most significant criteria, there are: the presence of a family, children (71.5%), reliable friends (78.7%), interesting work (53.7%), such indicators as the presence of prestigious property, wealth, a high position important to today's youth. And unfortunately, we have to state a reduction in the importance in the eyes of young people of such a socially oriented goal as "an honestly lived life."
First of all, under the influence of the media, according to young people, there is a formation of such qualities as a citizen and a patriot (22.3%), propaganda of money (31.7%), violence (15.5%), justice (16.9%) , faith in God (8.3%), family values (9.7%).
The answer of young respondents to the question of what they consider the main thing in the upbringing of adolescents in modern conditions seems to be very important. As can be seen from the survey, today's youth demonstrate a fairly wide range of educational orientations, among which is the need to give children a good education, to instill organization, self-discipline and hard work, to cultivate honesty and kindness, as well as stamina and mental abilities.
Thus, in the educational orientations of modern young people, there is a combination of the so-called “bread” moments (education, training in a profession that “feeds”) and the need for moral improvement and upbringing of children (development of honesty, kindness, diligence, self-discipline).
It is noteworthy that the personal qualities associated with the attitude towards other people also have a focus on traditional moral orientations among young people. Of interest in this regard is the answer about the most important human qualities that are most valued in people. Thus, such qualities as responsiveness (82.4%), reliability (92.8%), honesty (74.9%), hospitality (58.2%), modesty (25.6%) received the highest rating. entrepreneurial spirit (57.8%).
One of the traditional basic values of Russian society is love for one's Motherland.
Family values are paramount at all times. Recently, about a hundred different marriages have been distinguished in the west. 61.9% of respondents consider this to be normal. But when answering the question: “How do you feel about the birth of children out of wedlock?”, We revealed the exact opposite of the previous answer. Thus, 56.5% believe that this is simply unacceptable in their lives.
In the structure of young people's value orientations, there is an unstable balance between traditional values and the new pragmatic "morality of success", the desire to combine values that ensure the success of activities, and the preservation of traditionally valuable relationships to a person, family, team. It is possible that in the future this will be expressed in the formation of a new moral system.
Such inalienable values for a democratic society as freedom and property have not yet become sufficiently actualized in the minds of Russians. Accordingly, the ideas of freedom and political democracy are not very popular. Indeed, the old ideas and values have undergone changes and have lost their former existential meaning. But the value system inherent in modern societies has not yet been formed. This is the value conflict. This is partly due to the inconsistent activities of the authorities. The difficult psycho-emotional state of the Russians is superimposed on their conviction that the authorities themselves do not comply with any laws, and it is precisely due to this that lawlessness reigns in Russia. This situation leads, on the one hand, to the spread of legal nihilism and a sense of permissiveness, and on the other hand, provokes a high demand for legality as the simplest need.
Values- this is a social concept, a natural object that acquires social significance and can be an object of activity. Values are the guideline of human life. they are necessary to maintain social order and are embodied in behavior and norm formation.
The American social psychologist Gordon Allport (1897-1967) developed the following classification of values:
Theoretical;
Social;
political;
Religious;
aesthetic;
Economic.
There is a conflict of values, which at the same time is the source of their development. In this regard, values are divided into two categories:
1) basic, terminal, stable value-goals (for example, freedom);
2) instrumental, i.e. value-means as personality traits, abilities that help or hinder the achievement of the goal (for example, strong will, endurance, honesty, education, efficiency, accuracy).
You can also subdivide values into actual, cash and possible. Due to the variety of classifications, it is rather difficult to study values. Indeed, how to move from the study of the ideals and goals desired and approved by society to real structures of values that exist in the mind?
The system of values reflects the essential goals, ideas, ideals of its era. The results of studies conducted at St. Petersburg University showed that in the 1930s-1950s. among the values in the first place were romance and diligence; in the 1970s and 1980s - practicality and perseverance. During the period from 1988 to 1990, the value of individual human existence increased and the orientation towards the broad human community decreased. Correlating values with one or another socio-cultural basis in the depths of which they arose, they can be classified as follows:
Traditional, focused on the reproduction of long-established goals and norms of life;
Modern, focused on innovation and progress in achieving rational goals;
Universal, equally focused on the reproduction of long-established goals and norms of life, and on their innovation.
Values can also be distinguished by relating them to the corresponding needs of individuals:
Vital (well-being, comfort, safety);
Interactionist (communication, interaction with other people);
Meaningful (norms and patterns of behavior approved in a given ethnic group, society, culture). According to the role of values for the functioning and development of society as an integral system, they are divided as:
Mainly integrating;
Mostly differentiating;
approved;
Denied.
For applied purposes, the typology of values is important according to their place in the status-hierarchical structure of the value consciousness of members of society. On this basis, there are:
"core", i.e. values of the highest status (fundamental moral values, they are shared by at least 50% of the population);
"structural reserve", i.e. values of average status, which at a certain time can move to the “core” (value conflicts are most intense in this area), they are approved by 30-45% of the population:
"tail", i.e. values of lower status, their composition is inactive (as a rule, they are inherited from the past layers of culture), they are shared by less than 30% of the population of Russia.
Table 3.1 Sociocultural parameters of values*
| Values | ends-means | Civilization affiliation | Relevance to human needs |
||||||
| terminal | instrumental | traditional | modern | universal | vital | implantation | social | meaningful life | |
| human life | + | + | ++ | ||||||
| Liberty | + | + | + | + | ++ | ||||
| Moral | + | + | + | ++ | |||||
| Communication | + | + | ++ | ||||||
| Family | + | + | + | ++ | |||||
| Job | + | + | ++ | ||||||
| well-being | + | + | + | ||||||
| Initiative | + | + | ++ | ||||||
| traditional | + | + | |||||||
| Independence | + | + | + | ||||||
| self-sacrifice | + | + | ++ | ||||||
| Authority | + | ++ | |||||||
| legality | + | + | ++ | + | + | ||||
| liberty | + | + | ++ | + | |||||
* "+" there is a match; "++" has a good match
Specialists recorded changes in the status-hierarchical structure of 14 basic (terminal and instrumental) values that occurred during the period of reforming Russian society in the 1990s. (Table 3.1).
The peculiarity of values as cultural phenomena is that even opposite values can be combined in the mind of one person. Therefore, the typology of people according to the criterion of values is particularly difficult and does not coincide with the typology of the population according to socio-professional characteristics. Below is the change in the prevalence of Russian values from 1990 to 1994, i.e. for the period "of the most dramatic changes in the objective conditions of the social environment (Table 3.2).
Russian society is changing. These changes, in fact, have no historical analogues. The conflict of values in modern Russian society is very complex and multifaceted. Since it is values that are the system-forming component of culture, it is necessary, when analyzing the interaction between them and the social behavior of individuals, to take into account, first of all, changes in the system of values. If earlier interaction "went" from needs to values through interests, today the impulse of interaction comes to an increasing extent from values to interests and from them to needs.
Table 3.2 change in the prevalence of Russians' values (1990-1994),%
| Values | Values | Place of values and socio-cultural evolution |
|||||
| Main array | Hot Spots | ||||||
| dominant |
|||||||
| legality | 1 | 65,3 | 80,0 | 74,8 | 1 | legality | Universal terminal-integrating kernel |
| Communication | 2 | 65,1 | 67,0 | 73,9 | 2 | Communication | |
| Family | 3 | 61,0 | 65,0 | 69,3 | 3 | Family | |
| Between opposition and domination |
|||||||
| Job | 4 | 50,0 | 61,9 | 56,1 | 4 | Liberty | |
| Moral | 5 | 48,4 | 53,2 | ||||
| Liberty | 6 | 46,1 | 49,5 | 5 | Independence | Modernist terminal-integrating reserve |
|
| The life of an individual | 7 | 45,8 | 51.0 | 49,6 | 6 | The life of an individual | |
| 50,4 | 46,7 | 7 | Moral | ||||
| 49,0 | 44,1 | 8 | Job | ||||
| Opposition |
|||||||
| self-sacrifice | 8 | 44,0 | 44,0 | 44,9 | 9 | Initiative | Mixed instrumented differential |
| traditional | 9 | 41,0 | 44,0 | 37,1 | 10 | traditional | |
| Independence | 10 | 40,0 | |||||
| Initiative | 11 | 36,2 | 38,3 | 34,3 | 11 | self-sacrifice | |
| minority values |
|||||||
| liberty | 12 | 23,3 | 32,0 | 25,0 | 12 | well-being | Mixed differentiating "tail" |
| well-being | 13 | 23,0 | 23,9 | 24,7 | 13 | liberty | |
| Authority | 14 | 18,0 | 20,0 | 19,6 | 14 | Authority | |
In this regard, and when considering the norms of interaction between individuals, one should also proceed from the system and dynamics of values. Social norms are realized in human relationships, social interaction. These are peculiar social standards for establishing modal proper behavior (proper from the point of view of society). They perform the function of integration, streamlining the lives of individuals, groups, and society. The main thing in the norm is its prescriptive character. Compliance with the norms leads to the exclusion of the influence of random motives; they provide reliability, standardization, predictability of behavior. All social norms can be divided into universal (mores, customs), intra-group (rituals), personal, individual. All norms are impersonal rules of conduct. The degree of their awareness and effectiveness is manifested in the fact that a person is aware of the consequences of his actions for other people and recognizes his responsibility for actions in accordance with the norms.
Questions and tasks for repetition
1. Describe the concept of "values".
2. What classifications of values do you know?
3. Describe the "value system"
