Society from the point of view of Marxist sociology. Socialization is a condition for the implementation of social technologies
EE BELARUSIAN STATE ECONOMIC UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics and Sociology of Labor
Abstract
on the topic: Personality from the point of view of sociology: concept, structure, types
Completed by student A.N. Wort
4th year, UEF, EPZ
Checked
teacher A.A. Pervachuk
Minsk, 2010
Content
Introduction 3
1.
The concept of personality in sociology 4
2.
Macrosociological level of personality analysis 7
3.
Interaction between the individual and society 8
4.
Conclusion 9
Introduction
Man acts as the starting cell of the social structure. Therefore, its study and determination of its nature, needs and desires is of great interest to sociology.
As you know, the object of sociology is society, consisting of social institutions, organizations, and groups. People are also the object of sociological research. Sociologists are interested in opinions, motives of actions, life plans, value orientations, goals of activity and much more that expresses the personality of a modern person. There is no socialization in animal communities. It is possible only in human society. Socialization is the process of transforming a person from an individual into a personality.
People's lives flow in communication with each other, so they need to unite and coordinate their actions. Of course, the world exists solely because the actions of a huge number of people are coordinated, but for this they need to understand who is supposed to do what and when. The first condition for organized social life is the existence of certain agreements between people, which take the form of social expectations expressed in norms. In modern society, the state plays the role of a mechanism for implementing a large number of norms - laws.
1. The concept of personality in sociology
The concept of “personality” should be distinguished from the concepts of “man” and “individual”, which are similar in content. When we say “person”, we mean a specific biological species - homo sapiens (reasonable man). The word "individual" is used to designate a specific member of that species. The individual is the unit of the human race.Personality- social characteristics of an individual. In sociology, the concept of personality is considered, firstly, in connection with the interaction of individuals with specific small or large social communities (class, nation, work collective, etc.), and, secondly, from the standpoint of the social characteristics of the individual, determined by his interests, needs, value orientations.
The formation of personality, its development can only be imagined in constant contact and close interaction with the surrounding social environment. In other words, a person can act simultaneously as both an object and a subject of social relations. On the one hand, social relationships shape personality. Here it appears as the object of these relationships. On the other hand, each person is capable, one way or another, of influencing social relations, modifying them, i.e. acts as the subject of these relations. The process of interaction of the individual with the social environment is characterized by two typical forms:
1) adaptation, i.e. passive adaptation of the individual to the surrounding reality;
2) integration- active interaction of the personality with the environment, when not only the environment influences the personality, but also the personality participates in its formation /3, p. 89/.
Each person is unique, different from others. This uniqueness stems from the conditions in which the social “I” of the individual was formed throughout his life, as well as personal qualities associated with physical characteristics, abilities, and inclinations, which are largely determined by genetic and hereditary factors.
However, the sociology of personality does not study personality as a unique, inimitable phenomenon. This is done by pedagogy, psychology and other sciences focused on the behavior of specific individuals.
Sociologists are interested in personality as a social community: the personality of a student, teacher, worker, i.e. a typologized personality that reflects the general ways in which specific social groups of people differ in terms of their personal characteristics. For example, students of the Faculty of Physical Education differ from students of other faculties in terms of the level of physical development, propensity for active forms of pastime and other characteristic features. The process of introducing an individual as an object of social relations to the social norms and values surrounding him is usually called socialization. The development of individual qualities of a person as a subject of social relations is designated in sociology by the concept of “individualization”. Personality education can be defined:
firstly, as a complex and lengthy process of introducing it to the social norms and values inherent in a particular society in specific historical conditions (i.e. socialization);
secondly, as the development of individual abilities and capabilities of each individual in the interests of a given society, individual social groups, and the individual himself (individualization).
If individualization predominates in the upbringing of a child’s personality, an individualist will be formed, oriented toward rigid egocentrism and disregard for collective interests. Dominating the elements of socialization over individualization in the process of education is also not desirable: the result will be a conformist, overly dependent on the people around him, unable to make decisions on his own. In other words, the two sides in the education of the individual (individualization and socialization) must be harmoniously balanced. And this is difficult to do without relying on sociological science, without using the methods of specific sociological research.
The nature of the individual’s relationship with the environment largely determines his social status and the social roles he performs.
Social status (from Latin status: state of affairs, position) is a characteristic of a person’s position in the social hierarchy. It records the differences between people in their social prestige in society and determines the individual’s place in the system of social relations.
Social prestige (from the French prestige: charm, enchantment) is society’s assessment of the social significance of things (their properties) and people (their behavior) from the point of view of norms and values accepted in a given system of social relations.
A person’s status depends on objective factors (salary, availability of material goods, quality of life, nature and content of work) and subjective indicators (personal characteristics, behavioral style, level of education and qualifications). The status happens:
¦ hereditary (or prescribed), when an individual acquires a position in society regardless of his personal efforts (the status of a millionaire, a black man, a woman);
¦ acquired, achieved by a person in accordance with his choice, efforts, merits.
Statuses are also divided according to other criteria. For example:
¦ natural status - associated with biological characteristics (the status of a man and a woman, a child and an adult is not the same);
¦ professional and legal status - has social criteria for its measurement, officially specified or informal.
Usually a person has several statuses. He can simultaneously have the status of an engineer, the father of his children, the driver of a personal car, or an amateur mushroom picker. However, only one integral status determines his position in society, associated, as a rule, with his profession, position, and income. Owning property usually increases social status, but not always. Titled but poor nobles always had a higher status than wealthy merchants. The president of a country is a more prestigious social role than a millionaire. Status may also be based on a person’s ethnicity.
Social role (from the French role: social function) is a model of behavior determined by the position of the individual in the system of interpersonal relations. It is adequate to the set of expectations associated with the behavior of a particular person in a social group. For example, the role of a teacher involves answering the questions: what should a teacher be like, what do you expect him to be like? There are roles of student, groom, father, athlete. When raising a boy, we teach him male roles. A person acquires new roles throughout his life. Roles are permanent, i.e. exist for a long time (for example, the role of a mother), and temporary, performed for a short period (for example, the role of a hospitable host). However, this division is often conditional: the mother can be deprived of parental rights, but hospitality towards loved ones is not excluded throughout life.
Two different assessments of their content can be simultaneously applied to social roles: role expectations, i.e. point of view on a particular role from the people around him, and role behavior, consisting of specific actions of a particular individual, from the standpoint of his beliefs. Sometimes the roles may be incompatible (say, the role of a student and the role of a young mother). A role conflict arises, which is resolved, for example, through the student’s academic leave. In sociology, they also use such a concept as role tension - incompatibility of role expectations (a priest in the army, despite religious commandments, blesses soldiers to kill).
2. Macrosociological level of personality analysis (personality types)
A number of personality theories have been formulated in sociology. And it is characteristic that all theories recognize the human personality as a specific formation, directly derived from social factors (the relationship between the biological and the social in personality). Some doctrines are based on the belief that human self-realization is possible only through the state. Naturally, a strong state is a benefit for citizens. And everything that helps strengthen the state, but meets the interests of society, is a real guarantor of freedom. This view of the relationship between the individual and the state dates back to Democritus, who proclaimed that the common good and justice are represented in the state. The interests of the state are above all. But Georg Hegel spoke most expressively, believing that the individual is free because the state is the highest form and embodiment of freedom. The views of Niccolo Machiavelli, who considered the strengthening of the state and its power to be the embodiment of the rational in the human, have the same philosophical basis.3. Interaction between the individual and society
Environmental conditions, position in the system of social connections and internal characteristics determine the personality, its behavior, attitudes and preferences, emotions and choices. Communication and interaction between people is established because people, in the process of satisfying their individual needs, depend on each other in something specific. In other words, each person performs certain social functions as a kind of assignment to perform a specialized occupation in social interaction: a doctor treats, a teacher teaches, educates, a driver drives a car, an entrepreneur manages and organizes production, etc. In sociology, motives personality is determined by its psychological state and the nature of the influence of the external environment (conscious or unconscious motives).
Political behavior- a type of social activity of an individual, whose actions are motivated and express the realization of their political status. Interest is one of the most important driving forces of behavior and activity of any social subject, be it an individual, nation, class, society, etc. Interest is organically connected with the needs of the individual or social communities. But if needs are focused, first of all, on satisfaction, on a certain set of means of life, then interest is directed to social institutions, institutions, norms of relationships in society, on which the distribution of values and benefits that ensure the satisfaction of needs depends. A subjective attitude towards such social conditions, institutions, norms, situations, their approval or condemnation, the desire to preserve or destroy them, is nothing more than the interest of the individual (hence it is clear why the movement of an individual from one social community to another changes its social interests) .The basis of the value attitude towards the surrounding world, the basis of the system of values and value orientations of the individual are needs and interests. Value is a special social relationship, as a result of which the needs and interests of a person or a social community, layer, group are transferred to the face of things, objects, spiritual phenomena, giving them certain social properties. Personal values are the objects of human aspirations, inclinations, desires, phenomena, processes, facts of reality that do not leave a person indifferent and can force him to act definitely. Value orientations are social values shared by an individual, which are the goals of life and the main means of achieving them and therefore acquire the function of the most important regulators of the social behavior of individuals. Attitude is a person’s general orientation towards certain objects that precede action and express a predisposition to act in a certain way.
Conclusion
As a result of the presented material, the following conclusions can be drawn.
1. The formation of personality, its development can only be imagined in constant contact and close interaction with the surrounding social environment. In other words, a person can act simultaneously as both an object and a subject of social relations. On the one hand, social relationships shape personality. Here it appears as the object of these relationships. On the other hand, each person is capable, one way or another, of influencing social relations, modifying them, i.e. acts as the subject of these relations.
etc.............
Very often we use the words “person”, “individual”, “personality”, “individuality”, using them as synonyms. However, these terms mean different concepts. The concept of “man” acts as a philosophical category, since it has the most general, generic meaning, distinguishing a rational being from all other objects of nature. An individual is understood as a separate, specific person, as a single representative of the human race. Individuality can be defined as a set of traits that distinguish one individual from another at the biological, psychological, social and other levels. The concept of personality is introduced to highlight the social essence of a person, as a bearer of social qualities and properties, a certain combination of which defines him as a person. Since this concept places emphasis on the social principle, personality acts as a special sociological category.
At the moment of birth, the child is not yet a person. He is just an individual. To become an individual, a child must go through a certain developmental path, where the prerequisites are biological, genetically determined prerequisites and the presence of a social environment with which he interacts. Therefore, personality is understood as a normative type of person that meets the requirements of society, its values and norms.
The characteristics of personality can be approached either from the point of view of its structure, or from the point of view of interaction with other people and the environment.
Structural analysis of personality is one of the most difficult problems in sociology. Since personality is considered as a structural integrity of biological, psychological and sociogenic components, biological, psychological and social structures of personality are usually distinguished, which are studied by biology, psychology and sociology. The biological structure of personality is taken into account by sociology when normal interactions between people are disrupted. A sick or disabled person cannot perform all the social functions inherent in a healthy person. Sociology is more closely related to the psychological structure of personality, which includes a set of emotions, experiences, memory, abilities, etc. Here, not only various kinds of deviations are important, but also the normal reactions of others to the individual’s activities. The qualities of a given personality structure are subjective. But when determining the social structure of a personality, one cannot limit oneself to its subjective side, since the main thing in a personality is its social quality. Therefore, the social structure of a person includes a set of objective and subjective social properties of an individual that arise and function in the process of his various activities. It logically follows from this that the most important characteristic of the social structure of a person is his activity as an independent action and as interaction with other people.
The following elements can be distinguished in the social structure of the individual:
A way of implementing special qualities in activity, manifested in lifestyle, its level and quality, in various types of activity: labor, family, socio-political, cultural, etc. At the same time, the activity of an individual in the production of material and spiritual values should be considered as the central link in the structure of the personality, determining all its elements;
Objective social needs of the individual: since the individual is an organic part of society, its structure is based on social needs that determine the development of man as a social being. A person may or may not be aware of these needs, but this does not make them cease to exist and determine his behavior;
Abilities for creative activity, knowledge, skills: heredity determines a person’s abilities, which determine the effectiveness of his activities, but what abilities will be realized depends on the interests of the individual and his desire to realize these inclinations. Indeed, natural abilities influence such parameters of human activity as tempo, rhythm, speed, endurance, fatigue, but the content of activity is determined not by biological inclinations, but by the social environment;
The degree of mastery of the cultural values of society, i.e. spiritual world of the individual;
Moral norms and principles that guide a person;
Beliefs are deep principles that determine the main line of human behavior.
All of these structural elements are found in every personality, although to varying degrees. Each person participates in the life of society in one way or another, has knowledge, and is guided by something. Therefore, the social structure of the individual is constantly changing.
Personality can also be characterized in terms of social type. The need to typify individuals is universal. Each historical era has formed its own types, for example, in accordance with the dominant values, the cultural types of the English gentleman, the Sicilian mafioso, the Arab sheikh, etc. arose.
The well-known psychological typology is based on the character and temperament of a person; it includes 4 types - choleric, sanguine, melancholic and phlegmatic.
The famous Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung (1875-1961) proposed his own typology, which is based on three axes of human thinking, and each of them divides the world and the idea of the world into two poles:
Extraversion - introversion,
Abstraction - concreteness (intuition - sensory),
Endogeneity – exogeneity (ethics – logic).
Extraversion and introversion are the division of the world into a world of objects and a world of interactions between them. In accordance with this division, the extrovert is focused on objects, while the introvert is focused on interactions between them. An extrovert is a person whose psychological characteristics are expressed in concentrating his interests on the external world, external objects. Extroverts are characterized by impulsive behavior, manifestation of initiative, sociability, social adaptability and openness of the inner world. An introvert is a person whose socio-psychological makeup is characterized by a focus on his inner world and isolation. Introverts consider their interests to be the most important and attach the highest value to them; They are characterized by social passivity and a tendency towards introspection. An introvert happily performs the duties assigned to him, but does not like responsibility for the final results.
The world is concrete and the world is natural. On the one hand, the world is formed from specific objects and interactions between them: for example, the boy Vanya goes to school. On the other hand, along with concrete truths, there are abstract truths, for example, “all children go to school.” A person with abstract or intuitive thinking (the terms “intuitive” and “abstract thinking” are identical) tends to think about all children. A person with concrete (sensory) thinking will think about his child.
The world is endogenous and exogenous, i.e. it is formed from internal and external phenomena. Jung himself called this axis “emotions - thinking”, and some social psychologists call it “ethics - logic”.
If in social psychology the main attention is paid to the development of psychological types, then in sociology - to the development of social types. Personality type as an abstract model of personal characteristics inherent in a certain population of people ensures the relative constancy of a person’s responses to the environment. The social type of personality is a product of the interaction of historical, cultural and socio-economic conditions of people’s life. According to L. Wirth, a social type is a person endowed with any characteristic properties that meet the requirements of society, its values and norms and determine his role behavior in the social environment. This means that an individual must be a typical representative of a group of people (class, estate, nation, era, etc.) in terms of behavior, lifestyle, habits and value orientations. For example, a typical intellectual, a new Russian of the 1990s, an oligarch.
Personality typologies were developed by many sociologists, in particular, K. Marx, M. Weber, E. Fromm, R. Dahrendorf and others, who used different criteria. Thus, R. Dahrendorf believed that personality is a product of the development of culture and social conditions. He used this criterion as the basis for his typology, in which the identification of personality types is carried out through the concept of homosociologicus:
Homofaber - in traditional society “a working person”: peasant, warrior, politician, i.e. a person endowed with an important social function;
Homoconsumer – modern consumer, i.e. personality formed by mass society;
Homouniversalis - a person capable of engaging in different types of activities, in the concept of K. Marx - changing all kinds of activities;
Homosoveticus is a person dependent on the state.
Another typology includes social personality types, identified on the basis of value orientations that individuals adhere to:
Personality types can be distinguished depending on the value orientations of individuals:
Traditionalists are focused on the values of duty, discipline, and obedience to the law; their level of independence, self-realization, and creativity is low;
Idealists are critical of traditional norms and have a strong commitment to self-development;
Frustrated personality type - characterized by low self-esteem, depressed well-being;
Realists – combine the desire for self-realization with a developed sense of duty, skepticism with self-control;
Hedonistic materialists are focused on satisfying consumer desires.
Since the personality structure contains two components: the totality of relationships with the outside world and internal, ideal relationships, the following personality types are also distinguished:
Ideal is a personality type that society proclaims as a kind of standard; the ideal type of personality in the era of the USSR was a true communist (pioneer, Komsomol member);
Basic – a personality type that best meets the needs of society, i.e. this is a set of typical personality traits that are most common in a given society; they are characteristic of people who grew up in the same culture and went through the same socialization processes, for example, the workaholic type in post-war Japan. As a rule, it is the basic type that predominates within a particular society.
All these typologies only confirm the confidence of sociologists that social types are a product of society. And since we live in an era of rapid change, an era of globalization, when national cultures are gradually melting into one global one, we may witness the emergence of new personality types.
Developed a fundamentally different theory Karl Marx(1818-1883) - an outstanding German political economist, philosopher and sociologist. Having based his theory on the principle of the material factor of historical development, Marx understood by “material factor” the development of the productive forces of society, which, in combination with the corresponding relations between people, create a socio-economic formation that dictates a specific mode of production and the corresponding forms of ownership.
The material forces that dominate society determine the “spiritual” superstructure, to which Marx attributed various kinds of political, moral, spiritual and other social institutions. Meanwhile, the dynamic picture of social development is determined not only by the scientific, technical, economic and socio-political progress of society, but also by the specific “location” of social classes, that is, large groups of people who have their own special relationship to the means of production, property and political institutions.
Social development, which takes shape as a result of economic progress and the corresponding development of class forces, moves from one stage to another, as a rule, through a powerful totalitarian crisis that covers all institutions of society. Marx called this crisis a social revolution, which, in his opinion, is the engine of history. Moreover, one of the social classes accelerates the arrival of the revolution, while other classes resist it.
In the social production of their lives, people enter into certain, necessary, relations independent of their will - production relations that correspond to a certain stage of development of their material productive forces. The totality of these production relations constitutes the economic structure of society, the real basis on which the legal and political superstructure rises and to which certain forms of social consciousness correspond. The method of production of material life determines the social, political and spiritual processes of life in general. It is not the consciousness of people that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness.
Marx introduces the concept of formations
Socio-economic formation, (or system) is a historically established type of society, which is based on a certain way of producing society, for procreation or offspring - that is, the creation of a new formation.
The mode of production that underlies the socio-economic formation is the unity of interaction between productive forces and production relations (relations of ownership of the means of production). Based on the method of production, superstructural relations are formed (political, legal and ideological institutions of society), which seem to consolidate the existing relations of production. The unity of interaction between the superstructure and the method of production constitutes a socio-economic formation.
According to Marx, humanity has gone through several socio-economic formations - primitive, slaveholding, feudal and capitalist, and the last - communist - should come in the future and is final.
At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production, or - which is only the legal expression of the latter - with the property relations within which they have hitherto developed. From forms of development of productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then comes the era of social revolution. With a change in the economic basis, a revolution occurs more or less quickly in the entire enormous superstructure. When considering such revolutions, it is always necessary to distinguish the material revolution, ascertained with natural scientific precision, in the economic conditions of production from the legal, political, religious, artistic or philosophical, in short, from the ideological forms in which people are aware of this conflict and are fighting for its resolution.
Not a single social formation dies before all the productive forces for which it provides sufficient scope have developed, and new higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions of their existence have matured in the depths of the old society itself.
Marx viewed human history as the history of struggle among large social groups
The revolution of the proletariat, according to Marx, will be for the first time in history a revolution of the majority for everyone, but not minorities for their own sake. “When, in the course of development, class differences disappear and all production is concentrated in the hands of an association of individuals, then public power will lose its political character. Political power, in the proper sense of the word, is the organized violence of one class to suppress another. If the proletariat in the struggle against the bourgeoisie certainly unites into a class, if through a revolution it turns into a ruling class and, as a ruling class, by force abolishes the old relations of production, then along with these relations of production it destroys the conditions for the existence of class opposition, destroys classes in general, and thereby its own dominance as a class in place. From the old bourgeois society with its classes and class oppositions comes an association in which the free development of everyone is the main goal.
7. Subjective method and psychological direction
in the sociology of Russia at the end of the 19th century.
Subjectivist paradigm focuses research on what people do and how they do it. Here, society is viewed from the point of view of the interaction of social groups, each of which has special values, attitudes, habits and statuses.
It is based on the ideas of Max Weber's understanding sociology, on psychological trends, with the exception of behaviorism, as well as on phenomenological philosophy. What unites this paradigm is the following:
1) social reality is understood as arising as a result of interactions mediated by the individual meanings and perceptions of the actors;
2) therefore, the main task of sociology is to understand the internal meaning of certain actions, to describe the ideas on the basis of which social reality is constructed, and the process of this construction;
3) this problem must be solved using methods that are fundamentally different from natural science.
Subjective sociology was formed in the 60s and early 70s. XIX century and set out in the works of P.L. Lavrova and N.K. Mikhailovsky, their kinships were shared by S.N. Yuzhakov, not being a populist.
Subjective sociology fundamentally distinguished between natural science and sociological knowledge and, because of this, objective and subjective methods of research. According to subjective sociology, the individual, and not a group or class, is the main “unit” of social structure, as well as historical development. The subjective thoughts and goals of an individual determine his social activity. The study of personality is carried out by a sociologist on the principle of “empathy”, “when the observer puts himself in the position of being observed." In addition, subjective sociology included an ethical aspect - the researcher’s assessment of social facts from the point of view of his social ideal and moral positions.
Petr Lavrovich Lavrov(1823-1900) was the first to introduce such terms as “anthropologism”, “subjective method”, “subjective point of view” into sociology. “In sociology and history,” wrote Lavrov, there are things that are unchangeable and absolute, as in other sciences. They are objective, they may not be known about in a particular era, but they are discovered in another... Sociology and history contains such truths that cannot be discovered until a certain moment, not because of an objective discrepancy with what is already known, but because of the subjective inability of society to understand the question and answer it."
The Russian sociologist explains this idea with the following example: until the working class had a desire to take part in public life, historians had no need to comprehend the past, which contained the origins of this desire, and although the chronicles and memoirs contained many interesting facts on this issue, they did not yet constitute a scientific understanding of history.
Revealing the main content of his approach to the life of society and its processes, Lavrov noted that “social forms are like products of social creativity of an individual that change in history due to their good, and therefore an individual always has the right and obligation to strive to change existing forms in accordance with his moral ideals, has the right and duty to fight for what it considers to be progress (constantly subjecting its ideas about progress to criticism on the basic requirements of ethics), developing a social force capable of triumphing in such a struggle."
Due to the fact that the majority is guided only by the calculation of benefit, interest is the most general social impulse and in every historical era the progressive movement is strong only when the interests of the majority coincide in their social ideals with the beliefs of the most developed minority. It is based on this theoretical position that Lavrov substantiates the organic connection between sociology and socialism. Socialism, according to Lavrov, fully meets the requirements stated above: “It represents the interests of the working majority, it is so imbued with the consciousness of class struggle; it realizes for the developed minority the ideal of a fair community of life, allowing for the most conscious development of the individual with the greatest solidarity of all workers, an ideal that can embrace everything.” humanity, destroying all distinctions between states, nationalities and races; it is for individuals who have been most thoughtful in the course of history, and the inevitable result of the modern process of economic life.
Another major Russian sociologist was also a subjectivist in sociology Nikolai Konstantinovich Mikhailovsky(1842-1904). “The fundamental and indelible difference between the relationship of man to man and to the rest of nature is, first of all,” wrote Mikhailovsky, “that in the first case we are dealing not just with phenomena, but with phenomena gravitating towards a known goal, whereas in second - this goal does not exist. This difference is so important and significant that it itself hints at the need to apply different methods to the two great areas of human knowledge... We cannot evaluate social phenomena except subjectively... the highest control must belong to This is a subjective method." Mikhailovsky believed that one cannot be impartial about the facts of social life. “Tell me,” he said, “what are your social connections, and I will tell you how you look at the world.” Mikhailovsky rejected the evolutionary theory of C. Darwin and G. Spencer and proceeded from the theory of the need to save the individual from the destructive effects of social control. In his opinion, there is an ongoing war between the individual and society, evidence of this is the history of Russia. By drawing attention to the influence that imitation, suggestion, and prestige have on social behavior, Mikhailovsky anticipated the psychoanalysis of S. Freud and V. Adler.
The structural-functional method is an approach to the description and explanation of systems, in which their elements and the dependencies between them are studied within the framework of a single whole; individual social phenomena perform a specific function in supporting and changing the social system.
The basis of the structural-functional analysis is the idea of social order, in which the conflict due to the superiority of the groups is based on the opportunity to save the individual and is described: and the destruction of, and growth of, basic types. The type of these three and those that have become relevant, in which the teaching of social science, as well as the definition of the form of society, the maximal consumption say � We basically led the world ��������to the world�type of o�with its �presumably markedness�about�the appearance, such as�for example, the motor��form of the general "the location of the th (�bor�th)�, as well as the two consumer's already known�
2) поѽкажми основ�тарыняют опѵ мя у�иде��оле�, интеѻьны�ься ольше�отноше�ть �ся в я социальных грто, �ешнЀав�дивЁтвенно�ункционально го анализа лст� идея ѵшени�твен�елем социалт опѵтут озникаю«�сать прЋе соѲозглашает ѽтересы рЏющиес�; он о� произвоЂип о�ноше�тов с точки оснот�тройки им�льѺса –�щТ�ю, ��я у��рвыР�ки�ен�алЃпКчес�ци�бщест�ствен�– с �зывают � �ы н