Sociocultural system and its structure. Open Library - an open library of educational information Society as a socio-cultural system elements and relationships

Society is the community that people form and in which they live. Society is not any mechanical collection of people, but such an association within which there is a more or less constant, stable and fairly close interaction of people.

The complexity of the general definition of the concept of "society" is associated with a number of circumstances. First, it is a very broad and abstract concept. Secondly, society is an extremely complex, multilayered and multifaceted phenomenon, which allows us to consider it from a variety of perspectives. Thirdly, society is a historical concept, the general definition of which should cover all stages of its development. Fourthly, society is a category studied by social psychology, sociology, history, social philosophy, and other sciences, each of which, in its own way, in accordance with its subject and method of research, defines and studies society.

Let us consider various approaches to the question of what is the basis of society: the first approach is the belief that the initial cell of society is living acting people, whose joint activity, acquiring a more or less stable character, forms society.

E. Durkheim saw the fundamental principle of the stable unity of society in the "collective consciousness". According to M. Weber, society is the interaction of people, which is the product of social actions, i.e. actions directed at other people. T. Parsons defined society as a system of relations between people, the connecting beginning of which are values and norms. From the point of view of K. Marx, society is a developing set of relations between people that develop in the process of their joint activities.

For all the differences in the approaches to interpreting society on the part of the classics of sociology, they have in common the consideration of society as an integral system of elements that are in a state of close interconnection. This approach to society is called systemic. System- this is a certain way ordered set of elements interconnected and forming a kind of integral unity. The internal nature of any integral system, the material basis of its organization is determined by the composition, the set of its elements. social system is a holistic education, the main element of which are people, their connections, interactions and relationships. They are stable and are reproduced in the historical process, passing from generation to generation.

T. Parsons formulated the main functional requirements, the fulfillment of which ensures the stable existence of society as a system:

1. Ability to adapt, adapt to changing conditions and increasing material needs of people (economic subsystem).

2. Goal-oriented, the ability to set the main goals and objectives and support the process of achieving them (political subsystem).

3. The ability to include new generations in the system of established social relations (customs and legal institutions).

4. The ability to reproduce the social structure and relieve tension in the system (beliefs, morality, family, educational institutions).

The subjects of society and public relations are individual people, groups of people and their institutions. Groups of people are divided into: natural(family, clan, people, nation); artificial, membership-based(associations by professions, interests). Natural collectives are characterized by a greater degree of integration and form stronger subsystems than artificial collectives.

The systemic and structural-functional approaches, enriched today with the findings and methods of cybernetics, synergetics, make it possible to single out the most significant system-integrative qualities ( character traits) society:

1. Society is considered as a whole as a single socially integral system ( integrity).2. Society functions in space and time ( stability).3. The integrity of society is organic, i.e. its internal interaction is stronger external factors (sociality).four. Any society strives for independence, regulation and manageability ( autonomy, self-sufficiency, self-regulation).5. Any society seeks to ensure the continuity of generations.6. Society distinguishes unity common system values (traditions, norms, laws, rules).

With the closest interconnections of such concepts as “society”, “country” and “state”, they must be strictly distinguished. “Country” is a concept that primarily reflects the geographical characteristics of a part of our planet, defined by the boundaries of an independent state. “State” is a concept that reflects the main thing in the political system of the country. “Society” is a concept that directly characterizes the social organization of a country.

Societyis a set of all forms of association and interaction of people that have developed historically, have a common territory, common cultural values and social norms, and are characterized by the socio-cultural identity of its members.

Society is a social reality of a special type, a product of human interaction. It is a complex system of economic, social, national, religious and other relations.

Today in sociology there is no single definition of the concept of "society". Theorists argue about the features that make up this category, about the essence of the term. The search for the latter has enriched sociological science with two opposing positions regarding main characteristic society. T. Parsons and other supporters of the first approach argue that society is, first of all, a collection of people. E. Giddens and scientists who share his point of view put the system of relations that develop between people at the forefront.

The totality of people, in the absence of a community uniting them, cannot be called a society. These conditions are typical for people who lived in ancient times. On the other hand, the system of relations and values cannot exist independently, in the absence of bearers of these values. This means that the features identified by representatives of both approaches are integral characteristics of society. However, if values perish without carriers, then a set of people not burdened with values in the process of joint life activity is able to develop their own system of relations. Therefore, society as a socio-cultural system is a set of people who, in the process of joint activity, develop a specific system of relations, which is characterized by certain values, culture.

In accordance with the functional paradigm, society as a sociocultural system includes several components:

Collectives are differentiated communities united by certain goals;
Values - cultural patterns, ideas and pillars that are shared and upheld by members of society;
Norms - regulators of behavior that ensure order and mutual understanding in society;
Roles are models of personality behavior, determined by the forms of their relationships with other subjects.

Society as a socio-cultural system - a set social groups and individuals whose interaction is coordinated and ordered by special social institutions: legal and social norms, traditions, institutions, interests, attitudes, etc.

Society as a socio-cultural system is not only a theoretical category, it is a living dynamic system that is in constant motion. The values of society are not static, they change as a result of the refraction of external events through the prism of the consciousness of social groups. Traditions and attitudes change, but do not cease to exist, being the most important link between people.

One of the most important values of modern society is material well-being. Consumer society is the result of the development of capitalism. Mass consumption of material goods and the formation of the corresponding characterize such a society. The philosophy of the members of such a society is the development of progress and the improvement of technologies to increase the volume of benefits.

The future of society depends on the form and quality of work Supporting marriage, providing free and public education are the most important areas that determine the prospects of each social system.

Introduction

Throughout the history of sociology, one of the most important problems has been the problem: what is a society? Sociology of all times and peoples has tried to answer the questions: how is the existence of society possible? What is the original cell of society? What are the mechanisms of social integration that ensure social order, despite the huge diversity of interests of individuals and social groups?

What is the original cell of society?

What is at its core?

When addressing this issue in sociology, different approaches are found. The first approach consists in the assertion that the initial cell of society is living acting people, whose joint activity forms society.

Thus, from the point of view of this approach, the individual is the elementary unit of society.

Society is a set of people who carry out joint activities and relationships.

The purpose of the work is to explain the concept of society as a socio-cultural system.

Work tasks:

give concepts of social, actions, interactions, relationships and relationships

define the main types social institutions

to reveal the sociological analysis of sociocultural processes.

1. Social actions, interactions, interconnections and relationships

The inclusion of a person in society is carried out through various social communities, which each individual person is personified, through social institutions, social organizations and complexes of norms and values \u200b\u200baccepted in society, that is, through culture.

A socio-cultural system is a social one, which is a set of social relations and connections between people, and a cultural one, which includes things, fundamental social values, ideas, symbols, knowledge, beliefs, and helps to regulate people's behavior.

The term "sociocultural" is intended to emphasize the unity and intersection of these two spheres of society, and a certain primacy of the "social", expressing the essence of the historically defined interaction of people (communities, associations, groups, institutions).

The sociocultural approach in sociology is associated with the allocation of societal systems - economic, social, political, ideological subsystems of society, which form a certain hierarchical dependence.

In the sociocultural analysis of society, it is important to take into account the desire of some groups to impose the norms of their subculture on other social subjects.

Thus, society is not a simple sum of individuals, their connections and actions, interactions, relationships and institutions, but an integral socio-cultural system, a social organism that functions and develops according to its own laws.

Society is a universal way of organizing social ties, interactions and relationships between people.

These connections, interactions and relationships of people are formed on some common basis. As such a basis, various schools of sociology consider “interests”, “needs”, “motives”, “attitudes”, “values”, etc.

Basic concepts of a systematic approach:

A system is a set of elements ordered in a certain way, interconnected and forming a certain integral unity. The internal nature of any integral system, the material basis of its organization is determined by the composition, the set of its elements.

The social system is a holistic formation, the main element of which are people, their connections, interactions and relationships. They are stable and are reproduced in the historical process, passing from generation to generation.

Social connection is a set of facts that determine the joint activity of people in specific communities at a specific time to achieve certain goals.

Social ties are established not at the whim of people, but objectively.

Social interaction is the process in which people act and experience interactions with each other.

Interaction leads to the formation of new social relations.

Social relations are relatively stable and independent ties between individuals and social groups.

From the point of view of supporters of a systematic approach to the analysis of society, society is not a summative, but an integral system. At the level of society, individual actions, connections and relationships form a new systemic quality.

Systemic quality is a special qualitative state that cannot be considered as a simple sum of elements.

Social interactions and relations are of a supra-individual, transpersonal nature, that is, society is some kind of independent substance that is primary in relation to individuals. Each individual, being born, constitutes a certain structure of connections and relations and is included in it in the process of socialization.

A holistic system has many connections, interactions and relationships. The most characteristic are correlative links, including the coordination and subordination of elements.

Coordination is a certain consistency of elements, that special nature of their mutual dependence, which ensures the preservation of an integral system.

Subordination is subordination and subordination, indicating a special specific place, the unequal significance of elements in an integral system.

So, society is an integral system with qualities in which there is not one of the elements included in it separately.

As a result of its integral qualities, the social system acquires a certain independence in relation to its constituent elements, a relatively independent way of its development.

On what principles does the organization of the elements of society take place, what kind of connections are established between the elements?

In answering these questions, a systematic approach to society is supplemented in sociology with deterministic and functionalist approaches.

The deterministic approach is most clearly expressed in Marxism. From the point of view of this doctrine, society as an integral system consists of the following subsystems: economic, social, political and ideological. Each of them can be considered as a system. To distinguish these systems from the social system proper, they are called social systems. In the relationship between these systems, causal relationships play a dominant role, that is, the systems are in a causal relationship. (2)

Society is a certain type of system, consisting of heterogeneous interconnected elements and subsystems, properties and relationships, created by individuals on the basis of a feedback mechanism, the purpose of which is to implement extreme principles in the life of individuals with the help of laws operating within certain boundaries. (1)

Society is a historically established relatively stable system of connections, interactions and relations between people, based on a certain method of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material and spiritual goods, supported by the power of political, moral, spiritual, social institutions, customs, traditions, norms, social , political institutions and organizations.

Along with economic determinism, there are schools and currents in sociology that develop political and cultural determinism.

Political determinism in explanation public life gives priority to power, authority.

An example of political determinism is the concept of society by the American sociologist Edward Shils. He singles out a number of features, the totality of which gives an idea of what society is.

A social system is a society only if it is not part of a larger society as an integral part.

Marriages are concluded between representatives of this association.

It is replenished mainly by the children of those people who are already recognized representatives.

The association has a territory that it considers its own.

It has its own system of government.

It has its own name and its own history, that is, a history in which many of its adult members see an explanation with their own past.

It has its own culture.

The deterministic approach is complemented in sociology by the functionalist one. From the point of view of functionalism, society combines its structural elements not by establishing cause-and-effect relationships between them, but on the basis of functional dependence.

Functional dependency is what gives the system of elements as a whole such properties that no single element has individually.

Functionalism interprets society as an integral system of coordinated acting people, whose stable existence and reproduction is ensured. the ideas of functionalism are more inherent in Anglo-American sociology. The main provisions of functionalism were formulated by the English sociologist G. Spencer (1820 - 1903) in his three-volume work The Foundation of Sociology and developed by the American sociologists A. Radcliffe - Brown, R. Merton, T. Parsons.

Basic principles of the functional approach:

Just like supporters of the systemic approach, the functionalists considered society as an integral single organism, consisting of many parts: economic, political, military, religious, etc.

But at the same time, they emphasized that each part can exist only within the framework of integrity, where it performs specific, strictly defined functions.

The functions of the parts always mean the satisfaction of some social need. Yet together they are aimed at maintaining the stability of society and the reproduction of the human race.

Since each of the parts of society performs only its inherent function, in the event of a violation of the activity of this part, the more the functions differ from each other, the more difficult it is for other parts to compensate for the violation of the function.

In the most developed and consistent form, functionalism is developed in the sociological system of T. Parsons. Parsons formulated the main functional requirements, the fulfillment of which ensures the stable existence of society as a system:

It must have the ability to adapt, adapt to changing conditions and the growing material needs of people, be able to rationally organize and distribute internal resources.

It must be goal-oriented, capable of setting the main goals and objectives and supporting the process of achieving them.

It must have the ability to integrate, to be included in the system of new generations.

It must have the ability to reproduce the structure and relieve tension in the system.

The transition to a new type of society is accompanied by cardinal changes in social institutions. These changes are taking place before our eyes, often receiving a negative assessment.

2. Main types of social institutions

When considering social phenomena and processes, the concept of "social institution" is often used as the initial cell of sociological analysis. The range of phenomena and processes that sociologists refer to as a "social institution" is quite wide. As Maurice Cornforth noted in his time, in the UK English language, capitalist system, croquet club, rowing competition, London department store, British railways, the Council for Control of Prices and Revenues, Parliament, the Department of Commerce, trade unions, political parties and the secret police - "these are all social institutions." Only the titles of works published by domestic authors over the past five years: D.V. Klepikov "Hazing as a social institution" (1997), O.V. Krachinskaya "Language as a social institution" (1998), V.L. Musician "Advertising as a social institution" (1998), P.V. Popov "Medical insurance as a social institution" (1998), O.V. Lysenko "School as a social institution in a society in transition" (1998), A.A. Terentiev "School as a social institution of Russian society" (1998), V.B. Kukharenko "Customs service as a social institution", A.F. Kalinin "Family as a social institution" (1999), N.I. Mironova "Local self-government as a social institution: genesis, formation, main trends" (2000), V.V. Khukhlin "Non-profit sector as a social institution" (2000), E.Yu. Gerasimov "Soviet communal apartment as a social institution" (2000), V.P. Peshkov "Political opposition as a social institution of the reformed Russian society: the evolution of perception by mass consciousness" (2000), V.I. Bashmakov "Trade unions as a social institution" (2001), A.A. Vladimirov "Higher School as a Social Institute of Civil Society" (2001), A.V. Rybakov "The Russian army as a social institution" (2002), N.B. Baraeva "Organized crime as a social institution" (2002), O.V. Lobz "Regional power as a social institution" (2002) testifies to the diversity of the range of phenomena and processes that can be designated by this concept.

In sociology, the term "institution" came from jurisprudence, where it was used to refer to a set of norms governing legal relations: the institution of property, the institution of inheritance, the institution of marriage. AT Ancient Rome manuals for lawyers, giving a systematic overview of the current laws of private law, were called institutions. In the sociological literature, the term "institution" has been used since the formation of sociology as a science and has become most widespread in connection with the use of institutional analysis of social phenomena and processes.

The pedigree of institutional analysis goes back to the founders of sociology - Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer. Although there is no definition of a social institution in their works, they view the life of society through the prism of special forms of social organization, which were later called social institutions. Representing society as a system in social statics, O. Comte names such social institutions as the family, cooperation, church, state as its primary elements. The variety of social institutions G. Spencer reduces to six main groups: domestic, ritual, professional, industrial, political, church. For the founders of sociology, the main purpose of social institutions is to maintain social balance and regulate the functioning of social communities.

Despite the fact that Marxism has long ignored institutional analysis as a product of bourgeois sociology, the founders of Marxism used the term "social institution" and applied institutional analysis to the consideration of the main social institutions of society, such as the family, the state, civil society. K. Marx, in a letter to the Russian writer Pavel Vasilievich Annenkov dated December 28, 1846, noted that "public institutions are products historical development". In his early work "On the Criticism of the Hegelian Philosophy of Law" (1844), he stated that for him such social institutions as the family, the state, civil society are not abstractions, but "social forms of human existence"]. The historical analysis of social institutions is given by F Engels in "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" (1884).

The most widespread institutional analysis was in the 20-50s of the XX century. in Anglo-American sociology, when the monographs of Joyce Hertzler "Social Institutions" (1929) and "American Social Institutions" (1961), Francis Chapin's "Modern American Institutions" (1935), Lloyd Ballard's "Social Institutions" specially devoted to the analysis of social institutions appeared (1936), Harry Barnes "Social Institutions" (1942), Constantine Panunzio "Main Social Institutions" (1946), James Feiblman "The Institutions of Society" (1956). The definitions of a social institution given by Anglo-American sociologists, despite different verbal interpretations, are essentially similar. So, for Charles Cooley, social institutions are certain established forms of thinking. Walton Hamilton understands social institutions as verbal symbols that describe a group of social customs that are widespread and unchangeable. For Glen Gilman, social institutions are not material things, but ideas. F. Chapin interprets social institutions as organizational models of group members' attitudes. From the point of view of T. Parsons, social institutions are samples of standardized expectations that govern the behavior of individuals and social relations. L. Ballard believes that social institutions are forms of organized human relations with the aim of establishing a common will. According to D. Homans, social institutions are a set of rules and norms that determine how a person should or should not behave under certain circumstances in a given situation. Joyce Hertzler argues that social institutions are a set of established and sanctioned rules and guidelines for the behavior of an individual in society. For Konstantin Panunzio, social institutions are certain systems of ideas, customs, associations and tools that, having arisen from the practice of mankind, direct and regulate the activities of people. James Feiblman interprets social institutions as group goals objectified with the help of material means of expression. In the interpretation of Anglo-American sociologists from socio-psychological and ethical positions, social institutions appear as mechanisms for introducing rationalistic attitudes and norms of individual behavior in society into human consciousness.

The Polish sociologist Jan Szczepanski notes that the term "social institution" in sociology and other social sciences has several meanings. J. Shchepansky reduces the definitions of a social institution to four main ones: 1) a certain group of persons carrying out joint activities; 2) a certain organization of people that performs a set of functions on behalf of the entire group; 3) institutions and means of activity that regulate the behavior of group members; 4) some social roles, especially important for the group. The Polish sociologist's own definition is as follows: social institutions are "systems of institutions in which certain people, elected by members of groups, are empowered to perform certain and impersonal functions in order to satisfy existing individual and social needs and to regulate the behavior of other members of groups."

Until the beginning of the 1970s, the term "social institution" was practically absent in Russian sociological literature, and Marxist critics attributed institutional analysis to the prerogatives of bourgeois methodology. One of the first in Soviet sociology to address institutional analysis was I.I. Leiman. In his work "Science as a social institution", he defined a social institution as "an association of people who perform specific functions within the framework of social integrity and are connected by common functions, as well as traditions, norms, values; an association that has an internal structure and hierarchy and is distinguished by a special stable nature of connections and relations, both internal and external. From the Marxist positions, the definition of a social institution is given in the dissertation research "Social institution as a social phenomenon" by N.B. Kostina. According to her definition, a social institution is "a social entity expressing a specifically stable set of social relations that develop in the process of joint activities of people, organized in an organized manner to perform socially significant functions."

A positive aspect of many definitions of a social institution is the indication that it is a kind of shaping, which, on the one hand, being stable, on the other hand, historically changeable, is designed to organize and regulate the activities of people as representatives of various social communities and social interactions that develop in the processes of interaction. connections. Social institutions, being elements organizational structure society, act as specific mechanisms for organizing and managing the processes of public life of people, thereby ensuring the stability of the social system and its further development. Social institutions as regulators of the processes of interaction and relationships of people are designed to help meet their material and spiritual, personal and social needs in specific historical conditions of functioning.

A more in-depth understanding of a social institution can be given by an analysis of its structure. Considering social institutions, most sociologists recognize the systemic nature of its structure. For example, K. Panunzio believes that each social institution, being a system, consists of four subsystems: 1) a subsystem of symbolic and utilitarian tools (houses, factories, cars, flags, insignia, etc.); 2) subsystems of contractual, family and compulsory associations (labor unions, school boards, political parties, sports associations, etc.); 3) subsystems of customs and rules of life and mores (marriage ceremony, compulsory school attendance, election campaign, etc.); 4) subsystems of ideas, beliefs, ideals (belief in God, the ideal of political democracy, etc.). J. Feiblman identifies six elements in the structure of a social institution: a social group, institutions, customs, material tools, an organization, a specific goal. J. Shchepansky refers to the constituent elements of the structure of a social institution: the goal, functions, institutions and means of achieving the goal, social sanctions. I.I. Leiman distinguishes the following components of the structure of a social institution: a team, a socially significant function, management units, and material institutions. According to N.B. Kostina, the subjects of activity, the goals of activity, the means and methods of activity should be considered as elements of a social institution. The schemes for the structure of a social institution proposed by representatives of institutional analysis do not reflect its structure and represent a set, sometimes arbitrary, of certain elements. In these schemes of the structure of a social institution, there is no objective basis for structuring elements. The study of the genesis of social institutions allows us to conclude that the structure of social action can act as an objective basis for the structure of a social institution, since it is the need to organize and regulate social actions that brings to life the emergence of social institutions. A social institution should be understood as the forms of organization of people's social life, which are established in the process of historical development in order to regulate their social actions and social ties.

3. Sociological analysis of sociocultural processes

social sociocultural institution society

) subsystems of symbolic and utilitarian instruments (houses, factories, cars, flags, insignia, etc.);

) subsystems of contractual, family and compulsory associations (labor unions, school boards, political parties, sports associations, etc.);

) subsystems of customs and rules of life and mores (marriage ceremony, compulsory school attendance, election campaign, etc.);

) subsystems of ideas, beliefs, ideals (belief in God, the ideal of political democracy, etc.).

J. Feiblman identifies six elements in the structure of a social institution: a social group, institutions, customs, material tools, an organization, a specific goal. J. Shchepansky refers to the constituent elements of the structure of a social institution: the goal, functions, institutions and means of achieving the goal, social sanctions. I.I. Leiman distinguishes the following components of the structure of a social institution: a team, a socially significant function, management units, and material institutions. According to N.B. Kostina, the subjects of activity, the goals of activity, the means and methods of activity should be considered as elements of a social institution.

The schemes for the structure of a social institution proposed by representatives of institutional analysis do not reflect its structure and represent a set, sometimes arbitrary, of certain elements. In these schemes of the structure of a social institution, there is no objective basis for structuring elements. The study of the genesis of social institutions allows us to conclude that the structure of social action can act as an objective basis for the structure of a social institution, since it is the need to organize and regulate social actions that brings to life the emergence of social institutions. In this sense, the words of T. Parsons that "the main subject of sociological analysis is the institutional aspect of social action" should be recognized as relevant.

In the monograph "The Structure of Social Action" (1937), T. Parsons names the main components of social action: the actor ("ego" and "alter"), the goal of the action (the subjective vision of the "ego" of the result of the action), the situation of action (conditions and means of action ), normative orientation of action (verbal description of a specific course of action). In T. Parsons' interpretation of the structure of social action, there is a predominance of psychological and axiological components. Without denying the whole approach of T. Parsons to the analysis of the structure of social action, it is more expedient to recognize the following components as structural elements of the structure of social action: actors (subject and object of social action), motivating forces of social action (needs, interests, goals, objectives and motives ), conditions and means of social action, the results of social action.

Using the principle of isomorphism of the structure of a social institution in the structure of social action allows us to represent the structure of a social institution as a system whose elements are personnel, social functions (a system-forming factor), social equipment and results of functioning.

The staff of a social institution is made up of individuals as representatives of certain social communities. Their actions are subordinated to the implementation of the functions of this social institution in the process of fulfilling their social roles.

Within the framework of institutional analysis, out of the variety of definitions of social functions, it makes sense to pay attention to those in which they are interpreted as such social roles (tasks) that a given social institution is called upon to perform (solve). Social functions can be external - in relation to the system of which this social institution is an element, and internal - in the processes of organizing social actions and regulating the social relations of its personnel. As a rule, a social institution is polyfunctional. Its specificity is determined, on the one hand, by the totality of social functions assigned to it, and, on the other hand, by the main (basic) social function. For example, the main function of the dissertation council is to organize the defense of dissertations. At the same time, the dissertation council can be assigned such social functions as expert (examination of the dissertation research to decide on the admission of the applicant to the defense) or communicative (organization of communication between the applicant and the Higher Attestation Commission).

The social equipment of a social institution is determined by spatio-temporal and material-symbolic parameters. Some sociologists identify social equipment with the institution within which the functioning of this social institution is organized. Thus, J. Feyblman calls the institution "the heart of a social institution." Despite the fact that the name of most institutions reflects the specifics of a particular social institution, the processes of functioning of an institution and the processes of functioning of a social institution are not identical. First, an institution is a single form of existence of a social institution (for example, the Academy of Sciences is a social institution, and the Russian Academy of Sciences is an institution). Secondly, the institution, as the focus of specific social equipment, with the help of which the functioning of a social institution is carried out, can also perform many applied functions due to the processes of personnel activity.

The functioning of a social institution presupposes the achievement of a certain goal and the solution of specific tasks that are completed in the results of the activities of its personnel. The results of the functioning of a social institution can be the created material and spiritual values, satisfaction of personal and social needs and interests, "reward and punishment" (P. Sorokin) of personnel, changes in the processes of social life. The results of the functioning of a social institution testify to its state and development, serve as a starting point for the further functioning of this social institution and those social institutions that are associated with it.

The classification of social institutions proposed by foreign representatives of institutional analysis is arbitrary and peculiar. Thus, Luther Bernard proposes to distinguish between "mature" and "immature" social institutions, Bronislav Malinovsky - "universal" and "particular", Lloyd Ballard - "regulatory" and "sanctioned or operational", F. Chapin - "specific or nucleating" and "basic or diffuse-symbolic", G. Barnes - "primary", "secondary" and "tertiary".

Foreign representatives of functional analysis, following G. Spencer, traditionally propose to classify social institutions based on the main social functions. For example, K. Dawson and W. Gettys believe that the whole variety of social institutions can be grouped into four groups: hereditary, instrumental, regulatory and integrative. From the point of view of T. Parsons, three groups of social institutions should be distinguished: relative, regulatory, cultural.

Seeks to classify social institutions depending on the functions they perform in various fields and branches of public life and J. Shchepansky. Dividing social institutions into "formal" and "informal", he proposes to distinguish the following "main" social institutions: economic, political, educational or cultural, social or public in the narrow sense of the word, and religious. At the same time, the Polish sociologist notes that the classification of social institutions he proposed is "not exhaustive"; in modern societies, one can find social institutions that are not covered by this classification.

Recognizing the possibility of classifying social institutions depending on the social functions they carry out, it also makes sense to classify them depending on the spheres and branches of public life within which these social institutions function. From a sociological point of view, four main groups of social institutions should be distinguished: social institutions in the spheres of material and spiritual production, political and domestic spheres. The sectoral principle allows us to study in more detail the social institutions of a given industry, designed to ensure the organization and regulation of social actions and social ties in the processes of its functioning and development. For example, the institutional analysis of such branches of the sphere of spiritual production as education, science, artistic culture, religion, involves the study of them as systems of social institutions.

Many definitions of a social institution indicate that it is a kind of shaping, which, on the one hand, being stable, on the other hand, historically changeable, is designed to organize and regulate the activities of people as representatives of various social communities and the social ties that develop in the processes of interaction. Social institutions, being elements of society as an organization, act as specific mechanisms for managing the processes of people's social life, thereby ensuring the stability of the social system and structure, and their further development. Social institutions as regulators of the processes of interaction and interconnections of people, ultimately, are designed to help meet their material and spiritual, personal and social needs in the specific historical conditions of existence. In his Ph.D. thesis "Artistic Culture as a System of Social Institutions". To date, the understanding of its essence has not changed, however, some adjustments have been made to the definition due to a deeper study of the social institution as a social phenomenon.

Conclusion

Until now, approaching society as a system of control, the individual and society have been considered as two entities opposed to each other.

The transition to a new type of society is accompanied by cardinal changes in social institutions. These changes are taking place before our eyes, often receiving a negative assessment.

Each of us is entangled in old identities and loyalties, and the choices we make at any given moment cannot be seen as entirely arbitrary. Various authorities try to buy our allegiance, but at the same time establish their control over us, whether we like it or not, only in them is our hope for preserving the values that we cherish. In this sense, Russian society, to a greater extent than rather stable Western societies, acts as a kind of "testing ground" on which those phenomena that will fully manifest themselves in the future in the global format are tested.

Russia, having become a testing field of modern civilization, shows the world community the features of the future, which it will face in the near future. This is the “new brave world”, which, perhaps, is not at all the one that “all progressive mankind” dreamed of. Based on the foregoing, it can be assumed that the paradoxes indicated above - the contradictions of Russian reality, in fact, are not such.

This is nothing but a projection of global trends.

I tried to reveal the topic "Society as a socio-cultural system" in the above material.

Below is a list of references with which the abstract was disclosed.

Bibliography

1.Zolotov V.I. Sociology: Tutorial. 2nd ed. Correct. and additional - Alt. State. Tech. Univ. I.I. Polzunov. - Barnaul, 2003. - 140 p.

.Cornforth M. Open Philosophy and Open Society. M., 1972.

.Marx K.P.V. Annenkov, December 28, 1846 // Marx K., Engels F. Op. Ed. 2nd. T. 27.

.Marx K. To the criticism of the Hegelian philosophy of law // Marx K., Engels F. Soch. Ed. 2nd. T. 1.

Annotation: The purpose of the lecture: to give an idea of society as an economic, political, personal, spiritual, intellectual, informational and social system, to reveal the essence of such concepts as social communities, social relations, social sphere.

Social relations permeate any other relations - personal, economic, political, spiritual, intellectual. Social relations differ in that they reflect subjects (people) who have a certain status. It is the relations of independent subjects that transform the totality of groups into society as an integral system.

In the most general sense, a system is an interconnection of various elements that form a single whole. An analysis of the scientific literature allows us to name such system features, how integrity(irreducibility of parts of the whole to the whole), structure(internal structure that determines the ordering of the elements of the whole), invariance(the ability to retain its essential properties under certain transformations of the object and its environment) and others. Society has all the properties that characterize any system.

A social system is a society only if it is not part of a larger society as an integral part. "In order to be a society, - notes the American sociologist E. Shils, - a social system must have its own internal "center of gravity", that is, it must have its own system of power within its own borders. In addition, she must have her own culture. Societies tend to be "national". Modern "national" societies are societies that claim to embody national unity and have their own national cultures, their own independent rather than dependent economic systems, their own systems of government, their own genetic self-reproduction, and their own sovereignty over a territory defined by boundaries - are the most independent of all social systems known to us from the history of mankind, the most independent societies their eras."

The American sociologist T. Parsons considered society to be a self-sufficient system, "which is able to function on its own without external control and regulatory influence of others external systems and has such internal resources that allow it to exercise self-government and self-regulation. A self-sufficient system is neither a family, nor a city, nor a village, nor an organization, nor a region.

Like any system, society goes through various stages in its development: origin, formation, flourishing, death or transformation into another society. So, society is a self-sufficient system of interactions and relationships of people, which has its own spatio-temporal characteristics.

Theoretical analysis allows us to propose two types of society models: the model of interaction and the model of interconnection. The type of interaction model is interactive (interaction in translation from English is interaction). The type of relationship model is communicative ( communication - message, transmission, communication). Communications serve the purpose of transmitting a variety of messages necessary for the political, personal, economic and spiritual life of people. Messages containing an element of novelty are called information. Thus, spiritual information is a necessary condition for the process of education and upbringing. Society in general and the education system in particular can be described as a gigantic field of communication. Therefore, it is appropriate to model society as an information and communication system, and the education system as a spiritual and communicative subsystem.

In the process of transition from a traditional society to an industrial one, the spheres of life were isolated and turned into independent systems. The liberation of society from the domination of religion and the church (secularization) led to the separation of spiritual life from economics and politics. In the spiritual culture itself, the education system and science acquired relative autonomy.

Describing the subjects of relations, answering the question "who enters into communication, who is connected by information exchange?", we have the right to depict society as a socio-communicative system. However, in any organization, not only the relationship is found, but also the process of purposeful influence on the behavior of objects and, therefore, the organization equally acts as a model of a socially interactive system.

Social relations are a unity of two states - relationships (relationship conditions) and interactions (relationship process) between people. For the most part, people enter into relationships because of the various benefits, living conditions necessary for their existence and development. In the process of interaction, people produce material and spiritual goods, exchange them, distribute and consume them. Economic and spiritual relations are not carried out by themselves, not automatically. This requires the manifestation of the will of people in relation to each other, there are relations of domination-subordination, relations of people in society regarding the formation, distribution, distribution and application of power (the will directed to another). it - political relations.

At the same time, the spheres of life of society in primitive and traditional societies do not have independence and integrity. Only in the process of transition from a traditional society to an industrial type, as a result of complication and differentiation, does the isolation of spheres of life begin and turn them into subsystems of society. Secularization (liberation of society from the domination of religion and church) leads, on the one hand, to the isolation of the economic and political life from the spiritual, on the other hand, to the isolation of the spiritual life itself from other spheres. At the same time, in the spiritual life itself, the formation of independent forms of relations - moral, aesthetic, scientific, ideological, educational, etc. The result of these changes is the formation of an independent and integral spiritual system society. With the formation of the internal market and the complication of the "economic mechanism", the formation of economic system society, which has its own integrity and ability to self-regulation. In modern times, liberal doctrines appear that require non-intervention of the state in the "internal" affairs of the economy, the recognition of proper economic laws in the economy. At the same time, the complexity of the "political mechanism" is also taking place. Thus, it develops politic system society, with its own independence and integrity. At the same time, personality begins to take shape as an independent system and area of personal life independent of other spheres - religion, politics, etc. In the 20th century, it acquires autonomy information sphere of society, and in the 21st century, the importance of the intellectual sphere, the core of which is science and innovative technologies, has grown. So, society is a system of economic, political, personal, spiritual, informational and intellectual relationships and interactions between people.

Society as a sociocultural system

The actions of some people are always directly or indirectly, openly or covertly connected with the actions of others. As noted above, the interconnection of people is ensured by the communication of society and the various information circulating in it. This gives us the opportunity to build a model of society as an information and communication system.

In sociology, the methods (technologies, mechanisms) that have developed in society that ensure the interconnection (interconnection) of people are called institutions. The process of formation of institutions (technologization, formalization of new forms of human relationships) is called institutionalization.

Society is a system of interconnections of many economic, political spiritual, information institutions. AT modern society every day we "get involved" in such economic institutions as property, market, bank, trade, etc. . Ownership institutions can be different (state, private, municipal, etc.), but in this case we are not talking about an object (land, building, machine), but about the established methods of owning, disposing and using these and other objects. Although, according to sociologists, the number of Russian citizens alienated from politics in 2000-2008 increased from 32 to 45%, we also have to deal with the political institutions of society. These include institutions state power(presidency, parliamentarism, law enforcement, etc.) Non-state political institutions include a political party, public organization, political communication. We are also "included" in various institutions of spiritual life - morality, art, education, religion, as well as in the institutions of intellectual and informational life. The institutions of personal life and personal communication are also multiplying, which is associated with the emergence of social networks on the Internet.

Thus, the product (creation) of people's interactions is a variety of institutions of society. As a result, society is a system of interconnections of many economic, political and spiritual institutions. However, institutions are not immutable. Economic, political, personal and spiritual relations are changing, as a result, sooner or later, institutionalization of new interactions and relationships occurs. In other words, new ways and technologies of human activity are being formed. Therefore, the same institute different types societies are very different from each other.

In addition to social institutions, people's lives are influenced by values and norms. Values form the most important element of a society's culture. They distinguish society from nature, giving meaningfulness, purposefulness to human interactions. With the help of values, people determine "what is good and what is bad", "what is good and evil", "what is good". At almost every step, we are dealing with a variety of values - economic, spiritual, political, values in the sphere of personal communication and social communication. It can be money, and power, and authority, and knowledge, and transport. Values are not something eternally given and unchanging. So, in the era of the USSR, money was not the dominant value. Money becomes a value only in a society in which there are commodity-money relations and a market economy.

Our behavior is regulated by various norms of informational, economic, spiritual, personal and political relations. These are labor norms and standards, consumption norms, moral norms, electoral legislation, and, in recent years, information load norms. A society with a market economy can be represented normative model"What is not prohibited is permitted." By studying the specifics of economic, political, moral, aesthetic, informational, everyday and other norms, we can imagine the structure of American, Japanese, Indian, Russian, Swedish society.

So, society is a system of interrelationships of people, conditioned by institutions, values and norms, and interactions carried out in a symbolic form. Thus, society manifests itself as a socio-cultural system.

Society as a social system

With all the differences in the definitions of "social", common to sociology is the idea that this concept expresses the interconnectedness of people, actions addressed in relation to another person or group. Everything that does not characterize the direct relationship of a person to another person (for example, the attitude to nature, artistic image, knowledge, technology, the state, etc.) is excluded from the concept of "social". "Social" means relations such as "person - person", "person - group", "person - group - society".

Social relations are the interrelations and interactions between the individual, groups and society - the subjects and objects of public (including economic, political, personal, intellectual, spiritual) relations.

Society can be represented as a socio-communicative system. The socio-communicative model represents society as a system of constantly reproducing processes of communication between the individual, communities of people and society as a whole. The communicative model allows you to explore the socio-psychological specifics of social relations. This is the social atmosphere, fashion, public opinion, social images and ideas, mass imitation and infection, myths and stereotypes to which the inhabitants of modern mass societies are exposed.

The second side of social relations are social interactions. This concept characterizes such relations in which the individual, communities of people and society act as factors in each other's activities.

The final definition will be as follows: social relations are the interactions of an individual, communities of people and society as a whole, interconnected with each other by a network of communications.

The same relations exist, for example, as economic and social relations at the same time. If we consider them from the point of view of who enters into a relationship with whom, then they manifest themselves as social. Social relations can be defined as a process of interaction and communication of an individual, communities of people and society as a whole, acting as subjects and objects of economic, political, personal, spiritual and intellectual relations. Social relations characterize society as a system of relations that determine the community of people united economically, politically, personally, spiritually, informationally ...

Based on the foregoing, it is possible to build a social model of society

society appears to us as a social system - interconnected and interacting economic, political, informational and spiritual figures, united by a common culture. This is how we represent society as a "civil society" consisting of families, generations, classes, ethnic groups, organizations and other communities of people.

Real communities of people are divided into mass and group. In real life, we often deal with predominantly group communities - certain sets of people who form an integral system. Among the group communities, there are target communities - organizations. It is to such communities that an educational institution belongs.

Nominal communities are united by some common socially significant features. Unlike real communities, they may not have direct contacts. Types of nominal communities: socio-class, socio-professional, socio-demographic, socio-ethnic, confessional.

The following specific types of social relations can be distinguished:

interpersonal relationships;
the relationship between the individual and the community;
relationship between the individual and society;
relationships between generations;
relations between men and women;
relations between townspeople and rural dwellers;
relations between regional communities;
family and marriage relations;
national relations;
professional relationship;
class relations;
organizational relationships;
confessional, etc.

Social relations are carried out not only "outside", but also "inside" communities. Students enter into relationships with teachers, and also form a system of internal (intra-student) relations. It is clear that social relations represent a complex network of various specific types.

"There are no irreplaceable people," I. Stalin said. However, as a result of mass repressions, the educated were replaced by the uneducated, and the highly qualified were replaced by the unskilled. The efficiency and quality of labor naturally fell, and signs of degradation and regression clearly appeared in the economy, politics and spiritual life.

Just as economic, political, personal, spiritual, informational relations form the corresponding spheres of society, another sphere stands out - social. What is the social sphere of society? It is necessary to distinguish between journalistic and scientific ideas about this area. In the media, and in official documents (the country's budget, for example), the social sphere means education, science, health care, social security and protection of the population, theaters, museums, etc. This view is not strictly scientific. These institutions and organizations operate in the economic, political and spiritual life of society. In the proper sociological understanding, the social sphere is the sphere of life of the individual and communities of people. For example, this is the sphere of life of generations, nations, professional groups, classes, etc. Science should be more accurately attributed to the intellectual sphere, education, art - to the spiritual sphere.

The social sphere is not a separate island of society. It "intersects" with other spheres of society. Economic relations appear as social if they are considered from the point of view of the subjects of these relations. And, conversely, social relations appear as economic, political, personal, informational or spiritual, if we analyze them from the point of view of content (because of what they interact). Therefore, the allocation of the social sphere of society is rather conditional. Wherever we are (at work, at home, in a store, in a theater), we will find ourselves in the social sphere of society. In other words, the social sphere is a cross-cutting sphere that permeates all other spheres of society, since the social status of subjects is important in politics, economics, and personal life, which determines all types of relations between them. Therefore, it is important that representatives of state power (political elite) be highly social, that is, they express the interests of society as a whole, its regions, groups and individuals.

Brief summary:

Society as a system consists of such subsystems as economic, political, personal, social, spiritual and intellectual
Social relations are not reduced to public relations, but characterize them from the point of view of their subjects, carriers (people, groups).
The relationship between the individual, communities of people and society as a whole is called social.
Social institutions are technologies, methods and mechanisms of social relations generally accepted in society.
Social organizations are targeted communities of people.
Social interaction (interaction) is a process in which individuals and groups influence other individuals and other groups by their behavior, causing responses.
The social sphere is a relatively independent sphere of the life of society, covering relations between communities, individuals with different social status.

Practice set

Questions:

What is the relationship between the concepts of "society" and "state"?
Is it right to identify a society with a population (a set of people)?
How do social relations relate to personal, political, economic, spiritual, informational ones?
Show with specific examples that society is not a collection of people, but a system of their relations?
Where do you see the integrity of society?
Using examples from personal and social experience, show the relationship between the social sphere and the sphere of personal life, with the economic, political, spiritual and information spheres?

What is the original cell of society?

What is at its core?

When addressing this issue in sociology, different approaches are found. The first approach is to assert that the initial cell of society is living acting people whose joint activities form society.

Thus, from the point of view of this approach, the individual is the elementary unit of society.

Society is a set of people who carry out joint activities and relationships.

But if a society consists of individuals, then the question naturally arises, should not society be considered as a simple sum of individuals?

Putting the question in this way casts doubt on the existence of such an independent social reality as society. Individuals really exist, and society is the fruit of the mentality of scientists: philosophers, sociologists, historians, etc.

If society is an objective reality, then it must spontaneously manifest itself as stable, recurring, self-producing phenomenon.

Therefore, in the interpretation of society, it is not enough to indicate that it consists of individuals, but it should be emphasized that the most important element in the formation of society is their unity, community, solidarity, and the connection of people.

Society is a universal way of organizing social ties, interactions and relationships between people.

For all the differences in the approaches to interpreting society on the part of the classics of sociology, what they have in common is the consideration of society as an integral element systems that are in close relationship. This approach to society is called systemic.

Basic concepts of a systematic approach:

Social connection is a set of facts that determine the joint activity of people in specific communities at a specific time to achieve certain goals.

Social ties are established not at the whim of people, but objectively.

Social interaction is a process in which people act and experience interactions with each other. Interaction leads to the formation of new social relations.

Social relations are relatively stable and independent connections between individuals and social groups.

Systemic quality is a special qualitative state that cannot be considered as a simple sum of elements.

Social interactions and relationships are supra-individual, transpersonal character, that is, society is some independent substance, which is primary in relation to individuals. Each individual, being born, constitutes a certain structure of connections and relations and is included in it in the process of socialization.

A holistic system has many connections, interactions and relationships. The most characteristic are correlative links, including the coordination and subordination of elements.

Coordination - this is a certain consistency of elements, that special nature of their mutual dependence, which ensures the preservation of an integral system.

Subordination - this is subordination and subordination, indicating a special specific place, the unequal significance of elements in an integral system.

So, society is an integral system with qualities that do not contain any of the elements included in it separately.

As a result of its integral qualities, the social system acquires a certain independence in relation to its constituent elements, a relatively independent way of its development.

On what principles does the organization of the elements of society take place, what kind of connections are established between the elements?

In answering these questions, a systematic approach to society is supplemented in sociology with deterministic and functionalist approaches.

The deterministic approach is most clearly expressed in Marxism. From the point of view of this doctrine, society as an integral system consists of the following subsystems: economic, social, political and ideological. Each of them can be considered as a system. To distinguish these systems from the social system proper, they are called social systems. In the relationship between these systems, the dominant role is played by causal relationships, that is, the systems are in a causal relationship.

Marxism clearly states on the dependence and conditionality of all systems on the characteristics of the economic system, which is based on material production, based on a certain nature of property relations. Based on the deterministic approach in Marxist sociology, the following definition of society has become widespread.

Along with economic determinism, there are schools and currents in sociology that develop political and cultural determinism.

Political determinism in explaining social life gives priority to power and authority.

An example of political determinism is the concept of society by the American sociologist Edward Shils. He singles out a number of features, the totality of which gives an idea of what society is.

1. A social system is a society only if it not included as part into a larger society.

2. marriages concluded between the representatives of this association.

3. It is replenished mainly at the expense of the children of those people who are already recognized representatives.

4. Association has territory which he considers his property.

5. It has its own system of government.

6. He has his own title and its own history, that is, a history in which many of its adult members see an explanation with their own past.

7. He has his own culture.

E. Shils is aware that many of these signs can be attributed to certain social formations: tribes, states, etc. And so he formulates system-forming feature of society: "In order to be a society, a social system must have its own internal "center of gravity", that is, it must have its own own system authorities within their own borders besides, she must have her own culture". The mention of culture as an additional factor determining the existence of society is important in the concept of E. Shils. He emphasizes that certain “collectives form a society by virtue of their existence. under common authority which exercise control over territory, designated borders, supports and enforces more or less common culture».

Functional dependence is what gives the system of elements as a whole such properties that no single element has individually.

Functionalism interprets society as an integral system of people acting in concert, whose stable existence and reproduction is ensured by the necessary set of functions. Society as a system is formed during the transition from an organic to an integral system.

The development of an organic system consists in self-dismemberment, differentiation, which can be characterized as a process of formation of new functions or corresponding elements of the system. In the social system, the formation of new functions occurs based on the division of labor. The driving force behind this is public needs.

The production of means necessary to satisfy needs, and the continuous generation of new needs, Marx and Engels called the first precondition for human existence. On the basis of this development of needs and methods of satisfying them, society generates certain functions, without which it cannot do without. People acquire special interests. Thus, according to Marxists, social, political and spiritual spheres are built over the sphere of material production, performing their specific functions.