What is common in their positions and ideas. Compare the ideas about a fair (ideal) social order of Plato and Marx. What do their positions and ideas have in common? Plato’s ideas about a fair social order

Sociological views in general, people’s thoughts about the structure public life accompany the entire course of development of world civilization. The first such ideas of people can be found in the content of myths, tales, legends, and epics. Further, in a more or less systematic and rational form social ideas begin to be reflected in ancient history and philosophy. Then social science topics penetrate almost all branches of humanities: economics, literature, art, politics, law.

The rapid growth of sociology as a science freed from projectism, fantasy and utopianism occurred at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. First in Western Europe and Russia, and then in the USA, a wide variety of sociological trends and schools began to emerge, which for many years determined the ideological and organizational aspects of the development of world sociology and which are rightfully recognized as its true sources and its components.

However, no matter how far social thought goes in its development, credit will always be given to the period when it began, albeit in a rather naive and sometimes utopian form. And this period is Antiquity.

Views of ancient thinkers

The first and fairly complete idea of the structure of society was given by the ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle. They, like modern sociologists, studied traditions, customs, morals, relationships between people, generalized facts, created theories that ended with practical recommendations on how to improve society. True, it must be borne in mind that in those days no distinction was made between the concepts of “society” and “state” and they were used as synonyms.

(427-348 BC) - ancient Greek philosopher, idealist, student of Socrates. His work “The State” is considered to be the first work in history on general sociology. In his work, Plato tried to build a model ideal state, in which three estates (classes) coexist on a parity basis: the highest - the sages who govern the state; middle - warriors protecting society from unrest and unrest; the lowest - artisans and peasants. This position of the classes should have been based, according to Plato, on the division of labor that actually exists in society, as well as on the understanding of each representative of the class of his position in society and his role in it. Relations between these estates-classes should be based on mutual respect and community of interests, which manifests itself in serving the idea. All three classes, each in its own way, serve the idea of justice. They are free, equal and happy. Free because they internally realized the necessity of their position. They are equal because every person in an ideal state occupies exactly the place in society for which he was born, and it is within the framework of his position that he has all the opportunities, and therefore is equal. To top class did not abuse power, Plato believed, it is necessary to deprive him of private property, which corrupts people, and it is necessary to allow highly educated, talented people who have reached the age of fifty to manage society. Thus, Plato created the world's first theory of stratification. His ideas about the structure of the state (society) are interesting and surprising, although developed on the basis of ethical rationalism. However, there is no need to prove that ethical rationalism in general (and Plato’s in particular) is equivalent to utopianism and cannot be realized without a certain amount of violence against a person.

Ideal state structure Plato contrasts the other four, classifying them as the so-called negative type. These are timocracy (the rule of the ambitious), oligarchy (the rule of the few), democracy (the rule of the many), tyranny (the rule of one). In his treatise The Republic, Plato writes that main reason The damage to such states lies in the “dominance of selfish interests” that determine the actions of people. It is in connection with this basic negative quality that he divides all existing states into four types in order of increasing “selfish interests” in them, and therefore, in order of “perversion” of the perfect type.

Since the main reason for the corruption of human societies and government systems- priority of material interests, therefore, the structure of the state should essentially be such that it does not interfere with the education of morality. It is the moral principle of building a state, the ideas of justice and the common good that Plato puts forward in the first place.

He thus laid the foundation for the humanistic tradition in social cognition, which was subsequently continued by others outstanding thinkers, primarily by Russian sociologists. It should be noted that the state, according to Plato, is not a single form of manifestation of such virtues as wisdom, courage, and justice. The state is a macrocosm. The microcosm is a separate person, his soul, which also includes principles that are similar in nature. Therefore, Plato believes, a unified harmony of interactions between the hierarchies of virtue of the state and the individual is necessary. However, the subject of freedom and highest perfection for Plato is still not the individual, or even the class, but the whole society, all of humanity as a whole.

(384-322 BC) was one of the first critics of Plato's model of the ideal state. For him, the state did not seem like any embodiment of a dream or beauty. He proceeded from the fact that man is a “political being” (social), striving for communication, and therefore he needs the state as a natural state, like air. “Every state is a kind of communication, and every communication is organized for the sake of some good. More than others and towards the highest of all goods, that communication strives that is the most important of all and embraces all other communications. This communication is called state or political communication.”

Unlike Plato, Aristotle makes an attempt to define the role of law in the state, objectively linking this concept with the concept of justice. Equality before the law will greatly benefit citizens. “Where there is no rule of law, there is no government.”

According to Aristotle, to build an ideal type of state does not require the revolutionary overthrow of the existing state and the remaking of the existing one real person. The task of politicians and legislators is not to build on the site of what has been destroyed. Politics does not create people, but takes them as nature created them. We need to follow the path of improvement political system rather than installing it initially. This is easier to do.

Thus, the true politician, according to Aristotle, is not the one who destroys, but the one who improves.

According to Aristotle, the backbone of the state is the middle class. There are two other classes - the rich plutocracy and the propertyless proletariat. The state (society) is best governed when:

the mass of the poor is not excluded from participation in government;
the selfish interests of the rich are limited;
the middle class is larger and stronger than the other two.

The imperfection of society, according to Aristotle, is overcome not by equal distribution, but by the moral education of people. At the same time, it is necessary to strive not for universal equality, but for equalizing life chances. Private property, according to the philosopher, does not harm, but develops healthy selfish interests. With collective ownership, everyone or the majority is poor and embittered.

In his main work “Politics” Aristotle derives and substantiates the following main forms of government: “correct” - monarchy, aristocracy, polity; " incorrect"-tyranny, oligarchy, democracy.

Religious Middle Ages and Modern Times

Social religious utopia is an image of a social order based on religious dogmas.

During the period of the decay of the Roman Empire, Christianity arose as the religion of the oppressed. "Sociological" aspect Christian teaching was that, on the one hand, it contained criticism of the existing (slave-owning) system, on the other hand, it proclaimed a number of progressive, democratic ideas that had great appeal at that time and continue to have great appeal to this day: universal human equality, brotherhood, love, etc. .d.

Among the economic provisions Christian revival The idea of “community of property” expressed in the “Acts of the Apostles” was put into practice for a long time in early Christian communities as one of the leading ideas expressing the concepts of social justice and democracy.

However, if early Christianity lived in the expectation of the “thousand-year Kingdom of God on earth” and strived for this in its social practice, then later Christianity stood on a different idea - the achievement of the “Kingdom of Heaven” in an indefinite distant future.

Individual thinkers of the Middle Ages and the New Age (IV-XVII centuries) made their contribution to the general prehistory of sociological knowledge.

So, Niccolo Machiavelli(1469-1527), turning to the ideas of Plato and Aristotle, tried to create his own theory of society and state on their basis. In his main work, “The Prince,” for the first time in the study of society and the state, he focuses not on their structure, functions and patterns (as is customary in modern social science), but on the behavior of the political leader and his role in the fate of the country. The question, posed so acutely almost five centuries ago, not only has not lost its relevance, but, on the contrary, has acquired exceptional important Nowadays.

Thomas Hobbes(1588-1679), known as the author of the theory of the social contract, in his social views, essentially laid the foundation for the doctrine of civil society. Civil society, according to his views, is the highest stage of sociality. It should be based not on a personal understanding of one’s own benefit, but on laws recognized by everyone. In civil society, according to Hobbes, three forms of government are possible: democracy, aristocracy and monarchy. In civil society, as a result of a social contract, the “war of all against all” must end. Citizens voluntarily limit their freedom, receiving in return the necessary support and protection from the state.

Theorists of social utopias

Based on their social origin, all utopian theorists can be classified as the so-called raznochinstvo. They came from different classes and social strata - from the most privileged (Saint-Simon, for example, a representative of an ancient aristocratic family) to those extremely close to the deepest people's "lower classes" (Jean Meslier - the poorest village priest). The British, Italians, French, Russians - they were all united by one common idea - the idea of the need for a human life worthy of a person.

The legend of the Golden Age, the legendary equalizing reforms in Sparta, Plato's utopias of caste slave-owning communism, combined with criticism of private property, and finally, the teachings of early Christianity with its preaching of universal equality, brotherhood and consumer communism - all this influenced all subsequent social utopias.

ThomasMop(1478-1535) was the world's first creator of an integral literary utopia and introduced the very concept into circulation: utopia - a “non-existent” country. The main thing in his work “Utopia” is a description of a social system based on collective ownership of the means of production, and a criticism of private property.

“It is impossible to distribute everything equally and fairly, as well as to happily manage human affairs, except by completely destroying property.” The communist organization of consumption and the communist organization of production - only on this basis, he believed, could the ideal of a highly developed personality put forward by the humanists of the Renaissance be achieved.

However, an analysis of the principles he put forward - the subordination of individual interest to the general, egalitarianism, asceticism, recognition of work as a form of “cart slavery” - and finally, More’s own disbelief in what he proclaimed, allows us to conclude that all this is nothing more than the ideal of a totalitarian state (Plato's legacy). “I readily admit that in the state of the utopians there is a lot that I could rather wish for our countries than I hope will happen.” With these words T. More ends his main work.

Tommaso Campanella(1568-1639). The ideas of T. More were further developed a century later in Campanslla’s work “The City of the Sun.” A monk, one of the leaders of the conspiracy against Spanish rule in Calabria (Italy), Campanella spent 27 years in prison, where he wrote dozens of essays. There he also created his main work, “City of the Sun,” handing over the sheets to the public. Sick and blind, Campanella translates the book into Latin language to publish it abroad.

"City of the Sun" is written in the form of a dialogue. The traveler finds himself in an unprecedented country, where he finds an ideally organized society. In an ideal city-state there is no parasitism. Everyone is engaged in productive work, ensuring abundance and the possibility of distribution of products but needs. There is no property, no family. Production, childbirth, education, training - everything is carried out by the state. In everything there is a triumph of the ideology of the crude, primitive, with its petty supervision and regulation of communism.

Gerard Winstanley(1609 - after 1660). According to Winstanley, ideal society- this is not a dream, but social order, which can be implemented in reality. Winstanley is not a dreamer, but a practical reformer, proposing a constitution for a “society of equals”, since the revolution did not lead to this. He calls on Cromwell to consolidate the republic by establishing the free use of land, for only this will create freedom for the citizen: “Now that all the power in the country is in your (Cromwell’s) hands, you will do one of two things: either declare the land free for the oppressed communities ... or remove the persons standing at the helm of government, leaving the old (royal) laws untouched, and then your wisdom and honor will be dispelled for centuries, and you will either perish yourself, or lay the foundation of even greater slavery for your descendants.”

Unlike previous utopian humanists, Winstanley does not derive the idea of a new system from abstract postulates, but seeks to present this system as a natural consequence of existing economic, social and political processes.

Late utopianism

The main representatives of late utopianism are Claude Henri Saint-Simon (1760-1825),Charles Fourier (1772-1837),Robert Owen (1771- 1858).

Saint-Simon and Fourier put forward the ideal of a society where there will be no division into workers and exploiters, where there will be no subordination of the people to a handful of people who own all the wealth of the country.

Utopian socialism of this period affirms the possibility of eliminating exploitation on the basis of the achievements of civilization that capitalism carried within itself: a high level of technical and industrial development, the rise of science, the development of democracy, etc. “The most important question to be decided is how property should be organized for the greatest good of the whole society, in regard to liberty and in regard to wealth.”

Fourier was the first to say that in every society the degree of emancipation of a woman is a natural measure of general emancipation.

Owen provided the economic basis for the social ideal. The changes occurring under capitalism in the production sphere “are preparatory and necessary steps leading to the great social revolution,” which, according to all three great utopians, should be achieved by peaceful, non-violent methods.

It should be emphasized that an essential element of the views of the late utopians is their theoretical aspect. According to them, the so-called Golden Age is ahead. Hence there is wide scope for imagination, various kinds of speculative designs, projects, models. In their judgments, the utopians, seemingly based on the real facts of life, ignored reality, broke away from it, squeezed it into the narrow framework of artificial schemes of a ghostly future.

Such abstract theorizing was adopted by the so-called orthodox Marxists (Vladimir Lenin, Georgy Plekhanov, Joseph Stalin, etc.), turning the theory of “scientific socialism” they created into a more harmonious and rationalized utopia of a new type.

The actual desire to escape from reality or to rise above it - characteristic the entire utopian direction in the development of world social thought.

The question is whether this circumstance is a purely psychological phenomenon - the tendency of people to idealize the past and dream about the future, criticizing the present - or is caused by an insufficient level of awareness of reality by man through the connection of science with real life, and finally, whether such a comprehensive task is generally achievable in a relatively short period scientific history, apparently remains open.

Age of Enlightenment

Among the progressive thinkers of the Enlightenment, whose goal was to restructure the entire social life of the 18th century, its most outstanding representatives occupy a significant and special place - Voltaire(present, name Marie François Arouet, 1694-1778) and Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778). In their works they expressed the main trends in the development of sociological thought of that time. They were the ideologists of the Great French Revolution, precisely because their works reflect an irreconcilable struggle against the outgoing feudal system, contain sharp criticism of existing foundations, religious ideology, and emphasize the need for human intervention in public life in order to rid it of injustices. In his work “An Essay on Universal History and on the Rights and Spirit of Nations,” Voltaire developed the idea of human progress and identified the path to a better future. He associated progress with the development of science and education.

Hence his belief in the power of an “enlightened state” capable of influencing the course of events in favor of social progress. Among his sociological views, the contractual theory stands out, according to which the basis of relations between society and the state should be an agreement between the ruler (state) and the sovereign (people), ensuring compliance with “natural rights” - freedom, equality before the law and ownership of the products of one’s labor.

Rousseau also sharply criticized feudal-class relations, defending the principles of freedom and equality. But unlike Voltaire, who represented the more moderate direction of the French enlightenment, Rousseau, as the most consistent spokesman for the interests of the poorest strata of the “third estate,” rejected the idea of an “enlightened monarch,” pinning his hopes only on the “general will” of the people. In the treatise “On the Social Contract, or Principles of Political Law,” he puts forward a project for a republic under the banner of “freedom and equality,” the idea of people’s sovereignty, and the principle of democracy. In his opinion, the inequality that reigns in society is due to private property, leading to political inequality and despotism. It is the social contract, Rousseau believes, that is called upon to ensure the establishment of democratic power, the transition from the actual to the civil state.

Utopianism of Russian socialists

An attempt to break out of the vicious circle of fruitless dreams about a better future or past without analyzing life itself was made by Russian thinkers of the 19th century, among whom Vissarion Belinsky (1811 — 1848),Alexander Herzen (1812-1870),Nikolai Chernyshevsky (1828-1889),Nikolay Dobrolyubov (1836-1861).

The main feature of Russian socialism is the attempt to “build bridges,” as Herzen put it, between the ideal and reality, the future and the present. History and theory are not divorced from real life categories of constructing schemes, and means “turned” to the present. These are like the wings of that bird whose name is real life, and in it there is always a place for future forms that one must be able to see, understand and theoretically comprehend.

This direction of socio-theoretical and historical research led to the emergence and development of a unique type of utopian socialism - “Russian”, communal, “peasant”, folk, that is, everyday socialism. The exaggeration of the role of everyday life in the life of society, a kind of social pragmatism, could not but affect the one-sidedness and, as a consequence, the utopianism of such views.

“We call Russian socialism that socialism that comes from the land and peasant life, from the actual allotment and the existing redistribution of fields, from communal ownership and communal management - goes together with the workers’ artel towards the economic justice that socialism in general strives for and which is confirmed the science".

The ideas of popular socialism were actively developed by Chernyshevsky. The revolutionary events in Europe of 1848-1849 played a certain role in the turn of Chernyshevsky, like other Russian socialists of the 1860s, to historical realism, to the desire to substantiate the socialist ideal based on the facts of reality itself.

“Thanks to the historical works of recent times and even more latest events in Europe we are beginning to understand a little inner meaning history of peoples...” stated Dobrolyubov.

At the same time, the attempt to derive a theory from life itself, and not vice versa, and even more so to impose this or that doctrine on living life, to squeeze it into the Procrustean bed of someone’s ambitious ideas is one of the most “remarkable” achievements of Russian social thought. However, in the end, for a long time it was mixed up with orthodox Marxism, pushed aside by it, and subsequently hidden from its own own people his fanatical “followers and leaders.”

Marxist teaching became one of the most influential in the 20th century. At the same time, it existed both in a radical version, whose supporters special meaning gave it revolutionary aspects (the violent seizure of state power, the destruction of the old state machine, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the complete elimination of private property, etc.), and in a more moderate, reformist form (the desire to preserve the democratic institutions established in Western society, gradual reform economy and other spheres of social life, refusal to incite class struggle). The first interpretation of Marxism was adhered to by Russian revolutionaries led by Lenin, the second point of view was professed by Western European social democrats. In addition to new “versions” of Marxism, a number of theories of social development appeared and were developed in Western social science. Technocracy has become one of the directions of social thought. Its supporters are based on the belief that the decisive factor in social development is technology and production technologies. Created human mind and with its hands, technical civilization has the ability for self-development and constant progress. A special role in such a society belongs to people who have scientific and technical knowledge - technocrats. Having come to power, these people organize competent management of social processes. The ideas of technocracy are reflected in the works of the American economist J. Galbraith. The advent of computer technology caused a new surge of interest in technocratic ideas. At the same time, there are many of their critics today. Attention is drawn to the fact that the exaggeration of the role of technology and industry as a whole in social development led to a barbaric attitude towards nature and confronted modern humanity problem of survival. It is also indicated that supporters of technocratic views underestimate the role of such important aspects in the life of society as spiritual culture.

Influential philosophical direction in the 20th century became existentialism. Its supporters see the historicity of human existence in the fact that he is always in certain situation, which I have to reckon with. At the same time, a person is able to go beyond the limits allotted to him by the time and specific situation and become free. Freedom can be found by focusing your life on something that goes beyond the boundaries of the situation dictating its own rules. This can be a focus on God (religious existentialists) or on one’s own subjectivity (relatively speaking, atheistic existentialism). Proponents of the latter direction (among them the French philosopher and writer Sartre) proceed from the fact that a person is free when he “designs” himself, often creates in spite of the circumstances of his life. Carrying the burden of freedom is not easy. A person can refuse it, become like everyone else, but in this case he ceases to be a person. Basic concepts: humanism, separation of powers, socialist ideal, Marxism, technocracy, existentialism. Terms: social statics, social dynamics.

Test yourself

1) How did they influence medieval performances about man and society Reformation and scientific discoveries 17th century? 2) What are the similarities and what are the differences in the views on the state of T. Hobbes and N. Machiavelli? 3) Why, in your opinion, was the idea of separation of powers first put forward by philosophers? 4) What new did the Enlightenment philosophers contribute to the development of social thought? 5) Describe the main provisions economic doctrine A. Smith. 6) Who is considered to be the founders of sociological science and why? 7) What new ideas about society and its development were put forward by K. Marx and F. Engels? 8) Compare the views of utopian socialists and the founders of Marxism on the future social order and the paths of transition to it. Highlight the commonalities and indicate the differences. 9) What new “versions” of Marxism appeared at the beginning of the 20th century? 10) What is the essence of the ideas of technocracy? 11) How do existentialist philosophers interpret the concept of “freedom”?

Think, discuss, do

1. In On the Citizen, Hobbes compares society to a clock. When we want to understand how a watch works, we take it apart and study individual parts. During the subsequent assembly of the watch, we strive to fit the parts to each other and determine the functions of each of them. This is how we develop an understanding of the operation of the clock mechanism as a whole. It’s the same with society: it should be mentally divided into parts, study each of them, see their mutual connections and functioning. As a result, we will understand what society is. What are the advantages of such a “disassembled and assembled” method of studying society compared to the then dominant method of observation? What, in your opinion, are the disadvantages of this method? 2. Marx argued: “Take a certain stage of development of production, exchange and consumption, and you will get a certain social system, a certain organization of the family, estates and classes.” Formulate the same idea using the concepts of “mode of production” and “socio-economic formation”. Do you share the Marxist idea of the primacy of economics in society? Give reasons for your answer. 3. Compare the ideas about a fair (ideal) social order of Plato and Marx. What do their positions and ideas have in common, and what are the significant differences? 4. Existentialist philosophers, unlike educators, supporters of Marxism and representatives of other directions, refused to look for a reasonable (progress-oriented) meaning of history. What events of the 20th century questioned the historical optimism of past thinkers?

Work with the source

Read an excerpt from “Man and Technology,” written in 1932. German philosopher O. Spengler.

We go down sighted

World history is not like the dreams of our time. The history of man is short when compared with the history of plants and animals, not to mention the long life of the planets. A sudden rise and decline after a few thousand years is of little importance for the fate of the Earth, but for us, born here and now, this story has tragic grandeur and power. We, people of the 20th century, are descending sighted... In itself, it is completely indifferent what the fate of this small planet will be in the crowd of “eternal” stars, where through short time will carry her through endless spaces... But each of us - nothing in itself - for an unspeakably short moment is thrown into this crush of one life long. Therefore, for us it is immensely important - this small world, this “world history”. Fate places everyone in the wrong world history in general, but everyone is born in a certain century, in a certain place, people, religion, class. We are not given the choice whether we will be born the son of an Egyptian peasant 3000 years before Christ, a Persian king, or today's vagabond. This fate - or chance - must be obeyed. She condemns us to certain situations, contemplations, and actions. There is no “man in himself” about which philosophers chatter, but only a man of his time, place, race. He asserts himself or submits in the struggle with the world given to him, and the divine Universe that extends around him is completely unaffected. This struggle is life, namely struggle in the sense of Nietzsche as the will to power, a fierce, cruel struggle without mercy... Questions and tasks: 1) What are the eternal philosophical problems affected by the author? 2) How, in your opinion, was the worldview of a person in the first half of the 20th century reflected in the author’s position? 3) Do you see any contradictions in the philosopher’s views? If yes, please indicate them.

Marxist teaching became one of the most influential in the 20th century. At the same time, it existed both in a radical version, whose supporters attached special importance to its revolutionary aspects (the violent seizure of state power, the destruction of the old state machine, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the complete elimination of private property, etc.), and in a more moderate, reformist form (the desire to preserve the democratic institutions that have developed in Western society, gradual reform of the economy and other spheres of social life, refusal to incite class struggle). The first interpretation of Marxism was adhered to by Russian revolutionaries led by Lenin, the second point of view was professed by Western European social democrats. In addition to new “versions” of Marxism, a number of theories of social development appeared and were developed in Western social science.
One of the directions of social thought has become technocratism. Its supporters are based on the belief that the decisive factor in social development is technology and production technologies. A technical civilization created by the human mind and hands has the ability for self-development and constant progress. A special role in such a society belongs to people who have scientific and technical knowledge - technocrats. Having come to power, these people organize competent management of social processes. The ideas of technocracy are reflected in the works of the American economist J. Galbraith.
The advent of computer technology caused a new surge of interest in technocratic ideas. At the same time, there are many of their critics today. Attention is drawn to the fact that the exaggeration of the role of technology and industry in general in social development led to a barbaric attitude towards nature and posed the problem of survival to modern humanity. It is also indicated that supporters of technocratic views underestimate the role of such important aspects in the life of society as spiritual culture.
An influential philosophical movement in the 20th century. became existentialism. Its supporters see the historicity of human existence in the fact that he is always in a certain situation with which he is forced to reckon. At the same time, a person is able to go beyond the limits allotted to him by the time and specific situation and become free. Freedom can be found by focusing your life on something that goes beyond the boundaries of the situation dictating its own rules. This can be a focus on God (religious existentialists) or on one’s own subjectivity (relatively speaking, atheistic existentialism). Proponents of the latter direction (among them the French philosopher and writer Sartre) proceed from the fact that a person is free when he “designs” himself, often creates in spite of the circumstances of his life. Carrying the burden of freedom is not easy. A person can refuse it, become like everyone else, but in this case he ceases to be a person.
Basic concepts: humanism, separation of powers, socialist ideal, Marxism, technocratism, existentialism.
Terms: social statics, social dynamics.

Test yourself

1) How did the Reformation and scientific discoveries of the 17th century influence medieval ideas about man and society? 2) What are the similarities and what are the differences in the views on the state of T. Hobbes and N. Machiavelli? 3) Why, in your opinion, was the idea of separation of powers first put forward by philosophers? 4) What new did the Enlightenment philosophers contribute to the development of social thought? 5) Describe the main provisions of the economic teachings of A. Smith. 6) Who is considered to be the founders of sociological science and why? 7) What new ideas about society and its development were put forward by K. Marx and F. Engels? 8) Compare the views of utopian socialists and the founders of Marxism on the future social order and the paths of transition to it. Highlight the commonalities and indicate the differences. 9) What new “versions” of Marxism appeared at the beginning of the 20th century? 10) What is the essence of the ideas of technocracy? 11) How do existentialist philosophers interpret the concept of “freedom”?

1. In On the Citizen, Hobbes compares society to a clock. When we want to understand how a watch works, we disassemble it and study individual parts. During the subsequent assembly of the watch, we strive to fit the parts to each other and determine the functions of each of them. This is how we develop an understanding of the operation of the clock mechanism as a whole. It’s the same with society: it should be mentally divided into parts, study each of them, see their mutual connections and functioning. As a result, we will understand what society is.
What are the advantages of such a “disassembled” method of studying society compared to the then dominant method of observation? What, in your opinion, are the disadvantages of this method?
2. Marx argued: “Take a certain stage of development of production, exchange and consumption, and you will get a certain social system, a certain organization of the family, estates and classes.”
Formulate the same idea using the concepts of “mode of production” and “socio-economic formation”. Do you share the Marxist idea of the primacy of economics in society? Give reasons for your answer.
3. Compare the ideas about a fair (ideal) social order of Plato and Marx. What do their positions and ideas have in common, and what are the significant differences?
4. Existentialist philosophers, unlike educators, supporters of Marxism and representatives of other directions, refused to look for a reasonable (progress-oriented) meaning of history. What events of the 20th century questioned the historical optimism of past thinkers?

Work with the source

Read an excerpt from the work “Man and Technology,” written in 1932 by the German philosopher O. Spengler.

We go down sighted

World history is not like the dreams of our time. The history of man is short when compared with the history of plants and animals, not to mention the long life of the planets. A sudden rise and decline after a few thousand years is of little importance for the fate of the Earth, but for us, born here and now, this story has tragic grandeur and power. We, the people of the 20th century, are going down sighted...
In itself, it is completely indifferent what the fate of this small planet will be in the crowd of “eternal” stars, where in a short time it will be drawn across endless spaces... But each of us is nothing in itself - on unspeakably for a short moment thrown into this life-long crush. Therefore, for us it is immensely important - this small world, this “world history”. Fate places everyone not in world history in general, but everyone is born in a certain century, in a certain place, people, religion, class. We choose not given, whether we are born the son of an Egyptian peasant 3000 years before Christ, a Persian king or a vagabond today. This fate - or chance - must be obeyed. She condemns us to certain situations, contemplations, and actions. There is no “man in himself” about which philosophers chatter, but only a man of his time, place, race. He asserts himself or submits in the fight against data peace to him, and the divine Universe stretching around him is completely unaffected. This fight and There is life, namely struggle in Nietzsche’s sense as the will to power, a fierce, cruel struggle without mercy...
Questions and tasks: 1) What eternal philosophical problems are raised by the author? 2) How, in your opinion, was the worldview of a person in the first half of the 20th century reflected in the author’s position? 3) Do you see any contradictions in the philosopher’s views? If yes, please indicate them.

Lesson 7-9

Social studies, profile level

Views on society and man in the industrial era ( Philosophy and social Sciences in New and Contemporary times)

D.Z: § 3, ?? (p. 23), tasks (p. 24)

explain the concepts and terms: “humanism”, “separation of powers”, “socialist ideal”, “technocratism”, “existentialism”, “social statics”, “social dynamics”;
introduce medieval ideas about man and society and views on society and man in New and Contemporary times;
develop the ability to carry out a comprehensive search, systematize social information on a topic, compare, analyze, draw conclusions, rationally solve cognitive and problem tasks;
contribute to the development of students' civic position.

humanism;
separation of powers;
socialist ideal;
Marxism;
technocracy;
existentialism;
social statics;
social dynamics.

Learning new material

Politics and state: a new look.
Enlightenment: faith in reason and progress.
The formation of social sciences.
A just society and the path to it.
Marxist doctrine of society.
Social and philosophical thought of the 20th century.

Remember. How things have changed catholic church influenced by the Reformation? What new did the Renaissance bring to the development of society? How did utopian socialists see the future of humanity?

The crisis of medieval ideas about man and society.

In modern times begins to take shape a new understanding of society and the person in it.

First, within the framework of philosophical movements
And later social sciences appeared (sociology, political science, etc.)

Philosophical teachings took shape back in Middle Ages (based on religious teachings, philosophy - “the handmaiden of theology”):

Idea : man is the main creation of God, it is more valuable than any other earthly creation.
Virtuous life – way to salvation during the Last Judgment

THOMAS AQUINAS (13th century)

Thanks to reason, a person can recognize universal essences in things
Man is rational, spiritual and social creature , for whom life in society is necessary condition self-realization.

Aquinas was canonized by the church, his teachings are recognized as the official philosophy of the church ( Thomism - a doctrine that combined Christian dogmas with the method of Aristotle)

AUGUSTINE (4-5 centuries)

Created the doctrine of the “City of God and the City of Earth”
In an earthly state, rulers are appointed by God to maintain order, and the church is necessary for the salvation of the soul

Famous philosophers of the Middle Ages:

Roger Bacon

English scientist of the 13th century. argued:
What knowledge can only be considered true when it is supported experience .
The task of science is to study nature in all its manifestations and to put the forces of nature at the service of people.

Famous philosophers Middle Ages:

MARTIN LUTHER (15-16th century)

Priests must teach believers to read holy books(faith is a direct connection with God)
The Church must become “cheap” (without magnificent ceremonies, without magnificent clothes of priests, rich decoration)
The Church must submit to secular authority (princes or emperors)

Lutheran Church

Philosophers of the era Renaissance ( Revival of the culture of antiquity) 16th century)

Reborn interest in antique Greek philosophy, to the person
The main direction in philosophy is humanism
In matters of truth science becomes the supreme authority , not theology (the teachings of N. Copernicus, G. Galileo, I. Newton)
New ones have emerged philosophical teachings about the structure of social life (Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu)

Machiavelli(15-16th century)

Created a doctrine about the mechanism of government
The goal of politics is coming to power and maintaining it, creating a stable state
The sovereign himself establishes laws and moral standards (the end justifies the means) "Machiavellianism"

Thomas Hobbes(16-17 centuries)

English philosopher.
State , according to Hobbes as the mythical biblical monster Leviathan, - the result of an agreement between people , putting an end to the natural state of “war of all against all.”
The basis of society is the state, which is supported by force
Main works: "Leviathan" (1651), "Fundamentals of Philosophy" (1642 - 58).

Social contract theory of the origin of the state , (put forward by the Dutch scientist G. Grotius and developed by T. Hobbes, D. Diderot, J. J. Rousseau, etc.)
the state arose as a result of an agreement between people,
which provided for the voluntary renunciation of individuals from part of their natural rights in favor of state power.

Hobbes's "Leviathan"

English philosopher, sometimes called the "intellectual leader of the 18th century." and the first philosopher of the Enlightenment.
On the inappropriateness of concentration of supreme power in one hand
Proposed the idea of separation of legislative and executive powers

Charles Montesquieu (17th – 18th centuries)

Conclusion about the need to separate a 3rd branch of government – the judiciary
Formalized the idea principle of separation of powers
Major works: "Persian Letters" (1721), " On the spirit of laws" (1748).

Marie Francois Arouet (Voltaire)(18th century) Age of Enlightenment.

French writer and philosopher-educator.
fought against religious intolerance and obscurantism,
criticized the feudal-absolutist system: "Philosophical Letters" (1733), " Philosophical Dictionary" (1764 - 69).
Society should rely on science and education, then people will become more moral
He influenced the development of world, including Russian, philosophical thought. One of the ideologists of the French Revolution of the late 18th century.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau 18th century)

criticized modern society, based on inequality, and contrasted it with the “natural state” of people, free and equal.

In his treatise “On the Social Contract” (1762), he draws ideal society , in which the state is called upon to provide people with freedom through the observance of political and property equality, preventing the polarization of wealth and poverty .

He considers small property based on personal labor to be the basis of society.

advocates direct democracy, when laws are approved by an assembly of all citizens .

Scottish economist and philosopher
the main conditions for economic prosperity are the dominance of private property, non-interference of the state in the economy
Social structure of society - classes of wage workers, capitalists, large land owners (differ in wages, rent)
The interests of workers and capitalists are opposite, this is inevitable.
Economics is a system in which objective laws that can be known operate.

Adam Smith (18th century)

Auguste Comte (18-19 centuries)

Introduced the term “sociology”, the concept of “social dynamics” (social changes)
Called for studying real facts public life
He considered the spiritual growth of people to be a real factor in the development of society

For the first time he used the concepts of “system”, “institution”, “structure”, etc. in relation to society.
The idea is about the complication of social organization with the development of humanity

Socialist ideas:

utopian socialists - Thomas More, Tommaso Campanella
French socialists - Henri Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier, English - Robert Owen. Ideas:

They criticized capitalist society (this is a society of chaos and disunity, greed and selfishness)
About a harmonious society where common interests, free creative work, and equality will prevail
Everyone will definitely work, and the benefits created will be distributed equally

The theory of social reorganization was most fully developed by German thinkers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (19th century)

check yourself

What are the advantages of such a “disassembled and assembled” method of studying society compared to the then dominant method of observation? What, in your opinion, are the disadvantages of this method?

2. Marx argued: “Take a certain stage of development of production, exchange and consumption, and you will get a certain social system, a certain organization of the family, estates and classes.”

Formulate the same idea using the concepts of “mode of production” and “socio-economic formation”. Do you share the Marxist idea of the primacy of economics in society? Give reasons for your answer.

3. Compare the ideas about a fair (ideal) social order of Plato and Marx. What do their positions and ideas have in common, and what are the significant differences?

4. Existentialist philosophers, unlike educators, supporters of Marxism and representatives of other directions, refused to look for a reasonable (progress-oriented) meaning of history.

What events of the 20th century questioned the historical optimism of past thinkers?

1) How did the Reformation and scientific discoveries of the 17th century influence medieval ideas about man and society?

2) What are the similarities and what are the differences in the views on the state of T. Hobbes and N. Machiavelli?

3) Why, in your opinion, was the idea of separation of powers first put forward by philosophers?

4) What new did the Enlightenment philosophers contribute to the development of social thought?

5) Describe the main provisions of the economic teachings of A. Smith.

7) What new ideas about society and its development were put forward by K. Marx and F. Engels?

8) Compare the views of utopian socialists and the founders of Marxism on the future social order and the path of transition to it. Highlight the commonalities and indicate the differences.

9) What new “versions” of Marxism appeared at the beginning of the 20th century?

10) What is the essence of the ideas of technocracy?

11) How do existentialist philosophers interpret the concept of “freedom”?