A real person in the modern world. About the place of man in the modern world, his role in the creation or destruction of this world

The inhuman world in which modern man lives forces everyone to wage a constant struggle with external and internal factors. What is happening around an ordinary person sometimes becomes incomprehensible and leads to a feeling of constant discomfort.

Daily sprint

Psychologists and psychiatrists of all stripes note a sharp surge of anxiety, self-doubt and a huge number of different phobias in an ordinary representative of our society.

The life of a modern person takes place at a frantic pace, so there is simply no time to relax and get distracted from numerous everyday problems. The vicious circle, consisting of a marathon distance at a sprint speed, forces people to run a race with themselves. Intensification leads to insomnia, stress, nervous breakdowns and illnesses, which has become a fundamental trend in the post-information age.

Information pressure

The second task that modern man cannot solve is the abundance of information. The flow of various data falls on everyone simultaneously from all possible sources - the Internet, the mass media, the press. This makes critical perception impossible, since internal "filters" cannot cope with such pressure. As a result, the individual cannot operate with real facts and data, since he is unable to separate fiction and lies from reality.

Dehumanization of relationships

A person in modern society is forced to constantly face alienation, which manifests itself not only in work, but also in interpersonal relationships.

The constant manipulation of human consciousness by the media, politicians and public institutions has led to the dehumanization of relations. The exclusion zone formed between people makes it difficult to communicate, look for friends or a soul mate, and attempts to get closer from the outside strangers very often perceived as something completely inappropriate. The third problem of the society of the 21st century - dehumanization - is reflected in mass culture, language environment and art.

Problems of social culture

The problems of modern man are inseparable from the deformations in society itself and create a vicious spiral.

The cultural ouroboros causes people to withdraw even more into themselves and move away from other individuals. Modern art - literature, painting, music and cinema - can be considered a typical expression of the processes of degradation of public consciousness.

Films and books about nothing, musical works without harmony and rhythm are presented as the greatest achievements of civilization, full of sacred knowledge and deep meaning, incomprehensible to most.

Crisis of values

The value world of each particular individual can change several times in a lifetime, but in the 21st century this process has become too fast. The result of constant change is constant crises, which do not always lead to a happy ending.

The eschatological notes slipping through the term “crisis of values” do not mean a complete and absolute end, but they make one think about the direction in which it is worth paving the way. Modern man is in a permanent state of crisis from the moment of growing up, because the world is changing much faster than the prevailing ideas about it.

Man in modern world forced to drag out a rather miserable existence: thoughtlessly following ideals, trends and certain styles, which leads to the inability to develop their own point of view and their position in relation to events and processes.

The ubiquitous chaos and entropy that reigns around should not be frightening or cause hysteria, since change is natural and normal if there is something unchanged.

Where and from where is the world heading?

The development of modern man and his main paths were predetermined long before our time. Culturologists name several turning points, the result of which was modern society and man in the modern world.

Creationism, which fell in an unequal battle under the pressure of adherents of atheology, brought very unexpected results - a widespread decline in morals. Cynicism and criticism, which have become the norm of behavior and thinking since the Renaissance, are considered to be a kind of "rules of good taste" for modern and clergymen.

Science in itself is not the meaning of the existence of society and is not able to answer some questions. To achieve harmony and balance, adherents of the scientific approach should be more humane, since the unresolved problems of our time cannot be described and solved as an equation with several unknowns.

The rationalization of reality sometimes does not allow seeing anything more than numbers, concepts and facts that leave no room for many important things.

Instinct vs reason

The legacy of distant and wild ancestors who once lived in caves is considered to be the main motives of society. Modern man is just as attached to biological rhythms and solar cycles as he was a million years ago. Anthropocentric civilization only creates the illusion of controlling the elements and one's own nature.

The payoff for such deceit comes in the form of personality dysfunction. It is impossible to control every element of the system always and everywhere, because even one's own body cannot be ordered to stop aging or change proportions.

Scientific, political and social institutions are vying with each other about new victories that will certainly help humanity grow blooming gardens on distant planets. However, modern man, armed with all the achievements of the last millennium, is not able to cope with a common cold, like 100, 500 and 2000 years ago.

Who is to blame and what to do?

No one is to blame for the substitution of values, and everyone is guilty. Modern human rights are both respected and not respected at the same time precisely because of this distortion - you can have an opinion, but you can’t express it, you can love something, but you can’t mention it.

Stupid Ouroboros, constantly chewing his own tail, will someday choke, and then the universe will come complete harmony and world peace. However, if this does not happen in the foreseeable future, future generations will at least hope for the best.

Man is the highest stage in the development of living organisms on Earth, the subject of labor, the social form of life, communication and consciousness, a bodily-spiritual social being. In relation to a person, we use various terms: "individual", "individuality", "personality". What is their relationship?

Individual - (from individuum - indivisible) separate Living being, an individual of the human species (homo sapiens), an individual. It is characterized by the integrity of the morphological and psychophysiological organization, stability in interaction with the environment, and activity.

Individuality is understood as the unique originality of a person, as opposed to a typical one. This is the most stable invariant of a person's personality structure, changing and at the same time - unchanged throughout a person's life. The freedom of the individual, its various manifestations are due to its individuality, which is expressed in the natural inclinations and mental properties of a person - in the features of memory, imagination, temperament, character, i.e. in all the diversity of human appearance and its vital activity. The entire content of consciousness, views, beliefs, judgments, opinions, which, even though they are common to different people, always contain something “their own” has an individual coloring. The needs and demands of each individual person are individualized, and for everything that this person does, it imposes its originality, individuality.

It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that individuality and personality fix different aspects of socially significant qualities of a person. In individuality, its originality is valued, in a person who manifests the sociality of a person, independence, independence, strength. Individuality indicates the originality of socially significant qualities. So, Leonardo da Vinci was not only a great painter, but also a great mathematician and engineer. Luther, the founder of Protestantism, created modern German prose, composed the text and melody of the chorale, which became the "Marseillaise" of the 16th century.

It is only in society that the essence of a person, his abilities, social ties, his material and spiritual needs, as well as human consciousness, which contributes to understanding the goals of life and activity, is formed and realized. Personality is a concrete historical phenomenon. Each era gives rise to a specific social type of personality. The era in which a person was born, lives and forms, the level of culture of the people seriously affect his individual behavior, actions, consciousness.

The concept of personality is used in various senses:

1) as a human individual, the subject of social relations and conscious activity;

2) as a stable system of socially significant features that characterize the individual as a member of society.

Personality is usually understood as the social aspect of human versatility, the social essence of a person. Its formation takes place in the process of socialization, when patterns of behavior and cultural norms are mastered under the influence of the social conditions in which a person exists, but at the same time, taking into account his individual characteristics. Thus, personality can be considered as a dialectical unity of the general (social-typical), special (class, national), separate (individual, unique). Personality acts as a measure of the wholeness of a person.

Personality can be characterized from at least two positions: functional and essential. A functional characteristic of a person is a characteristic of a person in terms of social statuses and social roles that a person has and performs in society. The essential characteristic of a person includes such traits as:

Self-consciousness is a set of mental processes through which an individual
recognizes himself as a subject of activity. Self-awareness includes self-esteem and
self-respect;

Character - individual combination of sustainable psychological characteristics
person, which determines the typical way of behavior for this person in certain
living conditions and circumstances;

Will - the ability to choose actions related to overcoming external or
internal obstacles;

Worldview as a condition for purposeful, conscious activity;

Moral.

It should be noted that the process of formation of the moral "I" of the individual occurs gradually and is determined not only by age and social environment, but in many respects, by the person's own efforts. The following stages of the formation of the moral "I" of a person and the corresponding motives of behavior can be distinguished:

1) premoral level, when a person's behavior is determined by fear of
punishment and considerations of mutual benefit;

2) the level of moral development at which a person is guided by externally given
norms and requirements (desire for approval from significant others and shame in front of their
condemnation);

3) the level of autonomous morality, including an orientation towards a stable internal
a system of principles, the observance of which is ensured by conscience.

Morality is usually understood as the norms and values that regulate human behavior. In a stricter sense, it is a set of norms and values that orient people towards the spiritual, lofty ideal of human unity. The ideal of unity is expressed in solidarity and brotherly (merciful) love. Ethics is often understood as the same as morality. In a special sense, ethics is a philosophical discipline that studies morality. Traditionally, ethics is called practical philosophy, since its goal is not knowledge, but actions.

Morality acts as an expression of the individual's need to build harmonious relationship with others, as a social form of relations between people, a measure of their humanity. The main forms of objectification of morality are virtues (perfect personal qualities), for example, truthfulness, honesty, kindness - norms containing a criterion for evaluating socially encouraged (requirements, commandments, rules), for example, “do not lie”, “do not steal”, “do not kill ". Accordingly, the analysis of morality can be carried out in two directions: the moral dimension of the individual, the moral dimension of society.

Since Greek antiquity, morality has been understood as a measure of a person's dominance over himself, an indicator of how much a person is responsible for himself, for what he does, i.e. as the domination of reason over affects. Reasonable behavior is morally perfect when it is aimed at a perfect goal - a goal that is considered unconditional (absolute) is recognized as the highest good. The highest good gives meaningfulness to human activity as a whole, expresses its general positive direction. People have different understandings of the highest good. For some it's a pleasure, for others - benefit, for others - love of God, etc. The orientation of the mind to the highest good is found in good will. According to I. Kant, this is the will, pure from considerations of profit, pleasure, worldly prudence. Morality as a volitional attitude is the sphere of actions, practical active positions of a person. The key question for morality is the following: how is the moral perfection of a person related to his attitude towards other people? Here, morality characterizes a person from the point of view of his ability to live in a human community. It gives human coexistence an intrinsically valuable meaning. Morality can be called a social (human) form that makes possible relationships between people in all their concrete diversity.

Next salient feature morality is the unity of free will and universality (objectivity, general validity, necessity). Morality is conceivable only under the assumption of free will, it is the autonomy of the will, its very legislation. I. Kant said that in morality a person is subject only to his own and, nevertheless, universal legislation. A person is autonomous in the sense that she herself chooses the law of her existence, she makes a choice between natural necessity and moral law. Morality is a universal law in the sense that nothing limits it, it is not a real universality, but an ideal one. The individual will is free not when it presents its own as universal, but when it chooses the universal as its own. The golden rule of morality provides an example of such a connection. "Do not act towards others in a way that you would not want others to act towards you." A specific mode of existence of morality is obligation.

In morality, the value attitude of a person to the world is realized. Value is not a generic property of something, but the attitude of an individual to an object, event or phenomenon as important, significant for a person. The most important values for an individual determine a coordinate system for him - a system of value orientations. At the top of the value pyramid is the highest good, or ideal. In the structure of moral consciousness, the ideal occupies key place, since it is he who determines the content of good and evil, proper, right and wrong, etc.

In a broad sense, good and evil denote positive and negative values in general. The content of good and evil is determined by the ideal of moral perfection: good is that which brings one closer to the ideal, evil is that which moves one away from it. In situations of conflict, a person sees his task in making the right and worthy choice. Moral values guide a person in his behavior. Following moral values is perceived as a duty, non-fulfillment of duty as guilt and is experienced in reproaches and pangs of conscience. Moral values are imperative (mandatory). Moral imperatives and the moral values affirmed by them are over situational and impersonal, i.e. universal character.

Among the fundamental categories of human existence, the categories of freedom and the meaning of life and the correlation of freedom and necessity, freedom and responsibility are distinguished.

The problem of human freedom has two main aspects - social and natural. The social freedom of a person depends on the social structure - politics, economics, etc. Historical progress is the way to the development of social freedom. The more developed a society, the more free it is, the more freedom a particular person has. The natural aspect of freedom has as its content the free will of man. To what extent can a person in his life make a choice and follow it? What does this choice depend on? In philosophy, various concepts of human freedom have developed:

1. Fatalism. According to this concept, man is a being objectively
conditioned and clearly determined by external forces (divine or
natural). Everything that happens in the world with a person is the result of the divine
predestination, fate. Thus, according to the fatalists, man does not do the real
choice and has no real free will. This point of view has many
opponents who pointed out its absurdity. The historical life of man is constantly
proves that in the most difficult conditions, on the verge of life and death, he can choose the truth
or lies, freedom or slavery, good or evil.

2. Voluntarism: Man is a being absolutely independent of external circumstances.
Human actions are completely arbitrary and do not depend on any causes and factors.
other than the will of the individual. It proclaims the complete independence of the will of man from
realities of the world. In practice, his choice still depends on many reasons, both internal,
as well as external. A person is forced to reckon with these reasons and accept
decisions based on available options.

3. Scientist-oriented philosophy (Spinoza, Hegel, Comte, Marx) consider freedom as a conscious necessity. In this case, a real free will is recognized for a person, but, at the same time, it is indicated that the choice and actions of a person are not carried out arbitrarily, but under the influence of certain reasons of a spiritual or material nature. Understanding freedom as perceived need puts necessity in the foreground, thus expressing the relation of the world to man, and not man to the world.

4. Modern understanding of the problem of freedom includes the rejection of the absolutization of the areas of freedom and necessity (that is, to really talk about relative freedom); personification and individualization of freedom (subjects of freedom, a form of being of freedom); consideration of the structure of necessity and freedom and their interaction, and this interaction is the essential contradiction of human existence; the problem of the criterion of freedom (duty, moral choice, meaning of life, conscience, responsibility). Thus, the center of philosophizing moves towards the relationship of man to the world. The nature of this relationship largely depends on the properties and efforts of the person himself.

Here are some concepts of freedom, which are based on the relationship of man to the world.

According to the Russian philosopher V.S. Solovyov's freedom always requires a moral attitude to choice and to the implementation of a decision. Freedom is responsible conscientious behavior. As V.S. Solovyov, - a person lives simultaneously in two worlds: the world of the past (experience) - a necessity and the world of the future - an opportunity. The world of the future enables moral judgment, i.e. gives freedom, and the link between necessity and freedom is the goal.

E. Fromm emphasized that a person belongs to two worlds: actually human and animal, which means that he is aware of his greatness and impotence. Freedom is realized by the very life activity of a person, in the process of which he makes his choice. Thus, freedom is a conscious, free choice by a person of his line of behavior. The main goal of choice is to go beyond the limits of present necessity. Exit options: a) regressive - the desire of a person to return to his natural sources - nature, ancestors, natural life, rejection of individuality (mass, crowd), self-reflection; b) progressive - development of actually human forces and potencies. The forms of manifestation of freedom are, first of all, the game, creativity, risk, the meaning of life.

Viktor Frankl, an Austrian psychologist and psychiatrist, believed that human freedom should be determined, first, in relation to drives. A person either allows his instincts to determine his behavior, or not; secondly, in relation to heredity. Compensation of innate inclinations and properties can be considered as a conscious choice. Thus, a huge role in the process of freedom is played by culture, civilization; thirdly, in relation to the environment: the natural environment, the psychological predestination of a person, the socio-cultural conditions of being. It turns out that freedom is the conscious development of a certain attitude to the environment, focused on "going out" beyond the boundaries of that Environment that no longer satisfies a person.

Man cannot change a single objective law of nature, society, but he may not accept them. It depends on a person whether to surrender "at the mercy" of the conditions, or to rise above them and thus discover his truly human dimension.

If necessity is a system of objectively real possibilities of human behavior in this particular life situation, then freedom is:

1. Conscious choice by a person of a variant of his behavior in a given situation,
according not only to the content of external circumstances, but also to the state of one’s own
spiritual world.

2. The ability of a person to "go beyond" the real situation, to design a different
situation and other internal state, as well as organize practical activities
to achieve this other.

3. An opportunity for a person to find his own meaning in life.

A person realizes his essence in activity, in purposeful activity, in which his free will is manifested. Freedom is the ability of choice based on the knowledge of necessity and activity taking into account this necessity. But freedom is directly related to the responsibility of the individual for his actions, and deeds, etc. Responsibility is a social attitude towards social values. Awareness of responsibility is nothing more than a reflection by the subject of being, social necessity and understanding of the meaning of the actions performed. Awareness of responsibility is a necessary means of controlling the behavior of an individual on the part of society through its self-awareness.

The formation of personality is impossible without observance of moral laws. Only morality makes it possible to affirm the personal independence of the individual. develops his ability to manage his activities, build his life meaningfully and responsibly. Irresponsibility and unscrupulousness are incompatible with individual independence, which is possible only when the individual's actions do not contradict the morality accepted in a given society. It is no coincidence that the greatest ethicist I. Kant wrote: “Act in such a way that the maxim of your behavior at any time could also be the norm of universal legislation.”

Each historical epoch forms its own values, which to one degree or another determine human behavior. In our time, such undoubted values are social justice, peace, democracy, and progress. In the modern world, the person himself is proclaimed as a value of a special kind. And he can become it in reality, if he manages to overcome the colossal social inequality. The knowledge of these values by each person serves as the basis for the formation of a holistic personality.

The problem of the meaning of life in the spiritual experience of mankind The meaning of life is an integration concept that combines a number of others in its content.

When considering the problem, the following questions arise: 1. Is the meaning of life only the result of a person's life, or can it be found in each individual life situation? 2. Does a person find the meaning of life in some "transcendent" values (God, higher ideals) or should it be found in ordinary everyday life values? 3. Is the meaning of life connected with universal human values, or is it found in the individual, individual values of each person?

There are different points of view as to what constitutes the meaning of life. The Marxist interpretation of the 20th century was to define the meaning of life as the final, objective, socially significant result of a life lived by a person. Another interpretation of the concept was the assertion that the meaning of life exists regardless of whether a person is aware of the meaningfulness of his being. As a result, the very life of a person, his freedom and uniqueness were excluded from the meaning of life. Another approach to the problem was that the concept of the meaning of life cannot be fundamentally separated from the real life, therefore, is not a scientific concept, but a general cultural description.

As W. Frankl stated, meaning is relative insofar as it refers to a specific person involved in the situation. We can say that the meaning changes, firstly, from person to person, and secondly, from one day to another. "There is no such thing as a universal meaning of life, there are only unique meanings of an individual situation." Thus, several conclusions are drawn:

The search for the meaning of life can never be completed, for the meaning of human life
consists in its search, and this search is called the life of man.

The meaning of life must be defined as a person's attitude to the situation in which he finds himself at any given time.

But the meaning of life cannot be taught, it cannot be imposed on a person.

At the same time, the affirmation of the individuality of the meaning of life does not mean a denial of certain common features and characteristics inherent in many different situations in which different people find themselves. For many people in similar life situations, there is a certain common content of life meanings. General content life meanings - this is the value. It acts as a guideline for people to search for their individual meaning of life in each situation (for example, the value of traditions and customs). In the system of human values, one can distinguish:

a) values of creation. They are carried out in productive creative acts (industriousness, creation).

b) the values of experience - the beauty of nature, art.

c) the value of communication. They are realized in the relationship of man to man (love,
friendship, sympathy).

d) the values of overcoming the situation and changing one’s attitude towards it are realized in
a person's attitude to situations that limit his capabilities. Sometimes only the values of overcoming oneself remain available to a person. As long as a person lives, he can realize certain values and be responsible to himself for finding the meaning of life. The meaning of life must be found independently, in every life situation, it is overcoming the conflict between the Self and the Environment, a way of forming a personality.

Questions for self-study

1. Man, individual, individuality, personality - how do these concepts relate?

2. What is the functional and essential characteristic of the personality?

3. What is self-awareness of a person? What does it depend on?

4. How does a person's self-esteem develop?

5. How are necessity, freedom and responsibility interrelated?

6. What is the essence of fatalism and voluntarism?

7. What are the forms of manifestation of freedom?

8. Why are freedom, the meaning of life, happiness considered as fundamental categories of human existence?

9. Can there be creativity in conditions of lack of freedom?

10. How are the needs and interests of a person reflected in his value ideas?

11. What is morality? What does it consist of? Golden Rule morality"?

Exercises and tasks

1. "There are only three events in a person's life: birth, life, death. He does not feel
when he is born, suffers, dying, and forgets to live.(B.Pascal). Do you agree with
by the author? How would you describe a person's life?

2. Philosophers are known to think a lot about death. Try to interpret the following sentences:

"A free man thinks of nothing less than death."(B. Spinoza).

“As long as we are alive, there is no death. Death has come - we are not.(Titus Lucretius Car).

3. B. Pascal defined freedom for himself as follows: "Freedom is not idleness, but
the ability to freely dispose of their time and choose their occupation;
in short, to be free means not to indulge in idleness, but to
decide what to do and what not to do. What a great blessing such freedom! Always
Does a person perceive freedom as a blessing?

4. Each person has many "roles" in life. Under various circumstances, meeting
different people, we behave differently: I have the same face and the same words when I speak
with the boss, and a completely different face and different words when I discuss something with my
friends. But there are people who always behave in all circumstances.
equally. They are equally polite and affectionate with adults and children, they are full of
dignity and are not lost when meeting with big bosses, they do not put on airs with their
subordinates, they don’t build anything out of themselves, they are always natural and simple. As a rule, this
adults, people of strong will and character. Have you ever met such
of people? And is this behavior possible in youth?

5. The psychology of the crowd is such that the brighter, more original and unique a person, the more
it causes envy and malice. If Mozart were not a brilliant composer, he
would have lived much longer, no Salieri would have envied him. We often hear:
be like everyone else, don't stick your head out, don't pretend to be clever! Maybe in these calls
Is there really some truth?

6. Do you agree that it is not so difficult to unlearn lying to others, much more difficult
to unlearn to lie to oneself, that is, to look at oneself honestly and sincerely?

7. How do you understand the phrase: “Death is not the end, but the crown of life”?

8. Is it possible to say that a person lives meaninglessly if he has never thought about the meaning of life?

9. Gorky at one time proclaimed: "Man - it sounds proud!". But neither N. Berdyaev, nor M. Heidegger, nor S. Frank, nor F. Nietzsche would agree with such a phrase. Why?

In the second half of the XX century. profound changes have taken place in society: man himself and his place in the world have changed. It can be concluded that a new society is being formed. It is called post-industrial, informational, technotronic, postmodern, etc.

The main ideas of the post-industrial society are outlined by the American sociologist D. Bell. Another representative of American sociology, M. Castellier, in his description of modern society, focuses primarily on its informational nature. One way or another, the authors emphasize the transition to a new period in the history of modern civilization, which was due to changes in the economy, social life, politics and the spiritual sphere. These changes were so significant that they led to the crisis of the previous development model. Happened in the middle of the 20th century. The scientific and technological revolution changed the structure of production - information technology came to the fore in importance.

According to Bell, the post-industrial, information society differs from the previous industrial society mainly in two ways:

1) theoretical knowledge acquires a central role;

2) the service sector is expanding in relation to the "producing economy". This means that there has been a fundamental shift in the ratio of three sectors of the economy: primary (extractive

general industry and Agriculture), secondary (manufacturing industries and construction), tertiary (services). This last one took the lead.

The basis of the post-industrial society is the unprecedented influence of science on production. If an industrial society is based on different kinds energy and machine technology, then post-industrial - on intellectual technologies, its main resource is knowledge and information.

Information in society has always played a special role. It is known that the experience accumulated in a long process could not be transmitted genetically, so society became more and more interested in the preservation and transfer of knowledge, i.e. social information. The development of information links has made society, like any living self-developing, self-regulating system, more resistant to influence environment, ordered the connections in it. Since information in society is primarily knowledge (but not all that humanity has, but only that part of it that is used for orientation, for active action), insofar as it serves as a necessary link in the management of systems in order to preserve and qualitative specifics, improve and development. The more information received is processed by the system, the higher its overall organization and efficiency of functioning, thereby expanding the possibilities of its regulation.

In modern society, information has become its extremely important resource. Society embarks on the path of informatization: a system-activity process of mastering information as a resource for development (and management) with the help of informatics tools in order to progress civilization. Informatization of society does not mean simply computerization, it is new level the life of each individual and society as a whole, in which the interaction of informatics and society is carried out on the basis of the study of laws and trends.

Thus, the information society is characterized by the state when society masters information flows and arrays that determine social development. Main and main form social development on a global scale, there is an information-intensive comprehensive intensification. On this basis, the global unity of the entire civilization develops. The creation of the Internet played an important role, followed by the merging of global media and computer communications into multimedia, covering all spheres of human life. A new information technology paradigm has been created, which, having changed the economy, has led to radical changes in public administration.

The features of post-industrialism were largely set by the emerging in the 16th-17th centuries. Western European civilization, having now received a deeper development. This:

high rates of development. The society has passed to an intensive way of development;

a fundamental change in the system of values: innovation itself, originality has become a value. In addition, individual autonomy occupies one of the highest places in the hierarchy of values. A person can change his corporate connections, be included in different

social communities and cultural traditions, especially as education becomes more accessible;

as never before, the manifestation of the essence of man as an active being, which is in a transformative relationship to the world. The activity-active ideal of man's relationship to nature has also spread to the sphere of social relations (struggle, revolutionary transformations in society, etc.);

a different vision of nature - knowing the laws of nature, society puts them under its control.

Therefore, scientificity has acquired special significance as the basis for further progress. At the same time, the problem of the possibilities of science arises, especially at present. The thing is

that the very development of technogenic civilization has approached critical milestones that marked the boundaries of this type of civilizational growth. With the advent global problems problems of the survival of mankind, the problems of preserving the individual and the biological foundations of human existence arose in conditions when the threat of the destructive influence of modern technogenesis on human biology is becoming more and more distinct. Anti-scientist concepts make science and its technological applications responsible for growing global problems. They come forward with demands to limit and even freeze scientific and technological progress; in essence, this means a return to traditional societies.

The role of technology in modern society is also controversial. On the one hand, performing a social function, it complements and expands the capabilities of a person. Its significance is so great that it gives rise to a certain state of mind - technocracy.

Technocracy absolutizes the role of technical ideas and principles of technical knowledge, extending them to other areas of human activity, believes that the leading place in modern society belongs to technical specialists.

On the other hand, the penetration of the principles of technical design into all areas of human life creates a threat to the person himself, his identity. There is a kind of "technical state" in which all priorities, and the very fate of society, are given to the scientific and technical elite. The laws of things created by civilization itself take the place of social and political norms and laws. Therefore, society is growing technical alarmism- panic before technology.

Literature

2. Philosophy / Ed. A.F. Zotova and others - M., 2003. - Sec. 5, ch. 7.

Topic 9.2. HUMAN PROBLEMS OF POST-INDUSTRIALISM

The progressive influence of science and technology in modern society leaves a deep imprint on the very nature of human existence. Radical changes - changes in the conditions of people's participation in the system of productive forces, in the nature of labor, in the structure of human relationships - are often made in a direction that can disrupt the historical continuity in the development of society. One gets the impression of a deepening gap between the traditional, historically established culture and the technical dimension of modern civilization. It is this circumstance that is emphasized by representatives of such a direction as cultural criticism(K. Jaspers, M. Heidegger, J. Habermas and others). They analyze the modern era from the point of view of the spiritual losses caused by the exclusive assertion of "technical civilization".

The contradiction between the historically established humanistic belief in human capabilities, in his creative principle, autonomy of will and activity, and the fact that scientific and technological civilization determines the thoughts and way of life of people is noted as a characteristic situation for the present. Moreover, these forms of dependence are multiplying, fragmenting, becoming less and less obvious. The break with the natural environment, the release of man from the power of the elements led to the power of the artificial environment over him. Moral, emotional reactions, personal experiences, etc., natural for a person, are suppressed.

Today, technology is no longer only a condenser of mechanical force, it is also a social, human technology. The power of technology over minds has expanded to the manipulation of mental life in general, including the unconscious. There is a technization of the entire sphere of life. With the use of technical means and criteria in the most diverse areas of public and private human life, the engineering of human motives is spreading in society. By remark

German philosopher M. Mayer, the whole life of a person turns into a technical or technological complex, consisting of the technology of happiness, the technology of acquiring material goods, the technology of communication between people, the technology love relationship, technologies for achieving influence and power, technologies for education.

If the technologization of these spheres of life only indirectly turns a person into an object, educating him to be more passive (but still leaves him with the appearance of independence), then technology, which includes possible types of psychotechnics, is already a direct threat to the identity of the individual. G. Marcel, for example, calls this technology "methods of dehumanization." E. Fromm argues that at present manipulating a person finds its most complete expression in psychological science.

The problem of human interaction with nature also showed itself in a new light. As it turned out, the dependence of man on nature exists along with the inverse dependence of nature on man. Increasingly intensive consumption of natural resources with the help of technical means has significantly undermined the natural foundations of life: the intensity of production is increasing, and the amount of waste is also increasing. economic activity. Social production, having taken 100 units of a substance from nature, uses 3–4, and throws 96 units into nature in the form of toxic substances and waste. This created a tense and in many cases a crisis situation in the interaction of man with nature. Every year, about 100 biological species die out on Earth. The rate of biodiversity decline indicates a true ecological catastrophe. Over the past 66 million years, this is the largest period of extinction of animals and plants. The biological state of the person himself has changed: heart disease has sharply increased, cancer diseases and so on.

For the current existence of man, these problems are extremely serious, so the connection "nature - technology - man" requires a new understanding. So, the German philosopher Habermas, trying to solve the problem, in his theory of society distinguishes two levels of social structure: the institutional framework and the technical “subsystem” subordinate to them. The model of society is built on the distinction between "goals" and "means", on the strict subordination of the "instrumental" to the social. Desirable guidelines for further development are developed at the social level, and then transferred to the sphere of technical implementation. Each of the spheres, according to Habermas, has fundamentally different development opportunities. In the "technical" terms, the path of society is a linear process, its limit is "the organization of society like an automaton", i.e. dead end. He connects the possibilities of social progress with the social sphere. Habermas, in his theory, breaks society, as it were, protecting the socio-cultural life of society from technical expansion by isolating the sphere of labor. His compatriot H. Shelsky rejects the thesis of the separation of the social from the “instrumental”, since modern conditions every technical problem and every technical achievement immediately becomes social, affecting relationships between people. Man does not resist at all tech world as something alien, external, he has long dealt exclusively with his own creation. A man of technogenic civilization is not an object, but a subject, a creator. However, a technically oriented mind acts as an end in itself, since the interest of the era is focused on the constructive genius of the mind, on technical capabilities intellect. In this regard, Shelsky traces the spirit of scientism and technocracy.

The existing and deepening problems of modern man lead to an aggravation of social contradictions and conflicts.

The economic crisis of the 70s of the last century made it necessary to revise the economic and social policy of the state, which got its name as the transition to industrialism.

Ä. Bell Notes positive sides ongoing changes:

innovative nature of production;

the growing role of education and knowledge, turning it into a "collective good";

subordination of the economic to the social and cultural;

approval of the class of knowledge carriers as the main one;

the transformation of the ethos of science into the ethos of the whole society;

the dominance of relations between people, and not between people and nature, etc.

However, already in the 1980s, neoliberalism in the economy, carried out by the state, led to a new aggravation of contradictions. The expansion of privatization, the strengthening of the power of private capital and, accordingly, the decline in the role of the state created difficulties in social policy, increased

rising unemployment, exacerbated social inequality. The new society began to qualify not only as a society of knowledge, information, services, but also as a society of risk, threats, fear, dangers. This is facilitated by the growing globalization in the modern world.

Therefore, we can say that post-industrialism, based on scientific and technological successes, still does not solve the problems that modern man faces. Indeed, the possibilities of society have expanded and its development has accelerated, the human world has changed radically, but the task is for humanity to realize the consequences of its capabilities and proceed primarily from the principle of humanism.

Literature

1. Philosophy / Ed. V.V. Mironov. - M., 2005. - Sec. VII, ch. 3.

2. Philosophy / Ed. T.I. Kokhanovskaya. - Rostov-on-Don, 2003. - Ch. 13, p. 3.

Topic 9.3. GLOBAL PROBLEMS OF MODERNITY

Global problems mean universal problems affecting the life of all mankind. This is a set of vital problems of mankind, on the solution of which further social progress in the modern era depends.

Under the influence of technogenic transformations, modern civilization itself has changed, its impact on the world is so great that it is right to speak about global problems. Vital problems existed before in the history of society, but they were local and regional in nature. In the modern era, however, they have acquired a planetary character, since humanity currently represents a single system based on an economic and political single life. Global problems are generated by history itself, namely, the enormously increased technical means human impact on nature and the huge scale of its economic activity, which upset the balance of nature and man.

The uneven development of the countries of the world community has also led to global socio-political problems.

In addition, the uneven development manifests itself in the fact that the technological power of mankind exceeds the level of social organization it has reached. Political thinking has clearly lagged behind political activity, and the motivational motives for the activities of the bulk of people and their moral values have not reached the requirements of modernity.

These are some of the reasons for the global problems facing modern society. These include:

1) prevention of a world thermonuclear war, creation of a non-nuclear non-violent world that provides peaceful conditions for social existence;

2) overcoming the ecological crisis generated by the catastrophic in its consequences human invasion of the biosphere, accompanied by pollution of the natural environment;

3) overcoming the growing gap in the level of economic and social and spiritual development between developed industrial countries and developing ones;

4) security economic development humanity with the necessary resources;

5) limiting rapid population growth (population explosion), complicating social and economic progress. As well as falling birth rates in developed countries;

6) timely foresight and prevention of various kinds of negative consequences scientific and technological progress and rational, efficient use of its achievements

in order to preserve the human race.

The difference between society and culture reveals its definitions as a set of human-created values. The world of culture is the world of material and ideal spiritual values, i.e. the world is an object of material and ideal taken in its relation to man, a world filled with human meanings. The interpretation of culture as a system of values restricts culture by nature and at the same time does not allow it to be identified with society. With this approach, culture acts as a certain aspect of society, thereby clarifying its social nature, but at the same time, the important problem of the relationship between culture and society is not removed. A person perceives culture selectively under the influence of preferences determined by many circumstances. And only on the basis of this culture, assimilated by him, is he able to develop further. As a subject of culture, he introduces something new into it. There are a lot of problems and contradictions in the ratio of development and creativity of culture. In order to understand them, it is necessary, at least in a general way, to analyze the problem of the development of culture. Demographic and energy problems, the task of providing food for the population of the Earth, go far beyond the boundaries of individual social systems and acquire a global, all-civilizational character. All mankind has a common goal - to preserve civilization, to ensure their own survival. It also follows from this that the fundamental differences in world social systems do not cancel the concepts of human civilization, modern civilization. terrestrial civilization, which must be saved from nuclear annihilation by the joint efforts of all peoples.

Death is the natural end of all life. Life is a form of existence of matter, arising under certain conditions at the time of its formation. From all other living beings, man differs most of all in that throughout his entire individual life he never reaches the "goals" of ancestral, historical life; in this sense he is a constantly unrealizable adequate being. The person is not satisfied with the situation. And this dissatisfaction contains the causes of creative activity that are not contained in its immediate motives. Therefore, the vocation, the task of each person is to develop all his abilities comprehensively and, to the extent possible, make his personal contribution to history, to the progress of society and its culture. This is the meaning of the life of an individual, which he realizes through society, but the same is the meaning of the life of society and humanity as a whole. Buddhism: Man lives in order to break the chain of rebirth and never be reborn again. Christianity is the ascent of man to God. The main mission of man is characterized as saving, testing, and edifying. Islam: a person lives in order to resurrect later. Medieval F. - theocentrism, in the Bible one of the main problems is life after death. Human life is a pain. Then the era of rationalism - man is a mechanism - is mortal. The task is not to die ahead of time, to work out your resource as much as possible; and then the era of enlightenment - mortal - be guided by all values (!) - encourages activity. F. existence is the main problem of death and immortality. The practical meaning of the problem: determines the system of values and directions of behavior. In the life of every normal person, sooner or later there will come a moment when he will wonder about the finiteness of his individual existence. (And if it is better not to think about it?). Man is the only being who is aware of his mortality (is it?). The first reaction following the realization of one's mortality may be a feeling of hopelessness and confusion. Overcoming this feeling, a person exists burdened with knowledge of impending death, which becomes fundamental in the future. spiritual development person. The presence of such knowledge in the spiritual experience of a person explains the acuteness with which he faces the question of the meaning and purpose of life. In this regard, questions often appear on the pages of philosophical literature: does a person's life have any meaning and value? Is life worth living? With a positive answer, the following points of view are common: the meaning of life is in accordance with one's own nature and satisfaction of needs, in obtaining pleasure and joy, in developing creative abilities and working for the benefit of society. And finally, one can meet the view that the meaning of life is in existence itself. This diversity of views testifies to how contradictory assessments of the purpose of life are.

Daily sprint

Psychologists and psychiatrists of all stripes note a sharp surge of anxiety, self-doubt and a huge number of different phobias in an ordinary representative of our society.

Information pressure

Dehumanization of relationships

A person in modern society is forced to constantly face alienation, which manifests itself not only in work, but also in interpersonal relationships.

The constant manipulation of human consciousness by the media, politicians and public institutions has led to the dehumanization of relations. The exclusion zone that has formed between people makes it difficult to communicate, look for friends or a soul mate, and attempts at rapprochement by strangers are very often perceived as something completely inappropriate. The third problem of the society of the 21st century - dehumanization - is reflected in mass culture, language environment and art.

Problems of social culture

The problems of modern man are inseparable from the deformations in society itself and create a vicious spiral.

Crisis of values

The eschatological notes slipping through the term “crisis of values” do not mean a complete and absolute end, but they make one think about the direction in which it is worth paving the way. A modern person is in a permanent state of crisis from the moment of growing up, since the world around him is changing much faster than the prevailing ideas about it.

A person in the modern world is forced to drag out a rather miserable existence: thoughtlessly following ideals, trends and certain styles, which leads to the inability to develop one's own point of view and one's position in relation to events and processes.

The ubiquitous chaos and entropy that reigns around should not be frightening or cause hysteria, since change is natural and normal if there is something unchanged.

Where and from where is the world heading?

The development of modern man and his main paths were predetermined long before our time. Culturologists name several turning points, the result of which was modern society and a person in the modern world.

The rationalization of reality sometimes does not allow seeing anything more than numbers, concepts and facts that leave no room for many important things.

Instinct vs reason

Who is to blame and what to do?

The stupid Ouroboros, constantly chewing his own tail, will someday choke, and then there will be complete harmony and world peace in the Universe. However, if this does not happen in the foreseeable future, future generations will at least hope for the best.