Federal State Budgetary Educational

higher professional education

MOSCOW STATE MACHINE BUILDING

UNIVERSITY (MAMI / UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING /

V.P. Osei

Test work onCulturology

Moscow - 2014

Topic: "Subjects of culture".

Introduction. What is culture.

The concept of the subject of culture. The people as a subject of culture. The people and the "mass".

Personality as a subject of culture.

The role of the intelligentsia and the cultural elite in the dynamics of cultural values.

Conclusion.

References.

1. Introduction

Modern dictionaries give the following concept of culture: Culture is a historically defined level of development of society, creative forces and abilities of a person, expressed in the types and forms of organization of life and activities of people, in their relationships, as well as in the material and spiritual values ​​created by them. The concept of culture is used to characterize certain historical eras (for example, ancient culture), specific societies, nationalities and nations (Mayan culture), as well as specific spheres of activity or life (for example, work culture, political culture, artistic culture); in a narrower sense - the sphere of the spiritual life of people. It includes the objective results of human activity (machines, structures, the results of cognition, works of art, norms of morality and law, etc.), as well as human strengths and abilities implemented in activities (knowledge, skills, skills, the level of intelligence, moral and aesthetic development, worldview, methods and forms of communication between people). Spiritual and material cultures are in organic unity. Society always creates an appropriate culture or a set of material and spiritual values ​​and methods of their production. The degree of cultural development can be different: strong or weak, high or low. This degree depends on the specific historical stage in the development of society, on the conditions in which mankind develops, on the possibilities that it possesses.

The purpose of this work is to reveal such concepts as the subject of culture, people and "masses", personality, to determine the role of the intelligentsia in society.

2. The concept of the subject of culture. The people as a subject of culture. The people and the "mass".

In cultural studies, the term "subject" is understood as the bearer of object-based practical activity or cognition, the source and agent of activity aimed at the object, which is the world around the subject in all its diversity. The subject can be both an individual, an individual person, and a social group, a certain set of people. The subject of culture is a creator, a creator of culture. It is generally accepted that the primary subject of culture is man. The initial characteristic of the subject is activity, which is of a conscious nature. Then the subject of culture is an active, self-directed being, carrying out the transformation of reality, the creation of the world of "second nature". To become a creator of culture, a person must form himself in the process of his life activity as a cultural and historical being, which is possible only as a result of socialization. Human qualities are the result of his mastering the language, familiarizing himself with the values ​​and traditions existing in society, mastering the methods and skills of activity inherent in a given culture.

A person can become a subject of culture only when he is included in social activity to transform the external world and the world of human social relations. Since cultural transformative activity is never carried out by a separate isolated individual, but only by such a subject that is included in collective activity, then the true cultural subject is humanity, society

People are an ambiguous term:

1) A people is understood, in particular, as an ethnos, that is, a certain group of people distinguished by the commonality of a number of characteristics - language, culture, territory, religion, historical past, etc.

2) The word "people" is also used in the meaning of a nation.

3) The concept "people" is also used to refer to the entire population of a country, regardless of its ethnicity.

In cultural studies, the people are considered as a spiritual and social community of people united by material, social and spiritual creativity and common ideas about law and common interests.

For many millennia, the people were not considered as a subject of cultural creativity. Because the people were opposed to the elite. That is, only mental activity was attributed to the sphere of culture.

The population goes the way of becoming a people, acquiring common values, enriching the cultural heritage. Although this path is reversible. With the disintegration of common values ​​and unity, the people also die out.

But it is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of people and masses. In the words of the Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gasset: "The mass is a lot of people without special merits." The masses have some things in common: tastes, interests, lifestyle, etc.

Jaspers views the masses as people who are not related to each other, but in their combination, they represent a kind of unity. But “the masses as a public are a typical product of a certain historical stage; they are people connected by perceived words and opinions, not differentiated in their belonging to different strata of society.” The masses make up their own opinion, which is not the opinion of any individual person, but is called public opinion.

The real subject of culture is the people, not the masses. But the crowd (mass) often plays an important role in a particular historical or cultural event, which then had a serious impact on the subsequent development of human society. Thus, "people" and "mass" are two opposite concepts. A people is a broad community that unites those social strata that are currently the "engines" of progressive development. However, this does not mean that the content of the concept of "people" is exhausted only by workers who carry out production material goods... The people also include other social strata of the population that contribute to social progress at this stage in the development of human society.

Culture (from lat.cultura - cultivation, upbringing, education, development, veneration)

a historically determined level of development of society and a person, expressed in the types and forms of organization of life and activities of people, as well as in the material and spiritual values ​​they create. The concept of capitalism is used to characterize the material and spiritual level of development of certain historical epochs, socio-economic formations, specific societies, nationalities and nations (for example, ancient capitalism, socialist capitalism, Mayan capitalism), as well as specific spheres of activity or life ( K. labor, artistic K., K. life). In a narrower sense, the term "K." belong only to the sphere of the spiritual life of people.

Pre-Marxist and non-Marxist theories of K. Initially, the concept of K. implied the purposeful impact of man on nature (cultivation of the land, etc.), as well as the upbringing and training of the person himself. Education included not only the development of the ability to follow existing norms and customs, but also the encouragement of the desire to follow them, formed confidence in K.'s ability to satisfy all the needs and demands of a person. This duality is characteristic of the understanding of K. in any society. Although the very word "K." came into use of European social thought only in the second half of the 18th century, more or less similar ideas can be found in the early stages of European history and beyond (for example, Ren in the Chinese tradition, Dharma in the Indian tradition). The Greeks saw in "paideia", that is, "good breeding", their main difference from the "uncultured" barbarians. In the late Roman era, along with the ideas conveyed by the main meaning of the word "K.", a different set of meanings emerged and spread in the Middle Ages, which positively assessed the urban way of social life and was closer to the concept of civilization that arose later (See Civilization). The word "K." began to be associated rather with signs of personal perfection, primarily religious. In the Renaissance, the perfection of K. began to understand the correspondence to the humanistic ideal of man, and later - to the ideal of the enlighteners. Pre-Marxist bourgeois philosophy is characterized by the identification of capitalism with the forms of spiritual and political self-development of society and man, as it manifests itself in the movement of science, art, morality, religion, and state forms of government. "... Production and all economic relations were mentioned only among other things, as secondary elements of the" history of culture "" (K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., Vol. 20, p. 25). Thus, the French enlighteners of the 18th century. (Voltaire, A. Turgot, J. A. Condorcet) reduced the content of the cultural and historical process to the development of human "mind". The "culture", "civilization" of a nation or country (as opposed to the "savagery" and "barbarism" of primitive peoples) consists in the "rationality" of their social orders and political institutions and is measured by the totality of achievements in the field of sciences and arts. The goal of K., corresponding to the higher purpose of "reason", is to make all people happy [eudemonic (see Eudemonism) concept of K.], living in accordance with the demands and needs of their "natural" nature [naturalistic (see. Naturalism) K.'s concept]. At the same time, already within the framework of the Enlightenment, “criticism” of C. and civilization (J. J. Rousseau) arose, opposing the depravity and moral depravity of “cultural” nations with the simplicity and purity of the “mores” of peoples at the patriarchal stage of development. This criticism was accepted by German classical philosophy, which gave it the character of a general theoretical understanding of the contradictions and collisions of bourgeois civilization (division of labor, the dehumanizing effect of technology, the disintegration of an integral personality, etc.). German philosophers were looking for a way out of this contradictory situation in the sphere of "spirit", in the sphere of moral (I. Kant), aesthetic (F. Schiller, romanticism) or philosophical (G. Hegel) consciousness, which they pass off as the realm of truly cultural existence and human development. From this point of view, K. appears as an area of ​​"spiritual freedom" of a person, lying outside of his natural and social existence, independent of his empirical goals and needs. The achievement of this freedom is the meaning of the entire cultural and historical evolution of mankind. The German philosophical and historical consciousness is characterized by the recognition of a multitude of peculiar types and forms of cultural development, located in a certain historical sequence and forming, in aggregate, a single line of the spiritual evolution of mankind. Thus, I. Herder regards K. as a progressive disclosure of the abilities of the human mind, but uses this concept to determine the stages of the relative historical development of mankind, as well as to characterize the values ​​of enlightenment. German romantics (Schiller, A. and F. Schlegel, late F. Schelling) continued Herder's line of double interpretation of K. On the one hand, they created the tradition of comparative historical studies of K. (W. Humboldt and the school of comparative linguistics), on the other - laid the foundation for the view of K. as a particular anthropological problem. The third line of concrete analysis of the customs and ethnic characteristics of K. also goes back to Herder (for the first time in the middle of the 19th century in the works of the German historian F.G. Klemm, who considers K. as a distinctive feature of a person).

In the late 19th - early 20th centuries. the universalism of the prevailing evolutionary ideas about K. was criticized from the idealistic positions of neo-Kantianism (see. Neo-Kantianism) (G. Rickert, M. Weber). In K. they began to see, first of all, a specific system of values ​​and ideas that differ in their role in the life and organization of society of one type or another. In a slightly different aspect, a similar view took shape in the “theory of cultural circles” (L. Frobenius, F. Gröbner), which was widespread until the early 1920s. 20th century (see Cultural-Historical School).

The theory of the unity of linear evolution K. was also criticized from the irrationalist positions of the philosophy of life (See Philosophy of Life) , and it was contrasted with the concept of "local civilizations" - closed and self-sufficient, unique cultural organisms going through similar stages of growth, maturation and death (O. Spengler). This concept is characterized by the opposition between capitalism and civilization, which is regarded as the last stage in the development of a given society. Similar ideas were developed in Russia by N. Ya.Danilevsky (See Danilevsky), later P. A. Sorokin , and in Great Britain - A. Toynbee. In some conceptions, the criticism of K., begun by Rousseau, was brought to its complete rejection; the idea of ​​"natural anticulturalism" of man was put forward, and any K. was interpreted as a means of his suppression and enslavement (F. Nietzsche). The degeneration of this position was fully manifested in the ideology of fascism.

From the last third of the 19th century. K.'s study also developed within the framework of anthropology (see Anthropology) and ethnography (see Ethnography). At the same time, various approaches to K. took shape. cultural anthropology, the English ethnologist E. Tylor defined C. by listing it specific elements, but without understanding their connection with the organization of society and the functions of individual cultural institutions. The American scientist F. Boas at the beginning of the 20th century. proposed a method of detailed study of customs, language and other characteristics of the life of primitive societies and their comparison, which made it possible to identify the historical conditions of their emergence. The concept of the American anthropologist A. Kroeber acquired a significant influence in non-Marxist anthropology. , has moved from the study of cultural customs to the concept of "cultural model"; the totality of such "patterns" constitutes the system K. A significant drawback of the concept of patterns is associated with Kroeber's refusal to apply the idea of ​​social determinism a . It also lacked an explanation of the reasons and motives for maintaining samples at the individual level. If the theory of "cultural patterns" subordinates the social structure of C., then in the functional theories of C., which originate from the English ethnologists and sociologists B. Malinovsky and A. Radcliffe-Brown (so-called social anthropology), the concept of social structure becomes basic. , and K. is viewed as an organic whole, analyzed according to its constituent institutions. Social anthropologists regard structure as a formal aspect of social interactions that are stable over time, and C. is defined as a system of rules for the formation of a structure in such relationships. The functions of K. consist in the mutual correlation and hierarchical ordering of the elements of the social system. The postulates of this functional theory were criticized by representatives of the structural-functional school in non-Marxist sociology (American sociologists T. Parsons , R. Merton, E. Schiele, and others), who sought to generalize the ideas about C. that have developed in cultural and social anthropology, and to solve the problem of relations between C. and society. In the structural-functional theory, the concept of K. is used to denote a system of values ​​that determines the development of forms of human behavior, and is considered as an organic part of a social system that determines the degree of its orderliness and controllability (see Structural-functional analysis). In non-Marxist cultural studies, other approaches to the study of C. are also being developed. Thus, on the basis of the tendency that has arisen within the framework of cultural anthropology to consider the role of C. in the transmission of social heritage from generation to generation, the idea of ​​the communicative properties of C. was developed. the study of the structure of C., which contributed to the introduction of the methods of semiotics, structural linguistics, mathematics, and cybernetics into cultural studies (the so-called structural anthropology - the American ethnographer and linguist E. Sapir , French ethnologist K. Levi-Strauss and others). However, structural anthropology wrongfully regards capitalism as an extremely stable construction and does not take into account the dynamics of the historical development of capitalism; it weakly traces the relationship of K. with the current state of society, there is no analysis of the role of man as the creator of K. With an attempt to solve the problem of K. - personality "connected with the emergence of a special direction of psychology K. [R. Benedict, M. Mead, M. Herskovitz (USA) and others]. Based on the concept of Z. Freud a , who interpreted K. as a mechanism of social suppression and sublimation of children's psychological impulses, as well as on the concept of neo-Freudians (see Neo-Freudianism) by G. Roheim, K. Horney, H. Sullivan (USA) about the composition of K. as the content of direct mental experiences captured in signs, representatives of this trend interpreted K. as an expression of the social universality of the basic mental states inherent in man. "Cultural samples" began to be understood as real mechanisms or adaptations that help individuals to solve specific problems of social existence. In this regard, K.'s ability was highlighted to be a model of learning, in the process of which common patterns are transformed into individual skills [M. Mead, J. Murdock (USA) and others].

The idealistic teachings of the neo-Kantian E. Cassirer and the Swiss psychologist and philosopher of culture C. Jung formed the basis for the concept of symbolic properties of K. A number of representatives of K.'s psychology, relying on the concept of “local civilizations”, sought to find a set of “cultural invariants” that were not reducible to each other. friend and do not have a real common substrate. This view was reflected in the theory of linguistic relativism by E. Sapir - B. Whorf, in the studies of specific cultures by R. Benedict as separate "cultural configurations" and in the general position of cultural relativism by M. Herskovitz. On the contrary, supporters of the phenomenological approach to K., as well as some representatives of the existentialist philosophy of K., put forward the assumption of a universal content hidden in any particular K., proceeding either from the statement about the universality of the structures of consciousness (E. Husserl , Germany), either from the postulate of the psychobiological unity of mankind (C. Jung), or from the belief in the presence of some kind of "fundamental basis", "axial primordiality" of K., in relation to which all its varieties are only "particulars" or "codes" (German philosophers M. Heidegger and K. Jaspers).

In modern conditions of accelerated scientific and technological progress and the exacerbation of social contradictions in capitalist society, the coexistence of two social systems and the appearance on the historical arena of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America many bourgeois sociologists and culturologists come to the conclusion that it is impossible to consistently carry out the idea of ​​a single K. This finds expression in the theories of polycentrism, the primordial opposition of West and East, etc., which deny general patterns social development. They are opposed by vulgar technological theories, which regard the developed capitalist countries as having reached the highest level of K.

The gap between humanitarian and technical knowledge was reflected in the theory of "two K." English writer Ch. Snow. With the growth of alienation, individuals in capitalist society revived different shapes cultural nihilism, whose representatives deny the concept of K. as a fictitious and absurd invention. Popular in the circles of the radical intelligentsia and youth were the theories of "counterculture" opposed to the ruling bourgeois C.

Marxist-Leninist theory of K. The Marxist theory of K., opposed to bourgeois concepts, is based on the fundamental principles of historical materialism about socio-economic formations as successive stages of the historical development of society, about the relationship between productive forces and production relations, the basis and superstructure, and the class character of capitalism in antagonistic society. K. is a specific characteristic of society and expresses the level of historical development achieved by mankind, determined by the relationship of man to nature and to society. K. is thus an expression of a specifically human unity with nature and society, a characteristic of the development of the creative forces and abilities of the individual. K. includes not only the objective results of human activity (machines, technical structures, the results of cognition, works of art, norms of law and morality, etc.), but also subjective human forces and abilities realized in activity (knowledge and skills, production and professional skills, the level of intellectual, aesthetic and moral development, worldview, methods and forms of mutual communication of people within the team and society).

It is customary to divide capitalism into material and spiritual, according to the two main types of production - material and spiritual. Material capitalism encompasses the entire sphere of material activity and its results (tools of labor, dwellings, everyday objects, clothing, means of transport and communication, etc.). Spiritual K. encompasses the sphere of consciousness, spiritual production (knowledge, morality, education, and enlightenment, including law, philosophy, ethics, aesthetics, science, art, literature, mythology, and religion). The Marxist theory of capitalism proceeds from the organic unity of material and spiritual capitalism "... In order to be cultured," wrote V. I. Lenin, "a certain development of the material means of production is needed, a certain material base is needed" (Poln. Sobr. cit., 5th ed., vol. 45, p. 377). In this case, the material foundations of capitalism ultimately play a decisive role in the development of capitalism. It is the historical continuity in the development of material capitalism that forms the basis of continuity in the development of capitalism as a whole. Lenin emphasized that "... whatever the destruction of culture, it cannot be deleted from historical life ... In one part or another, in one or another of its material remnants, this culture is unavoidable, difficulties will only be in its renewal" ( ibid, v. 36, p. 46).

Each socio-economic formation has its own type of capitalism as a historical integrity. In connection with the change in socio-economic formations, a change in the types of capitalism occurs, but this does not mean a break in the development of capitalism, the destruction of the old capitalism, rejection of the cultural heritage and traditions, because each new formation necessarily inherits the cultural achievements of the previous one, including them in new system public relations... At the same time, the Marxist theory of C., proceeding from the variety of forms of C. of various peoples and societies, resolutely opposes the absolutization of any C., rejects not only the theory of cultural diffusionism but , but also cultural relativism , dividing the world into a multitude of initially isolated, deprived of close relationships K.

K. is a universal and class phenomenon. "A class that has at its disposal the means of material production, at the same time also has the means of spiritual production, and because of this, the thoughts of those who do not have the means for spiritual production find themselves in general subordinate to the ruling class" (K. Marx and F. Engels. , Works, 2nd ed., Vol. 3, p. 46). Antagonistic formations are characterized by the spontaneity and unevenness of the cultural and historical process, the strengthening of the cultural differentiation of society. The capitalism of the ruling class pushes into the background the spiritual activity of the masses, but it is precisely this activity that determines the objective universal human content of many of the most important achievements of each nation. K. As the class struggle intensifies, and as the class struggle becomes more and more involved in the active social life of the hitherto passive classes alienated from the higher values ​​of the K. social groups and the associated democratization of the mechanism of production and distribution of cultural goods is increasingly revealing the illusory nature of what is proclaimed by the ruling classes, the so-called. "Cultural unity" of society. The process of cultural polarization, which begins in the early stages of class society, is especially intensified in the era of modern capitalism, in which the contradictions of social and cultural development become especially acute. The ruling classes strive to impose on the masses a primitive - "mass culture" (see Mass culture). At the same time, along with the capitalism of the ruling class under capitalism, the new capitalism begins to emerge more and more confidently in the form of democratic and socialist elements, "... for in every nation there is a working and exploited mass, whose living conditions inevitably give rise to a democratic and socialist ideology." (Lenin V.I., Complete collection of works, 5th ed., Vol. 24, pp. 120-21). In Lenin's doctrine of the two capitalism, antagonistic formations in each national capitalism emphasize the need to distinguish between the progressive democratic and socialist elements of capitalism, which are fighting the dominant exploitative capitalism.

The victory of the socialist revolution marks a radical revolution in the development of society and its capitalism. In the course of the socialist cultural revolution (see Cultural Revolution), socialist capitalism is created and established, inheriting everything that is valuable in capitalism, created at the previous stages of society's development, and signifying a qualitatively new stage in society. cultural development of mankind. The main features of socialist spiritual capitalism, determined by the new forms of social relations and the dominance of the Marxist-Leninist worldview, are Narodnost ' , communist Ideology and Party system , Socialist Collectivism and Humanism , organic combination Internationalism a and socialist patriotism a. For the first time in history, the development of socialist capitalism under the leadership of the Communist Party acquires a deliberately planned character and is determined by each historical stage, on the one hand, the achieved level of capitalism and material productive forces, and on the other, the socialist and communist ideal.

The most important goal of socialist capitalism is the formation of a new person, the transformation of the scientific Marxist-Leninist world outlook into a conscious conviction of each member of society, the upbringing of high moral qualities in it, and its enrichment. the spiritual world... Acting as a mechanism for the transmission of progressive values ​​and traditions accumulated by society, socialist capitalism is also called upon to provide the maximum opportunity for creativity that meets urgent social needs and for the growth of the spiritual and material wealth of society and of each person. The main criterion of cultural progress in socialist society is determined by the extent to which the historical activity of the masses, their practical activity in their goals and means, becomes creative activity based on the achievements of material and spiritual culture.

The experience of the USSR as a multinational socialist state is a shining example of the development of socialist capitalism in the conditions of interaction between national capitalism. At the same time, any Soviet national capitalism not only relies on its own cultural heritage, but also enriches itself at the expense of the achievements of capitalism of other peoples. The ever-increasing process of interaction between the nations of socialist capitalism leads to the growth of common international features in each national capitalist society, socialist in content, in the main direction of development, diverse in its national forms, and internationalist in spirit and character, Soviet capitalism. is an organic alloy of spiritual values ​​created by all the peoples of the USSR. The growing rapprochement of national K. is a progressive objective process. The Communist Party opposes both its artificial forcing and against any attempts to delay it, to consolidate the isolation of national capitalism. Socialist capitalism is a prototype of the world spiritual capitalism of communist society, which will be of a universal human nature. "The culture of communism, absorbing and developing all the best that has been created by world culture, will be a new, higher stage in the cultural development of mankind" (Programma KPSS, 1972, p. 130).

Lit .: K. Marx and F. Engels, German Ideology. Works, 2nd ed., Vol. 3; Marks K., Capital, ch. 1, ibid., V. 23; his, To the criticism of political economy. Foreword, ibid., V. 13; Engels F., Anti-Dühring, ibid., V. 20; his, The role of labor in the process of turning a monkey into a man, ibid; his, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, ibid., v. 21; Lenin V.I., What inheritance do we refuse ?, Poln. collection cit., 5th ed., vol. 2; his, Party organization and party literature, ibid, v. 12; him, in Memory of Herzen, ibid., v. 21; his, On proletarian culture, ibid., v. 41; Program of the CPSU (Adopted by the XXII Congress of the CPSU), Moscow, 1972; Materials of the XXIV Congress of the CPSU, Moscow, 1971; Brezhnev LI, On the fiftieth anniversary of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, M., 1972; Lunacharsky A.V., Cultural tasks of the working class. Human and class culture. Sobr. cit., t. 7, M., 1967; Krupskaya N.K., Lenin's installations in the field of culture, M., 1934; Kim M. P., Communism and culture, M., 1961; Agosty E.P., Nation and Culture, trans. with isp., M., 1963; P. P. Gaidenko, Existentialism and the problem of culture, M., 1963; Communism and culture, M., 1966; Artanovsky SN, Historical unity of mankind and mutual influence of cultures, L., 1967; Kovalev S. M., Socialism and cultural heritage, M., 1967; Lotman Yu. M., On the problem of the typology of culture, in the book: Works on sign systems, Tartu, 1967; Ornatskaya LA, On the origin and formation of the concept of "culture", in the collection: Problems of Philosophy and Sociology, L., 1968; Zlobin NS, Socialist state and culture, M., 1968; Mezhuev VM, On the concept of "culture", M., 1968; Semenov VS, Intelligentsia and the Development of Socialist Culture, M., 1968; Baller E. A., Continuity in the development of culture, M., 1969; E. S. Markaryan, Essays on the Theory of Culture, Yerevan, 1969; M. Lifshitz, Karl Marx. Art and social ideal, M., 1972; Ideological struggle and modern culture, M., 1972; Party and socialist culture, M., 1972; Arnoldov AI, Culture and modernity, M., 1973; Taylor E., Primitive culture, trans. from English, M., 1939; Klemm G., Allgemeine Cultur-Geschichte der Menschheit, Bd 1-10, Lpz., 1843-52; Benedict R., Patterns oJ culture, Boston - N. Y.; General anthropology, ed. F. Boas, Boston; Herskovits M. J., Man and his works, N. Y. 1948; White L. A., The science of culture, N. Y., 1949; Kroeber A. L., KIuckhohn C., Culture. A critical review of concepts and definitions, Camb. (Mass.) 1952; Kroeber A. L., The nature of culture. Chi.,; Snow C. P., The two cultures and the scientific revolution, Camb. 1959; Malinowski B., A scientific theory of culture and other essays, N. Y., 1960; Mead M., Continuities in cultural evolution. New Haven. 1965.

In various areas of human life, he studies many sciences - history, ethnography, archeology, sociology, ethics, aesthetics, religious studies.

Each of them gives its own image of culture. Philosophical analysis of culture allows you to get an idea of ​​this multifaceted phenomenon in the most holistic and generalized form.

But no matter how diverse the definitions of culture are, they all agree on one thing: the term "" emphasizes human existence, not biological existence. The world of culture is not a consequence of the action of natural forces, but the result of the efforts of the people themselves, aimed at improving their being.

Therefore, we can define the concept of culture as historically certain level development of society, creative forces and abilities of a person, expressed in the types and forms of organization of life and activities of people, as well as in the material and spiritual values ​​they create.

Culture is the result of the combined activities of people and the process of preserving, producing, distributing and consuming what is created. Man and culture mutually develop each other. Culture is impossible without a person, he is the creator or subject of culture. But man, by nature, is given only an organism that possesses certain inclinations. And only under the influence of culture (mastering the language, familiarizing with the values ​​existing in society, mastering labor skills) do human, personal qualities manifest themselves and a creative subject arises.

A person is not born a social being, but becomes such in the process of activity. Education and upbringing is nothing more than the mastery of culture, the process of its transmission from one generation to another.

The process of personality socialization is accompanied by the process of its individualization. Culture here appears as a complex system that absorbs all the contradictions of society. These contradictions were the reason for the formation of a pessimistic view of culture among a number of philosophers. He was the first to formulate such a point of view back in the 18th century. J.-J. Rousseau, who believed that culture was created to suppress and enslave humans. Private property makes people unequal, and, therefore, unhappy, generates envy, anger and competition, and the best inclinations of a person are suppressed by society.

Later formed the concept of counterculture, the founder and inspirer of which is F. Nietzsche... He denies the need for a single value system in society. A person is free to choose any values ​​for himself, without agreeing with the opinion of society and other people. Nietzsche's aphorisms are deliberately mutually exclusive in meaning, thereby showing that opposite truths can be justified and equally have the right to exist. The superman is able to drop cultural prohibitions, everything that prevents him from living, he creates a law for himself. In Russian literature, Turgenev's Bazarov is a striking representative of the counterculture, who denies all social traditions and norms. Bazarov is sometimes accused of calling for abandoning the old world without offering anything in return. But for representatives of the counterculture, it is precisely the desire to destroy any system of values ​​that is characteristic, and it would be illogical to impose another instead.

Positions of Nietzschean philosophy on the problems of culture, society and man were developed in the works of German and French existentialists. Thus, M. Heidegger opposed the dictatorship of the facelessness of modern bourgeois society, against the subordination of man to things. J.-P. Sartre denies any possibility of social progress, emphasizing that this does not change the person himself, forced only to adapt to circumstances. A person must choose his own actions, focusing on his own inner world. A. Camus wrote that there are no moral rules and laws in the world, the world is absurd and chaotic. Therefore, a person needs to accept life as a game and live it, playing by his own rules.

The philosophy of psychoanalysis also develops the problem of the influence of culture on a person. Z. Freud emphasized that a person in the conditions of Western culture has an unstable psyche, suffers from neuroses that arise under the influence of contradictions between their own desires and the needs of the individual and the norms and prohibitions of culture that prescribe certain behavior. One of Freud's followers E. Fromm draws attention to the fact that modern man always faces a choice: to have or to be? A person either reveals his inner dignity, or turns into a particle of market relations, and then the content of his life becomes the possession of things and money - these inauthentic attributes of being. The main human need - to be oneself - is suppressed by bourgeois civilization.

Critics of modern culture are also the philosophers of the Frankfurt School (the most prominent representative of G. Marcuse), who propose to start the struggle for freedom from universal denial. In practice, according to Marcuse, these ideas can be implemented by people on the sidelines of society, not integrated into the system of social relations - and declassed elements. The concept of universal denial was in the 60-70s. widely adopted by the youth of the West, which forced the governments of a number of countries to create ministries for youth affairs, ensuring the conflict-free adaptation of young people to the existing cultural environment.

A purely positive assessment of modern culture was given only by representatives of the technical intelligentsia, linking the problems of culture with successes in the field of material and technical support of mankind (such views are expressed by W. Rostow, D. Bell, R. Aron). However, the twentieth century. raised questions about the goals of scientific and technological progress and the limits of its growth, about nuclear and environmental threats and other global issues modernity. Material comfort does not make a person happier, and the desire for comfort, as history shows, is more a sign of the decline of society than of its prosperity. First of all, a person needs the opportunity to survive on his planet and realize himself as a person.

So what is culture? This is the way of thinking and life of the people. These are material and spiritual values ​​created by the people. It is a set of relationships between people and nature. This is the peculiarity of the life of nations and peoples in a particular period of history. At the same time, these are the best achievements of all mankind - the treasures of world culture.

Typology of culture

In modern philosophy there are many concepts of cultural typology and a number of principles for analyzing these typologies.

So, typologies of cultures can be roughly divided into three groups.

A number of thinkers, to one degree or another, deny the existence of world culture as a whole and do not recognize the existence of universal laws for the existence and development of cultures, as well as meaning in the history of not only humanity as a whole, but also in the history of individual peoples. A striking representative of this direction is K. Popper, who claims that all attempts by scientists to find certain points that unite people into one whole are untenable. "There is no single history of mankind, but there is only an infinite number of stories associated with different aspects of human life."

The German thinker M. Weber also believes that there are no patterns of cultural development, materialistic or spiritual, and no concept of cultural development is therefore unable to predict the future.

That is, in this case we are talking about philosophical concepts that deny the very possibility of creating a typology of cultures.

Civilizational approach to the typology of cultures. The essence of the concept in its most general form is that human history is a set of civilizations that are not related to each other. At the same time, the laws governing the development of these civilizations exist. Representatives of such concepts deny the meaning of universal history.

Thus, O. Spengler argued that culture is a closed system of values ​​and the mutual influence of cultures affects them negatively... There is as much sense and progress in the existence of man and culture as there is in the life of a butterfly.

Spengler identified eight cultures: Egyptian, Indian, Babylonian, Chinese, Greco-Roman (Apollo), Byzantine-Arab (magical), Western European (Faustian) and Mayan culture. Spengler celebrated the birth of Russian-Siberian culture. Each culture, having completed its life cycle, dies, passing to the stage of civilization.

A. Toynbee substantiated the concept of human development as a cycle of local civilizations. Toynbee first identified 21 separate, closed civilizations, then reduced this number to 13. All civilizations, according to Toynbee, are equivalent and go through the same stages of development - emergence, growth, breakdown and decay. The universe is constantly asking questions of civilization, and as long as it is able to answer these questions, it exists. These issues today, undoubtedly, include the problem of preserving life on our planet. Civilizations are dying in agony, wars and revolutions, which cause a lot of concern to other peoples. In the twentieth century, Toynbee believes, only five major civilizations survived - Chinese, Indian, Islamic, Russian and Western.

Monistic concepts prove that the history of culture is a single natural process in which both the meaning of history and the material and spiritual progress of all mankind take place.

For example, Hegel substantiated the concept of the development of culture as a natural process in which the culture of each nation and the stages of its development represent a natural step in the improvement of the human spirit. The history of culture, being the embodiment of the world spirit, develops in time, pursuing a specific goal at each stage of its development. The general goal is the development of freedom of spirit, in relation to a person and society - this is the freedom of a person in a civil society.

The monistic concept of cultural development is defended, already from a materialist standpoint, by Marxism, which studies the most general laws of the development of human society. The subject of historical materialism is universal laws and driving forces societies viewed as holistic, contradictory and interdependent. Marxism calls for knowing the laws of development and using the knowledge gained for the benefit of humanity.

K. Jaspers is the creator of the original concept of "axial time", which covered the period from 800 to 200 years. BC. The culture of this time spiritually changed a person.

Jaspers divided cultures into three types:

The culture of the "axial peoples"... This culture, as it were, was born a second time in the axial time, continuing its previous history. It was she who laid the foundation for the spiritual essence of man and his true history. Jaspers attributed to it the Chinese, Indian, Iranian, Jewish and Greek cultures.

Cultures not affected by the axial time and those who remained internally alien to him, despite their simultaneity with him. Jaspers attributed to them the Egyptian and Babylonian cultures, which, despite their enormous successes, could not be reborn and later became victims of external forces.

Culture of this type divides peoples into those, the basis of the formation of which was the world that arose as a result of the axial time (Macedonians and Romans) and subsequent peoples and those who remained on the sidelines of development, that is, primitive peoples.

Hegel identified three historical types of culture as three phases of the development of the absolute spirit: eastern, Greco-Roman and Germanic(European) culture. The goal of history, according to Hegel, is the development of freedom. Therefore, the criterion of cultures is the principle of awareness of freedom. “The East knew and still knows that only one is free; the Greek and Roman world knew that some were free; the German world knows that everyone is free. "

Nietzsche also distinguished three types of culture: Brahmic (Indian), Hellenic and Christian. The latter, in which we live, gave rise, according to Nietzsche, a slave psychology, obedience, fear of struggle and change, doctrinaire morality, sluggishness, general dullness, the psychology of the "crowd". Here, human originality, individuality, and independence act as a criterion for the typology of cultures.

Philosophical culture

Philosophical culture represents the ability to assimilate philosophical knowledge and familiarize yourself with the world of philosophical knowledge, mastering the experience of philosophical understanding of reality, acquiring the skills and abilities of philosophical expression, i.e. philosophical language. This sphere of culture is associated with the reflection of the relationship between man and the world, man and other people, as well as the attitude towards oneself as an object of research and exists in the form of philosophical concepts, schools, works of philosophers. The specialized level of culture is represented by the works of specialist philosophers, the ordinary level is represented by common sense and folk wisdom - by aphorisms, proverbs and sayings.

Of all spheres of culture, philosophical culture least of all needs social organizations, although there are connections between philosophers and philosophical schools operate. Often, philosophical culture depends on national specifics, which determines the traditional range of problems of philosophy and approaches to their solution. There is no direct connection between philosophy and other spheres of culture, but we can talk about its indirect influence on religion, morality, law and science.

it follows that the speed is determined by the electromechanical characteristic

It can be seen from the formula that an increase in current leads to a decrease in the rotation speed. A decrease in the rotation speed leads to a decrease in the EMF until the voltage drop across the internal resistance and EMF balances the input voltage.

Topic number 1 Introduction. Development and formation of the theory of cultural studies. Culture as a social phenomenon.

1. Science of cultural studies.

Culturology is one of the youngest sciences. The term "culture" itself, although this word has been known since ancient times, in the modern meaning familiar to us is used only with early XIX century.

The term "cultural studies" is even younger. It first appeared in the works of the American scientist Leslie White in the middle of the 20th century. With this concept, he meant a new discipline, born at the intersection of humanitarian and socio-scientific knowledge. White substantiated the need for the formation of a new science and laid down its general theoretical foundations. In his works "Science of Culture", "Evolution of Culture", "The Concept of Culture", he considers culture as an integral system of elements of the material and spiritual plans, which has the property of self-adjustment and movement forward as a person assimilates reality and the very development of the technological and energetic aspects of civilization ...

Culturology took the place of the basic discipline among other social and humanitarian sciences, received its own subjects and objects of study, laws of functioning, areas of application. The well-known scientists O. Shpendler, O. Kont, T. Sharden, P. Sorokin, Y. Lotman and others contributed to the formation of the science of culturology.

Culturology- a humanitarian science about the essence, laws of existence and development of culture, human meaning and ways of comprehending it.

Culturology has its own subjects and objects of study.

The subject of cultural studies are the objective laws of the world and national cultural process, monuments and phenomena of material and spiritual cultures, factors and prerequisites that govern the emergence, formation and development of cultural interests and needs of people, their participation in the augmentation and transmission of cultural values ​​from generation to generation.

Object of cultural studies are the cultural aspects of various aspects of the social life of people, the identification of features and achievements, the main cultural and historical types, the analysis of trends and processes occurring in the modern socio-cultural environment.

2. The concept of culture.

The concept of "Culture" is central to cultural studies.

In antiquity (Ancient Romans), the concept of "Culture" meant the cultivation of the land (its cultivation). Until now, this meaning has been preserved (cereals, etc.).

The ancient Greeks meant this as a difference from the savage barbarian tribes.

In the Middle Ages, the concept of "Culture" meant the pursuit of the divine ideal.

The enlighteners of the 16th-17th centuries had in mind the rationality of human society.

In the 18th century, the concept of "Culture" meant good breeding, adherence to ethical standards, and a certain degree of education.

In the 19th century, 4 basic understandings of the word "Culture" were established;

1) the level of the general state of mind;

2) the level of intellectual development of the whole society;

3) the totality of artistic and creative activities;

4) the way of life of the material and spiritual plane.

Culture- a historically determined level of development of society, creative forces and abilities of a person, expressed in the types and forms of organization of life and activities of people, in their relationships, as well as in the material and spiritual values ​​created by them.

Culture is created by a person, being a subject of nature, and at the same time, culture affects a person through norms, rules, laws, and a person is an object of cultural influence. This happens through the laws of cultural succession and inheritance.

3. Functions of culture.

Culture is a multifunctional system:

1) the development and transformation of the surrounding world is one of the main functions;

2) cognitive;

3) storage and transfer of human experience, knowledge, culture, information;

4) educational;

5) educational;

6) communicative (communication);

7) normative (regulatory);

8) psychological relaxation.

4. The structure of culture.

The structural units of culture are material and spiritual cultures.

Material culture- subject-object human activity aimed at satisfying his needs, i.e. "Man in things".

Material culture includes buildings, structures, transport, communications, animal species, plant varieties, human reproduction, production processes, tools and means of labor, money, physical education (sports), ecology, etc.

Spiritual culture- the emotional and sensory side of human activity.

Forms of spiritual culture:

1) One of the earliest - myth- a special system of worldview, giving an explanation of the surrounding world through nature, its deification and endowing it with supernatural power.

During the transition from form 1 to form 2 (within 30,000 years), there are:

Totemism- worship of the animal world.

Fetishism- worship of inanimate nature.

Animism- the spiritualization of animate and inanimate nature.

Paganism- polytheism.

2) Religion- a special worldview system that explains the world around us through God and endowing it with supernatural power.

3) Philosophy(about VI BC) - the science of the universal laws of development and movement of nature, society and thinking.

4) The science - a system of knowledge about the laws of formation, formation, development of nature, society, man.

5) Art - human activity according to the laws of beauty and harmony.

6) Morality - human activity, which is governed by the rules and norms adopted in societies.

5. Mass and elite culture.

Mass (public) culture- designed for a wide range of consumers. The genres of mass culture include melodramas, action films, styles of unscientific fiction, entertainment shows, hits, varieties of light genres of music, and the yellow press. It should have an easy plot, the action should take place in an exotic location.

Elite culture- culture for the elite and created by the elite themselves: ballet, opera, theatrical genre, symphonic and classical music, painting.

The concept of "culture" Culture is a historically defined level of development of society, creative forces and abilities of a person, expressed in the types and forms of life and activities of people, in their relationships, as well as in the material and spiritual values ​​they create. 2. Culture - cultivation, upbringing, education, development, reverence - a historically determined level of development of society, expressed in the types and forms of organization of life and activities of people, as well as the material and spiritual values ​​they create.

Approaches to Understanding Culture Technological. Culture is the totality of all achievements in the development of the material and spiritual life of society. Active. Culture is a creative activity carried out in the spheres of material and spiritual life of society. Valuable. Culture is the practical realization of universal human values ​​in the affairs and relations of people.

Types of culture: World and national. Material - associated with the production and development of m objects and phenomena of the material world, with a change in the physical nature of man. Spiritual - a set of spiritual values ​​and creative activity for their production, development and application.

Spiritual culture - higher form social reflection of human life Reveals sense-forming ideas. Promotes self-knowledge. Helps to assert itself. Forms value orientations. Satisfies the need for self-awareness. Leads to self-realization.

Assignment What features of culture does the author highlight? Give any three arguments by which the author proves that culture is inherent only to man. Prove with the help of three examples illustrating the continuity in the development of culture, the validity of the statement “culture is not born from scratch” A number of scientists consider culture as a link between nature and society. Give three reasons to support this opinion.