The concept of socio-cultural transformation. Sociocultural transformations: types, models, boundaries

Author(s) of the article: Tarasov Aleksey Nikolaevich, Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Philosophy, Lipetsk State Pedagogical University
Chapter: Theoretical cultural studies
Keywords:

sociocultural transformation, worldview, late Hellenism, Renaissance, avant-garde, postmodern, crisis of culture.

Worldview is a system of generalized knowledge about the world as a whole, about a person's place in it, about his attitude to the world. The task is to trace how the processes of cardinal changes in society, referred to by the term "sociocultural transformation", affect this system of views. The paper analyzes four periods of sociocultural transformations in the continuum of European culture: late Hellenism, Renaissance, avant-garde and postmodern. It is concluded that not only the worldview of a particular person is subject to change, but also the "collective social" worldview prepares the processes of sociocultural transformations.

Article text:

There are a significant number of definitions of the term "worldview". In our opinion, the latter should be understood as an integral system of a person's views on the world (i.e., on nature, society and thinking), which have a significant impact on the value orientation and human activity.

Worldview acts as a spiritual and practical phenomenon and is a fusion of knowledge, behavioral attitudes, values ​​and beliefs. This is a question about a person's attitude to the world, about his place and purpose in this world, solving problems about the status of a person in objective reality, his determination and possibilities. Based on the solution of these issues, a person develops a life attitude, which is guided in practical activities.

Worldview is a fundamental element of any cultural system. A worldview can be everyday-practical and theoretical, everyday and scientific, individual and social. The main historical types of worldview include: mythological, religious, philosophical.

Worldview has two sides: attitude (psycho-emotional basis of the worldview) and worldview (intellectual basis). We can say that the worldview is a complex, tense, contradictory unity of worldview and attitude, knowledge and values, intelligence and emotions, reasonable justification and faith, beliefs and doubts, socially significant and personal, traditional and creative thinking.

During periods of crisis in the development of culture, both the worldview of an individual and the "collective social" worldview, often defined as mentality, undergo significant changes. The scale of such changes increases many times during periods of sociocultural transformations, i.e. during transitional periods from one culture system to another. In the continuum of European culture, in our opinion, four sociocultural transformations can be defined: late Hellenism - as a transition from ancient to medieval culture, Renaissance - as a transition from medieval to modern European culture, avant-garde - from new European to modern, and on present stage transformation, a reflection of these socio-cultural processes has become postmodern - the transition from modern to post-modern cultural system. Each of these transitional periods reflects the qualitative changes taking place in the field of science, religion, art and philosophy, the replacement of one culture-system with another. At the same time, transformational processes take place, often leading to a replacement for characteristics of the opposite order by those that were in the previous culture system. The transition to such periods is prepared by the socio-economic conditions for the development of a particular region, and the socio-cultural transformation itself is always based on a philosophical and theoretical basis, a vivid reflection of which is, for example, postmodern as a modern socio-cultural transformation. At the same time, as a rule, it is art, due to its specificity - the artistic image, that is the first of all spheres of culture to reflect the essence of the ongoing changes, which the thinkers of the past paid attention to. Sociocultural transformation in this respect leads to changes in the systemic order, opening the way for a new cultural system, and the worldview is no exception.

Worldview is formed under the influence of many factors. However, the specific historical conditions in which a particular person lives play a fundamental role in its formation. Undoubtedly, the progressive, dynamic development of society along the path of creation forms an anthropogenic worldview with a stable positive ideal. On the contrary, the movement of society along a destructive path overthrows the formation of a worldview in the direction of anthropogenic culture.

The dynamics of culture, namely the specificity of a particular period of its development, also affects the worldview. As is known, the process of culture dynamics can be represented as a successive change of cardinal changes with the formation of new axiological landmarks and the systematic progressive development of established norms and values. The latter just form the essence of the culture-system, in the sense that they can be used to identify the characteristic features that distinguish one period from another, for example, the ancient culture-system from the medieval one, etc. In the worldview, both individual and collective, all these characteristics are directly embodied. Thus, considering the specifics of the medieval culture-system, we note that its distinctive feature is theocentrism, the idea that God acts as a source of higher knowledge, the primary cause and essence of being, and everything has value insofar as it correlates with God. Therefore, the worldview of a typical representative of medieval culture will be essentially theocentric, i.e. all phenomena of being will be evaluated from the standpoint of the yardstick, which is God. Another example is the new European culture system. At this stage, the worldview setting is defined as anthropocentrism, i.e. Man is the highest value, the source of knowledge. A person’s awareness of himself as a higher power had grandiose consequences in the field of science, art, and even religion (an example of which in the continuum of European culture was the emergence of Protestantism, when a person can communicate directly with God “without an intermediary”).

So, in periods of systemic progressive development of culture, the worldview reflects and develops established norms and values ​​without significantly changing them.

A different situation is observed in periods of crisis and periods of socio-cultural transformations. Such periods seem to be naturally necessary in the dynamics of culture, they are necessary at least for the cultural paradigm to push off from past norms and values ​​and reach new frontiers of anthropogenic cultural orientation. In transitional eras, the old norms and values ​​are overthrown, while the new ones have not yet been established. It is at such moments that a paradigm shift in worldview begins.

Depending on the scale of changes, worldview attitudes are revised in different ways. The crisis of culture marks a change of a structural nature, and a socio-cultural transformation of a systemic one, in the sense that the entire ideological paradigm of society is changing.

The reasons for such changes can be various factors, both internal and external. However, as an analysis of the history of European culture shows, these causes act in combination.

The transition from ancient to medieval culture was prepared by the course of historical development - the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 marked the end of antiquity. At the same time, historical sources of the late Hellenistic period show that what was happening caused misunderstanding among typical representatives of the ancient world. In this regard, many tried to find support in religion, so the emerging Christianity took a general position in the worldview of the transitional period and finally established itself in the medieval cultural system.

The transition from a theocentric to an anthropocentric worldview during the Renaissance was accompanied by a transformation of value attitudes, norms and ideals. This was caused, first of all, by the fall of the authority of the Catholic Church, as a result, the former religious ideology was overthrown, it was replaced by humanism. To a certain extent, this can be considered as a cardinal change in the worldview paradigm, perhaps even a replacement of the opposite nature, because if before God acted as the basis of being, and man obeyed him, now man is understood as an effective force that transforms this world.

Changes in the worldview at the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries, caused by the III socio-cultural transformation, represented by the culture of the avant-garde, reflected all spheres of culture. Thus, for the first time in science, the phenomenon of radioactivity was noticed, which for a long time could not be explained, which gave grounds to some physicists to declare that “matter disappeared.” From the position of modern scientific knowledge, we understand that such a statement is erroneous - the sum of knowledge itself at that time was not able to explain the discoveries noticed. So, the scientific worldview of the turn of the century underwent a transformation, a cardinal change of views.

Something similar is observed in art. There is a transformation in the understanding of the essence of art. If previously the classical, realistic line dominated, according to which art is a reflection of reality in the form of an artistic image in order to convey socially significant experience, now, as a result of sociocultural transformation, abstraction comes, which has become established and has become the basis of modernist trends.

Worldview orientations have undergone a change in philosophy as well. In fact, until Ser. 19th century philosophy saw its goal in knowing the essence of being rational methods. Appeared on the second floor. 19th century irrationalism began to subject this attitude to deposition.

So, on the example of the III socio-cultural transformation, represented by the culture of the avant-garde, there is a clear trend towards the transformation of the worldview. Similar processes of mutual influence of socio-cultural transformation and worldview in each specific period have always manifested themselves. At the present stage, the ongoing systemic changes are reflected through the culture of postmodernity.

Thus, the worldview, representing a system of views on the world, is always determined by the specific historical conditions of its development. It is constantly in dynamics, although the latter is uneven. In periods of progressive development, the worldview appears as an established system of norms and values. During periods of cardinal changes (sociocultural transformations), the worldview is influenced by external factors and transforms itself, often acquiring characteristics of the opposite order, compared with the previous culture system.

Literature:

1. Tarasov A.N. Determination of the culture of late Hellenism as a socio-cultural transformation: a philosophical analysis // In the world of scientific discoveries. Krasnoyarsk: Scientific and Innovation Center, 2013. No. 1.3 (37) (Humanities and social sciences). pp. 276-293.
2. Tarasov A.N. Categorical-conceptual apparatus of analytics of socio-cultural transformation // Historical, philosophical, political and legal sciences, cultural studies and art history. Questions of theory and practice. Tambov, 2012. Issue. No. 1 (15). Part 1. S. 189-191.
3. Tarasov A.N. The concept of "culture-system" in the aspect of analytics of socio-cultural transformations in the continuum of European culture // Fundamental research. 2013. No. 4 (part 1). pp. 190-193.
4. Tarasov A.N. Futurist Manifestos as a Cultural-Philosophical Basis for the III Socio-Cultural Transformation in the Continuum of European Culture // Contemporary Issues science and education. 2013. No. 1; [Electronic resource] URL: www.science-education.ru/107-8330 (date of access: 01.11.2013).
5. Tarasov A.N. Mass culture as one of the origins of the postmodern type of artistic culture // Man and the Universe. St. Petersburg, 2007. No. 8. S. 98-107.
6. Tarasov A.N. ON THE. Berdyaev on the role of art in reflecting the process of socio-cultural transformation // Modern problems of science and education. 2011. No. 6; [Electronic resource] URL: www.science-education.ru/100-5171. (date of access: 01.11.2013).
7. Tarasov A.N. Periods of socio-cultural transformations in the continuum of European culture // Historical, philosophical, political and legal sciences, cultural studies and art history. Questions of theory and practice. Tambov, 2012. Issue. No. 10 (25). Part 1. S. 185-192.
8. Tarasov A.N. Pluralism as a Characteristic of Sociocultural Transformations in the Continuum of European Culture: Philosophical Analysis // Almanac of Modern Science and Education. 2013. No. 9. P. 173-175.
9. Tarasov A.N. Poststructuralism as a philosophical basis for the postmodern type of artistic culture // Izvestiya of the Russian State Pedagogical University. A.I. Herzen. St. Petersburg, 2008. No. 74-1. pp. 478-483.
10. Tarasov A.N. Russian religious philosophy vt. floor. XIX - early. XX centuries about the culture of the avant-garde as a manifestation of socio-cultural transformation // European Social Science Journal. Moscow, 2011. Issue. No. 11 (14). pp. 35-43.
11. Tarasov A.N. Synergetic approach to the analysis of socio-cultural transformations in the continuum of European culture // Fundamental research. 2013. No. 6 (part 1). pp. 212-215.
12. Tarasov A.N. The essence of the concept "sociocultural transformation" // Historical, philosophical, political and legal sciences, cultural studies and art history. Questions of theory and practice. Tambov, 2011. Issue. No. 7 (13). Part II. pp. 211-213.
13. Tarasov A.N. Theoretical and methodological aspects of the analytics of socio-cultural transformation // Historical, philosophical, political and legal sciences, cultural studies and art history. Questions of theory and practice. Tambov, 2011. Issue. No. 8 (14). Part II. pp. 204-206.
14. Tarasov A.N. The theory of deconstruction as a philosophical and theoretical basis for the aesthetics of postmodernism // Philosophy and Society. Moscow, 2009. No. 1 (53). pp. 174-187.
15. Tarasov A.N. Phenomenon of "beautiful" in the artistic culture of postmodernism: cultural analysis: author. diss. … cand. philosophy Sciences. Tambov, 2010. 23 p.
16. Tarasov A.N. Phenomenon of "beautiful" in the artistic culture of postmodernism: cultural analysis: diss. … cand. philosophy Sciences. Lipetsk, 2010. 160 p.
17. Tarasov A.N. Philosophical origins of the artistic culture of postmodernism: post-Freudianism // Bulletin of the Tambov University. Ser. Humanitarian sciences. Tambov, 2007. Issue. 12 (56). pp. 59-63.
18. Tarasov A.N. Philosophical analysis of the development of religion in the continuum of European culture during periods of socio-cultural transformation // Modern problems of science and education. 2012. No. 5; [Electronic resource] URL: http://www.science-education.ru/105-6939. (date of access: 01.11.2013).
19. Tarasov A.N. Economic culture of society in the context of modern socio-cultural transformation of the Euro-Atlantic civilization: a philosophical aspect // Fundamental research. 2012. No. 9 (part 1). pp. 182-185.
20. Tarasov A.N. Analysis of development of science in the continuum of European culture during periods of social and cultural transformations: the philosophical aspect // Applied and Fundamental Studies: Proceedings of the 1st International Academic Conference. Vol. 2. October 27-28, 2012, St. Louis, USA. Publishing House "Science & InnovationCenter", 2012. P. 303-308.
21. Tarasov A.N. Philosophical knowledge in the context of socio-cultural transformation (on the example of Hellenism) // Analytics of Culturology. - Tambov. 2012. No. 22. P. 166-169. /[ Electronic journal] URL: /journal/archive/item/799-9.html . State number reg. 0421200022/0009.
22. Tarasov A.N. Influence of socio-cultural transformation on changing the essential boundaries of art // Analytics of Cultural Studies. - Tambov. 2011. No. 21. S. 193-197. / [Electronic Journal] URL: /journal/archive/item/756-31.html . State number reg. 0421100022/0105.
23. Tarasov A.N. Aspects of assessing the state of modern culture of the countries of the Euro-Atlantic civilization // Analytics of Culturology. Tambov. 2011. No. 21. P. 190-192. / [Journal] URL: /journal/archive/item/755-32.html . State number reg. 0420900022/0104.
24. Tarasov A.N. Aesthetic culture of society in the context of socio-cultural transformation (on the example of mannerism) // European Social Science Journal. Moscow, 2012. Issue. No. 5 (20). pp. 191-199.
25. Tarasov A.N. Sociocultural determination of the artistic culture of postmodernism // Analytics of cultural studies. Tambov. 2009. No. 15. S. 222-225. / [E-zine] URL: /component/k2/item/320-article_27.html . State number reg. 0420900022/0143.
26. Tarasov A.N. Postmodern art practices: happening, performance // Analytics of Cultural Studies. Tambov. 2009. No. 15. S. 99-101. / [E-zine] URL: /component/k2/item/361-article_49.html . State number reg. 0420900022/0134.
27. Tarasov A.N. Postmodernism in Traditional Forms of Artistic Culture: Architecture, Literature, Painting // Analytics of Cultural Studies. Tambov. 2009. No. 15. S. 226-230. / [E-zine] URL: /component/k2/item/322-article_28.html . State number reg. 0420900022/0144.
28. Tarasov A.N. Analytics of sociocultural transformation // Analytics of cultural studies. Tambov. 2012. No. 24. S. 65-73. / [E-journal] URL: /journal/new-number/item/876-9.html .
29. Tarasov A.N. Philosophical and theoretical grounds for the actualization of the concept of "sociocultural transformation" // Analytics of Culturology. Tambov. 2012. No. 23. S. 218-221. / [Electronic Journal] URL: /journal/archive/item/840-9.html .
30. Tarasov A.N. Analytics of the culture of the avant-garde as a socio-cultural transformation in the continuum of European culture: a philosophical aspect // Analytics of Culturology. Tambov. 2013. No. 25. P. 9-14. / [Electronic journal] URL: /journal/new-number/item/908.html ← PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF THE CULTURE OF LATER HELLENISM AS I SOCIO-CULTURAL TRANSFORMATION IN THE CONTINUUM OF EUROPEAN CULTURE

Today, hardly anyone will doubt that the last decades of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century have become a unique period in the history of mankind, a period of changing eras and the formation of a fundamentally new type of society. Indeed, just four decades ago, a number of futurologists (D. Bell, D. Riesman, O. Toffler, A. Touraine, etc.) began to predict the entry of the most developed countries into a qualitatively new stage of social development associated with the development of information and communication technologies. After 20-30 years, most of the events they predicted came true, and today they have significantly surpassed many forecasts.

At the same time, technological changes are accompanied by the transformation of all spheres of public life and the social nature of social relations. In fact, today we are witnessing a radical change in the sociocultural paradigm. The problem is that socio-humanitarian knowledge in this situation clearly lags behind the knowledge of natural science and technology. Today, there are a number of phenomena, for the understanding of which in modern sociological and philosophical knowledge there are neither definitions nor adequate models. Every day we come face to face with events and phenomena that destroy all the usual ideas about the social structure. The new sociocultural model that is taking shape before our eyes with each of its elements - communication and behavioral schemes, methods of acquiring, interpreting and transmitting knowledge, schemes of rationality, forms of everyday practices, the type of perception and "construction" of reality - differs sharply from the world in which we still lived a few years ago. The differences are so great that the emerging “new world” no longer fits, “does not fit” into any of the existing schemes for explaining reality. And the speed of technological and socio-cultural changes is such that new theoretical models being created lose their relevance within a few years. As a result, the emerging new society exists according to new laws, not yet fixed in theoretical concepts, which determines the relevance of research in this area.

Understanding such a situation, which is characterized by the simultaneous transformation of both the technological and social spheres of sociocultural life, is impossible through the efforts of individual sciences and requires a transdisciplinary approach. The dialogue between philosophy and the sphere of information technology is gaining the greatest relevance.

At the same time, a holistic deep understanding of modern socio-cultural reality is impossible at the level of individual phenomena and spheres of socio-cultural life - technological, communicative, everyday, etc. In all these cases, we are talking about a superstructure, a surface layer of culture, which is based on certain fundamental foundations and is determined by them. .

The current socio-cultural stage is transitional, dramatic and difficult for Russian culture. This situation in the history of Russian culture is characterized primarily by the confrontation between authoritarian and democratic principles. Each concept, moving to an initially alien soil for it, acquires a new meaning. Therefore, in Russia there can be no democracy in the Western version: our history considers an authoritarian system justified. The latter is much better suited to our socio-cultural conditions, the mentality of our citizens.

For Russian citizens now the most important task is to determine the future goal of being. Either society remains in the shadow of paternalism, and the troubled times are replaced by modernized authoritarianism, or anarchy continues to rampage. Historical experience shows that, as a rule, the first option always won. Any country should make a historical choice based on the conditions of its existence, cultural traditions, and not blindly copy alien cultural patterns.

At the moment, creative freedom and lack of freedom are in a stable and irreconcilable confrontation. The problem of choice became relevant in this situation: either to follow a dangerous path, the road of deprivation, unexpected turns, or to follow the old path. Paradoxical as it may seem, modern culture connects the incompatible. "Hand in hand" go together collectivism and individualism, anti-Western sentiments and the desire to reunite with world civilization. AT recent times many cultural figures are trying to find a way out of the crisis. This phenomenon is increasingly embracing modern domestic culture, despite spiritual freedoms, democratic reforms and publicity. Many creative people dream of state guardianship and funding. Paternalism, as a rule, guaranteed guardianship over talents. It is convenient with this ideology: society has a clear idea of ​​​​the goal and is confident in the future.

Of course, any guardianship of culture develops into its planning. First there will be social orders, and then strict control will begin. But, on the other hand, it removes any responsibility. Illusions that the state can become different are too naive and have no basis. If the state allows itself to “unscrew the nuts”, then the situation may get out of control, which in this situation may be the death of Russian statehood.

Many researchers are inclined to think that no matter how difficult the situation may be, culture will find potential in itself and survive. We remind you that culture is not a homogeneous formation, but a synthesis of subcultures: mass, elite and popular. Nothing can suppress the germs of true culture in our society. Despite the fact that the mass culture of the West has flooded the Russian market, colonization of Russia will not happen. This will only serve as a powerful impetus for the development of new potentials.

The fact is that the socio-cultural organism reacts to the invasion of alien cultural elements in the same way: the reaction of cultural rejection begins. All signs of the postmodern modern era are aimed at connecting the irreconcilable. Russian culture most likely synthesizes elements of various cultures in its body: it will not remain Americanized. The comprehension of postmodernism in the Russian version may drag on for another ten years. And under the most fantastic circumstances, we can get authoritarianism in the mildest version, and not an unsuccessful example of democracy stylized as a Western one.

It can be argued that most often the driving force of socio-cultural transformations is the element of culture, which at a given moment of time has the greatest dynamics of development. Today, such an influencing element is technology and technology, or rather, the emergence and widespread dissemination of the latest means of communication. It can be argued that three technological "breakthroughs" have defined the face of today's world:

Creation of the global Internet (as an information space),

Development of the Web 2.0 Internet resource design standard and the emergence of social networks (as a communication space and a space for universal creativity),

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1. Socio-philosophical foundations for the study of everyday life

§ 1 Everyday life as a social phenomenon and category of social philosophy

§ 2 The structure of everyday life in the interpretations of Western and Russian philosophical thought

CHAPTER 2. The world of everyday life in the reflection of everyday knowledge

§ 1 Ontology of everyday existence: socio-cultural space-time of everyday life

§ 2 Everyday experience as practical knowledge

§ 3 Transformation of everyday life in the context of informatization and globalization

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Introduction to the thesis (part of the abstract) on the topic "Transformation of the socio-cultural space of everyday life in socio-philosophical reflection"

Dissertation conclusion on the topic "Social Philosophy", Pravovskaya, Nadezhda Ivanovna

Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for review and obtained through original dissertation text recognition (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors related to the imperfection of recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.

Introduction

Chapter 1. History and logic of the formation of socio-cultural forecasting 14

1.1. Classical concepts of sociocultural dynamics 15

1.2. Marxism and the theory of post-industrial society 26

1.3. Communication models 68

Chapter 2. Socio-cultural dynamics of modernity and channels of communication 107

2.1. The value component of personality in modern society.. 108

2.2. Current characteristics of the educational paradigm 126

2.3. Structure and dynamics of the information and intellectual space 152

Conclusion 169

References 171

Introduction to work

General characteristics of the work The relevance of the research topic. The end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century is characterized by the high speed and scale of the ongoing changes. In this regard, the study of the features of transformations that provoke various kinds of social challenges is currently acquiring particular relevance.

Even in the philosophy of the Enlightenment, and later in Marxism and a number of other socio-philosophical concepts, it was assumed that understanding the history of the past would allow mankind not only to foresee, but also to create the history of the future. Society was seen as a predictable and stable system. If we follow this logic, then the development of science and technology should lead to global order and stability.

The world we live in today is becoming less and less predictable and controllable. Moreover, some of the trends that were expected to lead to a more orderly and manageable society, in particular the progress of science and technology, did not live up to these hopes. Modern culture is distinguished by complex and contradictory trends - pluralism in the assessment of norms and values, a changing scale of their assessment and correlations, mosaic, fragmentary structure, integration of existing trends, the rapid devaluation of cultural phenomena, and the refusal to follow cultural universals. The strengthening of socio-cultural diversity creates additional conditions for the manifestation of various kinds of social deviations, negative factors of cultural development. The tendencies of standardization and rationalization, reduction of axiological filters of culture transmission, intensification of national-ethnic conflicts, the threat of global ecological and terrorist catastrophes are aggravated. The saturation of society with information, events, the mobility and flexibility of sociocultural dynamics require more advanced, complex methods of regulation, streamlining the forms of collective life and their social consolidation, which is a necessary condition for positive cultural development.

Strengthening communication in the context of heterogeneity of socio-cultural transformations creates new connections. Communication processes go beyond the technological problem, as they include a wide range of socio-cultural aspects, which necessitates their adequate assessment in the framework of philosophical and cultural analysis.

Thus, the relevance of our study is based on an attempt to understand the contradiction between the main paradigm of the Enlightenment, with its belief in the universality of progress provided by the expansion of knowledge and education, a more perfect organization of society and other social achievements, and modern realities far from such universality.

The degree of development of the problem

Images of the future have always excited the developed imagination. The project or scenario approach was organically present in the works investigating the dynamics of the historical process. The Importance of Structuring Directions sociocultural development, which has been realized, albeit latently, since the times of Antiquity, is due to the urgent need of people to orient their activities in the present.

Attempts to comprehend the dynamics of social processes are present in the works of Plato and Aristotle, Roman philosophers, N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbs, J. J. Rousseau and other philosophers of the 18th century, for example, A. Smith, who, as a rule, used their theories mainly to describe political processes. In the 19th century, within the framework of positivism, O. Comte created a theory of social progress, which in its realistic character echoes the concepts of his predecessors - A.-R. J. Turgot, J.-A. de Condorcet and A. de Saint-Simon - and in many ways unites them.

Among the classical concepts that still cause controversy and give rise to new theories, it is impossible not to single out the social theory of Marxism, which absorbed many achievements of the philosophical thought of its time.

In the 60s. XX century, the synthesis of various approaches to assessing the current state of society laid the foundation for the theory of post-industrial society in its current understanding. The concept of a post-industrial society, most fully developed in the work of Daniel Bell "The Coming Post-Industrial Society", is of interest to us, first of all, by the complexity of the analysis of the emerging society, as well as by the accurate prediction of changes.

A number of researchers described a new state within the framework of postmodernism, believing that the era of modernity, the core of which was industrial development, has ceased to exist. A number of studies have been devoted to the issue of parallels between the postmodern worldview and technological innovations, among which, first of all, the work of J.-F. Lyotard "The State of Postmodernity", in which it was first announced that the culture of developed countries entered the postmodern era, and, above all, in connection with the formation of a post-industrial or information society.

The problems of modernity and the analysis of development trends within the framework of the theory of post-industrial society are dealt with by the Center for Studies of Post-Industrial Society under the direction of V.L. Inozemtseva; within the framework of the theory of the information society - the Center for the Development of the Information Society. These centers have published a number of significant works in the field of socio-cultural dynamics and the transition to a post-industrial society.

Problems related to socio-cultural communication, its creative role in the information society, are studied by a number of fundamental and applied scientific disciplines (social philosophy, sociology, cultural theory, computer science, political science, journalism theory). The problem of assessing the role and place of communication channels in modern society is brought to the center of attention by such representatives of poststructuralist and postmodern thought as J. Baudrillard, J. Deleuze, F. Guattari, U. Eco, A. Crocker, D. Cook and others. information flows and media is handled by renowned scientist Scott Lash.

The theoretical and conceptual foundation of the dissertation were the works of researchers of modern cultural studies - A.I. Arnoldov, N.G. Bagdasaryan, I.M. Bykhovskaya, S.N. Ikonnikova, M.S. Kagan, I.V. Kondakova, T.F. Kuznetsova, V.M. Mezhuev, E.A. Orlova, V.M. Rozina, A.Ya. Fliera, E.N. Shapinskaya. The problems of the dynamics of cultural processes considered in the work, their essential characteristics, the issues of modern regulation and self-regulation of culture are reflected in their works.

The evolution of sociocultural communication in society, its creative role in the processes of cultural development at different times were analyzed by scientists of various schools and areas of humanitarian thought - T. Adorno, E. Cassirer, Yu.M. Lotman, A. Moll, Yu. Habermas, L. White . The development of the problems of the specifics of socio-cultural communication and the prospects for its development from the point of view of futurology - in the studies of D. Bell, S. Breton, J. Galbraith, M. McLuhan, I. Masuda, O. Toffler, M. Castells. The principles of the functioning of the media as an important social institution for the development of culture were actively written by V.M. Berezin, Yu.P. Budantsev, E.L. Vartanova, B.A. Grushin, L.M. Zemlyanova, V.A. Ukhanov, B.M. Firsov.

The theory and practice of cultural research shows that a promising trend in the development of the system of sociocultural communication is its virtualization. Despite the innovative nature of the phenomenon, it has already been comprehended in a number of publications - D.V. Ivanova, V.A. Emelina, M.M. Kuznetsova, N.B. Mankovskaya, N.A. Nosova.

Aspects of the processes of modernization and globalization are deeply considered by modern domestic scientists V.G. Fedotova, A.I. Utkin, A.S. Panarin and others over the past years.

S. Huntington in recent works "Clash of Civilizations" and "Who are we?" highlights the key problems of modern society and formulates a forecast for the near future.

The issue of values, traditions, family is explored by the Director of the London School of Economics Anthony Giddens in the works "The Fleeing World", "Sociology", etc.

In general, thirty years separate us from the time when the understanding of impending changes as a qualitatively new stage in social progress became generally accepted among social theorists in most developed countries. The past years have only emphasized two fundamental shortcomings that were inherited even then in approaches to the analysis of trends in modern society. The first of them stems from the excessive concentration of researchers on individual economic, and sometimes even technological processes, which does not contribute to the creation of a comprehensive picture of the development of the social structure. The second drawback is related to the fact that the exaggeration of the role of such changes objectively gives rise to the illusion of the relative stability of recent trends. Assumptions, and sometimes even excessive confidence of scientists that in the coming years the social whole will not undergo radical changes, will not pass into a new quality, will not acquire a different character of development, artificially narrow the possibilities of research. In this sense, it is obvious that the sociocultural dynamics today are so unusual that the method of extrapolation does not always work. Even with regard to such a significant process as globalization, there is no certainty that it will continue in this form. For example, the American sociologist I. Wallerstein shows that unexpected obstacles may arise in the way of this process, which will change the entire trajectory. Synergetic analysis also indicates that any dynamic process can change its direction at bifurcation points.

The relevance of the topic, the degree of its scientific development, the formulated research problem determine the choice of its object, subject, goals and objectives.

The object of the study is socio-cultural transformations.

The subject of the dissertation research is the theory and trends of socio-cultural changes, presented and accumulated in modern scientific knowledge.

Goals and tasks of the work. The main purpose of the work is to identify trends and some mechanisms of sociocultural changes, as well as to trace the development of ideas about sociocultural dynamics.

To achieve the intended goal, the following tasks are set:

Carry out a typology of the concepts of socio-cultural dynamics based on their comparative analysis;

Analyze the concepts of socio-cultural dynamics, which are based on communication processes;

To give an analysis of the key components of the process of formation and transmission of social information. Methodology and research methods. When choosing a research methodology, it is fundamentally important to analyze the material accumulated in scientific knowledge in the field of structuring modernity and, on this basis, to study trends in further sociocultural development.

Each culture sets a certain vector for the transformation of all the material of a transforming society, having internal mechanisms and technologies necessary for processing raw information (or what it considers information) into cultural concepts, assessments, attitudes and actions.

The problem we are considering is at the junction of different areas of socio-humanitarian knowledge, and therefore the methodological basis of this work is a systematic, interdisciplinary, communication approach to the analysis of socio-cultural transformations. Since the work studies the processes, the direction of which is considered to be historically progressive, we inevitably rely on the methodology of evolutionism and its main basic premises. The dissertation consistently implements the general scientific principles of objectivity and concreteness. The main research methods were analysis, comparison, generalization.

When considering the issue of trends in the socio-cultural development of the value component of the personality, the dynamics of educational systems and the media, the principles of cultural analysis were applied. The object of comparative analysis was the concept of socio-cultural dynamics, formed in modern scientific knowledge. To analyze the transformation processes themselves, a systematic sociocultural approach was used, the essence of which is the understanding of society as a unity of culture and sociality, formed by human activity, as well as the synergistic principles of non-linear development.

Scientific novelty of the research.

1. Based on a comparative analysis, the study carried out a typology of the concepts of sociocultural dynamics, revealing the logic of the transition from pre-industrial societies to industrial and post-industrial ones. The peculiarity of the author's approach lies in the choice of the dominant component in the changes in society, which acquires a key role in its transformation.

2. Three types of models of sociocultural transformations have been identified: based on the political structure, economic development, and the mode of communication.

3. The thesis is argued that only concepts that see the method of communication as the determining factor in the development of society make it possible to most fully analyze the trends in the functioning of society, since the life of a modern person takes place within the framework of the intellectual and information space.

4. Three components of the process of formation and transmission of social information in modern society are identified, namely: the value space of the individual, the sphere of education and the media that accumulate social experience and occupy an important place in the system of its transmission.

5. Internal contradictions in the functioning of the studied communication channels are revealed, which are minimized within the framework of the complementarity principle. Thus, the departure from traditional values ​​is accompanied by a parallel strengthening of the desire for national identity; the media, along with the increase in coverage distance, are increasingly differentiated in accordance with the expectations of the direct consumer; the education system following social demands causes a certain resistance of conservative elements.

Provisions for defense:

1. The growing importance of informatization and communication, thanks to the achievements of science, has affected the whole world. That is why communication processes today are a key factor in socio-cultural changes. Their analysis makes it possible to achieve an understanding of the deep and currently not fully clarified trends characteristic of such key areas of modern culture as education, mass information and values.

2. The value space of modern man has undergone qualitative changes due to the tension that arises in connection with the different directions of the processes of transnational globalization and the strengthening of national identity.

3. An integrative factor in the formation of personality is education, which contributes to the growth of social capital by revealing the rational content of the body of knowledge, with the involvement of the emotional component in this process. At the same time, continuity and departure from stereotypes become an important characteristic of the education process. Thus, the formation of social capital takes place, which becomes a decisive factor in sociocultural dynamics.

4. The media are undergoing significant changes, losing temporal significance and increasing coverage distance. At the same time, they acquire an increasingly individualized character, transforming from a means into an end, into a final product.

Theoretical and practical significance of the work

The theoretical significance of the work lies in the fact that the analysis contained in it is a step towards the philosophical understanding of the social mechanisms of the dynamics of society and its current trends; in building a structural model of the socio-cultural communication system and defining it as a basic factor of cultural regulation.

Consideration of a set of issues related to the communicative aspect of transformations is also of great practical importance. The results obtained in the dissertation can be used:

For the formation of socio-cultural technologies necessary for the creation of a system for regulating the information and intellectual space;

When evaluating the effectiveness of knowledge transmission channels in modern society, organizations involved in these processes;

When reading special courses on the problems of the information society, on social forecasting and design for students of both humanitarian and technical universities.

Approbation of the obtained results.

1. The main ideas of the dissertation research are reflected in a number of speeches at Russian and international conferences, in particular, at the "Engelmeyer Readings" (Moscow-Dubna, March 2002), at the scientific seminar "Philosophy-Education-Society" (Gagra, June 2004 g.), etc.

3. Within the framework of research work under the grant "Electronic means of communication in the system of modern culture" (Competition of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation in 2003 for fundamental research in the field of the humanities, grant code G02-1.4-330).

4. In the implementation of the results of the dissertation research in the educational process, in particular in the basic course of cultural studies, read at the Department of Sociology and Cultural Studies of the Faculty of Social and Human Sciences of the Moscow State Technical University. N. E. Bauman.

5. During the discussion of the thesis at a meeting of the Department of Cultural Studies of the Moscow State Pedagogical University on November 14, 2004 (Minutes of the meeting No. 4).

Work structure

The dissertation (volume of 180 pages) consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of references (166 titles).

Classical concepts of sociocultural dynamics

One of the most fundamental features of ancient mythology was its clearly expressed ahistorical character. The ancients came to the inevitable conclusion that cyclical processes, determined by the divine will, represent the standard of any development. Progress in this case turned out to be an exception, an anomaly and could hardly be perceived as something positive.

Plato owns a number of theses that make it possible to understand the views of Greek authors on the relationship between progress and cyclicality. Stating that “the movement that takes place around some center ... as far as possible, is in all respects similar and closest to the circulation of the Mind”, the philosopher continues: “... since the soul makes the circulation of everything in us, then necessary, it must be recognized that the care of the circular movement of the sky ... belongs to the soul. Thus, the manifestation of cyclical elements in social life becomes possible as the rational principle begins to prevail in society and the state arises; directed development can take place only in that period of history where people have already been left by the care of the gods, but have not yet risen to self-organization.

The main part of the political theory of Aristotle, as well as the theory of Plato, is connected with the evolution of forms of government. Distinguishing three main types of government - monarchy, aristocracy and politics)4, Aristotle also considers derivatives of them, "perverted" forms - tyranny, oligarchy and democracy5. He describes in detail the transition from one state form to another, but neither the reasons for the change nor their general direction are analyzed. Some predetermination of the development of the forms of the state (according to him, “in general, in which direction the state system leans, the change occurs in that direction ... the watered, for example, will turn into democracy, the aristocracy - into the oligarchy”6) is limited in the concept of the philosopher by a single principle : one or another social form that existed before, one way or another will return again, because the most perfect type of movement is circular movement7.

Roman thinkers made such ideas even more strict and categorical. The last step towards the theory of absolute cyclism was made at the end of the ancient era, and the views of Lucretius, the famous Roman materialist, became its formal basis. In relation to society, Lucretius suggested that it had already reached the highest point of its development and that a decline should begin soon, marking a new cyclical turn. The idea of ​​total circulation is also supported by Tacitus, who noted that “everything that exists is characterized by a certain circular motion, and as the seasons return, so it is with morals”8.

Antique historical theories are largely conditioned by the specific religious doctrine of that time. If in such religions as Christianity or Islam, religious events unfolded against the background of human society, and moral problems became the central problems, that is, faith was initially socialized, then in ancient ideas, religion explained not so much the root cause of events as each individual element of world schematics. . As a result, nature itself turned out to be a real deity, the divine order of things was set by successively changing states, while complex and diverse social relations could not be adequately described on the basis of appropriate methodological grounds.

The fundamental principles of ancient historical concepts were: the removal of the source of development of the social organism outside of itself, the recognition of the movement, both nature and society of a cyclical nature, as well as special attention to the study of superficial forms of human community. And yet, this experience was an impressive breakthrough of the intellect into the sphere of knowledge of social life at a time when it had not yet taken developed forms.

Christian doctrine, which appeared in the middle of the eighth century and incorporated some of the radical features of the ancient tradition, contributed, however, to a radical revision of previous ideas about man and his place in the world.

The Christian theory of history is based on the fact that God is the source of the progress of society, not as an immediate cause, but as an entity with which “man relates as to some of his goals”9; such an approach denies the social structure as something closed and unchanging, contributing to the understanding of the inevitability of its evolution and development.

Created by St. Augustine's interpretation of the development of the earthly community could not but become the object of close attention. Arguing that historical time is not a vicious circle, but a ray open to the future10, because the deity himself has set a goal towards which humanity is going and will come at the end of its history, the theologian proposes a twofold periodization of the development of the earthly city. However, neither in the first nor in the second case is this periodization based on an assessment of the stages of a person's spiritual development. On the one hand, St. Augustine singles out the family, the city and the world as the most important stages of social progress,11 which seems to be an achievement in comparison with the teachings of ancient authors, to the extent that the latter term does not include the state structure, identical to the theologian's concept of "city". On the other hand, a periodization is proposed, partly duplicating the story presented in the Gospel of Matthew. Since the time after the Nativity of Christ, the author recognizes only the Last Judgment as the only significant event, which signifies that “the earthly city will not be eternal”12.

Christian social doctrine introduced the idea of ​​progress into the philosophy of history, albeit understood purely theologically, revealing the source of positive changes in social life only in the moral improvement of the individual.

In modern times, a number of trends were formed in the philosophy of history, a characteristic feature of which was attempts to synthesize the social teachings of Christian authors and the concepts of the ancient period. Most often they ended with the creation of eclectic constructions, resembling antique or Christian only in form. In essence, they were contradictory theories, often far from humanistic principles.

Eclecticism inevitably led to a contradiction between the idea of ​​the formation of the state and ideas about natural law. According to N. Machiavelli and T. Hobbes, the state of nature consisted in the incessant war of man against man, the main motive of which was personal material gain. The transition to society is interpreted by them rather than as a change, but only as an ordering of this state of affairs: in the new conditions, the right of the strong remains as important as before, and irreconcilable enmity moves from the level of individuals to the level of peoples and states.

Reconstruction of the elements of the social contract theory in fact in the same forms in which they were conceived in antiquity, also determined the limits of the prognostic possibilities of new concepts. Both N. Machiavelli and G.

Marxism and the theory of post-industrial society

Among the classical concepts that still cause controversy and give rise to new theories, it is impossible not to single out the social doctrine of Marxism, which absorbed many achievements of the philosophical thought of its time.

The most important backbone principle of Marx's theory is the materialistic approach to understanding history. An example of its use is the famous fragment from the preface to the work "On the Critique of Political Economy". “In the social production of their lives,” K. Marx wrote, “people enter into certain, necessary, relations independent of their will - relations of production that correspond to a certain stage in the development of their material productive forces. The totality of these production relations constitutes the economic structure of society, the real basis on which the legal and political superstructure rises and to which certain forms of social consciousness correspond. The mode of production of material life determines the social, political and spiritual processes of life in general. It is not the consciousness of people that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being determines their consciousness.

Based on the postulate of the primacy of production in relation to other aspects of social life, the founders of Marxism sought to comprehend all spheres of human life, exploring the problems that can be traced to the most different stages development of society.

By the middle of the 19th century, the period in which the work of the founders of Marxism fell, the development of both European and Asian nations provided significant material for historical generalizations. The successive replacement of economic systems became obvious; the dependence of political development on the evolution of the economic basis seemed equally undoubted. All previous forms of organization of society, with the exception of the tribal community, seemed to be linked together by the very fact of the dominance of economic relations over all other aspects of life, which made it possible to consider them as components of a single state in its deepest essence.

However, along with the understanding of the internal unity of the economic era, as never before, its division into outwardly different forms of organization of production and models of social interaction was also realized. Therefore, the second side of the problem of periodization of history inevitably remained connected with understanding the course of social changes that accompanied the movement from one specific form of social organization to the next. Both of these tasks were solved by the founders of Marxism in their theory of social progress. Having created a two-level model of periodization based on the identification of social formations and modes of production, considering the transitions from one social formation to another and from one mode of production to another as social and political revolutions, respectively, K. Marx gave the picture of history the appearance of a systematic scientific theory with powerful predictive and futuristic potential.

K. Marx did not devote a separate work or series of works to the periodization of social development; remarks valuable for understanding the subject are scattered throughout many of his writings. Of particular importance for understanding this component of Marx's doctrine is the term "social formation", which he first used in 1851 in his work The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. Considering the events of the period of the Great French Revolution, K. Marx noted that the transition of the ideologists of the bourgeoisie from revolutionary to counter-revolutionary positions occurred when the new order became dominant, when a new social formation took shape. Seven years later, in 1858, in the Preface to the work “On the Critique of Political Economy”, K. Marx introduces the term “economic social formation”, thereby concretizing the concept of “social formation” and defining the scope of each of the terms. “In general terms,” K. Marx wrote, “Asian, ancient, feudal and modern, bourgeois modes of production can be designated as progressive eras of economic social formation ... the prehistory of human society ends with the bourgeois social formation.” The author makes it clear that there is a historical era, which is a "social formation" and has its main features of economic features, combining a number of production methods based on common characteristics.

The concept of "economic social formation" indicates that the main feature characteristic of all the periods included in it, K. Marx considered the economic nature of the life of society, that is, such a way of interaction between members of society, which is determined not by religious, moral or political, but in primarily economic factors. This term is used only in relation to a period characterized by the dominance in public life of relations based on private property, individual exchange and the resulting exploitation.

At the same time, K. Marx and F. Engels use the term "economic social formation" both to refer to a separate historical period characterized by the above features, and to describe a number of historical states, each of which has the same basic features. Thus, warning against the idea that the phases of social evolution are stages between which there are no transitional periods and transitional forms of social relations, K. Marx wrote: “Just as with the successive change of various geological formations, with the formation of various economic social formations one should believe in suddenly appearing, sharply separated from each other periods.

The value component of personality in modern society

The question of values ​​is the most discussed in modern science and can only be resolved on the basis of a careful comparison of what this or that system of values ​​is with what the whole system of scientific knowledge tells us about a person and society. Meanings and values ​​are derived both from the system of knowledge, the universal laws of the world, and from historical and religious experience. The study of meanings can also move us along the path of understanding universal laws. Today, a new concept of ecocentrism is replacing anthropologism: not a person in the center of the universe, but a person to maintain the universe. Two key trends of the 21st century are also fighting here - fundamentalism and cosmopolitan tolerance.

Value systems play an important role in society. They provide a cultural basis for loyalty to a particular economic and political order. By interacting with economic and political factors, value systems determine the face of social change.

Culture in the context of values ​​can be defined as a “strategy of survival”, because in any society that has managed to survive over a long historical period, culture is in mutually favorable relations with economic and political systems206.

Philosophical views, fundamental values, social attitudes, customs and general outlook on life differ significantly in different civilizations. The resurgence of religion in much of the world reinforces these cultural differences. Cultures can change, and the nature of their influence on politics and economic development can vary across historical periods. And yet it is obvious that the main differences in the political and economic development of various civilizations are rooted in the difference in cultures. East Asian economic success is due to East Asian culture, as are the difficulties that East Asian countries have faced in building stable democratic systems. The reasons for the failure of democracy in most of the Muslim world are largely rooted in Islamic culture. The Development of Post-Communist Societies in Eastern Europe and in the Space former USSR determined by civilizational identification.

The changes that have taken place in the last decades in the economic, technical and socio-political spheres have led to serious shifts in the cultural foundations of modern society. Everything has changed: the incentives that motivate a person to work, the contradictions that become the causes of political conflicts, the religious beliefs of people, their attitude to divorce, abortion, homosexuality, the importance that a person attaches to having a family and children. Even what people want from life has changed. In recent years, we have witnessed the beginning of a huge change in the identification of peoples and the symbols of this identification. The world, including social structures, political systems and economic orders, began to line up along new lines - cultural ones.

All these changes occur gradually, in turn, reflecting changes in the process of human formation, which determine the face of different generations. Thus, among the older members of society, traditional values ​​and norms are still widespread, while groups of young people are increasingly committed to new orientations. As the younger generation matures and gradually supplants the older one, the worldview paradigm of society is also undergoing a transformation.

Traditions and customs determined the life of people for most of the history of mankind. At the same time, historically a very small number of researchers have paid significant attention to this. Enlightenment philosophers were extremely negative about tradition. The original meaning of the tradition is to transfer something to someone for the purpose of preservation. In the Roman Empire, the word "tradition" was associated with property inheritance rights. In the Middle Ages, the understanding of tradition in the modern sense did not exist, since the whole world around was tradition. The idea of ​​tradition is a product of modernity. Institutional changes in the era of modernity, as a rule, concerned only public institutions - the government and the economy. In everyday life, people continued to live traditionally. In most countries, family values ​​and gender differences continued to be strongly influenced by tradition and did not change.

Two key changes in tradition are taking place in modern society. In Western countries, not only do social institutions change under the influence of tradition, but everyday life also undergoes changes. Most of societies that have always remained strictly traditional are freed from the power of tradition.

E. Giddens speaks of a "society after tradition". The end of a tradition does not mean that tradition disappears, as Enlightenment philosophers would have liked. On the contrary, it continues to exist and spread in various forms. But tradition has a completely different meaning. Previously, traditional actions were supported by their symbols and rituals. Today, the tradition is becoming partly “exhibition”, “museum”, sometimes turning into kitsch, into souvenir folk crafts that can be bought at any airport. The restored monuments of architecture, or the Berber settlements in Africa, may very accurately reproduce the tradition of their time, but life has “gone” from this tradition, the tradition has turned into a protected object.

It is obvious that tradition is necessary for society, and, most likely, will always exist, since through tradition information is transmitted from generation to generation. For example, in the educational environment everything is very traditional. It is not only the disciplines studied that are traditional; without an intellectual tradition, modern scientists would not know in which direction to move. But in the same academic environment, the boundaries of tradition are constantly being overcome and changes are taking place.

With the departure of tradition, the world becomes more open and mobile. Autonomy and freedom can replace the hidden power of tradition and promote dialogue. Freedom, in turn, brings new problems. A society that lives on the other side of nature and tradition, as Western society does, is constantly faced with the problem of choice. And the decision-making process inevitably leads to an increase in addictions. The concept of addiction used to apply only to alcohol and drugs. Today, any area of ​​life can be associated with addiction. A person can become addicted to work, sports, food, love - just about anything. Giddens fully connects this process with the departure of tradition from the structure of society.

Along with the change of tradition, self-identity changes. In traditional situations, self-identification is determined, as a rule, by the stability of the individual's social position in society. When the tradition ends, and the choice of lifestyle becomes the main one, the individual does not go free. Self-identities have to be created and recreated more often than before. This explains the extraordinary popularity of all kinds of therapies and consultations in the West. “When Freud created psychoanalysis, he thought he was creating a cure for neurotics. The result was a vehicle for the renewal of self-identity in the early stages of a decentralized culture. Thus, there is a constant war of freedom and autonomy with addictions and coercions.

Kuzmicheva O.V.

Samara

Transformation of socio-cultural space within the framework of the economic system

In everyday life, social space undergoes various kinds of changes. However, being the object of study mainly of sociological sciences, social space is defined as the relationship of social subjects, as an area of ​​interaction of social roles, statuses.

At the present stage of development of the socio-economic formation, there is a need to study and analyze the social space from interdisciplinary positions, due to the growing influence on all spheres of society. This approach was outlined by Shulus A.A., who pointed to the participation of the social sphere in the economy, politics, and culture. The interconnection of these spheres gives a variety of relations: socio-economic, socio-political, and socio-cultural.

Each of the presented spheres of interaction with the social space can be considered individually. The socio-cultural space is actively influenced by a number of external and internal factors, under the influence of which it is formed. Internal factors are: natural factors, economic factors, social factors, cultural factors, individual and personal characteristics of a person. External factors are: the process of globalization, the factor of the information revolution, the cultural diversity of the world.

In general terms, the transformation of the socio-cultural space is understood as significant changes in the functioning of social institutions, social groups, as well as the system of relations between individuals, under the influence of new, transformed social norms, cultural and other values. In addition, changes in the quality and volume of services provided by social institutions and the ability of the population to use these services are taken into account. [ 2 ]

The basic characteristics of modern society are susceptibility to innovation, a powerful potential for self-development and responsibility. In particular, a fairly large part of society is characterized by a sense of personal responsibility. More than half of the population of the region, answering the question to what extent the improvement of life depends on you, expressed their readiness to design personal life strategies under their own responsibility.

characteristic feature transformation, despite the fact that it may be manageable, is spontaneity. The driving force, as a rule, becomes an active group of the population, with their inherent interests. Being in interaction, individuals form systems of connections in the sociocultural space. By studying and using these connections, the population is able to accelerate or slow down the development of the economy. In every space, communication systems act as a resource for the formation of social capital.

The influence of the features of the transformation of the socio-cultural space is becoming relevant against the backdrop of economic and social instability. In the theory and practice of modernization processes, the sociocultural factor acts as a kind of basis that largely forms the basis of transformations, including economic ones.

The transformation of the socio-cultural space is inextricably linked with the transformations in the economy, where the impact of the global financial and economic crisis is especially acute. Also, the deep socio-economic differentiation of regions negatively affects the quality and availability of cultural goods. Problems in the real sector of the economy led to changes in the labor market. Due to the reduction in production, mass layoffs began, sending workers on administrative leave, and reducing wage rates. Unemployment, the disproportionately widening gap between wealth and poverty, corruption, the low quality of life of the bulk of the population - all this characterizes not only the level of material well-being, but also the culture in the country.

The transformation of the social structure of society is characterized by very contradictory processes, such as a large-scale concentration of production, on the one hand, and a lag in the development of medium and small businesses, on the other; formation of high-tech production and raw material orientation of production. That is, the socio-cultural transformation of society is determined by the need to develop in the unity of its socio-economic, scientific, technical and cultural components, which ensures the integrity of the modernization process.

Most of the approaches to the concept of modernization formulated by Russian researchers, in particular VG Fedotova, reveal it precisely as a sociocultural process.

The most difficult from the theoretical and practical points of view is the search for an effective combination in the process of modernization of universal guidelines, with cultural factors specific for each region that determine the direction of development.

World experience shows that the degree of success of modernization is directly determined by the level of development of the social environment, the prevailing values ​​in it, its susceptibility to the processes of improving existing or introducing new technologies, products and services, implementing new principles for organizing economic life, new models and management mechanisms, etc. d. Obtaining relevant information is possible by conducting research on the socio-cultural potential of the population of the territory.

The absence in the Strategies of socio-economic development of a description of the socio-cultural integration of its constituent entities significantly narrows the corridor of real opportunities for reforming the regional economy.In an environment of general tension, people tend to unite to overcome it. Residents are united not only by difficulties of a financial nature, but also by sympathy for those whose social status has been shaken, and internal anxiety in connection with the aggravation of regional problems and the threat to the future of the territory. In this way, shared experiences reinforced the sense of regional cohesion.

Theoretically significant disclosure of the relationship of external economic factors of the globalization of the socio-cultural space. Russia in the territorial context is characterized by a strong uneven economic development. This unevenness is largely determined by the availability of natural resources, the existing infrastructure, climate indicators, and other objective factors that largely determine the level of economic development of the regions.

Taking into account the specifics of the economies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, two development scenarios are possible for our country: a positive one, during which human society receives certain benefits (both material and spiritual), and a negative one, in which negative trends are clearly seen for a person.

Trends in the development of Russia's sociocultural space in the context of globalization can be divided into two groups. The first is the tendencies based on the acceptance of traditional socio-cultural models of behavior, generally recognized spiritual and material values ​​of culture within the boundaries of a spatially defined society. The second group of tendencies is the strengthening of the denial of traditions, the predominant orientation towards Western patterns, norms and models of sociocultural behavior, in an extreme form, the Americanization of the modern sociocultural space of Russia. Overcoming and mitigating the separation of these groups of trends is an urgent problem of state cultural policy and the task of the activities of bodies that carry out the functions of social management of the development of the Russian sociocultural space.

Market institutions cannot serve as sufficiently effective, let alone universal regulators of social relations, especially in the socio-cultural sphere. An urgent need is to develop an institutional framework for the development of the socio-cultural space of Russia, which would ensure the priority of the spiritual content of cultural works and limit the exorbitant focus of cultural organizations and institutions on commerce and profit maximization.

In order to remain among the main actors globalization, it is necessary to stabilize economic growth trends by wisely investing money received from natural resources in innovation. It is also important how effectively the leadership uses the natural advantages of the regions and the available factors of production, or, on the contrary, how effectively it makes up for the lack of these advantages through some of its own unique initiatives.

Besides, it is necessary to invest in human capital, which is the intellectual potential of the entire state as a whole, because it is knowledge that allows you to create modern information products and competently apply them in practice.

In the management system of the socio-cultural space, in cultural policy, it is necessary to focus on renewal and innovation, which includes: financial support for cultural institutions, promotion of cultural values ​​to Russian society, in particular to young people.

Given the complexity and multidimensionality of sociocultural development, further research is needed on the sociocultural specifics and modernization potential in order to develop more specific proposals for choosing the most relevant innovative technologies.

Bibliography

1. .Belyaeva L.A. Social strata in Russia: the experience of cluster analysis. // Socis. 2005. No. 12. p. 5764.
2. Ivanova S.A. Priorities for the Formation of the Social Space of the Innovative Economy of the Region/IPRE RAS. SPb.: "Scythia-print". 2013. 191 p.
3. Shulus A.A. Socioeconomics as an intersectoral science: Sat. - M.: AT i SO, 2008. - 376 p.