Weber's concept is based on the existence of different types of action. The most important of these is the goal-rational action, "focused exclusively on means that (subjectively) are considered adequate for (subjectively) unambiguously perceived goals." Here the degree of evidence is the highest. As rationality decreases, the action becomes less and less comprehensible, its immediate evidence becomes less and less. And although in reality the border separating the goal-rational action from the irrational can never be rigidly established, although “part of every sociologically relevant action (especially in traditional society) stands on the verge of both,” nevertheless, the sociologist must proceed from the goal-rational action as actions of the social-typical, considering other types of human behavior as a deviation from the ideal type.
So, according to Weber, understanding in its pure form takes place where we have before us - goal-oriented rational action. Weber himself believes that in this case it is no longer possible to talk about psychological understanding, since the meaning of the action, its goals lie outside the boundaries of psychology. But let us put the question differently: what exactly do we understand in the case of a goal-oriented rational action: the meaning of the action or the agent himself? Weber chose goal-rational action as an ideal-typical model because both of these moments coincide in it: to understand the meaning of an action means in this case to understand the actor, and to understand the actor means to understand the meaning of his actions. Weber regards this coincidence as the ideal case from which sociology should start. In reality, most often these two points do not coincide, but science cannot, according to Weber, start from an empirical fact: it must create an idealized space for itself. For sociology, this “space” is purposeful-rational action.
Six types of social action according to their orientation
M. Weber identified six types of social action:
1. The correct type, in which the end and the chosen means are objectively adequate to each other and therefore strictly rational.
2. The type in which the means chosen to achieve the goal seem adequate to the subject himself. Objectively, they may not be so.
3. The action is approximate, without a clearly defined goal and means, according to the principle "maybe something will work out."
4. Action that does not have a precise purpose, determined by specific circumstances and understandable only in view of them.
5. An action only partially comprehensible of its circumstances. It also includes a number of incomprehensible elements.
6. An action that is caused by completely incomprehensible psychological or physical factors and is inexplicable from a rational point of view.
This classification is not far-fetched or speculative. It allows you to order all types of social action according to the degree of decreasing rationality, and, consequently, intelligibility. In fact, the transition from one type to another is almost imperceptible. But the accumulation of growing quantitative differences ultimately turns the type of goal-rational action into its opposite, into the type of irrational, practically incomprehensible, inexplicable action. Only the last two types need to be explained from a psychological point of view. Patrushev A.I. The enchanted world of M. Weber.s. - 102.
Should consider the behavior of an individual or a group of individuals as the starting point of her research. A separate individual and his behavior is, as it were, a "cell" of sociology, its "atom", that simple unity, which itself is no longer subject to further decomposition and splitting.
Weber clearly connects the subject of this science with the study social actions: "Sociology ... is a science that seeks, by interpreting, to understand social action and thereby causally explain it process and impact "[Weber. 1990. S. 602]. Further, it is true, the scientist asserts that" sociology is by no means concerned with one "social action", but it is (at least for the sociology that we are dealing with here) its central problem, constitutive for it as for science "[Ibid. P. 627].
The concept of "social action" in Weber's interpretation is derived from actions in general, by which is meant such human behavior, in the process of which the acting individual associates with him or, more precisely, puts a subjective meaning into it. Consequently, action is a person's comprehension of his own behavior.
This judgment is immediately followed by an explanation of what a social action is: "" Social "we call an action that, according to the supposed actor or actors, the meaning correlates with the action of other people and focuses on it" [Ibid. S. 603]. This means that social action is not just "self-oriented", it is oriented, first of all, towards others. Weber calls orientation towards others "expectation", without which action cannot be considered social. It is important here to clarify who should be classified as "others". Of course, these are individuals, but not only. By "others" are meant "socially common" structures such as the state, law, organizations, unions, etc. those on whom the individual can and is really oriented in his actions, counting on their definite reaction towards them.
Is every action social? No, Weber argues and cites a number of specific situations that convince the reader of the validity of his negative answer. For example, prayer is not a social action (since it is not designed to be perceived by another person and his response). If it is raining outside, gives another example of "non-social" actions Weber, and people open their umbrellas at the same time, this does not mean at all that individuals orient their actions towards actions other people, it is just that their behavior is equally motivated by the need to hide from the rain. This means that an action cannot be considered social if it is determined by an orientation toward some natural phenomenon. Weber does not consider social and purely imitative action performed by an individual in a crowd as its "atom". Another example of "non-social" actions which he cites concerns actions, focused on the expectation of a certain "behavior" on the part of not other individuals, but material objects (natural phenomena, machines, etc.).
It is clear, therefore, that social action includes two points: a) the subjective motivation of an individual (individuals, a group of people); b) orientation towards others (other), which Weber calls "expectation" and without which action cannot be regarded as social. Its main subject is the individual. Collectives (groups) sociology can only consider as derivatives of their constituent and idi types. They (collectives, groups) are not independent realities, but rather ways of organizing the actions of individual individuals.
Weber's social action appears in four types: goal-rational, value-rational, affective, traditional. Goal-rational action is an action based on "the expectation of a certain behavior of objects of the external world and other people and the use of this expectation as" conditions "or" means "to achieve their rationally set and thoughtful goal" [Weber. 1990. S. 628]. Rational in relation to the goal, goal-oriented rational action is actions: an engineer who builds a bridge, a speculator who seeks to make money; general who wants to win a military victory. In all these cases, goal-oriented rational behavior is determined by the fact that its subject sets a clear goal for himself and uses appropriate means to achieve it.
One of the central points of Weber's theory is the allocation of an elementary particle of an individual's behavior in society - social action, which is the cause and effect of a system of complex relationships between people. “Social action”, according to Weber, is an ideal type, where “action” is the action of a person who associates subjective meaning (rationality) with him, and “social” is an action that, according to the meaning assumed by its subject, is related to the action of other persons and is oriented on them. The scientist identifies four types of social action:
§ goal-rational- using certain expected behavior of other people to achieve goals;
§ value-rational - understanding of behavior, action as actually value-significant, based on the norms of morality, religion;
§ affective - especially emotional, sensual;
§ traditional- based on the strength of the habit, the accepted norm. In the strict sense, affective and traditional actions are not social.
Society itself, according to Weber's doctrine, is a collection of acting individuals, each of whom strives to achieve their own goals. Meaningful behavior, as a result of which individual goals are achieved, leads to the fact that a person acts as a social being, in association with others, thus ensuring significant progress in interaction with the environment.
Scheme 1. Types of social action according to M. Weber
Weber deliberately ranked the four types of social action he described in ascending order of rationality. This order, on the one hand, serves as a kind of methodological device for explaining the different nature of the subjective motivation of an individual or a group, without which it is generally impossible to speak of an action oriented towards others; he calls motivation “expectation,” without which action cannot be regarded as social. On the other hand, and in this Weber was convinced, the rationalization of social action is at the same time a tendency in the historical process. And although this process does not proceed without difficulties, various kinds of obstacles and deviations, European history of the last centuries. the involvement of other, non-European civilizations on the path of industrialization is evidenced, according to Weber. that rationalization is a world-historical process. "One of the essential components of the 'rationalization' of action is the replacement of internal adherence to habitual morals and customs by systematic adaptation to considerations of interest."
Rationalization, also according to Weber, is a form of development, or social progress, which is carried out within the framework of a certain picture of the world, which are different in history.
Weber identifies three most general types, three ways of relating to the world, which contain the corresponding attitudes or vectors (directions) of people's life, their social action.
The first of them is associated with Confucianism and Taoist religious and philosophical views that have spread in China; the second - with Hindu and Buddhist, widespread in India; the third - with the Jewish and Christian, which arose in the Middle East and spread to Europe and America. Weber defines the first type as adaptation to the world, the second as escape from the world, and the third as mastering the world. These different types of attitude and way of life set the direction for subsequent rationalization, that is, different ways of moving along the path of social progress.
A very important aspect in Weber's work is the study of basic relations in social associations. First of all, this concerns the analysis of power relations, as well as the nature and structure of organizations, where these relations are most pronounced.
From the application of the concept of "social action" to the political sphere, Weber deduces three pure types of legitimate (recognized) domination:
§ legal, - in which both the ruled and the rulers obey not some personality, but the law;
§ traditional- due primarily to the habits and mores of a given society;
§ charismatic- based on the extraordinary abilities of the leader's personality.
Sociology, according to Weber, should be based on scientific judgments, as free as possible from all kinds of personal predilections of the scientist, from political, economic, ideological influences.
10. K. Marx, F. Engels. Materialistic understanding of history.
Karl Marx (1818–1883) criticized Feuerbach's anthropological materialism for its abstract approach to understanding man. In "Theses on Feuerbach" he stressed that "the essence of man is not an abstract inherent in a separate individual. In its reality, it is the totality of all social relations. " Of course, the idea that “a person is shaped by circumstances” is not new; Marx's detailed analysis of these circumstances turned out to be new. Of the whole variety of social relations, Marx singles out material, production relations, that is, those relations that develop between people in the process of producing material goods, as the main ones that define them. Marx comes to the conclusion that it is labor, material production that constitute the basis of human existence, the history of people.
This is how the most important, central idea of Marxist philosophy is born - materialistic understanding of history... In a succinct form, the essence of the materialist understanding of history is set forth by Marx in his work "To the Critique of Political Economy" (1859): "The totality of 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 materialist understanding of history, Marx establishes a certain recurrence in the history of various countries, in the organization of their social life. He identifies several main historical forms of organization of society (or formations). The differences between the formations are based on differences in the type of organization of material production. As a result, the history of mankind is presented in the form of development from the primitive system, through the slave-owning and feudal system to the capitalist one, and from it, inevitably, to the communist social formation.
Here Marx arrives at the second most important idea of his philosophy - the understanding of history as a natural, natural-historical process. He comes to the conclusion that there are not only objective laws of the development of nature, but also of society. Based on this conclusion, Marx and his colleague F. Engels in the "Manifesto of the Communist Party" proclaimed the inevitability of the fall of capitalism and the transition to a communist society.
As a young man, Marx became interested in the ideas of communism. They expressed the dream of a humane and just social order. In the proletariat, Marx saw a special class, whose vocation is the destruction of the exploiting society, with its inherent alienation of man. Marx believed that the basis of all human alienation is economic alienation, or alienated labor (that is, forced labor). Neither the starting material nor the products of such labor belong to the worker - they are alien to him. Prospects for human development - in the destruction of alienated labor, and hence private property. Marx came to the conclusion that only after the abolition of private property, labor should turn into a means of human self-development, become a need for him. A comprehensively developed man living in harmony with nature - these are some of the features of the communist ideal drawn by Marx.
It is easy to see that Marxism, like all classical philosophy, was inherent in the belief in the power of the human mind, capable of creating a perfect society. The idea of social progress is filled here with a new meaning: each of the formations is considered as a stage of historical progress, the apex of which is communism.
The fate of Marxist philosophy turned out to be unique: the arguments of its supporters are comparable in strength to those of its opponents. As for the idea of a materialist understanding of history, according to Karl Popper, one of the most implacable critics of Marx, it contains common sense and retains its significance today. "Marx taught us," Popper notes, "that the development of ideas cannot be fully understood unless we take into account the conditions of their origin and the economic situation of their creators." At the same time, Popper believes that Marx's economic determinism (that is, his insistence on economic prerequisites as the last foundation of social development) is erroneous. “Experience shows,” he writes, “that under certain circumstances the influence of ideas can outweigh the influence of economic factors. And it is impossible to correctly understand the nature of economic development without taking into account the development of scientific, religious and other ideas. "
But the materialist understanding of history by no means denies the role of ideas in the life of society. It only requires going further: where do the ideas themselves come from?
11. Features of the formation and development of Russian sociology. The main schools and directions: L. Mechnikov, N. Mikhailovsky, P. Lavrov, N. Ya. Danilevsky.
In Russia, sociology began to gain its position in the 60s. XIX century, when the scientific community and the reading public were able to get acquainted with the translations of books and articles by O. Comte. Experiencing the influence of various currents of Western sociology, Russian sociologists create their own original concepts, reflecting the uniqueness of Russian society. In the development of sociological thought in pre-revolutionary Russia, 5 stages can be distinguished:
Since the early 1860s. before 1890;
Since the 1890s. before the beginning of the XX century:
Since the beginning of the XX century. before 1917;
Revival 1950-60s;
1980-1990s
1 The first stage in the development of sociology (1860s - 1890) is associated primarily with the work of the prominent ideologists of populism P.L. Lavrov and N.K. Mikhailovsky. The direction they developed was called the "ethical-subjective school". These thinkers believed that an objective study of social phenomena should be combined with their subjective assessment based on the principles of ethics and social justice.
In his opinion, the leading force, "the main organ of progress is the personality, characterized by a critical consciousness to change frozen social forms." According to Lavrov, the historical process has direction and is measured by the degree of development of social solidarity.
He identifies three types of solidarity:
Habit-based;
Based on the similarity of affects and interests;
Conscious solidarity based on the unity of the beliefs of people.
From this he concludes that only those groups and peoples can be recognized as historical, in the midst of which conscious solidarity has appeared.
N.K. Mikhailovsky held similar views. According to Mikhailovsky, the main task of sociology as a science should be not so much in the search and discovery of objective laws, but rather in revealing the human, humanistic content of social progress and correlating it with the needs of the human personality.
He calls a subjective method such a way of satisfying a cognitive need, when the observer sociologist puts himself in the position of the observed. According to him, the individual and society mutually complement each other, since any suppression of the individual harms society, and the suppression of the public is harmful to the individual.
Thus, as the leading force of social progress, Lavrov and Mikhailovsky viewed the "critically thinking person" who, in their opinion, acted as the creator of history and at the same time as the bearer of the moral ideal. They saw the essence of progress in the growth of social solidarity and consciousness of the individual.
Along with subjective sociology, positivism played a significant role in the sociological thought of Russia at that time. The positivist approach was most fully developed in the scientific work of M.M. Kovalevsky - a famous historian, ethnographer and sociologist. He was one of the first to apply the comparative historical method in sociology, with the help of which he investigated the genesis of peoples of different countries and eras. Kovalevsky called the analysis of social phenomena based on their origin "genetic sociology", and from this point of view he considered, in particular, the origin of the family, property, and the state.
Based on the attitudes of "sociological pluralism", he developed a theory of social progress, which is sometimes called the core of his sociology. Kovalevsky saw the main content of social progress in "expanding the sphere of human solidarity."
In the mainstream of positivism, the "naturalistic" school developed, within the framework of which several trends and directions of sociological thought arose. These include the concept of geographical determinism, developed by the great geographer and sociologist L.I. Mechnikov. He explained the unevenness of social development by the influence of geographical conditions, mainly water resources and communication routes. At the same time, the decisive role in the development of society was assigned to the influence of the hydrological factor (rivers, seas, oceans). The theory of L.I. Mechnikova contained valuable ideas explaining the mechanisms of interaction between nature and society.
The most prominent representatives of the psychological trend in Russian sociology were E.V. De Roberti and N.I. Kareev.
E.V. De Roberti, understands sociology as a theoretical generalizing science, the main task of which is “to discover the laws governing the emergence, formation and gradual development of the highest supra-organic or spiritual form of world energy.
According to De Roberti, there are four groups of social facts that ultimately determine the behavior of individuals in society and the specifics of their psychological interaction: knowledge, religious belief, aesthetic feelings and practical, technical actions of people.
A great contribution to substantiating the role of mental factors in the development of society was made by N.I. Kareev. He considered the spiritual interaction of people as a determining factor in social life to be the subject of the study of sociology. Kareev noted that in the activities and behavior of people, and therefore in their entire social life, the intellectual, emotional and volitional sides of their spiritual life play a large role. In his opinion, the mental life of a person follows from his "mental nature" and is determined by it. Like De Roberti, Kareev attached great importance to "collective psychology", which underlies the development of spiritual culture.
Simultaneously with the so-called academic sociology in Russia, ideological and political sociology was developed greatly.
Religious social philosophy (Christian humanism) is associated with the names of such Russian thinkers as A. Khomyakov, K. Leontiev, Vl. Soloviev, N. Berdyaev and others. The emergence of this trend was caused primarily by the growth in the late XIX - early XX century. crisis phenomena in all spheres of public life, as well as an increase in the activity of the masses and the confusion of the intelligentsia.
Vladimir Soloviev and Nikolai Berdyaev were deeply aware that a true sociology can only be that which, in its essence, is the ideology of the national spirit. They believed that sociology should develop such important integral concepts that unite society as "national idea", "social ideal", "fundamental interest" and other concepts related to the category of the so-called value orientation, both global and national.
The sociology of Marxism in Russia was represented by two main theories: orthodox Marxism (G.V. Plekhanov and V.I. Lenin) and the so-called "legal Marxism" (PB Struve, M. Tugan-Baranovsky and others).
Legal Marxism is a theoretical and ideological direction of social thought, which recognized the truth of the economic doctrine of K. Marx about the nature and historical inevitability of capitalism. The most prominent representatives of this trend were P.B. Struve and M. Tugan-Baranovsky.
According to P. Struve, Russia's economic prosperity in the future will become possible on the basis of the capitalist path of development. He considered a necessary condition for this to be successful in carrying out social reforms and creating opportunities for the free development of individuals. Struve assigned an important role to the activities of the bourgeois state - the "organization of order" capable of establishing the economic and political life of society and preventing social conflicts.
M. Tugan-Baranovsky, as well as P.B. Struve, preferred civilized capitalism to socialism. As a prominent economist and sociologist, he expressed ideas:
Partial and cooperative entrepreneurship;
Connections of large and small production;
Public self-government in public organizations, communities;
Distribution according to work: "from each according to his ability, to each ability according to her work."
Tugan-Baranovsky attached great importance to free agricultural cooperation, through which peasants can come to large and efficient production.
The main meaning of the Marxist theory lies in revealing the laws and essence of the transition from private to public property.
Anarchism (from the Greek. Anarchia - anarchy, anarchy) is a socio-political trend that denies the need for state and other power and preaches unlimited freedom of the individual. non-recognition of generally recognized laws and order. The most prominent representatives of anarchism in Russia were the Russian revolutionaries M.A. Bakunin and P.A. Kropotkin.
Anarchism of the 19th century was subdivided into two streams:
1 anarchism-individualism, of which Bakunin was a representative,
2 anarchism-collectivism. Kropotkin represented the second trend, developing it into anarchism-communism.
The essence of anarchism, as Bakunin believed, can be expressed in the words: "leave things to their natural flow." Hence one of the central ideas of anarchism - the idea of individual freedom as its natural state, which should not be violated by any state institutions. The state, according to Bakunin, is always the power of the minority, a force opposed to the people.
Like Bakunin, Kropotkin strongly opposed "state socialism", believing that the working people themselves were able to "develop a system based on their personal and collective freedom." This free "anarchic communism", in his opinion, should be a society of equal people, based on self-government and consisting of many unions organized for all kinds of production: agricultural, industrial, intellectual, artistic, etc.
A prominent representative of the historical school (trend) of Russian sociology was N. Ya. Danilevsky (1822-1885). In his most famous work "Europe and Russia", he identified and analyzed the main "cultural and historical types", or civilizations. According to his theory, every society, every nation in its development goes through cyclical stages - birth, youth, decrepitude and death. Danilevsky's civilizational approach served as a methodological basis for the search for a special historical path for Russia, justification of its originality and the possibility for it not to repeat the stages of development of Western countries.
Danilevsky's ideas had a strong influence on P.A. Sorokin, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy. Their echoes are heard in the ideas of L.H. Gumilyov and many other authors.
2 At the second stage (1890s - early XX century), the process of institutionalization of Russian sociology begins, which penetrates the academic environment and increasingly finds support in scientific and public circles.
During this period, new directions in sociology arose, the most influential of which was the sociological school of law. Representatives of this school are well-known legal scholars and sociologists N.Zh. Korkunov, S.A. Muromtsev, P.I. Novgorodtsev and others - sharply criticized positivism and strove to provide a normative, moral and legal basis for public life. The merit of these researchers was that they succeed in deeply developing a number of methodological problems of sociological knowledge.
By the end of the second stage, Russian sociology entered the international arena. At the same time, there have been shifts in the process of institutionalization of Russian sociology. Thanks to the efforts of M.M. Kovalevsky in 1908, the first in Russia department of sociology was opened at the private Psychoneurological Institute in St. Petersburg.
3 The third stage (beginning of the 20th century - 1917) in the development of Russian sociology is characterized by an orientation towards neo-positivism, the most famous representatives of which were K.M. Takhtarev and P.A. Sorokin.
Among Russian sociologists K.M. Takhtarev was one of the first to draw attention to the need to apply empirical methods in sociology - observation, experiment and socio-statistical measurement, since without mathematics sociology cannot become an accurate and objective science.
Scientific and organizational activities of P.A. Sorokin contributed to the acceleration of the process of institutionalization of sociological science. With his active participation, the country's first sociological society is being created, and a degree in sociology is being established. In 1920, the country's first sociological faculty was opened at Petrograd University, headed by P.A. Sorokin.
Pitirim Sorokin is a prominent scientist and public figure who made a huge contribution to the development of national and world sociology. P. Sorokin distinguishes between theoretical and practical sociology. Theoretical sociology, in his opinion, only observes, analyzes and builds conceptual models, while practical sociology should be an applied discipline.
The sections of sociological knowledge, according to P. Sorokin, are:
Social analytics, which studies the structure (structure) of a social phenomenon and its main forms;
Social mechanics (or social physiology), which describes the processes of interaction of social aggregates (people, groups, social institutions);
Social genetics, which studies the development of social life, its individual aspects and institutions.
P. Sorokin considered interaction to be the primary unit of sociological analysis. Developing the idea of understanding society as a special social space that does not coincide with the territorial, physical, etc., P. Sorokin created two interrelated concepts: social stratification (social stratification) and social revolution.
According to the first theory, the whole society is divided into different strata - strata, which differ among themselves in terms of income level, types of activity, political views, cultural orientations, etc. Sorokin referred to the main forms of social stratification as economic, political, and professional. The internal dynamics of stratification systems is expressed in the processes of social mobility - the movement of people along the positions of social space.
P. Sorokin was opposed to all social upheavals, including revolutions, and advocated a normal, evolutionary path of development. He believed that problems arising in society should be solved on the basis of sound management.
Taking general philosophical ideas about the dual nature of man as a criterion for classification, in which the concepts of "material" and "ideal", "sublime" and "earthly" coexist, P. Sorokin identified three types of cultural supersystems: sensual, ideational and idealistic (or integral).
Thus, sociology in pre-revolutionary Russia developed as a part of global sociological thought. Experiencing the influence of various currents of Western sociology, she was at the same time able to put forward many of her own theories and concepts that reflected the originality of the development of Russian society.
4 Fourth stage. The revival of Russian sociology began only in the late 1950s and early 1960s. in connection with the liberalization of the political regime. In the 1960s. sociology is restoring its social status. In 1962, the Soviet Sociological Association was created, in 1968 - the Institute of Concrete Social Research of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (now the Institute of Sociology). Faculties and departments are being opened at the country's universities. Since 1974, a specialized journal "Sociological Research" has been published.
During this period, large-scale sociological studies were carried out to study the impact of scientific and technological progress on the social and professional structure of workers, their attitude to work. The so-called "social planning", drawing up a plan for the social and economic development of industrial enterprises, collective and state farms, and even some cities, became widespread. In the course of these studies, a wealth of factual material has been accumulated, methods of sociological research have been worked out, skills in conducting sociological research have been acquired.
So, in the post-war period, there was a partial institutionalization of sociology in the USSR, but it did not become widespread in society, and the development of this science continued to be restrained by party bodies.
5 Fifth stage. The modern stage of the rapid development of Russian sociology began in the mid-1980s. At the stage of the stage, sociology leaves the tutelage of the CPSU and historical materialism, becomes an independent science and academic discipline, taught in most Russian universities since 1989/1990.
The subsequent intensive development of sociology is associated with fundamental changes that have taken place in the life of the country since the mid-1980s. In 1987, the All-Union Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM) was created, as well as a number of independent sociological services. Polls of the population on a variety of issues, the practical use of sociological information have become quite common. Sociology found its rebirth, began to be taught in higher and secondary specialized educational institutions of the country as a general education discipline.
In 1988, a resolution was adopted by the Central Committee of the CPSU, which for the first time recognized the need for higher sociological education in the country. June 6, 1989 can be considered the birthday of the sociological faculty of Moscow State University, which turned out to be the first sociological faculty of the USSR after a long break. Its organizer and head of the department of sociology, professor V. Dobrenkov, became the dean of the faculty.
Sociological faculties of universities are successfully functioning in many large cities. In recent years, dozens of textbooks and teaching aids have been published on general and sectoral sociological disciplines.
The development of sociological science in Russia in the second half of the 20th century is due to a number of features:
The slow formation of the social prerequisites of capitalism and the institutions of civil society. The bipolar structure of Russian society ("bottom-top"), with the practical absence of a middle class, stimulated a high degree of violence, a special punitive role of the state in the integration of society. Collective (communal) forms of social community determined the underdevelopment of individual consciousness, the priority of public interest over personal;
The integrating principle was Orthodoxy;
Significant influence of ideology. In the public consciousness of Russian society, extremes prevailed - conservatism and radicalism. The first was associated with Slavophilism, with the search for a special path for the development of Russia. Radicalism insisted on revolutionary methods of transforming society (from the Decembrists to Bolshevism).
Conclusion
Thus, the development of sociology as a science in our country has passed a difficult path. At each stage of historical transformations, sociology opened the way for new directions that determined its movement forward.
Among the problems that are leading for sociology at the present stage of development are: the social position of a person in society and the group, social structure, participation in management, "human relations", public opinion, sociocultural and interethnic processes, environmental problems and other issues related to a specific historical and socio - economic situation in the context of the country's transition to market relations.
The birth and development of Russian scientific sociology was due to numerous reasons and factors. By the middle of the 19th century, when Russian sociology, based on the prevailing opinion, began its formation, Western sociological thought had already found its embodiment in the works of O. Comte, Saint-Simon, G. Spencer and other social scientists of that time. Undoubtedly, the sociological views of Western schools and their representatives had a certain influence on the process of the emergence of sociology in Russia.
Sociological thought in Russia is developing as a part of global sociological science. Influenced by various currents of Western sociology, she at the same time puts forward original theories that reflect the uniqueness of the development of Russian society.
Contemporary Russian sociology is the sociology of liberalism, a social system based on the economic freedom of the individual and on the priority of civil society over the state.
12. P. Sorokin in the history of Russian and world sociology.
Pitirim A. Sorokin(1889-1968) - one of the most prominent classics of sociology, who had a great influence on all development in the XX century. Sometimes P. Sorokin is called not a Russian sociologist, but an American one. Indeed, chronologically the "Russian" period of his activity is strictly limited to 1922, the year of his expulsion from Russia. However, the formation of Sorokin's sociological views, as well as his political position, took place precisely in his homeland, in the conditions of wars, revolutions, the struggle of political parties and scientific schools. In the main work of the "Russian" period - the two-volume "System of Sociology" (1920) - he formulates the basic principles of the theory of social stratification and social mobility (he introduced these terms into scientific circulation), structures theoretical sociology, highlighting social analytics, social mechanics and social genetics.
Sorokin considers social behavior, social interaction of individuals, which he considers as a generic model of both a social group and society as a whole, to be the basis of sociological analysis. He divides social groups into organized and unorganized, paying special attention to the analysis of the hierarchical structure of an organized social group. Within the groups there are strata (layers), distinguished by economic, political and professional characteristics. Sorokin argued that a society without stratification and inequality is a myth. The forms and proportions of the stratification may change, but its essence is constant. Stratification is an invariable characteristic of any organized society and exists in a non-democratic society and in a society with a “flourishing democracy”.
Sorokin speaks of the existence of two types of social mobility in society - vertical and horizontal. Social mobility means a transition from one social position to another, a kind of "lift" for moving both within a social group and between groups. Social stratification and mobility in society are predetermined by the fact that people are not equal in their physical strength, mental abilities, inclinations, tastes, etc .; moreover, by the very fact of their joint activity. Joint activity necessarily requires organization, and organization is unthinkable without leaders and subordinates. Since society is always stratified, inequality is inherent in it, but this inequality must be reasonable.
Society should strive for a state in which a person can develop his abilities, and science and the instinct of the masses, and not revolutions, can help society in this. In Sociology of Revolution (1925) Sorokin calls the revolution a "great tragedy" and defines it as "a death machine that deliberately destroys the healthiest and most able-bodied, most outstanding, gifted, strong-willed and mentally qualified elements of the population from both sides." The revolution is accompanied by violence and cruelty, a reduction in freedom, not an increase in it. It distorts the social structure of society, worsens the economic and cultural position of the working class. The only way to improve and reconstruct social life can only be reforms carried out by legal and constitutional means. Every reform must be preceded by a scientific study of specific social conditions, and every reform must first be "tested" on a small social scale.
Sorokin's theoretical legacy and his contribution to the development of national and world sociology can hardly be overestimated, he is so rich in deeply meaningful, theoretically and methodologically supported knowledge of social reality and trends in the future development of society.
Sociology P. Sorokin
Pitirim Sorokin(1889-1968) created a sociological theory that was called "integral". It viewed society as a sociocultural system. He singled out four sections in sociology: the doctrine of society, social mechanics (definition of the statistical laws of society), social genetics (the origin and development of society), social policy (private sociological science).
The element of society is the interaction of individuals. It is subdivided into stereotyped and unconventional, one-sided and two-sided, antagonistic and non-antagonistic. Society is a process and result of social interaction (the interaction of many individuals). Its result is their adaptation to the environment. In the process of such adaptation, a social order of society arises, the main development trend of which is social equality.
The development of human society takes place through evolution and revolution. Social evolution represents a gradual and progressive development based on knowledge of society, reforms, human cooperation, striving for social equality. Social revolution - rapid, deep progressive or regressive development of society, based on the violence of one class over another. It changes the nature of social equality.
Based on the experience of personal participation in the two Russian revolutions of 1917, P. Sorokin singles out their main reasons: the suppression of the basic needs of the majority of the population by the existing social system, the ineffectiveness of this social system, the weakness of the forces of public order protection. The social revolution is going through stages revolutionary explosion when basic needs find a way out and destroy the country, and counterrevolution when these needs curb.
Pitirim Sorokin developed a theory social stratification, division of society into many social strata (strata) depending on wealth, power, education, etc.
He also belongs to the priority in the discovery of the theory of social mobility, movement from one social stratum to another.
M. Weber's theory of social action.
Performed:
Introduction ………………………………………………………………………… ..3
1. Biography of M. Weber …………………………………………………… ..4
2. The main provisions of the theory of social action ……………………… 7
2.1 Social action ………………………………………………… ..7
3. The theory of social action ………………………………………… ........ 17
3.1 Purposeful rational behavior …………………………………… ........ 18
3.2 Value-based and rational behavior ………………………………… ..22
3.3 Affective behavior …………………………………………… ..23
3.4 Traditional behavior …………………………………………… .24
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………… .28
References ……………………………………………………… ........ 29
Introduction
Relevance of the topic. The theory of social action is the "core" of M. Weber's sociology, management, political science, sociology of management and other sciences, and therefore its importance for professional training is very great, because he created one of the most fundamental concepts of sociological science in its entire existence - the theory of social action as a tool for explaining the behavior of various types of people.
The interaction of a person as a person with the world around him is carried out in the system of objective relations that develop between people in their social life and, above all, in production activities. Objective relations and connections (relations of dependence, subordination, cooperation, mutual assistance, etc.) inevitably and naturally arise in any real group. Interaction and relationships are formed on the basis of human actions and behavior.
The study of the theory of social action by Max Weber, one of the basic concepts of sociology, makes it possible in practice to find out the reasons for the interaction of various forces in society, human behavior, to comprehend the factors that force people to do just that and not otherwise.
The purpose of this course work- study of the theory of social action by M. Weber.
Coursework objectives:
1. Expand the definition of social action.
2. Designate the classification of social actions proposed by M. Weber.
1. Biography of M. Weber
M. Weber (1864-1920) belongs to those universally educated minds, which, unfortunately, are becoming less and less as the differentiation of the social sciences grows. Weber was an outstanding specialist in the field of political economy, law, sociology, philosophy. He acted as a historian of economics, political institutions and political theories, religion and science and, most importantly, as a logician and methodologist who developed the principles of cognition of the social sciences.
Max Weber was born on April 21, 1864 in Erfurt, Germany. In 1882 he graduated from the classical gymnasium in Berlin and entered the University of Heidelberg. In 1889. defended his thesis. He worked as a professor at the universities of Berlin, Freiburg, Heidelberg, Munich.
In 1904. Weber becomes editor of the German sociological journal Archives of Social Science and Social Policy. Here his most important works are published, including the programmatic study "Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism" (1905). This study begins a series of Weber's publications on the sociology of religion, which he pursued until his death. At the same time, he dealt with problems of logic and methodology of the social sciences. From 1916 to 1919 he published one of his main works - "The Economic Ethics of World Religions". Among the last speeches of Weber, the reports "Politics as a profession" (1919) and "Science as a profession" should be noted.
M. Weber was influenced by a number of thinkers who determined in many ways both his methodological attitudes and his worldview. Methodologically, in the field of the theory of knowledge, he was greatly influenced by the ideas of neo-Kantianism, and above all by G. Rickert.
By Weber's own admission, the works of Karl Marx were of great importance in shaping his thinking, prompting him to study the problems of the emergence and development of capitalism. In general, he attributed Marx to those thinkers who most strongly influenced the socio-historical thought of the 19th and 20th centuries.
As for the general philosophical, worldview plan, Weber experienced two different, and in many respects and mutually exclusive influences: on the one hand, the philosophy of I. Kant, especially in his youth; on the other, almost at the same period, he was under the influence and was a great admirer of N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbes and f. Nietzsche.
To understand the meaning of his views and actions, it should be noted that Kant attracted Weber, first of all, with his ethical pathos. He remained true to the Kantian moral requirement of honesty and conscientiousness in scientific research until the end of his life.
Hobbes and especially Machiavelli made a strong impression on him with their political realism. As the researchers note, it was the gravitation towards these two mutually exclusive poles "(on the one hand, Kant's ethical idealism with its pathos of" truth ", on the other, political realism with its attitude of" sobriety and strength ") that determined a kind of duality of M. Weber's worldview.
The first works of M. Weber - "On the history of trading societies in the Middle Ages" (1889), "Roman agrarian history and its significance for public and private law" (1891) - immediately put him in a number of prominent scientists. In them, he analyzed the relationship of state and legal formations with the economic structure of society. In these works, especially in the "Roman Agrarian History", the general outlines of "empirical sociology" (Weber's expression) were outlined, which was closely associated with history. In accordance with the requirements of the historical school that dominated German political economy, he considered the evolution of ancient agriculture in connection with social and political development, and did not miss the analysis of the forms of family life, way of life, customs, and religious cults.
A trip to the USA in 1904, where he was invited to read a course of lectures, had a great influence on his formation as a sociologist. In 1904, Weber became editor of the German sociological journal Archives of Social Science and Social Policy. Here his most important works are published, including the programmatic study "Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism" (1905). This study begins a series of Weber's publications on the sociology of religion, which he pursued until his death. At the same time, he dealt with problems of logic and methodology of the social sciences. From 1916 to 1919 he published one of his main works - "The Economic Ethics of World Religions". Of the last speeches of Weber, the reports "Politics as a profession" (1919) and "Science as a profession" should be noted. They found expression in Weber's mindset after the First World War. They were quite pessimistic - pessimistic, in relation to the future of industrial civilization, as well as the prospects for the implementation of socialism in Russia. With him, he did not associate any special expectations. He was convinced that if what is called socialism is realized, then it will be, only brought to the end, a system of bureaucratization of society.
Weber died in 1920, not having time to carry out all his plans. His fundamental work "Economy and Society" (1921) was published posthumously, where the results of his sociological research were summed up.
2. The main provisions of the theory of social action
The theory of action has a stable conceptual base in sociology, the formation of which was influenced by various directions of thinking. In order to supplement or expand this theoretical foundation in order to further improve the theory, it is necessary to proceed from the current level of its development, as well as from the contributions of the classics, who today are beginning to form in a new way. All this is necessary in order for it to be effective and not lose its relevance for the future. As for the contribution of M. Weber to the formation of the theory of action, there is a complete mutual understanding among sociologists today. There is no doubt that his founding of sociology as a science of social action represented a radical turn against the positivism and historicism that prevailed in the social sciences at the beginning of the twentieth century. However, great ambiguity and inconsistency exists over the interpretation of his views.
2.1 Social action
Weber defines action (regardless of whether it manifests itself externally, for example, in the form of aggression, or is hidden inside the subjective world of the individual, like suffering) as such behavior with which the acting individual or individuals associate a subjectively assumed meaning. Action becomes "social" only if, according to the meaning assumed by the actor or actors, it correlates with the action of other people and focuses on it. " the basis is subjective meaning. We are talking about a predetermined plan or project of action. As a social, it differs from reactive behavior in that this meaning is related to the action of another. Sociology, therefore, must devote itself to the study of the facts of social action.
This is how Weber defines social action. "Action" should be called human behavior (indifferent, external or internal action, inaction and or suffering), if and since the actor or actors associate some subjective meaning with it. "But" social action "should be called one that, in its meaning, implied by the acting or acting, is related to the behavior of others and is thus oriented in its course." Proceeding from this, "an action cannot be considered social if it is purely imitative, when an individual acts like an atom of a crowd, or when he is guided by some natural phenomenon."
Purpose - meaningful understanding and explanation of social reality, which appears to be the result of meaningful social activity.
Social action, according to Max Weber, is distinguished by two features that make it social, i.e. different from just action. Social action:
1) has a meaning for the one who makes it,
2) focused on other people.
Sense is a certain idea of why or why this action is being performed, it is some (sometimes very vague) awareness and direction of it. Weber's well-known example illustrates his definition of social action: if two cyclists collide on the highway, then this is no social (albeit one that occurs between people) action - that's when they jump up and begin to sort things out among themselves (swear or help a friend friend), then the action takes on the characteristics of the social.
If we analyze social action as a system, the following constituent elements can be distinguished in it:
1) the actor (subject of the action)
2) the object of the action (the person who is being acted upon)
3) a means or instrument of action
4) method of action or method of using means of action
5) the result of the action or the reaction of the person being acted upon.
Social action must be distinguished from behavior. Behavior is a reaction to an action. Social action is a system of actions, means and methods by which a person or groups try to change the behavior, attitudes or opinions of other persons or groups.
A social action, its implementation, requires the subject to have a certain attitude or a strong inclination to perform a certain action.
Social action, writes Weber, is considered to be an action "the subjective meaning of which refers to the behavior of other people." Based on this, an action cannot be considered social if it is purely imitative, when an individual acts like an atom of a crowd, or when he is guided by some natural phenomenon (for example, an action is not social when many people open their umbrellas in the rain ).
Signs of social action:
1 ... the most important sign of social action is subjective meaning - personal comprehension of possible options for behavior.
2 ... important is the conscious orientation of the subject to the response of others, the expectation of this response.
Obligatory components of the action are subject and an object actions.
Subject- is the bearer of purposeful activity, one who acts with consciousness and will.
An object- what the action is directed to.
V functional aspect stand out stages of action :
1. associated with goal setting, goal setting
2. related to their operational implementation.
At these stages, organizational links are established between the subject and the object of action. The goal is the ideal image of the process and the result of an action. The ability to set goals, i.e. to ideal modeling of forthcoming actions, is the most important property of a person as a subject of action.
Six types of social action according to their orientation:
M. Weber identified six types of social action:
1. The correct type, in which the end and the chosen means are objectively adequate to each other and therefore strictly rational.
2. The type in which the means chosen to achieve the goal seem adequate to the subject himself. Objectively, they may not be so.
3. The action is approximate, without a clearly defined goal and means, according to the principle "maybe something will work out."
4. Action that does not have a precise purpose, determined by specific circumstances and understandable only in view of them.
5. An action only partially comprehensible of its circumstances. It also includes a number of incomprehensible elements.
6. An action that is caused by completely incomprehensible psychological or physical factors and is inexplicable from a rational point of view.
This classification is not far-fetched or speculative. It allows you to order all types of social action according to the degree of decreasing rationality, and, consequently, intelligibility. In fact, the transition from one type to another is almost imperceptible. But the accumulation of growing quantitative differences ultimately turns the type of goal-rational action into its opposite, into the type of irrational, practically incomprehensible, inexplicable action. Only the last two types need to be explained from a psychological point of view.
Not all types of action - including external ones - are "social" in the sense accepted here. An external action cannot be called social if it is focused only on the behavior of material objects. Internal attitude is social only if it is oriented towards the behavior of others. So, for example, actions of a religious nature are not social if they do not go beyond the limits of contemplation, prayers read alone, etc. The management (of an individual) is social only if and insofar as it takes into account the behavior of others. In the most general and formal expression, therefore, - if such management reflects the recognition by third parties of the actual rights of a given individual to dispose of his economy at his own discretion. Not all types of relationships between people are social in nature.
Social action is not identical to either:
a) the uniform behavior of many people (if many people on the street open umbrellas in the rain, this (as a rule) does not mean that a person's action is focused on the behavior of others; these are just actions of the same type to protect against rain);
b) the one that is influenced by the behavior of others (it is known that a person's behavior is strongly influenced simply by the fact that he is among the crowded "mass" of people (the subject of "mass psychology" studied in Le Bon's work); such behavior is defined as behavior An individual can also be the object of massive influence from the scattered masses of people if they influence him simultaneously or sequentially (for example, through the press), and he perceives their behavior as the behavior of many. Reactions of a certain type become possible only due to this fact that the individual feels himself to be a part of the "mass", other reactions, on the contrary, are hindered by this.)
M. Weber sought to show how the most important social facts - relations, order, connections - should be defined as special forms of social action. Another thing is that this aspiration has not actually been realized. A systematic explanation of these social facts through the study of the individual actions that constitute them did not take place. Social action leads to social fact. This is Weber's most important thought. But in this case, one should pay attention to the fact that not all the facts that traditional sociology investigates can be explained as certain joint actions, and also refuted through the explanation of the individual actions of the participants. These facts include income distribution, social ideas about values. Social ideas about the world and values that individuals strive to achieve, ideas that, for their part, determine various phenomena - all this is at the center of attention of social science.
In the context of Weber's theory, it is necessary to understand the principles by which the process of performing an action can be explained, which presupposes its reduction to the corresponding motives. It is also necessary to explain the result of an action through understanding, which involves the establishment and investigation of those actions that preceded it. Explaining action through understanding also allows taking into account special principles and techniques for this, i.e. how to use them in each specific case. Weber's judgments regarding the explanation of actions lead to such a theory of the latter, which does not pin any particular hopes on the principle of understanding. M. Weber moves along this path, it will become clear after checking and reconstructing those specific techniques that he uses to explain action through understanding.
To explain the flow of an action by means of understanding, it is necessary to limit oneself to a number of rules and requirements. Therefore, in Weber, it is advisable to distinguish between two points:
1. General techniques for explaining action through understanding.
2. Specific instructions on how these techniques and methods should be used in a particular case.
For Weber, the course of action is behavior under certain external conditions. Its explanation, like the explanation of any other event, must be made by bringing it under the general empirical pattern with which the conditions of action are associated. With this approach, understanding will play a dual role.
Direct explanation is preceded by a special type of understanding aimed at identifying the type of action that needs to be explained by closing its external features to the meaning or purpose of this action, which presupposes the use of hypotheses regarding the connection of certain external features with the corresponding purpose of the action. Direct explanation must be done through “explanatory understanding”. We are talking here about reducing the meaning of an action to its subjective grounds, in order to understand why the person of interest to us acts in this way, and not in another.
To reveal these subjective grounds, a kind of representation of oneself in the place of the acting individual, in the conditions in which he finds himself, is assumed. It is necessary to make available reflections on the goals and means that preceded the actions to be explained. This presupposes that “it is necessary to make the previous connection of feelings and emotions accessible and understandable”.
Weber, therefore, believes that the explanation of action occurs through reference to a specific causal principle. For Weber, explanation acts as a device in which the general rules of experience are applied. However, he expresses the idea that the basis for the interpretation of behavior is one's own knowledge of everyday life. Therefore, the general rules applied when disclosing the grounds for action reveals "their direct connection with personal experience, which substantiates everyday knowledge, and therefore they are not precisely and not quite definitely formulated." Therefore, in the general interpretation of explanatory understanding, Weber draws attention to the fact that understanding occurs in the light of the general rules of everyday knowledge.
For Weber, understanding is a means to find the most obvious and adequate explanation for a given action. But the presence of a “understandably” definite cause of action is not a condition for an adequate explanation. The latter exists when, during empirical verification, it is found that the found explanation turns out to be correct. How such a check should look like - Weber does not specify. With any specific explanation of an action, he seeks to test hypotheses regarding the causal relationship of certain external situations and subjective grounds for action, on the one hand, and a number of grounds for action with the corresponding action, on the other. For Weber, it is important to establish the correspondence between adequacy in meaning and verification through experience.
This test involves some statistical methods, historical comparison and, as a last resort, a thought experiment. In this test, Weber would like to verify the assumptions used in explaining an action regarding the existence of its determinants. For example, the assumption about what goals, assessments of the situation and ideas about the actions of the participants, consistent with the goal, were held by the actors.
The psychological understanding of other people's mental states is, according to Weber, only an auxiliary, and not the main tool for the historian and sociologist. It can be used only if the action to be explained cannot be understood by its meaning.
“In explaining the irrational moments of action, understanding psychology, indeed, can undoubtedly provide an important service. But this, he emphasizes, does not change anything in the methodological principles. "
Directly the most understandable in its semantic structure is an action that is subjectively oriented strictly rationally in accordance with the means that are considered uniquely adequate to achieve unambiguous and clearly perceived goals. "
The most "understandable" is a meaningful action, i.e. directed towards the achievement of goals clearly recognized by the acting individual himself and using for the achievement of these goals means recognized as adequate by the acting individual himself. The consciousness of the acting individual thus turns out to be necessary for the action being studied to act as a social reality.
In explaining action, Weber assigns decisive importance to motives. Therefore, the typology of actions refers to the existing types of motivation. Within the framework of this approach, the individual acts as something self-evident, as an initial given. Society is a collection of people and connections between them. Weber is interested in the formation of a certain stereotype of orientation, which is obligatory for many individuals. It presupposes the existence of corresponding values of norms. Coherence arises when the participants in the interaction are oriented towards this stereotype. Therefore, sociology explains by understanding the meaning of the action that is summed up under it. In this context, society for Weber is something that is consciously regulated.
M. Weber considers only its goal as the determinant of action and does not pay due attention to the circumstances that make it possible. He did not indicate sufficient conditions to find out among which alternatives of action the choice is made. He has no judgments about what goals of action and in what situations the actor has, and, finally, what options for action leading to this goal sees the subject, and what type of selection among them he makes.
3. The theory of social action
Weber identifies four types of activity, focusing on the possible real behavior of people in life:
- goal-rational,
- value-rational,
- affective,
- traditional.
Let us turn to Weber himself: “Social action, like any action, can be defined:
1) purposefully, that is, through the expectation of a certain behavior of objects of the external world and other people and using this expectation as “conditions” or as “means” for rationally directed and regulated goals (the criterion of rationality is success);
2) value-wise, that is, a conscious belief in ethical, aesthetic, religious or any other unconditional self-value (intrinsic value) of a certain behavior, taken simply as such and regardless of success;
3) affectively, especially emotionally - through actual affects and feelings;
4) traditionally, that is, through habit. "
Ideal types of social action
| A type | Target | Facilities | General characteristic |
| Whole-rational | It is realized clearly and distinctly. Consequences are foreseen and evaluated | Adequate (reasonable) | Completely rational. Assumes a rational calculation of the reaction of the environment |
Value- rational |
The action itself (as an independent value) | Adequate to the set goal | Rationality may be limited - irrationality of a given value (ritual; etiquette; dueling code) |
| Traditional | Minimum goal-setting (awareness of purpose) | Habitual | Automatic response to familiar stimuli |
| Affective | Not realized | Henchmen | Striving for immediate (or as quickly as possible) satisfaction of passion, relief of neuro-emotional stress |
3.1 Goal-rational behavior
In "Economy and Society" it is called differently: first "rational", later - "goal-rational", which reveals two distinctive features:
1. It is “subjectively goal-rational”, i.e. due, on the one hand, to a clearly perceived purpose of the action, which does not raise doubts about its implementation. On the other hand, it is a conscious idea that the performed action achieves the goal at the lowest cost.
2. This action is “correctly oriented”. This assumes that in this case the assumption is used that the action of interest to us is consistent with its purpose. It depends on the fact that the subject's ideas about the given situation - let's call them conditionally “ontological” knowledge - were correct, as well as the ideas about what actions he can use to achieve the intended goal. We will conventionally call these representations “monological” knowledge. Schematically, goal-oriented rational action can be described due to the following determinants:
1. A clear awareness of the goal is crucial here in the sense that the undesirable consequences for other subjective goals that may arise in the process of its implementation are questioned. This action is carried out in this situation with the least expensive means for its implementation.
2. Goal-rational action can be defined indirectly, due to the existence of two special determinants:
a) through correct information about the originality of a given situation and the causal relationship of various actions with the implementation of the goal pursued in this situation, i.e. through correct “ontological” or “nomological” knowledge;
b) thanks to a conscious calculation of the proportionality and consistency of the action carried out on the basis of the available information. This involves performing at least four operations:
1. Rational calculation of those actions that may be possible with a certain degree of probability. They can also be the means to achieve the goal.
2. Consciously calculating the consequences of actions that can act as means, and this involves paying attention to the costs and undesirable consequences that may arise due to the frustration of other goals.
3. Rational calculation of the desired consequences of any action, which is also considered as a means. It is necessary to consider whether it is acceptable in the event of undesirable consequences arising.
4. Careful comparison of these actions, considering which of them lead to the goal at the lowest cost.
This model should be applied when explaining a specific action. At the same time, M. Weber outlines two fundamental classes of deviations from the model of goal-oriented rational action.
1. The actor proceeds from false information about the situation and about the options for action that can lead to the implementation of the goal.
2. The actor exhibits a value-rational, affective or traditional action that
a) is not determined through a clear awareness of the goal, which casts doubt on the frustrations of other goals that arise during its implementation. They are characterized through goals that are carried out directly, without taking into account other goals.
b) Not determined by a rational calculation of the proportionality and consistency of action in relation to the situation, carried out on the basis of available information. Such actions are viewed as a limitation of rationality - the further they deviate from it, the more they reveal irrational signs. Therefore, Weber identifies the irrational with the irrational.
So, on the one hand, a value-based rational action is based on a goal, the implementation of which does not take into account the consequences that need to be foreseen. On the one hand, this action is consistent and planned to a certain extent. It follows from the establishment of those imperatives that are responsible for the choice of alternatives to action.
Purpose of rationality is, according to Weber, only a methodological, not an ontological attitude of a sociologist, it is a means of analyzing reality, and not a characteristic of this very reality. Weber specifically emphasizes this point: “This method,” he writes, “of course, should be understood not as a rationalistic prejudice of sociology, but only as a methodological tool, and, therefore, it should not be considered, for example, as a belief in the actual prevalence of the rational principle over life. For it says absolutely nothing about the extent to which rational considerations determine the actual action in reality. " Choosing goal-oriented rational action as a methodological basis, Weber thereby dissociates himself from those sociological theories that take social “totality” as the initial reality, such as “people”, “society”, “state”, “economy”, etc. etc. In this regard, he sharply criticizes "organic sociology", which considers the individual as a part of a certain social organism, strongly objects to the consideration of society according to a biological model: the concept of an organism as applied to society can only be a metamorphosis - no more.
The organicist approach to the study of society abstracts from the fact that man is a being that acts consciously. An analogy between an individual and a cell of the body is possible only if the factor of consciousness is recognized as insignificant. Weber argues against this, putting forward a model of social action that accepts this factor as essential.
It is the goal-oriented rational action that serves as a model of social action for Weber, with which all other types of action are correlated. Weber lists them in the following order: “There are the following types of action:
1) more or less approximately achieved correct type;
2) (subjectively) goal-oriented type;
3) action, more or less consciously and more or less unambiguously goal-oriented and rationally oriented;
4) an action that is not oriented in a goal-rational manner, but understandable in its meaning;
5) an action, in its meaning more or less understandably motivated, but disturbed - more or less strongly - by the intrusion of incomprehensible elements, and, finally,
6) an action in which completely incomprehensible mental or physical facts are associated "with" a person or "in" a person by imperceptible transitions "
3.2 Value-based rational behavior
This ideal type of social action involves the commission of such actions that are based on the conviction of the self-sufficient value of the action as such, in other words, here the action itself acts as a goal. Value-rational action, according to Weber, is always subject to certain requirements, in following which the individual sees his duty. If he acts in accordance with these requirements - even if rational calculation predicts a greater likelihood of adverse consequences of such an act for him personally - then we are dealing with a value-rational action. A classic example of value-rational action: the captain of a sinking ship is the last to leave, although this threatens his life. Awareness of this direction of action, correlating them with certain ideas about values - about duty, dignity, beauty, morality, etc. - already speaks of a certain rationality, meaningfulness. If, moreover, we are dealing with consistency in the implementation of such behavior, and therefore intentionality, then we can talk about an even greater degree of its rationality, which distinguishes a value-rational action, say, from an affective one. At the same time, in comparison with the goal-rational type, the “value rationality” of the action carries something irrational, since it absolutes the value on which the individual is oriented.
“Purely value-wise,” Weber writes, “one acts who, regardless of the foreseeable consequences, acts in accordance with his convictions and does what, as it seems to him, demands from him duty, dignity, beauty, religious prescription, reverence or importance of any ... "business." Value-based rational action ... is always an action in accordance with the commandments or requirements that the actor considers presented to himself. In the case of a value-rational action, the goal of the action and it itself coincide, they are not dismembered, just as in the case of an affective action; side effects in both the first and the second are not taken into consideration.
It seems that the difference between goal-rational and value-rational types of social action is about the same as between the truth and true... The first of these concepts means "that there is in fact, "regardless of the system of ideas, convictions, beliefs prevailing in a particular society. It is really not easy to get this kind of knowledge, you can simply sequentially, step by step, approach it, as the positivist Comte proposes to do. The second means comparing what you observe or intend to undertake with the norms and ideas generally accepted in this society about what should be done and what is right.
3.3 Affective behavior
Affect- this emotional excitement, which develops into passion, a strong emotional impulse. Affect comes from within; under its influence, a person acts unconsciously. As a short-term emotional state, affective behavior is not focused on the behavior of others or a conscious choice of goals. A state of confusion before an unexpected event, elation and enthusiasm, irritation with others, depression and melancholy are all affective forms of behavior.
Due to the fact that this action is based on a goal, the implementation of which is not questioned with the established undesirable consequences for other goals. But this goal is not long-term as in value-rational action, it is short-term and not stable. Affective action also has a quality that is not subjective-rational, i.e. it is not connected with the rational calculation of possible alternatives of action and the selection of the best of them. This action signifies a feeling-dictated devotion to a target attitude that fluctuates and changes according to a constellation of feelings and emotions. Comprehension of an affectively established goal in relation to other goals in terms of their compatibility, as well as their consequences, is unproductive here.
"An individual acts under the influence of affect if he seeks to immediately satisfy his need for revenge, pleasure, devotion, blissful contemplation, or relieve the tension of any other affects, no matter how base or refined they may be."
3.4 Traditional behavior
It cannot even be called conscious, because it is based on a dull reaction to habitual stimuli. It proceeds according to the once adopted scheme. The irritants are various taboos and prohibitions, norms and rules, customs and traditions. They are passed down from generation to generation. This, for example, is the custom of hospitality that exists among all peoples. It is followed automatically, out of habit to behave this way and not otherwise.
Traditional action is associated with rules of a certain order, the meaning and purpose of which are unknown. With this type of action, there is a goal, for the achievement of which a certain sequence of actions is required. In this case, this sequence has not been calculated. With the traditional orientation, the scope for rational understanding is narrowed due to the norms prescribing, in a particular case, specific goals and means for their implementation.
However, actions determined through a stable tradition are preceded by incomplete processing of information about the existing situation, which contains a kind of “habitual charm” to which they react with traditional actions, and actions leading in this situation to the set goal.
As Weber himself points out,
"... purely traditional action ... is at the very border, and often even beyond what can be called" meaningfully "oriented action.
Strictly speaking, only the first two types of action are completely social, because they deal with a conscious meaning. So, speaking about the early types of society, the sociologist notes that traditional and affective actions prevailed in them, and in an industrial society - goal-oriented and value-rational ones with a tendency for the former to dominate.
The types of social action described by Weber are not just a methodological device convenient for explanation. Weber is convinced that the rationalization of rational action is a tendency in the historical process itself.
The four indicated types of action are arranged by Weber in the order of increasing rationality: if the traditional and affective actions can be called subjective-irrational (objectively they can turn out to be rational), then the value-rational action already contains a subjective-rational moment, since the actor consciously correlates his actions with a certain value as a goal; however, this type of action is only relatively rational, since, first of all, the value itself is accepted without further mediation and justification and (as a result) the side effects of the action are not taken into account. The actual behavior of the individual, says Weber, is oriented, as a rule, in accordance with two or more types of action: there are goal-rational, value-rational, and affective, and traditional moments in it. True, in different types of societies, certain types of action can be predominant: in societies that Weber called "traditional", traditional and affective types of action orientation prevail, of course, two more rational types of action are not excluded. On the contrary, in an industrial society, goal-oriented rational action acquires the greatest importance, but all other types of orientation are, to a greater or lesser extent, present here as well.
Finally, Weber notes that the four ideal types do not exhaust the whole variety of types of orientation of human behavior - but since Since they can be considered the most characteristic, they represent a fairly reliable tool for the practical work of a sociologist.
The typology of the increasing rationality of social action expressed, according to Weber, an objective trend in the historical process, which, despite many deviations, was of a worldwide nature. The increasing weight of goal-oriented rational action, displacing the main types, leads to the rationalization of the economy, management, the very way of thinking and the way of life of a person. Universal rationalization is accompanied by the growing role of science, which, being the purest manifestation of rationality, becomes the basis of economics and management. Society is gradually transforming from traditional to modern, based on formal rationalism.
Conclusion
Max Weber's ideas are very fashionable today for modern sociological thought in the West. They are experiencing a kind of renaissance, revival. This indicates that Max Weber was an outstanding scientist. His social ideas, obviously, were of a forward-looking character, if they are so much in demand today by Western sociology as a science about society and the laws of its development.
In Weber's understanding, human action takes on a character social action, if there are two points in it: the subjective motivation of the individual and the orientation towards another person. Understanding motivation and attributing it to the behavior of other people are essential aspects of sociological research. Weber also identified four possible types of real behavior of people in life: goal-rational, holistically rational, affective and traditional.
Having thus determined the meaning of social action, Weber came to the conclusion that the main position of rationality, which is reflected in modern Weber's capitalist society, with its rational management and rational political power.
In all his studies, Weber pursued the idea of rationality as a defining feature of modern European culture. Rationality opposes the traditional and charismatic ways of organizing social relations. Weber's central problem is the connection between the economic life of society, the material and ideological interests of various social groups and religious consciousness. Weber viewed personality as the basis of sociological analysis.
A study of Weber's works allows us to draw the necessary conclusion that a person's behavior entirely depends on his worldview, and the interest that each person has in a particular activity is due to the value system that a person is guided by.
Bibliography:
1. Weber M. Basic sociological concepts // Weber M. Selected works. Moscow: Progress, 1990.
3.Gaydenko P.P., Davydov Yu.N. History and Rationality (Max Weber's Sociology and the Weberian Renaissance). M .: Politizdat, 1991.
4. Gaidenko P.P., Davydov Yu.N. History and Rationality (Max Weber's Sociology and the Weberian Renaissance). M .: Politizdat, 1991.
5. Zborovskiy G.E. History of Sociology: Textbook. - M .: Gardariki, 2004.
6. History of sociology in Western Europe and the United States. Textbook for universities. / Responsible editor - academician G.V. Osipov. - M .: Publishing house NORMA, 2001
7. History of theoretical sociology. In 4 tons / hole Ed. And compiled by Yu.N. Davydov. - M .: Canon, 1997.
8. Aron R. Stages of development of sociological thought. –M., 1993.
9. Goffman A.B. Seven Lectures on the History of Sociology. –M., 1995.
10. Gromov I. et al. Western theoretical sociology. - SPb., 1996.
11. Radugin A.A., Radugin K.A. Sociology. Lecture course. –M., 1996.
12. Sociology. Foundations of the general theory. Tutorial. / G.V. Osipov et al. –M., 1998.
13. Sociology. Textbook. / Ed. E.V. Tadevosyan. –M., 1995.
14. Frolov S.S. Sociology. –M., 1998.
15. Volkov Yu.G., Nechipurenko V.N., Popov A.V., Samygin S.I. Sociology: Course of lectures: Textbook. - Rostov-n / D: Phoenix, 2000.
16. Lukman T. On the sociological vision of morality and moral communication // Sociology on the threshold of the XXI century: New directions of research. M .: Intellect, 1998.
17. Berger P., Lukman T. Social construction of reality. Treatise on the Sociology of Knowledge / Per. from English E. D. Rutkevich. M .: Academia-center, Medium, 1995.
18. Borovik V.S., Kretov B.I. Fundamentals of Political Science and Sociology: Textbook. - M .: Higher school, 2001.
19. Kravchenko A.I. "Sociology M. Weber".
20. Internet resources (, www.5ballov.ru, yandex.ru, www.gumer.ru)
In addition to six types of social action according to their orientation, Weber identified four more special types: goal-rational, value-rational, affective and traditional Patrushev A.I. The enchanted world of M. Weber. p. - 103. “Social action, like any action, can be defined:
1) goal-rational, that is, through the expectation of a certain behavior of objects of the external world and other people when using this expectation as a "condition"
Or as a "means" for rationally directed and regulated goals (the criterion of rationality is success);
2) value-rational, that is, through a conscious belief in ethical, aesthetic, religious or otherwise understood unconditional self-value (intrinsic value) of a certain behavior, taken simply as such and regardless of success;
3) affectively, especially emotionally - through actual affects and feelings;
4) traditionally, that is, through habit.
One cannot immediately fail to draw attention to the fact that even the last two types of action - affective and traditional - are not social actions in the strict sense of the word, because here there is nothing to do with the meaning realized and underlying the action. Weber himself notes that “strictly traditional behavior, as well as purely reactive imitation, completely and completely stands on the border, and often on the other side of what can generally be called“ meaning-oriented ”action, for it is very often only dull reaction to habitual irritations, proceeding according to the once adopted habitual attitude. Only value-rational and goal-rational actions are the essence of social action, in the Weberian sense of the word.
“Purely value-wise,” Weber writes, “one acts who, regardless of the foreseeable consequences, acts in accordance with his convictions and does what, as it seems to him, demands from him duty, dignity, beauty, religious prescription, reverence or importance of any ... "business." Value-based rational action ... is always an action in accordance with the commandments or requirements that the actor considers presented to himself. In the case of a value-rational action, the goal of the action and it itself coincide, they are not dismembered, just as in the case of an affective action; side effects in both the first and the second are not taken into consideration.
In contrast to value-rational action, the last, fourth type - goal-rational action in all respects lends itself to dismemberment. “Purposefully,” Weber writes, “one acts who orients his action in accordance with the goal, means and side effects and at the same time rationally weighs both means in relation to the goal, as goals in relation to side effects, and, finally, various possible goals in relation to each other. "
The four indicated types of action are arranged by Weber in the order of increasing rationality: if the traditional and affective actions can be called subjective-irrational (objectively they can turn out to be rational), then the value-rational action already contains a subjective-rational moment, since the actor consciously correlates his actions with a certain value as a goal; however, this type of action is only relatively rational, since, first of all, the value itself is accepted without further mediation and justification and (as a result) the side effects of the action are not taken into account. The actual behavior of an individual, says Weber, is oriented, as a rule, in accordance with two or more types of action: there are goal-rational, value-rational, and affective, and traditional moments in it. True, in different types of societies, certain types of action can be predominant: in societies that Weber called "traditional", traditional and affective types of action orientation prevail, of course, two more rational types of action are not excluded. On the contrary, in an industrial society, goal-rational action acquires the greatest importance, but all other types of orientation, to a greater or lesser extent, are also present here. P.P. Gaidenko, Yu.N. Davydov. History and Rationality (Max Weber's Sociology and the Weberian Renaissance). M .: Politizdat, 1991. p. 74.
Finally, Weber notes that the four ideal types do not exhaust the whole variety of types of orientation of human behavior - but since they can be considered the most characteristic, then for the practical work of a sociologist they are a fairly reliable tool A.I. Patrushev. The enchanted world of M. Weber. With. 105.
The typology of the increasing rationality of social action expressed, according to Weber, an objective trend in the historical process, which, despite many deviations, was of a worldwide nature. The increasing weight of goal-oriented rational action, displacing the main types, leads to the rationalization of the economy, management, the very way of thinking and the way of life of a person. Universal rationalization is accompanied by the growing role of science, which, being the purest manifestation of rationality, becomes the basis of economics and management. Society is gradually transforming from traditional to modern, based on formal rationalism.
In Weber's doctrine, rationality is divided into formal and material, the difference between which is very significant.
"The formal rationality of the economy should indicate the measure of the calculation that is technically possible for it and actually applied by it." On the contrary, material rationality is characterized by the degree "to which any provision of material goods with the benefits of a certain group of people takes or can take the form of an economically oriented social action from the point of view of certain value postulates."
Material rationality is associated with the value-rational type of action, formal rationality with the goal-rational, which turns it into rationality in itself.