What is the role of a person in society and family. Obtaining paid medical care in public and private medical institutions, as well as from persons engaged in private medical practice, is carried out on the grounds and in the manner established by law. Ka

2. The place of a person in a team and society

A child was born in the family. He inherited from his parents a human physiological organization, a human brain in terms of volume, structure, and weight. What is the consciousness of this child, or rather, what will be his thoughts, experiences, ideas? Who will he become, what, what place will he take in society? Maybe everything is predetermined by fate, and the environment in which he fell at birth does not play any role in his formation and development? Perhaps, just as a photographic film gradually develops and an image is revealed on it more and more clearly, so in the course of its development, in a person, what is inherent in him in finished form will only appear more clearly, and only time is needed for its manifestation?

The history of mankind, the history of each individual, convincingly shows that this is not so.

A person, having been born, immediately falls into the environment of people, experiences their influence. The role of the environment is enormous. Communication with people forms not only certain features of behavior, but essentially the person himself, his consciousness.

Watch the child. From the earliest years, under the influence and with the help of the people around him, he masters household items that he meets for the first time, repeats the first words after adults, learns their meaning, and receives the first knowledge about the world from adults. In games, in communication with older children, the child perceives and assimilates various ideas, under the influence of parents, he learns what is good and what is bad.

So, consciousness is not inherent in the finished form in a person by some supernatural force, but is formed as a result of life in society. From this we can draw the following conclusion: it is in the conditions of life that one must look for the key to certain moods, ideas, aspirations and interests of a person, the key to the features of his psychology, his personality.

In conversation, we use such concepts as "man", "personality", "individual". They certainly have a lot in common, but there are also differences. The concept of "man" is more general. With it, we express the integrity of the human being, the unity of all its manifestations, both social and biological. And using the word "personality", we emphasize, first of all, the social properties of a person, such, for example, as relationships with other people, a place in society. In this case, we are not interested in biological features, say, the shape of the nose, the color of the eyes, etc. And, finally, the "individual". They use it when they want to talk about a person as a separate, single representative of a social group, to show the properties of appearance, psyche or behavior inherent in him.

Each person is characterized by certain psychological characteristics, a certain spiritual world: feelings, moods, character, abilities, interests, ideals, aspirations, beliefs, etc. Of course, the child inherits from his parents certain inclinations, however, the determining their development is influenced by the environment, the society in which a person lives. Human behavior depends on its natural organization, natural features, say, on the type nervous system, temperament. One, suppose, is characterized by increased irritability, it is more difficult for him to restrain himself, it is easier for another to remain calm even in difficult life circumstances. But under the influence of life, upbringing, the nature of activity, these natural properties of the nervous system can change, certain abilities will develop under favorable conditions, and perish under bad conditions. A personality is formed with its inherent views, attitude to the environment, the nature of behavior, interests. Most clearly, the psychological orientation of the individual is manifested in the worldview.

What is called worldview? Man's views on nature, society, his place in life, moral principles. But a worldview is not just a system of human knowledge, but a person's beliefs based on this knowledge, his attitude to various social phenomena. For example, this or that person studied the works of the founders of Marxism-Leninism. Can it be said on the basis of this alone that he possesses a Marxist worldview? Of course not. Knowledge can be called a worldview only when it becomes a person's personal conviction, when it expresses his attitude to the environment, and will be embodied in actions, in practical activities. A worldview cannot help but influence a person's behavior, the nature of his life, since it is not just some kind of abstract knowledge, knowledge as such, but a person's conviction.

The worldview, views, beliefs, ideals, likes and dislikes of an individual, of course, are not innate features, they are formed under the influence of the society in which he lives. He is influenced by the spiritual atmosphere of this society, the opinions, moods, aspirations that prevail among the people around him.

So, a person, his consciousness, behavior is a product of the social and cultural environment. In the words of Karl Marx, the essence of man "is the totality of all social relations." This is determined by the fact that a person lives in society, in a concrete historical system of human relations. Therefore, it is not a person in general that is formed, but a specific, concrete historical type of personality.

In the process of the historical development of mankind, one society was replaced by another, social conditions, the nature of relations between people changed, and this was reflected in a change in their ideas, ideals, and views. So, under the primitive communal system, when people owned everything in common, naturally, their consciousness was free from the desire for personal enrichment, accumulation. The emergence of private property gives rise to the psychology of the owner, the money-grubber. A person who lives and is brought up in a bourgeois society falls into the atmosphere of this psychology. Under capitalism, the psychology and morality of private property and profit, individualism and egoism have developed to extreme forms.

The absence of private property, the change in social relations forms a different psychology - the psychology of collectivism, solidarity. Here, for example, is the characteristic data of one of the surveys of young readers conducted by Komsomolskaya Pravda. Of the 17,446 people who answered the questionnaire, only 381 named a successful, profitable marriage as the only goal of life, only 342 limited their future to "home comfort." And the vast majority - 95.9 percent have set other goals for themselves: to serve the people, to benefit people, to become highly qualified specialists, masters of their craft, a Person with a capital letter. The young people's answers vividly express the psychology of a person who expresses new, socialist relations. We are forming a new personality, with new needs and interests. All this suggests that the arguments of religious and bourgeois ideologists about human nature as eternal and unchanging are without foundation.

Religious ideologists also preach the ideas of divine predestination: everything in the world, in people's lives, is supposedly predestined by supernatural forces. If so, then if you are oppressed by a capitalist, endure, show humility, pray and you will receive a reward in the afterlife. Such ideas played into the hands of the exploiting classes, since they accustomed the working people to passivity, submissiveness, and distracted them from revolutionary actions.

But a person is not only a product of society, certain social conditions and circumstances, but also the creator of these conditions. He is able to change, transform circumstances, his life. In the Soviet Union, and later in other socialist countries, the exploitation of man by man was abolished, and a new, socialist society was built. In their practical activities, people transform both the surrounding life and their inner world, which manifests the activity of the individual, his creative nature, his freedom.

But in order to change the life of society, one must know the laws of its development. They also have an objective character, that is, they act in nature and society, regardless of whether we know them or not. If we do not know, then we are their slaves, if we know and use in our practice, then we become creators, gain freedom. The higher, the richer the knowledge of people, the more effective their activity in transforming the world. And only in a society where there are no oppressed and disadvantaged classes, where public property dominates, are equal and real opportunities created for everyone - to work, rest, get an education, and actively participate in the life of the country.

The communist worldview, based on a scientific understanding of the phenomena of nature and society, orients a person to the knowledge of these laws, to change, to improve the life of the people, to build a happy life. real life for all workers. Therefore, it activates the forces and abilities of a person, directs them to socially useful activities. The religious, on the other hand, explains the development of the world by fictitious supernatural forces. His whole system, based on illusions, incorrectly orients a person in life, relaxes the will, directs it to unrealistic hopes, unnecessary fears, reconciles with suffering, grief, promising eternal happiness in the other world.

People with different views on life have different interests, aspirations, goals. A person is active in relation to that phenomenon that has some value, some meaning in his eyes. Religion directs a person's attention to the other world, and some people direct their feelings, interests, aspirations to these illusions. After all, if a person has eternal life ahead, the believer argues, why strive for something in this transient life, why associate the fulfillment of desires with it. As a result, a person is passive in a team, society, he transfers his hopes, his happiness to the unreal world, refusing the true ways to their implementation, construction. The believer is in a false position due to the fact that in his decisions he proceeds from the wrong idea - he believes in the existence of an afterlife. Such views disorient the believer, give him the illusion of eternity and take away the fullness of the only real life.

Thus, the conditions of the material life of society, the peculiarities of its economic system, the nature of relations between people, the spiritual atmosphere, the dominant ideology influence the formation of the psychology of each member of this society. In a society divided into classes of oppressors and oppressed, the opposition of the interests of these classes is natural. In a socialist society, social oppression has been eliminated, there are no more classes with opposing interests, and this is reflected in the dominant psychology and ideology.

However, in our society there are still people who have not freed themselves from certain remnants of the past. What explains this? After all, human consciousness is formed in the process of life in society. Why, then, in our country, where scientific ideology dominates, there are believers in God?

Take for example two members of our society. One was born in a religious family, the other - in a family of atheists. From the very beginning, the children found themselves in a different environment, assimilating different views. This explains the fact that the vast majority of believers came from religious families. This means that a person enters into conscious life, having already certain inclinations, interests, views, formed in his first team - the family.

One and the same concept, depending on education, can have different meanings. The French philosopher of the 18th century Helvetius writes on this subject that if for a girl raised by a pious mother, the word "virtue" evokes only an idea of monastic discipline, then for a girl who grew up in an educated, patriotic family, this word is associated with deeds that are useful to the Fatherland. .

In accordance with his aspirations, interests formed in the family, a person has a different attitude to the life around him, focuses his attention on one thing, does not notice the other, perceives the third in his own way. Those ideas, ideas that exist in society, he, of course, cannot perceive in full, assimilates only some part of these ideas as a result of communicating with people, reading newspapers, books, etc. For the formation of his consciousness, it is important what he learns. And this is largely determined by education, the influence of the immediate environment.

A person from an unbelieving family also falls under the influence of religious ideology. This is usually due to the fact that his life was unsuccessful, he was lonely, his friends overlooked his misfortune, did not come to the rescue in time. Despondency, pessimism, loneliness, fear make a person receptive to religion, he finds consolation in it. And in such cases, religiosity is explained not by some kind of supernatural intervention, but by the way of life, the influence of the microenvironment, the environment.

But even believers, being members of our society, cannot but experience the influence of communist ideology. Many of them listen to the radio, read newspapers, work in teams. Religion in their minds is gradually receding into the background, it determines their behavior and interests less and less. A person can break away from the milieu of believers. This happens when its ties with society expand.

Under socialism, the working masses do not act as separate, disparate individuals, but as a cohesive socio-political and spiritual whole, in which everyone feels that they are part of a community that is close to them in terms of ideological principles, political interests and views and which makes it possible to work and reveal all their abilities. in free labor for the good of society and for the good of every individual. In this sense, the society of developed socialism has the integrity of a system, each element of which develops in accordance with the others.

The most important social formation, the primary cell of socialist society, which ensures the connection of the individual with society as a whole, with its various spheres, is the collective. The stronger the social ties and relationships between people in it, the more viable the team, the more effectively it performs its tasks, the more purposefully it affects the individual. The collective as a form of social community of people differs from other communities in that in it the individual exists not only as the bearer of a certain social role, but in a community of equals he manifests all his individual properties and qualities.

The labor collective, which develops and acts as the basic unit of socialist society, embodies the most important features and advantages of socialism. The socialist labor collective, by its social nature, is an association of people who are free in the social sense, in which workers, collective farmers, intelligentsia, representatives of various nations of the Soviet country work together and in cooperation with other collectives. As noted in the Law on labor collectives adopted in June 1983, in these associations joint work is carried out on the basis of comradely cooperation and mutual assistance, the unity of state, public and personal interests is ensured, the principle of responsibility of each to the team and the team for each employee is affirmed. Work collectives provide a deep understanding of the relationship between their work and the well-being of all members of the team, with the well-being of the whole society.

All this fundamentally distinguishes the socialist labor collective from those associations of workers in capitalist enterprises that are carried out under the authority and in the interests of capital and which K. Marx called "imaginary collectivity", "a surrogate for collectivity." In contrast to the capitalist forms of association of people, where labor and capital, worker and capitalist, irreconcilable in their interests, are opposed to each other, socialist labor collectives are becoming more and more socially homogeneous. They not only develop and enrich collective forms of activity, but also affirm the collectivist consciousness and behavior of people, when each member of the team takes care of both personal success and the affairs of his fellow workers, society as a whole.

It is in the socialist labor collective that such important qualities of the individual are laid down and formed, which are the moral basis of his spiritual world, such as understanding the significance of everyday work not only for himself personally, but also for the success of the collective cause, as well as for the growth of the well-being of all Soviet people, the feeling of being the owner of his own fate, their country. In the collective, the ideological and moral potential of society is assimilated and enriched, refracted in relations and actions specific to it, and the standards characteristic of socialist society, patterns of behavior become the ideological and moral basis of the personality of the worker, are refracted in his consciousness, aspirations and actions.

The opinion of the collective is of great importance in the successful solution of economic, social and educational tasks, in the formation of a new person. Collective discussion of pressing problems, accounting public opinion on issues of improving the organization of labor, strengthening order and discipline, organizing free time, improving consumer services and educating people - the most important way for the effective implementation of the rights of the labor collective to participate in the affairs of society.

The process of assimilation by a person of values, norms, attitudes of society occurs not only under the influence of the work collective, but also in other collectives and groups of the environment significant for the individual. Each specific team as such does not have the entire set of social values(material and spiritual), necessary for the formation of a socially active, spiritually rich, holistic personality. Due to the limited nature of the main goals for which a collective is created and functions - production (labor), cognitive (educational), artistic (say, a union of composers or an amateur art group), etc., and also due to the inevitable limited means of material and of a spiritual order, which are at the immediate disposal of this team, he is not able by himself to perform such a large-scale, complex and multifaceted task as the formation of an integral, comprehensively developed, spiritually rich personality.

A collective of a higher level, higher social rank and broader social opportunities - socialist society as a whole - has real means for accomplishing this task. Each specific collective included in this social community - production, educational, military, scientific research, etc., contributes with its resources, means and capabilities to the fulfillment of this task, global in scale and significance for socialist society. Therefore, the more actively a person is involved in activities and communication within the collective, and at the same time, the more energetically he is included in the creation, assimilation, reproduction of the values of socialist life and culture outside the collective, outside it - in the field of science, art, education, sports, social activities etc., the richer it becomes in its social and spiritual development. But since such development is not limited to the self-development of the individual, but is expressed and refracted in its activity and in its communication within the team, insofar as it (development) contributes not only to the versatility and integrity of the individual, but also to the versatility and integrity of the team.

The highest measure of the development of truly collectivist relations in the work collective is the degree of development and active use of the creative potential of the individual both in production and labor activities and in communication, in the possibilities of creative, intellectual saturation of her leisure, communication outside of working hours.

However, despite the importance of the educative influence of the collective on the development of the individual, on the enrichment of his spiritual world, this process cannot be simplified, since the individual perceives the influences coming from the collective as an original individuality, having its own views, feelings, interests, aspirations that distinguish it from other people. The important role of the collective in the formation of personality lies precisely in the fact that all forms of influence on the spiritual world of a person, used in a collective, achieve success only when the individually unique properties and traits of each personality are taken into account. The educational role of the collective increases to the extent that the individual characteristics of its constituent people are taken into account and, taking into account these characteristics, the common task is carried out related to the formation of a conscious and active citizen of a socialist society, possessing a Marxist-Leninist worldview, ideological conviction, high moral culture, conscientious attitude to to work.

Consider the definition of what a role is. This is a problem in the social sciences. In sociology, this term means a certain model of a person in the circumstances set by social institutions. This concept is closely related to the social status of the individual, since it implies a set of actions that people expect from a person in accordance with his social position.

Classification of behavior patterns

The role of a person, as a rule, is determined by several factors: his official status, family, friends with whom he enters into informal communication. Let us briefly describe the main components of the given situations. Professional duties give a person a formal model of behavior, which he willy-nilly is forced to adhere to. Colleagues, superiors at work expect from the subject such actions that would meet the needs of the team.

The family also involves a wide range of very different behaviors. Interpersonal relations between spouses are built both on an emotional-sensory level and on legal norms enshrined in public institutions. And every time a person acts depending on which of the above levels the contact takes place.

What is the role in informal communication can be traced on the example of such phenomena as the selection of a leader in a group, the presence in any team of a person whom everyone treats with disdain, or a pet in the family, etc. Each of these situations sets a certain behavior of its participants, which is formed most often at a subconscious level.

Role Acquisition Paths

Any person can raise or, conversely, lower his social status, which, in turn, will lead to a change in his manners and actions in society. Most often, a person achieves this in a professional field: for example, a student can achieve a scientific degree and become a professor, or a simple soldier can rise to the rank of general, or an ordinary official can be promoted. However, biological roles cannot be changed; in this case, it is about how a person corresponds to them.

The degree of formalization of relations

The characterization of the question of what a role is involves finding out the relationship between the interpersonal and official models of human behavior in a particular status. If a person occupies a certain position in society for a long time, then his behavior, as a rule, combines formal and informal elements. For example, in the case when a person serves at one job for a long time, his relationship with his boss is likely to develop in exactly this way. The subordinate will behave in accordance with the prescribed norms, but at the same time, due to a long acquaintance, behavior will sometimes be determined not by rules and attitudes, but by emotions and feelings.

Motives and stereotypes

A person, often without thinking about what a role is, nevertheless acts in accordance with the set standards, which depend on his social status. Interpersonal relationships depend on attachments and sympathies, which determine behavior in an informal relationship. For example, the natural attachment of parents to their children is the motivation for taking care of them. The desire to achieve material wealth or high social status is often an excellent stimulus for career advancement. The moral sense of duty also determines a person's behavior in difficult circumstances.

The role of the individual in society is often based on stereotypes. Under the latter concept, it is customary to understand stable actions and attitudes towards certain events, facts, people. Certain patterns of perception of reality often form in advance the views and, consequently, the actions of a person. With the help of stereotypes, a person forms his own, perhaps even somewhat simplified, idea of the world around him, which forms his behavior in relation to given objects.

Gender norms

A large role in the development of society is played by a set of norms and ideas about how a person should behave depending on belonging to the male or female sex. Perhaps this is one of the earliest installations in human society. It is significant that scientists do not consider it possible to say that the gender role in society was originally a biologically given constant. On the contrary, some researchers tend to see social or cognitive elements in it.

The fact is that this concept implies certain social expectations on the part of society in relation to a man and a woman. For example, from time immemorial it has been considered that the spouse is the earner, and the wife and mother are the keeper of the hearth and the educator of children. However, recently there has been a tendency to change these ideas: for example, women, in connection with feminization, tend to perform male functions.

Theme description: School essay on the topic: On the role of man in society.

"The role of man in society".

Modern people live in a society, in connection with which they are somehow forced to take part in some activities useful for the whole society. Probably, not one civilized person cannot live without society, because this is how housing, food are acquired and various moral needs are satisfied. But if man cannot live without society, can society do without man?

Probably everyone understands that there is no such person without whom society would collapse. But vice versa. I believe that there is no unnecessary person, because everyone has their own role and everyone is useful for others in some way. How is it determined what role a particular person will play? Does it depend on whether he will be a simple hard worker, a competent specialist or a wealthy investor, or maybe even a politician?

I think that each person chooses what role he will play in society. If he is persistent and goes to his set goal, no matter what, he is likely to achieve it. The main thing is not to give up, after the “falls” this is probably the most key factor. Of course, there are various unforeseen situations when everything will go completely different from what was planned, and maybe even radically vice versa. However, I doubt that if Putin did not want to become president, he would become one, and also, if Mendeleev did not work so hard studying chemical elements, he would dream of his famous table.

It is also worth noting that the roles of people should be different, and they cannot all become bosses at the same time, because if this is allowed, it will turn out that it is much more prestigious to be just a good employee and that the bosses themselves fight for you, like for a prize at an auction.

(Painting by Kazimir Malevich "Rest. Society in top hats" 1908)

I personally came to the following conclusion for myself: a person receives a role in society in proportion to his indispensability. But in order to become truly indispensable, you need to do a huge amount of work and in the area that is currently most in demand. However, together with the above, it should be taken into account that the real world is very unstable and what is in great demand today, tomorrow may turn out to be unnecessary to anyone and vice versa. Therefore, you need to have a goal and go towards it, but it is also necessary to be diversified and be ready for unexpected changes.

Social role is a status-role concept, which is one of the most popular theories in sociology. Any person is a part of society, society and, in accordance with it, performs a number of functions, and therefore, in this concept, a person is a subject. Well-known American sociologists laid the foundations for the concept of personality, they were R. Minton, J. Mead and T. Parson, of course, each has individual merits for the contribution of their efforts and potential to the development of the status-role concept.

Social status and social role are the main two concepts that describe a person. An individual, occupying a certain place in society, is fixed by a social position and has certain rights and obligations. It is this position that defines a person. At the same time, a person has several statuses, one of which is the main or basic, that is, the main status is the profession or position of a person.

The social role is the functions of a person that he performs within the framework of his social status in a particular And given that one person has several statuses, then, accordingly, he performs several roles. The total set within the framework of one social status is a social set. A person performs more social roles if he has a much higher status and position in society.

The social role of a person working in a security agency is fundamentally different from the role set of the President of the country, this is all understandable and easy. In general, the American sociologist T. Parson was the first to systematize the roles, thanks to which five main categories were identified that allow qualifying individual social roles:

A social role is something that is regulated in some cases. For example, the social role of a civil servant is strictly outlined, and the role of the fact that this employee is a man is very blurred and individual.
Some roles are extremely emotional, while others require rigor and restraint.
Social roles may differ in the way they are obtained. It depends on the social status, which is prescribed or achieved by a person independently.
The scale and scope of powers within one social role is clearly defined, while in others it is not even established.
The performance of the role is motivated by personal interests or for the sake of public duty.

It is important to remember that a social role is a model of behavior that is balanced between role expectation and a person's character. That is, this is not an exact mechanism and scheme, as expected from a particular social role, but role-specific behavior depending on the individual characteristics of a person. Once again, we will consolidate that the social role of a person is determined by a specific social status, expressed by a certain profession, field of activity. For example, a teacher, musician, student, salesman, director, accountant, politician. The social role of the individual is always assessed by society, approved or condemned. For example, the role of a criminal or a prostitute has a public censure.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

1. Correlations of the concepts "individual", "personality", "individuality" with the concept of "person"

Man is a multifaceted and multi-qualitative phenomenon, a product of society, a natural being, a subject of culture, etc. Therefore, for its expression, it requires various concepts, the most important of which are: " Human" , " individual" , " individuality" , " personality".

Concept " Human" reflects the generic features inherent in the human individual, his biological organization, consciousness, language, ability to work. Thus, it gives the most general and therefore the most abstract characteristic of the individual, devoid of his concrete image.

The concept of " individual" designates a person as a single representative of the human race, belonging both to nature and society, combining a combination of biological properties and social appearance.

But how is the individual connected with society, does this connection allow the individual to be an individual and claim personal autonomy?

The problem of individuality has always attracted the attention of scientists and has been associated with the question of whether a person can become himself, an original, unique personality. Individuality is the unique originality of any phenomenon, a separate being, and, of course, first of all, refers to a person, a deep knowledge of which is impossible without considering him as an individuality.

The definition of individuality is an attempt to comprehend the integrity of a particular subject, based on its individual parameters. The task of this definition is to complicate the simple isolation of the fact of the separateness of a certain person to developed ideas about the formation and existence of his uniqueness. At the same time, the original emphasis of addressing a person is not only not lost, but serves as a constant guide and goal for comprehending human reality, its most important initial characteristic.

Nature itself preserves in the individual not only general species, but also unique, unique features, which is already found at the genetic level. The biological uniqueness of organisms is rigidly programmed by the genotype and is preserved with any changes in the environment. The wider the biological diversity of individuals, the stronger the position of the species consisting of them in nature.

Also, the successful functioning and development of society presupposes the presence of a certain level of diversity of its members. It is the diversity of its members, the existence of distinct individualities, that constitutes the real richness of every society and its culture. Therefore, the individual originality of people is the law of social development. This is the so-called paradox of individuality. Society requires a certain unification of individuals, for example, professional, and at the same time cannot exist without the preservation and development of people's individual characteristics. In this sense, individuality can be represented as a social way of human existence.

Individuality and singularity are not the same thing. The singular confirms the fact of the existence of individuality, pointing to its presence, but does not express the qualitative certainty of individual existence. Hence, the definition of individuality through singularity is its formal characteristic, not related to its meaningful analysis.

Individuality is not reduced to the differences of individuals, is not identical to the uniqueness of the individual. This is far from the only sign of individuality. It is not for nothing that in ancient philosophy he did not play a significant role at all in the characterization of individual existence. The general orientation of the worldview of the ancient Greeks, who considered the world as an eternal cycle and repetition of being, was reduced to emphasizing the priority of universality over random isolation.

The main reason why the uniqueness of an individual is not identical with individuality lies in the definition of individuality as a holistic characteristic. Individuality should be revealed as a single, multi-level structure associated with a holistic view of the individual.

The fact that individuality manifests itself both at the biological, mental and social levels explains why it is of interest to many sciences. This allows us to talk about individuality as a biological, psychological and social problem.

It is noteworthy that the very term "individuality" means the unity of the manifold. Therefore, in order to understand the problem of individuality, it is necessary to imagine a person not only as an open, but also as a closed system from the point of view of its whole. Man is a unity of internally interconnected properties.

Of course, individuality is only a relatively closed system. "Openness" and "closeness" are equally necessary for the normal existence of the system. In order for individuality to be stable, it must be impenetrable to the external environment every time, but for all its isolation, individuality is always a part of the external world, in constant interaction with which it exists and develops.

As an integral system, individuality includes, firstly, common features inherent in an individual as a representative of a biological species and human society; secondly, the special features that are inherent in him as a participant in specific social relations; thirdly, individual signs associated with the specifics of its biological organization, social environment.

These properties of a person, taken by themselves and not as their simple totality, but taking into account all the internal interconnection and integrity, form the individuality of a person. Hence, as a concrete being, individuality has such a social being in which the individual and the general, the natural and the social are not just present, but interact, merging into a single whole.

Individuality manifests itself in different ways in the objective world, organic nature and human society. Accordingly, there are various forms of it: subject, biological and social. The most common features of individuality include: isolation, integrity, originality, uniqueness, activity, which are inherent in all its forms to one degree or another.

The definition of individuality as a systemic, holistic object does not ultimately consist in listing its various features, but in highlighting the main system-forming factor that determines its integral essence and links all its particular definitions into general concept. Such an essential-forming factor of individuality, characterized by a variety of features, is originality concrete individual, his ability to be himself, to act as an independent being within the natural, social, cultural whole.

In this regard, the signs of singularity and originality are not a criterion for the concept of individuality, because they do not express its integral and original character.

This approach is not limited to fixing the bare fact of individuality and uniqueness, but allows you to reveal the internal structure and mechanism of its functioning and development. Only on this basis is it possible not formally, but organically to include individuality in general connections, to show its place and role in the existence of the system of which it is an element. Such a concept makes it possible to connect it with the processes and trends of social development.

Let us note in this connection that what is often unique and unrepeatable in individuality is formed by the very combination of common, typical properties of a person. This is also why it is correct to remark that apart from the connection with the general, individuality does not exist. But the other extreme is also wrong - the reduction of individuality entirely to the general properties of a person. In both cases, individuality is deprived of its own meaning. In the first case, getting lost in uniqueness and randomness, in the second - dissolving in the universal. Giving a holistic view of a person in the unity of his individual and general properties, the concept of individuality thereby characterizes him as a concrete being.

The individual appears as an individual when he is taken into autonomy his being. All people live in society, but at the same time everyone lives his own individual life, i.e. separates itself into a relatively independent "point of being", which allows him to actively, creatively manifest himself in the world around him. The individuality of a person consists not so much in the fact that each individual is unique, although this also contains the moment of his individuality, but in the fact that each representative of the human race is a separate, original world, which, being included in the social structure, retains its relative independence.

Of course, the independence of the individual is based on his uniqueness, but at the same time on his general properties that connect him with the genus. Each individual acquires its independence primarily due to the role it plays in society. That is why individuality cannot be understood as the absolute independence of the individual from the external world. The essence of individuality is the originality of the individual, based on his constant relationship with society.

The definition of individuality as a special form of human existence in society makes it possible to overcome the biologist approach to its understanding, according to which it is given to a person by nature, and is only socialized in society. It is also directed against psychologism, which limits individuality to the sphere of consciousness, psychological characteristics personality. It makes it possible to present individuality as a special, formed quality of a particular person, taken in the unity of his natural and social properties.

2. Man as an object and subject of social relations

The entire history of world social thought reflects the main thing in the processes taking place in society: the vital activity of a person entering into relationships with other people in order to meet emerging needs. But not only the life activity of a person characterizes the qualitative certainty of society, but society also forms a person as a thinking being, possessing speech and capable of purposeful creative activity, forms a personality.

A special place in the social structure of society is occupied by a person as the main, initial element of this structure, without which there is and cannot be either social actions, connections and interactions, or social relations, communities and groups, or social institutions and organizations. Man is both the subject and the object of all social relations. It is rightly said: what people are - such is society; but it is no less true that, as a society, so are the members of that society. As the prominent Yugoslav sociologist Er. Lukacs, "Man is a product of society and its laws, but society is the way it is, precisely because it is a society of people, because people are united in it, and not other beings." This does not mean, he further notes, that society is wholly determined by man, or even primarily by man; but it means that the individual is one of the factors that determine society.

Man is a living being with the gift of thinking and speech, the ability to create tools and use them in the process of social labor. From a biological point of view, man is the highest stage in the development of animals on earth. While the behavior of an animal is completely determined by instincts, human behavior is directly determined by thinking, feelings, will, the degree of knowledge of the laws of nature, society, and oneself.

3. The concept of freedom, its philosophical, ethnic and political and legal aspects

The simplistic-materialistic understanding of the freedom of the will of a person, which connects it only with necessity, even a cognized one, actually deprives a person of this freedom. The French philosopher P. Holbach noted: "In all his actions, a person is subject to necessity. His free will is a chimera." According to Buechner, freedom is the freedom of a man with his hands tied, the freedom of a bird in a cage. Indeed, if everything is unequivocally necessary, if there are no accidents, opportunities, if a person acts like an automaton, then there will be no room for freedom. Even if a person recognizes the necessity of something, this knowledge also does not change the situation. A criminal who is in prison and "knows" this necessity does not become free from it.

There is another interpretation of freedom, opposite to the first. Freedom, they believe, is "the ability to do as you like. Freedom is freedom of will. Will - in its essence, always free will" ("Philosophical Dictionary". Translated from German. Ed. G. Schmidt. P. 523). Catherine the Great said: "Freedom is when no one can force me to do what I don't want." It sounds attractive from her lips, she caught the opposite of freedom not so much to necessity (it’s easier to deal with it!), As to coercion.

But what about the absolute freedom proclaimed by some theoretical philosophers? The existence of such freedom is questionable.

A French legend tells of the trial of a man who, while waving his arms, inadvertently broke another man's nose. The accused justified himself by saying that no one could deprive him of his freedom to wave his own arms. The court decision on this matter read: the accused is guilty, since the freedom to wave the arms of one person ends where the nose of another person begins.

Freedom, as we see, may not know the line separating it from the erroneous, and even clearly criminal actions of man. Freedom often comes into conflict with the elementary norms of life.G. Dimitrov once said: "fascism and the legal system are two things that are completely incompatible"; "Fascism is essentially the arbitrariness of a gang of big capital. This is a ruling criminal regime." "Freedom" and "arbitrariness" for the "ruling criminals" - this is freedom, for the people - arbitrariness, terror.

The French legend just cited demonstrates an elementary phenomenon: there is no absolute freedom, freedom is always relative (and not only in view of the existing certain framework for its implementation; it, as in the example of fascism, has one assessment in one "reference system" and another assessment - in another "reference system").

Imagine that an individual has achieved maximum or absolute freedom in the world. Having become so free, a person will begin to understand that his freedom has turned into boundless loneliness. "Escape from Freedom" is the name of the book by the American philosopher E. Fromm. The name well conveys the mood of such a person: "why do I need such freedom?" Having eliminated all forms of dependence, the individual is finally left alone with his individual "self". Disappears nature, society. Numerous ties disappear, which, although they limited the freedom of a person, made him close to a certain circle of people, connected him with certain things. "Man is free" - "it means he is alone." In "The Brothers Karamazov" F.M. Dostoevsky, in the words of the Grand Inquisitor, emphasized an important idea: “nothing has ever been more unbearable for a person and for human society than freedom”, and therefore “there is no more boundless and painful concern for a person than, remaining free, to find as soon as possible someone to bow before.”

Freedom is not only the choice of possibility (such a choice is also forced), freedom is creativity, the creation of what has not been before. "The definition of freedom as a choice is still a formal definition of freedom. This is just one of the moments of freedom. True freedom is revealed not when a person has to choose, but when he has made a choice. Here we come to a new definition of freedom, real freedom. Freedom is the inner creative energy of a person Through freedom, a person can create completely new life, a new life of society and the world. But it would be a mistake to understand freedom as an internal causality. Freedom is outside causal relations. causal relationship are in the objectified world of phenomena. Freedom is a breakthrough in this world."

In the concept of freedom N.A. Berdyaev, the substantiation of the fact that true, real freedom is, first of all, creativity is valuable. And whatever moment of freedom we would not have in mind - whether the choice of opportunities in the material world or the creation of a new situation - everywhere we find the creativity of man. And yet, no matter how impressed we are with the general pathos of his conception, we cannot agree with his elimination of determinism.

In deterministic philosophy, freedom is understood as the ability of a person to act in accordance with his interests and goals, based on the knowledge of objective necessity. The antonym of the term "freedom" in this case is "coercion", i.e. the action of a person under the influence of any external forces, contrary to his internal beliefs, goals and interests.

This opposition of freedom to coercion is fundamentally important, since coercion is not identical with necessity. B. Spinoza paid attention to this moment. “You think,” he wrote to his opponent, “there is no difference between necessity and coercion, or violence. A person’s desire to live, love, etc. is by no means forced by force, and, however, it is necessary.” ("Selected Works". In 2 vols. M., 1957. Vol. II. S. 584 - 585). “I call free such a thing that exists and acts from the mere necessity of its nature; I call forced that which is determined by something else to exist and to act in one or another definite way” (ibid., p. 591). That freedom and necessity are not antipodes presupposes the recognition of the possibility of the existence of freedom without giving up necessity.

Human experience and science show that even the most seemingly irrational actions of a person are always conditioned by the inner world of a person or external circumstances. Absolute free will is an abstraction from the real process of formation of a person's volitional act. Of course, a person's volitional decision, connected with the choice of goals and motives of activity, is determined mainly by his inner world, the world of his consciousness, but this inner world of a person or the world of consciousness does not oppose the external world, but is ultimately a reflection of this external objective world, and the dialectical interdependence of events in this inner world is a reflection of the dialectical interdependence of phenomena in the external world. Objective determination of phenomena in the world, objective natural necessity are reflected in the world of consciousness in the form of a logical and psychological necessity that links human ideas, cognitive images, concepts and ideas. Moreover, the very goals of human activity, which underlie the free choice of a line of behavior by a person, are determined by his interests that arise in the course of his practical activity, in which the subjective dialectics of his consciousness is formed and developed under the influence of objective dialectics.

The real free action of a person appears primarily as a choice of alternative lines of behavior. There is freedom where there is a choice: the choice of goals of activity, the choice of means leading to the achievement of goals, the choice of actions in a certain life situation etc. The objective basis of the choice situation is the objective existence of a spectrum of possibilities determined by the action of objective laws and the variety of conditions in which these laws realize their action, as a result of which the possibility turns into reality. In the objective world, the realization of each event is preceded by the emergence of a whole spectrum of possibilities. Ultimately, only one of them actually receives realization, namely, the one for the realization of which the necessary conditions are partly necessary, and partly by chance. In the nature of a real situation, there is no choice: the possibility is realized that should be realized in the existing objective conditions. With the emergence of a person endowed with consciousness, the situation changes. Knowing the laws of nature and society, a person becomes able to single out various possibilities; he can consciously influence the creation of those conditions under which this or that possibility can be realized. Accordingly, he faces the problem of choice: what opportunity should be realized through his activity?

From this it is clear that the situation of choice can have an explanation only in the presence of an objective regular conditionality of events and phenomena. After all, the basis for the situation of choice is the existence of an objective spectrum of possibilities, and the objective basis of the possibility is the regularity and set of various conditions necessary for its implementation. Perhaps something that does not contradict objective laws, for the implementation of which there are necessary conditions. In other words, the measure of the possibility of an event is directly proportional to the measure of its necessity. However, the very situation of choice is not freedom, but only a necessary prerequisite for freedom, free action. The act of free action itself is associated with the choice of a certain alternative in a situation of choice and its implementation in reality. The choice of an alternative behavior is determined primarily by the goals of a person, and they, in turn, are determined by the nature of practical activity and the body of knowledge that a person has. The knowledge on which the subject relies in his choice of alternatives is, first of all, the knowledge of necessity. A person chooses that line of behavior that for him has an internal necessity in the light of the knowledge at his disposal.

One of the aspects of the manifestation of human freedom is the ability of a person to transform the world around him, his ability to transform himself and the surrounding society of which he is a part. The prerequisite for this ability to create oneself also arises at the pre-social level of the evolution of matter with the emergence of systems with organic integrity. "At the points of transition from one state to another, a developing object usually has a relatively large number of "degrees of freedom" and becomes in the conditions of the need to choose from a certain number of possibilities related to changing the specific forms of its organization. All this determines not only the multiplicity of paths and directions of development, but also the important circumstance that the developing object, as it were, creates its own history "(Blauberg I.V., Sadovsky V.N., Yudin E.G. "System approach in modern science" // "Problems of methodology of system research". M., 1970. P.44).

Freedom (and we again draw attention to the essence of the concept of N.A. Berdyaev) is creativity, "the creation of what has never been before."

All of the above allows us to assert that, within the framework of the general concept of determinism, freedom can be defined as the highest form of self-determination and self-organization of matter, manifesting itself at the social level of its movement.

The problem of free will is closely related to the problem of moral and legal responsibility of a person for his actions. If a person is forced to commit this or that act by force, then he cannot bear moral or legal responsibility for it. An example of such an act is injuring or killing a rapist in self-defense.

The free action of a person always implies his responsibility to society for his action. "Freedom and responsibility are two sides of one whole - conscious human activity. Freedom is the ability to carry out goal-setting activity, the ability to act with knowledge of the matter for the chosen goal, and it is realized the more fully, the better the knowledge of objective conditions, the greater the chosen goal and means of it achievements correspond to objective conditions, natural trends in the development of reality - Responsibility is dictated by objective conditions, their awareness and the subjectively set goal, the need to choose a method of action, the need for vigorous activity to achieve this goal. Freedom generates responsibility, responsibility directs freedom "(Kosolapov R.I. , Markov B.S. Freedom and responsibility. M., 1969. P.72).

According to the scientific and philosophical worldview, both freedom and responsibility can only be conceivable in a world where there is an objective conditionality, determinism. Making a decision and acting based on the knowledge of objective necessity, a person is able to simultaneously form in himself a sense of responsibility to society for his actions. Responsibility is determined by the level of development of public consciousness, the level of social relations, existing social institutions. And even when a person is responsible to himself, to his conscience, he reflects contemporary social ties and relationships. The concept of freedom turns out to be connected with the concept of repentance. The problem of freedom, which includes the problem of cognition and social action, is one of the leading problems linking dialectics, theory of knowledge and ethics, as well as the philosophy of being and social philosophy into a single whole.

Freedom is one of the main philosophical categories that characterize the essence of a person and his existence, consisting in the ability of a person to think and act in accordance with his ideas and desires, and not as a result of internal or external coercion.

For an individual, the possession of freedom is a historical, social and moral imperative, a criterion of his individuality and the level of development of society. Arbitrary restriction of the freedom of the individual, strict regulation of his consciousness and behavior, relegation of a person to the role of a simple “cog” in social and technological systems is detrimental to both the individual and society. Ultimately, it is thanks to the freedom of the individual that society acquires the ability not only to adapt to the existing natural and social circumstances of the surrounding reality, but also to transform them in accordance with its goals. Of course, there is not and cannot be any abstract, much less absolute freedom of a person either from nature or from society, but at the same time, a specific material carrier of freedom, its subject is always a person, and, accordingly, those communities in which it is included. - nations, classes, states.

man public social right

4. Freedom and order, human rights and obligations

Probably no philosophical problem has had such a great social and political impact in the history of society as the problem of freedom. This problem is especially acute in the modern era, when an ever-increasing mass of people is drawn into the struggle for its practical achievement.

The Republic of Kazakhstan recognizes and guarantees human rights and freedoms in accordance with the Constitution. Human rights and freedoms belong to everyone from birth, are recognized as absolute and inalienable, determine the content and application of laws and other regulatory legal acts.

A citizen of the Republic, by virtue of his citizenship, has rights and incurs duties. Foreigners and stateless persons enjoy the rights and freedoms in the Republic, as well as bear the obligations established for citizens, unless otherwise provided by the Constitution, laws and international treaties. The exercise of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen must not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons, encroach on the constitutional order and public morality.

Everyone has the right to recognition of his legal personality and the right to protect his rights and freedoms by all means that do not contradict the law, including necessary defense. Everyone has the right to judicial protection of their rights and freedoms.

Everyone has the right to receive qualified legal assistance. In cases stipulated by law, legal assistance is provided free of charge.

No one may be subjected to any discrimination based on origin, social, official and property status, gender, race, nationality, language, attitude to religion, beliefs, place of residence or any other circumstances.

Everyone has the right to life.

No one has the right to arbitrarily deprive a person of life. The death penalty is established by law as an exceptional measure of punishment for terrorist crimes involving the death of people, as well as for especially grave crimes committed in wartime, with the sentenced person being granted the right to apply for pardon.

Everyone has the right to personal freedom.

Arrest and detention are allowed only in cases provided for by law and only with the sanction of a court, with the right of appeal granted to the arrested person. Without a court sanction, a person may be detained for a period not exceeding seventy-two hours.

Every detainee, arrested, accused of committing a crime has the right to use the assistance of a lawyer (defender) from the moment, respectively, of detention, arrest or arraignment.

Human dignity is inviolable.

No one shall be subjected to torture, violence, other cruel or degrading treatment or punishment.

Everyone has the right to privacy, personal and family secrets, protection of their honor and dignity.

Everyone has the right to privacy of personal deposits and savings, correspondence, telephone conversations, postal, telegraphic and other communications. Restrictions on this right are allowed only in cases and in the manner expressly established by law.

State bodies, public associations, officials and mass media are obliged to provide every citizen with the opportunity to get acquainted with documents, decisions and sources of information affecting his rights and interests.

Everyone has the right to determine and indicate or not to indicate their national, party and religious affiliation.

Everyone has the right to use their native language and culture, to freely choose the language of communication, upbringing, education and creativity.

Freedom of speech and creativity are guaranteed. Censorship is prohibited.

Everyone has the right to freely receive and disseminate information in any way not prohibited by law. The list of information constituting state secrets of the Republic of Kazakhstan is determined by law.

Propaganda or agitation of a violent change in the constitutional order, violation of the integrity of the Republic, undermining the security of the state, war, social, racial, national, religious, class and tribal superiority, as well as the cult of cruelty and violence are not allowed.

Everyone who is legally located on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan has the right to free movement on its territory and free choice of residence, except in cases specified by law.

Everyone has the right to travel outside the Republic. Citizens of the Republic have the right to unhindered return to the Republic.

Everyone has the right to freedom of conscience.

The exercise of the right to freedom of conscience should not condition or limit universal human and civil rights and obligations to the state.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan have the right to freedom of association. The activities of public associations are regulated by law.

Everyone has the right to freedom of labor, free choice of occupation and profession. Forced labor is allowed only by a court verdict or in a state of emergency or martial law.

Everyone has the right to working conditions that meet the requirements of safety and hygiene, to remuneration for work without any discrimination, and to social protection from unemployment.

The right to individual and collective labor disputes is recognized using the methods of their resolution established by law, including the right to strike.

Everyone has the right to rest. Those working under an employment contract are guaranteed the length of working hours established by law, weekends and holidays, and paid annual leave.

The residence is inviolable. Deprivation of dwelling is not allowed, except by a court decision. Penetration into a dwelling, its inspection and search is allowed only in cases and in the manner prescribed by law.

In the Republic of Kazakhstan, conditions are being created to provide citizens with housing. The categories of citizens specified in the law who need housing are provided for an affordable fee from state housing funds in accordance with the norms established by law.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan may own any legally acquired property in private ownership.

Property, including the right to inherit, is guaranteed by law.

No one may be deprived of his property except by a court decision. Forcible alienation of property for state needs in exceptional cases provided for by law may be carried out on condition of its equivalent compensation.

Everyone has the right to freedom of entrepreneurial activity, the free use of their property for any lawful entrepreneurial activity. Monopolistic activity is regulated and limited by law. Unfair competition is prohibited.

A citizen of the Republic of Kazakhstan is guaranteed a minimum wage and pension, social security by age, in case of illness, disability, loss of a breadwinner and other legal grounds.

Voluntary social insurance is encouraged, the creation of additional forms social security and charity.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan have the right to health care.

Citizens of the Republic have the right to receive free guaranteed volume medical care established by law.

Obtaining paid medical care in public and private medical institutions, as well as from persons engaged in private medical practice, is carried out on the grounds and in the manner established by law.

Citizens are guaranteed free secondary education in state educational institutions. Secondary education is required.

A citizen has the right to receive, on a competitive basis, free higher education at a state higher education institution.

Obtaining paid education in private educational institutions is carried out on the grounds and in the manner established by law.

The state establishes obligatory standards of education. The activities of any educational institutions must comply with these standards.

The state aims to protect the environment favorable for human life and health.

Concealment by officials of facts and circumstances that threaten the life and health of people shall entail liability in accordance with the law.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan have the right to assemble peacefully and without weapons, hold meetings, rallies and demonstrations, processions and picketing. The exercise of this right may be restricted by law in the interests of national security, public order, health protection, and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan have the right to participate in the management of state affairs directly and through their representatives, apply personally, as well as send individual and collective appeals to state bodies and local governments.

Citizens of the Republic have the right to elect and be elected to state bodies and local self-government bodies, as well as to participate in the republican referendum.

Citizens recognized as legally incompetent by a court, as well as those held in places of deprivation of liberty by a court verdict, do not have the right to elect and be elected, to participate in a republican referendum.

Citizens of the Republic have an equal right to access public service. The requirements for a candidate for the position of a civil servant are determined only by the nature of the job duties and are established by law.

Everyone is obliged to comply with the Constitution and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, respect the rights, freedoms, honor and dignity of other persons.

Everyone must respect State symbols Republic.

Payment of legally established taxes, fees and other obligatory payments is the duty and obligation of everyone.

Protection of the Republic of Kazakhstan is a sacred duty and duty of each of its citizens.

Citizens of the Republic carry out military service in the manner and types established by law.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan are obliged to take care of the preservation of historical and cultural heritage, to protect historical and cultural monuments.

Citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan are obliged to preserve nature and take care of natural resources.

The rights and freedoms of man and citizen may be limited only by laws and only to the extent necessary to protect the constitutional system, public order, human rights and freedoms, health and morality of the population.

Hosted on Allbest.ru