Fundamentals of the socio-philosophical theory of modernity

The paper considers socio-philosophical theory of modernity, which significantly influences development of the modern society. The system of individual and collective goal setting is created on its basis and formats all the principle spheres of social life, while the complex of ideas is not subjected to any consistent critical reflection. These ideas are formulated by referring to the methodological arsenal of philosophy and use for their substantiation the data obtained in the process of the social and human sciences development. The first idea radically distinguishes modern society from the traditional society. It is the idea of historical time, within which framework a completely special attitude towards the future is formed. Future in modern understanding of the historical time is not a repetition of the past, but rather acts as a negation of the past or as the maximum distance from the original state of society. The second idea assumes that the new is recognized as an absolute value, while the old is devalued and ultimately subjected to disposal. The social and cultural world variability in modernity also acquires the status of value, which opens up a series of beneficial alterations affecting institutions, values, knowledge, and technologies. The third idea of modernity is the idea of social individualization forming the basis even in the individualized society concept. In such a society, the desire to see prospects and determine strategic objectives loses its meaning, which conflicts with the first and second ideas of the modernity. Tactical types of the individual and collective activity replace the emerging project-based attitude towards the future at the early modernity stage. Negative side of this idea is the increasingly clear tendency towards fragmentation and disintegration of the traditional forms of sociality. The fourth idea of modernity “adjoins” the third, it also uses the term individualization; however, individualization of consciousness, thinking, and reference to value are meant here.

EDN SLSUCX

References
[1] Przhilenskiy V.I., Przhilenskaya I.B., Bondarenko N.G., Sergodeeva E.A. Lektsii po filosofii nauki [Lectures on philosophy of science]. Rostov-na-Donu, MarT Publ., 2008, 590 p.
[2] Luhmann N. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, Suhrkamp Verlag, 1998 [In Russ.: Luman N. Samoopisaniya. Moscow, Logos, Gnozis Publ., 2009, 320 p.].
[3] Kovalev A.Yu., Yushnikov A.V. Velikaya frantsuzskaya revolyutsiya v russkoy konservativnoy publitsistike vtoroy poloviny XIX — nachala XX v. [The Great French Revolution in Russian conservative journalism in the second part of the 19th — beginning of the 20th centuries]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Istoriya — Tomsk State University Journal of History, 2022, no. 79, pp. 138–143.
[4] Comte A. Discours sur l’esprit positif, 1844 [In Russ.: Kont O. Dukh pozitivnoy filosofii. Saint-Petersburg, Vestnik Znaniya Publ., 1910, 80 p.].
[5] Marx K. Kritika politicheskoy ekonomii [Critique of the political economy]. In: Marks K., Engels F. Sobranie sochineniy. V 50 t. T. 46. Ch. 1 Ekonomicheskie rukopisi 1857–1859 gg. [Marx K., Engels F. Collection of works. In 50 vol., Vol. 46. Part 1. Economic manuscripts 1857–1859]. Moscow, Gospolitizdat Publ., 1969, 618 p.
[6] Przhilenskiy V.I. Sotsialnye tekhnologii: fundamentalnye i prikladnye problemy [Social technologies: fundamental and applied problems]. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2016, 176 p.
[7] Jaspers K. The Origin and Goal of History, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1953 [In Russ.: Yaspers K. Smysl i naznachenie istorii. Moscow, Respublika Publ., 1994, 527 p.].
[8] Eisenstadt S.N. Modernization: Protest and Change, Prentice Hall, 1966 [In Russ.: Eyzenshtadt S.N. Bazovye kharakteristiki modernizatsii. CyberLeninka]. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/2012-04-015-eyzenshtadt-sh-n-bazovye-harakteristiki-modernizatsii-perevod-eisenstadt-s-n-the-basic-characteristics-of-modernization/viewer (accessed February 1, 2024).
[9] Shmerlina I.A. Sotsialnost i problema smysla: k vyrabotke mezhdistsiplinarnogo ponyatiya [Sociality and the problem of senыe: development of the interdisciplinary concept]. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki — Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2004, no. 3, pp. 137–151.
[10] Weber M. Izbrannoe. Obraz obshchestva [Selected works. The image of society]. Moscow, Yurist Publ., 1994, 704 p.
[11] Przhilenskaya Yu.G. Trud i trudovye otnosheniya v gorizonte mezhdistsiplinarnykh issledovaniy [Labor and labor relations in the horizon of interdisciplinary research]. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Severo-Kavkazskiy region. Obshchestvennye nauki — Bulletin of Higher Education Institutions. North Caucasian Region. Social Sciences, 2022, no. 2, pp. 10–19.
[12] Horkheimer M., Adomo T.W. Dialektik der Aufklaerung. Philosophische Fragmente, Fischer Taschenbuch 1988 [In Russ.: Khorkkhaymer M., Adorno T.V. Dialektika Prosveshcheniya. Filosofskie fragmenty. Moscow, Medium Publ., Saint Petersburg, Yuventa Publ., 1997, 312 p.].
[13] Beсk U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London, Sage Publications, 1992 [In Russ.: Bek U. Obshchestvo riska. Na puti k drugomu modernu. Moscow, Progress-Traditsiya Publ., 2000, 384 p.].
[14] Gavrov S.N. Istoricheskoe izmenenie institutov semyi i braka [Historic change in the institute of family and marriage]. Moscow, NITs MGUDT Publ., 2009, 134 p.
[15] Bauman Z. The Individualized Society, Polity, 2001 [In Russ.: Bauman Z. Individualizirovannoe obshchestvo. Moscow, Logos Publ., 2005, 390 p.].
[16] Bauman Z. Liquid Modernity, Cambridge, 2000 [In Russ.: Bauman Z. Tekuchaya sovremennost. Saint Petersburg, Piter Publ., 2008, 240 p.].
[17] Kuzmina D.Yu., Prudenko Ya.D. Gumanitarnye nauki v tsifrovoy vek ili neotvratimost distsiplinarnoy gibridizatsii [Humanities in the Digital Age, or the Inevitability of Disciplinary Hybridization]. Mezhdunarodnyi zhurnal issledovaniy kultury — International Journal of Cultural Research, 2012, no. 3, pp. 17–23.
[18] Fedotova V.G. Modernizatsiya: pereosmyslivaya teoriyu i praktiku [Modernization: rethinking theory and practice]. In: Sotsiologicheskiy ezhegodnik — Sociology Annual Book. Moscow, RAN INION, VShE Publ., 2010, pp. 63–80.
[19] Koryakin V.V. Sovremennyi mir i filosofiya [Modern world and philosophy]. In: Novye idei v filosofii. Vyp. 21: Filosofiya kak innovatsionnyi faktor nauki i obrazovaniya [New ideas in philosophy. Iss. 21: Philosophy as the innovation factor in science and education]. Perm, PGU Publ., 2013, pp. 11–30.
[20] Chukin G.S. «Khoroshee obshchestvo» i ego protivniki: k probleme kontseptualizatsii tsennostey v sotsialnoy nauke [“Good society” and its adversaries: the problem of value conceptualization in social science]. Voprosy filosofii — Problems of Philosophy, 2009, no. 5, pp. 36−46.