The state of the basic values ​​of Russian society. Values ​​and psychological state of modern Russian society Socio-psychological classification of values

Return back to

For many years, material wealth was considered the most important value of society, and economic growth was one of the main target indicators for the development of society.

It was believed that achieving economic growth automatically entails progress in the development of individuals and the entire society, and an increase in aggregate output (for example, growth in GDP per capita) reduces poverty and increases the overall well-being of the population.

This assumption was based on the belief that production generates income, and higher income in turn increases material, or economic, well-being.

The link between output growth and poverty reduction was considered so strong that many economists believed that focusing on growth itself was sufficient to achieve the goal of development. Economic growth has become not just a means of ensuring development, but the goal of development itself.

The realization that economic growth is not synonymous with human development came with increasing socio-political instability and poverty of the population. The practice of some developing countries has shown that the situation of people can worsen even with the development of production.

In the 1980s, the idea that people and their development were the most important goal of social progress began to receive increasing support in economic research, the development of national development programs and international cooperation projects.

The UN Development Planning Committee decided to devote its report to the humanitarian aspects of economic restructuring. The results of the research carried out in preparing this report under the leadership of Mahbub ul-Haq, as well as C. Griffin and J. Knight, formed the basis of the conceptual approach to human development.

“The fundamental goal of social development is to create an environment conducive to people enjoying long, healthy and productive lives,” wrote Mahbub ul-Haq in the first Human Development Report.

The true wealth of nations is people. This simple truth is sometimes forgotten. Fascinated by the rise and fall of national income, measured by GDP. People strive to equate human well-being with material well-being. Of course, the importance of economic stability and GDP growth cannot be underestimated (they are fundamental to the sustainable progress of humanity, as can be seen in the many countries that suffer from their absence), but the most reliable criterion of progress is the quality of life of people.

As Aristotle believed, “...wealth is obviously not something we strive for, because it is simply obtained and serves something else.” This “something else” is the ability of people to realize their potential as human beings. To achieve their potential, people must be able to make decisions that promote their self-actualization, creativity, and satisfaction.

Material wealth, which previous development concepts were aimed at increasing, really plays a huge role in people's lives.

This role, however, should not be exaggerated, since:

Wealth is not an indispensable condition for democracy, equal rights for men and women, or the preservation and development of cultural heritage;
- wealth in itself does not guarantee law and order and social peace;
- human needs are not limited to material enrichment: a long and healthy life, familiarization with culture and science, creative and social activity, preservation of the natural environment and life in harmony with it were, remain or are becoming significant values ​​for many, and for some - more important than increasing wealth.

The main principle on the basis of which the contradictions between wealth maximization and human development are resolved is formulated as follows: “National wealth can expand the possibilities of choice for people. This, however, may not happen. The determining factor here is not wealth itself, but how different countries use it. And until society realizes that its main wealth is people, excessive preoccupation with the production of material goods will obscure the ultimate goals of enriching people’s lives.”

Today, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) is the UN's global development network, promoting positive change in people's lives by providing member countries with access to knowledge, experience and resources. UNDP in 166 countries helps them find solutions to global and national development problems, which is based on a conceptual approach to human development.

World leaders have committed to achieving the Millennium Development Goals, which focus on halving poverty levels.

UNDP coordinates global and national efforts to achieve these goals: “Our work is carried out in such main areas as helping countries in matters of democratic governance, poverty alleviation, crisis prevention and recovery, energy and the environment, HIV/AIDS. Across all of our activities, we assist countries in protecting human rights and empowering women.”

Content:
1. Introduction
2. Values ​​of modern Russian society
3. Conclusion
4. References

Introduction
Values ​​are generalized ideas of people about the goals and means of achieving them, about the norms of their behavior, embodying historical experience and concentratedly expressing the meaning of the culture of a particular ethnic group and of all humanity.
Value in general and sociological value in particular have not been sufficiently studied in domestic sociological science. It is enough to familiarize yourself with the contents of textbooks and teaching aids on sociology published at the end of the twentieth century and in recent years to be convinced of this. At the same time, the problem is relevant, socially and epistemologically significant both for sociology and for a number of social and human sciences - history, anthropology, social philosophy, social psychology, government studies, philosophical axiology and a number of others.
The relevance of the topic is presented in the following main provisions:
· Understanding values ​​as a set of ideals, principles, moral norms that represent priority knowledge in people’s lives, have a very specific humanitarian significance both for a particular society, say, for Russian society, and at the general human level. Therefore, the problem deserves comprehensive study.
· Values ​​unite people on the basis of their universal significance; knowledge of the patterns of their integrative and consolidating nature is completely justified and productive.
· Social values ​​included in the subject field of sociological problems, such as moral values, ideological values, religious values, economic values, national ethical values, etc., are of utmost importance for study and accounting also because they act as a measure of social assessments and criteria characteristics.
· Clarifying the role of social values ​​is also important for us, students, future specialists who will carry out social roles in social reality in the future - in a work collective, city, region, etc.

Values ​​of modern Russian society
The changes that have occurred over the past ten years in the sphere of government and political organization of Russian society can be called revolutionary. The most important component of the transformation taking place in Russia is a change in the worldview of the population. It is traditionally believed that mass consciousness is the most inertial sphere compared to the political and socio-economic ones. However, during periods of sharp, revolutionary transformations, the system of value orientations can also be subject to very significant shifts. It can be argued that institutional transformations in all other areas are irreversible only when they are accepted by society and enshrined in the new system of values ​​that this society is guided by. And in this regard, changes in the worldview of the population can serve as one of the most important indicators of the reality and effectiveness of social transformation as a whole.
In Russia, as a result of changes in the social structure during the transition from an administrative-command system to a system based on market relations, there was a rapid disintegration of social groups and institutions, and a loss of personal identification with previous social structures. There is a loosening of the normative value systems of the old consciousness under the influence of the propaganda of ideas and principles of new political thinking.
People's lives are individualized, their actions are less regulated from the outside. In modern literature, many authors talk about a crisis of values ​​in Russian society. Values ​​in post-communist Russia really contradict each other. Reluctance to live in the old way is combined with disappointment in new ideals, which turned out to be either unattainable or false for many. Nostalgia for a giant country coexists with various manifestations of xenophobia and isolationism. Getting used to freedom and private initiative is accompanied by a reluctance to take responsibility for the consequences of one’s own economic and financial decisions. The desire to defend the newfound freedom of private life from uninvited intrusions, including from the “watchful eye” of the state, is combined with a craving for a “strong hand.” This is only a cursory list of those real contradictions that do not allow us to unambiguously assess Russia’s place in the modern world.
Assuming consideration of the process of development of new value orientations in Russia, it would not be amiss to first pay attention to the very “soil” on which the seeds of a democratic social order fell. In other words, what the current hierarchy of values ​​has become under the influence of the changed political and economic situation largely depends on the general ideological attitudes that have historically developed in Russia. The debate about the Eastern or Western nature of spirituality in Russia has been going on for centuries. It is clear that the uniqueness of the country does not allow it to be attributed to any one type of civilization. Russia is constantly trying to enter the European community, but these attempts are often hampered by the “eastern genes” of the empire, and sometimes by the consequences of its own historical fate.
What characterizes the value consciousness of Russians? What changes have occurred in it in recent years? What has the previous hierarchy of values ​​transformed into? Based on data obtained in the course of several empirical studies on this issue, it is possible to identify the structure and dynamics of values ​​in Russian society.
An analysis of Russians’ answers to questions about traditional, “universal” values ​​allows us to identify the following hierarchy of Russians’ priorities (as their importance decreases):
family - 97% and 95% of all respondents in 1995 and 1999, respectively;
The family, providing its members with physical, economic and social security, at the same time acts as the most important tool for the socialization of the individual. Thanks to it, cultural, ethnic, and moral values ​​are transmitted. At the same time, the family, remaining the most stable and conservative element of society, develops along with it. The family, thus, is in motion, changing not only under the influence of external conditions, but also due to the internal processes of its development. Therefore, all social problems of our time affect the family in one way or another and are refracted in its value orientations, which are currently characterized by increasing complexity, diversity, and inconsistency.
work - 84% (1995) and 83% (1999);
friends, acquaintances - 79% (1995) and 81% (1999);
free time - 71% (1995) and 68% (1999);
religion - 41% (1995) and 43% (1999);
politics - 28% (1995) and 38% (1999). 1)
Noteworthy is the very high and stable commitment of the population to such traditional values ​​for any modern society as family, human communication, and free time. Let us immediately pay attention to the stability with which these basic “nuclear” values ​​are reproduced. The four-year interval did not have a significant effect on attitudes towards family, work, friends, free time, or religion. At the same time, interest in the more superficial, “external” sphere of life—politics—has increased by more than a third. It is also understandable that for the majority of the population in today’s crisis socio-economic situation, work is of great importance: it is the main source of material well-being and the opportunity to realize interests in other areas. At first glance, the only thing that seems somewhat unexpected is the mutual position in the hierarchy of values ​​of religion and politics: after all, over the course of more than seven decades of Soviet history, atheism and “political literacy” were actively cultivated in the country. And the last decade of Russian history was marked, first of all, by turbulent political events and passions. Therefore, it is not surprising that there is some increase in interest in politics and political life.
Previously, the qualities desirable for the social system were, as it were, predetermined by communist ideology. Now, in the conditions of the liquidation of the monopoly of one worldview, the “programmed” person is being replaced by a “self-organizing” person, freely choosing his political and ideological orientations. It can be assumed that the ideas of political democracy of a rule of law state, freedom of choice, and the establishment of a democratic culture are not popular among Russians. First of all, because the injustice of today’s social system, associated with growing differentiation, is activated in the minds of Russians. Recognition of private property as a value may have nothing to do with its recognition as the object and basis of labor activity: private property in the eyes of many is only an additional source (real or symbolic) of consumer goods.
Today, in the minds of Russians, those values ​​that are in one way or another connected with the activities of the state are updated first of all. The first among them is legality. The demand for legality is a demand for stable rules of the game, for reliable guarantees that changes will not be accompanied by a massive ejection of people from their usual niches in life. Russians understand legality not in a general legal sense, but in a specific human sense, as a vital need for the state to establish an order in society that actually ensures the safety of individuals (hence the high rating of the word “security” as the main need of a vital type). There is every reason to assume that in the minds of the majority of Russians, despite all the ideological shifts that have occurred in recent years, the correlation of the law with the usual functions of the former state, as a guarantor of public order and a distributor of basic goods, still prevails. A private person, formed in the Soviet era, sees in another private person (or organization) a competitor not in production, but exclusively in consumption. In a society where all sources and functions of development were concentrated in the hands of the state, in a society that tried to develop technologically without the institution of private property, such a result was inevitable. Currently, one of the main values ​​of Russians is a focus on private life, family well-being, and prosperity. In a crisis society, the family has become for most Russians the center of attraction for their mental and physical strength.
The concept of security, like perhaps no other, captures continuity with the consciousness of the “traditionally Soviet” type and at the same time carries within itself an alternative to it. In it one can see nostalgic memories of the lost orderliness (traces of “defense consciousness”), but at the same time, the idea of ​​​​protection of the individual who has felt the taste of freedom, protection in the broadest sense of the word, including from the arbitrariness of the state. But if security and freedom cannot become complementary, then the idea of ​​security, with increasing interest in it, may well be combined in Russian society with a demand for a new ideological unfreedom of the “national socialist” kind.
So, the value “core” of Russian society consists of such values ​​as legality, security, family, and prosperity. Family can be classified as interactionist values, the other three are vital, the simplest, significant for the preservation and continuation of life. These values ​​perform an integrating function.
Values ​​are the deep foundations of society; how homogeneous or, if you like, unidirectional they will become in the future, how harmoniously the values ​​of different groups can be combined will largely determine the success of the development of our society as a whole.
As has already been noted, fundamental changes in society are impossible and incomplete without changing the value consciousness of the people who make up this society. It seems extremely important to study and fully monitor the process of transformation of the hierarchy of needs and attitudes, without which real understanding and management of social development processes is impossible

Conclusion

The most significant values ​​are: the life and dignity of a person, his moral qualities, moral characteristics of human activities and actions, the content of various forms of moral consciousness - norms, principles, ideals, ethical concepts (good, evil, justice, happiness), moral characteristics of social institutions, groups, collectives, classes, social movements and similar social segments.
Among the sociological consideration of values, religious values ​​also occupy an important place. Faith in God, the desire for the absolute, discipline as integrity, high spiritual qualities cultivated by religions are so sociologically significant that these provisions are not disputed by any sociological teaching.
The considered ideas and values ​​(humanism, human rights and freedoms, environmental ideas, the idea of ​​social progress and the unity of human civilization) act as guidelines in the formation of the state ideology of Russia, which becomes an integral part of post-industrial society. The synthesis of traditional values, the heritage of the Soviet system and the values ​​of post-industrial society is a real prerequisite for the formation of a unique matrix of the integrative state ideology of Russia.

Bibliography:

revolution.allbest.ru/ sociology/00000562_0.html
etc.................

Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications

Federal Communications Agency

Siberian State University of Telecommunications and Informatics

Department of Sociology, Political Science and Psychology

Home written work

Topic: “Values ​​in modern Russian society”

Is done by a student

Checked

Introduction 3

Values ​​in modern Russia: results of expert research 4

Dominant values ​​6

Material well-being 6

“I” value (individualism) 7

Career (self-realization) 7

Stability 8

Freedom 9

Respect for elders 9

God (belief in God) 10

Patriotism 10

Duty and Honor 11

Anti-values ​​12

“Ideal” consolidating values ​​13

Conclusions: key trends in the development of the Russian value doctrine 14

Conclusion 15

References 16

Introduction

Value is a characteristic feature of human life. Over the course of many centuries, people have developed the ability to identify objects and phenomena in the world around them that meet their needs and to which they treat in a special way: they value and protect them, and focus on them in their life activities. In everyday usage, “value” is understood as one or another value of some object (thing, state, action), its dignity with a plus or minus sign, something desirable or harmful, in other words, good or bad.

No society can do without values; as for individuals, they have a choice whether to share these values ​​or not. Some are committed to the values ​​of collectivism, while others are committed to the values ​​of individualism. For some, the highest value is money, for others - moral integrity, for others - a political career.

Currently, the problem of value is of great importance. This is explained by the fact that the process of renewal of all spheres of public life has brought to life many new, both positive and negative phenomena. Developing scientific and technological progress, industrialization and informatization of all spheres of modern society - all this gives rise to an increase in negative attitudes towards history, culture, traditions and leads to the devaluation of values ​​in the modern world.

The shortage of spiritual values ​​is felt today in all spheres. Many of our ideals have changed dramatically during the changes. The spiritual balance was disrupted, and a destructive stream of indifference, cynicism, disbelief, envy, and hypocrisy rushed into the resulting void.

The purpose of my work is to study these changes and identify new, modern values ​​of Russian society.

Values ​​in modern Russia: results of expert research

During the period from July 15 to September 10, 2007, specialists from the Pitirim Sorokin Foundation conducted a study “Values ​​in modern Russia.” It became the first stage of a large-scale project of the same name, aimed at promoting the development of a value base capable of consolidating various groups of Russian society.

The relevance of the study is due to the obvious demand of society for a new understanding of the value foundation. Various state and social institutions respond to such a request by intensifying the discussion of this topic, but it is not accompanied by a study of the fundamental foundations on which the expected correction of the value doctrine of society should take place. How do Russians understand the concept of “value”? What moral standards are capable of consolidating society? What ideology should these values ​​serve to form? The initiators of the research project will try to find answers to these and other questions.

The purpose of the first – this – stage of work was to study the value trends of Russian society. In particular, the following tasks were proposed for solution:

To study opinions about the key values ​​that dominate in Russian society at the present stage.

Determine the vector for correcting axiological preferences of various religious, ethnic and age groups of Russians.

To record the understanding of different audiences of the concept of “national ideology”, as well as experts’ forecasts regarding the development of the national idea of ​​Russia.

Determine the value priorities of Russian youth, related political preferences and electoral plans.

The research was conducted through an expert survey and focus groups with various youth audiences.

According to the surveyed social scientists, the Russian value system is still chaotic, undergoing transformation, and has not yet fully formed in its new capacity.

The reasons for such a long registration process are “ numerous disasters that befell Russia in the last century"and reflected on the collective consciousness of the population. Experts believe that " people have still not recovered from the feeling of the ground being pulled out from under their feet“According to social scientists, there is no single value system in Russia today.

However, many value subsystems coexist in the country, spontaneously formed in accordance with the interests and needs of certain social groups.

Some experts called the modern value picture of Russia “ situation of valuable debris", When " different parts of society make use of their wreckage».

Dominant values

Among the axiological attitudes characteristic of modern Russian society, study participants - experts and actors of youth focus groups - indicated the following values ​​(ranked according to the principle of descending significance):

Material well-being.

The value of “I” (individualism).

Career (self-realization).

1. Stability.

2. Respect for elders.

   God (belief in God).

   Patriotism.

   Duty and honor.

Material well-being

The priority of the values ​​of material well-being and consumer wealth (in common parlance - mercantilism) for most of modern Russian society is noted by many experts. First of all, these values ​​are highlighted by the interviewed social scientists who have the opportunity, in the course of their professional activities, to monitor the dynamics of social demands. They note that consumer orientation is unconventional for Russia, since it began to take shape only in the 90s, when the “idealistic” generations left socially active life.

Analyzing the reasons for the dominance of consumer orientation as a value, experts pointed to the massive propaganda of the consumer lifestyle and the urbanization of the country as such.

The value of "I" (individualism)

The respondents believe that it is precisely in the individual’s concentration on his own needs and, accordingly, “ in the perception of the surrounding world through an egocentric prism“is the essence of individualism as a value.

This situation, experts believe, is a consequence of the introduction of the idea of ​​a consumer society, when an exaggerated focus on wealth focuses a person only on personal interests. Individualism is a response to the empty niche of “common” values, the Soviet system of which was destroyed and a new one was not created.

The dominance of individualist values, according to a number of respondents, limits the socio-psychological wealth and cultural prospects of the country.

Career (self-realization)

A peculiar conversion of the individualistic priorities of modern Russian society is the presentation by experts of self-realization as an important value, which primarily means a successful career. According to the majority of respondents, it is precisely this that gives Russians, especially young people, “ feeling of worth in the eyes of others", indicates " compliance with public standards", gives the feeling that " you have achieved something in life" Self-realization was identified as a dominant value at the current stage by both experts and youth representatives who participated in focus groups.

Family

The basic nature of the value of family was noted by all study participants without exception.

However, the nature of loyalty to family values ​​varied among a number of expert groups. A significant portion of respondents confidently insist that the family in Russia has been and remains a key element of the social system.

Supporters of this position note that in the new Russia the trend of growing importance of the family is intensifying and insist on the need for systematic work to introduce family values ​​into the public consciousness.

For another number of experts, the appeal to the family as a value is external - inertial - in nature: this value is indicated as fundamental, but subsequent discussions about it demonstrate a peripheral attitude to the institution of family in reality.

Separately, it is worth highlighting the position of young people regarding the family: an unexpected result of the study was the fact that, despite the erosion of the institution of family in a modern globalized society, the vast majority of the young audience states the importance of the family and points to the importance of preserving and protecting the family institution.

Stability

The overwhelming number of respondents - experts and participants in youth focus groups - noted stability, which means the absence of socio-political and economic cataclysms, as a basic value for them.

Young people associate the likelihood of their success in life with stability. Middle-aged and older experts explain the desire for stability as fatigue from the “era of change.”

The desire of society for stability, experts note, has socio-psychological and pragmatic aspects. Firstly, the correction of the circumstances of existence from extreme to comfortable requires the instinct of psychological self-preservation of society. Secondly, Russians associate the prospects for a personal and national economic breakthrough with stability.

Liberty

During the study, freedom as a basic socially significant value was noted mainly by representatives of the youth audience. At the same time, it is worth pointing out the semantic dichotomy of the value of freedom, which emerged in connection with which youth groups spoke out on this issue.

Russian national values ​​lie at the heart of Russian culture. To understand what Russian culture is, you must first understand the historically established, traditional values ​​of the Russian people, and understand the mental system of values ​​of the Russian person. After all, Russian culture is created by Russian people with their own worldview and spiritual way of life: without being a bearer of Russian values ​​and without possessing the Russian mentality, it is impossible to create or reproduce it in your own, and any attempts along this path will be fake.

Russian national values ​​lie at the heart of Russian culture.

The most important role in the development of the Russian people, the Russian state and the Russian world was played by the agricultural peasant community, that is, the origins of the generation of Russian culture were embedded in the value system of the Russian community. The prerequisite for the existence of the Russian individual is this very community, or as they used to say, “the world.” It should be taken into account that for a significant part of its history, Russian society and the state were formed in conditions of military confrontation, which always forced the interests of individual people to be neglected for the sake of preserving the Russian people as a whole, as an independent ethnic group.

For Russians, the goals and interests of the team are always higher than personal interests and the goals of an individual person - everything individual is easily sacrificed to the general. In response, Russian people are accustomed to counting and hoping for the support of their world, their community. This feature leads to the fact that a Russian person easily puts aside his personal affairs and completely devotes himself to the common cause. That is why are the state people, that is, such a people who know how to form something common, large and extensive. Personal benefit always comes after public benefit.

Russians are a state people because they know how to create something common for everyone.

A truly Russian person is categorically confident that first it is necessary to organize common socially significant affairs, and only then this whole whole will begin to work for all members of the community. Collectivism, the need to exist together with one’s society is one of the brightest features of the Russian people. .

Another basic Russian national value is justice, since without its clear understanding and implementation, life in a team is not possible. The essence of the Russian understanding of justice lies in the social equality of the people who make up the Russian community. The roots of this approach lie in the ancient Russian economic equality of men in relation to the land: initially, members of the Russian community were allocated equal agricultural shares from what the “world” owned. This is why, internally, Russians strive for such a realization concepts of justice.

Among the Russian people, justice will always win a dispute in the categories of truth-truth and truth-justice. For Russians it is not as important as it once was and as it is at the moment, much more important is what and how it should be in the future. The actions and thoughts of individual people have always been assessed through the prism of eternal truths that support the postulate of justice. The internal desire for them is much more important than the benefit of a specific result.

The actions and thoughts of individuals have always been assessed through the prism of justice.

Individualism among Russians is very difficult to implement. This is due to the fact that from time immemorial, in agricultural communities, people were allocated equal plots, land was periodically redistributed, that is, a person was not the owner of the land, did not have the right to sell his piece of land or change the culture of cultivation on it. In such a situation it was it is impossible to demonstrate individual skill, which in Rus' was not valued too highly.

The almost complete absence of personal freedom has formed among Russians the habit of rush jobs as an effective way of collective activity during agricultural periods. During such periods work and holiday were combined in a phenomenal way, which made it possible to a certain extent to compensate for great physical and emotional stress, as well as to give up excellent freedom in economic activity.

A society based on the ideas of equality and justice was unable to establish wealth as a value: to an unlimited increase in wealth. In the same time live prosperously to a certain extent was quite revered - in the Russian village, especially in the northern regions, ordinary people respected merchants who artificially slowed down their trade turnover.

Just by becoming rich you cannot earn the respect of the Russian community.

For Russians, a feat is not personal heroism - it should always be aimed “outside of a person”: death for one’s Fatherland and Motherland, feat for one’s friends, for the world and death is good. Immortal glory was gained by people who sacrificed themselves for the sake of others and in front of their community. The basis of the Russian feat of arms, the dedication of the Russian soldier, has always been contempt for death and only then - hatred of the enemy. This contempt for the possibility of dying for the sake of something very important is rooted in the willingness to endure and suffer.

At the heart of the Russian feat of arms, the dedication of the Russian soldier, lies contempt for death.

The well-known Russian habit of getting hurt is not masochism. Through personal suffering, a Russian person self-actualizes and wins personal inner freedom. In the Russian sense- the world exists steadily and continuously moves forward only through sacrifice, patience and self-restraint. This is the reason for Russian long-suffering: if the real one knows why this is necessary...

• List of Russian valuables
• statehood
• conciliarity
• justice
• patience
• non-aggressiveness
• willingness to suffer
• pliability
• non-covetousness
• dedication
• unpretentiousness

Currently, man is formally declared as the highest value of modern Russian society. Freedom, security and justice are also recognized as basic values, but these highest values ​​are not fully realized for both objective and subjective reasons. It can be argued that socio-economic processes in Russia should have led and led to the formal recognition of human value. But they also led to the situational formation of interests in a person that do not coincide with the interests of the state and society. Under the influence of the egoization of the individual and his appropriation of greater freedom, the hierarchy of the value system inevitably had to change and has changed towards the priority of personal values, while socially significant values ​​are gradually losing their significance both for society and for the individual.

For the individual, private values, such as material success, freedom, justice and others, come first in importance as the highest, and social reality gives rise to a tendency towards a perverted, egotistical understanding of these values. As K fears. G. Volkov, Russia is threatened by the development of a phenomenon known in the West as hyper-individualization. Hyper-individualists recognize only the independence of the individual and strongly reject the concept of social responsibility, which can ultimately lead to the collapse of society.

The priorities of society's development are shifted: the market has a dominant, self-sufficient importance, while a person is considered only as its element, completely subordinate to its needs. The social cost of reforms, the goal of which is actually to build a market economy without taking into account the interests of the individual, is extremely high for the majority of the population, since the highest value - the value of a person - is actually depreciated in the public consciousness. The possibility of such a development of events in Russia as a result of the fall of Soviet power was foreseen back in 1937 by N.A. Berdyaev.

The loss of values ​​and ideals is accompanied by an increase in utilitarianism in relation to society and the individual, their subordination to the laws of the market, and their transformation into commodities. In this regard, modern Russian society can be characterized as a society of gradual egoization and alienation of the individual, resulting in social apathy, indifference, a kind of “omnivorousness”, which are gradually transformed into cynicism, cruelty and unprincipledness towards everyone except oneself and one’s closest significant environment.

With the market orientation of society, a person increasingly views his capabilities, abilities and qualities as a product that has a certain price on the market and is subject to sale. Focus on “market”, market-oriented qualities of the individual, its socio-economic, but not personal-moral significance, increasingly leads to the fact that success, understood mainly as material success, is considered as the only worthy, socially and personally significant goal of life activity. which, at any cost, the individual tends to consider himself as a value. Another consequence of this process may be the formation of a personality that is not harmoniously developed, but specialized.

This process is, unfortunately, natural and inevitable in the conditions of modern Russia. Therefore, personal success, measured by the material standard of living, has practically become an end in itself, pushing the moral and spiritual foundations of the individual to the margins of public attention. The economic success of an individual, determined by his ability to adapt to the changing demands of the market, naturally leads to a decrease in the importance of not only professional, but also moral attitudes and value orientations, which are transformed in such a way as to receive the highest rating in the labor market and ensure material well-being in the near future.

The ongoing differentiation of the population along material, social, spiritual and moral grounds, which increasingly alienates people from each other and atomizes society, cannot but affect the real morals of social work specialists. The spiritual, truly human, values ​​of Russians have been replaced by material ones, implying only material enrichment and carnal pleasures. Moreover, the achievement of this enrichment and pleasure is permitted by any means, which are mainly of an immoral nature.

As a result of this, society, unfortunately, is gradually sliding down to the level of “situational morality”, the motto of which is: what is moral is what is economically useful in a given situation, since it is the economic potential and status of the individual that largely determine at present his status in society, the possibility of obtaining benefits for myself. According to R. G. Apresyan, the basis of morality is the need for unity with other people." The tendency to identify benefit and morality gradually leads to the fact that one of the main questions of philosophical ethics - the question of the relationship and correspondence of goals and means - is resolved on level of everyday consciousness in the form of permissiveness in relation to means, if only the goal suits the individual, seems to him to be situationally justified and personally significant.As a result, in Russian society there is a tendency towards the destruction of moral principles, an increase in immorality and permissiveness in thinking and behavior.

No less dangerous is the tendency towards devaluation in the public and individual consciousness of socially significant values ​​- collectivism, solidarity, unity. The value of labor has decreased significantly, giving way to the value of material success, regardless of work activity. There is an alienation of mass consciousness from traditional Russian values ​​and guidelines - the ideas of unity, conciliarity, collectivism, solidarity, moral purity, altruism and social optimism, which have always dominated the Russian national mentality. At the same time, there is an attempt to replace them with really existing market-type values ​​- selfishness, pragmatism, social and moral cynicism, and lack of spirituality. This process can have the most negative consequences for Russia, since it can lead to the loss of national identity in mentality, spirituality and culture, and the final collapse of society. It can have irreversible consequences for an individual: at the end of the 19th century, F. Nietzsche noted that the loss of the value of collectivism can lead to the loss of the value of the individual.

As is known, the formation of spiritual culture and morality is a long process, spanning millennia, while the cultural and moral degradation of a nation under certain conditions can occur quite quickly, and, starting from a certain moment, the process of demoralization can acquire an avalanche-like character, capturing more and more new and new social strata and groups, depriving them of moral principles, ideals and values ​​and instead establishing indifference, lack of spirituality, cruelty, social and moral nihilism in individual and mass consciousness. The vast majority of people alive today perceive as value only that which better helps them “outperform” their competitors. Any means suitable for this seems to have an illusory value in itself.

An analysis of trends in the development of value orientations of the population allows us to conclude that the value orientations of representatives of various population groups are shifting towards individual and personal ones. This is largely facilitated by the deep crisis in the economy, social life and spiritual sphere, as well as the activities of the majority of official media, calling on the population to rely only on themselves and take care only of themselves, without expecting any help from the state.

At the same time, although the egoization of Russians is gradually occurring, it is of a situationally forced nature and is regarded by the citizens themselves more as a necessary measure to ensure survival in the absence of assistance and effective social and economic policy from the state, rather than indicating an essential attraction to individualism. It can be assumed that the egoization of the population in Russia is a kind of defensive reaction, with the help of which citizens, without relying on state help, hope to ensure their individual survival in the difficult conditions of radical reforms and the associated crisis. Thus, the insufficient protection of citizens by the state is compensated by such “forms of self-defense” as egoization and alienation.

No less dangerous is the tendency towards polarization of morality. The differentiation of the living conditions of Russians leads not so much to the emergence of natural differences in the field of morality, but to the polarization of moral attitudes inherent in different social groups, and this polarization occurs in accordance with the division of society along income and property lines. At the same time, two economically opposite “poles” - the super-rich and the super-poor - are distinguished by the greatest lack of principles and cynicism in moral terms, and in this matter, two economically opposite “poles” are closed. The middle social strata show moderation in matters of morality and relative adherence to its positive norms.

The polarization of the moral attitudes of social groups depending on the level and quality of life indicates the lack of possibility, or at least difficulty, in organizing their joint social creativity. It not only does not prevent, but also contributes to the further disintegration of society into hostile groups, the reign of anarchy, immorality, and arbitrariness in society. For the super-rich, in the context of primitive capital accumulation, morality is a hindrance that can lead to a reduction in profits if it is given too much attention. For the ultra-poor, morality can cause humiliation and death. These polar groups, located in peculiar extreme circumstances, are subject to the process of demoralization to the greatest extent and consider it possible for themselves not to follow the prescriptions of morality: compassion, care for others, moderation are naturally considered by them, in the spirit of the philosophy of F. Nietzsche, as herd virtues.”

The experience of analyzing social development leads to the conclusion that in the mentality of citizens belonging to the intermediate (relatively stable and wealthy) strata of the population of modern Russia, adherence to collectivist-socialist and Orthodox values, interconnected - sovereignty, paternalism, collectivism, equality and justice, which does not fit into the framework of traditional Western ideology, but at the same time is fully consistent with the traditional national mentality of Russians. The “non-market nature” of Russians as a nation, noted by the overwhelming majority of experts, makes it impossible for the majority to actively appropriate market values, although it does determine the objective situational need to be guided by them in everyday activities and relationships.

Therefore, in modern Russia there is a kind of internal distancing from the imposed norms and values ​​of the market model, which indicates the preservation of a deep, ineradicable commitment to traditional values ​​in the mentality of Russians. Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that at present there is a tendency towards distancing from the cult of war and violence, a return to traditional tolerance, mutual support and creative altruism, although still very little. This can be explained by the deep, not always clearly realized connection of Russians with national culture, a unique way of perceiving the world, which determines a certain way of thinking and acting and makes it unacceptable for the majority of the population to act in accordance with the norms of a culture and morality that is alien to it.

Thus, in the public consciousness of the population of modern Russia, there are opposite trends: on the one hand, the desire to preserve the integrity of the traditional system of values ​​and the foundations of morality (ethos, which includes humanism, compassion, collectivism, justice, freedom, equality, etc.), and on the other hand, a situationally conditioned tendency to reassess values ​​and to free oneself from the need to comply with basic moral norms (a variable part of the ethical system based on individualism and selfishness, equality, unconditional freedom).

The presence of these two tendencies leads to the fact that the interests of the individual take priority over the interests of the group, community, society, since the “poles” of society are most active in the formation of the hierarchy of values, imposing their attitudes on more “moderate” social groups. Freeing himself from moral shackles, a person, as it seems to him, receives the necessary “freedom”, by choosing which, he not only acquires what he wants in the form of material success, but also feels fulfilled as a value. On the other hand, at the same time, the value of security necessary for the survival and relatively stable existence of the majority of Russians increases. This part of Russians is ready to give up part of their freedom in exchange for guaranteed security.

The presence of this trend can serve as definite evidence of the dehumanization of social relations. The priority of the interests of the individual presupposes an awareness of the value of the individual himself and, of course, is associated with respect for his rights, honor and dignity. However, in a crisis society, the priority of the interests of the individual and his freedom in the absence of proper security and social justice lead to the fact that a person’s needs can be satisfied most often by infringing on the interests of other individuals, since equality of opportunity for an individual to realize his rights is still really absent. This determines alienation, leading to polarization and atomization of society, isolation and loneliness of people, and the absence of a single constructive platform for joint social creativity. The low level of state responsibility for citizens entails a decrease in their social activity.

All this, unfortunately, leads to the conclusion that the real content of consciousness as an individual in general, as well as the everyday and professional consciousness of a specialist in the field of social work, may differ significantly from the ideal model. At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, during the period of change from the industrial world civilization to the post-industrial one, our country is experiencing one of the deepest crises in the history of mankind. system crisis values, their radical revision. No wonder WHAT values n moral principles implemented in activities can significantly differ from humanistic and professional significant. Specialist, influencing society, he himself largely degree is his product. Subjectivity and subjectivity specialist can determine that his perception of the profession and social being will generally be biased. This point of view he can trans lyrate into society.

The activities of social institutions designed to promote the formation of an individual’s opinions and attitudes on various issues, and thereby the formation of his ways of life, take place in society as a constant factor. However, unfortunately, its effectiveness is low. In our country, according to A. A. Vostil, the process of socialization of the individual has been destroyed, and at present all conditions have been created for the prosperity of persons with sociocultural pathology."

At the same time, there may be counteraction to the influence of the “market” on the consciousness of the individual. This counteraction can be provided by the education system in general and social education in particular. The process of formation of personality in general and of a specialist in the field of social work should be considered as the most important component of his professional training and his formation as an individual.

In this regard, one of the problems of the deontology of social work is determining the level and quality of influence of the above elements and structures of social consciousness on the content of the duty and responsibility of a social worker. The individual consciousness of a specialist cannot but experience processes in the spiritual and social spheres of society, which together lead to the degradation of the ethical consciousness of the individual. The task of deontology in this aspect may be to justify the need for a social worker to fulfill his duty to society, despite the fact that in the modern situation society may seem to be an antagonist of an individual.