A fairy tale using terms from sociology. Socialization processes using the example of a fairy tale - abstract

Work is most effectively done in small groups using brainstorming. Then representatives of each group talk about their fairy-tale characters, based on the table.
Here are some examples of students completing this task.
Charles Pierrot's fairy tale "Cinderella" . The main character of the fairy tale initially had a low social status, did hard and dirty work as a servant, was poorly dressed and had no rights. At the end of the tale, she has achieved upward social mobility and acquired the highest status, becoming the wife of a prince. That is, the social elevator “successful marriage” was used, but it was helped by such personal qualities like patience, hard work, kindness.
Tale by G.H. Andersen "Hans the Block". The main character, the stupidest and least loved of the three sons, was infringed on in his rights and property. But it was he (and not his smart, educated, arrogant brothers) who married the royal daughter, completing upward vertical mobility. Such traits as stupidity, arrogance, and resourcefulness helped him achieve this (as in many Russian folk tales about Emelya and Ivanushka the Fool).
Old woman from a fairy tale A.S. Pushkin's "Goldfish" At first she had an extremely low social status, since she was a serf peasant and had very meager property. Further, throughout the tale, she made upward social mobility step by step, but, having achieved a high position in society, she quickly returned to her original status. The old woman rose upward thanks not to her own efforts, but to the magical power of the goldfish, and slid down because of her own greed and greed.
Fairy tale hero A.N. Tolstoy "The Adventures of Pinocchio" Karabas-Barabas was the owner of a puppet theater, i.e. a fairly wealthy and noble man, but by the end of the tale he has undergone downward vertical mobility, going broke and losing all his capital. This happened because he was greedy and cruel and could not stand the competition with the kind and cheerful Pinocchio.
Princess from a fairy tale G.H. Andersen "The Swineherd" ranked second at the top of society after her father the king. In the future, she was destined for the royal throne, but instead, having lost her high status, she became marginalized and practically a lumpen beggar, an exile. Such a sharp downward upward mobility occurred because the princess did not live up to her social role, displaying a low level of culture and primitive interests, thereby earning the contempt of the prince and the wrath of her father.
Having considered the various types of mobility of fairy-tale heroes, we do general analysis completed table. Of particular interest is the column “Personality Traits and Factors Contributing to Social Mobility.” Here we observe an interesting situation: on the one hand, honest, kind heroes achieve upward social mobility thanks to hard work, a kind heart, and internal and external beauty. Another group of fairy-tale characters - lazy, cunning, stupid - increase their social status thanks to arrogance and deception. We draw a parallel with today and note that both options also exist in the modern world. However, legal liability inevitably arises for violation of legal norms. Downward social mobility, that is, a decrease in social status, in fairy tales occurs as a result of greed, greed, and stupidity.
Having aroused the interest of students with the help of fairy tales, we move on to discussing “social elevators,” that is, ways of changing social status in modern society. And here we, first of all, call education and qualifications, as well as the necessary personal traits - hard work, determination. We note the army, business, civil service, public policy, science, sports as “social elevators”, we also mention arranged marriage.
In such conversations, I try to convince young people that it is possible to improve their existing social status if they strive hard for it. But you can waste your time condemning insufficiently smart bosses and officials, endlessly complaining about the injustice of social life - and this time will pass unnoticed. Yes, in our society, as in any other, there is enough injustice, but there is also justice (after all, absolutely fair or unjust societies do not exist, it is a utopia or a dystopia). A person from the bottom of society, thanks to education, hard work and determination, reaches social heights - and there are many such examples around us, as in fairy tales.
Thus, this lesson helps students firmly consolidate the acquired knowledge, develop their own attitude to social processes, and ultimately contributes to the formation of an active life position.
// Teaching history at school. - 2008. - No. 5. - P.68-69.

"Actual" analysis

This level of analysis can be called “actual” based on the word “actual” - “real”, “real”, “relevant in given time" The field we are considering is limited immediate situation, in which the author of the fairy tale is located. At the same time, of course, it is worth understanding that a person is simultaneously in many situations that coexist at different levels. Well, for example, at the same time he can be a newcomer to the group, but at the same time the oldest in the same group in age, a fugitive (that is, a “traitor”) for his family, which he left at home, and at the same time a zealot for order in terms of the atmosphere at the seminar etc., etc. But in a specific fairy tale, as a rule, it is precisely that actual situation that is in a certain sense “the most relevant,” that is, most often the most emotionally charged.

At the most superficial level (but not the easiest and simplest, as practice shows), such an analysis is a comparison of the plot of a fairy tale and the events that directly occur with its author.

Let's take an example of a fairy tale told by a young woman at the very beginning of the seminar.

Mobile communications

Once upon a time mobile phone. It was so new and cute, with many functions.

But finally the owner decided to connect his phone again to some kind of mobile connection. He thought for a long time and decided to choose the same communication system and the tariff that were the very first. And he issued this tariff already for for a long time

. I signed such a long-term plan.

(Lena Litvinyuk, Odessa)

So, in what situation is the author of the fairy tale at the time of the story? She came to the seminar with her long-time lover, with whom she had not lived together for a long time. This seminar, in fact, was one of their very first joint activities after a break of several years. There are two more men present in the group at the same time, with whom she had love relationships at different times.

This fairy tale, of course, still has a lot of interesting and important things to understand, but now I want to dwell only on the correspondence between the fairy tale and the “external” life plot. This plot clearly includes: the desirability of men for the female author (without them she is “like dumb”); her ability to “sort through” fans (her “mobility”); competition between men;

clear choice and preference for first love, “return to square one”; the desire to continue this recovering relationship for a long time.

At this level, we focus our attention on the “status” of the hero of the fairy tale and its author, that is, on his group role, place in the hierarchy. As a rule, a fairy tale necessarily contains such information, especially a fairy tale composed in an unformed, “raw” group, where the issue of status is unclear and therefore alarming. In each group there are certain “places” that are almost the same for any group, regardless of whether it is a school teachers’ council, a group of tourists or a seminar on fairy tale therapy.

These “status” places are concentrated, firstly, around the “top”, where the “leader”, “first wife” or “first adviser”, “assistant psychotherapist” and so on sit.

There is, as a rule, an edge of “opposition”, that is, characters competing with the elite for power, among whom there may be “the smartest”, “parricide” and others. There is, of course, a “gray” majority, law-abiding, passive, among whom characters and roles appear dimly - for the time being. There are “margins”, “fugitives”, “outsiders” - those who claim their right to be outside society while being inside.

Once upon a time there lived in the desert, in a large hole, a gopher named Vasya.

In the mornings he did gymnastics, ate only vegetarian food, and in the evenings he sang songs.

He lived happily like this, but one day the young people came to the desert and began to catch animals for the zoo. And Vasya the gopher, not expecting anything bad, suddenly fell into a noose, and then into a bag, and then into a living corner of the youth department. It wasn't that he was very scared, but at first he felt very strange. Then he realized that no one was going to do anything bad to him, they even fed him quite decently. The youngsters loved Vasya, they took him out of the cage all the time and stroked him. For some time he lived like this, and then he missed his native desert. Then Vasya examined the room in which he was sitting, looking for all sorts of holes and loopholes - what led where, and then began to gather a crowd to escape. Not all the animals in the living area knew about freedom, but Vasya told them all how nice it was there, how the sun rose and the grass turned green, and a bunch of animals agreed with him that it was time to escape. One fine night, animals led by a gopher fled from the living area, from the zoo, then from the city. Of course, none of them particularly knew where to go, and Vasya, to be honest, didn’t really know. But animal instinct led him to the desert.

He palpably “saunters” over the adequacy of the official leader, hinting at least at his youth (“Younnats”, young naturalists).

By the way! The name Vasya, that is, Vasily, comes from the Greek “basileus” - ruler, king.

And the name of the gopher is in some strange way similar to “wort,” the main function of which is “fermentation.” If this is a “ferment of minds,” then this is again the opposition. Doesn’t anyone see an allusion here to wanderings, “wandering” in the desert (and there is also an image of the desert in the fairy tale), the exodus from slavery under the leadership of Moses? The author of the tale about the cute gopher himself, by the way, is a Jew; and the figure of Moses, the first prophet and lawmaker, the greatest leader of Israel, is all the more significant for him.

Feather grass

Feather grass grew in the endless steppe. Grass grew around, another feather grass grew, the wind blew, and the feather grass was happy with its life. He tried to help his neighbors, to protect them from strong wind either from rain or from too much sun. And sometimes he dreamed of becoming a tulip, such as he sometimes saw on the horizon. The tulips were large and beautiful.

An excellent sketch of the position of the “gray mass”, the silent majority. There are many of us, we are almost indistinguishable from each other, and we are guided by tulips, which are visible as distant spots of color (it looks like Philip Kirkorov, in my fantasy). Inside ourselves, we help each other.

It would be worth noting here that the author did practically nothing with her fairy tale during further analysis, she remained silent and nodded: “Yes, yes,” when others said something. The affair quickly ended as the group's attention shifted to something else. No one was going to become a “Tulip”.

Magic acorn

If we analyze this fairy tale from the point of view of status (although, as always, it is full of other interesting meanings), then its author (a woman) strives to take a position “in the crowd,” although closer to the leader (indicated in the fairy tale, apparently, old man). That is, I would see here an indication of a certain kind of chosenness (unlike other surrounding oak trees), but one that is acquired by itself, without struggle (and in general, status position in the group among people, like among monkeys, without struggle not achieved). In the status sense, the author of the fairy tale demonstrates humility and passivity, the main features of the “middle class”, as well as, of course, naivety (which also primarily distinguishes the “crowd”, “people”, “majority”). Such a simple guy from the people, but closer to the “feeding trough”.

Valentina Tereshkova stirred my brain. Or Yuri Gagarin himself.

Actually, the longer I think about this fairy tale now, the more I see that the author is claiming a rather special place. Normally, neither acorns are lying around in huts, nor are oak trees planted near apple trees.

In short, she somehow can do what others cannot. Claiming to be the “first wife”? If yes, then it is very weakly expressed.

I believe that in the harem she would have gotten a fairly average place.

But in any case, there is no talk of any “opposition” or “marginality” here. The author positions himself very positively, he does not cause any harm, but only good miracles.

Snow tunnel

Once upon a time there lived such a creature in a house where there were many people. The creature really loved to play, and somehow it began to play, and in the meantime all the people dispersed. It looked around - there was no one around.

Back and forth around the house, but the house is empty. After some time, he felt uncomfortable in the house, and there was no food there. It decided to find people. I tried to leave the house, but everything was covered in a blizzard.

The “loner” status differs from others in that it does not seem to make claims for group values (high status in the hierarchy, attention, time, strokes, and so on). He also seems to make no claims to the attention of the opposite sex (in the fairy tale this is expressed by the hero’s middle gender, another sign of marginality in our sexist society).

In addition, a loner often does not distinguish between the statuses of the other members of the group and does not observe the appropriate symbols (distance, bows, coquetry, dress code, etc.).

When I obsessively repeat “as if” in these descriptions, I point out that the “loner” is often a hypocrite, that is, he uses the “game of marginality” to achieve completely social goals, which he tries to achieve “out of turn” and “ for free". For example, in this case it may be increased attention due to pity for the “freezing” person. This is not always the case, but it happens often.

I want to point out that status - or at least the claim to a certain status - is well reflected in a person's location in a group. If this is, for example, a psychotherapeutic group that sits in a circle to work, then with a high probability the “first wives” and “advisers” of the “leader” will be next to the psychotherapist, and the “opposition” will actually be in opposition, that is, opposite.

“Marginalized people” are often located behind people’s backs, in corners or in completely exotic places. (How do you, for example, hang upside down on a wall bars? It happened.)

Behavioral style analysis The main character of a fairy tale is characterized by a certain style of behavior, which, generally speaking, is almost certainly inherent in the author and is relevant for him in the situation of creating a fairy tale. Emelya's style is to be lazy and hope for chance, Cinderella's style is to be obedient during the day and secretly naughty at night, the stepmother's style is to order and get angry, and so on. This style of behavior is worth paying attention to, if only because with a very high probability the author is unconsciously telling what his style of behavior will be in interaction with you. Almost every fairy tale recorded here corresponds to a certain behavior of the hero, which at the same time quite accurately describes the behavior of the author in the external, “real” environment (for example, at a seminar where the fairy tale was written). only to the “higher powers” (in the fairy tale - lightning, an old man, a voice from above), that is, communicate only with the “top” and not pay much attention to the rest. Third, promise something magical and amazing (“spread vibes of hope”). And fourthly, at some point he just will disappear- note that the oak tree that would grow from an acorn does not appear further in the fairy tale, and the narrator said that it was so, there was no oak tree there, there were just gifts lying around the yard. And so it happened, the narrator did not come to the next lesson of the seminar.

"Mobile phone" will be tempt(both appearance and communication), choose often, but not for long, and ultimately stay faithful some old proven values.

Vasya the gopher will be hide, search moves, revolt, organize socially significant events, from which not everyone will emerge unharmed, but he will.

The creature from the "Snow Tunnel" will work by yourself with myself, without noticing others, and itself will be invisible.

Here's another nice example.

Raspberry pie

A raspberry pie was going around the world. He went wherever he wanted.

He sees a jelly river ahead. He began to swim across it, and on the other bank sat Three Fat Men. Pie became worried that he might be eaten, and floated downstream and around the place where the Fat Men were sitting. I got out to the shore and went on my own. I approached the forest, and there was Baba Yaga. The pie again realized that it could be eaten, and decided to change.

He turned into a flying carpet and flew over the forest.

So, the style of behavior here is two-stage: hero attracts, and then runs away. The author himself very quickly (and, in my opinion, correctly) understood what this style of behavior was on an everyday level.

Of course, the famous Dynamo game is to seduce and not give.

Basic myth

In analyzing a fairy tale, it can be very useful to reduce it to a certain “basic” myth, to an archetype. There is no single list of “basic myths,” but in any case, they include the main plots of ancient mythologies and “big” religions. Such a prototype can be established in most cases, and this gives us knowledge of the origins and consequences of a fairy-tale situation, as well as significant associations from mythology.

Alien There was a war on a distant planet. There was a very advanced civilization there, and the war was fought in space, on spaceships

. And then one interstellar pilot was shot down and fell to planet Earth. His ship burned down, and he barely escaped. When he was cured, he decided to live on this planet. It was located away from the interstellar routes, and he had never heard of it.

He took on the form of a man and began to live on Earth. He contacted his planet via radio, but there they only wanted to punish him for the crashed ship. And the alien began to live on Earth, and gradually became completely human. Having lived one life, he was reborn into another person and lived on Earth further. He knew a lot that ordinary people could not, and therefore he could easily, for example, be an excellent doctor or teacher. Then an invitation came to him from his home planet to return, but the alien thought and thought and no longer wanted to return. He serves him very friendly, sincerely and strives to realize on Earth what he himself suffered from in another world - to stop wars.

This is all very similar to the Boddhisattva, the Buddhist savior. The basic myth about the Boddhisattva is this: this is a person who has realized his true nature and thereby gained the opportunity to leave this world; but before the last step, he takes an oath that he will help all living beings to be saved, and until this happens, he will not accept his own salvation. The myth is clearly dualistic: it presupposes the existence of “that world” (where salvation is) and “this world” (where suffering is). This myth defines as its basic value completely selfless love, as well as “salvation” and “consciousness” (by which salvation is achieved). Almost all of this is “acted out” in a fairy tale about an alien.

With this interpretation (which can be called archetypal analysis ) a “random”, “quick” fairy tale becomes deeply rooted in human culture, and its hero - a human personality - realizes his involvement in the main plots of humanity (or the universe). Since the cultural context of such stories is usually well known to us, the specific tale itself receives a number of significant hypotheses for analysis.

Remember the fairy tale about the gopher Vasya, the basic myth of which I called the myth of the great Jewish prophet and leader Moses. It can be said that this is the same "savior" myth as the Boddhisattva myth, but there is a very significant cultural difference that is significant for the specific authors of these tales.

Moses is a hero of mythology with a rigid distinction between "us" and "outsiders", while the Boddhisattva (at least in his idea) treats "all living beings" with love.

The basic myth is not always easy to “find,” but thinking in this direction is certainly useful.

We may be fairly confident that a basic myth exists, but, for example, we may lack certain information to distinguish one from another; then it is quite easy to obtain by asking the author of the fairy tale the necessary questions.

Of course, such an analysis requires a fairly good knowledge of mythology. And it seems to me that it doesn’t matter which one. For example, I know the mythology of the ancient Greeks better and know the Scandinavian or Indian mythology quite poorly. But when I hear stories from these mythologies, I usually quickly and easily find Greek parallels that are sufficient to understand. I remember Hillman once writing about the “barbaric luxury” of Jung’s knowledge in the sense of world mythologies; reading Campbell or Eliade in this sense is also a pleasure. And yet, despite all the advantages of erudition, you can forget all the names of all the gods and spirits, but remember and instinctively sense the basic scheme of the archetypal plot - and be an excellent analyst.

Situation analysis analysis

The analysis must ALWAYS include the situation of telling a fairy tale, the group’s unconscious reaction to it, the process of discussing it, and also very often the replay of the same plot. Silence, fussiness, ignorance, quarrels, and so on - all this almost certainly has a direct relationship to the “message” of the fairy tale and very often is simply a replay of the same plot that is described by the fairy tale. For many people, this parallelism between “fairy tale” and “reality,” when it can be clearly demonstrated, is something like a “trick”; To me, the situation seems much stranger when there are no similarities or intersections between the fairy tale and the plot around it.

Sun

And here is the situation of the birth of a fairy tale: in a large audience, at the end of a short seminar, several fairy tales have already been spoken and analyzed, and we were all about to do another exercise, when suddenly a rather large and a pretty young girl blurts out this fairy tale in one breath. The remaining tales had previously been discussed with interest by many people; after that there was mostly silence, and gradually people began to hear “Well?” - almost all of them were from women, although the audience was full of men, and they had clearly been more active before. The girl continued to sit in the center and discuss this fairy tale with me (looking almost all the time only at me). WITH

different sides

Mocking and skeptical comments began to come from women, of which I remember one, probably the main one: “It’s time for the sun to set.” I told her about the same thing, and the girl, understanding this (as far as I could judge), finished the analysis and left for the place herself.

Here the situation “around the fairy tale” very vividly reflects the fairy tale itself: there is a “sun” that suddenly rose right in the center of the “universe”;

there are “people”, some small and invisible to the sun, but important to him as a whole; there are “clouds” of mutual misunderstanding; there is an explanation by the “wind” (and by the way, I am often represented this way in fairy tales) that there is no need for the sun to “shine” all the time, it’s fine for him to take a break from the central role. “Sunny” maintains her role - a very narcissistic one, of course - in that she herself went to work, she herself predetermined the results of this work, and she herself completed it.

Fairy tales, plots and scenarios of modern Russia

There are no recipes for Russia today in this regard. On the one hand, it is clear that the Russian viewer, like the viewer all over the world, loves, in general, the same thing that the whole world and the mass viewer love. But so far there is no “mainstream” in Russia, i.e. flow of sufficiently high-quality films (such high-quality products), there can be no recipes. There can be no approach to technology for the production of this very “mainstream” film, which usually has a fairly high budget and is designed for the fact that a sufficient number of viewers have already formed in the country’s market. Those. there must be a certain critical mass that allows, for example, 1.5 million dollars to be returned to the box office due to the fact that there is still a viewer and an appropriate product can be produced for him, trying to make it of the highest quality, but, in general, guided by a market approach. This time is actually already coming; we can say that it is already on the threshold.

I think that this year, and certainly next year, will be marked by the appearance of such products. The number of active Russian films visible to the public is not very large, but this percentage will increase. But today this situation has not yet fully emerged, so we are acting in accordance with the situation. And the situation is that today the wall of American films is being broken through by special films, individual films, to which no recipes, knowledge, technologies, or marketing can be applied. You can support a film with them, and you need to do this, but if these films don’t have some kind of flywheel, some kind of zest, then all your other theoretical knowledge about what the story should be, what the hero should be like, they’re not worth a penny. One-piece, absolutely one-piece films, made by hand, “hand made films”, which are capable of winning this audience today, can shoot up.

This, unfortunately, has nothing to do with artistic quality. But that's the way the world is. I won’t give many examples, but, on the one hand, the film “Brother,” produced by Balabanov at our studio, is certainly distinguished by its artistic quality, and it has many festival awards, which to some extent confirms this. On the other hand, there is the film “Don’t Even Think”, an absolutely meaningless cinema, but successful because it also has its own trick. Cheerful, funny, it was precisely because of his disregard for some sacred cinematic cows that he fired. I haven’t even seen Don’t Even Think 2, but it’s probably made from the same recipe.

Success can only be determined in retrospect, when the film took place, only then does it become a kind of object of study, explanation, construction of various theories, which is not what I do. I just put something aside in the cerebellum, write it down somehow, and I continue to live with this knowledge. Success is not calculated anywhere, including in Hollywood. Those. it is calculated, but the efficiency of the film industry is like that of a steam locomotive - a little more than 3%. It's like being in a casino. When you try to tell them: “Why did you sell our film so poorly? It looks like they didn’t spend any effort,” they say: “Well, the film didn’t work, what should we do now? No one knows this in advance.”

There is an absolute grain of truth in this. In America, as the most powerful cinematic power, the emergence of super-successes is cultivated. Once every 7 years, a relative figure, but quite accurate, some kind of super-success must happen in the American film space, otherwise the Hollywood myth, part of the American dream, will stop working. This American machine quite deliberately produces these flashes every seven years. They filmed it for 70,000 dollars, collected 70 million - success, everything is fine, etc. And this corresponds to the nature of cinema and the nature of success. When a certain level related to the market volume, etc., is more or less calculated, we can approximately calculate that, given such and such a market, this film will bring 50% of the profit. But this is not success. Real success- this is when a film makes 1000% profit, no one can ever predict this.

In my speech there will be many reservations related to some randomness of decision-making. This is still a kind of artistic creativity, and the producer’s task in this sense is quite simple - to make the right choice. This is the only task of the producer. The producer is a responsible person, he is responsible for giving life to this film: not only producing it, but also releasing it, managing it, etc. But these are, nevertheless, secondary questions; the main thing is this choice.

Just like with a director, the choice of actor is the defining moment. If he chooses the main character correctly, this is the person the film needs, then whether this actor plays a little better or a little worse doesn’t matter, and the director wins. If the director chooses a wonderful actor, but the wrong one, and he will play wonderfully in his own way, but the director will put everything into... The director usually understands his tragic mistake in this case during the first days of filming. Therefore, he begins to make efforts, directs all his energy to correct this mistake, so that he can get out of the actor whom he chose incorrectly what he still needs. But this never happens, and the film will no longer be brilliant. The producer faces the same problem of choice. If it is solved, then everything else is a matter of technology. When I read the script and see the director who is behind it, then after the last line it is clear to me that yes, this must be done. And if this feeling does not arise, then...

Sometimes, as an intermediate option, I see that the screenwriter is interesting, that you can keep him in mind, that you need to discuss something with him and make him some kind of proposal, but you still don’t need to film it.

What is the strength in, brother?

The following question proposed by the organizers. The stories behind "Brothers"(“brothers”, not “brothers”, maybe this is correct) or “Peculiarities of national hunting and fishing”, appeal to existing ideas and conversations in society or promote these ideas, in the sense of answering questions that the viewer does not knows the answers before? What questions and confusions about modern life should a good film or story answer?

If we operate in terms such as question and answer in relation to a film, then, of course, it is more correct to accept the fairly well-known concept that the film doesn't solve the riddles, the film solves them. The riddle about a person is constantly being solved. Here you can argue with Dostoevsky, who said that, having spent your whole life solving the riddle of a person, you cannot consider that you are busy with nonsense. Perhaps, in other areas of human activity, it is the unraveling of human nature that is an interesting and fascinating matter. I believe that in artistic creativity it is more of a riddle.

But in fact, not a single film director or producer thinks like that. The director and producer have a very practical mindset. Pushkin’s phrase that poetry should be stupid is absolutely brilliant. She is undoubtedly brilliant and describes nature artistic creativity much better than everyone else. Thinking with your brain when creating a work of art is not correct. It is necessary - the spinal cord or the stomach. Until now, no one has been able to describe what is happening there, in the stomach or spinal cord.

This is, indeed, something so strange, some kind of mystical process, if we talk about works marked with the seal self made. This is so that I don’t utter other pretentious words. The director or screenwriter never thinks or theoretically substantiates anything about what he writes. If it is a good director and a good screenwriter. Dialogues are written this way because a person simply has hearing. Dialogues, as we know, are a very essential part of success in modern cinema, because Silent films are a thing of the past. Dialogue now is a very strong and important position.

People who write dialogues do not write them well because they think them through, but because they have an ear. All. This is what God gave. This is very difficult to learn. You can learn how to construct a script, you can learn some dramatic moves, but it is impossible to learn how to write dialogues if God did not give it to you.

Cinema, in general, is not a very intellectual sport. Cinema is a sensual sport with enormous energy. Cinema is not high art, like, say, the paintings of Velazquez or Van Gogh. But it has the strongest energy and power, and here it can compete with other genres. The energy of sensuality in cinema is colossal. Cinema, of course, has its trump cards, but bringing them into some kind of system? No. Hollywood cinema and socialist realist cinema are very similar, they were and are made according to the same laws, but now they are not relevant for us. Maybe tomorrow.

Cinema and ideology

Do I have a personal sense of a common ideology that unites most films? I'll probably note one point. Something related to the ethnic diversity of the world plays some role in my choice. And in my films that I made as a director, this is present, and in a large number of films that I produced as a producer, this is present. This doesn't make any sense, but it's extremely interesting to me. This is my personal exercise field. German, Jew, Russian, Tatar - for some reason everything from this opera excites me since childhood. I have a special, some kind of brotherly, relationship, for example, with the Tatars, with the Indians, with the Germans. I believe that Russia and Germany are sisters, between whom there were two of the bloodiest wars. I don't have any special theories about this. I'm just wondering how Russians in America or how an American in Russia will behave.

I even have several projects that will appear sooner or later. High-quality screenwriters will appear in our country, I’m moving smoothly to one of the following questions, I will order it, I will look for colleagues in these projects that interest me. They ask me: “What is your studio, what is its focus, what is its ideological platform?” I answer that our motto is the famous Chinese slogan: “let a hundred flowers bloom.” This is true. I love different films. Including, I love making them. Van Gogh ate paints. This is very clear. You need to eat the substance of what you do. This seems logical to me.

Where do scripts come from?

Question about screenwriters, are there any today? Of course have. And I must say that the last year and a half have inspired some optimism, because a year and a half ago it was very bad both in terms of new directors and new screenwriters. Now this situation is changing before our eyes and, as you all know very well without me, the two most high-profile Russian projects of last year were the debuts, “Return” and “Boomer”. We currently have two films in production, one we have just finished, it was made jointly with the Kazakhs, Germans and French, filmed in Kazakhstan, and will be the only film representing Russia in the official program of the Cannes Film Festival “New Look”.

We have talented people, but no professional people. So that you can invite the screenwriter to dialogue and cooperation, with the hope of a high-quality reading, with the hope that there will be a script - this does not exist yet. There are no professional people in highest degree these words that can hear you, understand what you want, truly get involved in it not only for money, but with your whole apparatus.

The highest professionalism does not presuppose working with a cold nose, but the fact that you somehow devote yourself entirely to what you do - everything, it’s already yours. There are still few such people. It's just not enough vocational school, and there is not enough path. The screenwriter, unlike the director, is growing. The director is maturing, the screenwriter is growing, and writers are baffled by the huge supply on the market that currently exists. A person who has written a more or less decent script immediately receives a commercially profitable serial offer, where the conditions are different and the bar is lower. Naturally, the person retrains. That's all. The same applies to excellent operators. There are, of course, exceptions to all rules, but The personnel situation in the cinema market is characterized by a shortage of creative personnel and second-level personnel. Naturally, you need the will to resist this situation if you set high goals for yourself. I would either forbid writing serials for 3 years after graduating from VGIK, or like this: immediately apply, they say, I’m going into serials, then immediately get a stamp in my passport, and - please.

Cinema and ideological order

“Who else, besides the audience, in our country can formulate tasks for the most important of the arts?” Of course, a variety of structures, including those in power, can determine what happens in the film market. And there's nothing wrong with that. Those. The state cannot take away the right to government contracts from some corporations; this right, in general, cannot be taken away from anyone. I personally believe that everyone has the right to create their own cinema and, in this sense, there are no restrictions. Moreover, interests can often overlap, i.e. cooperation is possible.

As an example, I will cite a conversation with representatives of Russian entrepreneurs (RSPP). They say: “They come to us with scripts and a proposal to film something, we also somehow think about it, but we don’t know how... I would like the image of a large entrepreneur to be more attractive to the viewer, to receive some kind of social justification ... We thought about a banker who is honest, doesn’t cheat with payments, doesn’t withhold money...” I’m exaggerating a little, but the gist of it was this.

I say that if you want to present your white image to the people, then you need to think in the direction of the movie “Pretty Woman”. Film a story with a beautiful girl! If you want to show your bright image to the country, make a film about love, if you still find the artist and artist, then consider that the issue has been resolved. There was also talk about the country's need for some kind of patriotic cinema. I say, okay, theoretically it can work, but you answer me one question: if I offered “Brother-2” in this capacity, would I say, invest money in this film, like in a patriotic movie? Well, they say, probably not.

But maybe yes. We can imagine simpler situations where potential participants in our game simply provide the opportunity to film. Yes, it could just be an order for a genre film and some kind of budget opportunity. Russian cinema is forced to compete with American cinema, and therefore it must grow, including in terms of budget. The Russian market today can only do so much, which means that in order to carry out a more budget-friendly project, you need to double this amount. And the producer cannot do this, even with the help of the Ministry of Culture. He will lose 1.5 million guaranteed. Few producers today can avoid losing 1.5-2 million in Russia. Therefore, an additional resource may be useful in facilitating the development of domestic cinematography as an industry. Because.

everything large-scale requires the revival of the school and those personnel who, to some extent, were in the Soviet Union Today we are not able to do this, even if we are showered with money. This is also a path, you need to follow it. Because cinema is, to some extent, a crowd scene, including pavilions and special effects, and everything else that is determined not only by money, but in some way: today there are 2 films, tomorrow – 5, and the day after tomorrow 6. Here Of these, it seems, one has already been completed, etc. This applies more to my films. As for the ideological motives that organizations are trying to play out, they are already clear from my speech, and I think they are clear to you. I think now there is no program or ideology that is going to be systematically promoted through cinema

. I don't think this is the case. So, check in - yes. Nevertheless, there is probably a desire to somehow participate on this front..

PAGE_BREAK-- Language for feature films

You know, I'm not an artist. I don’t have this talent, but I’ll give you an example of a dialogue between me and the screenwriter, or between me and the director. I'll exaggerate a little.

Working with an artist in a movie: “No, no, Valya, this is where it’s more profitable! Turn around! And a little closer. Don't cross the line! Fine. And just like in the last take, only a little more energetic. That’s good!”

Conversation with the director: “Well, in my opinion, it’s in vain that he’s in this episode... We need to throw him out of there... Let’s think about it...”

This is how it's done. When I approached this wonderful establishment, I saw a sign there with the signature Polit.ru. I must say I was a little tense. I must say that I wholeheartedly salute those who came up with this, the producers of this case. This seems to me to be a very good long-forgotten tradition. So, returning to the fact that I tensed up: now, I think, it will begin now - “fascists”, “Brother-2”... Not in the sense of attack, but in the sense that we will now discuss all this: certain ideologemes that have nothing to do with art. Political correctness is harmful to art, destructive to it, even if this art is just cinema.

We still love the film “Chapaev” not for the third international, but for something else: for Chapaev, for these heroes, for these images, for how funny Petka and Anka do something there. For that. It’s not that I can’t talk about this topic. I probably can, if I remember all our conversations 25 years ago. I'm not interested. On the contrary, I try to distance myself from this. If there is some kind of conscious effort in me, then it is connected with pushing away some political and ideological moment from myself. This is, of course, connected with my personal biography, because I lived a significant part of my life in the Soviet Union. I really don't like socialism, very much. Then I was sick of it all, I don’t want to do it today.

I am ready to listen to all the moralizing that if you don’t get involved in politics, then it will deal with you, please, you can teach me here for the next 100,000th time. But since I came, I am nevertheless ready to answer questions from the public. But bear in mind, I don't really take this seriously. Yes, this is of serious importance in the world, but we are talking about my activities.

If this situation arises, I try to either modify it or distance myself. I have no internal ban on contacts with anyone, for me, the main criterion for all my activities is the film. Not profit, not ideology, not some other message, not festivals - a film. The film can be interpreted in any way. It's none of my business anymore. He can do some work in society - that's none of my business. If it's a quality film, I think the work it does can only be good. If it is not of high quality, then I am already wrong, even before it does any work. I’m already very ashamed and I’m taking it very hard.

Question about the Russian hero

You can't invent a hero, i.e. Every director, every screenwriter comes up with a hero. It is impossible to write scripts without a hero. Everyone comes up with it. Whoever came up with a good idea guessed it right. I don’t want to indulge in platitudes, I’m sure that the audience knows perfectly well even without me that Cinderella, Ilya of Murom, a hero who can be called the word “Schwarzenegger”, and a whole set of other heroes, of course, exist. It's a gentleman's set of sorts, and if you follow these kinds of approaches and rules, you end up with something that people want to watch. So what? Many films are made according to these recipes. Some - in spite of them. Success has nothing to do with this directly.

If we talk about simple commercial success in a developed market - yes, by doing everything according to the rules, you get a certain product, deliver it to the cinema, and due to the fact that there are 100 million current viewers in America, you are fairly guaranteed to get a certain share of this market. In this sense, this is a conveyor belt, this is a factory, this is an industry. This has its own charm, its own game. It’s impossible to say that we won’t play it. She is also interesting to me in her own way. If it makes sense to discuss this, it would probably be for sociologists and cultural experts, when 20 such films are released in the country every year and the law of large numbers begins to operate. Then some conclusions begin to appear: for example, last year we had 17 action films, this year only 14, but 3 melodramas appeared, this indicates an improvement in morals in our society, the heroes of melodramas are more in demand by the public today than yesterday. I don’t do this, although, probably, this should be done, and, probably, there is something right in this.

And when you start writing a script, then all this dissolves in some kind of fog, all the rules from textbooks about 36 dramatic situations are forgotten. There are 36 types of dramatic situations that exist in the world, and there is none more. Indeed, you start to twist it - and it seems, really, no more. So take one of them and that’s it. I won't go into too much drama, but just keep in mind that it's simple. And there can be 10 heroes. Take some of them and implement them in one of 36 situations. Problem for a freshman. And the industry works on this. But I don’t have any themes, I don’t have any heroes, so I’m trying to speak in a primitive language of images.

It is fruitful, there is a mystery in it. Good films have a mystery. It is not found in products, specifically manufactured products. Mysticism of cinema, the mysticism of artistic creativity is not invented, just like the mysticism of the earth, blood, something else - it’s all there. Mysticism not in some sophisticated sense, but in the sense of what can be conveyed in Russian by the word “secret”. And talent, these words are next to it. This is interesting. And this is not described. "Brother" appeared because he appeared . New hero is born maximum once every 20 years in any cinematography. In America, perhaps more often, due to the huge amount of resources that are allocated to film production.

War elephant on Red Square

The director is the main subject of cinematography; cinema is made by the director. It, of course, depends on the world. Moreover, the director depends on him to a greater extent than the artist, composer, etc. Because this is a public, collective profession, the director manages people. There is, of course, a significant aspect of technology. Where the director is rational is in creating a shooting schedule. Because of this, when conceiving a film, he subconsciously focuses on what is possible. The poet, apart from the limits of his native language, has no barriers. There is paper, pencil, language, your talent - and that’s it.

A poet can write about war elephants rushing through Red Square. The director won't succeed. It's not real. Expensive. Quite stupid. And he regretfully rejects this idea. A talented director needs to have this organ, which is responsible for matching reality. Constraints, including financial ones, are what enhance the director’s capabilities. There is such a reinforced concrete limiter - this is the frame format. It varies in proportions: 3/4 is classic, but it is a rectangle whose long side lies at the base. Why not a triangle, why not a square? Where is the creative freedom? Nobody talks about it. On the contrary, it is perceived naturally.

Therefore, the interaction of the director, screenwriter and other participants in the creative process with society, the universe, of course, occurs. And, of course, a talented director knows something about the future, each in his own way. You can study the work of each director and draw some conclusions from this. This is a fascinating activity in its own way, but not my thing. I would be happy to read something like this about Balabanov and Rogozhkin, with whom I often work. I sometimes read something like this and get some pleasure from it. But this is not my job, I won’t tell you anything interesting here.

Bibliography

To prepare this work, materials from the site were used www.polit.ru/

Task formulation. Create a status portrait of one or more members of your family. To trace changes in the status portrait throughout the life cycle of an individual.

Option 1 Status portrait of each family member

See table. 4.2 and fig. 4.11.

Table 4.2

align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> Statuses	Father	Mother	Sister	I
Floor	Man	Woman	Woman	Woman
Age	Maturity	Maturity	Maturity	Maturity
Race	Caucasian
Nationality	Russian	Russian	–	–
Health	healthy	Healthy	Healthy	Healthy
Marriage-family-kinship	Married Father, Grandfather-in-law	Married Mother, Grandma Tesha	Married Daughter, Sister Mother	Single Daughter, Sister Aunt
Economic	Property owner; Average income; Low paid worker	Unsecured; Unemployed	Unsecured; Housewife	Low paid worker
Professional	Vocational education, Locksmith	Secondary technical education	Secondary technical education, Student	Secondary technical education, Student
Political	–	–	–	–
Religion	Atheist	Atheist	Atheist	Atheist
Territorial	city dweller	City girl	City girl	City girl

Option 2 Status portrait of my family member and its dynamics

Man. Adult. Forty-five years old. Russian. Has the status of a citizen of the Russian Federation. Completely healthy, that is, has the status of a healthy person. Professional status: doctor.

Does not belong to any political group. Religious status: atheist.

A resident of the city of Moscow – the status of a city dweller. Throughout his life, his status constantly grew. In childhood, being a son, grandson, brother (social statuses), he also had the status of a school student.

In his youth, while remaining in the status of a son and brother, he lost the status of a grandson, since his grandfather died, but acquired the status of a student. Then his social status changed - he became a graduate student.

Thus, his statuses - social, economic, professional - changed throughout his life: from childhood to mature age(Fig. 4.12).

The person in question is a resident of the city of Moscow, that is, by his status, a city dweller. Born healthy. And throughout his life he has the status of a healthy person.

When he went to school, he acquired the status of a student. Having joined the ranks of the Komsomol, he became a class Komsomol organizer, and, naturally, his status changed - the social status of a Komsomol leader.

Then he was elected secretary of the school Komsomol organization. His status changed again.

Having entered a university, while remaining in the status of a city resident, he receives new status– student. Proving himself to be an active and diligent student, he graduates from the institute with honors and enters graduate school at the institute. Accordingly, the status changes again - the status of a graduate student.

After graduating from graduate school, he defends his dissertation and becomes a candidate of medical sciences. His status thus changed again. Along with the increase in professional status, the economic status also increased - he began to receive higher wages.

Having started independent work, he was appointed head of the hospital department. This entails a new change in economic status.

After defending his doctoral dissertation, he is awarded the academic degree of Doctor of Medical Sciences.

He currently works successfully in a private clinic in the USA. His geographic status changed as he became a US citizen.

Option 3 Status portrait of family members

Female gender.
Age: adult (46 years old).
Health: healthy.
Race: Caucasian.
Russian nationality.
Marriage and family statuses: wife, mother, daughter, sister, niece, aunt, sister-in-law.
Professional status: cashier.
Political status: voter, non-partisan.

Dad

Gender: male.
Age: adult (46 years old).
Health: healthy.
Race: Caucasian.
National status: Russian.
Marriage and family statuses: husband, father, son, brother, nephew, uncle, brother-in-law.
Economic status: employee.
Professional status: navigator engineer.
Political status: non-partisan, voter.
Religious status: Christian (Orthodox).
Territorial status: city dweller.

Grandmother

Female gender.
Age: old age (80 years).
Health: healthy.
Race: Caucasian.
National status: Russian.
Marriage and family kinship: widow, mother, grandmother, mother-in-law, mother-in-law, sister, aunt.
Professional status: fireman.
Economic status: pensioner, owner.
Political status: non-partisan, voter.
Religious status: Christian (Orthodox).
Territorial status: city dweller.

My parents have reached the stage of maturity (they are 46 years old). The dynamics curves of individual portraits are directed upward (Fig. 4.13, 4.14). This can be commented on by the fact that hundreds are in development, that is, they are growing. For example, we can note the development and growth of professional status (promotion, increase in position, acquisition of new rights, responsibilities, etc.)

My grandmother has reached the stage of old age (she is 80 years old). The curve of the dynamics of her individual portrait, having reached maturity, then begins to decline (Fig. 4.15). So, for example, having reached a certain age, a person leaves work and becomes a pensioner, which means his professional status will no longer grow, but rather will decline.

Note: the graphs of the dynamics of individual portraits are not made accurately. A curve cannot only rise and not have declines. For example, my mother, having the professional status of a salesperson, became a housewife in 1993, and in 1995 acquired the professional status of a cashier. Consequently, the curve will first decline and then rise again. Grandmother, for example, having privatized an apartment in 1995, acquires the economic status of the owner, etc. When a grandmother gets married, she acquires the marital status of a wife; then, having lost her husband, she becomes a widow, etc.

Task 3 Content of social status

Task formulation. Describe the rights and responsibilities of the randomly selected status.

Option 1 Driver

Rights: can drive cars of any categories, can take exams for a new category, change jobs, enter into a contract with an employer, quit, go on vacation.

Responsibilities: must know the rules of the road, follow them, keep the car in perfect condition, repair equipment on time, conduct technical inspections, undergo medical examinations, observe safety precautions, follow the instructions of superiors.

Rights: can receive education at any educational institution, move from one faculty to another, transfer from one educational institution in another, study at several faculties at once, participate in the discussion of issues of improving educational processes.

Responsibilities: must comply with the rules of behavior in educational institutions, comply with education legislation, and take care of the property of the educational institution.

Option 2 Father

Rights: to raise a child in accordance with one’s moral principles (plus teach him the rules of behavior that he himself was taught); make decisions for the child when he is unable to do so (due to his infancy); spend as much time with the child as desired (but taking into account the interests of the child and mother); punish a child when he is guilty; receive reciprocal support from the child.

Responsibilities: teach the child to live in society; monitor the child’s health; bear financial responsibility for the child until he turns 18 years old; provide the child with certain material and moral support (that is, take care of the child); behave with the child in accordance with the provisions of current legislation.

Option 3 Adoptive father

Rights: has the right to give an adopted son (daughter) his last name, patronymic, title, leave an inheritance, assign maintenance, convert, give education, upbringing, demand respect and respect, help in old age, and fulfillment of family responsibilities.

Responsibilities: he is obliged to support and raise an adopted child on an equal basis with his own; if he turns out to be the eldest, he must leave an inheritance to him (majorate), give him a name, religion, and make no distinction between him and his own children.

A prisoner

Rights: has all the rights of a free person not stipulated by the conditions of imprisonment - the right to vote, freedom of religion, the right to human existence, to education, to rest, to contact relatives and outside world(except in exceptional cases), for treatment, assistance from a lawyer, for pardon.

Responsibilities: the prisoner is obliged to serve his sentence, fully obey the orders of the administration, the regime and regulations of the prison, work, maintain order and hygiene, be punished for again crimes committed(misconduct, violation of the regime).

Tourist

Rights: has the right to use all services provided by the country of visit, retain all the rights of a resident of his country, has the right to marry in this country (if he is not in a marriage relationship in the country of residence), to leave the country in the event of war, disasters and natural disasters .

Responsibilities: obliged to comply with all laws, norms of behavior and moral principles of the host country, not to enter into religious, ethnic and other confrontations, to leave the country at the request of its or its government.

A comment. In all three tasks, a variety of solutions were selected - some are better, others are worse. The disadvantages and advantages of each answer option are visible only when comparing them with each other. The teacher, having received the written work of students, as a rule, is in no hurry to immediately assign grades. He looks through them and identifies the best ones, which set the criterion for comparison. The best jobs, sometimes just two or three, sometimes more than ten, determine the level of excellent work. Excellent work should not only be the most complete, but also the most correct. Its graphic performance must be at the appropriate level. After determining the highest score, other low-quality works receive corresponding points on a five-point scale. I split the five-point scale and set it, for example, 2, 3 or 4.6, etc. Framing the assessment allows you to identify the nuances that distinguish one student's work from another. Since each student completes up to 10 written works per semester, the average grade is quite accurate and aggregated.

Try to conduct an examination of the works published above yourself and give your own assessments. At the same time, do not forget that the teacher can always argue his position. He can record this, if necessary, in writing, for example, on title page work, or express it orally. Prepare your arguments too.

Task 4 Status analysis of a fairy tale

Task formulation. Make a sociological analysis of the fairy tale X. K. Andersen “Flint”, that is, answer the questions:

The work was carried out by M. Yu. Duyanova, a 2nd year student (1998) at the Institute of Sociology of GUGN.

– How is the social structure of fairy-tale society depicted?

– Is it possible to find examples of social mobility?

List all the statuses that are given in this fairy tale. Try to classify them according to characteristics familiar to you.

What type - open or closed - is the society depicted in the fairy tale “Flint”?

The fairy-tale society is a closed type. It has a class character and is divided into a higher class (king, queen, princess, maid of honor, officers, royal council) and a lower class (servants, soldiers, witch...).

Statuses encountered in the fairy tale:

Soldier – achieved social status.
Witch – this status can be both achieved and ascribed, so let’s call it mixed.
Servant is an achieved status.
Friend is an achieved status.
Maid of honor is an achieved status.
King is an ascribed status.
Queen is an ascribed status.
Princess is an ascribed status.
Officers - achieved status.
Shoemaker boy is an achieved status.

The fairy tale contains examples of vertical social mobility: a) a soldier becomes a king - this is intragenerational upward mobility; b) the princess becomes a queen - intragenerational and ascending.

Task 5 Status comparison

Task formulation. Compare the following statuses: servant, employee, servant, servant, servant, servant, in service.

Before comparing these statuses, it seems to me that it is necessary to give clear definitions of these concepts. I used two good ones dictionaries.

Servant. Domestic worker for personal services, to carry out the instructions of the master, master; footman. A servant in the house, in person; involved in domestic service. Employee. A person employed in various fields of mental work. A person who is in some kind of service.

Servant. A servant of a monastery or bishop. Monastic or bishop's servant, acolyte; servants were given from the volosts, where this duty was assigned to the family of short-lived or scoundrels in exchange for recruitment and other duties; Balti people also become servants, either by obedience or by hire. A short man was not taken into the army due to his short stature. A scoundrel is someone who is not capable of serving as a soldier. Serving. In Muscovite Rus': related to the performance of state and military duties. Serving, or subject to service, obliged.

Servant. Soldier, military man. Military personnel, lower rank, serving or retired. Servant. In pre-revolutionary life: a domestic worker.

Servants in the house, servants, people for household work and services. In service. Service: to be in service - in the service, mainly for personal services, as a servant, servant.

Judging by the names, these statuses existed in the pre-revolutionary Russia. Therefore, I cannot consider these statuses from the point of view of the four main dimensions of stratification: income, power, education and prestige, and attribute them to one class or another, since at that time in Russia there was a completely different type of stratification - estates. It is also difficult to determine exactly which classes the representatives of these statuses belonged to. Servants and servants in service most likely belonged to the bourgeois class. The servant most likely came from the peasant class, just like the servant. But according to the Table of Ranks, an employee could be a tradesman (postal and telegraph employees) and even a nobleman (for example, Pushkin was a chamber cadet). We can only say that the status of an employee has a higher rank than all other statuses, because employees are engaged primarily in mental work. People occupying all other statuses were engaged primarily in manual labor. We can also say that all these statuses are social and belong to the category of professional statuses; only servant, in my opinion, belongs to the category of religious statuses. It can also be said that the statuses of servant and servant are completely incompatible with the status of servant, since people who were unfit for military service were taken into service. “Servant,” “servant,” and “servant” are essentially different names for the same position that an individual can occupy in society.

Task 6 Status incompatibility

Task formulation. Check the status combinations below for status compatibility. In addition to the usual formulation of status incompatibility, which you became familiar with in this topic, use new formulations.

Stratification incompatibility is a contradiction between positions on four scales of stratification (income, power, education, prestige) of the same holder of a status set, for example, a professor or a policeman. To visually depict type 1 status incompatibility, namely stratification, it is advisable to draw the corresponding stratification profiles, that is, a graphical representation of individual statuses on four stratification scales. A more detailed description of this concept is given in Topic 7 “Social Stratification”.

Spheral incompatibility is a contradiction between statuses or types of activity belonging to four spheres of society: economic, social, political, spiritual. To consider statuses from the point of view of spheral incompatibility, one should use the status portrait (status set) of a person, as already mentioned at the beginning of this section (Topic 4), and essentially both new formulations are an organic continuation of the theoretical provisions that we have considered.

Option 1

Task formulation. Check the following combinations for status compatibility:

Pensioner, businessman.
Minister, fisherman, collector.
Photographer, NHL player.
Film buff, drug addict.
Collective farmer, city dweller, pensioner.
Teacher, businessman, intern.
Policeman, pensioner.
Tourist, prisoner.
Disabled person, athlete.
Orthodox, drug addict.

1. Pensioner, Businessman

Let us consider the stratification compatibility of these two statuses. To do this, let us draw a diagram of their stratification profiles (Fig. 4.16).

The diagram shows that the two statuses are incompatible (stratification profiles are at different levels) and, therefore, these statuses cannot belong to the same individual. Individuals who have these statuses belong to different classes: “pensioner” to the lowest, and “businessman” to the highest.

Let's consider “spheral” status compatibility. To do this, let us depict a status portrait of a person (4.17).

Analysis of “sphere” compatibility shows that the “Pensioner” status belongs to the socio-demographic group: the main criterion for an individual to belong to the Pensioner status is age (Fig. 4.18).

The status “Businessman” belongs to the group of social statuses: the main criterion for belonging to this status is profession (Fig. 4.19).

The socio-demographic status according to the “age” characteristic for a Pensioner assumes that the individual must have an age above the age at which the law provides the opportunity to retire. Social status according to the characteristic “profession” for a Businessman certainly presupposes his employment in some professional field of activity (before retirement). Therefore, we can conclude that for a Pensioner and a Businessman there is no “sphere” status incompatibility (a Businessman cannot be a Pensioner).

2. Minister, Fisherman, Collector

Let us consider the stratification compatibility of these three statuses. At the same time, let us consider two cases when the status of “Fisherman” is understood as a profession and a hobby. The “Collector” status is only a hobby, since the “Collector” profession does not exist. Let us depict diagrams of stratification profiles (Fig. 4.20, 4.21).

From the first diagram (Fig. 4.20) it follows that the three statuses are incompatible (stratification profiles are at different levels) and therefore cannot belong to the same individual. Individuals with these statuses belong to different classes: lower, middle, higher.

There is no stratification profile for the status “Fisherman” in the meaning of hobby due to the uncertainty of the characteristics of the profiles (for example, the hobby “fisherman” can be had by individuals with high and low incomes, with higher education and without it at all, etc.). Therefore, just like in the previous case, the statuses are incompatible.

Let's consider “sphere” status compatibility for two cases (“Fisherman” in the meaning of “profession” and “hobby”). To do this, let's turn to the status portrait of a person.

Analysis of “sphere” compatibility shows that the status “Minister” belongs to a social group: the main criterion for an individual to belong to the status “Minister” is appointment to one of the highest government posts.

The status “Fisherman” belongs to the group of social statuses (the main criterion for belonging to this status is profession).

The status “Collector” belongs to the group of social statuses: the main criterion for belonging to this status is determined by whether the type of his activity belongs to the Spiritual sphere (Fig. 4.22).

For the statuses “Minister” and “Collector” there is “spheral” compatibility, since political activity does not contradict the possibility of having any hobby (in our case, a minister can be a collector). The status of “Fisherman” has spheral incompatibility with the status of “Minister” (the civil service does not imply the possibility of combining it with other areas of professional activity).

In connection with the above, we can conclude that the three statuses under consideration are incompatible.

In the second case (“Hobby Fisherman”), the status “Fisherman” belongs to the group of social statuses (the main criterion for belonging to this status is the spiritual sphere), therefore, unlike the first case, it has spheral compatibility with the status of Minister, since the political activity does not contradict the possibility of having any hobby. Consequently, the three statuses under consideration are compatible.

3. Photographer, NHL Player

Let us consider the stratification compatibility of these two statuses. Moreover, in two cases, the status “Photographer” is understood as a profession and a hobby. The diagram of stratification profiles for the first case will be as follows (Fig. 4.23).

The diagram shows that the NHL Player has a very low degree of stratification compatibility (with a low level of education and little power, this status has very high income and prestige). Therefore, these statuses cannot be compared.

Let's consider “sphere” status compatibility for two cases (“Photographer” in the meaning of “profession” and “hobby”). To do this, let's turn to the status portrait of a person.

Analysis of “sphere” compatibility shows that the statuses “NHL Player” and “Photographer” belong to a social group: the main criterion for an individual’s membership in these statuses is their profession (Fig. 4.24).

The statuses “NHL Player” and “Photographer” do not have “sphere” compatibility, due to the impossibility of combining these two professions.

In the second case (“Hobby Photographer”), the status Photographer belongs to the group of social statuses: the main criterion for belonging to this status is the spiritual sphere, therefore, unlike the first case, it has spheral compatibility with the status “NHL Player”, since any professional activity does not contradict the possibility of having any hobby.

4. Movie buff, drug addict

It is impossible to construct stratification profiles for these statuses due to the uncertainty of the profile characteristics (the statuses “Movie buff” and “Drug addict” cannot belong to individuals of different classes).

"Sphere" compatibility. “Cinema buff” is a social status (the main criterion for belonging to this status is the spiritual sphere). “Drug addict” is a socio-demographic status (the main criterion for belonging to this status is the individual’s health status). The statuses “Ki noman” and “Narkom”n have “spheral” compatibility, due to the fact that the spiritual preferences of an individual do not depend on his state of health.

5. Collective farmer, City dweller, Pensioner

Let us consider the stratification compatibility of these three statuses. At the same time, a stratification profile can be built only for two statuses: “Collective farmer” and “Pensioner”, and any individual can have the status “City dweller”, regardless of his income, power, education and prestige (Fig. 4.25).

From this diagram it is clear that the stratification profiles lie at different levels, therefore we can conclude that these statuses are incompatible.

"Sphere" compatibility. “Collective farmer” is a social status: the main criterion for belonging to this status is profession; “City dweller” is a social status: the main criterion for belonging to this status is the place of residence; “Pensioner” is a socio-demographic status: the main criterion for belonging to this status is age (Fig. 4.26, Fig. 4.27).

For the statuses Pensioner and City Resident there is “sphere” compatibility; individuals have this status regardless of their place of residence. The socio-demographic status according to the “age” characteristic for a Pensioner implies that the individual must have an age above the age at which the law provides the opportunity to retire. Social status according to the characteristic “profession” for a collective farmer certainly presupposes his employment in a certain professional field of activity (until retirement). Therefore, we can conclude that for the Pensioner and the Collective Farmer there is a “sphere” status incompatibility.

Based on the above, it follows that these three statuses are incompatible, that is, they cannot belong to the same individual.

6. Teacher, Businessman, Intern

Let us consider the stratification compatibility of these three statuses. At the same time, a stratification profile can be built only for two statuses: “Teacher” and “Businessman”, and any individual can have the status “Trainee”, regardless of his income, power, education and prestige (Fig. 4.28).

The diagram shows that the stratification profiles of the statuses given to us do not lie at different levels, therefore, these statuses are incompatible.

"Sphere" compatibility. “Businessman” and “Teacher” belong to the group of social statuses, since both are professions. Accordingly, here we can confidently talk about the incompatibility of these two statuses, due to the fact that these two professions are incompatible. The “Trainee” status can be combined with both the “Teacher” and “Businessman” status, since the “Trainee” status means that an individual works or studies to gain experience and skills in a certain field of activity (for example, a teacher can attend advanced training courses qualifications).

Thus, from the above we can conclude that these three statuses are incompatible; they cannot simultaneously belong to one person.

7. Policeman, Pensioner

Let us consider the stratification compatibility of these statuses. To do this, let's draw a diagram of stratification profiles (Fig. 4.29).

The diagram shows that the stratification profiles lie at different levels, therefore these two statuses are incompatible.

"Sphere" compatibility. Following the logic, we will determine which group these statuses belong to: “Policeman” is a social status, “Pensioner” is a socio-demographic status. And as mentioned above, a pensioner is a non-working person, the source of his income is the pension provided to him by the state, a policeman is a working person.

8. Tourist, Prisoner

In this case, we will consider only “spheral” compatibility. To do this, we determine which groups these statuses belong to. “Tourist” and “Prisoner” are social statuses, namely episodic ones. An individual has these statuses only for as long as the term of the tourist voucher or the term of imprisonment lasts. So, let’s compare these two status characteristics. A prisoner is a person deprived of his will, he is limited to his place of stay (prison), he does not have the right to leave until a court decision or the end of the term given to him, accordingly, he cannot have the status of a tourist for the reasons listed above. These statuses are incompatible.

9. Disabled person, Athlete.

Here we will also consider only the “sphere” compatibility of the two statuses. Let us determine which status groups they belong to: “Disabled” – socio-demographic, it is determined by the state of health of the individual. “Sportsman” is a social status, it is determined by the individual’s profession. Let's consider two cases:

These two statuses are incompatible, since an athlete can only be an individual who has good health, while a disabled person is deprived of it.

These statuses are compatible if we talk about a disabled athlete participating in competitions among people like himself.

10. Orthodox, Drug Addict.

As in previous cases, we cannot build stratification profiles for the statuses given to us; accordingly, we turn to another type of compatibility, namely “spheral”. The status “Orthodox” is social, as it relates to the spiritual sphere of society; it is a person professing Orthodoxy. “Drug addict” is a socio-demographic status (the main criterion for belonging to this status is the state of health). Although things like drugs are unacceptable in Orthodoxy, this does not contradict the fact that any person, including a drug addict, can be a believer, and therefore Orthodox. Thus, these two statuses are compatible.

Option 2

Check the following combinations for status compatibility:

Surgeon, Catholic.
Safecracker, miner.
Fashion designer, car enthusiast.
Schoolboy, killer.
Intellectual, revolutionary.
Gardener, policeman.
Paralytic, steelworker.
Lover, soldier.
Cash collector, motorcyclist.
Businessman, Armenian.
Volunteer, slave
Played up, father.
Walking, housewife.

Status compatibility check scheme

Checking each status separately for stratification incompatibility (the criterion is the stratification profile according to 4 stratification scales for a given status, that is, if it deviates greatly from the straight line, then such a status is stratification incompatible).

“Sphere” incompatibility (incompatibility of statuses in areas of activity or status categories). The mechanism for determining such incompatibility. The status portrait of a person is examined, the belonging of the statuses under study to the left (social statuses), right (socio-demographic) parts of the scheme, as well as to episodic and personal statuses is established. Depending on this, one of the following stages is selected:

Search for incompatibilities between the left and right parts (“within” the right statuses of incompatibilities there are practically no incompatibilities).
Search for status incompatibilities between left statuses.
Establishing compatibility of episodic statuses with each other or with left/right statuses.
Establishing compatibility of personal statuses with each other or with left/right statuses.

11. Surgeon, Catholic

It is almost impossible to determine stratification incompatibility for the “Catholic” status, since people with such a status (status in the spiritual sphere) can occupy almost any position in the stratification by income, power, education and prestige. This applies especially to modern societies with freedom of religion, where Catholicism is a common religion. It is practically impossible to determine the stratification profile of Catholics in our country, mainly because there are such a clear minority.

The status of a “Surgeon” in our country can hardly be called stratificationally compatible (The difficulty lies in determining which surgeon we are talking about. In this case (for Russia) we will talk about a surgeon working in a state clinic or hospital.): income, power, prestige is at the level of the lower class, education is at the level of the middle class. However, if we take into account that a large number of professionals left state institutions, and people came with less than a high education, often not even fully competent in their profession, then the same status may be stratificationally compatible. In the West, this status is compatible, since it implies income, education, prestige at the level of the upper middle or upper classes, power is also quite high, since the behavior of a large number of people depends on its decision.

Both of these statuses relate to social ones (one – to professional ones, the other – to statuses in the spiritual sphere). In general, in modern society these statuses can be called “spherally” compatible. The very fact that there is no “religion” column in the passport suggests that a Catholic can engage in any profession, including being a surgeon.

Although previously a Catholic could not only occupy high positions in the state (remember, for example, the Russians’ refusal to recognize the Pole Vladislav as Tsar in 1610 due to the fact that he was a Catholic and did not convert to Orthodoxy), but also in general any significant profession (and the status of a doctor and surgeon belonged to at least the upper middle class). I don’t think that in Russia in the 18th and 19th centuries a Catholic surgeon would have found patients.

We must also take into account the fact that accepting Catholicism does not prohibit a person from being a surgeon. After all, some religions prohibit people from engaging in certain professions. For example, members of a sect such as Jehovah's Witnesses cannot carry weapons, which means they cannot be soldiers, lyceum members, etc. Based on the basic commandment “thou shalt not kill,” for example, Catholics or Orthodox Christians cannot be murderers or mercenaries and so on. It turns out that if the profession of a surgeon is associated with the risk of killing a person, then a Catholic cannot belong to this profession. Most likely, this is not the case, since in this case the surgeon’s goal is not to kill a person, but to save him.

12. Bearcatcher, Miner

“Bughunter” is a stratificationally incompatible status, since it presupposes a high (Further, when I say that a particular status has a high (average, low) income (power, education, prestige), I will mean that on the income scale this status is at the level of the upper class.) income, low prestige, low power (if by this we mean the number of like-minded subordinates - the “average” security guard works alone, as a rule), low education (although there may be security guards with a higher education, but most likely they will be “high-class” robbers; it will be difficult to classify them as “standard” bear cubs).

“Shakhtar” is currently a stratification-compatible status: low income, power, education, prestige. However, in Soviet times this was not the case, especially during the years of industrialization. Then this status was stratificationally incompatible: high income (during the years of industrialization, a miner’s income was on average 3–6 times higher than the income of the average worker; in 1931, a miner’s daily bread norm was 30% more than a worker’s norm in an industrially unimportant enterprise; the monthly meat norm – 5 times, butter and eggs actually received only they, high prestige (the highest among miners and metal workers), but low power and low education. So then this status was stratificationally incompatible.

We can say that both of these statuses are social and belong to the same category - professional statuses. Most likely, these two statuses are “spherally” incompatible. Previously, a miner would not have become a safecracker, since the honor of being a miner is high, and there was no point in it, as has already been said. Now, as before, the miner’s profession is one of the hardest, so using such a profession as a “cover” would be extremely unwise. Although, due to dire need, a miner can become a bearcutter (this status can become, as it were, episodic), but if a person becomes a “permanent” safecracker, then he will most likely give up this profession. Thus, the bugbear and the miner as a whole are “spherno” incompatible, although such compatibility is more likely today than in Soviet times.

13. Fashion designer, car enthusiast

“Fashion designer” in general is a stratification-compatible status (high income, education - a modern fashion designer is a highly educated person, prestige, and power is slightly lower, but quite high if measured by the number of people who are influenced by the result of the work of this person). The stratification profile of the “Car Enthusiast” is almost impossible to determine, since such status can belong to a representative of any class (except for the lowest, such status implies a person’s income above the subsistence level, although the owner of the old “For Porozhets” is a car enthusiast).

Both of these statuses relate to social ones (“Fashion designer” is a professional one, “Car enthusiast” is difficult to classify into one of the categories, perhaps this is the status of the spiritual sphere or some “leisure” sphere). In most cases, they are “spherally” compatible, since a fashion designer can choose to work with a car at his leisure. Of course, this does not mean that a millionaire fashion designer will delve into a car engine, but he can collect cars and then he will also be a kind of car enthusiast.

14. Schoolboy, Killer

Determining the stratification profile of a schoolchild and his stratification compatibility is quite difficult. How to calculate his income? By parents' income? If so, then the student high school has an average income (wealthier parents will send their children to better, not “average” schools), low power (if only the power of authority in front of students junior classes), low education and low or average prestige (The same difficulties arise with prestige as with income. Is it even possible to determine it? On the one hand, the prestige of a schoolchild in comparison with his peer who does not study, but wanders, will be above. And on the other hand, is the question correct: “Who has higher prestige: a schoolboy, a janitor, a banker, a student?” Here we are mixing professional statuses with educational statuses. If “Schoolboy” is an “educational” status, then it is in general. falls out of the general stratification (as a set of stratification by income, power, education and prestige).).

The “killer” is not a stratification-compatible status, since he has a high income and average power (on the one hand, as a rule, he does not have subordinates, on the other hand, he can impose his will on his victim with the help of weapons, demanding unquestioning submission) , low or average education, low prestige (Here it is also important to consider who we mean by a murderer. Someone who killed once (then “Killer” is an episodic status), especially not for the purpose of material enrichment; we cannot relate to status “Killer” as the main status. Here we will consider the killer as the main status, that is, the status most characteristic of a given person with whom he identifies himself.)

“Spherno” these two statuses turn out to be incompatible (both being social), if only because a killer is, as a rule, a person more mature than a schoolboy (especially a hired killer). But according to theory, an adult killer should be in prison, and a minor should be in a colony. If in such a colony there is something similar to a school, that is, the child receives an education, then these statuses are “spherally” compatible.

15. Intellectual, Revolutionary

Analyzing these two statuses, we need to stipulate in relation to what period of time we will be talking. Let's take the time when these two statuses are most clearly represented: the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th centuries.

Who is an intellectual? Let us assume that an intellectual is not only the most educated person, primarily engaged in complex creative work, the development and dissemination of culture (“intellectual”), but, first of all, one who has devoted his life to public service. The intelligentsia includes the Decembrists, Westerners, Slavophiles, Narodniks, and, possibly, Marxists late XIX-early 20th centuries.

Stratification compatibility. “Intellectual” is, in my opinion, a more or less compatible status: high income, high education (his educational level in any case was several orders of magnitude higher than that of a peasant or worker), relatively great power (the fact that intellectuals they tried to teach the authorities, but the authorities did not always obey them, with the exception of the “intellectuals in power”, which indicates rather the opposite. At the same time, the intelligentsia is considered as a third force or link in the system of power-people, which indicates its relatively high power. , more precisely about its influence on life in the country, and in February 1917 they received real power). Its prestige is quite difficult to assess, but I dare to suggest that it is not below average.

It's more difficult with the Revolutionary. Presumably, the status of “Revolutionary” can belong to practically people of different classes (a revolutionary can be both a worker and a director of a plant, while the first belongs rather to the lower class, and the director to the higher class, the stratification profile of one can be direct , and the other with a broken line).

"Sphere" compatibility. In general, these two statuses (both social) are compatible. In general, the entire intelligentsia of the second half of the 19th century can be divided into conservatives, revolutionaries and liberals. P. Kropotkin, M. Bakunin, P. Lavrov - both intellectuals and revolutionaries, f. M. Dostoevsky is an intellectual, but not a revolutionary. N.A. Berdyaev is first a Marxist revolutionary, then closer to the liberal movement, although, according to him, he is against identifying himself with any movement or direction. Then he, N. O. Lossky and some other intellectuals declared in the collection “Vekhi” that they were not intellectuals. To put it simply, the reason for this is that at that time intellectuals in the mass consciousness were equated with revolutionaries, destroyers of society (which once again proves the compatibility of statuses), but they did not want to be like that. The relationship between the statuses of a revolutionary and an intellectual is presented in Fig. 4.30.

16. Gardener, Policeman

Stratification compatibility. With a gardener it is practically the same as with a car enthusiast, that is, we do not define a stratification profile for this status, except in the case when “Gardener” is a professional status. Then the status of “Gardener” will imply low or average income, low power, low education and low prestige - a stratification-compatible status.

“Policeman” is not a compatible status in our country. His stratification profile can be determined quite accurately: the policeman has a high income (upper-middle class, lower-upper class), great power (upper-middle or lower-upper class), low education (upper-lower or lower middle class ) and average prestige (medium-medium). As you can see, the scatter is quite large, which indicates internal incompatibility in status.

"Sphere" compatibility. Just as in the case of a fashion designer and a car enthusiast, these two statuses are completely compatible. Although, of course, it is quite difficult for us to imagine a policeman in uniform in the garden beds or a policeman caring for dahlias or roses, since we most often associate him with something rough, incapable of careful handling and long, painstaking work (maybe I'm wrong). In this case, these two statuses can be called only partially compatible.

17. Paralytic, Steelmaker

Stratification compatibility.

A paralytic has a rather direct stratification profile (the straight line runs through the upper (lower-lower) class), although this is not a rule, but rather our stereotype. A paralytic may have a very high education, although, I repeat, the very concept of “paralytic” is not associated with educated person, high income (large lifetime pension, income from shares, etc.), great power (if paralysis has not affected the person’s mind, then he can occupy a high position, for example, be a director, but then he will be perceived more as “Director”, and the secondary one will be “Paralytic”; prestige will also be determined in a person not as a paralytic, but as a director).

“Steelworker” in our time is an internally compatible status - the stratification profile is a straight line passing through the upper (lower-lower class). However, in Soviet times (especially in the 20s), his stratification profile looked different and practically coincided with the profile of a miner, since a steelmaker also belonged to a number of honorable and “industrially important” professions.

"Sphere" compatibility. It is obvious that such two social statuses are incompatible. How can a Steelworker be a paralytic if the profession of a steelworker requires hard physical labor and strain on all the organs of his body? However, even here there may be a kind of compatibility: suppose a person worked all his life as a steelmaker, retired, had a stroke, and became paralytic. But nevertheless, in conversation he often proudly says: “I am a steel var!” or “We, the steelworkers.” That is, in fact, without being a steelmaker, he would have to say that he was a steelmaker, but he himself identifies himself more likely with the Steelmaker (for him this is the main status) and not with the Paralytic. Even neighbors are more likely to say that “our neighbor is a steelworker” than “our neighbor is a paralytic.” Thus, from this position it can be shown that these statuses can be compatible.

18. Lover, Soldier

Stratification compatibility. It is impossible to determine the stratification profile (and, accordingly, stratification compatibility) of the “Lover” status, since it can be any person occupying any position in society, belonging to any class and any stratum. It’s easier to check your “Military” status. Let’s assume that he lives in our country and has a low rank (for simplicity, let’s just take “private soldier”). He will have low income, low power (they are commanded, but not he), low education (although it will be quite high if a person came to serve as a soldier after college) and low prestige, that is, in general, such a status will be internal compatible (the stratification profile runs along lower-lower or upper-lower class), with the exception of the case when the private is a graduate of a higher educational institution. Like many statuses, the stratification profile of a military man in our country has changed over time. Thus, in the 30s, in the pre-war and post-war times, a serviceman had a relatively high income (meals on cards at the level of the special and First lists, which equated him to the most skilled workers), high prestige (being a soldier is not only prestigious, but this is still an opportunity for the peasant to leave the village for the city), secondary education (higher than that of most peasants and many workers), low power. Therefore, at that time the stratification profile was more crooked and took place on stratification scales “higher” than now.

"Sphere" compatibility. It seems to me that these two statuses are “spherno” compatible. After all, the status “Lover” does not imply the presence of the “object” of one’s love in close proximity (this is confirmed by the fact that one can love some actor, singer, etc.). On the contrary, very often a Serviceman is associated with a Lover: the “standard” situation is that a guy in love is drafted into the army, but throughout his entire service he loves a girl who is waiting for him (or not waiting).

19. Cash collector, Motorcyclist

Stratification compatibility. The status of “Collector” (collector is a cashier engaged in receiving and issuing money and valuables mainly outside the institution) supposedly has an average income, power at the lower-middle class level, average education and average prestige, so this status can be called stratified compatible. With the “Motorcyclist” it is practically the same as with the Motorist, that is, the stratification profile of this status is impossible to determine.

"Sphere" compatibility. In my opinion, these two statuses are quite compatible, if we understand by “Motorcyclist” a person whose hobby is related to a motorcycle (a kind of “leisure” status). “Collector” (professional status) is a person who usually rides in a special armored car, and a motorcyclist rides an open, unprotected motorcycle, that is, the collector cannot perform his work on a motorcycle, and only from this position can we talk about status incompatibility .

20. Businessman, Armenian

Stratification compatibility. Armenian is a socio-demographic status (nationality). It is almost impossible to draw a stratification profile, because, for example, in their homeland, Armenians can occupy all positions of social stratification (this is the same as determining the status “Russian” in Russia), but in our country, it seems to me, this status can only be level of the lower or middle class (but there may also be cases of an Armenian being in the upper class), but we cannot say anything definite about the profile itself.

“Commersant” is a social status, if we understand this word objectively, as “a person engaged in private trade” (and, as a rule, in the market) occupies a position in the lower-middle or upper-low class and is generally compatible (although If we consider that many of those who entered the market in the 90s were former teachers and scientists, then in this case this status will be incompatible. In Soviet times, this concept was value-laden, and meant the same thing as “. speculator,” which determined the incompatibility of this status: relatively high income, low power, secondary education, low prestige (this was precisely caused by the negative action of the authorities towards this group of people).

"Sphere" compatibility. In the mass consciousness, these two statuses seem very compatible, since “Armenian” in this case refers to “persons of Caucasian nationality”, which all our modern markets are full of, that is, when you say “Armenian”, the first thing that comes in my head, this is a trader at the market. So it is impossible to talk about status incompatibility in this case.

21. Volunteer, Slave

Stratification compatibility. Determine such compatibility of the “Volunteer” status (It is necessary to stipulate who we will understand by the word “volunteer”. Let it be a person who voluntarily renounces his personal interests or benefits (from freedom, from earning money, from a peaceful life, from working for himself ) in favor of another (either an individual or some community). Most often, a volunteer is one who voluntarily exposes his life to danger for the benefit of society or community (a volunteer in a war, a volunteer to eliminate a disaster, etc.) impossible. , since this status does not imply membership in any class. The status of “Slave” implies: income, power, prestige at the level of the lower-lowest class. Education, as a rule, is lower (if this person was born a slave), but can be much higher, for example, in the case when enslaved people become slaves after the conquest: among them there may be highly educated ones. But this is a special case: in general, the stratification profile of a slave is a straight line passing through the lower-lowest class.

"Sphere" compatibility. I believe that these statuses are practically incompatible. There are two possible options here. Either a person already belongs to the status of “Slave”, he theoretically voluntarily agrees to any work, then he will be a volunteer. But it seems to me that if such cases have occurred in history, they are isolated. After all, a slave, as a rule, is not given the right to make decisions independently; the owner decides everything for him, and a volunteer is precisely the one who does something of his own free will. If, for example, a peasant under serfdom in Russia is equated to a crab, then when conscripted into the army, one person at a time was taken from the yard (recruitment sets under Peter I), and here we cannot talk about voluntariness. If the peasants (in addition to the established norm) themselves volunteered to go there, then they could be called volunteers. However, I am not confident in the widespread existence of such a practice, although if the partisan movement is also included in it, then in such a narrow case we can talk about the compatibility of the statuses “Slave” and “Volunteer”.

The second option is that a person voluntarily becomes a slave, that is, these two statuses turn out to be compatible. This option seems simply absurd. But let's look at this case: a man voluntarily marries, and subsequently becomes a slave to his wife, fulfilling all her wishes and orders. And the neighbors say: “He is his wife’s slave.” Here we, of course, understand the statuses “Slave” and “Volunteer” somewhat differently, but we can still talk about some compatibility of these statuses. Let's consider another case. From the theory of the “Social Contract” of T. Hobbes it follows that people living in a state of “war of all against all”, over time, voluntarily enter into an agreement among themselves to obey the ruling power that the majority chooses. “When such a government is elected, citizens lose all rights, except for those that the government deems appropriate to grant them” (See: B. Russell. History of Western Philosophy. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk University Publishing House, 1999. P. 513 .) . That is, in the extreme case (for this we need to “weaken” the concept of “Slave” and, more importantly, accept the theory of T. Hobbes), people actually become both “Volunteers” and “Slaves” of the state, that is in this case these statuses are compatible. Thus, in fact, these two statuses turn out to be incompatible, but we can find isolated cases of their compatibility.

22. Playing around, Father

23. Walking, Housewife

Due to the similarity of these “pairs” of statuses, I consider it possible to consider them not separately, but together with the aim of more easily comparing them.

Stratification compatibility. “Going for a walk”, “Walking” are most likely two episodic statuses, somewhat similar, for example, to a pedestrian. In accordance with this, just as with a pedestrian, it is impossible to draw a stratification profile and determine stratification compatibility. Father is a socio-demographic status (family-marriage-related), the stratification compatibility of which also cannot be determined (this status does not imply any position on the four stratification scales). The stratification profile to housewife (social status), in contrast to the previous three statuses, we can at least roughly determine. Low own income (if you do not take into account the breadwinner’s income in her income), low power (as a rule, only over children), low education (in our country, the education of a housewife cannot be determined, since the spread is quite large - highly educated women often become housewives ), low prestige. So, in general, this status is stratification compatible.

"Sphere" compatibility. The status “Humored” and the status “Father” are theoretically compatible. However, from a moral point of view, ideal father This is not exactly a “playing around” person. In our country, a “playing father” is a completely normal phenomenon, which indicates the compatibility of these statuses (of course, in this case I am not assessing whether this is good or bad, I am simply stating a fact). There is hardly a father in our country who has never been a “player” (after all, “player” is an episodic status).

From the point of view of norms and customs, the statuses “Housewife” and “Walker” are not compatible. And unlike the previous pair, in practice these two statuses are much less often combined, but, nevertheless, it cannot be said that such cases do not exist.

Thus, if we proceed from formal norms, then neither one nor the other pair of statuses is compatible. If from the standpoint of real life, then both one and the other combination of statuses is possible, but in terms of the mass of such cases, the combination of the statuses “Royal” and “Father” is in first place. Society's assessment of such combinations is different: a “playing father” is, although not good (does not correspond to the norms), but acceptable, but a “playing housewife” is already bad. We see that essentially the same phenomena are assessed differently by society, which may be due to certain traditions and customs.

Formation of sociological knowledge

The sociological workshop is intended to consolidate theoretical material, presented by the teacher in lectures or obtained by students from educational, scientific reference or scientific monographic literature. Some tasks are aimed only at consolidating the lecture material, while others, which go beyond its scope, require painstaking independent work with additional literature.

The teacher indicates accurate sources or guides students in what type of literature should be used to complete homework. Indicating accurate data has not only advantages (they are obvious), but also disadvantages, since these particular sources may not be available in your home or public library. In addition, the teacher may not know the entire range of literature, which is constantly replenished and updated. In such cases, it is advisable not to hamper students’ initiative in choosing preferred sources.

Topic 1 of this book addressed the following issues:

History of sociology.

Interdisciplinary matrix of sociology.

Intradisciplinary structure of sociology.

Spontaneous sociology and everyday consciousness.

It is advisable to include the first and fourth topics in a practical lesson, and leave the second and third topics for independent study. As my experience shows, they are the most difficult for students to complete, since they require deepening into professional knowledge related to fundamental science.

On the history of sociology, you can offer to prepare an abstract. Let's say about the contribution of O. Comte to the development of sociological thought. The names of sociologists are chosen either by the teacher or given to the students themselves. Using the available literature, they easily cope with the task. Below we present to your attention the works of students devoted to the analysis of the main problems in the works of M. Weber and F. Tönnies. In addition, you will become familiar with how students perform tasks related to the methodology of social science. We will talk about composing sociological tales, analyzing common sense and science, and searching for sociological issues in fiction.

Task 1 Ideal type of M. Weber

It is more difficult to understand the peculiarities of the teaching of one or another sociologist, say, the same M. Weber. As an example, I will give independent works on ideal types by M. Weber. They were executed twice. The first time, the teacher did not explain what they were and suggested reading about ideal types in reference literature. The result was amazing: the vast majority of students correctly copied definitions from the available literature, but gave completely erroneous examples. The second time, having become acquainted with the completed work, the teacher explained the mistakes and asked those who considered their work incorrect to redo it. As a result, most students completed the task correctly again, but some of them either did not notice the mistakes they had made or were too lazy to correct them. Let me give you a few examples.

Task formulation. Get acquainted with the description of M. Weber's ideal type in scientific, reference or educational literature. Summarize the main provisions of this teaching and create your own examples of ideal types.

A. Correct description of the ideal type, borrowed by students from literature.

An ideal type is a methodological means of sociological (or historical) research, which is a theoretical construct. This construction is not extracted from social reality, but is constructed as a theoretical scheme, the elements of which are aspects of social reality, taken in their individual originality, logical consistency and rational correctness. That is, “scientists of society select as defining characteristics of an ideal type certain aspects of behavior or institutions observed in the real world, and then, through a certain exaggeration, elevate them into the form of an ideal construct.” The ideal type serves to construct a logical model of the aspect of social reality to be studied, which a) would contribute to a clearer identification of this aspect, b) would serve as a kind of standard, by comparison with which one could judge the extent to which the empirical reality under study is moving away or approaching.

The ideal type is precisely a standard, a prototype, a prototype, something not real, but only possible, and only logically possible.

The ideal type is built by bringing its elements to the maximum possible logical interconnectedness and coherence. This system of connections represents a utopia, built from real education by replacing empirical dependencies with purely logical ones. And “the sharper and more unambiguous the ideal types are constructed, the more alien they are in this sense to the world, the better they fulfill their purpose.”

Weber emphasizes that the ideal type taken in its pure form cannot be found anywhere in empirical reality: such mental constructions “are as rare in reality as physical reactions, which are calculated only under the assumption of absolutely empty space.” Thus, analogues of the ideal type in sociology can serve as mental formations in physics, for example, the concept of an “ideal gas” or “a body on which no forces act.” So, for example, in reality it is impossible to find a purely goal-oriented action (that is, an action characterized by the unambiguity and clarity of the acting subject’s awareness of his goal, rationally correlated with clearly meaningful means, etc.).

This individual-typical construction does not say how this or that process actually proceeds, but speaks about something else - what this process would be like and what the circumstances of its occurrence could be. By comparing the way processes actually proceed with this ideal construction, we find out the degree of deviation of the actual from the possible, as well as the reasons for such a deviation. In any case, it is easier to interpret any particular phenomenon of social reality by comparing it with some ideal type.

Weber believed that a significant discrepancy between ideal types and reality may entail redefining a given ideal type, but he also argued that ideal types are not models that should necessarily be tested. According to Weber, ideal types are such general, abstract concepts as “pure competitive market”, “church”, “bureaucracy”, “economic exchange”, “craft”, “capitalism”, “Christianity”.

Literature

Abercrombie N., Hill S., Turner B. S. Sociological Dictionary / Transl. from English, ed. S. A. Erofeeva. Kazan: Publishing house Kazan, unta, 1997.

Weber M. Selected works. M.: Progress, 1990.

History of theoretical sociology. In 4 volumes / Answer, ed. and compiled by Yu. N. Davydov. M.: Kanon+, 1997. T. 2.

Russian Sociological Encyclopedia / Edited by. ed. G. V. Osipova. M.: Publishing group NORMA-INFRA, 1998. P. 575-576.

B. Examples of ideal types invented by students.

Company. The basic principles of its activities will be the following: a) employees work in such a way that they can be interchangeable, each is required to perform only one task; b) the behavior of the performers is completely determined by a rational scheme, which ensures accuracy and unambiguousness of actions, avoiding prejudice and personal sympathy in relationships; c) the enterprise is free to choose any means to ensure its sustainability; d) all employees comply with safety regulations; e) there is a system of rewarding the most capable workers; f) the enterprise takes care of the health and rest of its employees.

Student. He must attend all lectures, regardless of his interests, be able to write quickly, listen carefully, think quickly, successfully pass tests and exams, otherwise the student will be called a poor student and then we should talk about the ideal type of “low student.” It is accepted that a student receives a scholarship depending on his academic performance, and there is hardly a student who does not know at least a small part, so to speak, of student jargon.

Open society (When creating this ideal type, the student used the book by R. Dahrendorf “After 1989”, which he noted in the note.). This concept as an ideal type has the following characteristics:

there are institutions that make it possible to change the government without resorting to violence;

there is no single body or position through which the activities of many people are coordinated;

everything is permitted that is not expressly prohibited, and little is prohibited;

what is permitted is left to individual choice;

roles are not given at birth, but are the result of personal achievements in all areas.

These, of course, are not all the characteristics of an “open society,” but they may be a description of the ideal type of open society.

Russian village in the outback. Her ideal typical features:

a small group of people, predominantly elderly;

poverty;

lack of interest in events in the country;

everyone knows everything about the others;

cordiality towards guests, even strangers, lack of motivation for profit.

Salesman. His ideal typical features:

man or woman about 30–45 years old;

balanced, polite;

honest, not trying to deceive the buyer;

serving conscientiously, not keeping you waiting;

With good taste who knows how to give the right advice;

neatly dressed in a special uniform;

interested in selling;

loving his job.

Passenger. The ideal passenger always pays for his or her fare and gives up his or her seat to disabled people, passengers with children, and residents. Such a passenger does not carry bulky luggage, does not violate public order in the cabin (does not be rude to other passengers, does not distract the driver while the vehicle is moving). When boarding, he waits for other passengers to get off, lets women (if he is a man) go ahead, and helps elderly and disabled people get in or out.

Strike. Any strike must begin with the dissatisfaction of the masses due to political, economic or other motives. If you look at the reasons for all the strikes, they began either due to non-payment of wages, or because the workers sought a reduction in working hours, an increase in wages, a change in management, etc. Then the conditions under which the strike would end should be presented. Next comes the final stage, when the authorities either make concessions to the strikers or suppress the strike. The mechanism for the emergence of strikes is as follows: among the dissatisfied masses there are activists who incite people, throw slogans at the masses and try to help the indignation spill out. Basically, such people know the psychology of the masses well. They subtly sense the moments when the people are ready to follow them. They know how to unite people with sweet slogans and words. The brightest examples such people - Lenin, Trotsky, Stepan Razin, etc. This is the type of typical strike.

Private company. Its characteristic features in modern Russian society are hiding taxes; has one general director and several deputies; has commercial departments; recruits personnel “from the street”, and in most cases “through acquaintances”; has contacts with criminal groups.

A comment. All students, in setting the conditions of the task (descriptions of the ideal type borrowed from the literature), quite correctly emphasized that Weber’s instrument of cognition is a theoretical construct that does not exist in reality, but notices the most characteristic, essential features in it. The ideal type indicates what a given phenomenon should be, and not what it actually is.

However, it is in understanding what should be that most distortions arise. Most often, students understand obligation in a moral and ethical sense, rather than in a theoretical and methodological sense. That is why the seller is a conscientious and honest worker, and the passenger is a citizen who pays his fare on time (examples 5 and 6). In fact, the ideal-typical construction of the seller and the passenger, if we are talking about Russian reality, should include directly opposite properties. The ideal type, although constructed before the sociologist conducts a survey or observation, should not be detached from, much less distort, reality. From our life experience, we know that many Russian sellers behave impolitely, and many passengers do not pay for their fares. It is possible that in Western European society everything is different, but the sociologist constructs his concepts based on the reality in which he lives.

If, for example, a boorish salesman is typical for our society, then this is an ideal-typical construction. It remains only to describe the empirical signs of this variable. The ideal must be understood as theoretical, and not as the best. And the term “type” in Weber’s formulation denotes a set of the most common features of reality. The sociologist knows about them, he described them, and the next step is a theoretical substantiation of why a transitional society, such as the Russian one, is characterized not by helpful and attentive sellers, but by completely different ones. Thanks to the ideal type, the sociologist does not move away from current reality, does not idealize it, but more deeply and accurately understands the world as it is.

You will have to analyze the remaining examples using the above notes on your own.

Task 2 “Community and Society” by F. Tennis

Task formulation. Read the work of F. Tennis “Community and Society” from the source: Sociological Journal. 1998. No. 3-4. pp. 206-229.

You need to: a) express the essence of the concept of Tennis, b) explain the lecture material using his ideas.

Option 1.

Ferdinand Tönnies was one of the founders of German classical sociology, contributed to the formation of sociology as a scientific discipline and its institutionalization in Germany. He conducted extensive empirical research and studied the history of philosophy and social thought. However, his main contribution to sociology was the development of a system theoretical concepts, which began in the book “Community and Society” (“Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft” (1887). The Tennis system was finally outlined in 1931 in the book “Introduction to Sociology.”

A. F. Tennis at the beginning of the article (“Community and Society” from the “Desktop Dictionary of Sociology”) makes the following distinctions:

between familiarity and strangeness

between sympathy and antipathy

between trust and mistrust

between connectedness and disconnectedness.

Here, binding is the opposite of freedom, it means obligation, obligation, prohibition. “A person is connected with other people insofar as he knows that he is connected with him.” He knows this more sensually or mentally. The connection can be, for example, sexual, baby and mother, slave and slave owner.

Social connectedness tends to become mutual dependence, that is, if the will of one person coincides and unites with the will of another, then a common will arises, a kind of unified will (here it should be said that, according to Tennis, in any interaction people are driven by will). The will of each individual person is part of the total will and is determined by it. Each person can imagine himself as a single natural personality or in a variety of such personalities. The social will “determines the interacting individual wills, partly granting rights, partly imposing duties, and establishing the right of one person as the duty of another.”

Any mutual activity can be understood as an exchange. In accordance with this, any life together is an exchange of mutual activity, and the motive can be:

expectation and demand of activity from another;

own desire and desire for the benefit of another.

Types of social connectedness contain the following elements:

mutual assistance, mutual assistance (or at least peaceful activity);

the associated (social) will that determines the individual will.

Social essence is a product of human thinking, which exists only for human thinking. She is thought of by socially connected people as “Something dominating them... and appears to them as a person endowed with will and capable of acting.” These social entities (for example, the church or the state) are inherent (or rather, attributed) with something divine, which is under the special protection of the gods. In fact, these imaginary entities are only the result of human thinking and human will, they are based on hopes and fears, needs and wants. This is a universal human will, the ability to want is understood as a natural, original ability, which is fulfilled in the ability to be able. Will can be divided into two ideal types:

"Essential Will". Such volition is formed not only under the influence of the received teaching, but under the influence of the way of thinking and feeling inherited from ancestors and predecessors. In connection with this type, all emotional, affective, semi-instinctive drives that are realized in activity are considered.

"Electoral will". In it, thinking plays a predominant, leading role; it is a rational will, focused only on the means.

“All types of connectedness in which the essential will predominates, I call community (Gemeinschaft), all those that are formed through the selective will or are essentially conditioned by it, society (Gesellschaft).”

Relationships that are given by nature and are essentially reciprocal, peculiar natural relationships that seem self-evident (for example, the relationship of brothers) fall under the concept of community. The relationships that arise between disparate individuals through the conclusion of an abstract (not necessarily formal) agreement (according to the principle: what I do for you is only to provoke a response) fall under the concept of society. This is the difference between communal and social relations. Community relations are divided into companionship, by the type of dominance (relationship between father and son) and mixed. Such division is inherent in social relations (Table 1.1).

A totality is a certain set of interconnected things, as a result of which common feelings and common images of thoughts arise, but the totality is not capable of actual volition, decision-making. The totality can be natural, mental and social (consciously accepted, desired natural and mental relationships). The concepts of community and society are applicable to the totality. Social aggregates are of a communal nature if they are recognized as given by nature or created by God (castes in India, classes in general), or social in nature if they do not recognize any data from the nature of masters and subordinates. “People”, class have a more communal character, class – more social.

A corporation is not something natural, it exists due to the fact that “many people think about it together,” it is capable of a single will and action, making decisions. A corporation can arise (stages of emergence):

from natural relationships if they have become social. They arise on the basis of a tribal community, clan union or clan. Characterized by the fact that from a simple feeling of cohesion grows a permanent sense of “I”;

land and cohabitation. These are ties that bind people together with ties of origin, but the latter weaken over time;

closer life together (city).

Such a phenomenon as individualism lies in the fact that not just social life is diminished, but communal social life, in its place a life is built that comes from the needs, interests, desires, and decisions of acting individuals. These are the conditions for the emergence of “civil society”, based on the concept of “society” by F. Tönnies. In accordance with this, the state can either be more close to a community (in which case it is thought of as an organism) or to society, in which case it is a machine, a mechanism for ordering rational, calculating individuals.

B. The concept of F. Tennis is related to the problem of the relationship between society and community that we have considered. The fact is that the title of Tönnies’s article “Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft” and, accordingly, the concepts introduced by him can be translated in different ways. "Gemeinschaft" is traditionally translated as "community", but recently "community" or "community" is more often used. Therefore, in essence, both we and Tennis used the same words (society and community) to refer to different phenomena. Although the concepts of Tennis have been discussed above, I consider it necessary to distinguish them from lecture ones (to avoid confusion, I will use the terms of Tennis in German - Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft).

First of all, society and community give us an idea of a certain set of social connections (on a “quantitative” basis: a community is only a person’s immediate environment, or a small model of society, a “subsociety”; society is both a person’s immediate and distant environment), then like Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft - about a special type of these connections. Although, in some cases, the concepts, for example, community and Gemeinschaft will coincide. For example, a group such as relatives. This is a person’s immediate environment, that is, a community, and provided that its members are guided in their behavior by instinct, habit and memory, then this will be Gemeinschaft. If suddenly these relatives decide to start a business and come to an agreement for this, then it will most likely be a community like Gesellschaft.

That is, Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft are rather properties, types, characteristics of associations, and not the names of associations themselves, which Tönnies calls social entities, dividing them into relationships, aggregates, corporations. Accordingly, if the community is part of society, then this cannot be the case with Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft. A community cannot turn into a society (a community is part of a society), while there is an opinion that Gemeinschaft can “evolve and change”, and then one can “view Gesellschaft as a perverted, degenerate Gemeinschaft.”

We defined society as an association that satisfies the characteristics noted by E. Shils; it is a social organization, where the basis is the social structure and social institutions, and the initial “building blocks” are statuses and roles. Using the terminology of Tennis, we can add that society (modern) is a Gesellschaft type totality, or a Gemeinschaft type totality (for example, the caste society of India).

It is almost impossible to unambiguously explain the concept of social organization in the broad sense of the word (as a form of ordered human activity that occurs according to clear laws) using the terminology of Tennis. These could be all social entities like Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft.

A social organization in the narrow sense of the word is most likely a corporation of the Gesellschaft type (for example, an enterprise, a university, etc.).

Social institutions also cannot be defined unambiguously. If we consider the traditional example of a state or a church, then these concepts would have to be deciphered differently at different times (for example, the church in the Middle Ages is a Gemeinschaft - a relationship such as domination). But if we take a social institution at any specific point in time, then we automatically replace it with specific organizations.

Thus, we can say that the concepts of “Gesellschaft” and “society”, “Gemeinschaft” and “community” are completely different concepts, but sometimes characterize the same phenomenon of social reality.

Literature

Tennis F. Community and society // Sociological Journal. 1998. No. 3-4. pp. 206-229.

History of theoretical sociology. In 4 volumes / Answer, ed. and compiled by Yu. N. Davydov. M.: Kanon+, 1997. T. 1. P. 340–352.

Option 2.

The essence of the concept of Ferdinand Tönnies. Within the framework of social evolutionism, a number of theories arose that set themselves the goal of reflecting the progressive development of society based on a comparison of its past and current state. The first attempt to create such a theory was made by the German sociologist F. Tönnies (1855 – 1936) in his famous book “Community and Society”. F. Tönnies uses the German terms Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft to differentiate between traditional and modern society based on 5 main types of social interconnection. The concept Gemeinschaft (community) applies to the peasant village community, and the concept Gesellschaft (society) to the industrial urban society. The main differences between them are as follows: 1) Gemeinschaft assumes that people live in accordance with the communal principle and worldly values, and a Gesellschaft type society is based on the pursuit of personal gain; 2) Gemeinschaft gives the main importance to customs, while Gesellschaft is based on formal laws; 3) Gemeinschaft presupposes limited and undeveloped specialization, while in Gesellschaft specialized professional roles are manifested; 4) Gemeinschaft is based on religious, and Gesellschaft is based on secular values; 5) Gemeinschaft is based on family and community, and Gesellschaft is based on large corporate and associative forms of association of people. The evolutionist theory of Tennis, like other theories, is based on the idea of social progress. The criterion of progress for Ferdinand Tönnies is a change in the system of social connections and the type of regulation of social relations.

Lecture material using the concept of F. Tönnies. At the lecture we discussed concepts such as “society” and “community”. Having analyzed these concepts, we came to the conclusion that “society” is much broader than “community”. Since community is a person’s immediate environment, which includes family, relatives, friends (that is, those people with whom a person comes into close contact every day); and society – the immediate and distant environments (Fig. 1.5).

We also found out that any society must satisfy the eight characteristics identified by Shils, and the community must satisfy only a few.

An important difference between community and society is that society is always a social organization, community is not always. Society satisfies the five basic fundamental needs and non-fundamental needs of people who have existed historically for a long time.

If we analyze the topic material and the concept of Tennis, we can draw some conclusions. The concepts of “community” or “Gemeinschaft” and “community” are essentially identical words. Members of a community or community may be related by blood, friendship, or neighbors. These connections are purely emotional, although it is possible that such a group is trying to achieve a specific goal. The community is distinguished by the unity of its “essential will.” The will can be reasonable, but irrational. The basis of relationships in society is rational will. Since society is the totality of all interpersonal relationships, then a certain control system is required. It should consist in the fact that the will of one member of society or a limited circle of people guides the will of others. Each society has its own historically established values, norms, and rules of behavior that are used by members of this society. The concepts of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft are schematically depicted in Fig. 1.6.

If we compare Fig. 1.5 and 1.6, we will see that we can put an equal sign between the Tennis community and the community and between the Tennis community and society as we consider it.

A comment. I have chosen those tasks that reflect his creative approach to implementation. Most homework on this topic was a summary, and sometimes a verbatim retelling of an article published in the relevant journal. Many studies lacked analysis and comparison with lecture material. Both published works are distinguished by both their creative approach and the ability to conduct a comparative analysis. True, one of them did not indicate the sources, for which it lost several tenths of a point.

Activity 4 Common Sense and Science

Task formulation. Find 5 examples that show how common sense judgments differ from scientific judgments, and describe why this happens.

Option 1.

In the reality around us, one can find many discrepancies between the judgments of common sense and science.

Common sense tells us that alcohol consumption is more common in women with a low level of education than in women with a high level of education. However, research in this area has refuted this assertion. “As the level of education increases, the relative frequency of alcohol consumption decreases in men and increases in women. Women with incomplete secondary and secondary education drink less often than men with the same educational status, and women with secondary specialized and higher education drink more often.” Explanation: “...Men have low educational level associated with alcohol abuse. Women with the same educational status tend to adhere to the norm. In general, conformism and the desire to correspond to the norm in all areas of life are most developed among women with a low level of education.” (Sociological journal. 1996. No. 1–2.)

Based on common sense judgments that are familiar to us, we will call a person who has lost a home “homeless” or “homeless,” that is, first a person loses a home and then becomes homeless. However, Dr. P. Henri, a consultant at a Paris center for helping the homeless, has a different opinion: “A homeless person, first of all, is in his mind, and a person’s material collapse hides personal failure, vulnerability, instability, loneliness, and even psychiatric problems have already left their mark on those whom the crisis is pushing towards collapse.”

These words are confirmed by the following data: 91% of homeless men are unmarried, 85% of them come from disadvantaged social classes, 13% of homeless people experience serious neuropsychological problems. (Questions of Statistics. 1977. No. 2.)

There is a belief that men and women are “naturally” created for certain roles, that is, work, hobbies, etc. are divided into male and female. This judgment was refuted by the American anthropologist Margaret Mead in 1935. She observed the lives of three tribes in New Guinea and found that, contrary to expectations: “In each of the three tribes, men and women performed completely different roles, sometimes in direct opposition to the generally accepted stereotypes considered “natural” for each sex.” (Smelser N. Sociology. M., 1994).

If we are asked “How do businessmen spend their leisure time?”, we will immediately think of restaurants and bars, because based on common sense, business people are the wealthiest part of the population, what else could they do in their free time, if not have fun from the heart? would be money. However, sociological studies show a completely different picture: 88% of surveyed businessmen never visit bars and restaurants in their free time, 10.2% sometimes and only 1.8% often.

In the course of a study of leisure time, businessmen were divided into six groups according to the style (type) of leisure behavior: “workaholics”, “family-oriented”, “sociable”, “having fun”, “individualistic introverts” and “economic”, from these six groups In terms of the frequency of visiting restaurants and bars, the “having fun” group stands out sharply; in the remaining groups, other interests predominate; it turns out that many simply have neither the time nor the desire for such entertainment. (Sociological journal. 1995. No. 3.)

Finally, another myth is about the incompatibility of women’s business with a full-fledged family life. 80% of the surveyed female managers consider themselves happy in their family life, and they manage to compensate for their employment in the business sphere either through the help of their parents, or through the redistribution of family concerns between their husband and growing children. Only 2 out of 15 women did not have husbands, one of whom separated from her husband because of business. Everyone knows how difficult it is to combine responsible work and family life, so it is not surprising that such a judgment arises; on the contrary, these studies are surprising. ( Sociological research. 1996. №3).

Conclusions. Common sense judgments are based on a subjective view of reality, which, as we see, is often unfounded and groundless, and this is not accidental. Often such judgments are expressed by incompetent people who have not the slightest connection to this issue. Judgments of science, based solely on verified facts, are objective. Often their results are opposite to common sense judgments, but this does not mean that they never coincide. Hypotheses put forward by scientists a priori are, in their source, judgments of common sense, and only when they are confirmed or not confirmed by experience do they become judgments of science.

Option 2.

Since the beginning of the 90s, a new factor has appeared in stabilizing the standard of living of students - additional income. What motivates a student to go to work? Anyone could answer this question: the student is in dire need of money or the family is poor. But it turns out that a poor family does not play a role in additional earnings.

In 1992, a study “Socio-economic foundations of student life” was conducted among students from the CIS countries.

The following fact turned out to be somewhat unexpected: there is no direct connection with the standard of living of the student’s family, that is, both those in dire need and those who have high level life. For 14% of respondents, money is very important, because it allows them to achieve at least a basic standard of living; for 40%, it allows them to have “pocket money.” And only for 5% do they provide a high level of well-being. These students turn into “correspondence students” because their work takes precedence over their studies.

I would like to consider an example that in one way or another is closely related to this topic. Everywhere there is an opinion that humor is just something incidental in the life of society and does not carry any meaning. Everyone believes that humor exists for the people, and science is not at all interested in it. But this opinion is wrong. This topic has long been of interest to scientists.

The journal “Sociological Research” has repeatedly and in various forms addressed this topic, and the beginning was made in 1986 with the publication of Paramonov’s humorous notes “The Tale of an Unlucky Respondent.” Then, from time to time, journalistic notes and analytical articles about humor appeared on the pages of the magazine. For example, the book by A.V. Dmitriev “The Sociology of Humor. Essays" is entirely devoted to this problem.

Obviously, the topic of humor is quite interesting to study. Much work has been written on this topic, so the idea that science is not involved in humor is incorrect.

There is a popular assumption that there are more unemployed women than unemployed men. Hence the expression “unemployment has a woman’s face.” However, studies show that the difference is very small and it can be said that the unemployment rate of men and women is almost the same. The journal Sociological Research provides figures confirming this fact: 5% of unemployed women, 4.8% of unemployed men were in the economically active population in 1992. 5.5% of unemployed women, 5.4% of unemployed men - in 1993. There is an obvious tendency towards equalization of the unemployment rate of men and women. So public opinion may be wrong.

The media is considered the most prestigious disseminator of information. There used to be radio, and now there is television. It is worth considering that people spend most life in front of their TV screens. Few people doubt the information they receive from the media. Although in vain. A 1995 study found that television and radio are the biggest sources of false information or rumors. It is worth considering the results of the study and everything will become clear. Below are the answer options and their percentages. How do rumors spread? When communicating with neighbors – 17%. In a conversation with workmates - 30%. When meeting with friends -11%. When talking with friends on the phone – 3%. On the streets, in transport – 24%. In queues – 15%. In the media - 32%.

As a result, we have another excuse to say that the media often misinforms people.

Due to the advent of television, there are fewer people reading books. Now many people believe that people in general have stopped reading. And what can we say about attitudes towards literacy? upper strata. After all, we believe that there are only “new Russians” there. Research conducted in 1996 helped clarify the situation. They were held among representatives of the Soviet nomenklatura and the new Russian intelligentsia. Here are the data obtained from the study.

Education:

Technical disciplines – 28%.

Economy – 18%.

Humanitarian – 12%.

Natural – 9%.

Didn’t graduate from university – 3%.

Scientific degree – 21%.

Have their own business – 23%.

Reading books: