Каталог статей из сборников научных конференций и научных журналов- The society and the state: dialectic aspect of interaction

O. Yu. Kolosova, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, assistant professor

Stavropol branch of Krasnodar University

of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation,

Stavropol, Russia

It is necessary to draw a democratic line between the society and the state [2, p. 142–145]. First of all, we will emphasize that the concept of society is especially social concept and therefore it is improperly to apply it to natural processes [6, p. 57–58]. Application of the term “society” to the analysis of natural phenomena and processes, from the scientific point of view, is improperly as this term has appeared for designation of those characteristics which have arisen in the universum. In nature everything is made spontaneously, there are their own laws of development and functioning. As for the society, it has arisen at a certain stage of evolution of nature, and, represents qualitatively new institution [16, p. 241]. It is traditional integrated form of activities of people for production of material and cultural wealth [14, p. 39–44]. Labour which has collective that is public character is the cornerstone of its emergence. In the course of co-production of values people must interact, enter certain social relations of production (primitive man couldn't hunt alone, it is impossible to produce modern difficult equipment alone) [10, p. 37–40]. Therefore K. Marx was absolutely right when he wrote that a society is a product of interaction of the people who are consciously pursuing their aims.

Concepts of society and state don't coincide both by origin or volume. In the primitive society there was no state. All human relations were governed by the unwritten law [7, p. 139–144]. The state arises about six thousand years ago. Thus, society existed without the state more than thirty thousand years. The state has arisen together with social classes when the unwritten law wasn't able to govern the public relations any more. Instead of the unwritten law there is an enacted law. A concept “society” is wider than a concept “state”. A society includes four big spheres: economic, spiritual, social and political. The state is a political scope and its kernel. Emergence of the state is natural process of historical development [1, p. 83–86].

The state has arisen from the society and turned into the independent body which is above society and at the same time interacts with it. Therefore quite often concepts of the state and society were considered as synonyms. As the state has arisen at a certain stage of development of society, it interacts with the society. As experience of history testifies, this interaction has very difficult nature reflecting difficult and contradictory developments of the society [13, p. 73–78]. The matter is that in the society there are individuals pursuing their interests which do not always coincide with common interests [12, p. 282–284]. Besides, in the society there are various classes having their own interests. To exist the society must have the political body governing all public relations. The state acts as such regulator. Of course, without interaction with the society regulation of the public relations is impossible. Level of interaction of the state and society is a difficult and multilateral process. It is determined by a type of a way of production of material life. Each type of a way of production has the level of interaction [5, p. 43–46].

Interaction of the society and the state is an appropriate and natural phenomenon because without such interaction there would be neither society, nor state. But there must be certain limits of interaction. Absolutization of society, unwillingness of its members to submit to the state, respect precepts of law lead to anarchy [15, p. 82–89]. On the other hand, absolutization of the government leads to dictatorship, suppression of human rights, repressions of dissidents, political parties and in general oppositionists. Therefore a certain limit of interactions of the society and the state is necessary. [4, p 118–124]. This limit is set by the civil society. The civil society is a society in which there are informal structures in the form of various organizations, movements, committees, associations, societies, meetings operating within legal laws and norms and exerting noticeable impact on official bodies of the power. It maintains a certain balance between the society and the state. If the state begins to exceed the authority, then structures of the civil society remind limits of intervention of the state in affairs of the society. And vice versa: if society breaks the laws and order adopted in the state, then the civil society warns that its actions can lead to the anarchy fraught with dangerous consequences for all people. Relationship between the society and the state always had contradictory nature. The main reason of all contradictions is that society as a social institution appeals to morals, and the state as a political system – to interests [8, p. 18–22].

Thus, contradictions between the state and society are shown, first of all, as contradictions between morality and policy. The purpose of society is non-violence. The purpose of the state is protection of class, group, national and other interests. The state has the powerful body, and it uses it for protection of these or those interests. It isn't always pleasant to the society, but the state doesn't listen to a voice of society. This contradiction, probably, will exist until there is a state as a political form of the government society. Nowadays in the context of globalization processes interaction of the society and the state undergoes essential transformations [3, p. 80–85]. Role of the state try to diminish tracing only to observance of human rights and protection of democratic principles. But such relation to the state leads to negative results. In the economic sphere, for example in developing countries, the states are actually deprived of an opportunity to be engaged in national economy as their niche was filled by multinational corporations. The result is known: the living standards of the population have sharply fallen. It generates social cataclysms with all that it implies. In the spiritual sphere the state is deprived of an opportunity to keep national culture [11, p. 29–31]. Immigration of millions of people from one country to another gradually leads to washing out of national identity [9, p. 123–128]. In a word, the balance in interactions of the state and society is broken. And if this balance isn't restored, the mankind can face unpredictable consequences.

Bibliography

1. Бакланов И.С. Социокультурное и коммуникативное наполнение понятия рациональности в современной социальной философии // Вестник Северо-Кавказского федерального университета. - 2011. - № 5. - С. 83-86.

2. Бакланова О.А Методологические измерения социальности в современной социально-теоретической рефлексии // Вестник Северо-Осетинского государственного университета имени Коста Левановича Хетагурова. -  2013. - № 2. - С. 142-145.

3. Болховской А. Л., Говердовская Е. В., Ивченко А. В. Образование в глобализирующемся мире: философский взгляд // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2013. - № 5. - С. 80-85.

4. Говердовская Е. В., Добычина Н. В. Взаимные референции между реальным и виртуальным пространством: новая коммуникационная среда // Социально-гуманитарные знания. - 2014. - № 7. - С. 118-124.

5. Гончаров В. Н. Концепция «информационного общества»: социально-философский анализ // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2009. - № 1. - С. 43-46.

6. Гончаров В. Н. Информационное общество: антропологический аспект // Альманах современной науки и образования. - 2009. - № 1-2. - С. 57-58.

7. Деркачев Г.И., Бакланов И.С. Проблемы и истоки легитимации власти в современной России // Социально-гуманитарные знания. - 2009. - № 9. - С. 139-144.

8. Ерохин А. М. Религиозное сознание в контексте общественных отношений // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2015. - № 2 (81). - С. 18-22.

9. Ерохин А. М. Научно-информационный аспект исследования социокультурного развития общества в области культуры и искусства // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2015. - № 2. - С. 123-128.

10. Камалова О.Н., Джиоева Д.А. Перспективы развития сенсорных технологий и проблема расширения чувственных возможностей человека // Северо-Восточный научный журнал. - 2011. - № 1. - С. 37-40.

11. Камалова О. Н. «Созерцание» в философско-культурологических построениях И. Ильина // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2012. - № 6. - С. 29-31. 

12. Лобейко Ю. А. Социальная активность личности в обществе: социально-педагогические аспекты формирования // European Social Science Journal.  - 2014. - №7-2 (46). - С. 282-284.

13. Лобейко Ю. А. Социально-психологические проблемы общения в контексте межличностных общественных отношений // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2015. - № 4. - С. 73-78.

14. Матяш Т.П., Несмеянов Е. Е. Православный тип культуры: идея и реальность // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2015. - № 3 (82). - С. 39-44.

15. Месхи Б.Ч., Несмеянов Е.Е. Теология или лженаука: что на самом деле разрушает отечественное образование // Гуманитарные и социальные науки. - 2014. - № 4. - С. 82-89.

16. Микеева О. А.  Анализ методологии и направлений исследований современной социальной реальности // Социально-гуманитарные знания. -2009. - №9. - С. 241.