Глава 1. Концептуальные подходы к анализу социального единства
Different conceptual aspects of social unity and their interrelations are discussed. The crucial role of the “abstract rules” in the 21st century large societies, including the Russian society, is emphasized. According to author, the two forms of social integration, cohesion and adherence to abstract rules, are united by civil solidarity and civil society.
Sociological theory concluded for a long time that social integration can not be based only on the mutual economic nterest and interdependence. The important role in this connection belongs to such forms of integration as solidarity (cohesion, consensus, etc.), on the one hand, and social regulation and self-regulation (symbols, values, norms), on the other hand. The first of these forms supposes the unity with some ("one's own") people and common identity with the members of one's own group as such; the other form is the adherence to definite rules having symbolic, value and normative aspects. It can be formulated a kind of sociological quasi-law: the more great and complex is a society, the more important in it are the abstract, general rules and the less important is solidarity, and vice versa.
We analyze the contexts of use of the category "people" in the Soviet and post-Soviet primary school textbooks. Empirical base of the research: 3 textbooks (1970-80-ies) and 12 textbooks (2001-2006). The analysis of the frequency of the use of the concept "people" in various meanings demonstrated: in Soviet textbooks the meanings "working people" and "co-citizenship" are dominated, in post - Soviet – “ethno-cultural community"."Ethnic groups" are mentioned in the Soviet textbooks only in the context of natural-climatic zones, with emphasis on economic specialization as "traditional" type of production. In the post-Soviet textbooks "ethnic groups" are mentioned in the civil and historical contexts. This includes the possibility and necessity of definite ethnic identification of the individual, the criteria of which are language, folklore, anthropological characteristics, mental warehouse. Approval of homogeneity of the group on the basis of these criteria leads to the approval of the homogeneity of the nation, as a nation as a political community is conceived in the modern textbooks as a developed form of the ethnic community. Such contexts are fixed through the approval of morality of the social order, which leads to the fixation of social hierarchy and to the spread of discriminatory practices against minorities.
Germany is a diverse country, a fact that offers opportunities for future development in a globalized world, but also poses challenges for the social coexistence of people. The majority of Germans tend to regard increasing diversity as an asset rather than a danger, and the acceptance of social diversity in Germany is well developed. At the same time, acceptance of diversity varies widely depending on the region and the dimension of diversity. While acceptance of people with disabilities or another sexual orientation than one’s own is high, religious diversity is far less accepted. These are the findings of a representative study, “Cohesion in Diversity: Diversity Barometer 2019 of Robert Bosch Stiftung,” for which 3,025 German residents aged 16 and older were interviewed by telephone about their opinions and attitudes toward various social groups. Where and with regard to whom are people especially accepting of diversity? According to the overall diversity index, which is based on a scale from 0 to 100, the mean value for the acceptance of diversity in Germany currently stands at 68 points, clearly in the positive range. At the same time, there is a noticeable west-east and north-south divide: The top five ranks are occupied by Hamburg (72 points), Schleswig-Holstein (71 points), Bremen (71 points), Berlin (71 points), and Lower Saxony (70 points), in other words, the three city-states and two large states in northern Germany. Next come the other states in what used to be West Germany. Bringing up the rear are the former East German states (excluding Berlin), with scores between 65 and 61 points. In addition to regional differences, there are sometimes significant differences in the acceptance of individual dimensions of diversity. In Germany, acceptance of people with disabilities (83 points) and non-heterosexual orientation (77 points), for instance, but also of people with a different ethnic background (73 points) is high. A majority are still open to people of a different age (70 points), a different sex (69 points), and low socio-economic standing (58 points). Skepticism seems to be predominant solely with regard to religion and religious diversity (44 points). However, the findings suggest that, despite the current media focus, this result is not a rejection of “Muslims” alone; the low approval rating tends to indicate a general reservation against religious lifestyles and traditions. When it comes to factors that can positively impact approval of a pluralistic society, individual and personal aspects are particularly important; these include empathy, (a rather left) political leanings orientation, and a positive attitude toward globalization. Structural factors (economic strength, unemployment rate, etc.) in people’s home region are of secondary importance, although regions with higher income disparities also show greater acceptance of diversity. This finding suggests that the existence of a certain level of diversity is a basic prerequisite for having to learn and practice a constructive way of dealing with diversity in the first place.
This work shows that being must originally be understood as implication. We begin with what Heidegger calls Hegel’s ‘new concept of being’ in the Phenomenology of Spirit: time as history is the essence of being. This concept however, is not univocal—for supersession means destroying-preserving. Hegel shows himself to be the thinker of truth as essentially ambiguous; and the Phenomenology is onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, the history of the being and unity, time and aspect, of the concept’s ambiguity. For Heidegger however, conceptual ambiguity confirms that Hegel’s history of being is stuck in a vulgar interpretation of time; and the Phenomenology can explain neither the origin of this time, nor the necessity of negation for the historical determination of being—for Hegel cannot think the ground of the concept of being, that is, the grounding of the ground. If Heidegger argues however, that the Phenomenology is predetermined by its ancient point of departure, we must go back to the Greeks, back to Aristotle’s original insight (overlooked by the entire history of philosophy as metaphysics): being and unity imply one another—for they are essentially implications. Thus the question of the meaning of being becomes the question of the meaning of implication.
The article analyzes cohesion concerns in sacral text. The paper outlines the main types of text cohesion such as lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical ones. Different ways and means of cohesion realization in the text of New Testament are considered particularly.
This article analyzes the consequences of integration in public education. I show that the flight from the integrated multicultural public schools to private education increases private educational expenditures and, as a result, decreases fertility among more affluent parents whose children flee. In contrast, among less prosperous parents, integration in public education decreases their children’s human capital levels. I demonstrate that the poor, who cannot opt out, incur greater costs than the rich, who can resort to private education. I also analyze the overall society-wide effect of the integration policy and derive a condition that determines precisely whether this policy increases or decreases the average level of human capital in society