Society

Society as A Self-Developing System

The notion that society constitutes a complex system evolving from its own foundations is as unquestionable today as it has always been. This system is perceived as encompassing all that pertains to the systemic characterization of society as a coherent whole, which unites individuals through various ties and relationships. While the individual also represents a system, in this context, systemicity is examined at a more "elevated" level—namely, at the levels of the state, ethnonational and social-class formations, as well as structural elements of society such as politics, law, and economics.

In understanding the concept of "society," one must discern two aspects, two dimensions: the individual and the social. First and foremost, society consists of the very people engaged in their social relations. All social phenomena ultimately arise from the actions of individuals—their goals, desires, thoughts, and free choices. Moreover, these individuals do not act in isolation from one another, thus society is not merely a collection of individuals, but an open system of their communication, interconnections, and interactions. Secondly, society is a system capable of self-regulation. The process of ordering and organizing social relations engenders relatively autonomous forms of social integration and regulation that govern relations between individuals, between social communities, and between humanity and nature (resulting in a system of norms and rules, rights and obligations, prohibitions and permissions).

This contradictory characteristic of social reality—that it is both a product of individual interactions and a reflection of their subjectivity (goals, interests, desires) while simultaneously being an independent, objective formation—accounts for the specificity of social laws (social determinism) that qualitatively differ from the laws of nature. Social existence and human history, along with the material world that surrounds us, consist of the efforts of specific individuals and result from their actions, reflecting the particular historical forms of humanity's relationship with nature. Yet, this result becomes an objective condition for human existence. Despite the fact that people create their own history and social life, the manner in which they are "included" in the socio-historical process is determined not only by their mastery of cultural heritage and subjective aspirations but also by the objective conditions of material production, the achieved level of social development, including the level of social consciousness. Thus, what is referred to as "social determinism" is a factor of dependency for individuals upon the products and outcomes of their own activities. From the aggregate activities of individuals, new objective historical circumstances arise, which, in turn, shape the subsequent development of humanity. Hence, there are no inevitable historical trends devoid of human activity. People find themselves dependent on the objective conditions and circumstances of life, while simultaneously creating and altering these circumstances.

When discussing the causes of society's self-development as a holistic system, it is fitting to highlight several leading contradictions that act as driving forces behind its development. It is evident that the foundation of such contradictions lies in the nature of the subjects of social development. As is well known in philosophy, a subject is understood as the bearer of practical activity and cognition, a source of activity directed toward itself and the object. The subject of social development includes not only the individual (with a particular emphasis on outstanding and historical figures), but also social groups (small, medium, large), nations, and socio-ethnic communities.

A distinctive feature of the social subject is its possession of needs and interests, which endow it with biological and social activity. Needs are defined as a lack or deficit of something essential for the maintenance of the organism's life, the human personality, the social group, or society as a whole, prompting the capacity to overcome this deficiency—this state facilitates the connection of the organism or social subject with the surrounding environment, serving as an internal motivator for activity. Interests are inherent attitudes of individuals that express a positive or negative orientation of their activity, striving, historical creativity toward the search, selection, utilization, or creation of means, norms, social institutions capable of satisfying human needs. Thus, interests, alongside needs, serve as the stimulating force of historical activity within the social subject. An important conclusion of social philosophy is the recognition of the infinite process of growth in needs, the cause of which lies in the interplay between production and human consumption of material and spiritual goods.

Given the characteristics of human existence, it is essential to identify a source of society's self-development as the contradiction between the natural and cultural organization of humans and human communities. Regardless of their historical development level, humans always remain part of Nature and the Cosmos, a specific manifestation of the phenomenon of life. This circumstance must be taken into account when interpreting all social phenomena, for any project aimed at constructing or reconstructing human life must primarily be grounded in the necessity of sustaining the life of the entire biosphere and the possibilities for existence and development of each human being. Hence arises the imperative that vitality, as an imperative focus on preserving the very phenomenon of life, should be the core, defining value of societal development, around which the overarching issue of life and death is formed. At the same time, the entirety of human history demonstrates that the process of maintaining conditions for human life is intertwined with the intensive transformation of nature. This creates a specific segment of "cultured" ("second") nature, which is both a result and a product of human activity. In other words, culture is nature shaped through a particular human approach aimed at satisfying specific needs. However, culture is not limited to the objects produced by humanity; it extends to social relationships and the products of spiritual production.

A more profound philosophical characteristic of cultural objects is their duality. Every cultural phenomenon is both sensual and supersensual, embodying a system of natural and social qualities. In this duality lies the essence of culture as a socio-historical means of human adaptation to the world, a trait that applies equally to humanity itself. Living in a world of culture and being a cultural phenomenon themselves, individuals leave behind manifestations of material or spiritual culture. In this way, they engage with the past, present, and future, becoming part of the flow of world history.

In discussing culture as a mode of existence for society and humanity, it is necessary to consider the problem of its genesis and structural characteristics. It is evident that during the long process of anthropo-sociogenesis, the leading component of culture has been the technology for sustaining human life and vital needs. Despite the outward similarities of human bodily functions to those of animals, it is within biological processes that the divide between the biological and the social began and expanded. In the pursuit of fulfilling biological needs, human bodily culture formed as the foundational layer of culture. Notably, the earliest moral prohibitions—taboos—were associated with food and sexual behavior, prerequisites for the establishment of culture. Securing sustenance and shelter from environmental conditions, as well as ritualizing sexual and reproductive functions, necessitated increasingly sophisticated organization of communal life.

The gradual transition from a subsistence economy to a productive one signified the growth of the second aspect of culture—its social forms. This new stage of development required a fundamentally new organization of culture, the essence of which lay in the management of human activities through technological means. In this lies the profound meaning of the phenomenon of power and the idea of statehood. Thus, historical changes in the organization of culture as an enhancement of survival technologies contributed to the social development of humanity and society as a whole.

Within the context of the contradiction between nature and culture, one must also consider the mechanism of self-development in social life known as the division of labor. Encompassing the entire realm of social production, with its primary components—production of material goods, human reproduction, the reproduction of social relations, and spiritual production—the division of labor, which has exhibited its own specific characteristics and impacts on various spheres of social life throughout history, can be regarded as one of the primary engines of social progress. Initially, it possessed gender and age characteristics, yet it progressively grew more complex, evolving into highly specialized forms of labor in contemporary computerized production. Thanks to the division of labor, individuals were able to secure the survival of the primordial community and each of its members, surpassing in this regard the societies of animals.

As production developed, humanity increasingly influenced the surrounding nature, thereby altering its own nature. Human labor serves as the factor that not only satisfies bodily needs but also shapes human society through a network of social connections and relations.

The evolution and complexity of labor activity occur simultaneously with the evolution of familial and marital behaviors, which are directly linked to human reproduction. In this process, a clear trend of continuous and progressive population growth is observed, which should be regarded as the realization of a specific mechanism for human survival amid the pressures of the surrounding environment. At the same time, this trend harbors several unique and significant contradictions, including the disparity between the overall pace of population growth and the pace of development of the material conditions for existence; the uneven rates of population growth across different regions of the globe, with more dynamic growth in underdeveloped countries with limited natural resources, contrasted with low birth rates in highly developed nations; mass migrations; and economic, political, and military conflicts. All of this constitutes a demographic problem, the resolution of which essentially means finding effective pathways for self-regulating the quantitative composition of the population as a prerequisite for the development and survival of humanity.

Even more complex for analysis is the source of self-development in social systems associated with the social relations that arise from human labor activities. In the context of the problem of society's self-development, a special focus lies on analyzing the motives and incentives for work and activity, as this significantly shapes an individual's relationship with the world and with themselves. Several leading motives and incentives can be identified:

1. The sustenance of one’s own existence and survival.
2. The continuation of the lineage.
3. The fulfillment of the inherent need for work, engaging in labor for the joy and richness of being.
4. The competition with others for the appropriation of labor products or for the assistance of others.

Thus, the decisive factors that define the structure of society itself must be acknowledged, encompassing the ties that bind individuals through economic, social, and cultural relationships. A characteristic feature of modern economic development is the broadening of the process of commercialization of the human labor product. In contemporary society, there exists a substantial number of social relations that engage individuals in productive activity, allowing them to move from their personal to their social selves, overcoming the contradiction between individual interests and societal needs. The necessity of production demands a concentration of labor and technology in specific locations, which simultaneously intensifies the nature of social interactions.

Moreover, the specificity of the social subject's activity must be acknowledged. In the process of self-development, individuals realize their own needs and interests, representing a nexus of contradictions that simultaneously exists and is in conflict with the needs of others. Consequently, within society, the potential for conflict, competition, and rivalries emerges, reflecting the irreducible nature of interests.

The social dimension of human existence necessitates that in the process of self-development, the interests of individuals and groups become mutually conditioned. Thus, to a certain degree, the economic and social systems become driven by a set of reciprocal obligations for participation in labor activities. In this context, the notion of obligation and responsibility serves as a framework for individuals to define their position within the collective, providing a comprehensive view of the self in relation to others.

This process of self-development necessitates not only the effective and sustainable generation of goods and services that meet societal needs but also a continuous engagement with the socio-cultural environment, shaping individuals' perceptions of their roles within the social context.

At the same time, we cannot overlook the contemporary challenges posed by globalization, which brings forth unprecedented changes to traditional social ties and structures. The influx of global capital, international migration, and technological advancements affect individual identities, leading to new forms of social inequality and the potential for conflict. These factors underline the pressing need for social adaptation and integration strategies that facilitate collaboration across diverse backgrounds, ultimately enabling societies to navigate the complexities of self-development in the global context.

The notion of society as a self-developing system reflects the inherent complexity of social interactions and the evolution of human experiences. Understanding the dynamics of self-development provides valuable insights into how societies can thrive while fostering collaboration and inclusivity, thus ensuring a sustainable and harmonious future for all.

In the course of humanity's multifaceted existence, specific social relations come into being. M. Weber characterized social relations as "the behavior of several individuals, interconnected in their content and oriented toward one another." Accordingly, social relations are entirely and exclusively predicated on the potential for social behavior to manifest an accessible (and understood) definitional character. A defining feature of this concept is the degree of relational connection—however minimal—between one individual and another. The content of this relationship can vary widely: struggle, animosity, love, friendship, respect, market exchange, "fulfillment" of agreements, "evasion" or refusal of such, rivalry of economic, erotic, or any other nature; class or national solidarity. Thus, the term "social relations," in itself, reveals nothing about whether it pertains to "solidarity" among the acting individuals or its exact opposite.

Social relations encompass all spheres of public life and activity. Material-economic relations include production relations, technological relations, distribution, and exchange; social-political relations comprise political, legal, moral, class-based, national, and social-group relations; and spiritual-cultural relations involve moral, religious, artistic-aesthetic, and scientific relations. The subjects of social relations are individuals and social communities, whose interests and needs form the foundation of these relations.

Society, as a unity of the social and the individual, is directed, firstly, towards ensuring conditions for the preservation and development of the social entity itself, and secondly, towards providing the means for individuals to realize and develop their capabilities in fulfilling their needs. The primary spheres of human existence give rise to the essential functions of society: the provision and reproduction of material-economic conditions of life (enhancing welfare and material well-being); the regulation and organization of social relations (social-political and ethical guarantees for humanity's survival, the ordering and normalization of political, legal, and moral relations); and the spiritual-cultural development of individuals.

The essence of social life is a creative process wherein humanity, as a socially-historical subject, constructs and develops the social conditions of its existence. In this process, individuals themselves evolve, enriching their capabilities and honing their skills. This distinctive feature of human existence is articulated in social philosophy by the concept of "social production." Social production is not limited solely to the economic sphere (material production); it also encompasses the development of diverse social relations and institutions (the production of forms of communication) and the formation and advancement of the spiritual realm of humanity, as well as social forms of consciousness (spiritual production). Thus, the primary spheres of activity, in their interconnection, constitute the actual process of social production as the production of life and its subject—the social individual.

This issue touches upon a number of key questions, including the meaning of life, freedom, rights, labor, equality, property, capital, power, the state, exploitation, and more, which directly or indirectly relate to the fundamental motivations driving human activity, thereby influencing the self-development of all facets of societal life.

A significant role in the self-development of society is played by the dialectic of the objective and subjective, which act in dialectical unity to create a specific mechanism of a self-organizing system. The foundation of this mechanism comprises unevenness, non-linearity, openness, and the capacity for constant restructuring of the internal structure of society. Society, in its entirety, represents a multi-layered system wherein complex processes of construction and destruction occur, characterized by periods of stability interspersed with instability and self-destruction of various elements within the social system. The continuous processes of societal formation, construction, and destruction manifest the "internal logic" of the social system's self-organization. Under normal functioning conditions of all system factors, society undergoes constant self-renewal. When, however, the interconnections among system elements are disrupted, society loses its ability to respond adequately to external influences. Consequently, the dynamism of societal self-development is impeded.

The dialectic of objective conditions and subjective factors occupies a central place in this process, realized through their continual development and convergence, mutually transitioning from one into the other—on one hand, through the objectification of the subjective, and on the other, through the subjectification of the objective.

The functioning of society as a self-regulating system occurs based on the dialectical unity of disordered, spontaneous determinants and organized, conscious factors. Elements of disorder and spontaneity in societal development manifest in uncontrolled processes of both objective and subjective orders, acting as spontaneous regulators. The efficacy of such objective regulators deepens and broadens the less understood societal life processes are, and the less frequently they are employed by individuals in practical activities.

Disorder should not be viewed exclusively as something negative; doing so underestimates the significance of disordered, spontaneous connections, which, alongside ordered factors, invariably serve as necessary conditions for the spiritual and practical mastery of the world. Disorder, as an objective factor in the self-organization of society, signifies the real possibility of parity in the interaction of diverse determinants of societal development. In conscious, spiritually-practical engagement with the world, disorder is linked with freedom and the alternative nature of decision-making, suggesting the possibility of varied activities among social subjects. Thus, objective self-regulation can encompass both constructive, creative, and destructive elements. Simultaneously, any absolutization of the role of disordered, spontaneous mechanisms within the process of objective self-regulation of the social system is tied to an undervaluation of the conscious factors of its regulation—namely, the active role of the social subject. In considering the dialectical unity of the objective and subjective as two opposing facets of a singular societal development process, it is essential to highlight the historical trend of an increasing role for the subjective factor. One premise of this trend is the continual deepening of the social subject’s knowledge about the natural and social world, as well as the identification and consideration of contradictions and laws governing societal development in their activities.

In light of the above, it is pertinent to underscore the contradiction between the real and the ideal, which implies an active, purposeful societal-transformative activity by the social subject as an endeavor to materialize a certain idealized social order, emerging from discontent with the imperfections of existing societal conditions. This underscores that no system of social organization is capable of satisfying the interests of all its social subjects. Thus, the entire history of human development comprises a persistent effort to identify and critically reflect upon the shortcomings of the social order, to uncover their causes, and to "improve" the organization of the social system. Such re-evaluation can take the form of an individual idea or a comprehensive theory, establishing fundamental guidelines for a "perfect" organization of social relations. These encompass all known models of social structure, including those based on theological principles (Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam) as well as secular models. However, it is a matter of course that no ideal model of a future "perfect" society can account for all factors, including unforeseen and spontaneous ones, that influence social processes, rendering it incapable of absolute perfection. Moreover, precisely due to the active endeavors of social subjects, the outcomes of implementing any given idea or social theory invariably deviate from initial expectations—resulting in unforeseen elements. This divergence not only fails to lead to the formation of a "perfect" society but necessitates the creation of a new program for its restructuring, rendering this process endless.