Freedom in human life social science. What does the term "free society" mean? Free society: various models

German philosopher 20th century E, Cassirer in his work "The Technique of Modern Political Myths" assessed this word as one of the most vague and ambiguous not only in philosophy, but also in politics.

In philosophy "freedom" usually opposes "necessity", in ethics - "responsibility", in politics - "order". And the very meaningful interpretation of the word "freedom" contains very different shades. Freedom can be identified with complete self-will, or it can be evaluated as a conscious decision, the subtlest motivation for human actions.

A. Schopenhauer believed that one can talk about freedom only as about overcoming difficulties. The hindrance disappeared, freedom was born. It always appears as a negation of something. To define freedom from itself is extremely difficult, simply impossible.

Freedom is a state of mind, it is a philosophical concept that reflects the inalienable right of a person to realize his human will. Outside of freedom, a person cannot realize the richness of his inner world and his possibilities.

Freedom is one of the indisputable universal values, but freedom is not absolute. If the individual is given the right to control his own destiny, an age of chaos will come. After all, the instincts of self-will, destructiveness and selfishness are strong in him. Freedom, of course, is good, but it is wonderful when a person voluntarily submits to the general will, consciously moderates his own impulses.

Freedom, if it is not. correlated with the requirements of morality, expediency, the interests of society and humanity, easily turns into permissiveness.

Can a person be absolutely free? No, because society, humanity as a whole is limited in its resources and capabilities. The freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another begins.

Freedom begins precisely where a person consciously limits himself. Feeling compassion for another and helping him, he frees himself from greed, selfishness. Recognizing the right of another to his own position in life, he eliminates his own limitations.

So, freedom acts as a universal value. People strive for freedom, because only in it and through it can the creative human potential be realized. However, freedom does not act as a universally binding principle. However, it is important to distinguish between freedom and willfulness. Freedom is a moral imperative; moral impulse, command, demand. It involves not only overcoming various obstacles in the path of a person, but also the conscious restriction of certain impulses that can turn into a lack of freedom for others. By infringing on someone else's freedom, a person runs the risk of finding himself in a zone of lack of freedom.

27. Freedom and Necessity

The idea of ​​freedom as a human value has always been important for philosophy, considering its essence and ways to achieve it. In general, two positions of understanding this problem have been formed - epistemological (“freedom is a conscious necessity”) and psychological (the doctrine of “free will”). In the most general sense, freedom is the ability of a person to be active in accordance with his intentions, desires and interests, in the course of which he achieves his goals.

“Necessary” in the language of philosophy means “regular”, which gives the idea of ​​freedom the meaning of some limitation. It turns out that in the manifestations of freedom a person is forced, i.e. necessarily limited, for example, by law, morality, one's own conscience, etc. In addition, he is not free from the laws operating in nature, society and culture, which subordinate any action to themselves. In this regard, human freedom is always understood in relation to something or someone. The life of a person in society imposes restrictions in connection with the realization of the freedom of another person. Therefore, the humanistic principle operates in philosophy, according to which it is believed that the freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another begins.

In the history of social thought, the problem of freedom was reduced to questions: does a person have free will and to what extent does he depend on external circumstances? A person has freedom in choosing goals and means to achieve them, but in the process of implementing goal setting, he encounters circumstances that need to influence his activities. Freedom here means only the relative independence of personal choice. Man should be aware of the necessary limitation of his freedom.

The free will of the individual is not only limited by social norms (morality, law, etc.), an individual hierarchy of values ​​and principles, but is also closely associated with the awareness of responsibility. In legal science, responsibility is interpreted as a measure of coercion associated with various deprivations and restrictions. In the philosophy of M.M. Bakhtin understands responsibility as an act of a person who asserts himself in front of another. The responsibility of a person's actions is always associated with the manifestation of free will, which does not violate the freedom of another. It is also a response to the challenge of being - the birth of our Self. the need to correlate their actions and the freedom of their manifestation with a sense of duty and personal conscience.

The category of responsibility can be understood in two ways: as external responsibility, dictated to a person from the outside - by other people or public institutions, and internal responsibility, a duty to oneself, usually referred to as "conscience". The opposite of these two forms of responsibility is relative. A sense of duty and conscience are, in fact, nothing more than the norms of external responsibility learned by a person. So, in the process of educating a personality, various forms of social activity, including moral regulations, become the norms of individual behavior.

Human actions can be dictated either by his own self-consciousness and will, or by social norms, sometimes in conflict with the former. The contradictions between the individual and the social in the manifestation of freedom are partly removed through various types of responsibilities.

25. Meaning human being

Philosophical ideas about the meaning of human existence are very diverse. In the most general terms, they can be divided into two branches. Some philosophers are looking for the meaning of life within itself, in any visible forms and manifestations of life: in love and kindness, in enjoyment, in achieving power over the world, in improving the mind, etc. In this case, life has absolute value in itself. Others go out in search of meaning beyond their own limits of life and see its purpose in serving some higher, ideal principle - humanity, Nature or God. In this case, life is seen as a means of acquiring other values, such as achieving happiness. In addition, some philosophers argue that life is completely devoid of meaning, since it is finite. If death exists in being, then life is absurd and turns into an expectation of its natural fate. In this case, philosophical discussions switch from the theme of the meaning of life to the problem of the meaning of death, for example, among the existentialists (Kierkegaard, Camus, Sartre). In the same vein, the idea of ​​life as a means of achieving immortality is developed in various forms - symbolic (social) or, on the contrary, literal (physical).

Philosophical understanding of the problem of the meaning of human existence complements the modern debate from the field of biological ethics - about the permissibility of euthanasia, suicide, abortion, organ transplantation, cloning, and other new aspects of understanding human freedom to dispose of life.

24. The idea of ​​a perfect person in different cultures

In their totality, moral values ​​form the ideal of a perfect person, who is far from being the same in different cultures oh, and in different eras. This ideal is visually demonstrated by the sensual images of gods and heroes in mythology and art.

In philosophy, the first attempts to construct the ideal of a perfect person date back to ancient times (“a noble man” in Confucius, a philosopher-ruler in Plato’s “State”, an “enlightened” teacher of life among Buddhists, etc.). In modern philosophy, the most vivid image of the perfect man - the Superman - was created by Friedrich Nietzsche in the book Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

Ideas about a perfect person are necessary for any society, because serve as an ideal guideline serving the purpose and meaning of human life in society. Most often, the image of an ideal, perfect person is formed under the influence of religious faith. In this case, perfection is seen as a sign of supernaturalness, a special benevolence of the deity to this person. In some cultures, the prophets - Christ, Muhammad, Buddha, Confucius - turned out to be the embodiment of perfection; in others, they considered the ruler, who is the embodiment of divine perfection among people on earth, for example, the pharaoh in Ancient Egypt. In any of the images, the most significant personality traits are fixed, which symbolize the ideal of goodness, justice, love.

28. Morality, justice, law

Morality (from Latin mores, mores) and law are ideal forms of regulation of human behavior. With their help, society directs and regulates the behavior of individuals in such a way that it meets the integral public interests.

Moral norms (moral values) are the subject of the study of ethics. Ethics includes kindness and justice, honesty and courage, patriotism, etc. among the moral values. abstract characteristics of the human personality.

The key category of morality is kindness. The principle of equivalent retribution for good and evil is expressed by the category of justice. Law draws a conditional boundary between good and evil, formalizing these abstractions, and establishes a fair measure of punishment for the evil done. Formal rules of law are called "laws". Laws form the subject of study of jurisprudence (jurisprudence).

Moral values

The content of all moral values ​​without exception - the categories of morality and law, including goodness, justice, and legality - is historical. This means that their content changes radically depending on specific historical conditions and circumstances. human life. What is considered good and just in one society, or even within one social group, is condemned in another, and vice versa. There are no universal and absolute moral values ​​that would be suitable for all people and for all time.

"Universal human morality" and "human rights" are abstractions that dictate to people the norms of behavior that in a given historical era better than others meet the interests of a particular human community (family, class, ethnic group, and, finally, humanity as a whole). When history gives the opportunity, each community seeks to impose its own values ​​on all other people, presenting them as "universal".

30. Aesthetic values ​​and their role in human life

The word "aesthetics" comes from the Greek aisthetikos - feeling, sensual. The sphere of practical application of aesthetics is artistic activity, the products of which - works of art - are subject to evaluation in terms of their aesthetic value. In the process of upbringing, a person develops various aesthetic values ​​(taste) that correspond to ideas of goodness and beauty, beauty and ugliness, tragic and comic.

Beauty is a measure of the correspondence between the essence of a thing and its external appearance, its sensual image. A thing that fully expresses its nature in its present, sensually perceived being is called "beautiful" (otherwise it is considered "ugly").

The principle that balances opposites is harmony, which serves as a measure of aesthetic values. AT ancient philosophy harmony meant the order and coherence of the cosmos, accessible in the understanding and feelings of a person through music, i.e. sequence of tones. In the Renaissance, the search for harmony was associated with the study of the structure of the human body, a recognized standard of beauty and proportion.

Currently, a relativistic view of the categories of aesthetics, artistic values, which are considered in relation to individual needs for beauty, goodness, truth, dominates, which greatly complicates their understanding and philosophical explanation.

31.Religious values ​​and freedom of conscience

Religion is a special form of human self-consciousness, i.e. a kind of "mirror" in which a person sees himself, his own image. Religion is also considered as a special kind of spiritual development of reality, the earliest in terms of historical time of occurrence and stable in terms of distribution. There is no consensus in science and philosophy on the question of the causes of the origin of religion, but there is a fairly traditional opinion about its evolution from the earliest primitive beliefs (family cults) to the emergence of the institution of the priesthood in monotheistic beliefs (recognizing only one deity as supreme, these include: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc.) and polytheistic beliefs (numbering a numerous pantheon of gods, these include: Hinduism, Shintoism, Buddhism, etc.). A characteristic feature of religion is its conservatism, understood as traditionalism - the unchanging adherence to the sacred tradition.

Religious thinking is distinguished by irrationality and belief in the supernatural, it is deeply symbolic and does not need formal logic to understand and explain the sacraments. The religious beginning of culture is opposed to the secular, which recognizes the exceptional position of the human mind, capable of subverting belief in the supernatural. A side manifestation of religious thinking is the fanaticism of faith, the product of secular (secular) thinking is militant atheism. Freedom of conscience regulates religious and secular opposition in culture, proclaiming an equivalent value, both belief in the supernatural and belief in its absence. Religious beliefs and atheism, in turn, form an antagonistic system of values. Religious values ​​are associated with worship, atheistic - with its debunking.

32. Consciousness and cognition

The problem of consciousness in philosophy is one of the most difficult, since it requires abstraction from the subject of thought. It is possible to cognize consciousness if one takes a position of being outside in relation to it, but in reality this is impossible; one cannot "get out" of one's own consciousness in order to know it. In this regard, philosophy considers consciousness through its relation to something, for example, in the direction to being (intentionality), to itself (reflexivity).

All forms of mental activity, starting with the simplest, elementary - a conditioned reflex, and ending with the highest - consciousness, perform the function of orientation of a living being in the external environment, in the surrounding world. The more complex this environment is, the more complex the organization of the psyche (soul) should be, which allows one to successfully navigate in such an environment. It is quite difficult to explain the relationship between consciousness and the psyche from a philosophical standpoint.

Consciousness is a form of orientation of the individual in the world of culture, in the environment. This environment has been formed over thousands of years of human history, it was created by the labor of many generations of people. Every object in culture has some ideal social meaning. Consciousness allows a person to navigate in this ideal environment, in the world of meanings.

Functionally, consciousness is understood as thinking, i.e. operating system. Consciousness is also explained very approximately in terms of the function of the brain. Such a view, widespread in natural science (biology, medicine), is not able to cover the value-semantic activity of consciousness, which goes beyond the physiological description and understanding of the phenomenon.

For a person, consciousness is represented in cognitive activity. Human knowledge begins with the assimilation of the meanings of the simplest objects of culture. In operating with these objects, the child also adopts the meanings contained in them, and learns to operate with these meanings as such (mainly in terms of verbal and speech), without touching real objects. This activity with the pure meanings of things is consciousness.

Consciousness, self-awareness and personality

The orientation of consciousness towards itself, expressed in the substantial finding of the "I" of the individual, is self-consciousness. Self-consciousness (what we call our “I”) is an attribute of a person, a function of her psyche, which allows a person to navigate in a social, cultural environment. But the personality itself is a particle of this environment, a phenomenon of culture. Directing his consciousness to himself, trying to understand himself, a person acquires self-consciousness and determines his place in being. However, a person is something much more than his self-consciousness, because in relations with the outside world, it forms its own individual world, in the center of which is the Self, and on the periphery are various social ties and socially significant objects. In the structure of self-consciousness of the individual, it is conditionally possible to distinguish - "I am ideal" and "I am real". The first means the goal of self-development and the limits of personal growth, concluded in achieving the desired qualities, position in society, knowledge, etc. The second is formed in the contradiction of the opinions of the surrounding people about the personality and her individual ideas about herself, their weighted assessment is indicative of a harmonious personality.

In the social sciences and the humanities, the question of the priorities of the social and biological in man has not been fully clarified. This problem also applies to the personality, the formation of which some see from birth, others from the stage of growing up. In psychology and pedagogy, it is believed that every person becomes a person in the process of socialization, while in philosophy there is no unanimity of opinion about whether every person becomes a person with a hierarchy of values, a high sense of responsibility, a need for self-perfection, ideas about the meaning of life.

33. The future of mankind and global problems of our time

Various aspects of the problem of the future of mankind are considered within the framework of futurology and social forecasting. The very idea of ​​the future has interested man throughout the history of his existence, most often in the form of an eschatological teaching. Scientific understanding of the future and the emergence of scenarios for the prospects of mankind arise only by the middle of the twentieth century, when society realizes the destructive nature of technological progress in the field of weapons. Simultaneously with the threat of nuclear war and the development of scenarios to prevent it in the future, the global problem of the demographic crisis is revealed, i.e. overpopulation of the earth as a result of an increase in the average life expectancy of people and an increase in the population, which entails another global problem - the lack of natural resources (fresh water, food, natural energy) and, as a result, getting out of the latter by increasing technology - an environmental problem. At the end of the 60s. In the 20th century, an international public organization "Club of Rome" was created, designed to discuss and stimulate research on global problems that arose as a result of the scientific and technological revolution and threaten the existence of people in the future.

In addition, in the second half of the twentieth century, another round of technological revolution began, based on the use of electronic computers and information technology. In the economically developed countries of the world there is an intensive process of intellectualization of the economy. Today, a form of society is being born, which has already been called the “knowledge society” (English knowledge society).

In the society of the future, knowledge will become the main resource of human activity in almost all its spheres. The wealth of a society is already largely determined not so much by the material resources that this society has, but by the size of its "intellectual capital". Countries that, by inertia or due to various historical circumstances, continue to live at the expense of the exploitation of their natural resources, labor force and classical, “material” capital, are doomed by history to economic, and generally social, backwardness.

35. Democritus

The atomistic doctrine of Democritus The premise of atomism was the need to give a material explanation of the observed properties of things - their multitude, movement and change. After Zeno, who proved that the hypothesis of the infinite divisibility of things, space and time leads to irremovable contradictions and paradoxes, any attempt to justify the reality of the multitude, the separateness of things and their mobility had to take this into account. The doctrine of atomism was an attempt to resolve these difficulties. Atomists assumed the existence of an infinite number of bodily particles, they admitted the existence of a void in which particles move and denied the possibility of particles to divide to infinity, they saw impenetrable atoms in them. According to this hypothesis, every thing, being the sum of a very large (but not infinite) number of particles - very small, but due to their indivisibility that do not turn into nothing, can no longer be considered as infinitely large and at the same time having no magnitude at all, as it was with Zeno. Democritus was a prominent representative of atomism. The initial position of the atomic system is the existence of atoms and emptiness, which form all complex bodies with their endless compounds. Consequently, one of the main prerequisites for the teachings of Democritus is the view that sensations represent, although insufficient, but a necessary source of knowledge. Insufficient and inaccurate evidence of sensation is corrected by the finer discernment of the mind. Thus the atoms and the void are invisible, but their existence is verified by reasoning based on sensory observations. Democritus distinguishes what exists in opinion from what exists in reality: “only in general opinion there is sweet, in opinion - bitter, in opinion - warm, in opinion - cold, in opinion - color, in reality, only atoms exist. and emptiness. However, Democritus does not deny the reality of the perceived sensibility. In this case, Democritus says that philosophy is not studying what is known to everyone, but what underlies everything, forms its cause. Apparently, Democritus does not agree that the sensory perceptions of qualities coincide with the qualities themselves. Atoms are small bodies that do not have qualities, while emptiness is the method in which all these bodies, during all eternity, rushing up and down, either intertwine with each other, or collide with each other and bounce, diverge and converge again into such combinations, and in this way they produce all other complex bodies and our bodies, and their states and sensations. To explain the real diversity of reality, Democritus admits that atoms differ in shape, order and position. This separation underlies all the observed differences. None of them, therefore, is unreasonable. He denies the existence of expediency in nature. Properties bitter, sweet, etc. exist conditionally, not by the nature of things themselves. He did not distinguish between causality and necessity, therefore he denied chance, considering it as the result of ignorance. According to Democritus, the human soul consists of the smallest, round, fiery, constantly restless atoms; possessing internal energy, it is the cause of the movement of living beings. He was the first to express the idea of ​​projective objectification of the subjective image: the thinnest “films” (surfaces) that flow into the eyes, ears, etc. are separated from the thing. In other words, a kind of fluids are emitted from objects, which, getting into our body through the sense organs, give rise to sensations, perceptions, i.e. images that we feel not in us, but where the perceived object is located: otherwise, we would not reach with a spoon into a plate, say, with soup, but into our eyes. In this case, the visual image is formed by the outflow emanating from the eyes, and from what is visible. The atomic doctrine is extended by Democritus to the doctrine of life and the soul. The life and death of an organism is reduced to the combination and decomposition of atoms. The soul consists of fiery atoms and is their temporary combination. The soul is not immortal.

36. Philosophy of Socrates

The turning point in the development of ancient philosophy was the views of Socrates (469-399 BC). His name has become a household name and serves to express the idea of ​​wisdom. Socrates himself did not write anything, he was a sage close to the people, he philosophized in the streets and squares, and from there entered into philosophical disputes. The invaluable merit of Socrates lies in the fact that in his facts the dialogue became the main method of finding the truth. Whereas previously principles were simply postulated, Socrates discussed all sorts of approaches critically and comprehensively. His anti-dogmatism was expressed in the rejection of claims to the possession of reliable knowledge. With the help of skillfully asked questions, he singled out false definitions and found the right ones. Discussing the meaning of various concepts (good, wisdom, justice, beauty, etc.), Socrates first began to use inductive evidence and give general definitions of concepts, which was an invaluable contribution to the formation of the science of logic. Socrates became famous as one of the founders of dialectics in the sense of finding the truth through conversations and disputes. The method of dialectical disputes of Socrates was to detect contradictions in the reasoning of the interlocutor and bring him to the truth through questions and answers. He was the first to see in the distinctness and clarity of judgments the main sign of their truth. In disputes, Socrates sought to prove the expediency and reasonableness of both the world and man. He made a turn in the development of philosophy, for the first time placing man, his essence, the internal contradictions of his soul at the center of his philosophizing. Thanks to this, knowledge moves from the philosophical doubt "I know that I know nothing" to the birth of truth through self-knowledge. Socrates elevated to a philosophical principle the famous saying of the Delphic oracle: "Know thyself!" The main goal of his philosophy is to restore the authority of knowledge, shaken by the sophists. His restless soul of an inimitable debater strove with unceasing and persistent labor for the perfection of communication in order to clarify the truth. Socrates insisted that he only knew that he knew nothing. Socrates emphasized the uniqueness of consciousness in comparison with material being and was one of the first to deeply reveal the sphere of the spiritual as an independent reality, proclaiming it as something no less reliable than the being of the perceived world, and thereby, as it were, laid it on the altar of universal human culture for the study of all subsequent philosophical and psychological thought. Considering the phenomenon of the soul, Socrates proceeded from the recognition of its immortality, which was linked with his faith in God. In matters of ethics, Socrates developed the principles of rationalism, arguing that virtue stems from knowledge and a person who knows what good is will not act badly. After all, good is also knowledge, so the culture of intelligence can make people good: no one is evil out of good will, people are only evil out of ignorance! The political views of Socrates were based on the conviction that power in the state should belong to the "best", i.e. experienced, honest, fair, decent and certainly possessing the art of public administration. He sharply criticized the shortcomings of contemporary Athenian democracy. From his point of view: "The worst is the majority!" After all, not everyone who elects rulers understands political and state issues and can assess the degree of professionalism of those elected, their moral and intellectual level. Socrates stood up for professionalism in management matters, in deciding who and whom can and should be elected to leadership positions.

37. Plato's doctrine of the "idea"

Plato (427-347 BC) is a great thinker, dropping with his subtlest spiritual threads this world philosophical culture. Space is a kind of work of art. He is beautiful, he is the wholeness of singularities. The cosmos lives, breathes, pulsates, full of various potentialities, and it is controlled by forces that form common patterns. The cosmos is full of divine meaning, which is the unity of ideas, eternal, incorruptible and abiding in its radiant beauty. According to Plato, the world is dual in nature: it distinguishes between the visible world of changeable objects and the invisible world of ideas. The world of ideas is a true being, and concrete, sensually perceived things are something between being and non-being: they are only shadows of things, their weak copies. The idea is the central category in Plato's philosophy. The idea of ​​a thing is something ideal. So, for example, we drink water, but we cannot drink the idea of ​​water or eat the idea of ​​the sky, paying in stores with ideas of money: an idea is the meaning, the essence of a thing. All cosmic life is generalized in Platonic ideas: they have regulative energy and govern the Universe. They have a regulative and formative power; they are eternal samples, paradigms (from the Greek jaradigma - sample), according to which the whole multitude of real things is organized from formless and fluid matter. Plato interpreted ideas as some kind of divine essence. They were conceived as target causes, charged with the energy of aspiration, while between them there are relations of coordination and subordination. The highest idea is the idea of ​​absolute good - it is a kind of "Sun in the realm of ideas", the world Mind, it deserves the name of Mind and Deity. Plato proves the existence of God by the feeling of our affinity with his nature, which, as it were, "vibrates" in our souls. An essential component of Plato's worldview is belief in the gods. Plato considered it the most important condition for the stability of the social world order. According to Plato, the spread of "impious views" has a detrimental effect on citizens, especially young people, is a source of unrest and arbitrariness, and leads to the violation of legal and moral norms. Interpreting the idea of ​​the soul, Plato says: the soul of a person before his birth resides in the realm of pure thought and beauty. Then she ends up on the sinful earth, where she is temporarily in a human body, like a prisoner in a dungeon. When she was born, she already knew everything. what you need to know. She chooses her own lot; it is already, as it were, destined for its own fate, fate. In this way. The soul, according to Plato, is an immortal essence; three parts are distinguished in it: rational, turned to ideas; ardent, affective-volitional; sensual, driven by passions, or lusty. The rational part of the soul is the basis of virtue and wisdom, the ardent part is courage; the overcoming of sensibility is the virtue of prudence. As for the Cosmos as a whole, the source of harmony is the world mind, a force capable of adequately thinking itself, being at the same time an active principle, helmsman of the soul, controlling the body, which in itself is devoid of the ability to move. In the process of thinking, the soul is active, internally contradictory, dialogical and reflexive. According to Plato, the highest good (the idea of ​​the good, and it is above all) is outside the world. Consequently, the highest goal of morality lies in the supersensible world. After all, the soul received its origin not in the earthly, but in upper world. And clothed in earthly flesh, she finds a lot of all kinds of evils, suffering. According to Plato, the sensual world is imperfect - it is full of disorder. The task of a person is to rise above him and strive with all the strength of the soul to become like God, who does not come into contact with anything evil; in freeing the soul from everything bodily, focusing it on itself, on the inner world of speculation and dealing only with the true and eternal.

So, you have seen how differently, and sometimes diametrically opposed, the concept of “freedom” is interpreted. Reflecting on different approaches, accepting something, and unconditionally rejecting something, we agree that there can be no truly free activity in the absence of choice. Freedom means the state of a person who is able to act in all important matters on the basis of choice. What kind of society can provide such a choice? Obviously, societies where arbitrariness and tyranny of individuals or groups of the population dominate, where the rule of law is violated, where the state exercises complete (total) control over the lives of its fellow citizens, cannot be classified as free. Does this mean that only that society will be free, where the intervention of the state in the life of an individual will be minimal? There are many supporters of this point of view. In the economic sphere of such a society, free enterprise based on the principles of competition reigns, in the political sphere - a variety of political parties, political pluralism, democratic principles state structure. This is a free-thinking society. And the point here is not at all that everyone has the right to say or write anything, but that any idea can be discussed. This process of interaction between people with different knowledge and standing on different points vision, and is the basis for the development of thought. People's lives are regulated only by democratically adopted laws and universally recognized norms of morality. “All that society and the state can do is to encourage freedom, not allowing monopoly in any of the spheres of life. Free from state interference, free to act at their own discretion, individuals will prosper, and their lives will be happy, ”wrote one of the American politicians. However, not everyone accepts this model of a free society. Some scientists and politicians, expressing the mood of a certain part of the population, believe that such unlimited individualism is not good for people. Genuine freedom involves something more than just the non-interference of the state in people's lives. Self-realization of a person is based not only on individual, but also on joint experience, a joint search for solutions, and the creation of a common good.

Therefore, the complement of freedom is cooperation, responsibility, justice, that is, all those values ​​that society must provide. Thus, the supporters of this concept believe that the role of society is more significant than they try to imagine. By uniting in a community, people acquire not only new values, but also collective protection, which is sometimes extremely necessary for them. The state also has a certain regulatory role to play. It not only creates and maintains institutions that guarantee the freedom of citizens, but should take care of a more even distribution of income, and prevent the gap between rich and poor from widening. The ideal of freedom must be complemented by the ideal of social justice. It is also important that the citizens themselves guarantee each other's freedom by conscientiously fulfilling their civic obligations. Thus, the situation of choice develops not only in the "space" of the personal life of each person. As you already know, it also occurs at the level of society as a whole. This is especially evident in the so-called transitional epochs. According to a number of researchers, such eras potentially contain a whole range of directions - alternatives - for further development. Which of them will be supported, for example, by the leadership of the country, can significantly affect the life of the whole society. So the choice in this case is associated with a very high responsibility. Examples of such situations and the consequences of the decisions taken have been preserved for us by the history of the distant and recent past. Basic concepts: freedom, freedom of choice, necessity, responsibility, free society. Terms: deindividualization, predestination.

Test yourself

1) How the concept of "freedom" was connected with the political struggle in the New and Newest time? 2) What can unlimited freedom of choice lead to? 3) How is freedom interpreted in Christian doctrine? 4) Show the influence of natural necessity on the free activity of people. 5) What is the social need expressed in? 6) What is the connection between the concepts of "freedom", "choice", "responsibility"? 7) Expand the various approaches to the interpretation of the concept of "free society". 8) Show the role of the state in maintaining the rights and freedoms of the individual in society. 9) How can citizens guarantee each other's freedom?

Think, Discuss, Do

1. What arguments can support the conclusion about the impossibility of absolute, unrestricted human freedom in society? 2. Which of the two statements below do you think is more true? “Our life is a line that we must, at the behest of nature, describe on the surface of the globe, not being able to move away from it for a single moment.” “The course of things seems inevitable only to those who have betrayed their convictions. History in itself can neither compel a person nor draw him into a dirty business. Man bears the whole weight of the world on his shoulders: he is responsible for the world and himself. 3. How do you understand the expression "Freedom is a choice"? 4. Can you support the following statement with concrete facts: “During the period new history Europe, the general direction of development was the liberation of the individual from all sorts of norms and regulations that fetter his daily life”? 5. Which of the following definitions of the concept of "freedom" seems to you the most accurate: 1) freedom is the absence of any barriers and obstacles; 2) freedom is the conscious adherence to necessity; 3) freedom (free will) is not self-will that can lead to any actions, but regularity, constancy, inexorability in the implementation of moral requirements by a person; 4) is freedom a conscious possibility of historical creativity? 6. Describe various models free society. What are your ideas about such a society? 7. Do you agree with the statement “It is impossible to live in society and be free from society”?

Justify your position. 8. Famous thinker of the XIX century. argued that “legally recognized freedom exists in the state in the form of a law ... Laws are positive, clear, universal norms in which freedom acquires an impersonal, theoretical existence independent of the arbitrariness of an individual. The code of laws is the bible of the freedom of peoples. Comment on this statement. 9. Sometimes freedom is understood as permissiveness. In a social sense, this means complete independence from any norms or restrictions. At the beginning of the XX century. in Russian villages they sang such a ditty:

There is no God, we don't need a tsar, We'll kill the Governor, We won't pay taxes, We won't become soldiers.

What are the consequences of such an interpretation of freedom? Concrete your reasoning with examples.

Work with the source

Read an excerpt from the work of contemporary American social psychologist E. Aronson.

How do we protect our sense of freedom

If persuasive messages are intrusive, then they can be perceived as an invasion of the freedom of individual choice and thereby intensify the search for ways to protect against them. Thus, if a pushy salesman persuades me to buy his product, my first reaction is to maintain my own independence: I would rather leave the store as soon as possible... Such resistance can manifest itself in various and interesting forms. Let's say I'm walking down the street and I'm politely asked to sign some kind of petition. I don't really understand the essence of what they offer me to sign. But at the moment when they explain to me what's what, a certain person stops nearby and begins to openly "pressure" me, demanding that I do not sign anything. In order to resist pressure and retain my freedom of choice, I am more likely to sign the proposed petition ... Of course, people can (and do) succumb to influence and submit to social pressure ... However, when this pressure becomes so pronounced that it threatens our sense of freedom, we not only resist the pressure, but also strive to act in the opposite direction. There is another aspect of the need for freedom and autonomy... Other things being equal, when confronted with information that contradicts their beliefs, people seek, if possible, to find counterarguments. In this way they can keep their own opinions from being over-influenced by others and protect their own sense of autonomy. Questions and tasks: 1) How, according to the psychologist, do people protect their inner freedom and autonomy? 2) Have you ever been in a situation similar topics that are described in the snippet? How did you act in such cases?

Conclusions to Chapter II

1. Science and philosophy have come a long way in understanding society and social entity person. Overcoming the one-sidedness of previous approaches, modern researchers define the essence of man as a unity of the natural, social and spiritual, consider him as a subject of socio-historical activity, a creator of culture. 2. Philosophers and sociologists distinguish three levels of consideration of society: socio-philosophical, historical-typological, concrete-historical. At the socio-philosophical level, the search for a social macrotheory capable of covering the entire variety of types and forms of social relations has long been conducted. Stage and cyclic, formational and civilizational, local and global models of society have been developed. 3. At the historical and typological level, studies distinguish traditional (agrarian), industrial (capitalist), post-industrial (civilizational) societies. There are also civilizations of western and eastern types. 4. In modern social science, the concept of social progress. The inconsistency of progress is noted, often the high "price" of society for achievements in certain areas. Discussions continue on the criteria for progress. At the same time, many researchers believe that true progress is manifested in the rise of humanism, in the creation of conditions for the free development of the individual.

Questions and assignments for chapter II

1. "The evolution of the primitive herd into a consanguineous community led to profound changes in the person himself, to the development of his communicative qualities, the emergence of the rudiments of morality." "The gradual development of a person's communication skills with his own kind contributed to the transition to a higher level of social organization - a consanguineous community." Formulate the problem, the various solutions of which are reflected in the given statements. Which of the two points of view do you find more convincing? If you do not agree with any of them, formulate your own solution to this problem. 2. Analyze two options for typology of societies. Determine the criteria for distinguishing different types of societies. Fill the table.

Types of societies Criteria for distinction

Civilizations of Western and Eastern types

Traditional, industrial, post-industrial societies

3. The German philosopher Fichte stated: “A philosopher who deals with history as a philosopher is guided by the a priori thread of the world plan, which is clear to him without any history, and he uses history ... only to explain and show in living life what is clear and without history. How do you understand the words “a priori thread of the world plan”? Name the ones you know philosophical teachings containing a similar plan of world history. What, in your opinion, are the advantages and disadvantages of the philosopher's view of history? 4. Expand the connection between social progress and the increase in human freedom. How does the increase in human freedom in modern society express itself?

Getting ready for the exam

1. Which of the following characterizes society as a system: 1) a thousand-year history of existence; 2) the relationship of spheres of public life; 3) variability of forms; 4) unpredictability of future states? 2. Which of the following features is characteristic of humans and absent in animals: 1) the action of the mechanisms of heredity; 2) the work of the sense organs; 3) species specialization; 4) articulate speech? 3. Eliminate the excess from the list. Only humans tend to (s): 1) upright posture; 2) moral feelings; 3) articulate speech; 4) use of tools. 4. The transition to an industrial society is characterized by: 1) an industrial revolution; 2) dominance Agriculture over the service sector; 3) the emergence of new information technologies; 4) a decrease in social mobility. 5. Are the following judgments about the interaction of society and nature correct? A. Society as a creator of culture develops independently of nature. B. History knows no examples of the beneficial influence of society on nature. 1) Only A is true; 2) only B is true; 3) both judgments are true; 4) both judgments are wrong. 6. Based on knowledge from social science and history courses, compare reform and revolution according to the following criteria: 1) the depth and scale of the impact on public life; 2) the role of the masses; 3) predictability of consequences. 7. Write an essay based on the following statement: “History itself can neither force a person nor involve him in a dirty business” (J.-P. Sartre).

Not due to external reasons in relation to the subject of activity. There are various approaches to understanding S. in philosophy. From the standpoint of the ontological approach, S. is seen as a fundamental, substantial principle. So understood S. determines the emergence of the world, its essence, the place of man in the world. Within the framework of the epistemological approach to the problem of S., the possibilities and limits of a person's awareness of his own activity are explored, the problem of the correlation between the means and goals of activity, the problem of goal-setting prerequisites, is analyzed. The ethical-psychological approach considers S. as S. of the will and the ability to suppress the will of another person or control it (rule). Within the framework of the sociological approach, socialism is reduced to the possibility of a person changing his place in the system of the social whole. In the early stages of the development of human thought (for example, in Ancient Greece) S. was most often considered as an opportunity to organize the life of a person and the state on the basis of reason, in spite of blind fate. This stage in S.'s understanding is distinguished by the undivided unity of the various principles of its interpretation. In the philosophical and religious tradition of the Middle Ages, S. is an integral characteristic of God, it is the ability to create the world “out of nothing”, guided by good will. Man, as the image and likeness of God, is endowed with this ability within certain limits. Interpretation of S. in the Christian medieval philosophy was fundamental to understanding man, his activities, relationships with God, people, nature. “Love God and do what you want” - this position of Augustine the Blessed was in many ways decisive for the subsequent discussion of the problem of C. At this stage of development philosophical thought the unity of the ontological, epistemological, and ethical approaches to understanding S. is violated. A gap appears between the S. of action and the possibility of its comprehension, between the S. of divine creation and human creative activity. This contradiction is expressed in concentrated form in the dispute between nominalism and realism: divine creation the world was considered either as being carried out “according to reason”, on the basis of the Divine plan, or as occurring involuntarily, spontaneously, proceeding from the non-rationalized will of God. In the Age of Enlightenment, the concept of S. turns into a manifestation of natural laws, freed from the obstacles that the unreasonable human community put up for them. On the other hand, S. as a characteristic of individual action turns out to be an illusion based on a person's ignorance of all the circumstances of his activity. The ontological and epistemological approaches to S. exist, as it were, on their own. AT German philosophy 19th century ontological and epistemological approaches to the concept of S. merge in the concept of S. as an absolute spiritual force, the creative power of the mind and knowing itself with the help of a person - a product and carrier of its creative activity . For many representatives of the philosophy of the XX century. S. is substantial. S. is inseparable from the concept of "human existence" (Sartre). S. as a human activity in the face of Nothing and as the very manifestation of Nothing in human life is considered by M. Heidegger. In the philosophy of N. Berdyaev, S. is the basis of the world, giving birth to both man and God. S. has many faces, it can be tamed by God, good S, and evil, graceless, destructive S. Without referring to the concept of S., it is impossible to explore the specifics of human relationships with the world. S. is the "bridge" that connects the various sides of the initially conflicting human nature, connects the existence of a person and his essence in a special way. C, free action is self-determination, self-determination, the ability to be and remain the cause of oneself. An attempt to imagine an absolutely free action, determined by nothing and no one, runs into paradoxes. Even if we are talking about the Creator of the world, then the world freely created in the act of creation from “nothing” turns into “circumstances”, into something external, which even the Creator must take into account. When it comes to a person, his life is inseparable from external circumstances. But these circumstances are varied, they provide different opportunities for action to the person who makes the choice. Behind the commission of a specific act, behind the choice of a specific method of action, there is a choice, the origins of which are rooted in human nature itself - the choice of value orientations, meaning, direction of all life as a whole. “We are free under duress,” wrote X. Ortega y Gaset. In addition to the above first understanding of S. as self-determination, there is a second understanding of S. as the ability to choose one of the two types of determination, the conditionality of one's own behavior. A person either obeys the “voice of nature”, the voice of his own passions, desires, the voice of the instinct of self-preservation, or decides to follow the path of determining himself by something that is outside the natural and social world - the highest values ​​​​of truth, goodness, beauty, along the path of “superhuman”, transcendent. E. Fromm believes that this form of S. is a necessary intermediate stage in the development of a person. The "best" and "worst" of people do not face a choice, they have already chosen: one is good, the other is evil. The choice exists for the immature person, for the “average”, for the one who still hesitates. Determination by the transcendent, superhuman requires constant personal effort; this is a special type of determination, established for oneself by a person and not dependent on external circumstances. This is a teleological determination that obeys the goal chosen by man, and not the law of causality. This is S., understood as the “necessity of oneself”, the need to be a man, a “powerless god” in conditions not created by me and not subject to me. Thus, the third meaning of S. is the need for a person who has already embarked on the path of following the “human image”, constantly, consciously choose only goodness, truth; it is a conscious effort to maintain the human in oneself. S. takes the form of the highest value of human existence, the embodiment of which becomes the main goal of a person - the meaning of his life. There is another, fourth meaning of S. - this is S. as authorship, S, as if accepting a choice with all its consequences in the material world and thereby manifesting itself as responsibility. A free person is the author of himself, he "signs" his every act. It may seem that another kind of S. is S. of non-action, S. not to choose at all, to remain forever with a “raised foot” for a step into the future that will never be taken. Such an “eternal Oblomov” plays with opportunities, he wants to be everything, without risking anything. Man becomes a slave to his own imagination. S. is lost before it was realized. A person can go the other way. He constantly chooses, but between "private" possibilities, he avoids the choice that would determine his life's most important task. Man in this case turns his life into a series of episodes, he does not want to show "responsible S." following his own path, he leaves the main choice - the choice of the meaning of his life. It is not detrimental to a person to make a “pseudo-choice”, when he makes some vital decision, blindly following traditions, public vengeance. C is thus closely related to the awareness of the contradictions underlying human nature; with the impossibility of evading the choice as a "vital" resolution of this contradiction; with constant efforts to maintain human essence. S. is inseparable from the essence of man.

Each person has their own concept of a free society: freedom of thought, the right to choose, liberation from stereotypes... A society free from the shackles of government and excessive tyranny on the part of the authorities is considered the most desirable in the modern world.

Utopia

Complete freethinking, the absence of barriers to challenging someone's ideas, the low level of influence of various power structures on individuals - all this, according to many years of research, cannot be fully realized in a reasonable society. Most scientists consider a free society a utopia, and all because within certain limits it is impossible to realize such a dream, since in any case the rights of other people will be infringed.

For example, during the consideration of someone's proposal, some people will be dissatisfied and will express their dissatisfaction directly to the author of the idea. Due to the groundlessness of such a protest, any important bill will not be able to enter into force, which is fraught with inhibition of the further development of society.

The term "free society": what do people understand by it?

For many, this concept is associated with emancipation in behavior, in the choice of a sexual partner (bisexuality, homosexuality), as well as with anarchy and complete lawlessness. Few individuals are able to fully understand what a free society really is. The concept of such social groups is deciphered as follows: the rights of the state are limited, it has the ability to intervene in the life of an individual if it is necessary to maintain the normal functioning and development of society. That is, the power structures that represent power can control a person only with a possible threat from his side to other people.

Signs of a free society

free-thinking society key figure is the people and their needs, can not develop without certain factors. Everyone's freedom consists not only in his right to choose, but also in the ability to act as he pleases, naturally, within the framework of established principles and morality.

The signs are:

• Freedom of entrepreneurial activity.
• A large number of political parties representing the interests of different segments of the population.
• Democracy, chosen as the main option for government.
• The daily life of citizens is regulated remotely, with the help of generally accepted democratic laws and

Sociological models of society

Various models of a free society, as well as other social groups, are presented below:

• Functionalist. Society is a stable and relatively stable, integrated structure. It consists of a society whose activities are aimed at ensuring stability, while taking into account the values ​​of the people.
• Sociocultural. Combines the doctrine of man from sociology and anthropology. The following aspects are important here: morality, social norms, the role of a person in the environment, family, the relationship of people to each other.
• Conflict. Society is constantly changing, its changes can be both individual and large-scale. Social conflicts are inevitable, since society is based on forcing some individuals to submit to others.

Examples

Despite the fact that the very concept of a free society is considered a utopia, there are 2 types of political systems of government used in different states. Examples of a free society:

• liberal state.
• Democratic state.

Civil society can also be called free. And from history, the USSR could be cited as an example. But there is one nuance here. Since the formation of the Land of Soviets, the word "freedom" appeared in almost every slogan of various parties. However, over time it became clear that the population of the state can hardly be called a free society. Of course, the utopia was present in some aspects, but still the authorities maintained total control over their citizens (the KGB, intelligence, "vigilant fellow citizens", vigilantes).

Democratic state

Democracy is the fundamental way of governing a country in general and members of various social groups in particular. This is a rather complex, multifaceted concept. A society that is free from excessive attention from the side of justice, and also aimed at realizing the will, desires and interests of the people, is democratic. In modern politics, there are rarely states that choose an exclusively democratic regime of government.

signs

Society, free and democratic, cannot exist without certain conditions. Its development is directly related to the presence of:

• Suffrage (and for each member of society).
• Equality, freedom of speech.
• State power, completely dependent on the opinion and will of the people.
• Parties, organizations that meet the preferences and interests of citizens.

liberal state

In liberalism, the freedom of the individual of each individual citizen is considered the prerogative. Moreover, democracy, various moral principles and foundations are the means to achieve freedom. In a liberal state, no attempts on the part of the authorities to control the spiritual, economic activities of the population are unacceptable. However, there is one thing about this kind of political regime: a society that is free from pressure from law enforcement agencies and other instruments of power is not completely free. The state still controls individuals, as if saying: "You can change and do whatever you want, but you can't change the government." considered an unstable, transitional form of government.

signs

Liberalism is characterized by the following features:

1. political instability.
2. Continuous education of various propaganda
3. on the judicial, executive, legislative, in order to protect citizens from possible arbitrariness on the part of any structures.
4. Implementation of programs that do not have power and popularity among the people.
5. A call for free market relations, the recognition of private property.
6. Acceptance of the rights and freedoms of the people, development of sources of information independent of the authorities.

Vita sine libertate, nihil!
(Life without freedom is nothing!)
Latin saying

Lesson Objectives:

• Educational (cognitive): to give students an idea of ​​what freedom is; show the evolution of the concept of "freedom"; reveal the features of the manifestation of freedom in various spheres of public life; to characterize the most common restrictions and violations of human and civil rights and freedoms.
• Developing: create conditions for the formation of students: logical and figurative thinking; ability to work with written and oral sources; ability to compare homogeneous phenomena; ability to group and classify information.
• Educational : to bring students to the understanding that freedom is an enduring value in any society, to reveal its significance in the life of every person; continue shaping value orientations students by discussing alternative models of human behavior in situations of choice; demonstrate a model of cross-cultural dialogue (on the example of statements by representatives of different cultures and eras about freedom); create motivation to study the subject.

DURING THE CLASSES

Today at the lesson we will talk about freedom. What expressions with this word do you know?(Freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of choice, freedom of creativity, etc.). As an epigraph for the lesson, I offer you the Latin saying Vita sine libertate, nihil!, which translates as "Life without freedom means nothing."

We will consider a number of questions during the lesson: firstly what freedom is, what are its main aspects, how it is limited and how it is violated; Secondly, we will see how freedom manifests itself in various spheres of public life ( in which?- economic, political, social and spiritual), in -third Why do we need freedom. We do not accidentally turn to this topic. Freedom is one of eternal values, and today more than ever it is important to know what freedoms and to what extent we have and how we can protect our freedom.

What is freedom? Let's turn to fragment No. 1 of the didactic material and get acquainted with one of the definitions of the concept of "freedom". The dictionary of S.I. Ozhegov gives us the following definition of the concept of "freedom": it is "independence, the absence of constraints and restrictions that bind the socio-political life and activities ... of society and its members." But this definition was not always so. In different historical eras, freedom was perceived by people in different ways. For primitive man to be free meant to belong to a clan, a tribe, "to be one's own." In antiquity freedom is the ability to control the fate that was in the hands of the gods, as well as freedom from political despotism. In the Middle Ages freedom meant leading a spiritual, righteous, and sinless life. During the Renaissance freedom was understood as the unhindered development of the human personality, the emancipation of the creative consciousness of people. Into the new time this word was written on the banners of all Western European revolutions and symbolized the equality of all citizens. For a man of an industrial, modern society freedom acquired economic and legal meaning. What is freedom for you personally? (this is an opportunity to have political and civil rights; to manage your resources, your capital, your time).

So, we tried to answer the first question of the lesson - what is freedom, as our contemporaries understand it. Name the documents in which human rights and freedoms are enshrined (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, constitutions of countries). Let's turn to task number 2 - this is a fragment of the text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation - and let's see what rights and freedoms are reflected there. We will distribute them according to the spheres of public life. However, there are rights and freedoms that are difficult to attribute to any particular area. These are the so-called personal rights and freedoms. Now read the document and distribute the numbers of articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation by spheres of public life (economic sphere: 8, 34, 37; political - 2, 13; social - 19; spiritual - 28, 29, 44).

So, we partially got acquainted with our rights enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and confirmed your idea that to be free means to have certain rights. The French philosopher Charles Montesquieu said that freedom is the right to do whatever is permitted by law. But sometimes freedom is understood as permissiveness, complete independence from any norms or restrictions. Even the Roman orator Cicero once remarked that freedom is independence from laws. So, you are presented with a choice of two points of view on freedom. What statement do you agree with? Now you are exercising your right to freedom. You choose - this is your free choice of two options - what are these options called? (Alternatives).

Our choice can be conscious or unconscious. let's consider situation of informed choice. Tell me what you could do now if you didn't have to go to this lesson? What made you come here? How conscious and how free is your choice? A conscious choice is not always the right one. A person can drink, smoke, use drugs. Is this a conscious choice? Free? (The choice is free, but entails lack of freedom, dependence). But the choice always remains with the person!

Sometimes choice happens unconsciously. Because of which? (Instinct (“I don’t know what came over me”), due to lack of information or false information). Give examples from your life when you made an unconscious choice.

And sometimes a person is in a situation of false choice. A similar situation is described in the novel by Yaroslav Hasek "The Adventures of the Good Soldier Schweik": "I offer you quartering or burning at the stake of your choice." Why is this a false choice?

Why do you think it is difficult for a person to make a choice? First, a person feels responsible for his choice and, at the same time, uncertain about it. Which exit? (Shift the burden of the decision on someone else's shoulders). On whose shoulders do we usually shift the burden of responsibility? Who do we blame for our failures? (parents, state, God). But when we do decide to make a choice, we face three questions. Let's work with task number 3 of didactic material.

"What I want?" - what does this question reflect? (wants, needs). "What I can?" - what does this question reflect? (Abilities: physical, intellectual, mental, as well as circumstances, that is, the influence of the situation). "What should I?" - what does this question reflect? Who or what forces people to make choices? (Duty, responsibility, conscience, etiquette, moral standards, traditions, public opinion, law, social standards, cultural traditions, etc.). But do the answers to all three questions always coincide? Often a person is torn between opposing aspirations, alternatives, between what he WANTS, CAN and MUST do. Give an example of the discrepancy between the answers to these three questions from your own life experience.

As you can see, there are internal and external factors that influence a person's choice. What applies to internal factors?(Desire, ability and responsibility, conscience). Now we have controllers in public transport, but this was not always the case. If we turn to representatives of the older generation, they will tell you that there used to be cash registers in public transport and passengers, entering the bus or trolleybus, had to throw a coin into the cashier and tear off the ticket. All buses had the inscription "Personal conscience - the best controller." Why do you think it doesn't exist now? Is there no conscience now? Or has it gotten smaller? Conscience is necessary for a person, because often we are responsible not only for ourselves, but also for the lives of other people. For example, what should be the responsibility of the driver? In what state should he start working? (sober, well-rested, not violating the rules of the road).

What applies to external factors limiting human freedom? (Norms of morality, traditions, public opinion, law, social standards and cultural traditions). And let's think about whether absolute, unrestricted freedom is possible? For example, is it possible to consider the hero of Daniel Defoe's novel "Robinson Crusoe" absolutely free, who lived alone on a desert island for a long time? Conclusion: freedom is always relative.

Thus, there are internal and external restrictions on human freedom. What are they needed for? (They are designed to ensure the freedom of people). Society monitors the observance of the norms adopted in it. The state supports the rights and freedoms of the individual in society through legislation. If the freedom of a person and a citizen is violated, then the state restricts the freedom of the violator - how? (Prisons, psychiatric hospitals). However, we should not forget that sometimes our rights and freedoms are restricted illegally. Let's look at possible violations of our rights in various areas of public life.

Economic sphere. How are consumer rights violated? (body kit, cheating, false information). To prevent such fraud, there is a “Consumer Protection Law”, which gives a person the opportunity to assert their rights. How are the rights of employees violated in the labor market? Let's turn to job advertisements (task number 4), because soon you yourself will face the problem of employment. Read the advertisements and name the requirements for employees (gender, age, length of service, qualifications, registration, work experience, etc.). Don't you think that this is a violation of the rights of citizens? This is discrimination in the labor market.

Political sphere. How are political rights to freedom violated? All of you know very well that in our city the "Vladimirsky Central" is still functioning - a prison that used to contain political prisoners who fought for civil rights. Let's read a poem by Alexander Galich (task number 5) and think about it: is it possible to say with certainty that the lyrical hero is not free? Conclusion: even if a person is not physically free, he can remain a free spirit.

spiritual realm. Let's turn to those articles of the Constitution that you referred to the spiritual sphere. How are these rights violated? (Censorship, religious oppression, etc.).

As we can see, our rights and freedoms can be violated in all spheres of public life. And the task of a person is to know their rights and fight for them! It is not enough just to have the right to freedom, you also need to be able to defend it. Let's see how you now understand the meaning of the word "freedom": offer your associations that begin with each of the letters of this word.

FROM words, power...
AT– power, choice, religious tolerance…
O- Responsibility, responsibility...
B- struggle, the future ...
O- restriction, relative freedom ...
D- activity …
BUT– alternative, absolute freedom…

Do we need freedom? Let's read the sentence given in task number 6. So how is it easier to live: free or not free? And what do you prefer: freedom, which entails a difficult choice and responsibility for the decision made, or following the path suggested by someone else, perhaps more intelligent and experienced?

Homework:

• Draw (or describe) a portrait of a free man. What qualities will he have?
• For those who wish: Recall situations from your own life when you left the selection (didn't make a selection). For what reasons? To whom did you shift this responsibility and why? Did you feel the consequences of this decision?

Didactic material for the lesson

1. Freedom is independence, the absence of constraints and restrictions that bind the socio-political life and activities of ... society and its members. (Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language. - M., 1978, p. 648).
2. Read excerpts from the articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and determine which areas of society they regulate.

Articles Constitution of the Russian Federation

Article 2 Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. Recognition, observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen is the duty of the state. Article 8 1. The unity of the economic space, free movement of goods, services and financial resources, support for competition, and freedom of economic activity are guaranteed in the Russian Federation. Article 13 1. Ideological diversity is recognized in the Russian Federation…. 3. Political diversity and multi-party system are recognized in the Russian Federation. Article 17 2. Fundamental human rights and freedoms are inalienable and belong to everyone from birth. 3. The exercise of human and civil rights and freedoms must not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons. Article 19 2. The state guarantees the equality of human and civil rights and freedoms regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership in public associations, as well as other circumstances ... Article 20 1. Everyone has the right to life Article 22 1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person Article 27 1. Everyone has the right to move freely, choose a place of stay and residence Article 28 Everyone is guaranteed freedom of conscience, freedom of religion... Article 29 1. Everyone is guaranteed freedom of thought and speech. Article 34 1. Everyone has the right to freely use his abilities and property ... Article 37 1. Everyone has the right to freely dispose of their abilities to work, to choose the type of activity and profession. Article 44 1. Everyone is guaranteed the freedom of literary, artistic, scientific, technical and other forms of creativity, teaching ...

3. Fill in the table "Factors influencing our choice":

• Required sales representative, male/female, 20 to 40 years old, car, driving license category "B", work experience as a sales representative or sales manager for at least 6 months. Executive, responsible. Salary 25,000-35,000 rubles, fuel, communications are additionally paid.
• The company needs a permanent job: a loader (male), salary up to 15,000 rubles; storekeeper-designer (male), salary up to 16,000 rubles; age up to 45 years. Full social package.
• Pharmacists needed. Experience from 1 year. Work in Gorokhovets, transport and housing are paid, salary is 15,000-20,000 rubles.
• A brand manager is required (male or female, under 35 years old, higher education (marketing specialist), preferably with work experience), salary from 18,000 thousand rubles.
• Required plumber (male, with experience of 1 year, age up to 45 years, salary 12,000 rubles).

5. Read a poem by Alexander Galich. Is it safe to say that prisoners are not completely free?

I choose freedom
But not out of battle, but into battle,
I choose freedom
Just be yourself.
And this is my freedom
Do you need clearer words?
And that's my concern
How can I get along with her.
But sweeter than your stories
I am the pride of my misfortune,
Freedom of government soldering,
The freedom of a sip of water.
(Alexander Galich)

6. How do you understand the following statement of the Polish satirist Stanisław Jerzy Lec:“Those who put blinders on their eyes should remember that the kit also includes a bridle and a whip”?

Sources and literature

1. Constitution of the Russian Federation. Anthem of the Russian Federation (as amended by the law of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation dated December 30, 2008 No. 7-FKZ). - Rostov n / a: Phoenix, 2009.
2. Social science. Tutorial for university entrants / G. G. Kirilenko, M. V. Kudina, L. B. Logunov and others; ed. Yu.Yu. Petrunina. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M., Aspect Press, 2003. S. 330-335.
3. Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language. - M., 1978. S. 648.
4. Fundamentals of State and Law: A Textbook for Applicants to Universities / Ed. Academician O.E. Kutafin. – 5th ed., revised. and additional - M.: Jurist, 1997. S. 74-86.
5. Sorokina E.N. Pourochnye developments in social science. Profile level: 10th grade. - M.: VAKO, 2008. S. 145-149, 396-401.