CC BY
2ОШ МАМЛЕКЕТТИК УНИВЕРСИТЕТИНИН ЖАРЧЫСЫ
ВЕСТНИК ОШСКОГО ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА BULLETIN OF OSH STATE UNIVERSITY
ISSN: 1694-7452 e-ISSN: 1694-8610
№3/2024, 56-70
ФИЛОСОФИЯ
УДК: 101.1 (476)
DOI: 10.52754/16948610 2024 3 6
THE ROLE OF SOCIAL MEMORY IN THE SOCIETAL TRANSFORMATIONS OF MODERN BELARUSIAN SOCIETY: THE THEORETICAL ASPECT
АЗЫРКЫ БЕЛАРУС КООМУНДАГЫ КООМДУК eЗГeРYYЛeР ЖАНА КООМДУК АЦ-
СЕЗИМДИН РОЛУ: ТЕОРИЯЛЫК АСПЕКТ
РОЛЬ СОЦИАЛЬНОЙ ПАМЯТИ В СОЦИЕТАЛЬНЫХ ТРАНСФОРМАЦИЯХ СОВРЕМЕННОГО БЕЛОРУССКОГО ОБЩЕСТВА: ТЕОРЕТИЧЕСКИЙ АСПЕКТ
Naumov Dmitry Ivanovich
Наумов Дмитрий Иванович Наумов Дмитрий Иванович
Candidate of Sociological Sciences, Associate Professor, Belarusian State Academy of Communications
с.и.к., доцент, Беларусь мамлекеттик байланыш академиясы к.с.н., доцент, Белорусская государственная академия связи [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0003-2508-0361
ОшМУнун Жарчысы, №3/2024
THE ROLE OF SOCIAL MEMORY IN THE SOCIETAL TRANSFORMATIONS OF MODERN BELARUSIAN SOCIETY: THE THEORETICAL ASPECT
Abstract
This study employs a socio-philosophical analysis to reveal the role of social memory in the societal transformations of contemporary Belarusian society and highlights the importance of this phenomenon in shaping its socio-cultural development. The theoretical and methodological framework for this research includes societal functionalism, an anthroposocietal approach, the concept of social transformations in postSoviet societies, and an informational approach to the study of social memory. These approaches enable a detailed exploration of how social memory influences societal transformations in modern Belarus, allowing for an assessment of its normative, value-based, and functional potential in establishing and maintaining a normative order, fostering social stability, and generating tension within the socio-cultural space.
Keywords: social memory, societal transformations, modern Belarusian society, normative and value regulations, socio-philosophical analysis.
АЗЫРКЫ БЕЛАРУС КООМУНДАГЫ КООМДУК вЗГвРYYЛвРЖАНА КООМДУК АЦ-СЕЗИМДИН РОЛУ: ТЕОРИЯЛЫКАСПЕКТ
Аннотация
Бул эмгекте социалдык-философиялык анализдин натыйжасында азыркы белорус коомунун коомдук кайра курууларындагы социалдык эс тутумдун ролу ачылып, анын социалдык-маданий eнYГYYCYн аныктоодо бул кубулуштун мааниси жацыланган. Бул изилдеенун теориялык жана методологиялык негизин социалдык функционализм, антропосоциеталдык мамиле, постсоветтик коомдун социалдык кайра тYЗYY концепциясы жана социалдык эс тутумду изилдееге маалыматтык мамиле тYзeт. Бул ыкмалар азыркы Беларус коомунун коомдук кайра курууларын аныктоодо социалдык эс тутумдун ролун ачып берYYгe, ченемдик тартипти тYЗYYДe жана сактоодо, социалдык туруктуулукту камсыз кылууда жана анын социалдык-маданий мейкиндигинде чьщалууну жаратууда бул кeрYHYштYн ченемдик, баалуулук жана функционалдык потенциалын аныктоого мум^ндук берет.
РОЛЬ СОЦИАЛЬНОЙ ПАМЯТИ В СОЦИЕТАЛЬНЫХ ТРАНСФОРМАЦИЯХ СОВРЕМЕННОГО БЕЛОРУССКОГО ОБЩЕСТВА: ТЕОРЕТИЧЕСКИЙ АСПЕКТ
Аннотация
В работе в результате социально-философского анализа выявляется роль социальной памяти в социетальных трансформациях современного белорусского общества, актуализируется значение данного феномена в детерминации его социокультурного развития. В качестве теоретико-методологического основания данного исследования выступают социетальный функционализм, антропо-социетальный подход, концепция социальных трансформаций постсоветского общества, информационный подход к исследованию социальной памяти. Данные подходы позволяют эксплицировать роль социальной памяти в детерминации социетальных трансформаций современного белорусского общества, определить нормативно-ценностный и
функциональный потенциал данного феномена в конституировании и поддержании нормативного порядка, обеспечении социальной стабильности и генерировании напряженности в его социокультурном пространстве.
Ачкыч свздвр: коомдук эс тутум, коомдук кайра тYЗYYлeр, азыркы Беларус коому, ченемдик жана баалуулуктарды женге салуу, коомдук жана философиялык талдоо.
Ключевые слова: социальная память, социетальные трансформации, современное белорусское общество, нормативно-ценностные регулятивы, социально-философский анализ.
Introduction
In the process of development of modern socio-humanitarian knowledge, an interdisciplinary field of research has been formed, the focus of which is on such socio-cultural phenomena as social memory in all its varieties (collective, cultural, historical, transnational, digital, etc.), collective representations and collective consciousness, remembrance and oblivion, commemorative rituals and practices, which are considered as functionally significant components of social development. As O.T. Loiko emphasizes, it is precisely «the existence of social memory, which preserves and translates the content of the value-semantic world of the epoch, that allows a person and humanity as a whole, identifying their actual existence with the existence of past generations, to remain and feel like a unique phenomenon» (Loiko, 2018, p. 14). Currently, this area of research, which has become known in modern socio-humanitarian knowledge as "memory studies", has its own system of theoretical ideas and methodological principles, a specific categorical apparatus, conceptualization schemes and methods of research on public life in a modern context and historical retrospective. All this makes it possible not only to talk about the memorial paradigm that defines the epistemological prospects of the research program of modern socio-humanitarian knowledge, but also to actualize the question of determining its heuristic potential and methodological limitations in the analysis and prognostication of the main problems of social development that are the subject of socio-humanitarian knowledge. Accordingly, the approbation of the theoretical and methodological principles and analytical tools of the memorial paradigm in the context of a socio-philosophical study of the societal transformations of modern Belarusian society is of certain theoretical and practical importance.
Modern Belarusian society can be considered as an example of a transitional type of society, which in historical perspective is the result of the collapse of the Soviet system, and in the genetic aspect acts as a transitional phase from industrialism to post-industrialism. According to V.V. Lokosov, this category explicates the fact that transformation is «a process of significant change in the societal system, which is characterized by qualitative changes in system-forming elements, multi-vector nature and a relatively high rate of their implementation, as well as increased influence of subjective factors» (Lokosov, 2022, p. 172). On one hand, the collapse of socialism as a paradigm of social development and a model of social order gave rise to a systemic crisis that affected all aspects of the life of an ordinary person, for whom institutional disintegration at the individual level meant the need to abandon previous cultural meanings, social values and ideals. The radical change of goals and values caused the disorientation of individual and public consciousness, gave rise to a normative value anomie in society. As A.I. Levko emphasizes, «the lifetime of modern generations of people is a time of constant changes and reforms associated with significant social upheavals caused by changes in the socio-political system, economic and environmental crises, and other challenges of the time» (Levko, 2019, p. 485). This actualized the need to develop new universal normative and value regulations, including through an appeal to the basic component of the social memory of the people. On the other hand, the development of an expansionist technogenic civilization is characterized by a whole range of crisis trends and phenomena in various areas of human activity. Their presence indicates a situation of disintegration of the techno-oriented normative and value basis of the historical process and, in turn, requires an axiological revision of the model of post-industrialism and the development of adequate measures in the field of goal-setting.
In this case, the relevance of the socio-philosophical study of the mechanism of the impact of social memory on the socio-cultural development of modern Belarusian society in the format of
societal transformations is determined by a whole complex of reasons having different origins and functional significance for macrosocial development.
Firstly, the contradictory nature of social transformations determines, at the individual level, a negative perception of the social reality of the surrounding world, the relativization of evaluative processes and phenomena in public life, and at the collective level, the weakening of the normative foundations of social regulation and integration in modern society, the sociocultural foundation of which is «a common cultural orientation, which is a source of legitimization of the normative order» (Reznik, 2003, p. 113). Accordingly, the reduction of the regulatory impact of social norms actualizes the need to identify the role of social memory in overcoming social destruction through the revitalization of social norms and traditional values, as well as the preservation and generation of positive experiences of social practices.
Secondly, the contradictory dynamism of a transforming society complicates the development of the desired image of a collective future based on social ideals and values in the mass consciousness. It represents a rather metaphorical and poorly concretized picture of long-term social development, in which the moralized dichotomy of the possible and impossible, acceptable and unacceptable, permissible and impermissible acts as structural components.In this case, the role of social memory is of interest, which is considered «as a transformation of information about the past, which is fixed in the public consciousness with the help of social and historical facts and influences the interactions of individuals in society» (Tsvetkova, Evchenko, 2023, p. 22), in the constitution of the desired image of the collective future. In fact, it is social memory that should provide this process with a normative and value basis and examples of the most successful historical achievements legitimized by the historical development of the people.
Thirdly, the logic and nature of technogenic development problematize the cultural legitimization of the normative order in society, create negative conditions for the preservation of norms and values that traditionally hold society together at the societal level. As I.V. Leusenko notes, «such samples, necessary for the preservation of society, are not formed when exposed to technology and are becoming more and more thinned in modern conditions» (Leusenko, 2011, p. 42), which contributes to the degradation of the axiosphere and the normative sphere of society. This aspect makes it necessary to identify the role of social memory in preserving traditional value orientations, norms and traditions at the microsocietal level, which prevent social anomie in a society that exists in the mode of technologically determined social transformations.
Fourthly, in modern historical conditions, society «must remember what it has accomplished, what trace it has left in the history of mankind and its own history. Shared memory serves as the basis for the solidarity of society, its ability to set and solve socially significant tasks» (Vereshchagina, Nechipurenko, Samygin, 2017, p. 106). However, according to K.V. Vodenko, the consequence of globalization as a process of cultural homogenization of mankind on the axiological basis of Western civilization «is the destruction of the basic cultural values of peoples, which is carried out by reformatting their historical memory, falsifying the events of the past, their new interpretation, which leads to the formation of a picture of the world beneficial to certain geopolitical forces claiming dominance in the world system» (2020, p. 6). Therefore, the epiphenomenon of transformational processes is the reassessment of the role of historical characters in the development of society, the revision of the pantheon of national heroes and the register of antiheroes, the revision of their
biographical data and the reassessment of their contribution to national history. Often, all these assessment processes are implemented in the format of memorial wars, which, thanks to information and communication technologies and the Internet, effectively fragment the real picture of the historical development of the people, split society on ideological and political grounds. In these conditions, it becomes necessary to identify the role of social memory (both in the form of collective historical memory and in the form of cultural memory) in preserving historical truth and cultural continuity of generations, considered as the fundamental basis of the historical subjectivity of the people.
Fifth, the transformational context problematizes the constitution of the societal order, since it complicates the synthesis of the institutional and normative conditions of society and its socio-cultural dynamics, which «restricts human freedom, puts within the framework of existence, but at the same time gives the opportunity for self-realization by participating in the "common cause", in the organization of the social world» (Pavlov, 2017, p. 51). In the context of variable and dynamic transformational processes that relativize societal transcendence as such, the establishment of normative and value limits of authentic personal existence is problematic for the individual. Therefore, the need to identify the role of social memory in overcoming the destructive impact of the transformational context on societality, considered as a way of transcending existence into invariant social forms, in the constitution of the existential component of the societal order of modern Belarusian society, is actualized.
Thus, the purpose of the study is to identify and theoretically conceptualize the role of social memory in determining and determining the direction of societal transformations in modern Belarusian society. The object of the study is societal transformations as a socio-cultural context of the development of modern Belarusian society, the subject of the study is social memory as a determinant of societal transformations that have a contradictory impact on various spheres of society. At the same time, the term "societal transformations" characterizes the social process of qualitative and, by historical standards, rapid change of the societal system, which «can be considered as a kind of social supersystem, as a "system of social systems"» (Locosov, 2022, p. 150), in a progressive or regressive direction with a change in the hierarchy and content of normative and value regulations of life. Such a radical change is due to the institutional and normative crisis of the former societal system, expressed in a decrease in the effectiveness of the integrative function performed by the societal community in relation to its internal and external environments due to the destruction or weakening of the structured normative order. In the process of societal transformations, the functioning of a stable system of interactions between social actors of different types and levels (individuals, organizations and groups) is destabilized for a certain period of time due to a decrease in the regulatory capabilities of basic institutions of society that determine the rules of the game, while increasing the importance of opportunistic interests and goals of social actors. This leads to a crisis format of social transformation of society, the collapse of old management systems, economic structures, social relations and practices, ideologies, behavioral stereotypes, etc., reduces the ability and readiness of society for self-development. The choice of the subject of the study is due to the complexity and multidimensional determination of societal transformations in modern Belarusian society, in which the role of social memory still remains undefined. Accordingly, the identification and theoretical conceptualization of the influence of social memory on societal transformations makes
it possible to identify and characterize their contradictory parameters and the conflictogenic nature of their course in modern Belarusian society.
Materials and Methods
In modern socio-humanitarian knowledge, theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of social memory have long been formed on the basis of a historical and philosophical analysis of the reception and interpretation of the relevant ideas of representatives of classical and non-classical philosophy who worked in line with the problematic field of social memory, which have heuristic potential in the context of predicting the direction and nature of societal transformations in modern society.
The methodological basis of the research aimed at identifying the role of social memory in the societal transformations of modern Belarusian society are the following theoretical approaches and concepts: societal functionalism (T. Parsons, P. Shtompka, etc.), anthroposocietal approach (N.I. Lapin, T.I. Adulo, O.A. Pavlovskaya, etc.), the concept of social transformations of the post-Soviet societies (T.I. Zaslavskaya, E.M. Babosov, V.V. Lokosov, J.T. Toschenko, etc.). These approaches make it possible to explicate the role of social memory in determining the societal transformations of modern Belarusian society, to determine the normative, value and functional potential of this phenomenon in the constitution and maintenance of normative order and ensuring social stability.
As a basic methodological tool, this work uses an informational approach to the study of social memory, in which this phenomenon is considered as a retrospective type of social information in the form of knowledge, axiological and normative regulations of social activity, artificially formed socio-cultural means and systems for processing, storing and broadcasting information significant for social development. This is due to the fact that at the present stage of human development, the new and most widespread form of social memory, which arose under the influence of the progress of information and communication technologies and digitalization, is digital memory. It acts as a macrosocial information system, which is theoretically generalized and recorded by means of a special sign system the collective experience of mankind in the form of an almost unlimited archive of actual group memories and identifications. Digital memory «exists at the intersection of two main streams: spontaneous digital memory and regulated web-based mobilization of memories» (Zubanova, 2020, p. 29). If in the first case we are talking about a spontaneous and rather chaotic representation of past events in user content, then in the second case we are talking about the administration of commemorative practices and moderation of user content aimed at creating and broadcasting personalized historical narratives, images and assessments of past events.
In a socially constructive aspect, «the digitalization of memory transforms a wide range of cultural processes, in particular, the formation of identity policies of "imaginary communities", which are increasingly not nations, but communities of social networks» (Nicolai, Vilkova, 2021, p. 7). It structures the socio-cultural space of both a particular society and the whole of humanity, builds social communication within reference groups (both in real and virtual space) and includes three forms of social information: operational, prospective and retrospective. At the same time, the operational and retrospective forms of the existence of social information are objectified in the corresponding
components of social memory - operational memory and long-term memory. Accordingly, the main processes of digital memory are: memorization, preservation, forgetting and restoration of social information. Unlike ordinary social memory, for which memorization and forgetting are actually antipodes, each of these processes is functionally closely related to the others, forming a digitalized commemorative space.
In general, the digitalized collective experience of mankind, as the substantial basis of digital memory, includes:
a complex of knowledge and information about the world, fixed in images of the past, historical narratives, social norms, values, traditions, customs and role relationships, in artifacts of material culture, which, thanks to digital technologies, is promptly updated in the public consciousness if the current state of society begins to be associated with some extraordinary events of the past and historical stages of its development;
the institutional and organizational infrastructure of a set of organizations responsible for the transfer of material and spiritual values, maintaining cultural continuity between generations, preserving the past in the present, as a result of which «in the digital age, communicative memory transmitted through specially organized institutions (social networks, mass media, messengers, communication services) acquires the status of cultural memory» (Simons et al., 2019, p. 923);
socio-cultural activities aimed both at reproducing existing patterns of behavior and perception through encoding and decoding cultural patterns and other information significant for the life of individuals, and at users constructing images of the past and externalizing memory in smartphones, online archives, social networks, blogs: «The Internet has absorbed and given new life to all literary genres related to memory, from diaries (and here it is necessary to recall the phenomenon of the blogosphere, in which a private diary is hybridized with the media) to memoirs; brought to life multiuser computer games on historical topics; opened archives, allowed to "reanimate" the presence of historical figures through fake thematic social media accounts» (Tikhonova, Frolova, 2020, p. 83).
However, the digital version of memory characterizes a radical change in the mechanisms of reproduction and translation of social memory in the information society, explicates the transformation of the past into a factor of collective and/or subcultural identification. Indeed, thanks to digital technologies and the Internet, it has become technically possible not only to make any fact of the past an object of reflection, but also to replicate individual assessments and interpretations, turning them into a component of collective discourses about the past.On the one hand, as V.N. Syrov believes, this allows us to «talk about multidirectional memory and its decentralization, due to the decentralization of culture or its ever-increasing polystylistic nature» (2021, p. 89).On the other hand, it captures the situation of the generation of real challenges and threats by globalization processes for the socio-cultural development of modern Belarusian society, which can find their expression in the form of a failure of the mechanism of societal determination of the normative order. That is why the specifics of the impact of modern information processes on the state of public and individual consciousness, which determine the parameters and trends of digitalization of social memory, in the context of ensuring the national security of the Republic of Belarus in structural and functional contexts are considered in the collective monograph of modern Belarusian philosophers «Security of
Belarus in the humanitarian sphere: socio-cultural and spiritual and moral problems» (Pavlovskaya et al., 2010).
The results of the study
In the historical aspect, societal functionalism actually represents «modern structural functionalism and describes the stages of social evolution (directed historical changes in the development of society)» (Danilova, Plotnikov, 2017, p. 18),based on the fundamental theoretical constructions of the outstanding American sociologist T. Parsons. From the point of view of T. Parsons, the integrative unity of modern society is achieved due to the functional coherence of its basic institutional subsystems with the dominant role of the societal community in this process. For T. Parsons, the societal community acts as an «invariant structure of society» (Lokosov, 2022, p. 188), which is a set of social groups organized and ordered on the basis of unified normative patterns legitimized by culture. Characterizing the societal community as the core of the entire social system, at the same time differentiated and segmented, the American sociologist emphasized that «the main function of this integrative subsystem is to determine the obligations arising from loyalty to the societal collective, both for its members as a whole and for various categories of differentiated statuses and roles within society» (Parsons, 1998, p. 25). He particularly focused on the functional significance of the societal normative order, constituted on the basis of general norms, values and normative patterns of role behavior preserved by social memory, in the formation of a «stratification scale - a scale of recognized and legitimized (to the extent that norms and values are assimilated) prestige of the collectives belonging to this community as its members, individuals, as well as statuses and roles common in this community» (Parsons, 1998, p. 27).
T. Parsons emphasized the importance of the normative-value component for the implementation of socially significant functions in modern society: «Values are primary in maintaining the pattern of functioning of the social system. Norms perform primarily the function of integration; they regulate a huge number of processes that promote the implementation of normative value obligations»(1993, p. 111).According to V.V. Lokosov, the American researcher «invested in the content of the "societal" primarily the unified cultural orientation of society as a whole» (2022, p. 149). As I.F. Devyatko emphasizes, values act as a «source of objective, "transcendent" meanings for the general system of action for cultural samples of the cultural subsystem (the latter include value-oriented standards, expressive symbolizations and cognitive ideas)» (2003, p. 129). Due to institutionalization, values in modern society turn into a source of normative patterns of the social subsystem, and through socialization - into normative orientations of social actors acting within certain social roles. From the point of view of T. Parsons, the basic foundations of «cultural legitimization are transcendent in relation to the specific and accidental nature of interests, influence and solidarity, acting at the societal level in the form of value commitments» (1998, p. 28).
The research focus of societal functionalism, which actually asserts a unidirectional linear model of structural and functional differentiation of society as a result of the realization of endogenous potencies and factors, is modernity as an «extremely dynamic and expansive social formation» (Shtompka, 2005, p. 591). The subject of this methodological approach is societal evolution, considered in the form of a universal «historical process of transition from predominantly
primordial, "natural" corporate actors, like a family or a related clan, to intentional corporate actors, the most characteristic examples of which are business organizations of a modern "organizational society"» (Devyatko, 2003, p. 256). This approach focuses on the explication and description of the legitimate foundations of the normative order of modern society, the study of social structures at the macro level, the study of institutional interactions and their long-term consequences, the disclosure of the content and functional significance of socialization as a complex of processes «during which a person becomes a member of the societal community and maintains this status» (Parsons, 1993, p. 104).
For societal functionalism, it is relevant to determine the nature of the influence of deterrent effects on social actors in certain social contexts generated by explication of normative and value regulators in public relations. As an example, one can cite the position of P. Shtompka, who absolutizes the functional significance of the phenomenon of trust in a modern highly differentiated and pluralistic society:«When there is a deep transformation of social systems, when previously existing traditional patterns, rules, roles, obligations, networks of connections are destroyed, and new ones arise gradually, the resulting structural and normative vacuum can compensate for that special "prosthesis", which is trust» (2012, p. 425).However, in modern Belarusian society, as evidenced by the results of sociological research, there is a certain axiological paradox when «through the function of integration of society, mainly modern and universal values are manifested, and through the function of differentiation - traditionalvalues» (Beznyuk, 2022, p. 17).It can be assumed that the social memory of the people not only preserves traditional values (family, tradition, sacrifice, etc.), but also quite effectively actualizes them in the social relations of individuals as basic regulators of vital activity.
The anthroposocietal approach based on the principle of relational activity realism acts as a methodological orientation that is adequate to modern transformational processes and has serious heuristic potential.The essence of this approach is determined by a special view of both man and society, which are understood as equal interpenetrating components of an integrated system constructed by the actions and interactions of people (Lapin, 2005, p. 17). On the one hand, the individual is considered as an active social subject, constructing diverse social practices and cultural meanings. On the other hand, society is interpreted as an anthroposocietal system that includes transpersonal institutions and organizations as material carriers of functions, as well as interpersonal relationships of people involved in the functioning of transpersonal structures and performing their functions.
As the basic principles of the anthroposocietal approach, N.I. Lapin identifies(2006, pp. 27-28):
• the principle of parity and interpenetration of culture and sociality, which means their autonomy and mutual non-reducibility, and also determines the non-hierarchical, network nature of the structure of society;
• the principle of functional inconsistency of social action, which emphasizes the multidimensional understanding of a person as a bio-socio-cultural being, explicates the inconsistency of cultural meanings and significations that act as the basis for social actions of various individuals;
• the principle of incompleteness of anthroposocietal responsiveness, which means incomplete compatibility of personal and behavioral characteristics of an individual, institutional and socio-cultural characteristics of society, which is expressed in a complex and contradictory interaction between them, is the main source of social change;
• the principle of instability of the anthroposocietal equilibrium, which fixes the relative nature of the equilibrium in the personality-culture-sociality system and asserts the universal nature of transformational changes in social time as the main source of the evolution of the societal system;
• the principle of binarity and reciprocity (inversion) of societal processes, which explicates their binarity, multi-vector nature and different functional load, implemented either in the direction of reproduction or qualitative change/development of social systems.
The highlighted principles allow both «to concretize the idea of society as a subject-activity, dynamic and fluid reality» (Lapin, 2021, p. 28) and to actualize the role of social memory as a tool for the accumulation, storage and transmission of information significant to society in the form of knowledge, axiological and normative regulations of social activity, artificially formed socio-cultural means and information processing systems, commemorative practices. The sociocultural «reality of society as a societal system consists of a stream of interpretations permanently implemented by various social actors» (Musiets, 2018, p. 15), which, by assigning certain meanings to social events, form a single semantic space of society and have a reverse effect on social reality. That is why N.I. Lapin emphasizes that the anthroposocietal approach is «understanding society as a flexible anthroposocietal system that exists due to human interactions and is able to change in response to threats of risks» (2006, p. 27). This system has integrity, common societal functions, societal-functional structures and societal processes, the totality of which forms the immediate socio-cultural environment of an individual's life, serves as a spatial cell of society and characterizes its dynamics in certain forms (functioning, evolution and transformation).
The anthroposocietal approach is characterized by a multidimensional, vertically and horizontally differentiated, hierarchized representation of the socio-cultural space. In this space, three independent spheres can be distinguished, in each of which social memory manifests itself in different ways:
• a multicomponent symbolic space of spiritual culture, which represents the objectification of values and norms, including the axiological complex that characterizes the ethnocultural specificity of the social memory of the people and is transmitted from generation to generation;
• the institutional space of the entire complex of social relations, including the totality of socialization agents as components of the organizational infrastructure of social memory;
• the subject space of cultural artifacts, both representing the level and specifics of the cultural development of society, and explicating the commemorative component of social institutions and practices.
Considering society as a societal whole in the context of relational activity realism, N.I. Lapin attributes to each level the performance of certain societal functions based on the identification of three levels of social actions: the action of the individual, the interaction of individuals and societal
interaction(2006, pp. 31-33).It seems that when implementing a number of societal functions, the content of social memory is updated in the following cases:
• at the first level, the goal-setting function involves the construction of individual goals based on the basic values of society preserved by social memory, and the identification function -on the basic values and norms acquired by the individual in the process of socialization, acting as a necessary basis for thinking and social activity;
• at the second level, the integration function involves coordinating the actions of individuals socialized within a common cultural framework, and the differentiation function implicitly actualizes the relevance of the status and role structure of society to its normative and value basis, preserved by social memory and, due to its traditionalism, possessing a certain dysfunctionality in relation to modern role models of behavior.
Within the framework of the logic of the anthroposocietal approach, the problems of the development of national culture are considered in the context of modern socio-cultural transformations that cause structural and functional changes in the social memory of the Belarusian people (Verenich, 2021). This work reveals the moments that are important for identifying the role of social memory in transformational processes: the innovative potential of cultural tradition and national artistic culture in the value-normative structure of modern Belarusian society is determined; the forms and ways of human existence in a risk society as a transformational macromodel are investigated; the mechanisms of promotion and positioning of national culture in the context of overcoming the negative impact of socio-cultural globalization and the functioning of a universal global electronic communication system are revealed.
The relationship between social memory and morality is considered in the works of O.A. Pavlovskaya, who defines morality (as a social institution) and morality (as a structural component of culture) as an immanent source of both historical existence and cultural creativity (Pavlovskaya, 2014) and the socio-cultural factor of modern human life (Pavlovskaya, 2021). The researcher considers morality as a component of ethnocultural identity and one of the leading factors of socio-cultural development, objectified in the moral culture of an individual, and a source of legitimization of the normative social order in modern Belarusian society. In the functional aspect, morality is the basis for the social integration of modern Belarusian society, which plays an important role in preserving the national cultural code, forming the moral culture of individuals. On the one hand, the motivating power of morality is provided largely due to the commemorative practices actualized in modern Belarusian society, which make it possible to actualize the moral potential of folk culture in the conditions of transition to the path of information development. On the other hand, institutionally, morality is in many ways a product of collective activity for the preservation and development of traditional cultural patterns, their implementation into modern social practices as normative regulators of activity.
The methodological significance of the anthroposocietal approach lies in the fact that it considers society as an integral non-equilibrium anthroposocietal system that responds to challenges and threats with qualitative social changes, generating institutional stabilization and normative order out of social crisis and chaos. It reveals the relationship between the subjective and the objective in society, the dialectic of micro and macro levels of social existence, actualizes the importance of a person as an active, conscious social subject, carrier and converter of sociality and culture. It is
important that this approach shows the role of the normative-value component in the socio-cultural determination of societal transformations. Thus, the key «basic values ensuring the integration of Belarusian society are the values of "Human life" and "Order", which are generalized principles of organizing social life, which are the foundation for recognizing and maintaining equal rights of all members of society» (Beznyuk, 2022, p. 16). It is interesting that the terminal status of these values in the axiosphere of Belarusian society and their positive role in programming the constructive direction of transformational processes has been fixed by domestic sociologists for a long time (Babosov, 2001). In addition, the anthroposocietal approach allows us to conceptualize the practice of instrumentalization of social memory in the political and economic spheres, the use of this phenomenon in post-Soviet society as a factor that explicitly determines ideologically motivated and politically controlled changes in macrosocial processes and implicitly creates variable parameters of their course.
The study of social transformations of post-Soviet society is in the focus of close attention of domestic and foreign scientists who seek to form a comprehensive scientific picture of the processes taking place, to identify the mechanism, specifics and their long-term social consequences. Such well-known scientists as T.I. Zaslavskaya, N.I. Lapin, V.V. Lokosov, V.A. Yadov, T.I. Adulo, E.M. Babosov, A.N. Danilov, Ch. S. Kirvel, O.A. Pavlovskaya and others made a significant contribution both to the research of transformational processes and to the development of the theoretical and methodological basis for the socio-philosophical study of a transitional society.
For N.I. Lapin, the category of transformation characterizes «a change in the totality of integral qualities of society, its transition from one qualitative state to another» (2006, p. 34). Considering transformational processes in a global context, V.V. Lokosov asserts their universality and conflictogenic nature: «The modern period of social development is defined in many social theories as a process of global transition (transit, transformation) from the established dominant type of societal system - most often called consumer society - to some other type what will be accompanied by a redistribution of the world order. In the course of this process, the predictability of the development of the existing system of public relations is lost, its imbalance and chaotic nature increases but, at the same time, it is a time of innovation» (2016, p. 18).According to V.V. Lokosov, the logic and direction of this unstable, contradictory and, to a certain extent, programmed by global elites in the interests of the collective West, global process «is determined by objective contradictions between the existing system of social relations and its weak adaptation to the challenges of the time, which are leading the world community to a crisis» (2022, p. 178).The epiphenomenon of transformational processes is the conflictogenic interference of two different vector bases - societal reformation and deformation. It is accompanied by the formation of a critical mass of social risks and, in general, has a destructive effect both on humans, which are the focus of the destructive impact of transformational processes (Adulo, Pavlovskaya, 2006), and on the socio-cultural space and social memory of the people. As E.M. Babosov emphasizes, in relation to post-Soviet society, this actualizes the need to preserve the civilizational and cultural code of society, which «represents a system of unique cultural archetypes, images and values, polished over centuries of historical development of the people, characterizing the identity, mentality and spiritual and moral attitudes of this people» (Kotlyarov, 2017, p. 111).
In the normative and value dimension, an immanent component of transformational processes is the inversion of the basic normative principles of the social organization of society, which are a product of the sociocultural evolution of society and remain in the social memory of the people. By their nature, these principles are altruistic and collectivist, therefore they are poorly intertwined with the ideological principles of subsidiarity, individual freedom and personal responsibility for one's fate that underlie the global social world order. As a result, the divergence of traditional and modern regulatory frameworks has a great conflict potential, the actualization of which can occur at any time due to various factors and random circumstances. Considering the problems of societal evolution, T.I. Zaslavskaya revealed the fact that the transformation of most post-communist societies at the first stages is accompanied by the destruction of normative and value foundations in the field of spiritual and intellectual life and culture(2002, p. 92). As a result of transformational pressure on the spiritual sphere of society, the role of morality (as a social institution) and ethics (as a structural component of culture) in the constitution of human social existence decreases, the importance of communalist and altruistic norms preserved by social memory as regulators of the «life-world» decreases (Pavlovskaya, 2021). The dominance of utilitarianism, pragmatism and consumerism, which have become the normative basis for social integration in global society, leads to destructive changes in the constitution of value orientations and motivations of individuals, to the emergence of an atomized and maladapted person. Accordingly, there is a problem of preserving value-semantic reproduction in society on its own ethno-cultural basis, which is necessary for the constitution of alternative social ideals that can ensure the integration of society based on the synthesis of traditional and modernist values. For modern Belarusian society, this aspect actualizes the problem of selecting socially significant information about the past, that should be preserved by social memory, as a basis for using selected information for the urgent needs of the present and planning the future.
Conclusions
Thus, social memory is a complex socio-cultural phenomenon in terms of structure and content, which plays an ambivalent role in the societal transformations of modern Belarusian society. On the one hand, it preserves the normative and value regulations of life activity that are significant for the entire Belarusian society, which represent the general cultural norms, values and normative patterns of role behavior necessary for the constitution of the societal normative order. In the socio-cultural space of modern Belarusian society, social memory plays an important role in the formation of collective ethno-cultural identity and maintaining social integration based on shared memories, historical symbols, group assessments and memorial narratives. In the functional aspect, social memory allows for the normative regulation of individual and collective behavior, the unity of the community, its stability and integrity, but at the expense of a certain socio-cultural unification and simplification of the construction and legitimization of cultural meanings and canons. On the other hand, the crisis of man-made civilization, which directly affects modern Belarusian society, has an impact on the parameters of socio-cultural development of a transitive society, social time and social space, which meaningfully, functionally and processually transform social memory, mechanisms of accumulation and reproduction of collective memories in modern society. As a result, the formation and maintenance of the space-time continuum of social memory in the context of the crisis of a man-made civilization seeking to destroy it becomes normative problematic and resource-intensive.
ОшМУнун Жарчысы, №3/2024
References
1. Адуло Т.И., Павловская О.А. (2006). Человек в условиях социальных трансформаций: философско-антропологический анализ. - Минск: Беларуская навука. - 311 с.
2. Безопасность Беларуси в гуманитарной сфере: социокультурные и духовно-нравственные проблемы (2010). / О. А. Павловская [и др.]; под. ред. О. А. Павловской; Нац. акад. наук Беларуси, Ин-т философии. - Минск: Беларус. навука. - 519 с.
3. Белорусское общество в контексте цивилизационно-культурного кода: социологическое измерение (2017) / И.В. Котляров [и др.]; редкол.: И.В. Котляров (гл. ред.) [и др.]. - Минск: Беларуская навука. - 392 с.
4. Верещагина А.В., Нечипуренко В.Н., Самыгин С.И. (2017). К проблеме определения социальной памяти: понятие, основные характеристики, функции и роль в формировании патриотизма // Историческая и социально-образовательная мысль. Том. 9. № 1. Часть 2. С. 97-107.
5. Воденко К.В. (2020).Историческая память в социально-гуманитарном дискурсе: многообразие мнений и подходов //Вестник ЮРГТУ (НПИ). № 4. С. 5-13.
6. Данилова Л.С., Плотников М.В. (2017). Механизмы социального взаимодействия: монография. - Н. Новгород: изд-во НИСОЦ. - 128 с.
7. Девятко И.Ф. (2003). Социологические теории деятельности и практической рациональности. - М.: «Авантиплюс». - 336 с.
8. Динамика ценностных ориентаций молодежи в трансформирующемся обществе (2001) / Е.М. Бабосов [и др.]; под ред. акад. Е.М. Бабосова. - Минск: ИООО «Современное слово». - 160 с.
9. Заславская Т.И. (2002). Социетальная трансформация российского общества: Деятельно-структурная концепция. - М.: «Дело». - 568 с.
10. Зубанова Л.Б. (2020). Медиа-репрезентации памяти: доминирующие коды прочтения травматичных событий в интернет-пространстве // Научный журнал «Дискурс-Пи». 2020. № 4 (41). С. 26-39.
11. Лапин Н.И. (2005). Антропосоциетальный подход: методологические основания, социологические измерения // Вопросы философии. № 2. С. 17-29.
12. Лапин Н.И. (2006). Антропосоциетальный подход // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. Том IX. № 3. С. 25-42.
13. Лапин Н.И. (2021). Российский проект цивилизационного развития» и антропосоциокультурный подход // Проблемы цивилизационного развития. Т. 3. № 1. С. 6-42.
14. Левко А.И. (2019). Социокультурные предпосылки инновационного развития общества: философско-методологический анализ. - Нац. акад. наук Беларуси, Ин-т философии. - Минск: Беларуская навука. - 508 с.
15. Леусенко И.В. (2011). Социетальная социология: предпосылки развития и экспликация методологической позиции // Известия вузов. Северо-Кавказский регион. Общественные науки. № 6. С. 40-44.
16. Лойко О.Т. (2018). Миф - архетип - текст - литургия: бытие социальной памяти. -Томск: Дельтаплан. - 194 с.
17. Локосов В.В. (2016). Переход от общества к со-обществу: концептуальные аспекты // Проблемы развития территории. Вып. 5 (85). С. 18-28.
18. Локосов В.В. (2022). Социология радикальных изменений: трансформация российского общества в 1987-2020 годах. - М.: ФНИСЦ РАН. - 552 с.
19. Мусиец П.В. (2018). Актуальные дескрипции (пост)современного общества в социально-философском контексте // Вестник Вятского государственного университета. № 3. С. 13-20.
Вестник ОшГУ, №3/2024
20. Национальная культура в контексте социокультурных трансформаций (2021). / М. И. Веренич [и др.]; науч. ред. В. А. Максимович. - Минск: Беларуская навука. - 456 с.
21. Николаи Ф.В., Вилкова Ю.В. (2021). Дигитализация памяти и «икономия» эпохи неолиберализма // Современная научная мысль. № 3. С. 6-10.
22. Павлов А.П. (2017). Экзистенциальная составляющая социетального порядка // Вестник Челябинского государственного университета. № 7 (403). С. 50-55.
23. Павловская О.А. (2014). Моральный фактор в жизни человека и общества: исторические уроки и современные проблемы. - Минск: Беларус. навука, 2014. - 578 с.
24. Павловская О.А. (2021). Мораль в транзитивном обществе: социально-философский подход. - Минск: Беларуская навука. - 308 с.
25. Парсонс Т. (1993). Понятие общества: компоненты и их взаимоотношения // THESIS. Вып. 2. С. 94-122.
26. Парсонс Т. (1998). Система современных обществ / Пер. с англ. Л.А. Седова и А.Д. Ковалева. Под ред. М.С. Ковалевой. - М.: Аспект Пресс, 1998. - 270 с.
27. Резник Ю.М. (2003). Введение в социальную теорию: Социальная системология. - М.: Наука, 2003. - 525 с.
28. Саймонс Г.Д., Мухин М.Ю., Олешко В.Ф., Сумская А.С. (2019). Цифровизация коммуникативно-культурной памяти и проблемы ее межпоколенческой трансляции: методика междисциплинарного исследования // Коммуникативные исследования. Т. 6. № 4. С. 906-939.
29. Социокультурные практики населения Беларуси в условиях цифровой трансформации (2022) / Д.К. Безнюк [и др.]; науч. ред. Д.К. Безнюк; - Нац. акад. наук Беларуси, Ин-т социологии. - Минск: Беларуская навука. - 195 с.
30. Сыров В.Н. (2021). К вопросу об особенностях формирования распространения и трансляции памяти в сетевом пространстве // Вестник Томского государственного университета. № 462. С. 87-95.
31. Тихонова С.В., Фролова С.М. (2020). Историческая память и медиальный поворот: цифровизация прошлого // Вестник Поволжского института управления. Том 20. № 4.С. 78-85.
32. Цветкова И.В., Евченко О.С. (2023).Динамическая структура коллективной памяти с позиций методологии социального конструктивизма // Вестник Вятского государственного университета. № 1 (147). С. 20-28.
33. Штомпка П. (2005). Социология. Анализ современного общества: Пер. с польск. С.М. Червонной. - М.: Логос. - 664 с.
34. Штомпка П. (2012). Доверие - основа общества. Пер. с пол. Н.В. Морозовой. - М.: Логос. - 440 с.
