|
ГЛАВНАЯ
> Вернуться к содержанию
Sociodynamics
Правильная ссылка на статью:
Artemov V.A., Novokhatskaya O.V.
From «absolute» time to «getting control over time»: theoretical aspects of social time in publications of the 1920-1930s
// Социодинамика.
2022. № 4.
С. 57-71.
DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2022.4.34006 URL: https://nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=34006
From «absolute» time to «getting control over time»: theoretical aspects of social time in publications of the 1920-1930s /
От «абсолютного» времени в «овладению» временем: теоретические аспекты социального времени в работах 1920-1930-х гг.
Артемов Виктор Андреевич
доктор философских наук
главный научный сотрудник, Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки Институт экономики и организации промышленного производства Сибирского отделения РАН
630090, Россия, Новосибирская область, г. Новосибирск, пр. ак. Лаврентьева, 17, оф. 329
Artemov Viktor Andreevich
Doctor of Philosophy
Chief Scientific Associate, Institute of Economics and Organization of Industrial Production of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Siberian branch)
630090, Russia, Novosibirsk, Prospekt Akademika Lavrentieva 17, office #329
|
arttime@ieie.nsc.ru
|
|
|
Другие публикации этого автора |
|
|
Новохацкая Ольга Викторовна
кандидат социологических наук
научный сотрудник, Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки Институт экономики и организации промышленного производства Сибирского отделения РАН
630090, Россия, Новосибирская область, г. Новосибирск, пр. ак. Лаврентьева, 17, каб. 329
Novokhatskaya Olga Viktorovna
PhD in Sociology
Scientific Associate, Institute of Economics and Organization of Industrial Production of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Siberian branch)
630090, Russia, Novosibirsk, Prospekt Akademika Lavrentieva 17, office #329
|
olganovo@ieie.nsc.ru
|
|
|
Другие публикации этого автора |
|
|
DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2022.4.34006
Дата направления статьи в редакцию:
30-09-2020
Дата публикации:
06-05-2022
Аннотация:
В статье рассматриваются малоизвестные в российской и зарубежной литературе положения российских ученых по социологическим аспектам социального времени. Все они, на наш взгляд, являются пионерными в области социологии времени. Анализируются такие понятия как «прошлое, настоящее, будущее время, их содержание и соотношение», «время как процесс изменений», «использование времени и овладение временем», «время индивида и время социальной системы», «биологическое время» как шаг к социальному времени. Начало 20-го века показало органическую связь развития естество- и обществознания и социальной практики, деятельности. Причем наиболее отчетливо эта связь проявилась в области представления о времени, отношения к времени Публикации, представленные в статье, идейно связаны с социальной практикой исследований времени, являются истоками теории социального времени. Отмечается, что первое в мире социологическое исследование бюджетов времени было проведено в Петрограде в 1921-1922 гг. П.А.Сорокиным. Авторы старались находиться в социологической области, понимая социологию как науку о функционировании и изменении социальных систем, представленных «погруженными» в культурно-институциональную среду подсистемами субъектов, их деятельности и отношений между ними. При подготовке данной статьи авторы обращали внимание на положения ученых, имеющие именно концептуальное значение как для науки, так и для решения реальных проблем учета и использования времени.
Ключевые слова:
социальное время, социальная система, бюджет времени, использование времени, социальные группы, социальные изменения, социология времени, прошлое, настоящее, будущее
Статья подготовлена по плану НИР ИЭОПП СО РАН, проект XI.179.1.1. «Социальные аспекты демографической и продовольственной безопасности России и сибирских регионов» № АААА-А17-117022250120-9.
Abstract: The article addresses those publications by Russian scientists on sociological aspects of social time, which are little known. In our opinion, all of them are pioneering in the area of sociology of time. The focus is on such concepts as «the past, the present, and the future time, their content and correlation»; «time as the process of change»; «using time and control over time»; «time of an individual and time of a social system»; «biological time» as a step towards social time. It is indicated, that the first sociological study on time budgets was conducted in Petrograd in 1921-1922 by P.Sorokin. We tried to remain within the field of sociology, understanding sociology as a science about functioning and changes in social systems; these social systems are presented by the subsystems of the subjects, their activity, and relations between them, «immersed» into the cultural-institutional environment. When working at this article, the authors focused on those statements of the researchers which are of conceptual significance for both the science and the solution of real time-budget problems.
Keywords: social time, social system, time budget, time use, social groups, social changes, sociology of time, the past, the present, the future
Introduction
Beginning of the XX century
has shown organic interdependence of the development of natural and social
sciences, and social practice. This interdependence has become more apparent
when speaking about the concept of time and attitude to time use.
A theory of relativity and
space-time, developed by G.Minkovsky and A.Einstein, which might seem to be
quite abstract and distant from real life, has nevertheless made great impact
on change in human perception of time. It is relevant to note that this theory per se was to a certain degree a
manifestation of the processes occurring in a global society in the beginning
of the last century.
We tried to remain within the
field of sociology, understanding sociology as a science about functioning and
changes in social systems; these social systems are presented by the subsystems of the subjects, their activity, and relations
between them, «immersed» into the cultural-institutional environment.
The article pays special
attention to theoretical works and separate statements of the Russian
researchers of the 1920s and the1930s in the sociology of social time.
The article is aimed at showing the
priority of the Russian researchers in stating, defining, and solving the questions
on social time studies and analyzing the discourse.
The main task is to reveal and present
some rare statements on social time (without specifying the details).
The period of the1920s and the1930s is
characterized by high empirical activity: more than 50 time-budget surveys of
various social groups – from schoolchildren to high officials/executives – were
conducted, with 27 thousand respondents being surveyed. Undoubtedly, this is the Russian and soviet
priority.
The characteristic
feature of this period, to be more exact, two periods (the 1920s and the 1930s),
on the one hand, was the state of the society, its economy, education and
culture, and on the other hand, the problems of its development.
1. A. Bergson’s ideas as a starting point
By the time when the book by I.N.Djakov [8],
devoted to the issues of time came out, Russian philosopher L.M.Lopatin [12]
and French philosopher A.Bergson [4, 5] had had their publications, related to
the problem, published in Russia. (It is also necessary to mention the work of
a French sociologist E.Durkheim, who proved
that the concept of time was related to the people’s «natural» and «social»
life, i.e. it originated within the nature and society; he emphasized a
collective character of time as a «tempo» [9, p.56–62]
and initiated the emergence, spread and further development of the term «social
time»).
According to L.M.Lopatin, the most important
characteristic of time is that «it flows, incessantly passes». «The past does
is already gone while the future does not exist yet; all time
changes pass by a certain motionless moment – the present … the whole
fact of time exists in its unreality». What is actual is an elusive moment of
the present, an instant that has no duration and reality [12, p.290–300]. As I.N. Djakov notes, this idea is a
reproduction of time perceived as a homogeneous straight line, which was
characteristic of mechanical natural sciences.
I.N.Djakov gives A.Bergson a credit for the
struggle against such an understanding of time. The French philosopher, who was
very popular in Russia (whose works were published in Russian, and in 1913-1914 a five-volume issue of
his collected works was printed) wrote that «no other question was neglected by philosophers to any greater degree than a
question on time; however, everybody unanimously declares it to be fundamental» [4,
p.6].
I.N.Djakov considered that
A.Bergson had made a great contribution to the field under study. While
A.Einstein and G.Minkovskiy put an end to the Newton’s idea of absolute time in physics, A.Bergson
did the same in philosophy. He studied the phenomenon of comprehension of time
which was, certainly, one of the major steps to «getting
control over» time. I.N.Djakov sees A.Bergson’s merit in the struggle
against understanding of time as a homogeneous straight line. Influenced by
A.Bergson’s ideas, I.N.Djakov with his essentially materialistic view on time,
took the first step towards the concept of «social time». Time is integral; its
characteristic feature is continuity, and integrity is «intensive». «Any
activity (expression of will) and any movement (expression of force) take place
in time and are necessarily strongly attached to the agent or to the
centre» [8, p.15]. Time is a «peculiar
process of non-spatial changes of exclusively qualitative character» [8, p.7].
Concerning the characteristics and correlation
of times, I.N.Djakov writes: «In the past we feel powerless (its events
are not any more in our power); at present – we possess effective initiative,
connected with all our past; in the future we are freely creating» [8, p.6]. The future reality is
not predetermined, but it is «creative».
Assuming that the present time contains all
the past as voided of activity, but still living «contemplative» fact,
and all the future, as an unpredetermined, an a priori creative «potential» [8, p.7], I.N.Djakov
underlines an active role of an individual; not only a contemplative
individual, but also the one, acting as a subject of activity.
The essence of I.N.Djakov’s statements lies in
cohesion of time and activity, in the influence of the past on the present and
the future; in the ability and the role of human activity concerning the
present and especially the future time.
2. It is necessary to
remember the link of times
N.A.Berdjaev also draws attention to time
issues in his publication [2]. He opposed only to «phenomenological» time and
favored time connection «with authentic being» and the recognition of
ontological time. The ground for his understanding of time is the idea of time «as
the intrinsic period», «an intrinsic epoch of eternity» when «the essence of
being» is understood as the process rather than a «motionless eternity» [2,
p.402-403]. Of course, N.A.Berdjaev as a religious philosopher did not do
without «the divine reality», which «can penetrate the time, break off time
chains, enter into it and become a prevailing force». But when he wrote about «the
deepest forces, divine and mysterious for us, which can interfere into the
world process from the world of eternity» [2, p.404–405], one can understand
them not only as being divine, but also as earthly and cosmic forces that are
not known to humans well.
N.A.Berdjaev as well as L.M.Lopatin, attached
excessive importance to the infinite smallness of the present time; and the «rupture»
of time into the past, the present and the future leads him to the conclusion
that «there is no real time» [2, p.406].
His
main thesis was that there is unity of the
past, present and the future time; he refused to give unconditional and rather abstract
preference to the future time, to worship only the present and deny the past.
As a reaction to the extreme revolutionary ideas (and deeds), which appealed to
finish with the
past, N.A.Berdjaev wrote about the necessity of «genuine and upcoming» historical reality which is in the
past time and without which there would be no present and no future. Also, N.A.Berdjaev
wrote about what «a
complete life that
combines three moments of time – the past, the present and the future» is like;
he emphasized that «historical process has a conservative and revolutionary
nature», and that «only interaction of these fundamentals creates history»; «in history
…the true, “noumenal” time, rather than the formal time operates»,
and it is impossible
to turn away
from the past for the
sake of «the cult of future» [2, p.407–409].
This priority of the past has allowed
N.A.Berdjaev to carry out a rather objective analysis of preconditions and
formation of a new social system, which he called «Russian communism» [3]; to
explain the rise of a new system on the basis of previous development of the
country. N.A.Berdjaev considered that the
Russian revolution, possessing «inherited characteristics of any revolution» «is
generated by the specifics of the Russian historical process»». «By the time when
revolution took place, the old regime was absolutely decayed, exhausted and
weak», and «Russia
was threatened with complete anarchy, anarchical disintegration», which «was
stopped by the communist dictatorship» [3, p.109].
At the same time, N.A.Berdjaev
practically excluded the future time from consideration, that
sharply hostile international environment in which the process of formation of
the real «Russian communism» took place. Moreover, under these conditions, he
reproached the new social system for «extreme etatism»,
«ardor for technical civilization and industry» [3, p.142], without which this
system could not protect itself, in our opinion.
3.
Actual present time and necessity of novelty of the future time
A famous philosopher S.Askoldov begins his
article [1] with the remark that «for a long time, philosophical thought has
been trying to go beyond the limits of time. It «is made by a simple negation
of the importance of time for this or that area of life» [1, p.80]. As a matter of fact, later, this statement,
though predominantly related to the exact sciences, was repeated by J.Whitrow [20], who used a more appropriate term «time
elimination». E.Meyerson is considered to be the first person to formulate the
term «time – elimination» [13, p.225]. «Instead of ignoring time aspect of
nature as it was done by Archimedes, mathematicians and physicists of New time tried to explain time through space, and
philosophers, especially idealists helped them in it» [20, p.13]. Similar
approach was used in biology. In general, it is one of the major principles in
the development of any science: for the
time being to eliminate from its structures the insufficiently
known or unexplored areas, which are not absolutely clear or cannot fit into
the existing patterns. As a result, it did not impede development of science
and did not remove unresolved problems, but made knowledge more certain and
practically suitable.
S.Askoldov’s main thesis was that the answer to
the question what time is lies in the answer to the question «what change is.
Change … makes the root or the essence of time … Change can be defined as the
unity of the past, the present, and the future. This consolidation occurs only
in the mind or through consciousness». Here the idealistic component is
very strong as the author refuses to admit that the objective reality is «able»
to change: «the area of material changes, if not to consider consciousness of
the observing subject, would as a matter of fact, lose its changeability» [1,
p.81]. «Change or time, which is basically the same, is a state of mind in the
first place»; it is «psychological time» which has «its own individuality and
subjectivity, and in this sense relativity» [1, p.82].
Relativity manifests itself in the fact that
different people in different psychological conditions have «unequal range or
duration of the present». According to S.Askoldov, «…unequal ranges of various
fragmented parts of present reality as if with concentric circles surround
certain general “present time”, common for certain events» (and subjects),
which is «almost point-like» [1, p.85], or is only a moment, as it is viewed by L.M.Lopatin and N.A.Berdjaev).
But in this psychological time S.Askoldov
points at «the objective content» which consists, firstly, in the unity of
three times, and secondly, in coincidence of «the central median point»-«now»
or «at the present time». Ontological time as «changeability of life», in his
opinion, should be distinguished from physical time, measured only by movement [1,
p.83].
Unlike N.I.Djakov, S.Askoldov does not attach
great philosophical and even more so sociological importance to the theory of
relativity as it does not cancel out the «unequivocal and universal» «now» or «present».
Referring to the facts of unambiguous «now», S.Askoldov considers that «the
cause of time is something objective». Also, this position was not shaken by
the relativity theory as, in his opinion, «the image of time in the form of
movement is not only one of its special cases (illustrations), but an
illustration, most deforming its nature». Basically, «time and space are the
forms of experience only coinciding, even in the area of senses, rather than
being inseparably linked with each other» [1, p.84–88].
Considering «various ways of philosophical
overcoming of time», S.Askoldov assumes that «the fullest philosophical
liberation from time» is presented in the theory of time by I.Kant, in which
time is considered only as a mental form, which S.Askoldov called the most «arbitrary
and unfeasible philosophy in history». According to S.Askoldov, «time, i.e.
change, is not an external form to life, as if imposed on life from the
outside, by cognition, but it is the characteristic of the very being, its
ontological modus or an attribute» [1, p.91]. S.Askoldov also notes the
advantage of Kantian theory, which lies in the fact that there is a possibility
of partial knowledge of the «thing in itself» when considering it beyond time limits, which seems also important
for the process of human knowledge. In ontological sense S.Askoldov attached
complete negation of time to «sublimated idealism» (Rikkert, Marburg school, Gusserl, but not to Platon and Hegel),
which assert that «the ideal does not have any relation to time»; the ideal is
conceived as «negation of almost all basic predicates of the real – time,
causality and, in general, energetics». According to S.Askoldov, in time issues
such idealism «is absolutely fruitless», and it is necessary «to appeal to the
forms of overcoming time in which the timeless is understood as being connected
with time through a real and continuous bond, and is even generating it» [1, p.
91–92).
S.Askoldov considers three theoretical types of
time interrelation. Firstly, the past, the present, and the future together
become the present. Secondly, «only the past can be transformed into the
present, preserving the force of the future as not having turned into the
reality yet». Thirdly, preservation of the force of the past under the
transformation of the content of the future into the present. In the first case
«there would be a struggle where, finally, non-existence/death would constantly
win against life». The result of the second case would be a «considerable filling
up of our empirical world… from which the death sting would be pulled out». «Transformation
of the past into the present designates only negation of dying, but is not
equivalent to the cancellation of creativity and novelty; cancellation of the
future is an inevitable mental refusal of
the creativity of the new». «The idea of the best, highest/supreme world should
induce us … mentally to transform the
past and the future not into nothing,
but in the very being of the present» [1, p.93–94]. We would like to remind you the
words of the first Russian sociologist N.G.Chernyshevskiy about the future: «Aspire
to it, work for it, approach it, and transfer everything that can be
transferred from it to the present» [6, p.426]. Such a completeness of life «for
which there cannot be … future any more, inevitably leads to a complete
abolition of time in terms of its division into three times. And full abolition
of time is equivalent to the cancellation of any change. Change is impossible
without time and vice versa» [1, p.96].
Thus, S.Askoldov, recognizing the significance
of the past time, actualizes the present
time and attaches great importance to the
future time, to a certain extent, confirming the fundamental importance of
novelty and change for a person and the society as social subjects.
4. The
end of absolute time
The important propositions on
social and sociological range of problems were also stated by researchers
involved into the field of natural sciences.
In 1922 in Petrograd, a brochure of an academician
A.E.Fersman «Time» was published, which was permeated with the spirit of activity of
thought, functioning, the idea of mastering/control over time», and «victory
over it» [10]. A.E.Fersman, as though further developing the «subjectivism» of
A.Bergson, emphasizes the struggle of a human thought against time; human
thought, «which advances its course in its creative dreams»; «creative thought
is winning and will win against time» [10, p.3–4].
Substance, energy, space, and
time per se have become relative in
G.Minkovsky and A.Einstein's theories, which, according to A.E.Fersman, «have
destroyed a belief in grandiosity and invincibility of time; removed the “aura
of inviolability” from Chronos, and dared to shake our own views» [10, p.12]. Of course, these words of A.E.Fersman are not
only related to a physical or mathematical theory. Here we come across such
terms as «to win the victory over time», «to seize control over time», which
have primarily social and social-psychological meaning, though being originated
from the pure theory. They reflect that state of mind, fundamental changes
occurring in science and society, those expectations from the future which have
arisen at that period.
A.E.Fersman
writes about penetration of time issues into other sciences, revival
of historicism, and he also draws attention to the question, whether it is
possible to get control over time [10, p.9].
In the research of another
Russian scientist A.L.Chizhevskiy, started in 1915, statistical regularities of the
course of historical processes on our planet in which solar activity
is of great importance were demonstrated at first in the form of
hypothesis, and further as a proven fact [7]. A.L.Chizhevskiy worked in an
interdisciplinary field, which covered astronomy, history, physiology,
psychology, and sociology. His research was conducted mostly at the end of the
1910s and in the 1920s of the last century. In A.L.Chizhevskiy's works time is
studied in its relation to space, sun, and nature; it is not viewed as absolute and unchangeable anymore in its «objective»,
«causal» influence on the life of humanity. Now it has become possible
to speak of the «solar» content as included not only in the ordinary,
individual time (which was recognized before), but also into social time in its
historical modus.
Of course, the relativity theory in
itself was of a little significance for the social life and for sociology. However,
with
respect to social and psychological aspects it was very important to overcome
the views of absoluteness of time, its complete independence of a human being
and his activities. It was specifically this discovery in physics that prompted
scientists to focus on studies in the field of social time, on changes in
psychological research on time; formation of the foundation of sociology of
time as a special branch of sociological science is also due to this event.
5. The first Russian sociologist
In the early 1920s P.A.Sorokin could be
characterized as the most advanced Russian sociologist, the sociologist of the
XX century. There were several reasons for it. Firstly, the studies of this
period served as the basis for his future fundamental works on social
differentiation and mobility, sociology of revolution and sociology of changes.
Secondly, the works of P. Sorokin were really diverse: from empirical (research
into famine) to theoretical (sociology system) ones. Thirdly, variety of his research
issues covered basic social phenomena and processes (social groups, their
mobility, war, crime, etc.). Fourthly, the sociologist had good knowledge of
the state of the contemporary world sociology, especially the American one,
strongly attached to empirical studies. Fifthly, the use of methodological
principles, different theoretical approaches, with preference to the objective
one, was also an advantage.
Certainly, Russia was not only his native
land, but also his creative motherland in one of the most difficult, critical
and tragic periods of its history.
It was in particular during the Russian period
of P.A.Sorokin’s scientific activity, under the influence of the processes
typical of Russia
in the 1910-1920s, when his ideas of social time, social and cultural dynamics,
realized in his researches and publications of the 1930s were formed.
When working on «The System of Sociology» [18],
P.A.Sorokin, on the one hand, used a considerable quantity of both foreign and
domestic sociological literature, i.e. the works of practically all leading
sociologists of the end of the ХIХ – the beginning of the XX centuries. However, in «The
System» we have not found any reference to the category of time in sociology
and to such modification of time as «social time». This fact proves quite
clearly that there was no such concept in the theoretical sociology of that
period.
In «The System of Sociology» the term «time» is
used in historical modus in relation to social changes. However, in his
research program [16], which was discussed and approved in the year of
publication of «The System of Sociology», P.A.Sorokin takes a resolute step
towards «structural» time, with the aim to study the structure of daily
activity of different social professional groups expressed in time indicators.
In this respect, the analogy to N.I.Ziber's program [15] seems relevant. Even
though in the above-mentioned programs the purposes of studying «time expenses»
are different, in both cases it was supposed to obtain data on time expenses for
the main types of work in different social groups. However, N.I.Ziber assumed
to arrive at the shares of various groups in cumulative/total expenses of time,
while P.A.Sorokin – at the comparison of certain groups and, probably, the
dynamics of their differences.
P.A.Sorokin has conducted the first
sociological survey on the use of time by means of time-budget method and laid
the fundamental groundwork for his major article [17] in the co-authorship with
R.Merton, where, probably, for the first time, the term «social time» was used.
6. «Time» in
sociology of the early 1930s
In the late 1920s, an outstanding economist and
sociologist N.D.Kondratyev started drafting his generalizing research,
realizing his original sociological economic approach to society, its
functioning and development. Understanding sociology as «a general theory of
social phenomena» [11, p.11], «a general theory of society» [11, p.86], and
political economics or «social economics as a part of sociology»,
N.D.Kondratyev uses only «historical» modification of time, including analysis
of «cause – effect – cause –effect…» correlation to separate what had occurred «before»
from what happened «after». He has also closely approached two other
modifications of social time. In his opinion, the presence of communication
between people (direct and indirect, communications-interactions and
communications-influences) «reveals why what is real is human population that
consists not only of the people living in the same place, but also of the
people who are geographically divided. It also reveals why real human
population exists not only in the present, but it also has long term existence»
[11, p.53]. The phrase «mass behavior acts, leading to the establishment of any
kind of communication between people, as such take place in time» [11, p.56]
gives us a clear understanding of the fact that time is considered here both as
a natural resource and as a cumulative time of action and interaction of the
subjects (structural time). N.D.Kondratyev notes that «… the chain of people’s
actions, leading not to the direct satisfaction of their needs, but only to the
creation of the means for their satisfaction … becomes longer and longer … in
the process of historical development. Another side of this historical tendency
of development, undoubtedly, is the fact that human vision of time and, in
particular, on the future time has broadened, and a human being has acquired
the increasing ability to operate not only in the interests of the given
moment, but also taking into consideration the future» [11, p.105].
The discussed publication of N.D.Kondratyev
adequately reflects the place of time category in sociological science of that
period. Social time in the early 1930s had neither any status nor category,
even a concept, but its sociological content was being formed, though very
slowly. N.D.Kondratyev was not able to continue his work on the generalizing
sociological economic research, and we can only assume what place the category
of social time would have taken in it. In our opinion, N.D.Kondratyev’s theory
of big cycles can be considered as a sketch of an approach to the development
of the whole society and specific social systems. Elaboration of this approach
can «give work» to the categories and indicators of not only historical, but
also of structural and system time.
Being a person and a scientist, deprived of
freedom and the possibility to be occupied with his work, N.D.Kondratyev
considered that «the most awful thing in life is loss of time» [11, p.537],
which «is irreversible» [11, p.538].
7. «… connected with vital/life phenomena»
An outstanding scientist and naturalist
V.I.Vernadskiy also paid much attention to time issues. In 1930-1931 he was
working on a large manuscript devoted to the problems of time in both science
and philosophy (it is worth mentioning that he made a special note about the
unity of space and time in his diary [19, p.419] already in the beginning of
1885 at the age of 21). At the end of 1931 he made a report on this topic at
the general meeting of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR.
We would like to draw special attention to four
ideas described in V.I.Vernadskiy's publications and manuscripts.
Firstly, he evaluated the 1920s as the period
when «historically unprecedented deepening of the concept of time» took place [19,
p.251] and when «time, for the first time, became an object of scientific research»
[19, p.298]. This statement should be referred not only to natural sciences and
philosophy, but also to sociology, including social, sociological time studies
of people and social groups as well as their vital/life activities, i.e. social
time.
Secondly, V.I.Vernadskiy connects this «explosion
of scientific creativity» with both «historical turning point in the life of
mankind, protest actions of broad masses, which have realized their real force»,
and with revision of the concept of Newtonian absolute time and space in
science [19, p.299].
Thirdly, V.I.Vernadskiy paid special attention
to a specific vision of time in the works of a famous sociologist and
philosopher G.Zimmel and a philosopher
A.Bergson – the time which is neither natural and «human» nor «historical», as Vernadskiy
noted in several cases, but a subject-human one.
Fourthly, which seems to be the most important,
V.I.Vernadskiy provided a definition for biological time, which was not very
far from elaboration of the concept of social time. He called biological time
the «time connected with the vital/life phenomena» [19, p.226]. Basically, what
was left was adding «human life»
to arrive at the «social time». Special attention should be paid to the
expression «connected/related». Its use essentially expands the volume
of social time, including functioning of everything created by people to
economize their time or to expand their creative possibilities. We consider
that this is one of the major directions in the further research on social time
both as a concept, a category, and the reality.
8. Time of individuals and
social systems
In the fundamental book (1924) that basically
discussed the problems of social time, V.N.Muravyov notes that «every science
raises a question about time issues» [14, p.100]. He also sets a goal to study
this question «from philosophical, logical, mathematical, sociological, and
organizational points of view»; he aims at conducting not only theoretical research, but also at combining it with practice – both scientific and also «social-organizational
practice, which has been developing in Russia lately», making equal use of the
experience of an individual and «the activity of social historical groups» [14,
p.96–98].
An approach to an individual
and a society as a system. System elements. According to V.N.Muravyov, «sociological
point of view on the multitudes» is the most perfect and general though in
relation to non-social systems it seems superfluous [14, p.105].
In his volume the author constructs the
sequence of social systems, or social subjects. Firstly, it is an
individual consisting of «physical and biological elements» and possessing
human intellect [14, p.235], i.e. an active individual. In our opinion, it is
very important to emphasize V.N.Muravyov's remark that «the essence of
peculiarity is not that it wants separateness, but also that in this
separateness it wishes to be everything» [14, p.224]. We make special emphasis
on it. To be! Everything! Secondly, these are «social-historical human
groups» in which V.N.Muravyov saw specificity of sociological approach.
Thirdly, he speaks about community at a country level. And, finally, it is the
mankind living on Earth.
Each individual acts/operates as «a
member of these systems» as every «action and thought has psychological,
social, and historical nature» [14, p.104]. V.N.Muravyov focuses on three main
areas of real activity of
humans: 1) «creation of new living beings or revival of the old ones»;
2) «change of the relations between people and, accordingly, change of an
individual»; 3) «change of the world in the form of transformation of material
things» [14, p.111].
In the process of activity
subjects become involved into certain relations.
V.N.Muravyov considers «social and historical relations» to be «timeforming factors».
Time «is created» by activity. According to
V.N.Muravyov, «time … if to consider it as reality, is nothing
else but change and movement» [14, p.101]; and time of an individual is
not only the physical (astronomical) time used by people in their activity and
life, but also the time, created by these people, because «each action, changing
the world, is such a creation» [14, p.108].
«Each member of the system has an internal time,
subject to him, and external, or compulsory time» [14, p.153]. Expansion of the
first one means «acquisition/occupancy of a wide circle of temporariness» [14,
p.154]. These circles of time constitute a doubly actual present time for
certain subjects and for social systems which they belong to (Compare to S.Askoldov’s
«circles»).
Overcoming time and getting
control over it. V.N.Muravyov uses two basic terms. The book is called
«Getting Control Over Time», but in the book the term «overcoming» is more
often used.
«Time overcoming» means attainment of
finiteness, discreteness of time in a certain activity, in the actions of a
certain person or a certain social system, and preserving this activity and its
outcomes in the memory or in any other form. «Mastering/getting control over
time» is a free activity of people in compliance with the laws of functioning
and development of a society as a social system. According to V.N.Muravyov, «control
over time is any change which is meaningfully and expediently made in the
nature, because it creates or recreates the reality according to the available
sample/pattern» [14, p.126]. It reflects the role of each individual in overcoming and
mastering of time. «Any conscious expedient action which gives us power over
the nature is really getting control over time» [14, p.229].
«Finally, the theory of control over time comes
up to the theory of formation… of human collectives in the first place» [14, p.106].
«Time use turns into control over it» [14, p.98]. An opinion of V.N.Muravyov seems to be quite valid when he states that getting control
over time is «one of the main reasonable purposes of an individual» [14,
p.107].
V.N.Muravyov’s views on a western society of
his time are worth mentioning here. He considered that manufacturing creates «goods
not for getting control over time, but for pastime. As though mankind puts the
question of not how to overcome time …, but how to spend time» [14, p.219].
According to V.N.Muravyov, control over time is «not an aspiration to lead a
vacuous and idle life, or to pass time which can be filled by any content, but
to have a life containing completeness of all implemented possibilities» [14,
p.229].
«Uniform» system.
V.N.Muravyov considered «that there is only one way of getting control over
time, which is establishing consent among all members within the system» [14,
p.165]. For an individual «time overcoming is
connected with his reasonableness».
«The future appears in the power of
all participants of the system as they act in cooperation and in consent» [14,
p.163]. This statement, as well as the statement about getting control over
time was very urgent for our country at that period. It was necessary to
create a «uniform» social system, capable
to implement these ideas, as if in compliance with V.N.Muravyov's words.
Speaking about time, V.N.Muravyov actually
means social time, i.e. the time «connected» with human life, with the
existence of a human society. He
closely approached the concept of «social time», having shown its content,
though this term was not used.
V.N.Muravyov was one of the first who basically
applied the system approach to the analysis of functioning and development of
societies of different levels, focusing on their time in the cumulative sense
rather than understanding it as the duration of their existence.
Conclusions
Almost all
publications, mentioned in this article, were formally outside the frameworks
of sociology as it was understood at that time (except for P.A.Sorokin's theoretical
and empirical attempt to use time indicators to study the influence of
professions on people, and also partially V.N.Muravyov's works.). However, it
does not impede us to consider them as inherently sociological ones, proceeding
from our understanding of the essence of sociology.
In the considered
works the term «social time» was not used yet, though more often the term «time» meant not an abstract, absolute or even simply astronomical time, but
the time of a person or a society which, accordingly, is used somehow.
On the one hand, revolutionary
period has «tightened» time, intensified and accelerated many economic,
political, and cultural processes. A stable and fitting with the reality
attitude/mood was formed concerning the possibility to «operate» the time, and,
in essence, to organize life in such a way that time becomes not an adversary
who has to be overcome, but an ally in life and in its improvement.
Since one of the tasks of the work is
to show the priority of the Russian sociology of time budget, it seems relevant
to examine what was done by the researchers in other countries.
In course of the research, the works
of such authors as Merton, Zimmel and Bergson were studied. The analysis of these
works has shown their insignificance; as such, the relation between the Russian
authors and their foreign colleagues was rather weak because of the lack of
contacts, which were completely impossible that time. Moreover, the level of
the developments in this sphere was rather low in the West.
There was no discourse on theoretical
aspects of social time because of rare publications as well as political
reasons and clear priority of empirical tasks in that period (the 1920s-1930s.).
There was no ground for the discourse.
The overall concept of social time, i.e. its separate aspects of fundamental
and applied character seemed more relevant rather than the discourse per se.
It was not a discourse, but a totality of statements and estimates on
the aspects of social time.
As a result, the statements given in
the article, in fact, supplement each other and seem mutually complementary,
paving the way towards a systemic concept of social time.
Those were the first and very important
cornerstones in the theory of social time, which is their true significance.
The authors of the statements presented
in the article did not respond to the statements and propositions of the others
since there was no discourse per se that
time; it was the complementarity of the statements and researches of the
authors that was of particular interest rather than the criticism of each
other.
The works considered in the
given article have become a very important step towards the theory of social
time.
In general, we arrive at the
following tendency in the directions of thought and practice: in theory, in
philosophy there is time «overcoming», and in practice, sociology, and
management – «getting control» over time.
Библиография
1. Аскольдов С. Время и его преодоление / Мысль, 1922, № 3. С. 80–97.
2. Бердяев Н.А. Время и вечность / На переломе. Философские дискуссии 1920-х годов: Философия и мировоззрение. М.: Политиздат, 1990. С. 402–410.
3. Бердяев Н.А. Истоки и смысл русского коммунизма. М.: Наука, 1990. С. 109-142.
4. Бергсон А. Творческая эволюция. М.–СПб.: Русская мысль, 1914. С. 6-29.
5. Бергсон А. Длительность и одновременность. Пг.: Academia, 1923. С. 11-19.
6. Чернышевский Н.Г. Что делать? Из рассказов о новых людях. – М.: Правда, 1985. С.423-427.
7. Чижевский А.Л. Космический пульс жизни: Земля в объятиях Солнца. Гелиотараксия. М.: Мысль, 1995. С.44-69.
8. Дьяков И.Н. Проблема взаимоотношения субстанции и времени. Этюд. (Свобода, стремление и творчество в свете мирового всеединства). М.: Товарищество типографии А.И.Мамонтова. 1917. С. 6-15.
9. Дюркгейм Э. Социология и теория познания / Новые идеи в социологии. Сб. 2. СПб.: Образование, 1914. С. 27–67.
10. Ферсман А.Е. Время. Пг.: Время, 1922. С. 3-12.
11. Кондратьев Н.Д. Основные проблемы экономической статики и динамики: Предварительный эскиз. М.: Наука, 1991. С. 11-538.
12. Лопатин Л.М. Положительные задачи философии. Ч. 1, 2. М.: Типография «Товарищество И.Н.Кушнеревъ и К», 1911. С. 290-300.
13. Мейерсон Э. Тождество и действительность. – М., 1912. С. 224-228.
14. Муравьев В.Н. Овладение временем. М.: РОССПЭН, 1998. С. 96-235.
15. Русов А.А. О статистико-экономической программе Н.И. Зибера / Социология в России XIX – начала XX веков. Социология как наука. Тексты / Под ред. В.И.Добренькова. М.: Международный университет бизнеса и управления, 1997. С. 572–591.
16. Сорокин П.А. Влияние профессии на поведение людей и рефлексология профессиональных групп / Вопросы изучения и воспитания личности. 1921, Вып. 3. Пг. С. 397–426.
17. Sorokin P.A., Merton R.K. Social time: A methodological and functional analysis / American Journal of Sociology. 1937. № 42. P. 615–639.
18. Сорокин П.А. Система социологии. Т. 1, 2. М.: Наука, 1993. С.103.114.
19. Вернадский В.И. Философские мысли натуралиста. М.: Наука, 1988. С. 226-299.
20. Уитроу Дж. Естественная философия времени. – М.: Прогресс, 1964. С. 12-16.
References
1. Askol'dov S. Vremya i ego preodolenie / Mysl', 1922, № 3. S. 80–97.
2. Berdyaev N.A. Vremya i vechnost' / Na perelome. Filosofskie diskussii 1920-kh godov: Filosofiya i mirovozzrenie. M.: Politizdat, 1990. S. 402–410.
3. Berdyaev N.A. Istoki i smysl russkogo kommunizma. M.: Nauka, 1990. S. 109-142.
4. Bergson A. Tvorcheskaya evolyutsiya. M.–SPb.: Russkaya mysl', 1914. S. 6-29.
5. Bergson A. Dlitel'nost' i odnovremennost'. Pg.: Academia, 1923. S. 11-19.
6. Chernyshevskii N.G. Chto delat'? Iz rasskazov o novykh lyudyakh. – M.: Pravda, 1985. S.423-427.
7. Chizhevskii A.L. Kosmicheskii pul's zhizni: Zemlya v ob''yatiyakh Solntsa. Geliotaraksiya. M.: Mysl', 1995. S.44-69.
8. D'yakov I.N. Problema vzaimootnosheniya substantsii i vremeni. Etyud. (Svoboda, stremlenie i tvorchestvo v svete mirovogo vseedinstva). M.: Tovarishchestvo tipografii A.I.Mamontova. 1917. S. 6-15.
9. Dyurkgeim E. Sotsiologiya i teoriya poznaniya / Novye idei v sotsiologii. Sb. 2. SPb.: Obrazovanie, 1914. S. 27–67.
10. Fersman A.E. Vremya. Pg.: Vremya, 1922. S. 3-12.
11. Kondrat'ev N.D. Osnovnye problemy ekonomicheskoi statiki i dinamiki: Predvaritel'nyi eskiz. M.: Nauka, 1991. S. 11-538.
12. Lopatin L.M. Polozhitel'nye zadachi filosofii. Ch. 1, 2. M.: Tipografiya «Tovarishchestvo I.N.Kushnerev'' i K», 1911. S. 290-300.
13. Meierson E. Tozhdestvo i deistvitel'nost'. – M., 1912. S. 224-228.
14. Murav'ev V.N. Ovladenie vremenem. M.: ROSSPEN, 1998. S. 96-235.
15. Rusov A.A. O statistiko-ekonomicheskoi programme N.I. Zibera / Sotsiologiya v Rossii XIX – nachala XX vekov. Sotsiologiya kak nauka. Teksty / Pod red. V.I.Dobren'kova. M.: Mezhdunarodnyi universitet biznesa i upravleniya, 1997. S. 572–591.
16. Sorokin P.A. Vliyanie professii na povedenie lyudei i refleksologiya professional'nykh grupp / Voprosy izucheniya i vospitaniya lichnosti. 1921, Vyp. 3. Pg. S. 397–426.
17. Sorokin P.A., Merton R.K. Social time: A methodological and functional analysis / American Journal of Sociology. 1937. № 42. P. 615–639.
18. Sorokin P.A. Sistema sotsiologii. T. 1, 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S.103.114.
19. Vernadskii V.I. Filosofskie mysli naturalista. M.: Nauka, 1988. S. 226-299.
20. Uitrou Dzh. Estestvennaya filosofiya vremeni. – M.: Progress, 1964. S. 12-16.
Результаты процедуры рецензирования статьи
В связи с политикой двойного слепого рецензирования личность рецензента не раскрывается.
Со списком рецензентов издательства можно ознакомиться здесь.
Предмет исследования статьи «От «абсолютного» времени в «овладению» временем: теоретические аспекты социального времени в работах 1920-1930-х гг.» - научно-философские концепции времени. Особый акцент автора статьи делается на отечественных философских поисках в области осмысления времени и его социального аспекта. Целью автора является показать ту трансформацию, которая происходит с восприятием времени на рубеже 19 и 20 веков и соответственно, осмысление времени.
Методология исследования включает в себя метод исторического анализа, позволяющий показать динамику в трактовке времени, метод сравнительного анализа, с помощью которого авторы пытается показать автономность основных разработок отечественных авторов в области теории времени и общефилософский подход «мышления в предельных, вбирающих понятиях» (Хайдеггер), который позволяет автору не только изучать процесс осмысления времени авторами начала 20 века, но и осуществлять собственную рефлексию феномена социального времени.
Актуальность исследования определена, с одной стороны, недостаточной изученностью представлений о социальном времени, возникновении этого понятия, изменении его, с другой – тем, что при анализе процесса концептуализации социального времени упоминания о родоначальниках этого подхода обычно ограничивается П. А. Сорокиным и Р. Мертоном. Автор статьи стремиться показать значительный вклад отечественных мыслителей в становление изучения социального аспекта времени.
Научная новизна работы связана со стремлением автора выявить и представить некоторые редкие высказывания о социальном времени и тем самым показать приоритет российских исследователей в постановке, определении и решении вопросов изучения социального времени. Безусловно новым является репрезентация взглядов С. Аскольдова, И.Н. Дьякова, А.Е. Ферсмана, Э. Мейерсона на природу времени, особенность человеческого его восприятия и представление указанных авторов в качестве предшественников осмысления специфики социального времени
Стиль, структура, содержание. Статья написана на английском языке, что выглядит оправленным в свете желания автора показать, что в России существует разработанная и не зависимая от западных традиция осмысления времени. Возможно, в таком варианте она будет доступна для англоязычных коллег, занимающихся социологическими исследованиями времени, и обогатит их представление о процессе формирования концепта «социального времени». Статья написана понятным языком, легко читается. Стиль изложения доступен для неспециалистов. В тоже время, не вызывает сомнения научный стиль статья, корректные и уместные цитирования. Статья имеет внутреннее членение и состоит из введения, восьми частей и заключения. Во введении, автор определяет временной период своего исследования – 20-30 годы 20 века и ставит цель работы. В первой части рассматривается теория времени А. Бергсона, устанавливаются параллели с книгой Лопатин Л.М. «Положительные задачи философии». Во второй части, автор обещается к религиозной философии России, в лице Бердяева, и выделяет, интересные, на его взгляд, идеи философа о времени. При этом нельзя согласиться с заявлением автора о том, что Бердяев «практически исключил из рассмотрения будущее время», поскольку этой теме философ уделяет пристальное внимание, именно в социальном аспекте. Разрабатывая идеи «оправдания творчеством» («Смысл творчества»), говоря о «Царстве Третьего Завета» (Царство Духа и Царство Кесаря), предостерегая об угрозе обездушивания (Человек и машина), Бердяев ассоциируется будущее время с тревогой, но и свободой, которая крайне важна для его философии. Опускает автор и роль философского творчества С.Н. Булгакова в разработке концепции времени. Русский философ в книге «Свет Невечерний» уделяет проблеме философского осмысления времени отдельную главу, в которой, в частности, он пишет, о зависимости скорости течения времени от степени греховности тварного существа, о «мгновенности» времени ангелов и тягучести времени человечества, возникшей после грехопадения. Третья часть статьи посвящена рассмотрению взглядов на время С. Аскольдова, связь его трактовки с изменчивостью мировых процессов и психологическим состоянием человека. В четвертой части автор намечает границу между «абсолютным» временем, как мировым хронометром, равновелико отсчитывающим время различных процессов на земле и новым пониманием времени как относительного процесса, роли в осознании этих изменений А.Э. Ферсмана. Отдельная часть посвящена философскому и социологическому творчества П. Сорокина, в том числе его ранним произведениям. В шестой и седьмой частях рассматриваются трактовки времени Н.Д. Кондратьевым и В.И. Вернадским, в восьмой – В.Н. Муравьевым. Автор показывает, как к 30 годам 20 века философская и социологическая мысль подходят к выделению особого вида времени – социального времени.
Библиография включает 20 наименований и хорошо представляет диапазон исследования. Основной акцент в ней делается на анализируемых автором работах, большинство из которых не было переиздано с начала 20 века.
Апелляция к оппонентам присутствует в ограниченном виде, так как автор обращается к малоизученным именам и работам. В тоже время, автор статьи не ограничивается констатацией взглядов рассматриваемых мыслителей, а ведет своеобразный диалог и их произведениями, что создает впечатление живого диалога мыслителей разных эпох.
Выводы, интерес читательской аудитории. Показав процесс изменения и переосмысления времени, автор статьи приходит к выводу о «преодоление» времени в теории философии и «получение контроля» над временем в практической области, что обуславливает актуализацию понятия социального времени. Статья будет интересна как философам и социологам, так и широкому кругу читателей, интересующихся осмыслением времени.
Ссылка на эту статью
Просто выделите и скопируйте ссылку на эту статью в буфер обмена. Вы можете также
попробовать найти похожие
статьи
|
|