Natural and social in man. The problem of anthroposociogenesis. The unity of the natural, social and spiritual in man

The n philosopher of the XIX century VS Soloviev defined man as a social being. This means that the highest ideals of existence, goals and life credo are not in his personal destiny and well-being, but are directed at the social destinies of all mankind. In the author's understanding, social destinies, most likely, mean one thing - the priority of collective tasks over individual values and needs. Hence a completely logical question arises: "What is natural and social in man?" Does it make sense in his life? But, unfortunately, there is no unified understanding of the process of becoming a person. This is the problem of many sciences that study such questions.

Natural and social in man: the problem of anthroposociogenesis

Anthroposociogenesis is the science of the formation and development of man. The term is interpreted as follows: "anthropos" is a person, "soci" is a society, "genesis" is development. This scientific direction studies the natural and the social in man. Also, anthroposociogenesis explores the role of the collective and society in this process. The main riddle of an individual, from the point of view of science, is the unity of the natural, social and spiritual in man.

Theories of origin

• The first theory is theological. It implies the influence of the higher divine powers and the appearance of man "out of nothing," "by the will of the supernatural." This so-called unscientific theory.
• The second theory is the transformation of anthropoid apes into humans. It appeared with the publication in the XIX century of Charles Darwin's book The Origin of Man and Sexual Selection. His work was supplemented by F. Engels in his book The Role of Labor in the Process of Converting the Monkey into Man. Of course, now there is a lot of criticism in their address. The stages of evolution are not fully understood until the end, many questions related to genetic changes are not explained. Until now, the so-called transition link has not been found - then this theory would have received irrefutable evidence and became a postulate. But one thing is unquestionable: this is the first scientific interpretation that explains the undivine origin. Its influence on humanity was simply staggering. No one before this dared to challenge the religion, completely denying it. But the theory ignored the natural and the social in man and their close relationship. That is, it actually equated him to an animal.
• The third theory is biosocial concepts. According to her, it is recognized that man is a social natural being. Adherents of the theory believe that the society had no less influence on the appearance of a reasonable person than the spontaneous factors. The concepts of biosocial development appeared on the obvious inconsistencies of Darwinism. Labor, natural factors, of course, greatly influenced the formation of personality, but social manifestations could not be ignored. For example, the development of labor activity and the appearance of tools, went simultaneously with the improvement of speech, the manifestation of consciousness, moral perception. And most importantly - the qualitative changes of one, led to similar metamorphoses in another aspect. This is so obvious from historical studies that it is not even clear what factor prevails - natural or social.

But what is natural and social in man? Social science gives an explanation of this question.

One of the manifestations of this concept is the desire for a philosophical understanding of the world, the search for the meaning of life. Why, for what do we live? Everyone, of course, will answer individually on this issue. Depending on culture, intellect, traditions. But most importantly, what is manifested in the social in man is the realization of belonging to the human race, to its unity on the planet. Each individuality is only a small grain in the system of society. Unity manifests itself not only in interaction with each other, but also with nature, the biosphere, the planet. Individuals in society should live in harmony with each other, as well as with the surrounding world. This is precisely what is natural and social in man.

Problem of the meaning of life

There is no unity on this issue. There are two basic concepts around which different points of view are formed.

• The first is the attachment of the meaning of life to earthly existence.
• The second - removed from the world, arguing that the earthly life is fleeting. This concept connects the meaning of life with values not related to the habitation of people on earth.

Points of view on this problem are many, ranging from ancient philosophers to modern scientists.

Pre-Christian interpretations

Pre-Christian scholars, such as Aristotle, who lived in the 4th century BC, tied the meaning of life to gaining happiness. But this concept is purely individual. So, in the opinion of the learned men, some see him as a virtue, others in discretion, and others in wisdom.

Medieval interpretations

Thinkers of the Middle Ages tied the meaning of life to the full knowledge of the divine powers, the supreme wisdom of the Creator. The methods of mastering this doctrine are the Bible, church and church books, divine revelations of saints, etc. It is important to know that the study of applied exact sciences was interpreted as immersion in darkness and ignorance. It was also believed that the fascination with science is antisocial.

Modern followers of medieval postulates

For the sake of justice it is worth noting that so far this line has many followers. As examples of the disastrous development of science and technology, discoveries such as atomic and hydrogen bombs serve. It is known that they can completely destroy the planet in a few minutes. Also, the development of industry and automation poisons the environment, making life unsuitable for habitation. The consequence of this can be considered a violation of the climate, the displacement of the poles, the deviation of the planet from the axis, etc. The highest happiness, the meaning of life for the followers of this concept is harmony with each other, with nature. The main goal is to save the Earth for future generations, abandoning everything that is fatal.

Renaissance

The philosophers of this period, whose bright representatives were scientists of the German school, believed that the meaning of human existence is contained in moral search, self-development and self-knowledge. These are thinkers I. Kant and G. Hegel. They argued that until we learn to understand ourselves, our essence, we can never understand the world around us. They did not deny the divine powers, but tied them to the inner unknown being of man. Until he learns to live in harmony with himself, he can not be in harmony with the society and the surrounding world. For example, the categorical imperative of I. Kant gives an understanding of this. Its main postulates sound like this:

• Do not do to people what you do not want them to do to you;
• Treat others as you want them to treat you.

The great philosopher asserted that man must understand the world through the prism of his own feelings. His ideas are very close to religious covenants. For example, "do not judge and do not judge," and other expressions of scripture are of the same orientation.

Results

So, what is natural and social in a person? Briefly you can answer this: it is the realization of the meaning of life, existence in harmony with oneself, humanity and the surrounding nature.