In order to better present the subject of social ecology, one should consider the process of its emergence and formation as an independent branch of scientific knowledge. In fact, the emergence and subsequent development of social ecology was a natural consequence of the ever-increasing interest of representatives of various humanitarian disciplines - sociology, economics, political science, psychology, etc. - to the problems of interaction between man and the environment.[ ...]
The term "social ecology" owes its appearance to American researchers, representatives of the Chicago School of Social Psychologists - R. Park and E. Burges, who first used it in their work on the theory of population behavior in an urban environment in 1921. The authors used it as a synonym for the concept " human ecology. The concept of "social ecology" was intended to emphasize that in this context we are talking not about a biological, but about a social phenomenon, which, however, also has biological characteristics.[ ...]
It should be noted, however, that the term "social ecology", apparently best suited to designate a specific direction of research into the relationship of a person as a social being with the environment of his existence, has not taken root in Western science, in which preference from the very beginning began to be given to the concept of "human ecology" (human ecology). This created certain difficulties for the formation of social ecology as an independent, humanitarian in its main focus, discipline. The fact is that in parallel with the development of the socio-ecological problems proper within the framework of human ecology, bio-ecological aspects of human life were developed in it. Having passed by this time a long period of formation and, due to this, having more weight in science, having a more developed categorical and methodological apparatus, human biological ecology for a long time “shielded” humanitarian social ecology from the eyes of the progressive scientific community. Nevertheless, social ecology existed for some time and developed relatively independently as the ecology (sociology) of the city.[ ...]
Despite the obvious desire of representatives of the humanitarian branches of knowledge to free social ecology from the "yoke" of bioecology, it continued to experience a significant influence from the latter for many decades. As a result, social ecology borrowed most of the concepts, its categorical apparatus from the ecology of plants and animals, as well as from general ecology. At the same time, as D. Zh. Markovich notes, social ecology gradually improved its methodological apparatus with the development of the spatio-temporal approach of social geography, the economic theory of distribution, etc.[ ...]
During the period under review, the list of tasks that this branch of scientific knowledge, which was gradually gaining independence, was called upon to solve, significantly expanded. If at the dawn of the formation of social ecology, the efforts of researchers mainly boiled down to searching in the behavior of a territorially localized human population for analogues of laws and ecological relations characteristic of biological communities, then from the second half of the 60s, the range of issues under consideration was supplemented by the problems of determining the place and role of man in the biosphere. , working out ways to determine the optimal conditions for its life and development, harmonization of relationships with other components of the biosphere. The process of its humanitarization that has engulfed social ecology in the last two decades has led to the fact that, in addition to the above tasks, the range of issues it develops includes the problems of identifying the general laws of the functioning and development of social systems, studying the influence of natural factors on the processes of socio-economic development and finding ways to control the action. these factors.[ ...]
In our country, by the end of the 1970s, conditions had also developed for separating social and environmental issues into an independent area of interdisciplinary research. A significant contribution to the development of domestic social ecology was made by E. V. Girusov, A. N. Kochergin, Yu. G. Markov, N. F. Reimers, S. N. Solomina and others.
V.V.Haskin. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is a complex of scientific branches that study the relationship of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the relationship of man with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.[ ...]
Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to emphasize the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of mankind with its environment. According to E.V. Girusov, social ecology should first of all study the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.[ ...]
Akimova T. A., Khaskin V. V. Ecology. - M., 1998.[ ...]
Agadzhanyan H.A., Torshin V.I. Human ecology. Selected lectures. -M., 1994.
CONTROL QUESTIONS FOR HUMAN ECOLOGY
TO PREPARE FOR RESULTS
The development of ecological ideas of people from ancient times to the present day. The emergence and development of ecology as a science.
The term "ecology" was proposed in 1866 by the German zoologist and philosopher E. Haeckel, who, while developing a classification system for biological sciences, discovered that there is no special name for the field of biology that studies the relationship of organisms with the environment. Haeckel also defined ecology as "the physiology of relationships", although "physiology" was understood very broadly - as the study of a variety of processes occurring in wildlife.
The new term entered the scientific literature rather slowly and began to be used more or less regularly only from the 1900s. As a scientific discipline, ecology was formed in the 20th century, but its prehistory dates back to the 19th, and even to the 18th century. So, already in the works of K. Linnaeus, who laid the foundations of the systematics of organisms, there was an idea of \u200b\u200bthe "economy of nature" - a strict orderliness of various natural processes aimed at maintaining a certain natural balance.
In the second half of the 19th century, research that was essentially ecological began to be carried out in many countries, both by botanists and zoologists. So, in Germany, in 1872, the capital work of August Grisebach (1814-1879) was published, who for the first time gave a description of the main plant communities of the entire globe (these works were also published in Russian), and in 1898 - a major summary of Franz Schimper (1856-1901) "Geography of Plants on a Physiological Basis", which provides a lot of detailed information about the dependence of plants on various environmental factors. Another German researcher, Karl Mobius, studying the reproduction of oysters in the shallows (the so-called oyster banks) of the North Sea, proposed the term "biocenosis", which denoted the totality of various living creatures that live in the same territory and are closely interconnected.
The 1920-1940s were very important for the transformation of ecology into an independent science. At this time, a number of books on various aspects of ecology were published, specialized journals began to appear (some of them still exist), and ecological societies arose. But the most important thing is that the theoretical basis of the new science is gradually being formed, the first mathematical models are being proposed, and its own methodology is being developed, which makes it possible to set and solve certain problems.
Formation of social ecology and its subject.
In order to better present the subject of social ecology, one should consider the process of its emergence and formation as an independent branch of scientific knowledge. In fact, the emergence and subsequent development of social ecology was a natural consequence of the ever-increasing interest of representatives of various humanitarian disciplines - sociology, economics, political science, psychology, etc. - to the problems of interaction between man and the environment.
Today, an increasing number of researchers tend to broaden the interpretation of the subject of social ecology. So, according to D.Zh. Markovich, the subject of study of modern social ecology, understood by him as a particular sociology, is the specific relationship between a person and his environment. Based on this, the main tasks of social ecology can be defined as follows: the study of the influence of the environment as a combination of natural and social factors on a person, as well as the influence of a person on the environment, perceived as the framework of human life.
A somewhat different, but not contradictory, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by T.A. Akimov and V.V. Haskin. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is a complex of scientific branches that study the relationship of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the relationship of man with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.
Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to emphasize the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of mankind with its environment. According to E. V. Girusov, social ecology should first of all study the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.
Social ecology is a relatively young scientific discipline.
Its emergence should be considered in the context of the development of biology, which gradually rose to the level of broad theoretical concepts, and in the process of its development there are attempts to create a unified science that studies the relationship between nature and society.
Thus, the emergence and development of social ecology is closely related to the widespread approach, according to which the natural and social world cannot be considered in isolation from each other.
The term "social ecology" was first used by American scientists R. Park and E. Burgess in 1921 to determine the internal mechanism for the development of a "capitalist city". By the term "social ecology" they understood, first of all, the process of planning and developing the urbanization of large cities as the epicenter of the interaction between society and nature.
Most researchers are inclined to believe that the development of social ecology begins after the First World War, at the same time there are attempts to define its subject.
What factors influenced the emergence and development of social ecology?
Let's name some of them.
First, new concepts appeared in the study of man as a social being.
Secondly, with the introduction of new concepts in ecology (biocenosis, ecosystem, biosphere), the need to study patterns in nature, taking into account the data of not only natural but also social sciences, became obvious.
Thirdly, the research of scientists led to the conclusion that it is possible for a person to exist in a deteriorating state of the environment caused by a violation of the ecological balance.
Fourthly, the emergence and formation of social ecology was also influenced by the fact that the threat to ecological balance and its violation arise not only as a conflict of an individual or group with their natural environment, but also as a result of a complex relationship between three sets of systems: natural, technical and social. The desire of scientists to understand these systems, in order to coordinate them in the name of protection and protection
human environment (as a natural and social being)
led to the emergence and development of social ecology.
Thus, the ratios of the three systems - natural, technical and social - are changeable, they depend on many factors, and this in one way or another affects the preservation or violation of the ecological balance.
The emergence of social ecology should be considered in the context of its development and the transformation of ecology into a social science that seeks to cover a wide range of problems in the field of environmental management.
As a result, "ecology" became a social science, while continuing to be a natural science.
But this created an essential prerequisite for the emergence and construction of social ecology as a science, which, based on its research and theoretical analysis, should show how social indicators should change in order to exploit nature less, that is, to maintain ecological balance in it.
Therefore, in order to maintain the ecological balance, it is necessary to create socio-economic mechanisms that protect this balance. Therefore, not only biologists, chemists, mathematicians, but also social scientists should work in this area.
The protection of nature must be linked to the protection of the social environment. Social ecology must examine the industrial system, "its linking role between man and nature, while taking into account trends in the modern division of labor."
The well-known representative of classical ecology McKenzie (1925) defined human ecology as the science of the spatial and temporal relations of people, which are affected by selective (selective), distributive (environmental factors) and accommodative (adaptive factors) forces of the environment. However, this led to a simplified understanding of the interdependence between the population and other spatial phenomena, which led to the crisis of classical human ecology.
After the Second World War, in the 1950s, there was a rapid economic growth in the industrial developed countries Germany, Austria, Italy, which required deforestation, mining and development of a huge amount of land resources (ores, coal, oil ...), construction of new roads, villages, cities. This, in turn, influenced the emergence environmental issues.
Oil refineries and chemical plants, metallurgical and cement plants violate environmental protection, emit huge amounts of smoke, soot and dust-like waste into the atmosphere. It was impossible to ignore these factors, as a crisis situation could arise.
Scientists are beginning to look for ways out of this situation. As a result, they come to the conclusion about the connection between environmental problems and social relations, about the connection between the ecological and the social. That is, all environmental violations should be analyzed in terms of
audits of social problems in industrialized countries.
In developing countries, there is a demographic boom (India, Indonesia, etc.). In 1946-1950. their exit from the colony begins. At the same time, the peoples of these countries used both political demands and an environmental program with social consequences was developed. The countries freed from the colonial yoke put forward claims to the colonialists for the destruction of forests and natural resources, that is, the violation of the ecological balance (India, China, Indonesia, and other countries).
This approach to environmental problems was already accentuated from biological and natural to social problems, that is, the main attention was paid to the links "between environmental and social problems." It also played a role in the development of social ecology.
Due to the fact that social ecology is a relatively young science, and it is closely related to general ecology, then, naturally, many scientists leaned towards one or another science when determining the subject of social ecology.
Thus, in the first interpretations of the subject of social ecology, which were made by McKenzie (1925), traces of animal ecology and plant ecology were easily visible, i.e., the subject of social ecology was considered in the context of the development of biology.
In Russian philosophy and sociological literature, the subject of social ecology is the noosphere, that is, the system of socio-natural relations, where the main attention is paid to the processes of human impact on nature and the impact on their relations.
Social ecology studies the relationship between a person and his environment, analyzes social processes (and relationships) in the context, while taking into account the characteristics of a person as a natural and social being, which affects both the elements of his environment and his relationship to them. Social ecology is based on the knowledge of humane ecology.
In other words, social ecology begins to study the basic patterns of interaction in the "society-nature-man" system and determines the possibilities of creating a model for the optimal interaction of elements in it. She seeks to contribute to scientific forecasting in this area.
Social ecology, examining the influence of man through his labor activity on the natural environment, also explores the impact of the industrial system not only on the complex system of relationships in which a person lives, but also on the natural conditions necessary for the development of the industrial system.
Social ecology also analyzes modern urbanized societies, the relationships of people in such a society, the impact of the urbanized environment and the environment created by industry, the various restrictions that it imposes on family and local relationships, Various types
social ties due to industrial technologies, etc. Therefore, the creation of the institute of social ecology and the definition of its subject of research were influenced primarily by:
The complex relationship of man with the environment;
exacerbation of the ecological crisis;
Norms of necessary wealth and organization of life, which should be taken into account when planning the ways of exploiting nature;
Cognition of possibilities (study of mechanisms) social control, in order to limit pollution and preserve the natural environment;
Identification and analysis of public goals, including a new way of life, new concepts of ownership and responsibility for the preservation of the environment;
Influence of population density on people's behavior, etc.
Thus, social ecology studies not only the direct and immediate influence of the environment (where technology is not developed) on a person, but also the composition of groups that exploit Natural resources, the influence of man on the biosphere, and the latter passes into a new evolutionary state - the noosphere, which is a unity, mutual influence of nature and society, which is based on society.
Consider the definitions of the subject of social ecology. When studying the historical process of the formation of social ecology, one should also take into account the various semantic colors (definitions) of the term "social ecology", which appeared in different periods of its development, which makes it possible to form a correct objective idea of science.
So, E. V. Girusov(1981) believes that the laws that make up the subject of study of social ecology cannot be defined only as natural or social, since these are the laws of interaction between society and nature, which allows us to apply the new concept of “socio-ecological laws” to them. According to E. V. Girusov, the basis of the socio-ecological law is the optimal correspondence between the nature of social development and the state of the natural environment.
S. N. Solomina(1982) points out that the subject of social ecology is the study of global problems of the general development of mankind, such as: the problems of energy resources, environmental protection, the problems of eliminating mass starvation and dangerous diseases, the development of the wealth of the ocean.
N. M. Mamedov(1983) notes that social ecology studies the interaction of society and the natural environment.
Yu. F. Markov(1987), tracing the relationship of social ecology with
V. I. Vernadsky’s doctrine of the noosphere, gives the following definition of social ecology: the object of social ecology is the system of socio-natural relations, which is formed and functions as a result of conscious, purposeful activity of people.
A. S. Mamzin and V. V. Smirnov(1988) note that "the subject of social ecology is not nature and not society in itself, but the system "society-nature-man" as a single developing whole."
N. U. Tikhonovich(1990) distinguishes global ecology, social ecology and human ecology. "Global ecology", in his opinion,
"includes in the field of his research the biosphere as a whole ... anthropogenic changes and its evolution."
The emergence of social ecology was preceded by the emergence of human ecology, and therefore often the terms "social ecology" and
"human ecology" are used in the same sense, i.e. they denote the same discipline.
The human environment (environment) in social ecology is understood as a set of natural and socio-ecological conditions in which people live and in which they can fulfill themselves,
The development of ecological ideas of people from ancient times to the present day. The emergence and development of ecology as a science.
The emergence of social ecology. Her subject. Relationship of social ecology to other sciences: biology, geography, sociology.
Topic 2. Socio-ecological interaction and its subjects (4 hours).
Man and society as subjects of socio-ecological interaction. Mankind as a multi-level hierarchical system. The most important characteristics of a person as a subject of socio-ecological interaction: needs, adaptability, adaptation mechanisms and adaptability.
The human environment and its elements as subjects of socio-ecological interaction. Classification of the components of the human environment.
Socio-ecological interaction and its main characteristics. The impact of environmental factors on humans. Human adaptation to environment and its changes.
Topic 3. The relationship between society and nature in the history of civilization (4 hours).
The relationship between nature and society: a historical aspect. Stages of formation of the relationship between nature and society: hunting-gathering culture, agrarian culture, industrial society, post-industrial society. Their characteristic.
Prospects for the development of relationships between nature and society: the ideal of the noosphere and the concept of sustainable development.
Topic 4. Global problems of mankind and ways to solve them (4 hours).
Population growth, population explosion. Resource crisis: land resources (soil, mineral resources), energetic resources. Increasing aggressiveness of the environment: water pollution and atmospheric air, growth of pathogenicity of microorganisms. Changing the gene pool: factors of mutagenesis, genetic drift, natural selection.
Topic 5. Human behavior in the natural and social environment (4 hours).
Human behavior. Levels of behavior regulation: biochemical, biophysical, informational, psychological. Activity and reactivity as fundamental components of behavior.
Needs as a source of personality activity. Groups and types of needs and their characteristics. Characteristics of human ecological needs.
Human adaptation in the natural and social environment. Types of adaptation. The peculiarity of human behavior in the natural and social environment.
Human behavior in the natural environment. Characteristics of scientific theories of the influence of the environment on a person.
Human behavior in a social environment. organizational behavior. Human behavior in critical and extreme situations.
Topic 6. Ecology of the living environment (4 hours).
Elements of the human living environment: social and living environment (urban and residential environments), labor (industrial) environment, recreational environment. Their characteristic. The relationship of a person with the elements of his living environment.
Topic 7. Elements of environmental ethics (4 hours).
The moral aspect of the relationship between man, society and nature. The subject of environmental ethics.
Nature as a value. Anthropocentrism and Naturocentrism. Subject-ethical type of attitude to nature. Non-violence as a form of attitude towards nature and as a moral principle. The problem of non-violent interaction between man, society and nature in various religious concepts (Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Islam, Christianity).
Topic 8. Elements of environmental psychology (4 hours).
Formation and development of environmental psychology and its subject. Characteristics of psychological ecology and environmental ecology.
Subjective attitude to nature and its varieties. Basic parameters of subjective attitude to nature. Modality and intensity of subjective attitude to nature. Typology of subjective attitude to nature.
Subjective perception of the world nature. Forms and methods of giving subjectivity to natural objects (animism, anthropomorphism, personification, subjectification).
Ecological consciousness and its structure. Structure of anthropocentric and ecocentric ecological consciousness. The problem of formation of ecological consciousness in the younger generation.
Topic 9. Elements of environmental pedagogy (4 hours).
The concept of ecological culture of personality. Types of ecological culture. Pedagogical conditions of its formation.
Ecological education of the individual. Development of environmental education in Russia. Modern content of environmental education. School as the main link in environmental education. The structure of environmental education of the future teacher.
Ecologization of education. Characteristics of the greening of education abroad.
EXAMPLE TOPICS OF SEMINAR LESSONS
Topic 1. The formation of the relationship between man and nature at the dawn of the history of civilization (2 hours).
Man's exploration of nature.
Features of the perception of nature by primitive people.
The formation of ecological consciousness.
Tylor B.D. Primitive culture. - M., 1989. - S. 355-388.
Levy-Bruhl L. Supernatural in primitive thinking. -M., 1994.-S. 177-283.
Topic 2. Modern environmental crisis and ways to overcome it (4 hours).
Ecological crisis: myth or reality?
Prerequisites for the emergence of an ecological crisis.
Ways to overcome the ecological crisis.
Literature to prepare for the lesson
White L. Historical roots of our ecological crisis // Global problems and universal values. - M., 1990. -S. 188-202.
Atfield R. Ethics of ecological responsibility // Global problems and universal values. - M., 1990. - S. 203-257.
Schweitzer A. Reverence for life. - M., 1992. - S. 44-79.
Topic 3. The ethical aspect of the relationship between man and nature (4 hours).
What is environmental ethics?
The main ethical and ecological doctrines of the relationship between man and nature: anthropocentrism and naturocentrism.
The essence of anthropocentrism and its general characteristics.
The essence of naturocentrism and its general characteristics.
Literature to prepare for the lesson
Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of freedom. The meaning of creativity. - M., 1989.-S. 293-325.
Rolston X. Is there an environmental ethics? // Global problems and universal values. - M., 1990. - S. 258-288.
Schweitzer A. Reverence for life. - M., 1992. - S. 216-229.
Topic 4. Ecology and ethnogenesis (2 hours).
The essence of the process of ethnogenesis.
The influence of landscape features on ethnogenesis.
Ethnogenesis and evolution of the Earth's biosphere.
Literature to prepare for the lesson
Gumilyov L. N. Biosphere and impulses of consciousness // The end and the beginning again. - M., 1997. - S. 385-398.
Topic 5. Man and the noosphere (2 hours).
The idea of the noosphere and its creators.
What is the noosphere?
The formation of the noosphere and the prospects of mankind.
Literature to prepare for the lesson
Vernadsky V.I. A few words about the noosphere // Russian cosmism: an anthology of philosophical thought. -M., 1993. -S. 303-311.
Teilhard de Chardin. The human phenomenon. -M., 1987.-S. 133-186.
Men A. History of religion: In search of the Way, Truth and Life: In 7 vols.-M., 1991.-T. 1.-S. 85-104; pp. 121-130.
Topic: Subject, tasks, history of social ecology
Plan
1. Concepts of "social ecology"
1.1. Subject, problems of ecology.
2. Formation of social ecology as a science
2.1. Human evolution and ecology
3. The place of social ecology in the system of sciences
4. Methods of social ecology
Social ecology is a scientific discipline that considers relationships in the "society-nature" system, studying the interaction and relationships of human society with the natural environment (Nikolai Reimers).
But such a definition does not reflect the specifics of this science. Social ecology is currently being formed as a private independent science with a specific subject of study, namely:
the composition and characteristics of the interests of social strata and groups that exploit natural resources;
perception by different social strata and groups of environmental problems and measures to regulate nature management;
taking into account and using in the practice of environmental measures the characteristics and interests of social strata and groups
Thus, social ecology is the science of interests social groups in the field of natural resources.
Tasks of social ecology
The goal of social ecology is to create a theory of the evolution of the relationship between man and nature, the logic and methodology for transforming the natural environment. Social ecology is designed to clarify and help bridge the gap between man and nature, between humanitarian and natural sciences.
Social ecology as a science should establish scientific laws, evidence of objectively existing necessary and essential links between phenomena, the features of which are the general nature, constancy and the possibility of their foresight, it is necessary to formulate the main patterns of interaction of elements in the "society - nature" system in such a way that this made it possible to establish a model for the optimal interaction of elements in this system.
When establishing the laws of social ecology, one should first of all point to those that proceeded from the understanding of society as an ecological subsystem. First of all, these are the laws that were formulated in the thirties by Bauer and Vernadsky.
First Law says that the geochemical energy of living matter in the biosphere (including humanity as the highest manifestation of living matter, endowed with reason) tends to maximum expression.
Second law contains a statement that in the course of evolution those species of living beings remain that, by their vital activity, maximize the biogenic geochemical energy.
Social ecology reveals patterns of relationships between nature and society, which are as fundamental as physical patterns. But the complexity of the subject of research itself, which includes three qualitatively different subsystems - inanimate and Live nature Both human society and the short existence of this discipline lead to the fact that social ecology, at least at the present time, is predominantly an empirical science, and the patterns it formulates are extremely general aphoristic statements (like, for example, Commoner's "laws").
Law 1. Everything is connected with everything. This law postulates the unity of the World, it tells us about the need to look for and study the natural origins of events and phenomena, the emergence of chains connecting them, the stability and variability of these connections, the appearance of gaps and new links in them, stimulates us to learn to heal these gaps, and also to predict the course of events .
Law 2. Everything must go somewhere. It is easy to see that this is, in essence, just a paraphrase of known conservation laws. In its most primitive form, this formula can be interpreted as follows: matter does not disappear. The law should be extended to both information and the spiritual. This law directs us to study the ecological trajectories of the elements of nature.
Law 3. Nature knows best. Any major human intervention in natural systems is harmful to it. This law, as it were, separates man from nature. Its essence is that everything that was created before man and without man is the product of lengthy trial and error, the result of a complex process based on such factors as abundance, ingenuity, indifference to individuals with an all-encompassing striving for unity. In its formation and development, nature has developed a principle: what is collected, then sorted out. In nature, the essence of this principle is that no substance can be synthesized in a natural way if there is no means to destroy it. The whole mechanism of cyclicity is based on this. A person does not always provide for this in his activity.
Law 4. Nothing is given for free. In other words, you have to pay for everything. In essence, this is the second law of thermodynamics, which speaks of the presence in nature of a fundamental asymmetry, i.e., the unidirectionality of all spontaneous processes occurring in it. When thermodynamic systems interact with the environment, there are only two ways to transfer energy: heat release and work. The law says that in order to increase their internal energy, natural systems create the most favorable conditions - they do not take "duties". All the work done without any loss can be converted into heat and replenish the internal energy of the system. But, if we do the opposite, i.e., we want to do work at the expense of the internal energy reserves of the system, i.e., do work through heat, we must pay. All heat cannot be converted into work. Any heat engine (technical device or natural mechanism) has a refrigerator, which, like a tax inspector, collects duties. Thus, the law states that you can't live for free. Even the most general analysis of this truth shows that we live in debt, because we pay less than the real value of the goods. But, as you know, the growth of debt leads to bankruptcy.
The concept of law is interpreted by most methodologists in the sense of an unambiguous causal relationship. Cybernetics gives a broader interpretation of the concept of law as a limitation of diversity, and it is more suitable for social ecology, which reveals the fundamental limitations of human activity. It would be absurd to put forward as a gravitational imperative that a person should not jump from a great height, since death is inevitable in this case. But the adaptive capabilities of the biosphere, which make it possible to compensate for violations of ecological patterns up to a certain threshold, make ecological imperatives necessary. The main one can be formulated as follows: the transformation of nature must correspond to its possibilities of adaptation.
One way to formulate socio-ecological patterns is to transfer them from sociology and ecology. For example, as the basic law of social ecology, the law of the correspondence of productive forces and production relations to the state of the natural environment is proposed, which is a modification of one of the laws of political economy. The laws of social ecology, proposed on the basis of the study of ecosystems, we will consider after getting acquainted with the ecology.
The formation of social ecology as a science
In order to better present the subject of social ecology, one should consider the process of its emergence and formation as an independent branch of scientific knowledge. In fact, the emergence and subsequent development of social ecology was a natural consequence of the ever-increasing interest of representatives of various humanitarian disciplines - sociology, economics, political science, psychology, etc., - to the problems of interaction between man and the environment.
The term “social ecology” owes its appearance to American researchers, representatives of the Chicago School of Social Psychologists ¾ R. Park and E. Burges, who first used it in his work on the theory of population behavior in an urban environment in 1921. The authors used it as a synonym for the concept of "human ecology". The concept of “social ecology” was intended to emphasize that in this context we are talking not about a biological, but about a social phenomenon, which, however, also has biological characteristics.
In our country, by the end of the 1970s, conditions had also developed for separating social and environmental issues into an independent area of interdisciplinary research. A significant contribution to the development of domestic social ecology was made by , and etc.
One of the most important problems facing researchers at the present stage of the formation of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress made in the study of various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on social and environmental issues that have appeared in the last two or three decades in our country and abroad, on the issue of what exactly this branch of scientific knowledge studies, there are still different opinions. In the school reference book "Ecology" two options for defining social ecology are given: in the narrow sense, it is understood as the science of "the interaction of human society with the natural environment",
and in a broad sense, the science "about the interaction of an individual and human society with natural, social and cultural environments." It is quite obvious that in each of the presented cases of interpretation we are talking about different sciences that claim the right to be called “social ecology”. No less revealing is the comparison between the definitions of social ecology and human ecology. According to the same source, the latter is defined as: “1) the science of the interaction of human society with nature; 2) ecology of the human personality; 3) the ecology of human populations, including the doctrine of ethnic groups. The almost complete identity of the definition of social ecology, understood "in the narrow sense", and the first version of the interpretation of human ecology is clearly visible. The desire for the actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge, indeed, is still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subjected to well-reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. , in particular, pointing to the expediency of breeding social ecology and human ecology, limits the subject of the latter to consideration of the socio-hygienic and medical-genetic aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature. A similar interpretation of the subject of human ecology is in solidarity, and some other researchers, but categorically disagree, and, according to which, this discipline covers a much wider range of issues of interaction between the anthroposystem (considered at all levels of its organization ¾ from the individual to humanity as a whole) with biosphere, as well as with the internal biosocial organization of human society. It is easy to see that such an interpretation of the subject of human ecology actually equates it with social ecology, understood in a broad sense. This situation is largely due to the fact that at present there has been a steady trend of convergence of these two disciplines, when there is an interpenetration of the subjects of the two sciences and their mutual enrichment through the joint use of the empirical material accumulated in each of them, as well as methods and technologies of socio-ecological and anthropoecological research.
Today, an increasing number of researchers tend to broaden the interpretation of the subject of social ecology. So, in his opinion, the subject of study of modern social ecology, understood by him as a private sociology, are specific links between man and his environment. Based on this, the main tasks of social ecology can be defined as follows: the study of the influence of the environment as a combination of natural and social factors on a person, as well as the influence of a person on the environment, perceived as the framework of human life.
A somewhat different, but not contradictory to the previous, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by and. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is a complex of scientific branches that study the relationship of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the relationship of a person with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.
Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to emphasize the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of mankind with its environment. In his opinion, social ecology should first of all study the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.
The history of the emergence and development of ecological ideas of people is rooted in ancient times. Knowledge about the environment and the nature of relationships with it has acquired practical significance since the dawn of the development of the human species.
The process of formation of a labor and social organization primitive people, the development of their mental and collective activity created the basis for understanding not only the very fact of their existence, but also for an ever greater understanding of the dependence of this existence both on conditions within their social organization and on external natural conditions. The experience of our distant ancestors was constantly enriched and passed down from generation to generation, helping a person in his daily struggle for life.
Approximately 750 thousand years ago people themselves learned how to make fire, equip primitive dwellings, mastered ways to protect themselves from bad weather and enemies. Thanks to this knowledge, man was able to significantly expand the area of \u200b\u200bhis habitat.
Beginning with 8th millennium BC. e. in Asia Minor, various methods of cultivating the land and growing crops are beginning to be practiced. In the countries of Central Europe, this kind of agrarian revolution took place in 6 ¾ 2nd millennium BC. e. As a result a large number of people moved to a settled way of life, in which there was an urgent need for deeper observations of the climate, in the ability to predict the change of seasons and weather changes. By the same time, people discovered the dependence of weather phenomena on astronomical cycles.
Special interest thinkers Ancient Greece and Rome showed to the questions of the origin and development of life on Earth, as well as to the identification of relationships between objects and phenomena of the surrounding world. Thus, the ancient Greek philosopher, mathematician and astronomer Anaxagoras (500¾428 BC e.) put forward one of the first theories of the origin of the world known at that time and the living creatures inhabiting it.
Ancient Greek philosopher and physician Empedocles (c. 487¾ ok. 424 BC e.) paid more attention to the description of the very process of the emergence and subsequent development of earthly life.
Aristotle (384 ¾322 BC e.) created the first known classification of animals, and also laid the foundations for descriptive and comparative anatomy. Defending the idea of the unity of nature, he argued that all more perfect species of animals and plants descended from less perfect ones, and those, in turn, trace their lineage from the most primitive organisms that once arose by spontaneous generation. Aristotle considered the complication of organisms to be the result of their internal desire for self-improvement.
One of the main problems that occupied the minds of ancient thinkers was the problem of the relationship between nature and man. The study of various aspects of their interaction was the subject of scientific interests of the ancient Greek researchers Herodotus, Hippocrates, Plato, Eratosthenes and others.
Peruvian German philosopher and theologian Albert of Bolstedt (Albert the Great)(1206¾1280) belongs to several natural science treatises. The works "On Alchemy" and "On Metals and Minerals" contain statements about the dependence of climate on the geographical latitude of the place and its position above sea level, as well as on the relationship between the inclination of the sun's rays and the heating of the soil.
English philosopher and naturalist Roger Bacon(1214-1294) argued that all organic bodies are, in their composition, various combinations of the same elements and liquids that make up inorganic bodies.
The advent of the Renaissance is inextricably linked with the name of the famous Italian painter, sculptor, architect, scientist and engineer. Leonardo yes Vinci(1452¾1519). He considered the main task of science to establish the laws of natural phenomena, based on the principle of their causal, necessary connection.
The end of the XV ¾ the beginning of the XVI century. rightly bears the name of the era of the great geographical discoveries. In 1492 the Italian navigator Christopher Columbus discovered America. In 1498 the Portuguese Vasco da Gama rounded Africa and reached India by sea. In 1516(17?) portuguese travelers first reached China by sea. And in 1521, the Spanish navigators, led by Ferdinand Magellan made the first trip around the world. Rounding South America, they reached East Asia and then returned to Spain. These travels were an important step in expanding knowledge about the Earth.
Giordano Bruno(1548¾1600) made a significant contribution to the development of the teachings of Copernicus, as well as to freeing him from shortcomings and limitations.
The onset of a fundamentally new stage in the development of science is traditionally associated with the name of a philosopher and logician. Francis Bacon(1561¾1626), who developed inductive and experimental methods of scientific research. He proclaimed the main goal of science to increase the power of man over nature.
At the end of the XVI century. Dutch inventor Zachary Jansen(lived in the 16th century) created the first microscope, which makes it possible to obtain images of small objects, enlarged with glass lenses. English naturalist Robert Hooke(1635¾1703) significantly improved the microscope (his device gave a 40-fold increase), with which he was the first to observe plant cells, and also studied the structure of some minerals.
French naturalist Georges Buffon(1707¾1788), author of the 36-volume Natural History, expressed thoughts about the unity of the animal and plant worlds, about their vital activity, distribution and connection with the environment, defended the idea of species change under the influence of environmental conditions.
major event in the 18th century. was the emergence of the evolutionary concept of the French naturalist Jean Baptiste Lamarck(1744¾1829), according to which the main reason for the development of organisms from lower to higher forms is the desire inherent in living nature to improve the organization, as well as the influence of various external conditions on them.
A special role in the development of ecology was played by the works of the English naturalist Charles Darwin(1809¾1882), who created the theory of the origin of species through natural selection.
In 1866 a German evolutionary zoologist Ernst Haeckel(1834¾1919) in his work "General Morphology of Organisms" proposed to call the entire range of issues related to the problem of the struggle for existence and the influence of a complex of physical and biotic conditions on living beings by the term "ecology".
Human evolution and ecology
Long before certain areas of ecological research gained independence, there was an obvious trend towards a gradual enlargement of the objects of ecological study. If initially they were single individuals, their groups, specific species etc., then over time they began to be supplemented by large natural complexes, such as "biocenosis", the concept of which was formulated by a German zoologist and hydrobiologist
K. Möbius as early as 1877 (the new term was intended to denote the totality of plants, animals and microorganisms inhabiting a relatively homogeneous living space). Shortly before this, in 1875, an Austrian geologist E. Suess To designate a "film of life" on the surface of the Earth, he proposed the concept of "biosphere". The Russian, Soviet scientist significantly expanded and concretized this concept in his book Biosphere, which was published in 1926. In 1935, the English botanist A. Tansley introduced the concept ecological system» (ecosystem). And in 1940, the Soviet botanist and geographer introduced the term "biogeocenosis", which he proposed to designate the elementary unit of the biosphere. Naturally, the study of such large-scale complex formations required the unification of the research efforts of representatives of different "special" ecologies, which, in turn, would be practically impossible without harmonizing their scientific categorical apparatus, as well as without developing common approaches to organizing the research process itself. Actually, it is precisely this need that owes its appearance to ecology as a single science, integrating in itself the particular subject ecologies that developed earlier relatively independently of each other. The result of their reunification was the formation of a "great ecology" (in terms) or "macroecology" (in terms of i), which today includes the following main sections in its structure:
General ecology;
Human ecology (including social ecology);
Applied Ecology.
The structure of each of these sections and the range of problems considered in each of them are shown in Fig. 1. It well illustrates the fact that modern ecology is a complex science that solves an extremely wide range of problems that are extremely relevant at the present stage of the development of society. According to the succinct definition of one of the largest modern environmentalists Eugene Odum, "ecology¾ this is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge, the science of the structure of multi-level systems in nature, society, their interconnection.
The place of social ecology in the system of sciences
Social ecology is a new scientific direction at the intersection of sociology, ecology, philosophy, science, technology and other branches of culture, with each of which it is in close contact. Schematically, this can be expressed as follows:
Many new names of sciences have been proposed, the subject of which is the study of the relationship between man and the natural environment in their entirety: natural sociology, noology, noogenics, global ecology, social ecology, human ecology, socio-economic ecology, modern ecology. Big ecology, etc. At the present time, one can speak more or less confidently about three directions.
Firstly, we are talking about the study of the relationship of society with the natural environment at the global level, on a planetary scale, in other words, the relationship of humanity as a whole with the Earth's biosphere. The specific scientific basis for research in this area is Vernadsky's theory of the biosphere. This direction can be called global ecology. In 1977, the monograph "Global Ecology" was published. It should be noted that, in accordance with his scientific interests, Budyko paid primary attention to the climatic aspects of the global environmental problem, although such topics as the amount of resources of our planet, global indicators of environmental pollution, global circulations of chemical elements in their interaction, and the influence of space on Earth, the state of the ozone shield in the atmosphere, the functioning of the Earth as a whole, etc. Research in this direction implies, of course, intensive international cooperation.
The second direction of research into the relationship of society with the natural environment will be research from the point of view of understanding a person as a social being. Human relations to the social and natural environment correlate with each other. "The limited relationship of people to nature determines their limited relationship to each other" and their limited relationship to each other - their limited relationship to nature "(K. Marx, F. Engels. Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 3, 29) In order to separate this trend, which studies the attitude of various social groups and classes to the natural environment and the structure of their relationships, determined by the attitude to the natural environment, from the subject of global ecology, we can call it social ecology in the narrow sense. In this case, social ecology, in contrast to global ecology, is closer to the humanities than to the natural sciences.The need for such research is enormous, and they are still carried out on a very limited scale.
Finally, the third scientific direction can be considered human ecology. Its subject, which does not coincide with the subjects of global ecology and social ecology in the narrow sense, would be a system of relationships with the natural environment of a person as an individual. This direction is closer to medicine than social and global ecology. By definition, "human ecology is a scientific direction that studies the patterns of interaction, the problems of purposeful management of the preservation and development of the health of the population, the improvement of the Homo sapiens species. The task of human ecology is to develop forecasts of possible changes in the characteristics of human (population) health under the influence of changes in the external environment and development of scientifically based correction standards in the relevant components of life support systems... Most Western authors also distinguish between the concepts of social or human ecology (the ecology of human society) and ecology of man (human ecology). the process of "entry" of the natural environment into the relationship with society as a dependent and controlled subsystem within the framework of the "nature - society" system. The second term is used to name a science that focuses on the person himself, as "biol ogical unit" (Issues of socioecology. Lvov, 1987. p. 32-33).
"Human ecology includes genetic-anatomical-physiological and medical-biological blocks that are absent in social ecology. In the latter, according to historical traditions, it is necessary to include significant sections of sociology and social psychology that are not included in the narrow understanding of human ecology" (ibid., p. 195).
Of course, the three scientific directions noted are far from enough. The approach to the natural environment as a whole, which is necessary for the successful solution of an environmental problem, involves the synthesis of knowledge, which is seen in the formation of directions in various existing sciences that are transitional from them to ecology.
Environmental issues are increasingly included in the social sciences. The development of social ecology is closely connected with the trends in the sociologization and humanization of science (natural science, in the first place), just as the integration of rapidly differentiating disciplines of the ecological cycle with each other and with other sciences is carried out in line with the general trends towards synthesis in the development of modern science.
Practice has a twofold impact on the scientific understanding of environmental problems. The point here, on the one hand, is that transformative activity requires an increase in the theoretical level of research into the system "man - natural environment" and an increase in the predictive power of these studies. On the other hand, it is the practical activity of man that provides direct assistance to scientific research. Knowledge of cause-and-effect relationships in nature can advance as it is transformed. The larger projects for the reconstruction of the natural environment are carried out, the more data penetrates into the sciences about the natural environment, the deeper the cause-and-effect relationships in the natural environment can be identified and, ultimately, the theoretical level of research into the relationship of society with the natural environment becomes higher.
The theoretical potential of the sciences that study the natural environment, in last years has grown noticeably, which leads to the fact that "now all the sciences about the Earth in one way or another are moving from descriptions and the simplest qualitative analysis
observational materials for the development of quantitative theories built on a physical and mathematical basis" (E.K. Fedorov. Interaction of society and nature. L., 1972, p. 63).
Formerly a descriptive science - geography - on the basis of establishing closer contact between its individual branches (climatology, geomorphology, soil science, etc.) and improving its methodological arsenal (mathematization, using the methodology of physical and chemical sciences, etc.) becomes constructive geography, focused not only and not so much on the study of the functioning of the geographical environment, regardless of man, but on the theoretical understanding of the prospects for the transformation of our planet. Similar changes are taking place in other sciences that study certain aspects, aspects, etc. of the relationship between man and the natural environment.
Since social ecology is a new emerging discipline in the process of rapid development, its subject can only be outlined, not clearly defined. This is characteristic of every emerging field of knowledge, social ecology is no exception. We will understand social ecology as a scientific direction that combines what is included in social ecology in the narrow sense, in global ecology and in human ecology. In other words, we will understand by social ecology scientific discipline which studies the relationship between man and nature in their complex. This will be the subject of social ecology, although it may not be definitively established.
Methods of social ecology
A more complicated situation occurs with the definition of the method of social ecology. Since social ecology is a transitional science between the natural and the humanities, insofar as in its methodology it must use the methods of both the natural and human sciences, as well as those methodologies that represent the unity of the natural science and humanitarian approaches (the first is called pomological, the second is ideographic).
As for general scientific methods, familiarization with the history of social ecology shows that at the first stage, the method of observation (monitoring) was mainly used, and the modeling method came to the fore in the second place. Modeling is a way of long-term and complex vision of the world. In its modern understanding, this is a universal procedure for comprehending and transforming the world. Generally speaking, each person, on the basis of his life experience and knowledge, builds certain models of reality. Subsequent experience and knowledge confirm this model or contribute to its change and refinement. A model is simply an ordered set of assumptions about a complex system. It is an attempt to understand some complex aspect of an infinitely varied world by choosing from accumulated ideas and experience a set of observations applicable to the problem under consideration.
The authors of The Limits to Growth describe the global modeling methodology as follows. First, we compiled a list of important causal relationships between variables and outlined the structure feedback. We then consulted the literature and consulted with experts in many areas related to these studies - demographers, economists, agronomists, nutritionists, geologists, environmentalists, etc. Our goal at this stage was to find the most common a structure that would reflect the main relationships between the five levels. Further development of this basic structure on the basis of other more detailed data can be carried out after the system itself is understood in its elementary form. We then quantified each relationship as accurately as possible, using global data if available, and representative local data if no global measurements were made. With the help of a computer, we determined the dependence of the simultaneous action of all these connections in time. We then tested the effects of quantitative changes in our underlying assumptions to find the most critical determinants of the system's behavior. There is no one "hard" world model. The model, as soon as it emerges, is constantly criticized and updated with data as we begin to understand it better. This model uses the most important relationships between population, food, capital investment, depreciation, resources, and output. These dependencies are the same all over the world. Our technique is to make several assumptions about the relationships between the parameters, and then check them on the computer. The model contains dynamic statements only about the physical aspects of human activity. It assumes that the nature of social variables - the distribution of income, the regulation of family size, the choice between industrial goods, services and food - will remain the same in the future as it has been for a long time. modern history world development. Since it is difficult to guess what new forms of human behavior should be expected, we did not try to account for these changes in the model. The value of our model is determined only by the point on each of the graphs, which corresponds to the cessation of growth and the beginning of the catastrophe.
Within the framework of the general method of global modeling, various particular methods were used. Thus, the Meadows group applied the principles of system dynamics, which assume that the state of systems is completely described by a small set of quantities characterizing different levels of consideration, and its evolution in time - by differential equations of the 1st order, containing the rates of change of these quantities, called fluxes, which depend only on time and the level values themselves, but not on the rate of their changes. System dynamics deals only with exponential growth and equilibrium.
The methodological potential of the theory of hierarchical systems applied by Mesarovich and Pestel is much wider, allowing the creation of multilevel models. The input-output method, developed and used in global modeling by V. Leontiev, involves the study of structural relationships in the economy in conditions where "a multitude of apparently unrelated, in fact interdependent flows of production, distribution, consumption and investment constantly influence each other , and, ultimately, are determined by a number of basic characteristics of the system "(V. Leontiev. Studies of the structure of the American economy.
The input-output method represents reality in the form of a chessboard (matrix), reflecting the structure of interbranch flows, the field of production, exchange and consumption. The method itself is already a kind of representation of reality, and thus the chosen methodology turns out to be essentially connected with the content aspect.
A real system can also be used as a model. Thus, agrocenoses can be considered as an experimental model of biocenosis. More generally, all nature-transforming human activity is a simulation that accelerates the formation of a theory, but it should be treated as a model, given the risk that this activity entails. In the transformative aspect, modeling contributes to optimization, i.e., the choice of the best ways to transform the natural environment /