Topic: Subject, tasks, history of social ecology

Plan

1. Concepts of “social ecology”

1.1. Subject, tasks of ecology.

2. The 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 - scientific discipline, which examines the 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 research, namely:

the composition and characteristics of the interests of social strata and groups exploiting natural resources;

perception by different social strata and groups environmental problems and measures to regulate environmental management;

taking into account and using the characteristics and interests of social strata and groups in the practice of environmental protection measures

Thus, social ecology is the science of interests social groups in the field of environmental management.

Problems of social ecology

The goal of social ecology is to create a theory of the evolution of the relationship between man and nature, a logic and methodology for transforming the natural environment. Social ecology is intended to understand and help bridge the gap between man and nature, between humanities and natural sciences.

Social ecology as a science should establish scientific laws, evidence of objectively existing necessary and essential connections between phenomena, the signs of which are their general nature, constancy and the possibility of their prediction, it is necessary to formulate in this way the basic patterns of interaction of elements in the “society - nature” system, so that this allows us to establish a model of optimal interaction of elements in this system.

When establishing the laws of social ecology, one should first of all point out those that were based on an 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 suggests that the geochemical energy of living matter in the biosphere (including humanity as the highest manifestation of living matter, endowed with intelligence) strives for maximum expression.

Second Law contains a statement that in the course of evolution, those species of living beings remain which, through their vital activity, maximize 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 laws it formulates are extremely general aphoristic statements (such as, for example, Commoner’s “laws”).

Law 1. Everything is connected to everything. This law postulates the unity of the World, it tells us about the need to search and study the natural sources of events and phenomena, the emergence of chains connecting them, the stability and variability of these connections, the appearance of breaks and new links in them, stimulates us to learn to heal these gaps, as well as predict the course of events .

Law 2. Everything has to go somewhere. It is easy to see that this is essentially just a paraphrase of the well-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 movement of elements of nature.

Law 3. Nature knows best. Any major human intervention in natural systems is harmful to it. This law seems to separate man from nature. Its essence is that everything that was created before man and without man is the product of long trial and error, the result of a complex process based on factors such as abundance, ingenuity, indifference to individuals with an all-encompassing desire for unity. In its formation and development, nature developed the principle: what is assembled is disassembled. In nature, the essence of this principle is that not a single substance can be synthesized naturally if there is no means to destroy it. The entire cyclical mechanism is based on this. A person does not always provide for this in his activities.

Law 4. Nothing is given for free. In other words, you have to pay for everything. Essentially, this is the second law of thermodynamics, which speaks of the presence of fundamental asymmetry in nature, that is, 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 your internal energy natural systems create the most favorable conditions - they do not take “duties”. All work done can be converted into heat without any loss and replenish the internal energy reserves of the system. But, if we do the opposite, i.e., we want to do work using 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 taxes. 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, since we pay less than the real cost of the goods. But, as you know, growing debt leads to bankruptcy.

The concept of law is interpreted by most methodologists in the sense of an unambiguous cause-and-effect relationship. Cybernetics gives a broader interpretation of the concept of law as a limitation on diversity, and it is more suitable for social ecology, which reveals fundamental limitations human activity. It would be absurd to put forward as a gravitational imperative that a person should not jump from high altitude, since death in this case is inevitable. But the adaptive capabilities of the biosphere, which make it possible to compensate for violations of environmental patterns before reaching a certain threshold, make environmental imperatives necessary. The main one can be formulated as follows: the transformation of nature must correspond to its adaptation capabilities.

One of the ways to formulate socio-ecological patterns is to transfer them from sociology and ecology. For example, the law of correspondence of productive forces and production relations to the state of the natural environment, which is a modification of one of the laws of political economy, is proposed as the basic law of social ecology. We will consider the patterns of social ecology proposed based on the study of ecosystems after familiarization with 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 scientific knowledge. In fact, the emergence and subsequent development of social ecology were a natural consequence of the ever-increasing interest of representatives of various humanitarian disciplines - sociology, economics, political science, psychology, etc. - in the problems of interaction between man and the environment.

The topic “social ecology” owes its appearance to American researchers, representatives of the Chicago School of Social Psychologists ¾ R. Parku And E. Burgess, 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 not talking about a biological, but about a social phenomenon, which, however, also has biological characteristics.

In our country, by the end of the 70s, conditions had also developed for the separation of socio-ecological 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 The challenge facing researchers at the present stage of development of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress achieved in studying various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on socio-ecological issues that have appeared in the last two or three decades in our country and abroad, on the issue of There are still different opinions about what exactly this branch of scientific knowledge studies. The school reference book “Ecology” gives two options for the definition of social ecology: in a narrow sense, it is understood as the science “about the interaction of human society with the natural environment”,

and in a broad ¾ science “about the interaction of an individual and human society with the 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 a comparison of 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 human personality; 3) 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 actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge is indeed still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subject to reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. , in particular, pointing out the expediency of dividing 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. Some other researchers agree with this interpretation of the subject of human ecology, but categorically disagree, and, in their opinion, this discipline covers a much wider range of issues of interaction of 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 to 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 empirical material accumulated in each of them, as well as methods and technologies of socio-ecological and anthropoecological research.

That's all today larger number researchers are inclined to an expanded interpretation of the subject of social ecology. Thus, in his opinion, the subject of study of modern social ecology, understood by him as private sociology, are specific connections 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 habitat as a set 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 slightly different, but not contradictory, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by I. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is complex of scientific branches studying communications public structures(starting with family and other small community groups), as well as the connection between humans and their natural and social environment. 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 especially emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.

Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to especially note the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of humanity with its environment. In his opinion, social ecology should study, first of all, 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 people's ecological ideas goes back to ancient times. Knowledge about the environment and the nature of relationships with it acquired practical significance at the dawn of the development of the human species.

The process of becoming a labor and public organization primitive people, the development of their mental and collective activity created the basis for awareness not only of the very fact of their existence, but also for an increasing understanding of the dependence of this existence both on the conditions within their social organization and on external natural conditions. The experience of our distant ancestors was constantly enriched and passed on from generation to generation, helping man in his daily struggle for life.

Approximately 750 thousand years ago people themselves learned to make fire, equip primitive dwellings, and mastered ways to protect themselves from bad weather and enemies. Thanks to this knowledge, man was able to significantly expand the areas of his habitat.

Beginning with 8th millennium BC e. In Western Asia, various methods of cultivating land and growing crops began to be practiced. In countries Central Europe This kind of agricultural revolution took place in 6 ¾ 2nd millennium BC e. As a result a large number of people switched to a sedentary lifestyle, in which there was an urgent need for deeper observations of the climate, the ability to predict the changing seasons and weather changes. The discovery by people of the dependence of weather phenomena on astronomical cycles also dates back to this time.

Special interest thinkers Ancient Greece and Rome were interested in questions of the origin and development of life on Earth, as well as in identifying connections 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 approx. 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 more and more perfect species animals and plants descended from less perfect ones, and they, in turn, trace their ancestry back to the most primitive organisms that once arose through spontaneous generation. Aristotle considered the complication of organisms to be a consequence 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 interest of ancient Greek researchers Herodotus, Hippocrates, Plato, Eratosthenes and others.

Peru German philosopher and theologian Albert of Bolstedt (Albert the Great)(1206¾1280) belongs to several natural science treatises. The essays “On Alchemy” and “On Metals and Minerals” contain statements about the dependence of climate on geographical latitude place and its position above sea level, as well as the relationship between the inclination of the sun's rays and the heating of the soil.

English philosopher and naturalist Roger Bacon(1214¾1294) argued that all organic bodies are in their composition different combinations of the same elements and liquids from which inorganic bodies are composed.

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 be the establishment of patterns of natural phenomena, based on the principle of their causal, necessary connection.

End of the 15th ¾ beginning of the 16th century. rightfully bears the name of the Age of Great Geographical Discoveries. In 1492, the Italian navigator Christopher Columbus discovered America. In 1498 the Portuguese Vasco da Gama circumnavigated Africa and reached India by sea. In 1516(17?) Portuguese travelers first reached China by sea. And in 1521, Spanish sailors led by Ferdinand Magellan did the first trip around the world. Having circumnavigated South America, they reached East Asia, after which they returned to Spain. These journeys were important stage 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 it from shortcomings and limitations.

The onset of a fundamentally new stage in the development of science is traditionally associated with the name of the philosopher and logician Francis Bacon(1561¾1626), who developed inductive and experimental methods scientific research. He declared the main goal of science to be increasing human power over nature.

At the end of the 16th century. Dutch inventor Zachary Jansen(lived in the 16th century) created the first microscope, which made it possible to obtain images of small objects magnified using glass lenses. English naturalist Robert Hooke(1635¾1703) significantly improved the microscope (his device provided a 40-fold magnification), with the help of which he observed plant cells for the first time, 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 animals and flora, about their life activity, distribution and connection with their habitat, defended the idea of ​​​​variability of species under the influence of environmental conditions.

A major event of the 18th century. was the emergence of the evolutionary concept of the French naturalist Jean Baptiste Lamarck(1744¾1829), according to which main reason The development of organisms from lower to higher forms is the inherent desire in living nature to improve organization, as well as the influence on them of various external conditions.

The works of the English naturalist played a special role in the development of ecology 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 the term “ecology”.

Human evolution and ecology

Long before individual areas of environmental research gained independence, there was an obvious tendency towards a gradual enlargement of objects of environmental study. If initially these were single individuals, their groups, specific biological 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. Mobius back in 1877 (the new term was intended to denote a collection of plants, animals and microorganisms inhabiting a relatively homogeneous living space). Shortly before this, in 1875, the Austrian geologist E. Suess To designate the “film of life” on the surface of the Earth, he proposed the concept of “biosphere”. This concept was significantly expanded and concretized by a Russian and Soviet scientist in his book “Biosphere,” which was published in 1926. In 1935, an English botanist A. Tansley introduced the concept of “ecological system” (ecosystem). And in 1940, a Soviet botanist and geographer introduced the term “biogeocenosis,” which he proposed to designate an 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 have been practically impossible without the coordination of their scientific categorical apparatus, as well as without the development of common approaches to organizing the research process itself. Actually, it is precisely this necessity that ecology owes its emergence as a unified science, integrating private subject ecologies that previously developed relatively independently of each other. The result of their reunification was the formation of “big ecology” (according to the expression) or “macroecology” (according to 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 illustrates well the fact that modern ecology is a complex science that is extremely decisive wide range tasks that are extremely relevant at the present stage of development of society. According to the capacious definition of one of the largest modern ecologists Eugene Odum, "ecology¾ “This is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge, the science of the structure of multi-level systems in nature, society, and 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 comes into very 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 its entirety: natural sociology, noology, noogenics, global ecology, social ecology, human ecology, socio-economic ecology, modern ecology. Greater ecology, etc. Currently, we can more or less confidently talk about three directions.

Firstly, we are talking about the study of the relationship between society and the natural environment at the global level, on a planetary scale, in other words, about the relationship of humanity as a whole with the Earth’s biosphere. The specific scientific basis for research in this area is Vernadsky’s doctrine 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, and global circulation are no less important. chemical elements in their interaction, the influence of space on the Earth, the state of the ozone shield in the atmosphere, the functioning of the Earth as a whole, etc. Research in this direction requires, of course, intensive international cooperation.

The second direction of research into the relationship between society and the natural environment will be research from the point of view of understanding man as a social being. Human relations to the social and natural environment correlate with each other. “The limited attitude of people towards nature determines their limited attitude towards each other” and their limited attitude towards each other determines their limited attitude towards nature” (K. Marx, F. Engels. Works, 2nd ed., vol. 3, p. 29) In order to separate this direction, which studies the attitude of various social groups and classes to the natural environment and the structure of their relationships, determined by their attitude to the natural environment, from the subject global ecology, we can call it social ecology in the narrow sense. In this case, social ecology, in contrast to global ecology, turns out to be closer to the humanities than to natural science. The need for such research is enormous, but it is still being carried out on a very limited scale.

Finally, human ecology can be considered the third scientific direction. Its subject, which does not coincide with the subjects of global ecology and social ecology in the narrow sense, would be the system of relationships with the natural environment of man as an individual. This direction is closer to medicine than social and global ecology. By definition, “human ecology is scientific direction, exploring patterns of interaction, problems of targeted management of the preservation and development of public health, and improvement of the species Homo sapiens. The task of human ecology is to develop forecasts possible changes in the characteristics of human health (population) under the influence of changes in the external environment and the development of scientifically based standards for correction in the relevant components of life support systems... Most Western authors also distinguish between the concepts of social or human ecology (ecology of human society) and ecology of man (ecology of man). The first terms denote a science that considers issues of management, forecasting, and planning of the entire process of “entry” of the natural environment into interrelation with society as a dependent and controllable 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 " biological unit"(Issues of socioecology. Lvov, 1987, pp. 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, not included in the narrow understanding of human ecology" (ibid., p. 195).

Of course, the three mentioned scientific directions are far from enough. The approach to the natural environment as a whole, necessary for the successful solution of an environmental problem, involves a synthesis of knowledge, which is seen in the formation of directions in various existing sciences, 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 of sociologization and humanization of science (natural science, first of all), 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 dual impact on the scientific understanding of environmental problems. The point here, on the one hand, is that transformative activity requires increasing the theoretical level of research into the “man - natural environment” system and strengthening the predictive power of these studies. On the other hand, it is the practical activity of man that directly assists scientific research. Knowledge of cause-and-effect relationships in nature can advance as it transforms. The larger projects for the reconstruction of the natural environment are carried out, the more data penetrates into the sciences of the natural environment, the deeper cause-and-effect relationships in the natural environment can be identified, and the, ultimately, the higher the theoretical level of research into the relationship between society and the natural environment becomes.

Theoretical potential of sciences studying natural environment, V last years has grown noticeably, which leads to the fact that “now all sciences about the Earth are one way or another moving from descriptions and the simplest qualitative analysis of observational materials to the development of quantitative theories built on a physical and mathematical basis” (E.K. Fedorov. Interaction of society and nature. L., 1972, p. 63).

A formerly descriptive science - geography - based on establishing closer contact between its individual branches (climatology, geomorphology, soil science, etc.) and improving its methodological arsenal (mathematization, use of the methodology of physical and chemical sciences, etc.) becomes constructive geography, focusing not only and not so much on the study of the functioning of the geographical environment independently of humans, but on the theoretical understanding of the prospects for the transformation of our planet. Similar changes are occurring 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 that is in the process of rapid development, its subject can only be outlined, but not clearly defined. This is typical for 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 social ecology as a scientific discipline that studies the relationship between man and nature in their complex. This will be a subject of social ecology, although it may not be conclusively established.

Methods of social ecology

More a difficult situation takes place with the definition of the method of social ecology. Since social ecology is a transitional science between the natural sciences and the humanities, 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 - ideographic).

As for general scientific methods, then acquaintance with the history of social ecology shows that at the first stage the observation method (monitoring) was mainly used, at the second the modeling method came to the fore. Modeling is a way of long-term and comprehensive vision of the world. In its modern understanding, this is a universal procedure for comprehending and transforming the world. Generally speaking, each person, based on his life experience and knowledge, builds certain models of reality. Subsequent experience and knowledge confirm this model or contribute to its modification 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 selecting from accumulated ideas and experience a set of observations that apply to the problem at hand.

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 reviewed the literature and consulted experts in many fields related to these studies - demographers, economists, agronomists, nutritionists, geologists, ecologists, etc. Our goal at this stage was to find the most general structure, which would reflect the main relationships between the five levels. Further development of this basic structure based on 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 taken. Using a computer, we determined the time dependence of the simultaneous action of all these connections. We then tested the effect quantitative changes in our basic assumptions to find the most critical determinants of system behavior. There is no one “rigid” world model. A model, once 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, 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 parameters and then test them on a computer. The model contains dynamic statements only about the physical aspects of human activity. It proceeds from the assumption that the nature of social variables - income distribution, regulation of family size, choice between industrial goods, services and food - will remain in the future the same as it has been throughout the modern history of world development. Because it is difficult to predict what new forms of human behavior to expect, we did not attempt to account for these changes in the model. The value of our model is determined only by the point on each of the graphs that corresponds to the cessation of growth and the beginning of a catastrophe.

Within general method global modeling, various private techniques were used. Thus, 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 consideration, and its evolution in time - by differential equations of the 1st order, containing the rates of change of these quantities, called flows, which depend only on time and the level quantities themselves, but not on the rate of their changes. System dynamics deals only with exponential growth and equilibrium states.

The methodological potential of the theory of hierarchical systems applied by Mesarovic and Pestel is much wider, allowing the creation of multi-level models. The input-output method, developed and used in global modeling by B. Leontiev, involves the study of structural relationships in the economy in conditions where “many seemingly unrelated, in fact interdependent flows of production, distribution, consumption and capital 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 intersectoral flows, the field of production, exchange and consumption. The method itself is already a certain idea of ​​reality, and, thus, the chosen methodology turns out to be significantly related to the substantive 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 human nature-transforming activity is a modeling that accelerates the formation of a theory, but it should be treated as a model, taking into account the risk that this activity entails. In the transformative aspect, modeling contributes to optimization, i.e., choosing the best ways to transform the natural environment/

1. Subject of study of social ecology.

2. The environment surrounding a person, its specifics and condition.

3. The concept of “environmental pollution”.

1. Subject of study of social ecology

Social ecology is a scientific discipline that examines 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 research, namely:

The composition and characteristics of the interests of social strata and groups exploiting natural resources;

Perception of environmental problems and measures to regulate environmental management by different social strata and groups;

Taking into account and using the characteristics and interests of social strata and groups in the practice of environmental protection measures

Thus, social ecology is the science of the interests of social groups in the field of environmental management.

Social ecology is divided into the following types:

Economic

Demographic

Urbanistic

Futurological

Legal.

The main task of social ecology is to study the mechanisms of human influence on the environment and those transformations in it that are the result of human activity.

Problems of social ecology mainly come down to three main groups:

Planetary scale - global forecast for population and resources in conditions of intensive industrial development(global ecology) and identifying pathways further development civilization;

Regional scale - study of the state of individual ecosystems at the level of regions and districts (regional ecology);

Microscale - the study of the main characteristics and parameters of urban living conditions (urban ecology or urban sociology).

2. The environment surrounding a person, its specifics and condition

In the environment, surrounding a person, four components can be distinguished. Three of them represent a natural environment modified to varying degrees by the influence of anthropogenic factors. The fourth is the social environment inherent only to human society. These components and their constituent elements are as follows:

1. The natural environment itself (“first nature”, according to N. F. Reimers). This is an environment either slightly modified by man (there is practically no environment on Earth that is completely unmodified by man, due at least to the fact that the atmosphere has no boundaries), or modified to such an extent that it has not lost the most important property of self-healing and self-regulation. The natural environment itself is close to or coincides with the one in Lately called "ecological space". Currently, such space occupies approximately 1/3 of the land. For individual regions, such spaces are distributed as follows: Antarctica - almost 100%, North America(mainly Canada) - 37.5, CIS countries - 33.6, Australia and Oceania - 27.9, Africa - 27.5, South America - 20.8, Asia - 13.6 and Europe - only 2.8 % (Problems of Ecology of Russia, 1993).

In absolute terms, most of these territories are located in Russian Federation and Canada, where such spaces are represented northern forests, tundra and other poorly developed lands. In Russia and Canada, the ecological space accounts for about 60% of the territory. Significant areas of ecological space are represented by highly productive tropical forests. But this space is currently shrinking at an unprecedented rate.

2. Natural environment transformed by man. According to N.F. Reimers, “second nature”, or quasi-natural environment (lat. quasi-as if). Such an environment for its existence requires periodic energy expenditure on the part of humans (energy investment).

3. Man-made environment, or “third nature”, or art-natural environment (Latin arte - artificial). These are residential and industrial premises, industrial complexes, built-up parts of cities, etc. Most people in industrial society live in conditions of just such a “third nature”.

4. Social environment. This environment has more and more influence on people. It includes relationships between people, the psychological climate, the level of material security, healthcare, general cultural values, the degree of confidence in the future, etc. If we assume that in big city, for example, in Moscow, all unfavorable parameters of the abiotic environment (pollution of all types) will be removed, and the social environment will remain in the same form, then there is no reason to expect a significant reduction in diseases and an increase in life expectancy.

3. The concept of “environmental pollution”

Environmental pollution is understood as any introduction into a particular ecological system of living or non-living components that are not characteristic of it, physical or structural changes that interrupt or disrupt the processes of circulation and metabolism, energy flows with a decrease in productivity or destruction of this ecosystem.

There are natural pollution caused by natural, often catastrophic, causes, such as a volcanic eruption, and anthropogenic pollution, resulting from human activity.

Anthropogenic pollutants are divided into material (dust, gases, ash, slag, etc.) and physical or energy (thermal energy, electric and electromagnetic fields, noise, vibration, etc.). Material pollutants are divided into mechanical, chemical and biological. Mechanical pollutants include dust and aerosols atmospheric air, solid particles in water and soil. Chemical (ingredient) pollutants include various gaseous, liquid and solid chemical compounds and elements that enter the atmosphere, hydrosphere and interact with the environment - acids, alkalis, sulfur dioxide, emulsions and others.

Biological pollutants are all types of organisms that appear with the participation of humans and cause harm to them - fungi, bacteria, blue-green algae, etc.

The consequences of environmental pollution are briefly formulated as follows.

Deterioration of environmental quality.

The formation of undesirable losses of matter, energy, labor and funds during the extraction and procurement by humans of raw materials and supplies, which turn into irrevocable waste dispersed in the biosphere.

Irreversible destruction of not only individual ecological systems, but also the biosphere as a whole, including the impact on global physical and chemical parameters of the environment.

Subject of study of social ecology

Social ecology is a scientific discipline that examines 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 research, namely:

The composition and characteristics of the interests of social strata and groups exploiting natural resources;

Perception of environmental problems and measures to regulate environmental management by different social strata and groups;

Taking into account and using the characteristics and interests of social strata and groups in the practice of environmental protection measures

Thus, social ecology is the science of the interests of social groups in the field of environmental management.

Social ecology is divided into the following types:

Economic

Demographic

Urbanistic

Futurological

Legal.

The main task of social ecology is to study the mechanisms of human influence on the environment and those transformations in it that are the result of human activity.

Problems of social ecology mainly come down to three main groups:

Planetary scale - global forecast for population and resources in conditions of intensive industrial development (global ecology) and determination of ways for the further development of civilization;

Regional scale - study of the state of individual ecosystems at the level of regions and districts (regional ecology);

Microscale - the study of the main characteristics and parameters of urban living conditions (urban ecology or urban sociology).

1. The environment surrounding a person, its specificity and condition

In the human environment, four components can be distinguished. Three of them represent a natural environment modified to varying degrees by the influence of anthropogenic factors. The fourth is the social environment inherent only to human society. These components and their constituent elements are as follows:

1. The natural environment itself (“first nature”, according to N. F. Reimers). This is an environment either slightly modified by man (there is practically no environment on Earth that is completely unmodified by man, due at least to the fact that the atmosphere has no boundaries), or modified to such an extent that it has not lost the most important property of self-healing and self-regulation. The natural environment itself is close to or coincides with that which has recently been called “ecological space.” Currently, such space occupies approximately 1/3 of the land. For individual regions, such spaces are distributed as follows: Antarctica - almost 100%, North America (mainly Canada) - 37.5, CIS countries - 33.6, Australia and Oceania - 27.9, Africa - 27.5, South America - 20.8, Asia - 13.6 and Europe - only 2.8% (Ecological Problems of Russia, 1993).

In absolute terms, most of these territories are in the Russian Federation and Canada, where such spaces are represented by boreal forests, tundras and other poorly developed lands. In Russia and Canada, the ecological space accounts for about 60% of the territory. Significant areas of ecological space are represented by highly productive tropical forests. But this space is currently shrinking at an unprecedented rate.

2. Natural environment transformed by man. According to N.F. Reimers, “second nature”, or quasi-natural environment (lat. quasi-as if). Such an environment for its existence requires periodic energy expenditure on the part of humans (energy investment).

3. Man-made environment, or “third nature”, or art-natural environment (Latin arte - artificial). These are residential and industrial premises, industrial complexes, built-up parts of cities, etc. Most people in an industrial society live in conditions of just such a “third nature”.

4. Social environment. This environment has more and more influence on people. It includes relationships between people, the psychological climate, the level of material security, healthcare, general cultural values, the degree of confidence in the future, etc. If we assume that in a large city, for example in Moscow, all unfavorable parameters of the abiotic environment (pollution of all species), and the social environment will remain in the same form, then there is no reason to expect a significant reduction in diseases and an increase in life expectancy.

1. The concept of "environmental pollution"

Environmental pollution is understood as any introduction into a particular ecological system of living or non-living components that are not characteristic of it, physical or structural changes that interrupt or disrupt the processes of circulation and metabolism, energy flows with a decrease in productivity or destruction of this ecosystem.

There are natural pollution caused by natural, often catastrophic, causes, such as a volcanic eruption, and anthropogenic pollution, resulting from human activity.

Anthropogenic pollutants are divided into material (dust, gases, ash, slag, etc.) and physical or energy (thermal energy, electric and electromagnetic fields, noise, vibration, etc.). Material pollutants are divided into mechanical, chemical and biological. Mechanical pollutants include dust and aerosols from atmospheric air, solid particles in water and soil. Chemical (ingredient) pollutants are various gaseous, liquid and solid chemical compounds and elements that enter the atmosphere, hydrosphere and interact with the environment - acids, alkalis, sulfur dioxide, emulsions and others.

Biological pollutants are all types of organisms that appear with the participation of humans and cause harm to them - fungi, bacteria, blue-green algae, etc.

The consequences of environmental pollution are briefly formulated as follows.

Deterioration of environmental quality.

The formation of undesirable losses of matter, energy, labor and funds during the extraction and procurement by humans of raw materials and supplies, which turn into irrevocable waste dispersed in the biosphere.

Irreversible destruction of not only individual ecological systems, but also the biosphere as a whole, including the impact on global physical and chemical parameters of the environment.

Subject of study of social ecology

The subject of studying social ecology is to identify patterns of development of this system, value-ideological, sociocultural, legal and other prerequisites and conditions for its sustainable development. That is, the subject of social ecology is a relationship in the “society-man-technology-natural environment” system.

In this system, all elements and subsystems are homogeneous, and the connections between them determine its immutability and structure. The object of social ecology is the “society-nature” system.

The problem of developing a unified approach to understanding the subject of social ecology

One of the most important problems facing researchers at the present stage of development of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress achieved in studying various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on socio-ecological 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” A.P. Oshmarin and V.I. Oshmarina gives two options for defining social ecology: in a narrow sense, it is understood as the science “about 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 the 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 a comparison of 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) 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 actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge is indeed still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subject to reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. S. N. Solomina, in particular, pointing out the advisability of dividing 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. V.A. agrees with this interpretation of the subject of human ecology. Bukhvalov, L.V. Bogdanova and some other researchers, but N.A. categorically disagree. Agadzhanyan, V.P. Kaznacheev and N.F. Reimers, according to whom, this discipline covers a much wider range of issues of interaction of the anthroposystem (considered at all levels of its organization from the individual to humanity as a whole) with the 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 to 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 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 are inclined to an expanded interpretation of the subject of social ecology. So, according to D.Zh. Markovich, the subject of study of modern social ecology, which he understands as a private sociology, is the specific connections 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 habitat as a set 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 slightly 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 connection of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the connection of humans 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 especially emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.

Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to especially note the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of humanity with its environment. According to E.V. Girusov, social ecology should study, first of all, the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.

Principles of social ecology

• · Humanity, like any population, cannot grow indefinitely.
• · Society in its development must take into account the extent of biosphere phenomena.
• · Sustainable development society depends on the timeliness of the transition to alternative resources and technologies.
• · Any transformative activity of society must be based on an environmental forecast
• · The development of nature should not reduce the diversity of the biosphere and worsen the quality of life of people.
• · The sustainable development of civilization depends on the moral qualities of people.
• · Everyone is responsible for their actions to the future.
• · We must think globally and act locally.
• · The unity of nature obliges humanity to cooperate.

SOCIAL ECOLOGY is a branch of science that studies the relationship between human communities and the surrounding geographic-spatial, social and cultural environment, the direct and collateral influence of industrial activities on the composition and properties of the environment, the environmental impact of anthropogenic, especially urbanized, landscapes, and other environmental factors on physical and mental health of a person and the gene pool of human populations, etc. Already in the 19th century, the American scientist D. P. Marsh, having analyzed the diverse forms of human destruction of natural balance, formulated a program for nature conservation. French geographers of the 20th century (P. Vidal de la Blache, J. Brun, Z. Martonne) developed the concept of human geography, the subject of which is the study of a group of phenomena occurring on the planet and involved in human activity. The works of representatives of the Dutch and French geographical school of the 20th century (L. Febvre, M. Sor), constructive geography developed by Soviet scientists A. A. Grigoriev, I. P. Gerasimov, analyze the impact of man on the geographical landscape, the embodiment of his activities in the social space.

The development of geochemistry and biogeochemistry revealed the transformation of humankind’s industrial activity into a powerful geochemical factor, which served as the basis for identifying a new geological era- anthropogenic (Russian geologist A.P. Pavlov) or psychozoic (American scientist C. Schuchert). The doctrine of V.I. Vernadsky about the biosphere and noosphere is associated with a new look at the geological consequences of the social activities of mankind.

A number of aspects of social ecology are also studied in historical geography, which studies the connections between ethnic groups and the natural environment. The formation of social ecology is associated with the activities of the Chicago school. The subject and status of social ecology are the subject of debate: it is defined either as a systemic understanding of the environment, or as a science about the social mechanisms of the relationship between human society and the environment, or as a science that focuses on humans as a biological species (Homo sapiens). Social ecology has significantly changed scientific thinking, developing new theoretical approaches and methodological orientations among representatives of various sciences, contributing to the formation of new ecological thinking. Social ecology analyzes the natural environment as a differentiated system, the various components of which are in dynamic equilibrium, considers the Earth's biosphere as an ecological niche of humanity, connecting the environment and human activity into a single system "nature - society", reveals the human impact on the balance of natural ecosystems, poses the question about the management and rationalization of the relationship between man and nature. Ecological thinking finds its expression in various proposed options for reorienting technology and production. Some of them are associated with sentiments of environmental pessimism and aparmism (from the French alarme - anxiety), with the revival of reactionary-romantic concepts of the Rousseauist type, from the point of view of which the root cause ecological crisis is scientific and technological progress in itself, with the emergence of the doctrines of “organic growth”, “steady state”, etc., which consider it necessary to sharply limit or even suspend technical and economic development. In other options, in contrast to this pessimistic assessment of the future of mankind and the prospects for environmental management, projects are put forward for a radical restructuring of technology, ridding it of miscalculations that led to environmental pollution (an alternative science and technology program, a model of closed production cycles), and the creation of new technical means and technological processes ( transport, energy, etc.), acceptable from an environmental point of view. The principles of social ecology are also expressed in ecological economics, which takes into account the costs not only for the development of nature, but also for the protection and restoration of the ecosphere, emphasizes the importance of criteria not only for profitability and productivity, but also for the environmental validity of technical innovations, environmental control over planning industry and environmental management. The ecological approach has led to the identification within social ecology of the ecology of culture, in which ways are sought to preserve and restore various elements of the cultural environment created by humanity throughout its history (architectural monuments, landscapes, etc.), and the ecology of science, in which it analyzes geographical location of research centers, personnel, disparities in the regional and national network research institutes, media, financing in the structure of scientific communities.

The development of social ecology has served as a powerful impetus for advancing new values ​​to humanity - the preservation of ecosystems, treating the Earth as a unique ecosystem, prudent and caring attitude towards living things, the co-evolution of nature and humanity, etc. Tendencies towards an ecological reorientation of ethics are found in various ethical concepts: the teachings of A. Schweitzer about a reverent attitude towards life, the ethics of nature of the American ecologist O. Leopold, the space ethics of K. E. Tsiolkovsky, the ethics of love of life developed by the Soviet biologist D. P. Filatov, etc.

Problems of social ecology are usually considered to be the most acute and urgent among global problems modernity, on the solution of which depend the possibility of survival of both humanity itself and all life on Earth. A necessary condition their solution is the recognition of the priority of universal human values ​​as the basis of a broad international cooperation various social, political, national, class and other forces in overcoming those environmental hazards, which are fraught with the arms race, uncontrolled scientific and technological progress, and many anthropogenic impacts on the human environment.

At the same time, problems of social ecology in specific forms are expressed in regions of the planet that are different in their natural-geographical and socio-economic parameters, at the level of specific ecosystems. Taking into account the limited sustainability and self-healing capacity of natural ecosystems, as well as their cultural value, is becoming an increasingly important factor in the design and implementation of industrial activities of humans and society. This often forces people to abandon previously adopted programs for the development of productive forces and the use of natural resources.

In general, the historically developing human activity in modern conditions takes on a new dimension - it cannot be considered truly reasonable, meaningful and appropriate if it ignores the requirements and imperatives dictated by ecology.

A. P. Ogurtsov, B. G. Yudin

New philosophical encyclopedia. In four volumes. / Institute of Philosophy RAS. Scientific ed. advice: V.S. Stepin, A.A. Guseinov, G.Yu. Semigin. M., Mysl, 2010, vol.IV, p. 423-424.

Literature:

Marsh D. P. Man and Nature, trans. from English St. Petersburg, 1866; Dorst J. Before nature dies, trans. from French M., 1908; Watt K. Ecology and management natural resources, trans. from English M., 1971; Ehrenfeld D. Nature and People, trans. from English M., 1973; Interaction between nature and society. Philosophical, geographical, environmental aspects of the problem. Sat. Art. M., 1973; Man and his habitat. - “VF”, 1973, No. 1-4; Commoner B. Closing Circle, trans. from English L., 1974; It's him. Technology of profit, trans. from English M., 1970; Ward B., Dubos R. There is only one Earth, trans. from English M., 1975; Budyka M.I. Global ecology. M., 1977; Dynamic balance between man and nature. Minsk, 1977; Odum G., Odum E. Energy basis of man and nature, trans. from English M., 1978; Moiseev N. N., Alexandrov V. V., Tarko A. M. Man and the biosphere. M., 1985; Problems of human ecology. M., 1986; Odum Yu. Ecology, trans. from English, vol. 1-2. M„ 1986; Gorelov A. A. Social ecology. M., 1998; Park R. E. Human Communities. The City and Human Ecology. Glencoe, 1952; Perspectives en Ecologie Humaine. P., 1972; Ehrlich P. R., Ehrllch A. H., Holdren J. P. Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions. S.F., 1973; Lexikon der Umweltethik. Gott.- Dusseldorf, 1985.