Читать онлайн книгу «General View of the Historical Development of Human Societies. Monograph» автора Mamanov Abdurahim
General View of the Historical Development of Human Societies. Monograph. Философия истории. Географическая школа в социологии
Mamanov Abdurahim
Following the emergence of Marx’s foundational theory regarding the historical progression of humanity, there arose a widespread disillusionment with overarching theoretical frameworks. Consequently, scholarly attention shifted predominantly towards localized and regional issues. However, it is imperative for historians to possess a comprehensive understanding of the broader trajectory of societal development; lacking such insight is akin to a sailor navigating the seas without a compass.
General View ofВ the Historical Development ofВ Human Societies. Monograph
Философия истории. Географическая школа в социологии
Mamanov Abdurahim
© Mamanov Abdurahim, 2024
ISBNВ 978-5-0064-0532-5
Created with Ridero smart publishing system
Mamanov Abdurahim
GENERAL VIEW OFВ THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OFВ HUMAN SOCIETIES
Monograph
TASHKENT-2023
Mamanov Abdurahim
Researcher at the Samarkand State University
2023
Contents
Introduction
It was mentioned in our previous studies that without creating a general picture of the path of historical development of human society, it is a difficult task to correctly understand and evaluate the historical events that happened in the life of this or that nation.[1 - Маманов А. Тарих миллатлар манфаатлари тўқнашувчи майдондир. �жтимоий фикр журнали 2020 й. 2-сон.]
It is indisputable that contemporary history textbooks for high and secondary schools often contain numerous shallow concepts, uncertainties, and erroneous conclusions regarding both global history and the specific history ofВ Uzbekistan. We believe that one ofВ the primary reasons for this discrepancy is the absence ofВ aВ developmental theory capable ofВ illuminating the trajectory ofВ human societal progress.
The history ofВ human society encompasses the narratives ofВ countless nations, many ofВ which have risen and fallen over time, with their positions often assumed byВ other peoples. Some nations confront crises, while others continuously advance and evolve, ultimately becoming leading global powers.
Is there aВ discernible pattern within this perpetual cycle ofВ ascent, crisis, emergence, decline, destruction, and prosperity, or is it merely aВ matter ofВ random chance?
We believe that the historical progression ofВ human society unfolds according toВ overarching principles. The task ofВ uncovering these principles falls under the purview ofВ the theory ofВ historical development, which is essentially the philosophy ofВ history.
While chance certainly plays aВ role inВ historical processes, it is essential toВ recognize that beneath the apparent randomness lies aВ foundation ofВ law. Events that may appear coincidental toВ us are, inВ fact, mechanisms through which these laws manifest and actualize.
As an illustration, the rise ofВ Islam inВ the Arabian Peninsula during the early 7th century constituted aВ significant event. This emergence was deemed necessary as the nomadic Arab tribes, characterized byВ their polytheistic beliefs where each tribe worshipped its own deity and engaged inВ perpetual warfare with others, required aВ unifying faith toВ consolidate into aВ cohesive nation.
However, the dissemination of this faith through the teachings of Muhammad – its specific manifestation – was also influenced by various incidental factors.
Those who refute the presence ofВ overarching laws inВ the historical evolution ofВ human society perceive historical development as aВ chaotic sequence ofВ happenstance events. They elevate the role ofВ chance toВ such an extent that they entertain the notion ofВ aВ breeze altering its course from the East toВ the West, thereby influencing the temperament ofВ an emperor and drastically reshaping the course ofВ human history.
If life were truly governed byВ such arbitrary occurrences, individuals and nations alike would be unable toВ anticipate the future or formulate any coherent plans.
Human history can be likened to a vast edifice with countless chambers. Each nation’s history forms one of these chambers within the larger structure. To accurately determine the exact dimensions, elevation, and arrangement of each of these numerous chambers, it is imperative to first ascertain the overall elevation, position, and shape of the entire edifice. Without establishing this overarching framework, it becomes evident that determining the placement, level, and configuration of the individual chambers becomes an insurmountable task.
Reflecting on a past experience, I once observed a group of individuals preparing a site for a new house. Despite possessing measuring instruments and intermittently moving about, they failed to complete the task. It became apparent that none among them possessed the expertise required for such an endeavor: one was a district’s chief physician, another his driver, a third an agronomist, and the fourth a foreman. It is likely that their inability to define the outer dimensions of the house precisely as a rectangular shape hindered their ability to position the chambers within the designated layout.
Realizing that their efforts would likely be inВ vain, IВ obtained their consent and proceeded toВ establish the outer dimensions ofВ the forthcoming building according toВ precise rectangular guidelines. Subsequently, we measured and arranged the rooms within this framework with precision.
The principles governing the construction process have been established for millennia, requiring no alteration or objection. However, aВ universally accepted theory ofВ historical development, capable ofВ satisfying all perspectives and immune toВ criticism, has yet toВ be formulated. As previously mentioned, history is aВ realm where national interests often clash. Each nation, recognizing itself as such, contends for its own interests, interpreting historical events accordingly, and formulating its own theory ofВ historical development.
Numerous theories have been devised to articulate the interests not only of distinct peoples and nations but also specific social classes. For instance, the theory of historical materialism, championed by Marx and Engels, primarily represents the interests of the proletariat, the world’s impoverished class.
However, it is crucial toВ recognize that the architect ofВ aВ theory ofВ historical development does not confine their philosophy toВ the interests ofВ aВ particular people, nation, or social class. Instead, they endeavor toВ present it as the trajectory ofВ historical progression applicable toВ all ofВ humanity.
Indeed, the true nature ofВ aВ theory, whether it accurately reflects the trajectory ofВ historical development for all humanity or merely serves the interests ofВ specific groups, will ultimately be determined byВ time itself. Time stands as the ultimate arbiter.
It is essential toВ acknowledge that not everyone will readily embrace novel ideas concerning historical development. As aВ general rule, any new scientific proposition, whether valid or erroneous, typically faces criticism from many quarters. This resistance stems from the fact that innovation often entails challenging established norms, concepts, and values held byВ the majority, be it inВ personal relationships or within the realm ofВ academia. Naturally, it is difficult for many individuals toВ embrace the new while relinquishing ideas, values, and concepts they have long regarded as true.
Initially, we will conduct aВ thorough critical examination ofВ various theories ofВ historical development, offering our perspectives on each. Subsequently, we will endeavor toВ articulate our own viewpoint, namely, the comprehensive framework ofВ human societal development from the vantage point ofВ the geographical school inВ sociology.
1.В Formative approach
The theoretical underpinnings of the formative approach were developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. According to this approach, human society’s history unfolds through a series of social and economic formations.
InВ accordance with Marxist theory, human endeavors toВ procure essential material goods for sustenance invariably manifest inВ distinct modes ofВ production. From this perspective, human society progresses through the following formations:
– Primitive community system.
– Slavery.
– Feudal system.
– Capitalism.
– Communism.
These are referred to as socio-economic formations, which are rooted in the method of producing material goods. Each society develops a complex of political institutions, ideological beliefs, and religious views based on its method of production – the economic foundation. Property and production relations in each society are shaped in accordance with a particular level of productive forces.
The mode of production in any society is determined by its specific relations of production and ownership. As productive forces grow and develop, a tension emerges between the existing method of production and the productive forces within society. This tension is typically resolved through a social revolution, wherein the established production and property relations are dismantled by the forces of production, paving the way for new production and property relations that align with the current level of productivity – a new economic foundation and mode of production. Subsequently, new structural, political, and social organizations – along with artistic, literary, ideological, and philosophical systems – emerge to correspond with the new economic base.
Presently, many scholars acknowledge that while the formative approach offers insights into European historical development, it falls short inВ accurately capturing the histories ofВ other regions, particularly those inВ the East:
“The formative approach is not without its limitations. Historical evidence suggests that not all countries follow the rigid framework proposed by proponents of this approach. For instance, many nations have not transitioned beyond the social and economic system of slavery. Moreover, the historical trajectories of Eastern countries often diverge significantly from the formative developmental system formulated for European societies.”[2 - Замонов А. Сам. ДУ тадқиқотчиси А. Мамановнинг “Тарих фанини ўқитишда инновацион услуб” номли мақоласига тақриз.]
According toВ Zamonov, the formative approach was primarily designed for European societies, suggesting it effectively elucidates the historical evolution ofВ Europe. However, we contend that the formative approach struggles toВ accurately depict the trajectory ofВ historical development not only inВ other regions ofВ the world but even within Europe itself.
InВ our view, the delineation ofВ slavery and feudalism as distinct periods inВ the history ofВ individual societies, as proposed byВ Marxists, lacks justification. We argue that these systems cannot be considered as separate periods or methods ofВ production within the historical development ofВ individual societies.
InВ essence, what criteria should be utilized toВ ascertain the method ofВ production that delineates aВ distinct period inВ the history ofВ human society?
According toВ Marx, aВ production method identified as aВ separate period and stage inВ human societal history is characterized byВ its economic foundation, alongside the development ofВ ideological superstructures, political and social institutions, legal systems, literature, art, philosophy, and other facets within society. However, some scholars argue that Marx and Engels did not sufficiently elucidate how this economic foundation gives rise toВ an ideological structure.
Erich Fromm, aВ renowned philosopher ofВ the 20th century, asserts that Marx emphasized the interconnectedness between society’s economic foundation and its political, legal, philosophical, artistic, and religious dimensions. According toВ Marx’s theory, the ideological structure arises from the economic base. However, Engels acknowledged that neither he nor Marx had elucidated how the economic base transitions into an ideological superstructure. Fromm suggests that this gap inВ Marxist theory could be addressed through psychoanalysis, revealing the mechanisms byВ which the economic foundation shapes the ideological structure. As Fromm states, “Marx emphasized that there is an interrelationship between the economic base ofВ society on the one hand and political and legal structures, philosophy, art, religion, and others on the other.”[3 - Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ-1992. Стр:В 327]
Hence, Marx and Engels did not delineate the process byВ which the economic base transforms into an ideological structure. According toВ Erich Fromm, this intermediary link is fulfilled byВ the social character ofВ that society.[4 - Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ. 1992. Стр:В 331]
Fromm posits that social behavior primarily stems from the requirements and necessities dictated byВ the prevailing mode ofВ production within society. Consequently, our current objective revolves around analyzing the attributes ofВ Western social character. Many scholars contend that the behavioral traits specific toВ aВ given society are intrinsic toВ its members and go unnoticed byВ them. Hence, individuals within that society may not discern the distinctive features ofВ their social behavior.
ToВ comprehend and assess the distinctive attributes ofВ social behavior inherent toВ aВ particular society, it is imperative toВ juxtapose it with dissimilar social behavior. For instance, toВ grasp the traits ofВ Western social character, it is necessary toВ contrast it with an alternative example, such as the Eastern social character.
AВ comparison ofВ Eastern and Western social behavior reveals stark differences inВ their primary characteristics. For instance, inВ Eastern societies, individuals often exhibit deference toВ authority, whereas inВ Western societies, emphasis is placed on individual freedom and dignity. While Eastern social character may prioritize attitudes ofВ deference and compromise, with morality holding aВ broader and more significant role than legal strictures, Western social character may be characterized byВ aВ stance ofВ assertiveness inВ interpersonal relationships, with the law holding greater sway than morality.
According to Erich Fromm’s teachings, the social character is shaped by the prevailing mode of production. From this perspective, one might inquire into the basis upon which the social character characteristic of the West is formed. If we adhere to the formative approach, which suggests that slavery and feudalism were the primary modes of production during Antiquity and the Middle Ages, one might wonder if the characteristics of these modes of production contributed to the development of the Western social character. For instance, how might the traits associated with slavery or feudalism – such as authoritarian rule and subjugation – have influenced the characteristics of the Western social character, such as individualism, prioritization of personal interests, and intolerance?
It would be more coherent toВ view slavery and feudal systems not as distinct modes ofВ production, but rather as methods ofВ exploitation employed byВ one class over another. Towards the decline ofВ communist ideology, there emerged notions that it is unscientific toВ regard slavery and feudal systems as separate stages inВ the history ofВ human society.[5 - Р�люшечкин В. Рџ. Рксплуатация и собственностьв сословно-классовых обществах. Рњ.В 1990]
It is striking that Marxist theory largely overlooks the concept of social behavior. How can we account for the dearth of inquiry into the notion of social character (mentality), not only during the era of Marx and Engels but also in the socialist countries until the latter stages of communist rule? In contrast, from the latter half of the 19th century and particularly the early 20th century, Western scholars dedicated significant efforts to studying social behavior – namely, the mentality of diverse peoples. This raises a pertinent question: was this oversight intentional on the part of Marxists, or simply a disregard for the matter?
Historical evidence and logical analysis suggest that the first possibility holds more credibility: after all, Karl Marx himself may have manipulated the theory of Asian mode of production (AMP) he developed for political ends.[6 - Латов Ю. Тройной юбилейТеории АСП. htts:||cyberleninka.ru|article|v|vostochnyy despotism-k-a-vittfoqelya-k-50-letiyu-strannoy-knigi.] Thus, what political motivations might have compelled Marxists to ignore reality? To answer this question, a deeper understanding of the content of the Marxist worldview is necessary.
As per the Marxist worldview, the history of human society is delineated by class struggle. “The history of human society is the history of class struggle,” as asserted by Karl Marx.
The formative approach toВ history effectively illustrates the history ofВ each society as aВ narrative ofВ class struggle unfolding beforeВ us.
In accordance with this approach, the names assigned to the stages of human societal history – excluding the primitive collective system and communism, namely slavery, feudalism, and capitalism – themselves signify that these stages are defined by class struggle. However, one might wonder: what if Marx and his contemporaries had acknowledged that social character serves as the intermediary between the economic base and the ideological superstructure?
If we consider that social character is shaped byВ the economic foundation, it would be imperative toВ establish aВ connection between the attributes ofВ the Western social character and the modes ofВ production ofВ slavery or feudalism as posited byВ the formative theory. Indeed, such an investigation would raise doubts regarding the validity ofВ the formative approach as outlined.
Further evidence supporting our aforementioned perspective is found in Karl Marx’s theory of the Asian mode of production (AMP), introduced in 1857. In this theory, Marx suggests that irrigated agriculture, necessitating a dry and warm climate prevalent in Eastern regions, serves as the economic foundation of Eastern despotism – the enduring communal life and overall advancement of the East. However, scholars widely acknowledge that Marx began to distort the theory of the AMP when it became apparent that it did not align with the political objectives pursued by Marxists.
However, there is another aspect of this issue that has largely escaped the attention of scholars: while Marx and his contemporaries acknowledged irrigated agriculture as the economic foundation of Eastern development, they failed to recognize that rainfed agriculture served as the opposite pole – the economic basis of Western development. This oversight seems incredulous. If Marxists had indeed acknowledged irrigated agriculture as the economic basis of Eastern development and rainfed agriculture as the economic basis of Western development, one of the fundamental tenets of Marxist doctrine – the notion that history is driven by class struggle – would have sustained a significant blow.
The Marxists aimed to empower the global proletariat to challenge the capitalists and bourgeoisie, ultimately constructing communism through a global revolution. To accomplish this objective, they sought a pristine historical narrative – a chronicle defined by class conflict: slaves opposing slavers, serfs resisting feudal lords, and the working class confronting capitalists.
It’s conceivable that Marx and his associates made these alterations with benevolent intentions. Their aim was to expedite the realization of a utopian communist society on Earth. If they deviated from scientific rigor for this cause – guided by their political interests – then it might be more fitting to liken them to shepherds rather than politicians; just as shepherds affix a bell to the lead sheep to prevent the flock from scattering.
Like a herd of sheep conditioned to respond to the sound of a bell, Marx and his colleagues envisioned the formative approach to history as the guiding call. Humanity was expected to heed this call – embodied by the formative approach to history – and march toward the radiant dawn of communism. However, one might ponder: is humanity akin to a herd of unquestioning sheep that obediently follows the ringer?
InВ contemporary times, there is aВ growing skepticism among scholars regarding the conclusions drawn from the formative approach toВ history.
1. The cultural approach, typical ofВ those who view history through aВ cultural lens, entails aВ rejection ofВ the overarching laws ofВ human history.
Adherents ofВ the cultural approach perceive the history ofВ human society as aВ succession ofВ civilizations that emerge and vanish sequentially.
The cultural approach places significant emphasis on examining specific facets ofВ the history ofВ individual societies, countries, and peoples that have wielded considerable influence inВ the progress ofВ humanity. It prioritizes the exploration ofВ material aspects ofВ societal development over spiritual factors.
Overall, within the realm ofВ the cultural approach, there exists no uniform consensus or singular perspective on historical development. This diversity is evidenced byВ the existence ofВ over 200В definitions ofВ the concept ofВ civilization inВ scholarly discourse. According toВ the cultural approach, which represents aВ somewhat broader and acknowledged perspective, human society progresses through the following stages ofВ civilization:
– Neolithic civilization
– First class civilization
– Ancient civilization
– Medieval civilization
– Pre-industrial civilization
– Industrial civilization
– Post-industrial civilization
While adherents ofВ the cultural approach delineate human society into various stages, there exists no unanimous consensus among them regarding how these stages, namely civilizations, differ from each other. Nonetheless, aВ widely embraced criterion is that each civilization exhibits aВ degree ofВ cultural advancement surpassing its predecessor.
One of the most significant contributions of proponents of the cultural approach to scholarship is the identification of the “period-cycle” phenomenon. Researchers who subscribe to the notion that the history of human society unfolds in periods that emerge and vanish sequentially have observed that this phenomenon adheres to a certain law: each “period” comprises several stages. The majority of scholars conceive of the “cycle” as encompassing four primary stages.
– Birth
– Growth.
– Stagnation.
– Crisis-disruption.
There’s no necessity to delve into the concept of “periods” at this juncture, as the analysis of the mechanism behind the occurrence of this phenomenon will be addressed later, specifically in the section related to irrigated agriculture. It suffices to mention here that although scholars of the cultural approach have meticulously scrutinized the notion of “periods,” they have yet to fully elucidate the mechanism underlying its occurrence – the laws governing it. For instance, O. Spengler, a prominent figure in the cultural approach, in his renowned work “The Decline of the West,” characterizes the “period” as a universal phenomenon and anticipates its spread to Europe.
However, research has demonstrated that the “period” is not a universal phenomenon but rather specific to Eastern countries and societies whose economy is dominated by irrigated agriculture (A. Mamanov. National Mentality: Features and Factors. Samarkand, 2015).
The cultural approach is characterized byВ its vast scope and diversity, encompassing aВ variety ofВ perspectives. As previously noted, aВ prevalent trait among these perspectives is the rejection ofВ overarching, universal laws governing the historical development ofВ human society. InВ essence, this cultural approach does not seek toВ offer aВ comprehensive portrayal ofВ the historical development ofВ human society, nor does it profess toВ doВ so.
Other theories
– Daron Ajemoglu
James A. Robinson
Why nations fail?
– At first glance, the title of the work suggests that the authors intend to uncover the reasons behind the disparities in the development of Earth’s peoples. However, upon thorough examination of the content, it becomes evident that the authors’ objectives diverge significantly. Essentially, it appears that the authors are endeavoring to undermine the framework capable of elucidating the genuine underlying causes of global developmental disparities and to divert developing nations from the path of progress.
Their viewpoint dismisses the significance of geographical conditions in shaping the development of Earth’s peoples. To illustrate this stance, they frequently reference the city of Nogales. They highlight the construction of a wall dividing the city into two parts as evidence supporting their argument.
The city ofВ Nogales serves as aВ stark example ofВ the disparities highlighted byВ the authors. Situated on the north side ofВ the wall is the United States, while the south side belongs toВ Nogales, Mexico. The contrast between the two halves is striking: the northern sector boasts prosperity, cleanliness, orderly streets, educated inhabitants, and longer life expectancy. Conversely, the southern portion grapples with uneven streets, high crime rates, inadequate healthcare, impoverished living conditions, resulting inВ aВ life expectancy that is, on average, 10В years shorter than that ofВ their northern counterparts.
Despite these disparities, the economies ofВ both sides are interconnected: businesses from the north export their goods toВ the south for processing, taking the finished products back for sale or further refinement. This dynamic is driven byВ significantly lower labor costs inВ the south compared toВ the north.
The authors contend that “the stark contrast between the two sides of the same city cannot be attributed to geographical conditions or climate.”[7 - Дарон Ажем ўғли, Жеймс А. Робинсон. Почему одни страны богатые, а другие бедные. Москва – 2015. стр. 15.]
They argue that the primary factor contributing toВ this disparity is the application ofВ different laws. However, this raises the question: Why are these laws not implemented on both sides ofВ Nogales?
We disagree with this perspective. The laws in Mexico and the United States were established based on the unique geographical conditions and climate of each country. Mexico’s climate necessitates irrigated agriculture, shaping its state system, laws, and way of life accordingly. Additionally, Mexico’s history as a Spanish colony has left a significant imprint, influenced by Spain’s hot and dry climate where irrigated agriculture played a vital role in the economy. Consequently, Spain’s development lagged behind rainfed countries like England due to the demands and characteristics of irrigated agriculture. It’s evident that both the climate requirements for irrigated agriculture and the social and political legacies inherited from Spain inevitably influenced Mexico’s development trajectory.
The expansive territory ofВ the USA spans several thousand kilometers from north toВ south, resulting inВ diverse climates. The northern regions predominantly experience aВ cool-temperate climate, while the southern areas are characterized byВ aВ dry and hot climate. Consequently, dryland agriculture predominates inВ the northern part ofВ the United States, while irrigated agriculture is prevalent inВ the south.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «Литрес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию (https://www.litres.ru/book/mamanov-abdurahim/general-view-of-the-historical-development-of-human-soci-70820581/) на Литрес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
notes
Примечания
1
Маманов А. Тарих миллатлар манфаатлари тўқнашувчи майдондир. �жтимоий фикр журнали 2020 й. 2-сон.
2
Замонов А. Сам. ДУ тадқиқотчиси А. Мамановнинг “Тарих фанини ўқитишда инновацион услуб” номли мақоласига тақриз.
3
Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ-1992. Стр:В 327
4
Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ. 1992. Стр:В 331
5
Р�люшечкин В. Рџ. Рксплуатация и собственностьв сословно-классовых обществах. Рњ.В 1990
6
Латов Ю. Тройной юбилейТеории АСП. htts:||cyberleninka.ru|article|v|vostochnyy despotism-k-a-vittfoqelya-k-50-letiyu-strannoy-knigi.
7
Дарон Ажем ўғли, Жеймс А. Робинсон. Почему одни страны богатые, а другие бедные. Москва – 2015. стр. 15.
Mamanov Abdurahim
Following the emergence of Marx’s foundational theory regarding the historical progression of humanity, there arose a widespread disillusionment with overarching theoretical frameworks. Consequently, scholarly attention shifted predominantly towards localized and regional issues. However, it is imperative for historians to possess a comprehensive understanding of the broader trajectory of societal development; lacking such insight is akin to a sailor navigating the seas without a compass.
General View ofВ the Historical Development ofВ Human Societies. Monograph
Философия истории. Географическая школа в социологии
Mamanov Abdurahim
© Mamanov Abdurahim, 2024
ISBNВ 978-5-0064-0532-5
Created with Ridero smart publishing system
Mamanov Abdurahim
GENERAL VIEW OFВ THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OFВ HUMAN SOCIETIES
Monograph
TASHKENT-2023
Mamanov Abdurahim
Researcher at the Samarkand State University
2023
Contents
Introduction
It was mentioned in our previous studies that without creating a general picture of the path of historical development of human society, it is a difficult task to correctly understand and evaluate the historical events that happened in the life of this or that nation.[1 - Маманов А. Тарих миллатлар манфаатлари тўқнашувчи майдондир. �жтимоий фикр журнали 2020 й. 2-сон.]
It is indisputable that contemporary history textbooks for high and secondary schools often contain numerous shallow concepts, uncertainties, and erroneous conclusions regarding both global history and the specific history ofВ Uzbekistan. We believe that one ofВ the primary reasons for this discrepancy is the absence ofВ aВ developmental theory capable ofВ illuminating the trajectory ofВ human societal progress.
The history ofВ human society encompasses the narratives ofВ countless nations, many ofВ which have risen and fallen over time, with their positions often assumed byВ other peoples. Some nations confront crises, while others continuously advance and evolve, ultimately becoming leading global powers.
Is there aВ discernible pattern within this perpetual cycle ofВ ascent, crisis, emergence, decline, destruction, and prosperity, or is it merely aВ matter ofВ random chance?
We believe that the historical progression ofВ human society unfolds according toВ overarching principles. The task ofВ uncovering these principles falls under the purview ofВ the theory ofВ historical development, which is essentially the philosophy ofВ history.
While chance certainly plays aВ role inВ historical processes, it is essential toВ recognize that beneath the apparent randomness lies aВ foundation ofВ law. Events that may appear coincidental toВ us are, inВ fact, mechanisms through which these laws manifest and actualize.
As an illustration, the rise ofВ Islam inВ the Arabian Peninsula during the early 7th century constituted aВ significant event. This emergence was deemed necessary as the nomadic Arab tribes, characterized byВ their polytheistic beliefs where each tribe worshipped its own deity and engaged inВ perpetual warfare with others, required aВ unifying faith toВ consolidate into aВ cohesive nation.
However, the dissemination of this faith through the teachings of Muhammad – its specific manifestation – was also influenced by various incidental factors.
Those who refute the presence ofВ overarching laws inВ the historical evolution ofВ human society perceive historical development as aВ chaotic sequence ofВ happenstance events. They elevate the role ofВ chance toВ such an extent that they entertain the notion ofВ aВ breeze altering its course from the East toВ the West, thereby influencing the temperament ofВ an emperor and drastically reshaping the course ofВ human history.
If life were truly governed byВ such arbitrary occurrences, individuals and nations alike would be unable toВ anticipate the future or formulate any coherent plans.
Human history can be likened to a vast edifice with countless chambers. Each nation’s history forms one of these chambers within the larger structure. To accurately determine the exact dimensions, elevation, and arrangement of each of these numerous chambers, it is imperative to first ascertain the overall elevation, position, and shape of the entire edifice. Without establishing this overarching framework, it becomes evident that determining the placement, level, and configuration of the individual chambers becomes an insurmountable task.
Reflecting on a past experience, I once observed a group of individuals preparing a site for a new house. Despite possessing measuring instruments and intermittently moving about, they failed to complete the task. It became apparent that none among them possessed the expertise required for such an endeavor: one was a district’s chief physician, another his driver, a third an agronomist, and the fourth a foreman. It is likely that their inability to define the outer dimensions of the house precisely as a rectangular shape hindered their ability to position the chambers within the designated layout.
Realizing that their efforts would likely be inВ vain, IВ obtained their consent and proceeded toВ establish the outer dimensions ofВ the forthcoming building according toВ precise rectangular guidelines. Subsequently, we measured and arranged the rooms within this framework with precision.
The principles governing the construction process have been established for millennia, requiring no alteration or objection. However, aВ universally accepted theory ofВ historical development, capable ofВ satisfying all perspectives and immune toВ criticism, has yet toВ be formulated. As previously mentioned, history is aВ realm where national interests often clash. Each nation, recognizing itself as such, contends for its own interests, interpreting historical events accordingly, and formulating its own theory ofВ historical development.
Numerous theories have been devised to articulate the interests not only of distinct peoples and nations but also specific social classes. For instance, the theory of historical materialism, championed by Marx and Engels, primarily represents the interests of the proletariat, the world’s impoverished class.
However, it is crucial toВ recognize that the architect ofВ aВ theory ofВ historical development does not confine their philosophy toВ the interests ofВ aВ particular people, nation, or social class. Instead, they endeavor toВ present it as the trajectory ofВ historical progression applicable toВ all ofВ humanity.
Indeed, the true nature ofВ aВ theory, whether it accurately reflects the trajectory ofВ historical development for all humanity or merely serves the interests ofВ specific groups, will ultimately be determined byВ time itself. Time stands as the ultimate arbiter.
It is essential toВ acknowledge that not everyone will readily embrace novel ideas concerning historical development. As aВ general rule, any new scientific proposition, whether valid or erroneous, typically faces criticism from many quarters. This resistance stems from the fact that innovation often entails challenging established norms, concepts, and values held byВ the majority, be it inВ personal relationships or within the realm ofВ academia. Naturally, it is difficult for many individuals toВ embrace the new while relinquishing ideas, values, and concepts they have long regarded as true.
Initially, we will conduct aВ thorough critical examination ofВ various theories ofВ historical development, offering our perspectives on each. Subsequently, we will endeavor toВ articulate our own viewpoint, namely, the comprehensive framework ofВ human societal development from the vantage point ofВ the geographical school inВ sociology.
1.В Formative approach
The theoretical underpinnings of the formative approach were developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. According to this approach, human society’s history unfolds through a series of social and economic formations.
InВ accordance with Marxist theory, human endeavors toВ procure essential material goods for sustenance invariably manifest inВ distinct modes ofВ production. From this perspective, human society progresses through the following formations:
– Primitive community system.
– Slavery.
– Feudal system.
– Capitalism.
– Communism.
These are referred to as socio-economic formations, which are rooted in the method of producing material goods. Each society develops a complex of political institutions, ideological beliefs, and religious views based on its method of production – the economic foundation. Property and production relations in each society are shaped in accordance with a particular level of productive forces.
The mode of production in any society is determined by its specific relations of production and ownership. As productive forces grow and develop, a tension emerges between the existing method of production and the productive forces within society. This tension is typically resolved through a social revolution, wherein the established production and property relations are dismantled by the forces of production, paving the way for new production and property relations that align with the current level of productivity – a new economic foundation and mode of production. Subsequently, new structural, political, and social organizations – along with artistic, literary, ideological, and philosophical systems – emerge to correspond with the new economic base.
Presently, many scholars acknowledge that while the formative approach offers insights into European historical development, it falls short inВ accurately capturing the histories ofВ other regions, particularly those inВ the East:
“The formative approach is not without its limitations. Historical evidence suggests that not all countries follow the rigid framework proposed by proponents of this approach. For instance, many nations have not transitioned beyond the social and economic system of slavery. Moreover, the historical trajectories of Eastern countries often diverge significantly from the formative developmental system formulated for European societies.”[2 - Замонов А. Сам. ДУ тадқиқотчиси А. Мамановнинг “Тарих фанини ўқитишда инновацион услуб” номли мақоласига тақриз.]
According toВ Zamonov, the formative approach was primarily designed for European societies, suggesting it effectively elucidates the historical evolution ofВ Europe. However, we contend that the formative approach struggles toВ accurately depict the trajectory ofВ historical development not only inВ other regions ofВ the world but even within Europe itself.
InВ our view, the delineation ofВ slavery and feudalism as distinct periods inВ the history ofВ individual societies, as proposed byВ Marxists, lacks justification. We argue that these systems cannot be considered as separate periods or methods ofВ production within the historical development ofВ individual societies.
InВ essence, what criteria should be utilized toВ ascertain the method ofВ production that delineates aВ distinct period inВ the history ofВ human society?
According toВ Marx, aВ production method identified as aВ separate period and stage inВ human societal history is characterized byВ its economic foundation, alongside the development ofВ ideological superstructures, political and social institutions, legal systems, literature, art, philosophy, and other facets within society. However, some scholars argue that Marx and Engels did not sufficiently elucidate how this economic foundation gives rise toВ an ideological structure.
Erich Fromm, aВ renowned philosopher ofВ the 20th century, asserts that Marx emphasized the interconnectedness between society’s economic foundation and its political, legal, philosophical, artistic, and religious dimensions. According toВ Marx’s theory, the ideological structure arises from the economic base. However, Engels acknowledged that neither he nor Marx had elucidated how the economic base transitions into an ideological superstructure. Fromm suggests that this gap inВ Marxist theory could be addressed through psychoanalysis, revealing the mechanisms byВ which the economic foundation shapes the ideological structure. As Fromm states, “Marx emphasized that there is an interrelationship between the economic base ofВ society on the one hand and political and legal structures, philosophy, art, religion, and others on the other.”[3 - Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ-1992. Стр:В 327]
Hence, Marx and Engels did not delineate the process byВ which the economic base transforms into an ideological structure. According toВ Erich Fromm, this intermediary link is fulfilled byВ the social character ofВ that society.[4 - Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ. 1992. Стр:В 331]
Fromm posits that social behavior primarily stems from the requirements and necessities dictated byВ the prevailing mode ofВ production within society. Consequently, our current objective revolves around analyzing the attributes ofВ Western social character. Many scholars contend that the behavioral traits specific toВ aВ given society are intrinsic toВ its members and go unnoticed byВ them. Hence, individuals within that society may not discern the distinctive features ofВ their social behavior.
ToВ comprehend and assess the distinctive attributes ofВ social behavior inherent toВ aВ particular society, it is imperative toВ juxtapose it with dissimilar social behavior. For instance, toВ grasp the traits ofВ Western social character, it is necessary toВ contrast it with an alternative example, such as the Eastern social character.
AВ comparison ofВ Eastern and Western social behavior reveals stark differences inВ their primary characteristics. For instance, inВ Eastern societies, individuals often exhibit deference toВ authority, whereas inВ Western societies, emphasis is placed on individual freedom and dignity. While Eastern social character may prioritize attitudes ofВ deference and compromise, with morality holding aВ broader and more significant role than legal strictures, Western social character may be characterized byВ aВ stance ofВ assertiveness inВ interpersonal relationships, with the law holding greater sway than morality.
According to Erich Fromm’s teachings, the social character is shaped by the prevailing mode of production. From this perspective, one might inquire into the basis upon which the social character characteristic of the West is formed. If we adhere to the formative approach, which suggests that slavery and feudalism were the primary modes of production during Antiquity and the Middle Ages, one might wonder if the characteristics of these modes of production contributed to the development of the Western social character. For instance, how might the traits associated with slavery or feudalism – such as authoritarian rule and subjugation – have influenced the characteristics of the Western social character, such as individualism, prioritization of personal interests, and intolerance?
It would be more coherent toВ view slavery and feudal systems not as distinct modes ofВ production, but rather as methods ofВ exploitation employed byВ one class over another. Towards the decline ofВ communist ideology, there emerged notions that it is unscientific toВ regard slavery and feudal systems as separate stages inВ the history ofВ human society.[5 - Р�люшечкин В. Рџ. Рксплуатация и собственностьв сословно-классовых обществах. Рњ.В 1990]
It is striking that Marxist theory largely overlooks the concept of social behavior. How can we account for the dearth of inquiry into the notion of social character (mentality), not only during the era of Marx and Engels but also in the socialist countries until the latter stages of communist rule? In contrast, from the latter half of the 19th century and particularly the early 20th century, Western scholars dedicated significant efforts to studying social behavior – namely, the mentality of diverse peoples. This raises a pertinent question: was this oversight intentional on the part of Marxists, or simply a disregard for the matter?
Historical evidence and logical analysis suggest that the first possibility holds more credibility: after all, Karl Marx himself may have manipulated the theory of Asian mode of production (AMP) he developed for political ends.[6 - Латов Ю. Тройной юбилейТеории АСП. htts:||cyberleninka.ru|article|v|vostochnyy despotism-k-a-vittfoqelya-k-50-letiyu-strannoy-knigi.] Thus, what political motivations might have compelled Marxists to ignore reality? To answer this question, a deeper understanding of the content of the Marxist worldview is necessary.
As per the Marxist worldview, the history of human society is delineated by class struggle. “The history of human society is the history of class struggle,” as asserted by Karl Marx.
The formative approach toВ history effectively illustrates the history ofВ each society as aВ narrative ofВ class struggle unfolding beforeВ us.
In accordance with this approach, the names assigned to the stages of human societal history – excluding the primitive collective system and communism, namely slavery, feudalism, and capitalism – themselves signify that these stages are defined by class struggle. However, one might wonder: what if Marx and his contemporaries had acknowledged that social character serves as the intermediary between the economic base and the ideological superstructure?
If we consider that social character is shaped byВ the economic foundation, it would be imperative toВ establish aВ connection between the attributes ofВ the Western social character and the modes ofВ production ofВ slavery or feudalism as posited byВ the formative theory. Indeed, such an investigation would raise doubts regarding the validity ofВ the formative approach as outlined.
Further evidence supporting our aforementioned perspective is found in Karl Marx’s theory of the Asian mode of production (AMP), introduced in 1857. In this theory, Marx suggests that irrigated agriculture, necessitating a dry and warm climate prevalent in Eastern regions, serves as the economic foundation of Eastern despotism – the enduring communal life and overall advancement of the East. However, scholars widely acknowledge that Marx began to distort the theory of the AMP when it became apparent that it did not align with the political objectives pursued by Marxists.
However, there is another aspect of this issue that has largely escaped the attention of scholars: while Marx and his contemporaries acknowledged irrigated agriculture as the economic foundation of Eastern development, they failed to recognize that rainfed agriculture served as the opposite pole – the economic basis of Western development. This oversight seems incredulous. If Marxists had indeed acknowledged irrigated agriculture as the economic basis of Eastern development and rainfed agriculture as the economic basis of Western development, one of the fundamental tenets of Marxist doctrine – the notion that history is driven by class struggle – would have sustained a significant blow.
The Marxists aimed to empower the global proletariat to challenge the capitalists and bourgeoisie, ultimately constructing communism through a global revolution. To accomplish this objective, they sought a pristine historical narrative – a chronicle defined by class conflict: slaves opposing slavers, serfs resisting feudal lords, and the working class confronting capitalists.
It’s conceivable that Marx and his associates made these alterations with benevolent intentions. Their aim was to expedite the realization of a utopian communist society on Earth. If they deviated from scientific rigor for this cause – guided by their political interests – then it might be more fitting to liken them to shepherds rather than politicians; just as shepherds affix a bell to the lead sheep to prevent the flock from scattering.
Like a herd of sheep conditioned to respond to the sound of a bell, Marx and his colleagues envisioned the formative approach to history as the guiding call. Humanity was expected to heed this call – embodied by the formative approach to history – and march toward the radiant dawn of communism. However, one might ponder: is humanity akin to a herd of unquestioning sheep that obediently follows the ringer?
InВ contemporary times, there is aВ growing skepticism among scholars regarding the conclusions drawn from the formative approach toВ history.
1. The cultural approach, typical ofВ those who view history through aВ cultural lens, entails aВ rejection ofВ the overarching laws ofВ human history.
Adherents ofВ the cultural approach perceive the history ofВ human society as aВ succession ofВ civilizations that emerge and vanish sequentially.
The cultural approach places significant emphasis on examining specific facets ofВ the history ofВ individual societies, countries, and peoples that have wielded considerable influence inВ the progress ofВ humanity. It prioritizes the exploration ofВ material aspects ofВ societal development over spiritual factors.
Overall, within the realm ofВ the cultural approach, there exists no uniform consensus or singular perspective on historical development. This diversity is evidenced byВ the existence ofВ over 200В definitions ofВ the concept ofВ civilization inВ scholarly discourse. According toВ the cultural approach, which represents aВ somewhat broader and acknowledged perspective, human society progresses through the following stages ofВ civilization:
– Neolithic civilization
– First class civilization
– Ancient civilization
– Medieval civilization
– Pre-industrial civilization
– Industrial civilization
– Post-industrial civilization
While adherents ofВ the cultural approach delineate human society into various stages, there exists no unanimous consensus among them regarding how these stages, namely civilizations, differ from each other. Nonetheless, aВ widely embraced criterion is that each civilization exhibits aВ degree ofВ cultural advancement surpassing its predecessor.
One of the most significant contributions of proponents of the cultural approach to scholarship is the identification of the “period-cycle” phenomenon. Researchers who subscribe to the notion that the history of human society unfolds in periods that emerge and vanish sequentially have observed that this phenomenon adheres to a certain law: each “period” comprises several stages. The majority of scholars conceive of the “cycle” as encompassing four primary stages.
– Birth
– Growth.
– Stagnation.
– Crisis-disruption.
There’s no necessity to delve into the concept of “periods” at this juncture, as the analysis of the mechanism behind the occurrence of this phenomenon will be addressed later, specifically in the section related to irrigated agriculture. It suffices to mention here that although scholars of the cultural approach have meticulously scrutinized the notion of “periods,” they have yet to fully elucidate the mechanism underlying its occurrence – the laws governing it. For instance, O. Spengler, a prominent figure in the cultural approach, in his renowned work “The Decline of the West,” characterizes the “period” as a universal phenomenon and anticipates its spread to Europe.
However, research has demonstrated that the “period” is not a universal phenomenon but rather specific to Eastern countries and societies whose economy is dominated by irrigated agriculture (A. Mamanov. National Mentality: Features and Factors. Samarkand, 2015).
The cultural approach is characterized byВ its vast scope and diversity, encompassing aВ variety ofВ perspectives. As previously noted, aВ prevalent trait among these perspectives is the rejection ofВ overarching, universal laws governing the historical development ofВ human society. InВ essence, this cultural approach does not seek toВ offer aВ comprehensive portrayal ofВ the historical development ofВ human society, nor does it profess toВ doВ so.
Other theories
– Daron Ajemoglu
James A. Robinson
Why nations fail?
– At first glance, the title of the work suggests that the authors intend to uncover the reasons behind the disparities in the development of Earth’s peoples. However, upon thorough examination of the content, it becomes evident that the authors’ objectives diverge significantly. Essentially, it appears that the authors are endeavoring to undermine the framework capable of elucidating the genuine underlying causes of global developmental disparities and to divert developing nations from the path of progress.
Their viewpoint dismisses the significance of geographical conditions in shaping the development of Earth’s peoples. To illustrate this stance, they frequently reference the city of Nogales. They highlight the construction of a wall dividing the city into two parts as evidence supporting their argument.
The city ofВ Nogales serves as aВ stark example ofВ the disparities highlighted byВ the authors. Situated on the north side ofВ the wall is the United States, while the south side belongs toВ Nogales, Mexico. The contrast between the two halves is striking: the northern sector boasts prosperity, cleanliness, orderly streets, educated inhabitants, and longer life expectancy. Conversely, the southern portion grapples with uneven streets, high crime rates, inadequate healthcare, impoverished living conditions, resulting inВ aВ life expectancy that is, on average, 10В years shorter than that ofВ their northern counterparts.
Despite these disparities, the economies ofВ both sides are interconnected: businesses from the north export their goods toВ the south for processing, taking the finished products back for sale or further refinement. This dynamic is driven byВ significantly lower labor costs inВ the south compared toВ the north.
The authors contend that “the stark contrast between the two sides of the same city cannot be attributed to geographical conditions or climate.”[7 - Дарон Ажем ўғли, Жеймс А. Робинсон. Почему одни страны богатые, а другие бедные. Москва – 2015. стр. 15.]
They argue that the primary factor contributing toВ this disparity is the application ofВ different laws. However, this raises the question: Why are these laws not implemented on both sides ofВ Nogales?
We disagree with this perspective. The laws in Mexico and the United States were established based on the unique geographical conditions and climate of each country. Mexico’s climate necessitates irrigated agriculture, shaping its state system, laws, and way of life accordingly. Additionally, Mexico’s history as a Spanish colony has left a significant imprint, influenced by Spain’s hot and dry climate where irrigated agriculture played a vital role in the economy. Consequently, Spain’s development lagged behind rainfed countries like England due to the demands and characteristics of irrigated agriculture. It’s evident that both the climate requirements for irrigated agriculture and the social and political legacies inherited from Spain inevitably influenced Mexico’s development trajectory.
The expansive territory ofВ the USA spans several thousand kilometers from north toВ south, resulting inВ diverse climates. The northern regions predominantly experience aВ cool-temperate climate, while the southern areas are characterized byВ aВ dry and hot climate. Consequently, dryland agriculture predominates inВ the northern part ofВ the United States, while irrigated agriculture is prevalent inВ the south.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «Литрес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию (https://www.litres.ru/book/mamanov-abdurahim/general-view-of-the-historical-development-of-human-soci-70820581/) на Литрес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
notes
Примечания
1
Маманов А. Тарих миллатлар манфаатлари тўқнашувчи майдондир. �жтимоий фикр журнали 2020 й. 2-сон.
2
Замонов А. Сам. ДУ тадқиқотчиси А. Мамановнинг “Тарих фанини ўқитишда инновацион услуб” номли мақоласига тақриз.
3
Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ-1992. Стр:В 327
4
Фромм Р. Р�з плена иллюзий. Р’В РєРЅРёРіРµ “Душа человека” Рњ. 1992. Стр:В 331
5
Р�люшечкин В. Рџ. Рксплуатация и собственностьв сословно-классовых обществах. Рњ.В 1990
6
Латов Ю. Тройной юбилейТеории АСП. htts:||cyberleninka.ru|article|v|vostochnyy despotism-k-a-vittfoqelya-k-50-letiyu-strannoy-knigi.
7
Дарон Ажем ўғли, Жеймс А. Робинсон. Почему одни страны богатые, а другие бедные. Москва – 2015. стр. 15.