Help on Tele2, tariffs, questions

As is known, the manifestation of any, even the most general, laws of history is diverse and multivariate. The role of the most outstanding person is always a fusion of previous development, a mass of random and non-random events, and her own characteristics. There are many ways to organize society, and therefore, there will be many options for the manifestation of personality, and their amplitude can be huge.

Consequently, depending on a variety of conditions and circumstances, taking into account the characteristics of the place under study, time and individual personality traits, its historical role can range from the most inconspicuous to the most enormous. Sometimes personality plays a decisive role.

Indeed, the nation itself consists of individuals, and the role of each of them is not equal to zero. One pushes the chariot of history forward, the other pulls it back, and so on. In the first case, this is a role with a plus sign, in the second - with a minus sign.

But we are now interested not in ordinary people, but in outstanding historical figures. What is their role?

Not that such a person, at his own will, is able to stop or change the natural course of things. A truly outstanding person not only does not try to “cancel” the laws of history, but, on the contrary, as G.V. Plekhanov noted, he sees further than others and wants more than others. A great man solves the problems put in the queue by the previous course of the intellectual development of society, he points out the new social needs created by the previous development of social relations, he takes the initiative to satisfy these needs. This is the strength and destiny of a great man, and the power is colossal.

He is, if you will, a look-ahead of history, he is the spokesman for the aspirations of a class, a mass, often only vaguely aware of them. His strength is the strength of the social movement behind him.

This is the fundamental difference in the assessment of the role of the individual in dialectical materialist philosophy and its opponents. In assessing the role of the individual, materialist social philosophy proceeds from the masses to the individual, and not vice versa, sees its role in the fact that it serves the masses with its talent, helps them straighten the path to achieving their goals, accelerate the solution of urgent historical tasks.

At the same time, firstly, the influence of the individual on the course of history depends on how numerous the mass that follows him and on which he relies through the party, through some class. Therefore, an outstanding personality must have not only a special individual talent, but also the ability to organize and lead people. Secondly, the anarchist attitudes are definitely wrong: there are no authorities. The entire course of history testifies that not a single social force, not a single class in history has achieved dominance if it did not put forward its political leaders, its advanced representatives, capable of organizing and leading the movement.

Of course, an outstanding personality should not have ordinary abilities for a certain type or series of activities. But this is not enough. It is necessary that in the course of its development society put on the agenda tasks for the solution of which a person with precisely such (military, political, etc.) abilities was needed.

It is accidental here that this particular person has taken this place, accidental in the sense that this place could have been taken by someone else, since the replacement of this place became necessary.

World-historical personalities are not only practical and political figures, but also thinking people, spiritual leaders who understand what is needed and what is timely, and lead others, the masses. These people, albeit intuitively, but feel, understand the historical necessity and therefore, it would seem, should be free in this sense in their actions and deeds.

But the tragedy of world-historical personalities lies in the fact that "they do not belong to themselves, that they, like ordinary individuals, are only tools of the World Spirit, although a great tool." Fate, as a rule, develops unfortunately for them.

The people, according to I.A. Ilyin, is a great separate and scattered multitude. Meanwhile, his strength, the energy of his being and self-affirmation require unity. The unity of the people requires an obvious spiritual and volitional incarnation - a single center, a person, an outstanding person in mind and experience, expressing the legal will and state spirit of the people. The people need a wise leader, like dry land needs good rain.

Throughout the history of mankind, a huge number of events have taken place, and they have always been directed by individuals of different moral character and mind: brilliant or stupid, talented or mediocre, strong-willed or weak-willed, progressive or reactionary. Having become, by chance or out of necessity, the head of a state, an army, a popular movement, a political party, a person can have a different influence on the course and outcome of historical events: positive, negative, or, as is often the case, both. Therefore, society is far from being indifferent in whose hands political, state and generally administrative power is concentrated.

The advancement of the individual is determined both by the needs of society and the personal qualities of people. “The distinguishing feature of genuine statesmen lies precisely in the ability to benefit from every need, and sometimes even a fatal combination of circumstances, to turn for the good of the state.”

The very fact of nominating this particular person to the role of a historical personality is an accident. The need for this advancement is determined by the historically established need of society for a person of this kind to take the leading place. N.M. Karamzin said this about Peter the Great: “The people gathered on a campaign, waited for the leader, and the leader appeared!” The fact that this particular person is born in this country, at a certain time, is pure coincidence. But if we eliminate this person, then there is a demand for his replacement, and such a replacement will be found.

Often, due to historical conditions, a very prominent role has to be played by simply capable people and even mediocre ones. Democritus wisely said about this: “the less worthy the bad citizens of the honorary positions they receive, the more they become careless and filled with stupidity and arrogance.” In this regard, the warning is true: "Beware of taking by accident a post that you cannot afford, so as not to appear to be what you really are not."

In the process of historical activity, both the strengths and weaknesses of the personality are revealed with particular sharpness and convexity. Both sometimes acquire a huge social meaning and influence the fate of the nation, the people, and sometimes even humanity.

Since the decisive and determining principle in history is not the individual, but the people, individuals always depend on the people, like a tree on the soil on which it grows. If the strength of the legendary Antaeus lay in his connection with the land, then the social strength of the individual lies in his connection with the people. But only a genius is able to subtly "eavesdrop" on the thoughts of the people.

No matter how brilliant a historical person may be, in his actions he is determined by the prevailing set of social events. If a person begins to create arbitrariness and elevate his whims into a law, then he becomes a brake and, ultimately, from the position of the coachman of the carriage of history, he inevitably falls under his merciless wheels.

The activity of a political leader presupposes the ability to make a deep theoretical generalization of the domestic and international situation, social practice, the achievements of science and culture in general, the ability to maintain simplicity and clarity of thought in the incredibly difficult conditions of social reality and to fulfill the plans and program outlined. A wise statesman is able to vigilantly follow not only the general line of development of events, but also many private "trifles" - to simultaneously see both the forest and the trees. He must notice in time the change in the correlation of social forces, before others understand which path must be chosen, how to turn the overdue historical opportunity into reality.

As Confucius said, a person who does not look far is sure to face close troubles. High power carries, however, heavy duties. The Bible says, "And from everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required." In any form of government, one or another person is promoted to the level of the head of state, who is called upon to play an extremely responsible role in the life and development of this society. A lot depends on the head of state, but, of course, not everything. Much depends on which society elected him, what forces brought him to the level of the head of state.

Thus, the emergence of outstanding personalities on the historical arena is prepared by objective circumstances, the maturation of certain social needs. Such needs appear, as a rule, at critical periods in the development of countries and peoples, when large-scale socio-economic and political tasks are on the agenda. From everything that has been said before, the conclusion follows directly and immediately that the theory and practice of the personality cult is incompatible with the spirit and essence of the dialectical-materialist social philosophy. The cult of personality in modern manifestations consists in imposing on the people admiration for the bearers of power, in attributing to the individual the ability to create history at his own discretion and arbitrariness, in transferring to the individual what is the cause and merit of the people.

The cult of personality (this was clearly revealed by Stalin's cult of personality) is fraught with great dangers and dire consequences. Attempts to solve complex problems of theory and practice alone lead to mistakes and blunders not only in theory but also in practice (the problem of the pace of collectivization, the conclusion that the class struggle will intensify with the progress of socialism, etc.). The cult of personality nourishes and reinforces dogmatism in theory, since the right to truth is recognized only for one person.

The cult of personality is especially dangerous because it entails the destruction of the rule of law and its substitution by arbitrariness, which leads to mass repression. Finally, disregard for the interests of ordinary people, covered up by an imaginary concern for public interests, results in a progressive fading of initiative and social creativity from below, according to the principle: we, comrades, have nothing to think about, leaders think for us.

The people are not a homogeneous and not equally educated force, and the fate of the country may depend on which groups of the population were in the majority in the elections, with what degree of understanding they carried out their civic duty. One can only say: what is the people, such is the personality chosen by them.

There are a lot of people who have changed the world. These are well-known doctors who came up with cures for diseases and learned how to perform complex operations; politicians who started wars and conquered countries; astronauts who first orbited the Earth and set foot on the Moon and so on. There are thousands of them, and it is impossible to tell about all of them. This article lists only a small part of these geniuses, thanks to which scientific discoveries, new reforms and trends in art appeared. They are individuals who changed the course of history.

Alexander Suvorov

The great commander, who lived in the 18th century, became a cult person. He is a person who influenced the course of history with his mastery of strategy and skillful planning of war tactics. His name is inscribed in golden letters in the annals of Russian history, he is remembered as a tireless brilliant military commander.

Alexander Suvorov devoted his entire life to battles and battles. He is a member of seven wars, led 60 battles, not knowing defeat. His literary talent manifested itself in a book in which he teaches the younger generation the art of warfare, shares his experience and knowledge. In this area, Suvorov was ahead of his era for many years ahead.

His merit, first of all, is that he improved the tendencies of warfare, developed new methods of offensives and attacks. All his science was based on three pillars: onslaught, speed and eye. This principle developed in the soldiers a sense of purpose, the development of initiative and a sense of mutual assistance in relation to their colleagues. In battles, he always went ahead of ordinary soldiers, showing them an example of courage and heroism.

Catherine II

This woman is a phenomenon. Like all other personalities who influenced the course of history, she was charismatic, strong and intelligent. She was born in Germany, but in 1744 she came to Russia as a bride for the Empress' nephew, Grand Duke Peter III. Her husband was uninteresting and apathetic, they almost did not communicate. Catherine spent all her free time reading legal and economic works, she was captured by the idea of ​​the Enlightenment. Having found her like-minded people at court, she easily overthrew her husband from the throne and became the full-fledged ruler of the Russian Empire.

The period of her reign is called "golden" for the nobility. The ruler reformed the Senate, took church lands into the state treasury, which enriched the state and made life easier for ordinary peasants. In this case, the influence of the individual on the course of history implies the adoption of a mass of new legislative acts. On account of Catherine: the provincial reform, the expansion of the rights and freedoms of the nobility, the creation of estates following the example of Western European society and the restoration of Russia's authority throughout the world.

Peter the Great

Another ruler of Russia, who lived a hundred years earlier than Catherine, also played a huge role in the development of the state. He is not just a person who influenced the course of history. Peter 1 became a national genius. He was hailed as an educator, "the light of the era", the savior of Russia, a man who opened the eyes of the common people to the European style of life and government. Remember the phrase "window to Europe"? So, it was Peter the Great who "cut through" it to spite all envious people.

Tsar Peter became a great reformer, his changes in the foundations of the state at first frightened the nobility, and then aroused admiration. This is a person who influenced the course of history by the fact that, thanks to him, progressive discoveries and achievements of Western countries were introduced into "hungry and unwashed" Russia. Peter the Great managed to expand the economic and cultural boundaries of his empire, conquered new lands. Russia was recognized as a great power and appreciated its role in the international arena.

Alexander II

After Peter the Great, this was the only tsar who began to carry out such large-scale reforms. His innovations completely updated the face of Russia. Like other famous personalities who changed the course of history, this ruler deserved respect and recognition. The period of his reign falls on the XIX century.

The main achievement of the king was in Russia, which hampered the economic and cultural development of the country. Of course, the predecessors of Alexander II, Catherine the Great and Nicholas the First, also thought about the elimination of a system very similar to slavery. But none of them dared to turn the foundations of the state upside down.

Such drastic changes took place rather late, as a revolt of discontented people was already brewing in the country. In addition, reforms stalled in the 1880s, which angered the revolutionary youth. The reformer tsar became the target of their terror, which led to the end of the reforms and completely influenced the development of Russia in the future.

Lenin

Vladimir Ilyich, a famous revolutionary, a person who influenced the course of history. Lenin led a revolt in Russia against the autocracy. He led the revolutionaries to the barricades, as a result of which Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown and the communists came to power in the state, whose rule spanned a whole century and led to significant, cardinal changes in the lives of ordinary people.

Studying the works of Engels and Marx, Lenin advocated equality and condemned capitalism in every possible way. The theory is good, but in practice it was difficult to implement, since the representatives of the elite still lived, bathing in luxury, and ordinary workers and peasants worked hard around the clock. But that was later, but at the time of Lenin, at first glance, everything turned out the way he wanted it to.

During the reign of Lenin, such important events as the First World War, the Civil War in Russia, the cruel and ridiculous execution of the entire royal family, the transfer of the capital from St. Petersburg to Moscow, the founding of the Red Army, the complete establishment of Soviet power and the adoption of its first Constitution fall.

Stalin

People who changed the course of history... The name of Iosif Vissarionovich burns in bright scarlet letters on their list. He became the "terrorist" of his time. The founding of a network of camps, the exile of millions of innocent people there, the execution of entire families for dissent, artificial famine - all this radically changed people's lives. Some considered Stalin the devil, others God, since it was he who at that time decided the fate of every citizen of the Soviet Union. Of course, he was neither one nor the other. The frightened people themselves put him on a pedestal. The cult of personality was created on the basis of general fear and the blood of the innocent victims of the era.

The person who influenced the course of history, Stalin, distinguished himself not only by mass terror. Of course, his contribution to the history of Russia has a positive side. It was during his reign that the state made a powerful economic breakthrough, scientific institutions and culture began to develop. It was he who led the army that defeated Hitler and saved all of Europe from fascism.

Nikita Khrushchev

This is a very controversial person who influenced the course of history. His versatile nature is well demonstrated by the tombstone erected to him, made of white and black stone at the same time. Khrushchev, on the one hand, was Stalin's man, and on the other, a leader who tried to trample on the cult of personality. He began cardinal reforms that were supposed to completely change the bloody system, released millions of innocently convicted from the camps, pardoned hundreds of thousands of those sentenced to death. This period was even called the "thaw", since persecution and terror ceased.

But Khrushchev did not know how to bring big things to an end, so his reforms can be called half-hearted. The lack of education made him a narrow-minded person, but excellent intuition, natural sanity and political flair helped him stay in the highest echelons of power for so long and find a way out in critical situations. It was thanks to Khrushchev that he managed to avoid a nuclear war during and even turn the bloodiest page in the history of Russia.

Dmitry Mendeleev

Russia has given rise to many great universals that have improved various areas of science. But Mendeleev should be singled out, since his contribution to its development is invaluable. Chemistry, physics, geology, economics, sociology - Mendeleev managed to study all this and open new horizons in these areas. He was also a famous shipbuilder, aeronaut and encyclopedist.

The person who influenced the course of history, Mendeleev, discovered the ability to predict the emergence of new chemical elements, the discovery of which is still taking place today. His table is the basis of chemistry lessons at school and at the university. Among his achievements is also a complete study of gas dynamics, experiments that helped to derive the equation of state of a gas.

In addition, the scientist actively studied the properties of oil, developed a policy of injecting investments into the economy and proposed to optimize the customs service. His invaluable advice was used by many ministers of the tsarist government.

Ivan Pavlov

Like all individuals who influenced the course of history, he was a very intelligent person, possessed a broad outlook and inner intuition. Ivan Pavlov actively used animals in his experiments, trying to highlight the common features of the vital activity of complex organisms, including humans.

Pavlov was able to prove the diverse activity of nerve endings in the cardiovascular system. He showed how he could regulate blood pressure. He also became the discoverer of the trophic nervous function, which consists in the influence of nerves on the process of regeneration and tissue formation.

Later, he took up the physiology of the digestive tract, as a result of which he received the Nobel Prize in 1904. His main achievement is considered to be the study of the work of the brain, higher nervous activity, conditioned reflexes and the so-called human signal system. His works became the basis of many theories in medicine.

Mikhail Lomonosov

He lived and worked during the reign of Peter the Great. Then the emphasis was placed on the development of education and enlightenment, and the first Academy of Sciences was created in Russia, in which Lomonosov spent many of his days. He, a simple peasant, was able to rise to incredible heights, run up the social ladder and turn into a scientist, whose trail of fame stretches to this day.

He was interested in everything related to physics and chemistry. He dreamed of freeing the latter from the influence of medicine and pharmaceuticals. It was thanks to him that modern physical chemistry was born as a science and began to develop actively. In addition, he was a famous encyclopedist, studied history and wrote chronicles. He considered Peter the Great an ideal ruler, a key figure in the formation of the state. In his scientific writings, he described him as a model of the mind that changed history and turned the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe management system. Through the efforts of Lomonosov, the first university, Moscow, was founded in Russia. Since that time, higher education began to develop.

Yuri Gagarin

People who influenced the course of history... Their list is hard to imagine without the name of Yuri Gagarin, the man who conquered space. Starry space has attracted people for many centuries, but only in the last century, mankind began to explore it. At that time, the technical base for such flights was already well developed.

The space age was marked by competition between the Soviet Union and the United States. The leaders of the giant countries tried to show their power and superiority, and space was one of the best ways to demonstrate this. In the middle of the 20th century, competition began over who could send a man into orbit faster. The USSR won this race. We all know the famous date since school: on April 12, 1961, the first cosmonaut flew into orbit, where he spent 108 minutes. This hero's name was Yuri Gagarin. The day after his journey into space, he woke up famous all over the world. Although, paradoxically, he never considered himself great. Gagarin often said that in those one and a half hours he did not even have time to understand what was happening to him and what his feelings were at the same time.

Alexander Pushkin

It is called "the sun of Russian poetry". He has long become a national symbol of Russia, his poems, poems and prose are highly valued and revered. And not only in the countries of the former Soviet Union, but all over the world. Almost every city in Russia has a street, square or square named after Alexander Pushkin. Children study his work at school, devoting to him not only school time, but also extracurricular time in the form of thematic literary evenings.

This man created such harmonious poetry that it has no equal in the whole world. It was with his work that the development of new literature and all its genres began - from poetry to theatrical plays. Pushkin is read in one breath. It is characterized by accuracy, rhythmic lines, they are quickly remembered and easily recited. If we also take into account the enlightenment of this person, his strength of character and deep inner core, then it can be argued that he is really a person who influenced the course of history. He taught people to speak Russian in its modern interpretation.

Other historical figures

There are so many that it would be impossible to list them all in one article. Here are examples of a small part of Russian figures who changed history. And how many others are there? This is Gogol, and Dostoevsky, and Tolstoy. If we analyze foreign personalities, then one cannot fail to note the old philosophers: Aristotle and Plato; artists: Leonardo da Vinci, Picasso, Monet; geographers and discoverers of lands: Magellan, Cook and Columbus; scientists: Galileo and Newton; politicians: Thatcher, Kennedy and Hitler; inventors: Bell and Edison.

All these people were able to completely turn the world upside down, create their own laws and scientific discoveries. Some of them made the world a better place, and some almost destroyed it. In any case, every person on planet Earth knows their names and understands that without these personalities, our life would be completely different. Reading the biographies of famous people, we often find ourselves idols from whom we want to take an example and be equal in all our deeds and actions.

There is a thesis that history is made by individuals, so when great personalities are at the head of the state, they make a great story, and when traitors and mediocrities rule the state, the country goes haywire.

This thesis is true in principle, but it describes only a small part of the historical process, for a better understanding of which it is necessary to understand where great personalities come from and why in some historical periods they find themselves at the head of the state, while in other historical periods this does not happen and the ruling elite is formed mediocrity and traitors with all the consequences.

If someone thinks that all this happens randomly and depends on whether a great statesman is born in the country or not, this is not so.

In a country with a population of many millions, people are born every year with very different qualities and inclinations, with abilities for a wide variety of activities - science, art, sports, crafts and many others, including management.

In any historical period, hundreds, and maybe even thousands of people live in a country of many millions, whose mindset, character traits and other qualities are similar to such historical figures as Lenin, Stalin, Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible and others.

It's just that not in all historical periods such people are in demand in the state and society, they do not always find themselves and make a career as politicians and statesmen.

This happens because politics is, figuratively speaking, a team sport. Politics cannot be played alone. And you can’t learn to play well alone either. Accordingly, one cannot prove oneself if there is no opportunity to play in a strong team.

Let's take a sports example. Let's take a game like hockey. Those who wish can, by analogy, consider the example of football or other team games, if they are closer to you.

Why are there many good hockey players in Russia? Because we have hockey schools, hockey rinks, there are many teams and coaches. Therefore, a boy who from an early age shows interest and ability in this game has a high chance of getting into a good coach, a good hockey school, then a youth league team, and from there to the big leagues and then to the KHL or NHL.

He has the opportunity to train and play with other talented guys, and then with real masters, learn from their experience and eventually become the same master, and if he trains hard and adds some of his original techniques to the experience gained, he will become an outstanding player .

To learn how to play hockey at the level of the best masters, without playing since childhood, without playing with the masters, is basically impossible.

You can watch the game on TV all you want and practice shooting in the backyard, but if you don't really play among the professionals, you won't be able to work out the interaction, you won't be able to learn how to beat others.

High skill comes with experience, is developed during training and games, it is not given from birth by itself.

To become a master, you need to play in a good team and with other good teams, and for this, the country must have a good strong league.

That is why there are many good hockey players in Russia, and there were even more of them in the Soviet Union - because in Soviet times there were hockey rinks all over the country, in many yards. And in Canada, for the same reason, there are many good hockey players - because there are several youth leagues and several adults, because every third person plays hockey there, and everyone else watches.

But in Japan there are no good hockey players. Because this sport is not developed there. And not at all because there are no children born there who are capable of sports and team games - they are born, approximately in the same number as in Russia and Canada, only they are engaged in other sports.

Football is very developed in France or Italy, rugby in Australia - that's why there are many good football players and rugby players, not hockey players.

Quite talented children are also born in African countries, but they become outstanding athletes when they leave for Europe and get into good clubs, and those who fail to do this very rarely achieve high results, because in Africa the system of clubs is poorly developed, there are few sports schools.

This is what happens in politics.

Politics is a team game, one might even say a super-team game, because in the whole country there are usually only a few large political teams in which you can learn this game, train, gain experience playing among great masters, prove yourself and grow to the highest level.

At the beginning of the 20th century, such teams in Russia were the Social Revolutionaries, Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, and of course the state team, staffed by the nobility and officials.

In the state team, only Stolypin grew out of the great figures of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In the team of Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, practically no one worthy of mention has grown. And in the team of the Bolsheviks, many great figures grew up at once - Lenin, Stalin and dozens of others.

And Trotsky, no matter how they treated him, was an outstanding personality who left a significant mark on history - he also grew up in the Bolshevik team.

Because the Bolsheviks ultimately won, because their team was stronger. And it turned out to be stronger because it was staffed by masters of their craft, who over the years have been building up their knowledge and experience, practicing team interaction, and learning from each other. And of course, we trained a lot, playing with other teams - the Mensheviks, the Social Revolutionaries, and most importantly - with the state.

The Bolsheviks gained experience during the events of 1905, drew conclusions and engaged in political activities for many years. Many were in exile, where they also had the opportunity to comprehend the state of affairs, exchange views and draw some conclusions.

In 1917, when the February Revolution happened, it was time for a big practical game. During the events of 1917, the Bolsheviks began to work out interaction at an accelerated pace, form a team, work out solutions, and in the end "outplayed" the Mensheviks, Socialist-Revolutionaries and the provisional government.

After that, a civil war began and society split into two large teams - red and white. And in this final duel, the red team won - for many reasons, which will be discussed below.

In the course of the revolution and the civil war, the Bolsheviks gained colossal experience in political activity and state building - experience that could not have been obtained in any other way.

It was from this experience - the command experience of the revolution and the civil war, as well as from previous theoretical studies and training in the period from 1905 to 1917, that such figures as Lenin, Stalin and others grew up.

Lenin and Stalin were not born great politicians and statesmen - they became them in the course of many years of practical training, finding themselves in a strong team, gaining valuable experience and taking part in historical events that gave them the opportunity to test themselves and prove themselves and test their capabilities on practice and draw conclusions from mistakes - both their own and those of others.

All this together led to the emergence of great personalities among the Bolsheviks.

A strong team, staffed with strong personalities, as well as great historical events have led to a positive selection and the formation of great statesmen.

But why did the Bolsheviks turn out to have a strong team, while the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries turned out to be weak, why did the state team turn out to be weak, why did the provisional government turn out to be incapacitated, and why did the Whites lose the civil war?

Is it a coincidence that the most powerful personalities gathered precisely in the team of the Bolsheviks?

Of course not.

If the appearance of strong personalities in one or another political team would be random, then the distribution would turn out to be more uniform and would depend on the size of the team. And most of the strong personalities should have ended up in the state apparatus as in the most numerous team, but this was not observed.

The Bolsheviks promoted the ideas of social democracy, which at the beginning of the 20th century were very progressive. The Social Revolutionaries did not have a strong and progressive ideological base, their ideas were reduced to revolution as such. The Mensheviks, in full accordance with the name, represented the minority of the Social Democrats.

The state apparatus was a bureaucratic machine, making a career in which is the lot of careerists and opportunists, but not individuals.

For the sum of these reasons, strong personalities began to gather in the Bolshevik team, because this team promoted strong progressive ideas and allowed them to express themselves.

But the Bolsheviks won not only because they had a strong team. The “white” team that emerged after the revolution also turned out to be quite strong in composition, but this was not enough to win.

The reason for the victory of the Bolsheviks in the civil war consists of several factors, among which two main ones can be distinguished:

1) The Bolshevik team was formed over a long period of time, starting from 1904-1905, and during this period it became quite well-coordinated, worked together, worked out interactions, and developed an ideological community. The team of "whites" was formed quickly during 1917-1918, and it included people with very different views - from monarchists to democrats. The lack of unity in the "white" team manifested itself constantly and can be easily traced by studying the history of the civil war. But this was not the only factor in the victory of the Bolsheviks.

2) The Bolsheviks offered society progressive ideas and an image of the future, which quickly became popular. The working class, soldiers and sailors, the intelligentsia and even part of the nobility took the side of the Bolsheviks. It was the popularity of the ideas of social democracy and communism that allowed the Bolsheviks to enlist the support of a significant part of society and rely on it to defend their power in the civil war.

If the Bolsheviks had not represented the ideas of social democracy that became popular in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, they would not have been able to win and retain power. And they would not have had a strong team, because it was the progressiveness and popularity of the ideas of social democracy that attracted strong and talented figures to the Bolshevik team.

Without the Bolsheviks and their team, without the ideas of social democracy that gained popularity in Russia, neither Lenin nor Stalin would have become great historical figures, they would not have made any history.

If it were not for the February Revolution as a historical event, the prerequisites for which arose long before the birth of Lenin, and the February Revolution itself happened without his participation, Vladimir Ilyich could have stayed in Switzerland and would have gone down in history as a philosopher and writer of the early 20th century, together with many others who wrote compositions, but did not take a direct part in history.

Therefore, before the individual begins to make history, history itself must make the individual.

History and society, its needs and ideas that meet these needs, leading to the emergence of political teams, the growth of their popularity and development, lead to the formation of strong personalities.

History is realized through personality, and personality through history.

Without a history that opens up opportunities for individuals, without society's demand for an individual to lead it, there will be no great historical figures, just as there will be no outstanding athletes without teams, coaches and spectators who need their performances.

Without society, without its requests, without historical moments that make it possible to express themselves - all potential Lenins, Stalins, as well as Yeltsins and Putins - would have remained in second or even third roles, would have gone down in history as writers or bombers, Chekists or secretaries of regional committees, nothing more.

The history of the destruction of the Soviet Union is actually very similar to the history of the destruction of the Russian Empire. Yeltsin and his associates came to power for similar reasons - because the ideas of democracy, only this time bourgeois, the ideas of private property, independence, various rights and freedoms became popular in society - just as they became popular in the early 20th century ideas of social democracy and communism.

Therefore, most of the bright politicians in the late 80s and early 90s gathered precisely in the camp of democrats, in the Yeltsin team, and in the team of supporters of the Soviet government there were almost no individuals capable of leading the country and people.

For the same reason, only the star of Putin, whom many consider indispensable and the most influential, burns in the political sky today. His star burns because the majority considers him the most influential, irreplaceable and does not want to see others.

Putin expresses the ideas of stability, getting up from his knees and revanchism, which are the most popular in society today, and there are simply no other fairly popular ideas today, so there are no political teams, and there are no bright personalities who would express them.

Modern Russian society enjoys being in a cozy raw material swamp, stable and predictable.

Society does not want to change and change the country, and therefore there are no individuals who would make history, except for those who are gathered into the team of the Kremlin and United Russia.

There is no political environment and command system that would form bright personalities, and there is no demand from society that forms the political environment necessary for this.

Demand creates supply - this also applies to individuals who make history.

What are the demands of society - such are the individuals who lead it.

Text from the exam

(1) History is not faceless. (2) Many names are carved on its pages, the memory of which survives centuries, decades. (Z) These are the names of the heroes. (4) At all times people have revered heroes. (5) They were the national pride of the peoples, legends were passed on from generation to generation, legends were formed. (b) Thousands and thousands of folios in many languages ​​of the world depict the deeds and accomplishments of heroic personalities. (7) Streets and squares are named after the heroes, expositions in museums are dedicated to them, songs are sung about them and poems are composed. (8) Superficially, one might get the impression that only great people - the heroes of history - manage its affairs. (9) For centuries, this view of the role of outstanding personalities, heroes among the crowd, was dominant. (10) Such views on the role of heroes in human history were also “substantiated” theoretically. (11) The English thinker Thomas Carlyle in his book "Heroes, the cult of heroes and the heroic in history" argued that world history is, in essence, the history of great people. (12) According to him, the hero who possesses traits of cruelty, ruthless authority and determination to use force is capable of playing a messianic role in history.

(13) The Russian sociologist Nikolai Mikhailovsky, in his work The Hero and the Crowd, wrote that the hero is the main creator of history. (14) Modern life, he argued, empties people's minds and paralyzes their will, as a result of which the masses turn into a "crowd". (15) And only a "hero" is able to raise and captivate her to a feat or a crime.

(16) Such views, expressing the essence of the theories of "elites", "leaders", in a camouflaged form affirm the historical conditionality of the power of the chosen minority, the need for a "strong hand" for those who are at the top of the pyramid of power.

(17) G.W. Plekhanov, wittily ridiculing this theory, wrote that for the Narodniks the masses are an endless series of zeros. (18) Only one can turn this chain of zeros into a positive value - a hero, standing at the head of a faceless row. “(19) A great man,” wrote G.V. Plekhanov in his work “On the Question of the Role of the Personality in History” is great ... in that he has features that make him the most capable of serving the great social needs of his time ... (20) A great man is precisely the initiator, because he sees further others and wants more than others. (21) He solves the scientific problems put in the queue by the previous course of the mental development of society; he indicates the new social needs created by the previous development of social relations; he takes upon himself the satisfaction of these needs. (22) He is a hero. (23) Not in the sense of a hero that he can allegedly stop or change the natural course of things, but in that his activity is a conscious and free expression of this necessary and unconscious course. (24) Outstanding personalities, heroes appear when people need them. (25) If the actions of these individuals coincide with the main progressive tendencies of social development, the interests of the advanced classes, their role is exceptionally great.

(According to D.A. Volkogonov)

Introduction

History is made by the interaction of vast masses of people. But at the head of events there is always someone leading the process or someone who was able to turn what is happening in a different direction, change the course of history.

Problem

Who are these people? What is their significance for society and history? Can one person influence the course of historical events? V.A. reflects on the role of personality in history. Volkogonov in his text, comparing the points of view on this issue of various philosophers.

Comment

Heroes are at the head of history, they leave a memory of themselves for all time, they are revered, admired, they make up legends and traditions about them. Streets are named after them, expositions are dedicated to them, poems and songs are written to their glory.

For example, Thomas Cargeil, an Englishman, assured that great people are at the head of history. They, even endowed with traits of cruelty and unquestioning, become saviors for society.

Another thinker, Nikolai Mikhailovsky, also asserts the dominant role of the hero in history. A simple person in our time is so impersonal and paralyzed that he is not able to influence history, he simply does not think about it. The crowd is not capable of moving forward on its own, only a hero is able to direct it on the right path.

G.V. Plekhanov presents a different point of view. In his opinion, any person who is able to look far into the future, who wants change more than anyone can become a historical arbiter. He is a pioneer, solving the problems set by previous generations. He is committed to meeting the needs of his people.

Author's position

Volkogonov is close to Plekhanov's position. He shares the idea that the hero sees further than others, all his actions express the decisive course of history.

own position

Volkogonov's position is close to me and understandable. Indeed, the hero is not only a representative of high society with power. First of all, this is a person who understands the needs of his people, fighting for their well-being.

Argument #1

Remembering the classics, we find confirmation of this. L.N. Tolstoy in the epic novel "War and Peace" depicts the course of history over decades, and one of the main themes of the novel is the role of the individual in history. The work presents images of emperors and commanders - Napoleon, Alexander the First, Kutuzov. Which of them is really the hero who directs the course of history?

Tolstoy believes that a true hero reflects the interests of the people, follows the people's morals. Alexander the First does not understand the needs of the people at all, does not know what is important for his people and country at the moment. Napoleon is so vain and ambitious that he does not understand at all what he is pushing his troops into. Kutuzov seems to be the true leader and arbiter of history to Tolstoy, because he strives to embody the interests of an entire people. He becomes the spokesman of the people's soul and the embodiment of patriotism.

Argument #2

The problem of the role of personality in history is raised by F.M. Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment. The real reason for Raskolnikov's actions is the murder of an old pawnbroker and her feeble-minded pregnant sister - a test of the effectiveness of his own theory. Raskolnikov divided people into two types: "having the right" and "trembling creatures."

The former create history through the transgression of the law, the latter obediently follow the will of the former. Napoleon, Mahomet and many other leaders shed blood, were criminals. It is they, according to Rodion, who move the course of history, guide humanity forward.

But Raskolnikov's theory turned out to be false. She didn't confirm. Above all the others in strength of mind was a little girl, humiliated and insulted, Sonya Marmeladova. Yes, and Raskolnikov himself, testing the effectiveness of the theory, subjected himself to incredible torment.

Conclusion

The problem of the role of the individual in history is multifaceted and complex. It is also relevant in our modern life, when the world is in limbo, when people close to power are ready to use any means to achieve their goals.

PERSONALITY IN HISTORY

The role of lchchiostch in the history of the analysis of philosophical concepts

V. I. Loginov

THE ROLE OF PERSONALITY IN HISTORY: ANALYSIS OF PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTS

History is a complex process of interaction of a huge number of people at some historical time in a certain geographical space. This is a contradictory result of the activity of successive generations with their own aspirations, hopes and expectations. But history is not a fatal, faceless process, but a complex and contradictory phenomenon, in which not only large masses of people participate, but also individuals, especially outstanding ones, who leave an imprint of their bright and unique individuality on the entire course of events. In this regard, one of the important aspects of the knowledge of history is the disclosure of the question of the nature and degree of influence of a person (ordinary, talented, outstanding, brilliant) on the course of historical events.

All philosophical concepts recognize the fact of the influence of the individual on the course of the historical process (1], but the mechanism of interaction between the individual and society, the individual and social communities, the individual and the objective laws of the development of history, the place and role of individuals in society is not understood unambiguously.

One of the most famous philosophical concepts of the role of the individual in history is Hegel's point of view. So, according to the views of Hegel, the bearer of historical necessity is the world mind, which directs history.

in such a way that it uses the interests, passions, aspirations of people, including outstanding ones, as a means to achieve its goal - to make progress in the awareness and realization of human freedom. At the same time, Hegel does not deny the influence of the individual on the course of development of the true freedom of man in history, but for him this influence completely depends on the secret mystical connection of an outstanding personality with the world mind. Moreover, the nature and mechanism of this mystical connection remains a mystery even for Hegel himself. The mystical connection exists as a given and a person cannot know it. Outstanding personalities, huge masses of people, entire nations, historical epochs are only tools of the world mind, which secretly and secretly controls them and through them achieves its goals.

An equally significant concept of the role of the individual in history

are the views of representatives of subjective idealism, which

believe that only a select few individuals with || gig.

active spirit, oppose humanity as an inanimate mass. These chosen, critically thinking individuals are the guiding star of the development of history, since they are associated with special areas of activity in society - the sphere of spiritual production and the management system. With this approach, the people turn into a crowd following them and blindly obeying the will of supra-historical personalities. Similar views were shared by many historians and philosophers. So, Russian populists of the 70s - 80s of the XIX century. - P. L. Lavrov, N. K. Mikhailovsky and many others - sympathized with the disasters of the Russian people, but did not see any historical significance in it. For them, the Russian people represented something like an infinite number of “zeroes.” These “zeroes” could turn into a significant historical value only when they were led by critical thinking personalities, genuine historical heroes.

This point of view on the role of the individual in history is multifunctional: it can be interpreted from various positions and used in practice in various ways, sometimes even reactionary. The position of the German philosopher F. Nietzsche is typical in this respect. In accordance with it, the people are a formless material from which anything can be created, the people are a simple stone that needs a carver. As such a "social architect" Nietzsche creates the image of the Superman, a hero standing "beyond good and evil", for whom the morality of most people

Chimera, nothing. The main social principle and driving motive

activities of such a person - the will to power. For the sake of this, everything is possible, everything is allowed, all means are good, everything is justified.

The theoretical error of populism consisted in the inability to scientifically determine, and even more so to work out, the social mechanism for the transformation of the crowd into the people as the driving force of historical development. For P. L. Lavrov and N. K. Mikhailovsky, a crowd always remains a crowd, even if it is directed by prominent historical figures. The crowd follows the historical person wherever they lead him. Russian Marxism tried to solve the problem posed in the course of sharp criticism of populism, but having solved it in a theoretical aspect, it could not successfully implement the proposed theoretical provisions in practice, since the social experiment proposed by Russian Marxists turned out to be unsuccessful.

The problem posed at one time by the Russian Narodniks has not gone into the past and is becoming very important for Russian society at the end of the 20th century. Today it is necessary to understand: who are we in our socio-psychological state, are we able, as a single people, to influence the choice of our historical development, are we able to control the process of the movement of our society towards the humane goal chosen by all of us. It should be recognized that we still have to solve many social problems in order to become a single people, exerting a decisive influence on the course of development of our society. Many decades of Stalinism, mass repressions, forced collectivization, stagnation, far from being in the best direction, affected the socio-psychological atmosphere in society. distribution.All these are the socio-psychological features that characterize the state of the crowd.The exit from this state of the crowd will not be easy and, apparently, will take a certain long stage in the development of Russia.

The question of the role of the individual in history is also covered in the works of religious philosophers, who do not exclude the fact that the individual plays a certain role in the development of history. However, they believe that the historical role of the individual is manifested not by his own will, but exclusively by the will of God. In any religious concept, God is one, omnipotent and omnipotent. He not only created the world and man, but with his power and rich content

directs the result of his creation to a specific goal. With this approach, the personality is assigned a completely insignificant role: it is the uncomplaining conductor of the divine destiny. Humility and humility, and not the desire to improve the world of man, are the main social qualities of the individual.

Did not disregard the question of the role of personality in history and scientists - materialists. In materialistic concepts, the role of the individual in history is not associated with the world mind or God, just as it does not depend on the will of critical personalities, genuine historical heroes. Personality in them is considered as a product of gradual social development, formed on the basis of various activities, wealth and diversity of social relations. The richer and more diverse the types and forms of activity, the more meaningful social relations, the more qualitatively the personality is developed and its role in the development of history is more effective. If we assume that the main essence and content of the personality is its socio-historical activity, aimed at resolving social problems that arise in the course of the development of history, then the question of its role in history can be more fully disclosed through the dialectical connection of the categories of the universal and the special.

What is the basis for the thesis that the creative role of the individual in history is a universal regularity?

Many authors dealing with personality problems recognize the position that objective social needs, the possibilities of future human development, goals and prospects live, function not as some kind of Hegelian abstract universal idea or a metaphysically distant entity that is hidden and inaccessible to us. people, and above all, as individual needs, the interests of each individual. And if this position is accepted by many scientists without a doubt, then the objective social need for history has no other form of manifestation except through the activity of a particular individual. After all, it is in individuals, in their historical actions, that the role of the masses, classes and other social communities finds its reflection and embodiment. A people, a class, a nation by themselves do not exist and do not develop apart from the concrete actions and deeds of individuals. This is the manifestation of the general regularity of the activity of the individual in history, which, unfortunately, is not always directed along the path of the progressive development of history.

Thus, the historical idea of ​​uniting Russian lands around Moscow during the 13th-15th centuries manifested itself as an objective need for the formation of a Russian centralized state. This historical necessity was realized in concrete individual actions of the great Russian princes.

The objective need for Russia's connection with Europe found its expression and realization in the concrete historical actions of Peter the Great.

So in any historical period, the realization of an objective historical need occurs through the individual activity of a person (ordinary, talented, outstanding, brilliant). In this complex dialectical process, the activity of the individual appears as a general pattern.

The general social activity of the individual as a subject of history has its own special forms of manifestation. What does it show

such a pattern?

Personality arose as a result of a long historical development, acting as the social image of each person, expressed in a specific individual characteristic. Personality is not an isolated phenomenon, it is always associated with the masses, social communities (class, nation, social group). The whole complex picture of social processes occurring both within the social community and in interconnection with other communities, the presence and functioning of various cultures, customs, traditions, religious beliefs and many other social phenomena are the source of manifestation of the general social activity of the individual. However, the expression of the general social activity of the individual has special, dissimilar forms of manifestation.

Thus, the transition from feudalism to capitalism occupied a significant era in world history and was a universal historical pattern that was realized through various social processes (evolutionary and revolutionary), headed by outstanding historical figures. However, with all the outward similarity, the formation of capitalist society in various regions of the world had its own specific historical originality, which was determined both by national and cultural characteristics and the nature of the impact of the personal factor, through the action of which the historical regularity was largely realized. Capitalism in Eastern countries (Japan, Korea, Taiwan) differs from capitalism in Western countries (USA, England, Germany).

* From the foregoing, there may be an idea that the activity of the individual is absolutely not determined by anything. To recognize this position means to agree with the point of view of subjective idealists, who reduce human history to the activity of genuine heroes, critically thinking individuals, whose position leads to voluntarism. According to their views, a critically thinking person rises above society (a passive crowd) and dictates, imposes his interests, desires and views on society. However, it is impossible to agree with such statements. The activity of the individual, his intervention in social life is always closely connected with the social laws that operate in society, regardless of whether the person knows these laws or not. Otherwise, the activity of the individual will be meaningless. So, if the necessary material prerequisites, the conditions for the emergence of a new stage in the development of society in the depths of the old one, have not yet matured, not a single historical figure is able to bring it to life. No one, no individual can reverse social development.

The dialectic of history is such that a historical personality changes the circumstances of social life under the pressure of the circumstances themselves. Historically emerging problems, expressed in social laws in the process of social cognition, determine the content and direction of the individual's activity, its historical boundaries and framework. However, one should not think that social law acts as a certain fatal force, fate, as representatives of vulgar economic materialism believe, considering the historical process as an action of the spontaneous development of the economic factor (the productive forces of society), in which neither the masses nor the historical personality can have any significant impact on the course of events. If we accept such a statement as true, then the critics of the social philosophy of Marxism will be right.

So. at the end of the 19th century. Stammler wrote that the followers of Marx (in fact, his criticism related to one of the currents of Marxism

Vulgar - economic materialism) allegedly contradict themselves when they organize a political party for the victory of socialism, because, according to their theoretical views, socialism will inevitably come anyway, objectively. After all, "no one organizes a party to promote the lunar eclipse," Stammler ironically. Such a statement proceeded from the misunderstanding that the historical law determines only the general direction of development.

history, while its specific course, pace and forms of historical development are determined by more specific causes in society: the balance of forces of progress and regression, the activity of the masses, individuals, the activities of political parties and many other social factors.

The individual has always faced and will face the problem of choosing from all the available possibilities and options for objective historical development - one that is associated with the progressive direction of the movement of history. Moreover, the task is not so much in the choice, but in the creative creation of new historical forms of development of society, in which the past, present and future are not opposed and mutually exclusive, but are harmoniously combined, creating a historically new, more perfect qualitative structure of social life, dialectically removing and destroying contradictions of the previous stages. The choice of a new social path of development is not simply, automatically, communicated to the individual by the objective course of the development of history, but arises and develops in the process of contradictory practical interaction of the historical subject with society. The final result of the historical choice can be considered as one of the forms of manifestation of the social activity of the individual.

Thus, thanks to a critical approach to the fatal-deterministic and mystical-providentialist interpretation of history, a dialectical understanding of the specific nature of socio-historical activity, which, unlike the natural world, is not given to the individual from the outside and in finished form, but arises and takes shape in the process of our practical interaction with nature, in a number of philosophical concepts of the late XIX - early XX century. a condition was created for a comprehensive justification of the place and role of the individual in history. Neither God, nor fate, nor fate, but a specific historical personality became a real co-creator of socio-historical reality, and, consequently, the very logic of the objective existence and development of history. Such an understanding of the development of history and the role of the individual in it opened up wide scope and opportunities for the theoretical analysis of the social activity of not only outstanding personalities in history, but also of any other personality.

The role of personality in history depends on the specifics and complexity of the flow of historical processes. Many researchers who develop the philosophical problems of history single out evolutionary and revolutionary forms in its development. In each of these

forms of the active role of the individual is manifested ambiguously. Most clearly, a person shows his social activity in critical periods in the development of history. The peculiarity of such forms of social development lies in the fact that before society

there are difficult tasks of determining and implementing the generally accepted path of social development, choosing real means to achieve the goals set. The grandiosity of the problems facing society requires both appropriate extraordinary decisions and fruitful activity on the part of the individual. It is during such historical periods that the role of the individual in history is widely and vividly revealed. Similar processes take place not only in society as a whole, but also in its individual areas (social, economic, political and spiritual). This is how Lomonosov and Mendeleev, Pushkin and Tolstoy, Repin and Kramskoy, Suvorov and Kutuzov, Stolypin and Witte and many other prominent historical figures entered history.

One may get the idea that in the evolutionary periods of the development of society, the role of the individual does not have a bright form of manifestation, since society develops and functions without serious social upheavals. It is difficult to agree with such a judgment. The role of the individual is also manifested in such periods, but it is associated with the resolution of less acute problems of social development. The main characteristic of the evolutionary period in the development of society is that during this period of historical time the leading social communities interact harmoniously with each other. Classes, nations, social groups make every effort, use knowledge and life experience to successfully achieve their goals. Each individual who is part of a particular social community is a direct participant in the evolutionary development of society, thereby showing his active role as a creative subject of history.

Throughout the history of mankind, in the course of a stable, evolutionary development of society, the main achievements in the field of material and spiritual culture were created. And one of the reasons that had a significant impact on the process of creating the above values ​​was the harmonious unity of the interests of prominent historical figures in various spheres of public life and the interests of ordinary, ordinary individuals representing various classes, nations and social groups. Such unity does not exist in revolutionary periods.

Rod DMYUS7I in short "Shiz Philosophical Quotes"

social development. It is known that in the course of social revolutions, deep social conflicts, wars, many cultural values ​​created by mankind during periods of stable, evolutionary development were destroyed.

In this regard, we can conclude that the nature and complexity of the development of historical processes (evolutionary and revolutionary) require a certain type of personality, which will have to resolve the existing social problems.

The role of personality in history also depends on the social environment in which it is formed. Social conditions that form people can be divided into three levels - general (a given society as a whole, social system, historical era), special (national, class and professional characteristics of the environment) and individual (family, team, microenvironment). The whole complex system of the social environment, in which the individual is included from the moment of his birth, gradually forms a certain type of personality. The environment presents the individual with its norms and values, customs and traditions, prejudices and superstitions. She controls his behavior, watching that. so that the individual does not deviate from the social norms prevailing in it. In this case, the concept of "personality" plays a very important role, because it explains why an individual, depending on various social conditions, on various factors of the social environment, is formed into a certain type. Only through social inclusion and assimilation of the values ​​of the social environment does the individual become an original subject history, gets the opportunity to become a creative force in the historical process.However, the direction of the individual's actions can be different, depending on his belonging to a certain social community that shares certain values ​​and guidelines for historical development.

Representatives of the philosophy of existentialism object to the dependence of the individual on the values ​​and norms of the social environment. According to their views, the inclusion of the individual in a certain system of the social environment, especially class and national, has a detrimental effect on the development of the creative activity of the individual. A personality in such a situation loses its true existence (existence), its individual "I", its originality. The social environment levels the personality, makes it mass, typical. Personal, unique originality dissolves in it. If such judgments are taken as truth, then personality, located in such

depending on the social environment, will not play an active role in the development of history.

Such views on the leveling impact on the personality of the social environment are based on the opposition of the individual and society, as supposedly two independent, unrelated entities. However, in real historical reality, the individual and society are dialectically connected, since the individual is not only a product of society, but also its subject - the protagonist of history. As K. Marx rightly wrote, "... just as society itself produces a person as a person, so he produces society." The individual becomes the creative force of the historical process only when he assimilates all the richness of the social relations of the social environment in which he enters. And then the social, embedded in the social environment, will not resist the personality in the form of an external and alien force that eliminates its individual originality, a unique vision of the development of history. Subsequently, the values ​​of the social environment become the worldview of the personality, its internal source of development, and the personality itself gradually turns into an original and unique “I”.

The social environment has a complex social system, and not all of its components present the same opportunities for personal development. So, the ruling classes and groups of society had great opportunities for realizing their potential abilities in historical reality, which was associated with the nature of their activities, a privileged position in society, a higher level of education and culture. As a result of the influence of these social factors, a large number of outstanding historical figures emerged from the ruling classes, who made a significant contribution to the development of society and its individual spheres.

As for the working classes, their living conditions have always limited the emergence of prominent historical figures. However, history also knows certain exceptions, when historical figures stood out from among the working classes, but they arose, as a rule, in difficult, critical periods of social development and, mainly, in the socio-political sphere of society. Only as an exception can one speak of the selection of outstanding personalities in the sphere of spiritual culture from the working classes.

History shows that at different stages of social development, the personal beginning of a person was revealed in different ways. So,

The role of /cchiopch in cstorchc. ata philosophical concepts _____________________

in the conditions of primitive society, it was still in its infancy. Most clearly, the personal factor begins to manifest itself during the period of the emergence and development of capitalist society. In the course of further historical development, due to the action of a whole complex of social factors, the individual begins to exert an ever greater influence on society. At present, the increasing degree of influence of the individual on the course of the development of history manifests itself as one of the objective laws that must be effectively used in solving social problems.

From the proposition about the active role of the individual in history, the question of the role of an outstanding personality follows.

Historical practice shows that in order to solve the urgent tasks of social development, there is a need for leaders, leaders, leaders who are called upon to lead the movement of the masses and solve existing problems. Not everyone can satisfy such a social need, but only those who have special social qualities that noticeably distinguish them from other people. But it is not great personalities who create, bring to life great epochs, but, on the contrary, the latter are that favorable environment, the condition in which the talent, genius, gifts of this or that personality can mature, manifest and be realized. After all, the existence of a social need is not yet a solution to the problems of social development. To solve a social problem, a person with a set of certain social qualities is needed. Thus, to solve the problems of economic development, a person is required who has a good understanding of the laws of this sphere of society; to solve the problems of military construction, a person with a different set of social qualities is required. A society must develop a mechanism capable of effectively shaping the corresponding social qualities in people. If such a mechanism does not exist, or if it does not work effectively, then society can mark time for a long time in an attempt to resolve existing problems.

A historical personality imposes a certain “seal” on the social processes at the head of which it stands. An outstanding personality accelerates the course of events. entirely dependent on her.

GV Plekhanov called it "an optical illusion". In this regard, the role of an outstanding personality cannot be overestimated, since no personality is able to change the course of history. Historical practice shows that those historical figures who did not take into account the objective laws of history, with the pressing problems of society, inevitably collapsed.

An outstanding historical figure is not alone, behind her are certain social forces on which she relies and whose interests she expresses and defends. The role of the individual is directly dependent on the degree of activity, and, most importantly, the historical perspective of the social community on which it relies.

Whenever conditions arise for society for a certain historical discovery - technical, social, scientific, cultural - there are people who carry them out. The more clearly a person realizes and more fully expresses the need for certain changes and actions, the greater his role and the more significant his contribution to the treasury of world culture. Only such an outstanding person is truly free, she consciously cognizes the surrounding historical necessity and realizes it in the interests of all mankind. *

NOTES "

1. See, for example: Anufriev E. A. Social status and personality activity. M., 1984: Berdyaev N. A. philosophy of freedom: the meaning of creativity. M., 1989; Berdyaev I. A. The meaning of history. M., 1990; Voronovich B. A. The creative potential of man. M., 1988; Guivan P. N. The formation of the Marxist concept of man. Tomsk, 1985; Krutova O. N. Man and history. M., 1982; Lebedev BK Social type of personality (theoretical essay). Kazan, 1971; The problem of man in the "Economic Manuscripts 1857-1859" To Marx. Rostov, 1977; Rezvitsky I. I. Personality. Individuality. Society. M., 1984; Skvortsov A. V. Culture of self-consciousness M., 1989: Shulga I. A. Class typology of personality. M., 1975.

2. Kelle V. Zh., Kovalzon M. Ya. Microenvironment. Theory and history. M.. 1981.

3. Marx K., Engels F. From early works. M., 1956. S. 589.