1.2. Charity Motivation

The motivation of social behavior (including charitable activities) depends on the system of social dispositions of the individual, his readiness for a certain course of action, which includes, firstly, the general system of value orientations of the individual, and secondly, the system of his public social attitudes towards certain social objects; thirdly, the system of situational social attitudes.
The system of motives for charitable activities includes all three levels. The highest level is the general dispositions that regulate the social orientation of the individual's social behavior towards altruistic deeds and charitable activities. The dominance of dispositions of other levels, determine the behavior in a particular field of activity, direct actions in relation to certain social objects and situations - determine the choice of the object of charity and the form of charity. However, the dominant motives for charitable activity are determined by the system of value orientations of society, the peculiarities of the socio-cultural conditions, and the prevailing social ideas.
Researchers studying the development of charitable activities in the history of Russia have tried to identify the main motives that make people perform charitable deeds. But for some authors, the interpretation of the motives of charitable activities is deliberately narrowed. Thus, Marxists consider the main and only motive to be the desire to receive social dividends and tax breaks in order to improve one's position. Scientists focused on the search for the spiritual roots of social activity tend to point only to religious, patriotic, cultural and aesthetic reasons for charity. They believe that morality can only be found in religious precepts and nothing else. So the famous Russian philosopher Bulgakov S.N. wrote: “...morality is rooted in religion. The inner light, in which the distinction between good and evil is made in man, comes from the Sources of Lights.”
What makes a person sacrifice his time, his means, his life for the sake of helping another person? It is believed that at the heart of the desire to help another is pity and altruism. Pathetic, according to Dahl, is the one who evokes a feeling of regret, participation, compassion, condolences. In his moral philosophy of good Soloviev B.C. proves the interconnectedness of the concepts of pity, mercy and altruism. “Just as shame distinguishes a person from other nature and contrasts it with other animals, so pity inwardly connects him with the whole world of the living. The internal basis of a moral attitude towards other beings can only be pity, or compassion, and not rejoicing, or co-pleasure.” But pity in itself is not yet a sufficient basis for all morality, since kindness of the heart towards living beings is compatible with immorality in other respects. It is very important that the helper realizes and embodies in his activity the idea that other people are like him and you need to treat them as you would yourself. That is, it is necessary to confirm in practice the basic principle of modern social policy and social work: "respect for human dignity, regardless of the state of his physical and mental health, age, gender, religion and social status."
Altruism is a moral principle, which consists in selfless service to other people, the willingness to sacrifice personal interests for their benefit; the opposite of selfishness. Altruism is a concern for the well-being of others rather than one's own. Altruistic behavior is the opposite of selfish behavior and involves the desire to help others. The term was introduced by Comte (fr. “vivre pour autrui” - “to live for others”), who believed that under the influence of positivism, society develops in the direction of humanistic values. This is a moral principle according to which the good of another person and he himself are more significant than his own “I” and his good. The principle of altruism is a universal formula for selfless beneficence. An altruist provides help even when nothing is offered in return, and nothing can be expected. A classic illustration of this phenomenon is Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan:
“...a certain man was walking from Jerusalem to Jericho and was caught by robbers, who took off his clothes, wounded him and left, leaving him barely alive. By chance, a priest was walking along the road and, seeing him, passed by. Likewise, the Levite, being in that place, approached, looked, and passed by. But a certain Samaritan, passing by, found him, and, seeing him, had compassion, and, going up, bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine; and putting him on his donkey, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And the next day, as he was leaving, he took out two denarii, gave it to the innkeeper, and said to him: “Take care of him; and if you spend anything more, when I return, I will give it to you.”
The Samaritan exhibits pure altruism. Filled with a sense of compassion, he gives his time, energy and money to a complete stranger to him, without expecting any reward or gratitude.
O.Kont distinguishes, firstly, the instinctive altruism inherent in animals, which unites individuals and the genus. Indeed, we can observe a certain manifestation of altruistic behavior in animals. It has been experimentally proven that rats can cooperate to meet the needs of only one of them or each of them in turn.
Secondly, Comte highlights altruism, which eventually turns into a spontaneous property that unites all people. This point of view is shared by P. Kropotkin. He believes that morality is a complex system of feelings and concepts, which is based on instincts (innate feelings and needs). In his system of morality he includes:
instincts (sociability);
Concepts of reason (justice);
Feeling approved by the mind (self-sacrifice).
Moreover, he uses the term readiness for self-sacrifice, generosity.
He says that this feeling is closer to altruism - that is, “the ability to act for the benefit of others”, he tries to avoid the Christian concept of love for one's neighbor. The words "love of neighbor" misrepresent the feeling that moves a person when he sacrifices his immediate benefits for the benefit of others. “Indeed, in most cases, a person who does this does not think about the victim and very often does not have any special love for these “others”. Most of the time he doesn't even know them." He believes that moral feelings can only be if they turn out to be without a back thought for retribution (during this life or after death). Thus, this is necessary for the person himself, this is characteristic of human nature. According to A. Schweitzer, humanity is "... the desire to be kind, not only because it is our essence."
Mironova G.A. in his work he identifies signs that allow classifying behavior as altruistic:
Voluntary and conscious actions as a manifestation of the properties of the will, and not the result of external coercion.
The disinterested exclusion of the expectation of a reciprocal beneficence.
The desire to contribute to the good of other people from humane motives.
The presence of an emotional attitude towards people, sympathy for them, goodwill, sympathy, willingness to help.
The social orientation of the act. Self-denial (selflessness).

"PHILOSOPHICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL BASES OF CHARITY ACTIVITIES IN THE SPHERE OF SOCIALIZATION OF ORPHAN CHILDREN..."

-- [ Page 1 ] --

federal state budgetary educational institution higher

vocational education

"St. Petersburg State University of Economics"

As a manuscript

Dmitrieva Maya Georgievna

PHILOSOPHICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL BASES

CHARITY ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF SOCIALIZATION

ORPHAN CHILDREN

Specialty 09.00.11. – Social philosophy

Thesis for the degree of candidate of philosophical sciences

scientific adviser cand. philosophy Sciences, Associate Professor Masloboeva O.D.

St. Petersburg - 2014

1.1 Genesis, functions and motives of charitable activities………….……20

1.2 Philosophical aspects of the historical features of the formation of charity in Russia and in the West…………………..………29

1.3 Features of the reflection of philanthropy in the mass and elite consciousness …………………………………………………………………..37

1.4 Criteria of true charity …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………56

2.1 Features of personality formation in the educational system of orphanages…………………………………………….....56

2.2 Correlation between axiological and methodological aspects in Russian philosophical pedagogy………………………………………….70

2.3 Tasks, problems and ways of social education in orphanages………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. orphans…………………………………………………………………………...98

3.1 Subject-subject relations in charitable activities as a basis social partnership……………………………………………98

3.2 Socialization of orphans as a process of becoming a holistic personality…………………………………………………………………….119

3.3 Charity in the field of socialization of orphans:

tasks, principles, priority areas of activity……..……………..135 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………..….. .146 References………………………………………………………….……..152

INTRODUCTION

The transformations of recent decades in Russia have led to fundamental changes in the socio-cultural environment of our society: socio-economic stratification, a change in ideological guidelines, a rethinking of the value system, and the formation of a new religious consciousness. One of the consequences of these processes was the revival in modern Russia such a social phenomenon as charity.

charitable activities as sociocultural phenomenon has deep roots in Russian history, but it should be understood that its features at the present stage are the lack of continuity, the loss of traditions, so today it can be considered as a completely new independent phenomenon, the formation of which is taking place before our eyes.

It is impossible not to attach importance to this phenomenon, since all manifestations of social consciousness, each socio-cultural element are in close interaction with each other and influence each other. The relevance of the study of the philosophical and methodological foundations of charitable activities lies in the need to comprehend the spiritual and moral responsibility for the ways of its formation, development, for the forms that it will take and, most importantly, for its consequences, results, and the impact that it has on all aspects of social life. .

The areas of application of modern charity are diverse:

assistance in improving the financial situation of low-income citizens and families, social rehabilitation of the disabled, assistance to victims of natural disasters, environmental, industrial or other disasters, social, national, religious conflicts, environmental protection and animal protection. One of the priority areas of charitable activity is assistance in family life, social adaptation, protection of the health and rights of orphans and children left without parental care. The effectiveness of charitable activity is determined by the extent to which both the laws and technology of this activity and the specifics of the sphere of charity are realized. The effectiveness of charitable activities directly depends on how philanthropists strategically own the problems of the area in which they do good.

Orphanhood should be recognized as one of the most urgent problems of our society: unprotected childhood, unguaranteed socialization of the child at all stages of growing up are fraught with serious social upheavals in the future in the fate of the children themselves and society. Particular attention deserves such a phenomenon as social orphanhood: a situation where a child is brought up in a state institution with parents who are recognized by law as unable to take care of their own children.

The priority activity of the state in solving this problem is the support and development of such family forms of life arrangement for orphans as adoption, guardianship, foster family. Obviously, such work requires an even greater level of responsibility for every step in this direction. A high degree of awareness and personal “inclusion” is required both from key decision makers and from ordinary local performers, employees of guardianship authorities or even journalists who cover this work and bring information about it to the public consciousness. However, today, unfortunately, it should be recognized that the level of conscious attitude to their activities, as well as responsibility for their results, is low among the majority of "doers". This is fraught with the return of children to state institutions, the so-called "secondary refusals", which lead to the final breakdown of the psychological, emotional state of the child, the collapse of a constructive worldview. According to statistics, every tenth child returns to the orphanage. It is not possible to calculate exact figures even from official sources; 80% of the returns are initiated by the adoptive parents. Many refuse after a fairly short period of time, encountering difficulties of a subjective-psychological nature: it is difficult for children to adapt to a new environment. But adoptive parents see objective reasons for the impossibility of keeping a foster family, for example, the child's genetic predisposition to antisocial behavior, negative life experience, since they are subconsciously tuned in advance to a "problem" child. Foster parents are not ready to overcome the difficulties that arise, they do not show the necessary patience and understanding, they do not realize the need for mutual participation in the adaptation process. After returning to the orphanage, the child receives an incomparable mental trauma. It cannot be said that there are no happy families among families with adopted children. They exist - and although there are not very many of them on an all-Russian scale, they set an example for those who want, but cannot decide to raise a foster child. But the number of orphans inevitably increases. Both the low percentage of adoptions and the massive returns of adopted children indicate that the society in which we all live is not able to bear responsibility for the results of our life, which in itself undoubtedly leads to regression. In an effort to improve official figures, children are given into any hands with the appropriate documents, without checking potential parents for seriousness of intentions, psychological and physical readiness. According to the reports of the Federal State statistical observation"Information on the identification and placement of children and adolescents left without parental care1", in 2009, the percentage of cancellations of decisions to transfer children to foster families was 8.1 in relation to the number of children placed in foster families for the year (see Table 1 ).

Such results lead not to a solution of the problem, but to its aggravation, leading to a dead end.

The situation can be further complicated by the concomitant trend of the total disbandment of the existing state system for the upbringing and education of orphans and children left without parental care. aim modern state social policy is

–  –  –

creation of optimal conditions for increasing the level of socialization of orphans and children left without parental care, kept in orphanages by reducing the number of children in these institutions and the simultaneous reorganization of existing orphanages. However, in practice, reforming the system of orphanages often proceeds by merging and enlarging them, when they are closed as unprofitable, first of all, small-scale orphanages, in which life is organized according to the family principle. In this regard, the problem of optimizing the work of still existing children's orphanages needs to be solved by developing innovative, methodologically sound principles of activity, including with the involvement of the potential of modern charity.

Today, the point of view is widespread that the system of raising children left without parental care in state institutions will become a thing of the past in the near future, since orphans will be adopted or transferred to professional foster families for upbringing. In fact, one should be aware that such a process cannot take place immediately and without problems. As long as there are parents who leave their children or are recognized as unable to raise them on their own, children will at least temporarily fall under the care of state institutions.

The probability and length of stay in an orphanage, shelter, social rehabilitation center increases if we are talking about teenagers or children with serious illnesses. Therefore, the problems of education in state institutions, the issues of reorganization and optimization of this system, including with the involvement of the potential of modern charity, not only do not lose their sharpness, but are becoming more and more relevant.

Today one should speak about charitable activity in the broad sense of the word; such a philistine meaning of this concept, as the transfer of surpluses to the needy, emasculates the inner content of charity, deprives it of meaning and even leads to results that contradict the tasks set. First of all, beneficence should be understood as a willingness to seriously think about the problem of the Other, to realize his pain as one’s own, not at the level of sentimental sympathy, but deeply accepting the fact of coexistence, coexistence of one’s own Self and the Other in a single social and natural continuum2.

Disadvantaged children, growing up, become equal members of our society as a single organism: they can become colleagues, colleagues or even spouses of our own children or offer them drugs, attack them in dark alleys. The true act of charity today is the self-consciousness of oneself as part of this single whole, as well as efforts aimed at rooting the fact of this involvement in the public consciousness. A shallow, superficial look at the phenomena of the political, economic, cultural, spiritual life of society, unwillingness to understand the essence of the processes taking place in it leads to aggravation of existing problems.

Thus, the relevance of this study is due to its social significance and practical relevance.

See Bakhtin M.M. To the philosophy of the act // Philosophy and sociology of science and technology. - M., 1986. - S.80-160.

The degree of development of the problem.

The current studies of contemporary philanthropy in Russia are mainly of a historical or sociological nature: L.V. Khoreva, M.D. Sushchinskaya "The History of Charity in Russia"; T.B. Kononov "Features of the Development of Charity in Russia"; N.P. Ivanov "The History of Charity in Russia"; V.A. Kuprin "The historical experience of the formation and institutionalization of charity in Russia (1985-2005)".

Philosophical understanding of the functional features of charity was carried out in the book by R.G. Apresyan "The idea of ​​morality and basic normative and ethical programs", as well as in his works "Dilemmas of charity", "Philanthropy: charity or social engineering".

The motives and functions of charitable activities are also studied by E.A.

Fomin, A.V. Lezhikova, E.R. Smirnova.

O.S. Khlyakina, R.P. Rybakova, T.Yu. Sidorina.

Understanding the role and place of charity in the structure of social policy is presented in the works of E.A. Zelenova, V.G. Varnavsky, A.V.

Khristoforova, A.K. Mishina.

Despite the fact that the listed aspects are considered by the authors quite deeply and systematically, so far it has not been studied. social role and the potential of charity in the field of socialization of orphans and children left without parental care.

The problems of personality formation in the conditions of an orphanage, as well as the social adaptation of pupils and graduates of such institutions are covered quite widely in modern sociological and pedagogical literature: Materials of the All-Russian Seminar "Socialization of orphans and children left without parental care"; dissertation research on pedagogy R.V. Solnyshkina "Formation of social responsibility in orphans", I.F.

Dementieva "Social orphanhood:

genesis and prevention.

In our opinion, disparate studies of the socio-pedagogical aspects of the problem of social adaptation of orphans, having a highly specialized approach to the issue of personality formation in an orphanage, lead to the fact that the means of socialization proposed by the authors of pupils and graduates of orphanages are reduced to solving problems at the empirical level without sufficient development of theoretical foundations. At the same time, the studies do not consider the conditions and possibilities for effectively attracting the potential of modern charity to solve these problems.

As ways to solve the problem of socialization of orphans, researchers suggest improving the measures of social support for graduates, strengthening the material and technical base of orphanages, creating additional educational opportunities for orphans, and organizing recreational activities. For example, in the dissertation work of O.V. Solovieva "Social adaptation of orphans to the market conditions of modern Russian society" a key place in solving the problems of orphans is given public service social protection and support for the low-income population, identifying the life plans of orphans through sociological research, development performance indicators, monitoring approaches to the processes of managing the social sphere. G.P. Bazhanova, as a modern approach to the socialization of pupils, proposes the organization of traditional educational workshops in the orphanage: sewing, plumbing, shoemaking, and considers the study of information technology to be a new means of remedial education3.

Bazhanova G.P. Modern approaches to the issue of socialization of pupils of educational institutions for orphans and children left without parental care // Socialization of pupils of educational institutions for orphans using innovative technologies. - M., 2010. - S. 24-26.

However, in our opinion, all these methods will be ineffective if they are not based on a verified philosophical and methodological basis. Of particular relevance is the development of philosophical and methodological aspects of charitable activities in the field of socialization of orphans, as well as understanding the problem of personality formation in an orphanage as a social system.

Domestic philosophical pedagogical thought has repeatedly addressed the problem of public education, the formation of a socially active personality (V.V. Zenkovsky, S.I. Gessen, K.N. Wentzel). Philosophy of the Slavophiles offers the ideals of patriarchal-family education as the basis for the spiritual development of a person. The ideals of personal freedom, the priority of universal human values ​​over national, tribal ones are reflected in L.N. Tolstoy to practically implement the ideas of free education in the Yasnaya Polyana school. A critical understanding of this experience is given by the great Russian teacher and philosopher S.I. Gessen in his work "Fundamentals of Pedagogy".

The ideas of Russian cosmism presented in the works of N.F. Fedorova, Vl.S.

Solovyov, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, P.A. Florensky, N.A. Berdyaeva, D.L. Andreev, provide a wide field for philosophical reflection and practical development of the heritage of Russian philosophical pedagogical thought. The very term "cosmic education" belongs to the Russian teacher, an outstanding domestic theorist and propagandist of free education K.N. Wentzel, and A.V. Khutorskaya.

The analysis of the degree of development of the problem indicates a certain disunity and a highly specialized focus of the available modern science charity research, as well as the socialization of orphans. Today, the further practical development of the heritage and the use of the potential of Russian philosophical thought is of particular relevance, which can become a methodological basis for the development of a social charitable project aimed at solving the problem of socialization of orphans and children left without parental care.

The object of the dissertation research: children's orphanages as a sphere of charitable activity.

The subject of the dissertation research: the impact of charitable activities on the process of socialization of pupils of orphanages.

Subject of study is interdisciplinary in nature at the intersection of such disciplines as social philosophy, ethics, sociology and pedagogy.

The purpose of the dissertation research is to develop the philosophical and methodological foundations of charitable activities in the field of socialization of orphans.

The set goal necessitated the formulation and solution of the following research tasks:

Development of theoretical tools for the study of charitable activities in the field of socialization of orphans: the conceptual and categorical apparatus, principles and regular relationships;

Consideration of the history of charitable activities in world and national history;

Socio-philosophical interpretation of the needs and interests of the benefactor as an acting subject;

Understanding the nature and essence of charitable activities, as well as identifying the criteria for true charity;

Identification of the peculiarities of the perception of charity in Russia and in the West;

Philosophical and methodological analysis of the problem of personality formation in orphanages;

Analysis of the correlation between the axiological and methodological aspects of education in Russian philosophical pedagogical thought;

Definition of tasks and ways of social education of orphans;

Socio-philosophical interpretation of the problem of correlation of goals and means of social education;

Development of the unity of the axiological and methodological foundations of the practice of charity;

Determination of the philosophical and methodological foundations for the formation and development of the institution of social partnership and solidarity in modern society;

Conceptualization of the possibilities and conditions for attracting the resources of modern charity to solve the problems of socialization of orphans.

Theoretical and methodological basis of the study.

The versatility of the object of study dictated the need for a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach to its comprehension, using the potential of the following disciplines: social philosophy, sociology, pedagogy; studying the materials of specific sociological empirical studies of the problems of modern charitable activity in Russia and abroad.

The study is based on the theoretical, methodological and ideological principles of Russian organicism and cosmism: the principle of the universality of life and unity, the principles of integrity and naturalness, the activity approach to a single natural and social organism and harmony4.

The methodological basis of the dissertation research is the principles of consistency.

The dialectical method is implemented in the work through compliance with the requirements of comprehensive consideration of the phenomena of social life, their internal inconsistency, interconnection and dynamics. The dissertation student was also guided by the prevailing in social philosophy, sociology, ethics, pedagogy See Masloboeva O.D. Russian organicism and cosmism of the 19th – 20th centuries: evolution and relevance. – M.: Academy, 2007 – 292 p.

scientific provisions and conclusions on the issues under study contained in the works of foreign and domestic authors, in particular in the pedagogical concepts of domestic philosophical pedagogical thought.

The methodological potential of the activity approach is updated through the dialectic of subjective and objective factors.

An important component of the theoretical and methodological basis of this study is the axiological approach: taking into account the requirement to comply ethical standards and principles that do not allow exaggeration of positive or negative examples of social reality.

The main empirical methods used included observation, study and generalization of the pedagogical experience of orphanages, the experience of charitable activities of non-profit organizations in St. Petersburg, a reflective analysis of the dissertation student's personal experience.

Scientific novelty dissertation research

1. A system of criteria for true charity has been identified.

2. The pedagogical ideas of Russian cosmism as a philosophical and methodological basis for creating a self-regulating educational system and a creative educational environment in the system of public education are updated.

3. It is shown that socialization should be understood as a process of becoming an integral personality, and social adaptation of orphans as a process of restoring the integrity of a social organism.

4. Within the framework of the activity approach, the regularities of the dialectics of subjective and objective factors in the upbringing and educational activities of an orphanage, as well as in charitable activities aimed at the socialization of orphans, are updated.

5. It is shown that the subject-subject relations underlying charity and the process of socialization of orphans make it possible to make the transition from the practice of subject-object-oriented sponsorship and subject-object-oriented educational socializing impact to the implementation of the idea of ​​social partnership.

6. The principle of the integrity of man and society, fundamentally reflected in Russian philosophy, is conceptualized not only as an ideal, but also as the basis of a social project to solve the problem of social orphanhood.

Provisions for defense:

1. Philosophical analysis of the traditional criticism of philanthropy made it possible to single out a system of criteria for true charity, which consists in observing the principles

Unselfishness of the giver or purity and unity of ends and means,

Mutual respect between the donor and the donee,

non-violence;

Creative love.

2. Analysis of the correlation between the axiological and methodological aspects of organizational systems and ideals of education in Russian philosophical pedagogy made it possible to update the pedagogical ideas of Russian cosmism as a philosophical and methodological basis for creating a self-regulating educational system and a creative educational environment that can stimulate the formation of an independent, harmoniously developed personality in an orphanage. .

3. The study of the goals and methods of social education of young people, including pupils of state institutions, showed that the main task of socialization should be recognized not as the adaptation of those being educated to the existing order of things, the social order, to the requirements and conditions of existence in this world, but the formation of a holistic creative worldview attitudes, the ability to recognize oneself as an independent, free person, a unique element of a single social organism, the desire and readiness to responsibly and creatively build one's own destiny.

4. An analysis of the correlation between the subjective and objective factors of the upbringing and educational activities of an orphanage showed that the formation of an independent, responsible and harmoniously developed personality of the pupil should be not a means, but the goal of the educational system, and that this task is possible only with a subject-subject-oriented educational - educational activities of a children's orphanage.

5. An analysis of the correlation between the subjective and objective factors of charitable activity led to the conclusion that only subject-subject relations, which form the basis of any charity and, especially, aimed at the social adaptation of orphans, make it not only effective, but also morally justified. In this case, we can talk about the transition from the existing and widespread practice of passive, subject-object-oriented sponsorship to the implementation of the idea of ​​social partnership.

6. The study of modern social practice has shown the need to actualize the potential of domestic philosophy, which has sufficiently deeply reflected the principle of the integrity of man and society, which should be considered not only as an ideal, but also as the basis of a social project to solve the problem of social orphanhood.

The degree of reliability and approbation of the results of the work.

The reliability and validity of scientific provisions is ensured by:

consistent and logically consistent implementation of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the study, the breadth of the information base.

The study is based on the theoretical, methodological and worldview principles of Russian organicism and cosmism: the universality of life, integrity and naturalness, an activity approach to a single natural and social organism and harmony, systematically developed by O.D. Masloboeva in the monograph "Russian organicism and cosmism of the XIX - XX centuries: evolution and relevance" (2007). The methodological potential of the activity approach is updated through the dialectic of subjective and objective factors5.

Basic provisions dissertations were tested in scientific publications, as well as at the following scientific and practical conferences:

The mission of the intellectual in modern society. All-Russian scientific and educational forum "Days of St. Petersburg Philosophy - 2007". St. Petersburg, November 2007;

Third International Scientific and Practical Conference “Philosophy for Children. Dialogue of cultures and culture of dialogue” Moscow, June 2008;

Knowing person. A person who creates. The man is a believer.

All-Russian Scientific and Educational Forum "Days of St. Petersburg Philosophy"

- 2008". St. Petersburg, November 2008;

Challenges of the new time: Youth. Society. Morality. Culture:

International scientific-practical conference of scientists, students, public. St. Petersburg, December 12-13, 2008;

The science. Philosophy. Society: V Russian Philosophical Congress.

Fourth International Scientific and Practical Conference "Philosophy

- Children. Thinking and Health” Moscow, November 2010;

The Future of Russia: Strategies for Philosophical Understanding: All-Russian Scientific and Educational Forum "Days of St. Petersburg Philosophy - 2010". St. Petersburg, November 18-20, 2010;

Philosophy in modern world: dialogue of worldviews. VI Russian Philosophical Congress. Nizhny Novgorod, 27 – 30 June 2012.

The author contributed to the introduction of the Philosophy for Children educational program into the practice of charitable activities in the orphanage No. 27, boarding school No. 67, the Transit social shelter of St. ed. prof. I.A. Safronova. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University of Economics, 2006. - S. 215-226.

positive and constructive character, skills of independent comprehension of own life experience.

The author developed and tested on the basis of the Central City Children's Library. A.S. Pushkin educational program "Finding oneself as a process of truly creative socialization" for preschoolers, based on the pedagogical principles of the philosophy of Russian cosmism.

The structure of the work reflects the logic of the study and corresponds to the order of solving problems to achieve the goal. The dissertation research consists of an introduction, three chapters, ten paragraphs, a conclusion and a list of references, including 176 sources. The total volume of the dissertation is 167 pages.

The main provisions of the work are reflected in the following publications of the author:

1. Dmitrieva, M.G. Social education: problems of personality formation in children's orphanages / M.G. Dmitrieva // Philosophy of education. - 2010. - No. 4 (33). – P. 322–328 (0.6 pp)

2. Dmitrieva, M.G. The problem of the formation of an integral personality in the conditions of an orphanage / M.G. Dmitrieva // Historical, philosophical, political and legal sciences, cultural studies and art history.

Questions of theory and practice. - 2012. - No. 6. – P. 90–93 (0.5 pp)

3. Dmitrieva, M.G. The principle of integrity and subject-subject relations as the basis of social partnership / M.G. Dmitrieva // Theory and practice of social development. - 2014. - No. 1. - S. 50-53. (0.5 p.l.)

Publications in other scientific publications:

4. Dmitrieva, M.G. Charity and social responsibility in the mass and elite consciousness / M.G. Dmitrieva // Mission of an intellectual in modern society. Annex of the Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. - Series 6. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 2008. - P. 119-132.

5. Dmitrieva, M.G. Traditions of Western and Russian Charity in Modern Society / M.G. Dmitrieva // Proceedings of the All-Russian scientific and practical conference "Non-classical society: development vectors". - Vladimir, 2008. - S. 213-217.

6. Dmitrieva, M.G. Philosophy of Russian cosmism as an axiological base for the formation of the principles of modern upbringing and education / M.G. Dmitrieva // Proceedings of the Third International Scientific and Practical Conference “Philosophy for Children. Dialogue of cultures and culture of dialogue”. - Moscow, 2008. - S. 155-156.

7. Dmitrieva, M.G. Expediency of charity in children's orphanages / M.G. Dmitrieva // Social and innovative model of the economic system: problems and prospects of building in Russia. - St. Petersburg: SPbGUEF, 2008. - S. 176-177.

8. Dmitrieva, M.G. Correlation of axiological and methodological aspects of systems and ideals of education in Russian philosophical pedagogy / M.G. Dmitrieva // Journal of Russian Philosophy and Culture "Veche". - Issue 19. - St. Petersburg: publishing house of St. Petersburg State University, 2009. - P. 101-114.

9. Dmitrieva, M.G. Philosophical and methodological aspects of the problem of personality formation in children's orphanages / M.G.

Dmitrieva // Problems of the formation of the economic system of Russia of an innovative type in the conditions of the economic crisis.

- St. Petersburg:

SPbGUEF, 2009. - S. 284-287.

10. Dmitrieva, M.G. The problem of social education in children's orphanages: the conflict of universal and individual / M.G.

Dmitrieva // Modern research social problems: collection of articles of the all-Russian scientific-practical conference. - issue. 1 "Socio-pedagogical and psychological research" / ed.

owls. RAE Ya. A. Maksimova. Krasnoyarsk: Scientific and Innovation Center, 2009. - P. 112-114.

11. Dmitrieva, M.G. The hierarchy of the goals of education in the philosophical and pedagogical concept of S.I. Gessen / M.G. Dmitrieva // Proceedings of the V Russian Philosophical Congress "Science. Philosophy. Society". - Novosibirsk, 2009. - S. 437-438.

12. Dmitrieva, M.G. Development of social activity of pupils of the orphanage: goal or means? / M.G. Dmitrieva // Modernization of the economic system of Russia as a condition for economic growth. - St. Petersburg: SPbGUEF, 2010. - S. 288-289.

13. Dmitrieva, M.G. Philosophical thinking in the formation of the personality of a pupil of an orphanage / M.G. Dmitrieva // Proceedings of the Fourth International Scientific and Practical Conference “Philosophy for Children. Thinking and Health. - Moscow, 2010. - S. 200-202.

14. Dmitrieva, M.G. Philosophical anthropology about the foundations of morality / M.G. Dmitrieva // Strategy for the development of the Russian economy in the context of modernization. - St. Petersburg: SPbGUEF, 2011. - S. 277-279.

15. Dmitrieva, M.G. Modern charity - from passive sponsorship to social partnership / Problems of formation of a new industrial society in Russia. - St. Petersburg:, St. Petersburg State University of Economics, 2012, p.

16. Dmitrieva M.G., The problem of subject-subject relations in the process of charitable activities in the field of socialization of orphans / Proceedings of the VI Russian Philosophical Congress "Philosophy in the Modern World: Dialogue of Worldviews", Nizhny Novgorod: Publishing House of the Nizhny Novgorod State University.

N.I. Lobachevsky, 2012. T. I. S. 171.

17. Dmitrieva M.G., Subject-subject-oriented environment as a prerequisite for successful socialization of orphanage pupils / Collection of reports "Russia in search of a new model of interaction between the state and the market" St. Petersburg, SPbGUEF, 2013, C 255-257.

Chapter 1 CHARITY AS A SOCIAL PHENOMENON

1.1 Genesis, functions and motives of charitable activities The nature of charitable activities is based on the ontologically inherent human ability to compassion, because “everything that exists in general, and in particular all living beings are interconnected by the compatibility of being and the unity of origin, all are parts and products of one common mother - nature... The natural, organic connection of all living beings, as parts of one whole, is a given of experience, and not only a speculative idea, and therefore the psychological expression of this connection - the inner participation of one being in the suffering of others, compassion, pity - is something understandable from an empirical point of view, as an expression of the natural and obvious solidarity of all that exists”6.

The genesis of charity is associated with a moral experience and a feeling of “humiliation for the dignity of any person of the state of inaccessibility for him of some natural blessings of life from the point of view of the ideas of a worthy and fulfilling life accepted in society”7.

On the other hand, social, material and other support for the most vulnerable members is a way of maintaining, a means of self-preservation of the entire community, not only in humans, but also in most animal species. Both in primitive tribes and in the most civilized modern states, one of the tasks of supporting stable, strong members of society for others - weaker and more vulnerable due to objective or subjective reasons - is to support the social order itself, its integrity, to keep it from decay. Therefore, we can say that the genesis of charity is associated with phenomena expressed in categories of both irrational and rational nature. P.A. Kropotkin speaks about mutual assistance as a driving force of evolutionary processes not only in the world Soloviev V.S. justification for goodness. - M .: "Republic", 1996. - P. 106.

Fomin E.A. Charity: a discussion field and research tasks // Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house im. N.I. Novikova, 2004. - P.37.

people, but also in animal communities. Thus, charitable activity, which is a special case of mutual support of living beings, can be considered as a system-forming principle of the existence and development of organic systems, the dialectical opposite of which is the principle of competitive rivalry, which has received comprehensive coverage in the theory of social Darwinism.

The rational need for survival, self-preservation of the primitive collective and the irrational need for compassion, sympathy were inextricably linked in the psyche of the primitive man and were reflected in the customs and traditions of the tribe. With the development and complication of the social structure, with the growth, enlargement and unification of social organisms (unification of tribes, the formation of statehood), these principles are separated: the state, law, law takes upon itself the observance of justice, this is how institutions of state social support arise, and personal moral experience of feelings compassion leads to private philanthropy. The latter is developing from the simplest forms of almsgiving to modern non-profit organizations that are not inferior in scale to serious business and government. The increased opportunities for influencing the social structure of the non-profit sector lead to the fact that modern charity can no longer and should not exist and develop in parallel with other social forces, but only in close interaction with them.

In this study, we will distinguish between the concepts of "charity" and "charity". Charity is a moral category of the active embodiment of rationally understood justice and an irrational feeling of compassion for another person. Charity means

See Kropotkin P.A. Mutual assistance as a factor of evolution. - M.: Self-education, 2007. -

non-state voluntary gratuitous activities in the social sphere. The terms "charity" and "philanthropy", although often used as synonyms, are distinguished by specialists. If charity is considered to be the traditional direct support of the poor, sick, disabled, generally disadvantaged, then philanthropy is a broader concept: in addition to traditional charity, it also includes donations to non-profit organizations that provide free services to the entire community, the population of a city, region or the whole country, (for example, financial support libraries, museums, educational and medical institutions, art groups). However, in the context of this study, the invariant content of the concepts of charity and philanthropy is more important than the differences between them.

The term “sponsorship”, which is no less common today, has nothing to do with disinterested charitable assistance, as it implies the financing of any activity, both individuals and legal entities for the purpose of obtaining any material benefit or profit, or in exchange for advertising.

V.I.

Guerrier, who identifies the following three of its forms:

almsgiving, almshouse and care for the poor.

Guerrier characterizes the first, earliest form of charity as a spontaneous manifestation of a subjective and random mood: “Almsgiving is almost always a good deed in relation to the one who gives it, but not always a good deed in relation to the one who receives it”9.

The almshouse, being a charitable institution, “should serve as a source of constant, eternal charity, it is intended not for random petitioners, but for a certain selection of those in need: old people, orphans Guerrier V.I. A note on the historical development of ways of charity in foreign countries and on the theoretical principles of its correct formulation. - St. Petersburg: Free Economic Society, 1897. - P. 2.

etc. and intends to render them not accidental help, but firmly secure their fate.

An even higher level of organization, meaningfulness of the collective activity of people, directed towards good, is, according to Guerrier, guardianship of the poor, which takes on broader and more complex forms. The positive difference between guardianship and alms is that it does not provide instant help, but tries to heal the need at the root. At the same time, unlike the almshouse, guardianship helps not only the lonely and homeless at the cost of entering closed institutions with a monotonous life and strict discipline, but also helps at home, without interrupting life, without breaking family ties. Guerrier considers another advantage of this form of charity to be its preventive nature, the ability to “provide assistance not only when poverty has already set in, but protect them from ruin, support a person or family stricken with illness or adversity, help them out in trouble, support them during illness, deliver earnings, to provide everything necessary to resume an independent life. Setting such goals for itself, Guardianship can introduce into charity a new, previously unused, fruitful principle of individualization, i.e.

adjust the method and amount of assistance to the characteristics and needs of the person assisted, can observe how the assistance was accepted, what consequences it had, what influence - in a word, it can have an educational value that previous forms could not have. Thus, Guerrier draws attention to the possibility and necessity of not only material charity, provided in the form of alms and often corrupting the petitioner, but also moral.

Guerrier summarized in his work not only the experience of charity that existed in Russia at the end of the 19th century, but also the similar historically developed Guerrier V.I. A note on the historical development of ways of charity in foreign countries and on the theoretical principles of its correct formulation. - St. Petersburg: Free Economic Society, 1897. - P. 2.

There. - S. 2-3.

philanthropic experience in Europe. The purpose of the study, which was the result of his work as a member of the Highly Established Commission for the Revision of the Laws on the Charity of the Poor, was to offer the state authorities the theoretical basis for the correct and effective organization of social work in Russia. One of the results of this study is the realization of the fact that the issue of charity, which originally had a subjective and moral character, sooner or later becomes a state issue, subject to resolution by legislative means, because “their (Guardianship) activity can be quite expedient only when when it is everywhere brought into a coherent system, and this is possible only with the participation of local, public and general, state authorities.

In this regard, it should be noted that in Russia XIX- the beginning of the XX century.

public and private philanthropy has become widespread and has demonstrated a high degree of development of voluntary initiative. It was through private donations that the social programs of city and zemstvo local self-government were financed, hundreds of charitable institutions, even those under state jurisdiction, were supported. Only since the 1890s. these questions began to be raised at the government level in the proper form, when, after the disastrous famine of 1891-1892. came the realization of the role of the state in the development of the social sphere.

After 1917 social help and social protection of the population become exclusively public affairs. The state seeks to use social policy as an instrument of both economic and ideological influence on society. In such a situation, charity, both personal and public, comes into conflict with the goals of state policy, as a result of which it is banned.

Guerrier V.I. A note on the historical development of ways of charity in foreign countries and on the theoretical principles of its correct formulation. - St. Petersburg, 1897. - S. 4.

Modern researcher of philosophical and ethical aspects of philanthropic activity R.G. Apresyan, comparing charity with state social assistance, comes to the conclusion that the difference between state social assistance and philanthropy is ethical in nature - state assistance is obligatory, philanthropy is voluntary. The following conclusion of Apresyan confirms the thesis put forward in this dissertation study above about the nature of the division in modern society of forms of state and private social assistance: “State assistance is one of the embodiments of social justice, philanthropy is one of the social embodiments of mercy”13.

Today it should be recognized that maintaining a certain balance between state social assistance and private charitable initiatives in the social sphere is one of the urgent tasks of the emerging civil society in modern Russia.

On the one hand, as some researchers note, the significance of the activities of charitable organizations lies in “preventing state monopoly in the social sphere, which inevitably leads to the fact that a person is completely dependent on the state; … in the debureaucratization of the very process of providing social assistance”14, when state assistance is focused on the interests of the state, and the interests of specific people are not taken into account.

On the other hand, precisely due to the fact that private charitable initiatives are voluntary, and systematic assistance to those in dire need should be mandatory in a legal society, “it is the state that can provide it most effectively”15. In addition, the need for state regulation of private and public charity is also associated with Apresyan R.G. Functional features of philanthropy // Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - P.44.

Gribanova G.N. State social policy and charity - approaches and trends / Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - P.59.

Apresyan R.G. Functional features of philanthropy // Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - P.44.

political aspects: after all, in cases where the financial resources at the disposal of a philanthropist are comparable to some items of the state budget, “philanthropic institutions can actually act not only as a balance sheet, but also as a rival of the state”16.

The motivation system for charitable activities is determined by the needs that are differently perceived by the subject of charity (individual or company) in his interest, depending on the values, ideals, and goals of this subject. The content of the motivation system is also influenced by specific historical conditions and external circumstances of activity.

It is customary to talk about how disinterested are the motives of a person who provides gratuitous assistance to his neighbor. There is a point of view that denies the possibility of the existence of absolute, ontologically rooted altruism, but the author of the dissertation does not share it, believing that charity, being a moral phenomenon, cannot be described only with the help of an economic categorical apparatus.

Modern scholars identify four main driving motives for charity on the basis of economic research17:

1) altruism proper;

2) receiving internal pleasure (satisfaction) from an act of charity, when neither personal benefits nor the effects of this act on the beneficiary matter to the donor;

3) social identification18 of a benefactor, when a donation is a means of expressing the donor's participation in a certain social sphere, a means of self-identification with the needs of others;

Functional features of philanthropy // Charity in Russia. - SPb., 2001. - S. 46.

Zagorulko N.M., Kazakov O.B., Potapenko M.S. Economic motivation for corporate philanthropy in Russian Federation// Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 2004. - S. 307.

This also includes “fashionable” charity motivated by the media.

4) quid pro quo - the possibility of obtaining benefits and advantages as a by-product of charitable activities. Interpretations of the benefit category are quite diverse and range from direct, really tangible benefits (for example, sponsorship of an elite gymnasium in exchange for the opportunity to study there for your children, obtaining tickets for the best seats in the hall as a result of donations to theaters, etc.) to receiving public recognition, approval, gratitude19 .

It can be seen that this motivational scale arranges motives as the rational component increases in them. Altruism can be considered a pronounced irrational motive, while the inner pleasure from philanthropic activity, not being a benefit in itself, still contains a rational motivational component - a satisfied need for narcissism. If the donor is a religious person, such a motive may be the personal salvation of the soul, when the very act of almsgiving is important, regardless of how the beneficiary uses it, how much it can change the situation for the better;

we can say that this is “getting inner pleasure not only from the consciousness -“ I am good ”, but also -“ I keep the Christian commandments.

Charity as a means of expressing donor involvement in a particular social area can bring economic benefit, but quite rational benefits in the form of increasing personal authority and influence in society, and sometimes such changes in social status inevitably affect the increase in personal well-being.

The quid pro quo motif (for example, the marketing benefits that the company that finances professional activity well-known sportsman or artist) – is essentially rational and performs. There is, in addition to the above, another alternative motive for philanthropy – forced charity, for example, on instructions received by an entrepreneur from local authorities. However, we do not consider this option, because such charity is fundamentally contrary to its essence, not being a voluntary act.

the basis of the actual sponsorship, which, as mentioned above, we do not attribute to charity in the framework of this study.

The considered motives changed little in the historical process, with the exception of the fact that in pre-revolutionary Russia the basis of altruism was the religious tradition, since the Orthodox Church has always attached great importance to charity.

An important feature of this historical stage is the absence of so-called corporate charity:

the benefactor has always been a private person, regardless of the scale of the donation.

Highlighting the rational and irrational motivational components of charity as a social phenomenon, it should be borne in mind that their ratio is determined by the free choice of the subject of charitable activity, which is essentially voluntary, not dependent on external coercion.

The following socio-economic functions of charity can be defined:

Ensuring a decent existence for those citizens who, due to objective characteristics and life situations unable to take care of themselves;

Removing social tension by leveling the standard of living, supporting the most disadvantaged segments of the population, who, due to objective circumstances, cannot adapt to new conditions;

Compensation for the shortcomings of the social policy of the state and the functioning of market mechanisms, primarily due to the efficiency and targeting of the assistance delivered, i.e. increasing its efficiency;

Cultivation of altruistic and philanthropic sentiments in society, impact on public opinion.

Philosophical understanding of the essence of the phenomenon of charity, undertaken in this paragraph, leads to the following conclusions.

Charity as an active embodiment of social assistance is a moral category. The rational basis for this category is the acceptance of justice as the law of the preservation and development of the social organism. At the same time, charity proceeds from the irrational and moral readiness of a person to accept problems, misfortunes, disorder, deprivation of another person “close to the heart”, in other words, the ability to compassion.

Charitable activity, by virtue of its voluntariness, comes from rationally and (or) irrationally colored motives to the extent that they prevail in a particular subject of charity.

1.2 Philosophical aspects of the historical features of the formation of charity in Russia and the West.

It is traditionally customary to associate the formation and development of charitable institutions with the emergence of Christian culture. However, as was shown in the previous paragraph, in the pre-Christian period, charity also existed in the form of community institutions of social protection: children had to respect their parents, provide for them in old age, parents were obliged to take care of their children, and in the event of illness or death of older family members the care of orphans fell on fellow tribesmen.

The customs of any traditional community from ancient times suggested one or another way of providing public assistance to its members who fell into distress due to crop failure, accident, illness.

In Russian villages, for example, "help" was widespread - the joint unpaid work of peasants, which was voluntary and often took the form of a ritual holiday. Public protection of the poor, the disabled, widows, old people, orphans was guaranteed by the entire peasant world. The philosophy of peasant charity in the community was determined by a very simple formula: "if I do not help the needy, then where is the guarantee that tomorrow I myself will not fall into the place of the one who asks, and then who will help me."

Such assistance cannot be called properly charitable, since it acted rather as a specific institution of social protection within the community.

As shown above, charity is formed as an independent socio-cultural phenomenon with the emergence of the state as a voluntary, conditioned by the personal needs of the philanthropist, an addition to the institution of state social support for citizens.

The Orthodox Church became the basis of Russian statehood, therefore the beginning of the history of domestic charity20 is considered to be the year 988, the date of the baptism of Russia. From the turn of the 10th - 11th centuries until the middle of the 16th century, Christian charity was mainly private and consisted mainly of giving alms to the poor and the poor.

The beginning of the next stage in the development of the institute of charity in Russia is associated with the adoption in 1551 by the Church Council of such a unique document as "Stoglav", in which for the first time attention is paid to the charity of the poor and the poor, and continues until the middle of the 17th century. This period is characterized, firstly, by the transition from private almsgiving to a system of public charity, and secondly, the first steps appear to organize not only church, but also state, secular assistance to those in need.

For the first time, the problem of begging at the state level was considered in the “Stoglavy Cathedral” (1551), “Cathedral Code” (1649) and, finally, “Decree”

(1682). These documents identified “concrete measures to localize begging, including through careful differentiation of groups of beggars and appropriate punitive and (or) preventive measures in relation to each category; for the first time, the idea of ​​teaching orphans and vagrant children the sciences and crafts arises as a means to prevent the growth of beggars; finally, See Khoreva L.V., Sushchinskaya M.D. History of charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 1999. - 92 p.

the issue of providing medical care to the sick is raised at the state level”21.

The fourth period lasts from the end of the 17th century to the middle of the 19th century and is characterized by the greatest development of the state charity system.

Each provincial city at this time has its own almshouse or other institution for public charity, management is carried out by the Orders of public charity, organized practically throughout Russia. It was during this period that secular traditions of helping the needy were born, on the basis of which private charity subsequently flourished.

The fifth stage begins in the middle of the 19th century and continues until 1918: in the first years of Soviet power, there were still some charitable institutions that functioned even under the tsar. At this time, there is an effective combination of state forms of charity with public and private forms. The tasks of organizing charity are entrusted to Zemstvos and City councils. During this period, with the growth of the bourgeoisie, the system of private charity and patronage especially developed, in a number of cases mediated through charitable institutions. The end of the 19th century - the beginning of the 20th century can be considered the heyday of charity in Russia.

It should be noted that in the Russian village of the second half of the 19th century, characteristic forms of communal institutions of social protection, which originated in the pre-Christian period, were preserved:

Alternate feeding of poor fellow villagers at home, daily or weekly;

Transfer of those in need for permanent maintenance to one of the members of the community for some kind of benefit (partial exemption from the payment of duties, increase in allotment, monetary surcharge, etc.);

Distribution of alms.

Kononova T.B. Features of the development of charity in Russia. - M. 2002. - S. 80.

“At the same time, the organization in Russian villages of special almshouses for the elderly, almshouses for the crippled and orphanages did not meet with any sympathy and support from the peasants. So, in the entire Vyatka province there were 17 almshouses; in Smolensk - 9; in Nizhny Novgorod and Kharkov - two each; in the rest - one at a time or not at all. There were even fewer orphanages in the villages: in the Saratov province - 4 orphanages; in Tula and Kazan - one each.

The above facts can be explained as follows: government forms of charity associated with the placement of orphans and the elderly in closed institutions and their separation from the natural life of the family, necessarily lead to a violation of the socialization of the wards. On the one hand, almshouses and shelters provide mandatory social support to vulnerable members of society, on the other hand, the result of living in a government institution is the social maladaptation of orphans, the disabled, and the elderly. Today, state charity is a common type of social support, while in the century before last communal ties were quite strong: the people, the “peace” were still able to solve the problems of social protection, relying on their own resources, naturally directly participating in the life of every person.

During the years of Soviet power, all issues of social security were concentrated in the hands of the state, and organizations such as the Red Cross society were quasi-public, receiving the bulk of their funding from the budget.

The stage that covers the last twenty-five years, starting approximately in 1989, can be called the period of the revival of the traditions of charitable work in Russia.

For the most part, charitable organizations in modern Russia do not turn to the experience of the pre-revolutionary tradition, but to modern Western ones. Kuzmin K.V., Sutyrin B.A. History of social work abroad and in Russia. - M., 2005.

samples, which greatly narrows the idea of ​​this social institution.

In our opinion, the current blind borrowing of Western forms of organizing charitable activities is based on their attractiveness from a pragmatic point of view due to greater methodological elaboration and efficiency. However, the factor of usefulness for a Russian person is traditionally not primary and, moreover, the only one, and the formalization of the process necessary to achieve this usefulness, which sometimes translates philanthropic activity onto the rails of competitive market relations, can deprive it of an essential component that is important for the consciousness of a Russian person: the spirit of disinterestedness and indeterminacy as absolute voluntariness.

Speaking about the religious motives of charity, traditional for Christian culture, one cannot fail to note the key features of the perception of the ideas of charity in Russia and in the West, which are covered in detail in the study by S.V. Klimova23.

A characteristic feature of Western Christianity (Catholicism, Protestantism), both in the past and in the present, is that charitable work has always been seen as an effective way of missionary work, attracting new disciples to the Church. Such charity, responding to social needs, at the same time performs purposeful work to turn the Church into an authoritative social force capable of influencing various aspects of public life.

The Orthodox Church, which has traditionally adhered to the principle of non-participation in political life, has a fundamentally different experience of introducing believers to mercy. realities today testify to the increasing involvement of the ROC in solving issues of a state nature (culture, education, politics, the formation of public opinion), but

See Klimova S.V. Christian meaning of mercy. // Charity and mercy:

collection of scientific papers. - Saratov, 1997. - P.80-85.

Initially, Eastern Christianity relies on the ascetic-monastic tradition, proceeds from the position of isolation from the "worldly fuss", non-interference in secular issues of social order. The peculiarity of the Orthodox soul lies in the fact that it acquires its pious disposition through a rite, but at the same time, the mystical purposefulness of the Orthodox soul for superearthly, absolute goodness does not mean indifference to earthly needs and human suffering.

Before the revolution of 1917, the Russian Orthodox Church actively developed various forms of charity, but the search for primary sources or information confirming its role in this area is complicated by the fact that helping a neighbor in need, which is called "Christ's sake", was considered a natural attraction of a true Orthodox, according to the gospel covenant: “You should not blow your good deeds in front of you.” Therefore, documents promoting church philanthropy are mostly absent.

In the 15th-16th centuries, the issue of charity (almsgiving) was the subject of lively debate in the context of the problems of accumulation of property, fair distribution, spiritual freedom and was reflected in the well-known controversy between the non-possessors and the Josephites. The founder of the doctrine of non-possession, Neil Sorsky, argued that the Christian commandment to help the poor among the Josephites turned into a tool for the accumulation of wealth by monasteries. And the very institution of alms justified inequality, which was contrary to the spirit of Christian teaching. As a result, he comes to the conclusion that "non-acquisition is higher than alms"24, thus laying the foundation for subsequent criticism of the accumulation of wealth.

The atmosphere of a critical attitude towards wealth in Russian society persisted during the development of capitalism in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Emphasizing the differences in the Russian and Western understanding of wealth, I.V.

Kireevsky noted that “Western man was looking for the development of external means of the Sorsky Nile. Tradition to his disciples about the skete residence. - St. Petersburg, 1912. - P.8.

alleviate the severity of internal deficiencies. The Russian man strove to escape the severity of external needs by internally rising above external needs.

Thus, Russian society was dominated by the belief that judging a person only by the amount of accumulated wealth means simplifying the understanding of the divine essence of a person, who, in the Christian Orthodox understanding, is not a means, but the goal of the universe. In this sense, economic and ethical ideas were fundamentally different from Protestantism, where wealth was understood as evidence of being chosen, and a person who managed to accumulate capital was perceived as a righteous man. The difference in attitudes towards the rich in Russia and in Western Europe was noted by V.P. Ryabushinsky.

In Russian society, he wrote, “poverty is not looked upon as proof of displeasing God.”26

Having moral foundations, charity is socially and culturally determined, therefore the formation of modern philanthropy in Russia should not go along the path of borrowing ideas and mechanisms of charitable activities from Western civilization, but, on the contrary, based on the continuity of domestic traditions of philanthropy.

Pursuing the goals of rational efficiency, modern Western charity is organized as a socially oriented commercial enterprise acting according to the laws of the market. The concepts of "social marketing", "social entrepreneurship" are firmly rooted, the percentage of expenses for the functioning of the charitable organization itself as an institution is inevitably growing: advertising, PR promotion. Assistance is aimed at solving the problems of "clients", which in this case become consumers of the local, national and even international services market.

Within the framework of this study, the ratio of rational and irrational motivational components is of particular interest Kireevsky IV. Criticism and aesthetics. - M., 1979. - P.286.

Ryabushinsky V.P. The fate of the Russian owner // Old Believers and Russian religious feeling. - Moscow-Jerusalem, 1994. - P.125.

charitable activities, which we have already discussed in the first paragraph of this chapter. Charity in the mass consciousness of the Russian people is, first of all, irrational mercy, not pursuing practical benefits for the donor. At the same time, the processes of globalization and changes in industrial relations lead to the tracing of some modern Western forms of corporate philanthropy, primarily focused on achieving rational results.

On the other hand, a Russian lady can also be called pragmatic, giving Christ for the sake of saving her own soul and not caring about the results of her deeds. And from this point of view, the pragmatic rule formulated by the classic of Western political economy J. Mill looks more humane: help could be calculated in advance, then it is harmful; but if, being available to everyone, this help encourages a person to do without it, then it is useful in most cases.

How rational is the nature of morality? Of course, it has a rational aspect, because morality is a mechanism of self-regulation of society, without which social institutions degrade and collapse.

The moral imperative of Christianity - to love your neighbor as yourself, means the need to recognize and accept the problems of your neighbor as your own. This moral potential is a necessary component of a healthy social organism, an indicator of its health and stability, the ability to self-preservation, reproduction and development.

Devoid of irrational motives, charity loses its essence, which is especially important for the consciousness of a Russian person: the spirit of disinterestedness, non-acquisitiveness, which is still a characteristic feature of our people, confusing many Western economists and sociologists.

Mill J.S. Fundamentals of political economy T.III. - M.: Progress, 1981. - S. 371.

Active moral love embodies mercy, creates the foundation and keeps the life of the community from destruction. Morality has ontological foundations, according to the teachings of Socrates, it constitutes the essence of a person, acting as his attribute. The motives of charity as a practical expression of morality also contain rational and irrational aspects, extremely finely balanced among themselves.

It can be said that the border between these aspects, like the border between the "city of the earth and the city of heaven" of Augustine the Blessed, does not even lie between Russia and the West, but in the soul of every person who performs an act of charity.

1.3 Features of the reflection of charity in the mass and elite consciousness

A study of the history of philanthropic activity in pre-revolutionary Russia shows that the concept and principles of charity have long been widespread and accepted in broad sections of Russian society. But of course, it was the intelligentsia, the middle class and high society that could take over the organizational functions. First of all, these were middle-aged women, usually married, charitable ladies from the middle class and high society, due to the fact that public consciousness assigned this function to them. Volunteer (gratuitous) activities of ladies philanthropists has become the most important occupation, along with other status and secular duties, as well as a way to increase personal social prestige. Volunteers-initiators of charitable companies not only took on the functions of collecting and distributing funds for the needs of socially disadvantaged sections of society, but also personally visited orphanages, almshouses, hospitals, families in need, etc.

For the merchants and big businessmen, funding charitable events was a way to gain public recognition and strengthen their authority.

Despite the fact that charity was officially excluded from the life of Soviet society, since only the state had the right to perform social assistance functions, it still existed in one form or another and was even prescribed - voluntary-compulsory membership fees to the Red Cross, to help starving African children, in support of political prisoners in developing countries. An unprecedented example is when tanks and military aircraft were assembled at the personal expense of Soviet citizens during the Great Patriotic War. But in most cases, due to the coercion of these forms, they cannot, according to the definition adopted in this study, be attributed to charity itself.

During the period of the formation of charity in the new Russia (late 1980s - early 1990s), in the absence of a legal framework and relevant elements of state regulation, the need for charitable activities is practically absent in the mass consciousness. It is reflected only in the lives of business leaders, and it can also be attributed to private charity, since in the conditions of the mass cooperative movement and the emergence of the first joint-stock companies, there is practically no separation of personal and corporate budgets.

Charitable activities at this stage are motivated by exclusively irrational factors:

revival of patronage traditions, personal charity, emotional outburst.

Starting from the mid-1990s, the formation of modern charity has been taking place, it has been transformed into a complex phenomenon, acquiring a more organized and systemic character. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that an understanding of charity appears in the public mind as an important factor in reducing social tension. On the other hand, in view of the fact that the main burden of providing gratuitous assistance lies with the commercial sector, the rational component of charity motivation is gaining momentum among business leaders: strengthening the image, gaining public confidence, and advertising purposes.

In this regard, there is a desire to streamline their philanthropic activities, for this purpose, areas of specialization of charity are distinguished, especially in large companies, specialized charitable structures are formed - foundations, departments, non-profit organizations (NPOs). All these are signs of the formation and development of corporate charity, relevant for modern stage philanthropy in Russia and long rooted in Western models of philanthropy.

At the same time, stereotypes of the perception of charity by the mass consciousness arise and become stronger, which are formed and often depend on the way information is presented in the media. A high level of distrust in charity is characteristic, since they tend to suspect domestic charity of money laundering, and they see the background of foreign humanitarian aid in an effort to strengthen the ideological influence on Russia, to weaken it. People prefer to give money directly to the needy than to transfer it to the Fund (the money will not reach the addressee), losing sight of the fact that if we are not talking about temporary patching of holes, but about ways to solve social problems, then we cannot do without planned, systematic activities.

At the other pole of the stereotypical perception of philanthropy by the mass consciousness is the practice of so-called “fashionable” charity, which has been increasingly spreading in recent years, which, by and large, comes down to massive collection of gifts, essentials, organizing leisure activities for needy segments of the population - orphans, the disabled, veterans. It is impossible to dispute the necessity and importance of such work. At the same time, only a small percentage of those participating in it are ready to delve into the essence of the true problems of their wards, for example, to provide personal assistance in social adaptation. Any sincere personal initiative that is not subjected to a critical awareness of the relationship between goals and results, put on stream, can not only be fruitless, but sometimes has a destructive effect, for example, supporting the socially dependent attitudes of the ward.

It should be noted that the stereotype of "fashionable charity" is also spreading in the mass consciousness thanks to the media, and its motives, in accordance with the classification proposed in paragraph 1.1, can mainly be described as the need for one's own social identification.

The ability to rise above the "here and now", to analyze and generalize the problem is a characteristic feature of the intelligentsia's consciousness, in this sense it can be called elitist. And since we have come to the conclusion that the most characteristic feature the modern stage of development of philanthropy in Russia is a mixture of personal and corporate charity, that today we are moving along the path of forming the foundations of corporate charity, it is from the intelligentsia that it is required to realize what it is, and what extremes must be avoided along this path.

The meaning of creating corporate forms of charitable activity lies in their systemic and organized nature, which serve as a guarantee of efficiency in solving certain social problems. This is the fundamental difference between corporate charity and personal charity, when "the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing." Such practical charity or almsgiving, most often aimed at helping an individual, is easier to organize and control, although the latter is not even always required, because, as was presented in 1.1, the donor's internal pleasure from an act of charity may not depend on the effect of this act on the beneficiary.

The flip side of organized charity is an increase in the cost of service elements - special management, holding marketing research. Here, a personal altruistic impulse may not be enough; it is necessary that charity be beneficial to the whole company. The more systemic attributes are acquired, the more the costs of maintaining the viability of this system increase.

On the basis of modern socio-economic studies28, the following aspects of corporate charity motivation can be distinguished.

A. An increase in income as a result of an increase in demand for products or services of a company with a socially responsible image.

B. Reducing costs by reducing the cost of labor force, growth in labor productivity, reduction in administrative costs due to the interest of staff in working in a company that performs a "social mission".

C. The growth of self-importance and prestige of top managers in the eyes of society, family, friends.

D. Getting personal satisfaction by top managers from the involvement of the company in the social life of the local community.

It should be noted that the main motives of corporate charity are rational in one way or another, which is due to the essence of corporatism as a product of the modern historical era and technocratic society.

The pragmatism and rationality of modern Western culture have turned charity into a business, creating powerful funds to finance educational, social and cultural programs of a local, national and international scale. Such programs are selected on a competitive basis according to criteria that correspond to modern principles of the humane development of the human community.

Sergey Turkin, director of the non-profit partnership "Social Investments", having analyzed the modern experience of Russian and foreign corporations and small companies, believes that today being socially responsible is beneficial for any company. In his work, he considers Zagorulko N.M., Kazakov O.B., Potapenko M.S. Economic motivation of corporate charity in the Russian Federation // Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 2004. - S.309-316.

the social responsibility of business not as an act of disinterestedness or a noble impulse of the soul, but as a systematic serious work to combine the interests of the company with the interests of society29.

The main idea of ​​corporate citizenship is that a company deliberately provides additional benefits to society by making all its business activities socially significant. This activity also implies additional expenses for the corporation to ensure the safety of employees at the workplace, to improve working conditions and quality control, and in addition, it can be aimed at solving some social problems of the so-called "local community". At the same time, the social position of businessmen can prevent, if not a revolution, then at least a serious social explosion. This is on the one hand, on the other hand, corporate citizenship turns into quite tangible benefits by increasing the loyalty of its employees, strengthening relations with the local community, and so on. Therefore, corporate citizenship cannot be called pure charity: its concept is based on interaction with the "local community", customers, authorities, non-profit organizations, development of long-term social investment programs and, as a result, improving the image, increasing competitiveness and sustainable development of the company.

Another work by Turkin explicitly states that political power can be another result of such an approach to charity: “The expansion of the sphere of responsibility is as natural as the expansion of the sphere of influence. The more we are responsible for something, the more we influence it. By offering social programs to your clients, you strengthen your client base. By investing in educational programs in your “local communities,” you grow dedicated employees.

See Turkin. C. Benefits of being kind: Make your business socially responsible. – M.: Alpina, 2007 – 384 p.

By getting involved in social programs at the local level, you build equal relations with the local authorities”30.

Examining the charitable activities of American banks, S. Turkin identifies three main sources that feed American corporate philanthropy - market pressure, social pressure, and internal convictions.

“In response to the massive and well-organized pressure of society, business has invented a wonderful buffer, making the non-profit sector its ally and partner. From this partnership, banks squeeze the maximum benefit, save their money and make new ones. Confirming with an example: reasonable egoism is when everyone feels good”31.

The elite consciousness fully implements rational motivation for morally justified activity (let us recall Rakhmet's "reasonable egoism"). The mass consciousness does not reflect on the rational component of compassion, for it charity is an impulse, moreover, which seems completely irrational, but in reality carries an unconscious pragmatism.

The elite consciousness is called upon to participate in the formation of a mass consciousness loyal to modern trends in philanthropy, characterized by the complementarity of personal and corporate forms of philanthropy. Trust in an NGO can only arise in the average person on the condition of personal participation in its activities, for example, as a volunteer (this is the complementarity of personal and organized philanthropy, which we are talking about). In addition, it is necessary to create and develop various forms of social partnership between commercial structures, authorities and the non-profit sector.

On the other hand, due to the reasons that we discussed above, there is a danger that rational motives will prevail in corporate Turkin S. Investing in social partnership. // Message. - 2000. - No. 11-12. - P.71.

Turkin S. Corporate philanthropy in America // Internet portal PATRONS. URL:

http://www.maecenas.ru/doc/2005_3_10.html of charity. The most striking examples of such a development of events are modern philanthropy American business(aka social involvement, aka community involvement), which itself has become a business.

Washing out the irrational components of motivation leads to the formalization of charitable activity, when it begins to solve the problems of the state's social policy, to replace it, and this is not true.

Another danger lies in the fact that charity is losing its main difference - a personal individual approach, corporate charity is often deprived of the opportunity to participate in the personal fate of a person in need, and is not interested in this. The decision to allocate funds is made in favor of large-scale PR-interesting actions that have a momentary, but ephemeral result.

One cannot ignore the possibility of increasing the social prestige of a particular corporate fund to such an extent that its founders can become significant figures not only in the economy, but also in the politics of both the local community and the state. The hand that gives bread acquires the attributes of power, the possibility of pressure, lobbying for one's own interests, not necessarily of an altruistic nature.

A.F. Veksler and G.L. Tulchinsky interpret charity as a "practical moral philosophy of modern business"32.

The ethical standard of modern practical charity should be recognized as the idea of ​​social partnership, understood as a conscious and responsible interaction of various social forces aimed at solving pressing social problems. The principles of organizing social partnership relations between state authorities, commercial structures, public organizations and independent representatives of civil society are discussed in detail in the third chapter of this study.

Veksler A.F., Tulchinsky L.G. Business and social investments // Charity in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 2004. - S. 302.

It can be added that modern level development of charity, social responsibility for the ways of its formation, the forms that it will take, and its effectiveness belongs primarily to the bearers of the elite consciousness - representatives of the intelligentsia, the ruling elite and leaders big business. This responsibility is primarily spiritual and moral.

1.4. Criteria for True Charity

Like any human activity, charity contains internal contradictions, conflicts, but rarely what type of activity causes such sharply opposite moral assessments - from admiration for altruism as a special ability to sacrifice one's own interests for the sake of the interests of another, which is characteristic of a person, to deep skepticism about the possibility true selflessness in this sacrifice. “This activity itself is considered by public opinion as a predominant area for the application of moral efforts. And at the same time, it is charity that often turns out to be the subject of close attention in terms of its compliance with moral standards.

The very concept of good in ethics and philosophy since ancient times meant that which contains a certain positive meaning. However, over time, the content of this concept has changed. So, in ancient philosophy, the good was interpreted differently: as pleasure among the hedonists, as abstinence from passions among the Stoics, as a virtue in the sense of the dominance of a higher, rational nature over a lower, emotionally sensual one in the philosophy of Socrates, as an eternal perfect idea of ​​Plato.

During the Middle Ages, the meaning and content of the concept of good fundamentally changes: God acts as the highest good, who is the source of all blessings and the ultimate goal of human aspirations. Thus, the achievement of Apresyan R.G. The idea of ​​morality. - M., 1995. - S. 317.

good for a particular person is the knowledge of divine truth, but progress along the path of knowledge is inseparable from suffering - divine punishment for sins. Suffering testified to the abandonment of man, from whom God turned away. However, after the atoning sacrifice of Christ, humanity had a hope for salvation through "love for one's neighbor." It is the Christian tradition that introduces a new concept into philosophy - "compassion", which later turns out to be inseparable from the concept of good.

In modern times, two main philosophical traditions of interpreting the concept of good have developed. The first tradition proceeded from the fact that human virtues are based on a rational principle, while the second one derived virtues from an emotional-sensual principle. The fundamental contradiction of these two approaches lies in the fact that the process of formation of individual virtues is understood quite differently: in the first tradition, they are the result of the influence of the natural environment on a person, while in the second, virtue is the innate qualities of a particular person.

In our opinion, it is precisely this opposition of the two foundations of morality - the rational and the irrational - that underlies the contradiction in the moral assessment of the concepts of good deeds, good creation, which we spoke about above.

If the idea of ​​what true good is is so socially and historically determined, then all the more attention should be paid to identifying the essence of the concept of beneficence, as well as identifying the criteria for true charity as a special social form of beneficence.

Numerous definitions of charity can be reduced to the definition of it as "a gratuitous activity for the creation and transfer of financial, material and spiritual values ​​(benefits) to meet the urgent needs of a person, social group or wider communities that find themselves in a difficult life situation"34.

Dictionary-reference book on social work. - M., 1997. - S. 34.

The key in this definition is the assessment of such assistance as gratuitous, as well as its focus on positive changes in the life of a particular person and society.

It is these two points - the motives and functions of charity - that cause the main skepticism and doubts about its truth.

R.G. Apresyan, offering a typification of traditional criticism of philanthropy, singles out socialist, feuilleton, utilitarian and ethical criticism35.

Socialist criticism, aimed at revealing the social meaning of charity, warns against hoping that through the development of charity one can put an end to painful issues of public life. Moreover, philanthropy, from this point of view, is meaningless and immoral, since it does not correct, but only aggravates the situation of the poor and disadvantaged people. It is only a respectable cover for the exploitative nature of a class-antagonistic society. In moral and psychological terms, this is self-deception of the bad conscience of the exploiters and the deception of those exploited by them. Along with this, attention is also drawn to the fact that in a capitalist society, philanthropy is a kind of business, and a very profitable one, a form of government, influencing ideology and mass consciousness.

The most striking example of socialist criticism of philanthropy is found in Paul Lafargue's On Charity: “Christian active love, which in deep humility requires from the rich man only a grain of his excesses, is, however, a virtue that brings very tangible benefits. Without violating the rich man's habits, without constraining him in the satisfaction of vicious needs, without restricting his pleasures, without requiring the slightest physical or mental exertion from him, and without costing him a lot of money, Christian active love at the same time serves as a source of public honor for him, usually associated with each act Apresyan R.G. The idea of ​​morality. -M., 1995. - S. 318-325.

generous generosity. And besides that, she also provides him with a place in paradise, for, as the apostle Peter says: "for love, many sins will be forgiven you." But active love also renders other important services, about which its preachers and apologists prudently try to keep silent. Mercy serves as a low means by which the character of the poor man is spoiled, his human dignity and self-respect are humiliated, and he is taught to endure an unjust and bitter fate with the patience of a sheep. Only a society that pushes the exploitation of the poor to extreme limits could manage to put on a pedestal of spiritual and social virtue an expense that brings such fabulously usurious interest”36.

We must agree with R.G. Apresyan, who points out that this criticism is sociological, not ethical, abstracting from the inner essence of philanthropy, which, being a social phenomenon, is characterized by internal multidirectionality. “Thus, charity, whatever it may be, can be used to camouflage the particular interests of the organizers of a charity event. But charity in itself, for example, helping the sick and the poor or supporting young talents, and the camouflage of particular interests, are phenomena that are different in nature. Selfishness does not become sublime from what is covered by philanthropy, but philanthropy in itself does not arise at all as a result of selfishness.

From a rational point of view, Lafargue is right and charity is unable to achieve its ultimate goals - to rid society of poverty, since such tasks can be solved only with the socio-economic transformation of society. However, if one takes an irrational-sensual position, one cannot but admit that the possibility of solving the problems of at least a small part of society, helping one in trouble the only person worth the effort, just as Dostoevsky does not justify the happiness of everything Lafargue P. Charity and the right to work. - St. Petersburg, 1918. - S. 3-4.

Apresyan R.G. The idea of ​​morality. – M., 1995. – P.319.

humanity at the cost of one child's tears, morally equalizing these values.

Apresyan's utilitarian criticism of philanthropy also indicates not only the inability of charity to fulfill its functions: to solve the task assigned to it by definition of reducing the level of social unhappiness in society, but, on the contrary, increases it.

Utilitarian criticism raises the question of the justice of charity in a political and economic context, because it satisfies the needs of those in need without mediation by labor. Hegel criticizes philanthropy from this position in the following way. “If the wealthy classes were given a direct obligation to maintain a decent standard of living for the impoverished mass of the population, or if direct means were found for this in other public property (in wealthy hospitals, charitable institutions, monasteries), then the existence of the needy would be ensured without mediation by labor, which would be contrary to the principle of civil society and the sense of independence and honor of its individuals; if these funds were mediated by labor (the provision of work), then the mass of products would increase, the surplus of which, in the absence of consumers who independently produce according to consumption, constitutes the evil that would only increase in both of these ways. This shows that with excessive wealth, civil society is not rich enough; does not have sufficient wealth of its own to prevent the emergence of an excess of poverty and the emergence of a mob”38.

Even greater skepticism is caused by the assessment of the motives of charity, because one of the generally recognized criteria for its truth is unselfishness, the existence of which is usually doubted. This kind of criticism includes, for example, feuilletonic, the meaning of which lies in the fact that quite often the organization of philanthropic activities costs more money than those, Hegel V.F. Philosophy of law. -M., 1990. - S. 272.

that go to the real help of the suffering. At the same time, charitable events themselves are arranged with such pomp that they attract and beckon with their form.

R.G. Apresyan attaches the greatest importance in his research to the fourth type - ethical criticism of charity, the subject of which is how to understand charity, its moral meaning from the point of view of the commandment of love.

R.G. Apresyan identifies several types of imaginary beneficence when it is associated with overt or hidden selfish motives of a rational nature.

Goodwill of an approbative order, which is expressed in the hope for the approval and gratitude of others, when “the positive sanction of a merciful act from public opinion is its only motive”39;

Selfish beneficence associated with a rationally selfish moral position, when doing good to another is a means of achieving one's own good;

Hedonistic-utilitarian beneficence, “which, unlike approbative and reasonable-egoistic, does not appeal in one way or another to someone else's interest and is unambiguously selfish. The main goal of such actions is not the benefit of another person, but the explicit or hidden satisfaction of the needs of the “benefactor”40.

A comprehensive analysis of critical approaches to considering the essence of charity, presented in Apresyan's study, allows us to draw the following conclusions.

Being an instrument of influence on the social position of the donor, charity to one degree or another can become a means of achieving his selfish goals. Apresyan R.G. The idea of ​​morality. - M., 1995. - S. 312.

Ibid., p.314.

charitable act is its focus on overcoming social injustice, an essential gap between members of society, while some forms of charity, pursuing the personal goals of the donor, on the contrary, emphasize and increase this gap.

Therefore, the whole variety of justified criticism of charitable activity comes down to accusations of the loss of its expediency, the emasculation of its original meaning.

Determining the criteria for true charity will allow us to evaluate and build our own charitable activities in terms of maintaining its expediency, focusing on overcoming the essential alienation of members of society from each other.

The first criterion of true charity should be recognized as the criterion of unselfishness, or purity and unity of ends and means. It is impossible to express this principle better than Immanuel Kant did, reflecting on the duties of virtue in relation to other people: “The duty of loving your neighbor can, therefore, be expressed as follows: it is a duty to make the goals of others (if only these goals are not immoral) mine; the duty of respect for my neighbor is contained in the maxim not to reduce people to the level of a mere means to achieve my goals (not to require another to humiliate himself by becoming a slave to my goal) ”41.

As a rule, one of the signs of following this principle is the anonymity of the benefit.

The selfish motives of a false beneficence done non-anonymously, for show, are denounced by Nietzsche through the mouth of Zarathustra: “You cannot bear yourselves and do not love yourself enough; and now you would like to tempt your neighbor to love and gild yourself with his delusion... You invite a witness when you want Kant I. Criticism of Practical Reason. Metaphysics of morals in two parts. - St. Petersburg, 2005. - S.

praise yourself; and when you have persuaded him to think well of you, you yourself think well of yourself.

Nietzsche calls to distance oneself from one's own compassion in order to avoid the temptation of narcissism, to preserve the purity of the selfless intention to help one's neighbor. Respect for the sufferer, which springs from genuine self-respect, he exalts above pity for him.

“Verily, I do not love those who are compassionate, who are blessed in their compassion:

they are too shameless.

If I must be compassionate, yet I do not want to be called one; and if I am compassionate, then only from afar.

I love to hide my face and run away before I'm known; so I advise you to do also, my friends!”43 Shame, which Zarathustra speaks of, is connected with another reason that casts doubt on the nobility of the motive for doing good. It lies in the essential inequality of the giver and the giver.

This is also a conflict:

the ontological reason for the act of charity is the moral sense of equality of people, the recognition of the need for accessibility for each person of some natural blessings of life from the point of view of the ideas of a worthy and fulfilling life accepted in society. At the same time, the very fact of charity always reveals and emphasizes this inequality. That is why Zarathustra calls with the greatest care and attention to treat the fact of your own beneficence and to the person you are helping: “for when I saw a suffering person suffering, I was ashamed of him because of his shame; and when I helped him, I walked mercilessly through his pride.

Great favors do not give rise to the grateful, but to the vengeful; and if the little beneficence is not forgotten, it turns into a gnawing worm.

Nietzsche F. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. - Minsk, 1997. - S. 52-53.

Ibid., pp.75-77.

Be prim when you take anything! Reward the giver by the very fact that you receive!” - so I advise those who have nothing to give.

So, the second criterion of the truth of a beneficence is closely related to the first, we would call it the principle of respect or equality, the observance of which can be illustrated by the words of Kant: “our duty is to save him, the recipient (benefaction), from humiliation with the help of such behavior that would represent our benefaction either simply as a performance of duty, or as an insignificant courtesy, and thus preserve his respect for himself. and in the form that seems most successful to the benefactor, firstly, it reinforces the relationship of inequality, and secondly, it makes aid ineffective.

The problem of false prosperity, when the price of happiness is freedom and one's own individuality, is posed in The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor by F.

M. Dostoevsky. The substitution of values ​​takes place in a false idea of ​​human happiness only as a piece of daily bread. It should not be forgotten also that reverse side charitable act is always the emergence of a relationship of dependence between the donor and the recipient. That is why in the 1920s of Soviet power a ban on private charity was legally established, and all types of social support were completely concentrated in the hands of the state. On the one hand, this led to such positive phenomena as compulsory free medicine and education, on the other hand, a society of people has emerged who are dependent on the state and are not ready to do something on their own for their own well-being. In addition, such total paternalism leads to Nietzsche F. Thus spoke Zarathustra. - Minsk, 1997, - P.76.

Kant I. Critique of Practical Reason. Metaphysics of morals in two parts. - St. Petersburg, 2005. - S.

essential lack of rights, since the giving hand has the right to impose its own ideology, system of values, norms and rules.

When offering help to a person, it is necessary to give him the opportunity to understand what is good for him and to choose what he needs. Here we return to the most ancient interpretations of the concept of good, which Socrates identifies with knowledge. But is this knowledge only rational, is it possible to know oneself, and even more so

– another, only reason? Probably not.

One cannot but agree in this regard with the conclusions that R. G.

So, the fourth criterion of true charitable activity should be recognized as the principle of creative love, educating, creative compassion, to which Nietzsche calls through the lips of Zarathustra:

“But if you have a suffering friend, then be a resting place for his suffering, but also a hard bed, a camp bed: in this way you will be most useful to him. And if a friend does something bad to you, say to him: “I forgive you what you did to me; but if you did it to yourself, how could I forgive it!... Remember also these words: every great love is above all its compassion: for what it loves, it still wants to create! Giving is an enormous moral work, and “giving well is an art, and, moreover, the highest, wisest art of kindness”48.

Compliance with the criteria of true charity requires a genuinely interested active participation in the problems and fate of the Other, therefore, for the success of charitable activities in a particular social sphere, Apresyan R.G. The idea of ​​morality. - M., 1995. - P.328.

Ibid., pp. 77-78.

Ibid., p. 242.

it is necessary to take into account its specifics: the features of the range of problems, their genesis, the contradictions on the way to overcome them, the dynamics and prospects for practical interaction of all participants in the charitable process.

Chapter 2 PROBLEMS OF PERSONALITY FORMATION IN THE PROCESS

SOCIALIZATION OF ORPHAN CHILDREN

2.1 Features of personality formation in the educational system of children's orphanages Orphanhood is one of the most difficult social and pedagogical problems of our time. The loss of a family is a serious barrier for a child to fully create his own family, it creates many personal problems, due to which graduates of orphanages are often not ready to become independent and active members of our society.

Modern sociological and psychological studies note a low level of social adaptation of graduates of boarding schools, who enter independent life with such personal characteristics as undeveloped social intelligence, dependency, and an increased level of victimization (willingness to become a victim).

The relevance of studying the problem of personality formation in orphanages is associated with the presence of internal conflicts and contradictions in the educational environment of the orphanage. The educational and upbringing system is an element of the general system of personality formation in modern society, therefore, the problems of education and upbringing of the younger generation are a model, an example of the key problems of the development of the state and society as a social system of a higher order.

Consider the conceptual and categorical apparatus, the basic principles and regular connections of the process under study.

A system is a way of organizing elements that are interconnected and combined for a common purpose.

Attribute properties of the system are:

integrity, which consists in the fundamental irreducibility of the properties of the system to the sum of the properties of its constituent elements, expressed in the principle of synergy, structural - the relationship of elements within the system, the mutual conditioning of the system and the external environment. Of these properties, "structurality"

We will consider the social system as orderliness and integrity, including social subjects as elements, and we will make an attempt to identify the dialectical contradictions that take place in the educational system of the orphanage as a social system.

Along with the categories "system", "orderliness" and "integrity", in the context of this study, the categories "subjective and objective factor" play a fundamental role in the analysis of the functioning and dynamics of social systems.

Subjective and objective factors are philosophical categories that express the main contradiction in the activity of a modern social subject. “The subjective factor is a free, purposeful activity of a social subject based on the functioning of consciousness, connecting the theoretical and practical aspects of social development.

The objective factor is the laws of nature and society, as well as the specific historical conditions of the life of a social subject, which do not depend on his will and consciousness and determine the direction and scope of his life”49.

In the system of social and educational institutions for orphans, the state norms and rules for the functioning of these institutions, as well as the negative socio-psychological conditions in which the pupils were before entering the orphanage or social rehabilitation center, act as an objective factor. To the objective factor Masloboeva O.D. Russian Organicism and Cosmism on the Role of the Subjective Factor in the Modern World // St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Humanities and social sciences. - 2010. - No. 1 (105). - S. 24.

also include low psycho-physiological indicators of the health of pupils, many of whom have severe hereditary diseases.

The subjective factor is the activity of pupils, teachers and administration of the institution, aimed at establishing relationships with each other and external environment, the ultimate goal of which is the successful socialization of pupils in independent life after graduation from the orphanage.

Children's orphanages, although they are not legally classified as institutions of a closed type (as, for example, correctional facilities, hospitals for the mentally ill, etc.), moreover, in most orphanages, social openness is officially proclaimed, yet in fact they are such in essence. The orphanage is a “state within a state”. This state of affairs is quite fair, if we proceed from the meaning of the very concept of "house", one of the meanings of which is disclosed in explanatory dictionary Dahl as "family, family, owners with households." It would never occur to anyone to complain about the social isolation of the “cell of society”, its selfhood is protected by the Constitution.

The contradiction between the need for open interaction of the educational system with the outside world and the need to comply with the statutory regulations of the state educational institution for orphans, which underlies the educational system of the orphanage, is its key feature. On the one hand, pupils are deprived of social contacts, and we are talking about a “lack of communication”, which gives rise to a whole heap of psychological and social problems for children. We are talking about contacts of a very different plan - from the lack of experience in relationships in the family: "parents - children", "husband - wife", "brothers and sisters", to a narrow set of social and everyday skills - going to the store, to the clinic. On the other hand, it is necessary to keep the "home" from random guests, to maintain an internal regime, that is, to comply with a whole range of norms aimed at protecting the integrity of the orphanage as a system and ensuring the psychological and physical protection of pupils.

Despite the fact that, as an educational institution, the orphanage is subject to government regulations and recommendations even in the most intimate areas of the internal routine and regime, the administration represented by the director is the “head of the family” in essence: only the director determines for the entire system at which point the coordinates intersect (balance) the "spirit" and "letter" of the law, since the practical observance of all norms and GOSTs is impossible, and sometimes unnatural.

The main conflict of the educational system of the orphanage can be described as a dialectical contradiction between the objective factor, which includes the laws and the prevailing conditions for the functioning of the orphanage as a social system, on the one hand, and the subjective factor, that is, the free purposeful activity of the administration, teachers and pupils of the orphanage, with another.

An orphanage is a form that was invented by society in order to provide a child left without parental care with everything necessary for the full development of a person. From the point of view of society as a developing healthy system, the main task of children's orphanages is the education (reproduction) of full-fledged members of this society.

The main functions of any system are, firstly, self-preservation, understood not only as maintaining its own stability, but also as reproduction; secondly, development, that is, optimization, self-improvement; thirdly, adaptation to changing environmental conditions as a function that assimilates the first two.

These functions, as a rule, are reflected in the statutory goals and objectives that are set for the orphanage as an educational institution:

Protection of the rights and interests of pupils;

Insurance and Pensions (Correspondence course) Course of Lec...” of the era of the Great Reforms Vladimir Pavlovich Bezobrazov is a bright researcher and publicist, a staunch opponent of the police...”

«Thursday, March 31, 2016 THIRD DAY OF THE FORUM 11:30 – 12:30 Registration, morning coffee 12:30 – 15:00 Open presentation Large PPP hall in healthcare: regional experience Today, healthcare is one of the most demanded industries for attracting private investment in the modernization of infrastructure...»

"Federal Agency for Education of the Russian Federation State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "SYKTYVKAR STATE UNIVERSITY" Department economic theory and corporate management...»UDK 371.214.19-057.875=111 N. P. Staroverova, O. N. Petrova Staroverova Nina Petrovna, Art. lecturer at the department "English language" MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Nizhny Novgorod State University. N.I. Lobachevsky V.N. YASENEV AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN THE ECONOMY EDUCATIONAL AND METHODOLOGICAL MANUAL Nizhny Novgorod UDC 681.3.01:33 BBK UV 61 F YASENE ... "

"Appendix 1 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Saratov State Agrarian ..."

«Information about the Bee 5 letters 5 sounds Bee 5 letters 5 sounds Bee 5 letters 5 sounds: Creditworthiness of the borrower and methods of its determination UNIVERSITY OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF EDUCATION Faculty: Business, Marketing, Commerce Discipline: Finance, monetary circulation and credit Test subject: Credit. .."

The article discusses the influence of ... "Reviewers: Doctor of Economics, Honored Economist of Russia, Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences VK Senchagov, Doctor of Economics, Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences V..." of management and financial accounting.3. The concept of responsibility centers and their classification.4. Objects, methods and principles of management accounting.5. The concept of production accounting and its place in the management system ... "of control and evaluation tools A set of control and evaluation tools is designed to evaluate the results of mastering the academic discipline: "Ethics of Affairs ..."

Thesis

on the topic:

The study of the phenomenon of charity in the history of Russia

INTRODUCTION

Domestic history continues to store many so-called “blank spots”, little-known pages that were simply inaccessible to researchers for many years. Thus, for example, the history of Russian charity, which is a major social phenomenon, is only just beginning to be studied at the present time.

Charitable activities in Russia have their own historical roots and traditions that date back to Ancient Russia. Over the centuries, its content and forms have changed significantly. For the first time this term in the scientific literature is found by N.M. Karamzin. However, its active use is carried out in the second half of the 19th century, when theoretical thought is being developed in the field of social support and protection of the poorest population. Charity was understood as a manifestation of compassion for one's neighbor, a non-state form of assistance to those in need. In the 20th century until the 1990s, this concept was interpreted in domestic scientific literature as a form of class manipulation of public consciousness in a capitalist society. Today, charity is understood as a non-profit activity aimed at helping those in need.

Currently, in line with the revision of attitudes towards universal human values ​​that is taking place in our society, there is a revival of once-forgotten concepts, traditions, activities, among which, no doubt, charity can be named.

At the same time, the relevance of the topic is also connected with those changes, crisis phenomena taking place in Russian society and caused by a historical turning point, the transition from old social relations to new ones. This process is especially painful for the poor or poor part of Russian citizens, because the country lacks the necessary system of social protection of the population and they are not provided with timely and targeted support. And the conditions necessary for the formation of a multifunctional social policy have not yet developed in the country. Progressive poverty, unprecedented social stratification that has affected all social groups and strata of Russian society, the loss of many worldview and moral life guidelines, the blurring of historical consciousness are the characteristic features of today.

The relevance of the research topic conducted in this course work also lies in the fact that charity at all times and in all economic formations has been a complex human action, the motivation of which was determined by social and psychological factors. On the one hand, the charity of the poor, the weak, the wretched was under the jurisdiction of the state. On the other hand, the existence of a certain “unfavorable” social stratum attracted the attention of society, aroused compassion and prompted actions designed to reduce the severity of trouble.

"Charity is a manifestation of compassion for one's neighbor and the moral duty of the possessor to rush to the aid of the have-not." The definition proposed by the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron contains an indication that, firstly, charity is a relationship between the haves and the have-nots, and secondly, and we emphasize this provision, this relationship is role-based, since it is prescribed by the institution morality.

In the Soviet period for scientific literature there was, as the analysis of bibliography shows, a virtual ban on the coverage of issues of charity (poverty is the result of special social relations in a capitalist society and the expression of their contradictions). This ban has been in effect since the mid-1930s. until the mid 1980s. In the process of transformation of Russian society, which began in the late 1980s, the study of charity becomes very relevant. It allows fixing the discontinuity and continuity in the development of social processes, to analyze the role of historical circumstances in it.

Currently, the study of charity is the object of many scientific disciplines: history, philosophy, ethics, sociology, psychology, political economy, jurisprudence. Very useful, giving an idea of ​​the modern study of charity, was the publication of the collection “Charity in Russia. Social and historical studies. 2001” (“Faces of Russia”, St. Petersburg, 2001). The voluminous publication provided an opportunity to speak to almost everyone involved in the problems of charity: from representatives of academic science to practitioners who summarized their experience for the first time.

A review of publications on the topic of charity suggests that although the number of studies has increased, there are still practically no works that reveal the technologies of charity as the interaction of social groups and social institutions. Charity is considered from historical, ethical, legal, philosophical and other aspects, but there are very few studies that reach a generalized sociological result and formulate specific recommendations.

The relevance of the sociological consideration of the topic, in my opinion, is:

a) in considering charity as a role interaction, in which the special content of the relationship between the philanthropist and the recipient of his help is manifested;

b) in the analysis of charity as a social-role interaction that develops between groups in the social structure of society;

c) in the positioning of each of the parties - giving and receiving - in relation to each other;

d) in the characterization of charity as a relationship that has a specific institutional - moral, legal design;

e) in the study of charity as a dynamic, developing and changing relationship, showing the measure of the development of civil society in a historically defined social system. All the identified aspects of sociological research are interconnected.

The degree of scientific development of the problem. The theoretical basis for the sociological study of charity was the work of foreign and domestic philosophers, historians, culturologists and sociologists.

The works of A. Aronov, N. Berdyaev, A. Bokhanov, M. Weber, Yu. Vishnevsky, P. Vlasov, M. Gavlin, F. Hegel, E. Giddens, I. Gorodetskaya, I. Hoffman, E. Zaborova, V. Klyuchevsky, J. G. Mead, G. Orlov, T. Parsons, E. Khorkova, V. Shapko.

We emphasize that the topic of charity has attracted an extremely wide range of researchers. But the aspect considered in the dissertation does not have a clearly identifiable academic tradition.

Methodological foundations of the study. Writing this thesis carried out on the basis of the methodology of sociology that developed at the end of the 20th century. Its distinguishing feature is the recognition of duality social development, in which the interaction of personality and social structure takes place. In transitional periods, which take place in the modern rhythms of historical changes, this pattern is not only formed, but also empirically fixed. The latter circumstance determined another distinctive feature of "non-classical" sociology: the unity of the empirical and theoretical analysis of the studied social phenomena.

The work is also based on the general scientific principles of analysis: development, historicism and consistency, which together provide the opportunity to consider charity as a phenomenon that manifests universal, national and personal value orientations.

The object of the study is charity as a process of developing relations between the state, social institutions and citizens, on the one hand, and between social groups, with another.

The subject of the research is the functioning of charity as a social-role interaction. The choice of the subject is due to the consideration that the period of the dissertation research fell on the stage of the so-called. "social transition" Russian history. This means that charity manifested itself under these conditions not so much in the form of relations between social groups that simply had not yet formed, but in the form of a personal choice of wealthy people who assumed civil responsibility for the state of culture in a transitional time for society. Thus, the motivation for choice and the socio-role design of charity became the subject of direct study.

The purpose of this course work: the study of the phenomenon of charity in the history of Russia as a social - role interaction based on the unity of methodological, theoretical and empirical analysis.

Work tasks:

a) definition and argumentation of the methodology for researching charity as a social-role interaction;

b) identification of historical (vertical and horizontal) continuity in the development of philanthropy in Russia;

c) consideration of the social role representation in Russian charity;

d) corporate philanthropy research;

e) construction of types of motivation for charitable activities based on the materials of the survey conducted by the author;

f) analysis of the evolution of charitable relations during the period of Russian transformation.

The practical significance of the research conducted in this course work lies in the fact that charity has regained its socio-historical significance and has become an important component of social relations in modern Russian society. In fact, the entire social sphere, to a greater or lesser extent, is currently associated with charity. In addition, mastering the methodology for analyzing social-role interaction, understanding the psychological levers of influence on business will help to involve a wider number of entrepreneurs, businessmen, and individuals in the circle of philanthropists. The "subject-object" relationship in charity is a very delicate area of ​​human communication. As a result, both sides of interaction should receive maximum satisfaction from cooperation, a kind of partnership vector for the future. This is all the more important because the state has not yet set itself the task of defining more clearly the direction of social support and social development of society. Therefore, business, cooperating with the social sphere, becoming socially responsible, engaging in charitable activities, begins to influence the expansion of civil liberties in society, is involved in the process of forming civil society, and contributes to the emergence of greater trust and openness in it.

The structure of the thesis - this work consists of an introduction, two chapters, six paragraphs, a conclusion, a list of references.

1 CHARITY HISTORY

1.1 The birth of philanthropy

The history of charity, as the sources testify, went through two stages in its development - pre-Christian and Christian. Each of them can be characterized as a special type social attitude in European civilization. The first is connected with the culture of ancient Greece and the Roman Empire. The unification in the pre-Christian stage of charity of two cultures - Greek and Roman - is very conditional, because these cultures were based on a completely various principles. But both social systems developed structured attitudes toward those who needed help.

Historical observations allow us to consider this stage of charity as a special type of subject - subject relations. The parties to the relationship were, on the one hand, the estate of the rich and the state, but, on the other hand, the estates of the haves and the have-nots. In this regard, the functions of maintaining generality have been distributed. The state took care of the general level of well-being of the population, while using the material and human resources of the empire. In its social policy, the state encouraged the enrichment of citizens and expected them to participate in meeting public needs.

Christianity - the religion of faith, hope and love of the oppressed estates, could not but change the ideology and content of charity. Through Christianity, the virtues of compassion, mercy, and love for one's neighbor were affirmed in the world. And over time, charity, helping the needy, has grown from a relationship between the one who gives and the one who receives help, into a relationship between the believer and God. Help was provided in the name of love for God, in the name of salvation.

In Russian Orthodox Christianity, charity was a very personal, in fact, confessional affair (giving a beggar a piece of bread, the believer actually fulfilled Christ's commandment and, as it were, communicated with God himself).

It should be noted that charity as an integral part of the teaching was inherent not only in Christianity. Without revealing this issue in depth, which is not the main one in our study, let's say that mercy, charity have always been one of the most important areas of activity of Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism, and they have accumulated vast experience in charitable activities, calculated for thousands of years.

Christianity opened to the Slavs a new world of high moral values ​​of love and compassion for one's neighbor, taught them to combine prayer with almsgiving, which are a cleansing sacrifice ... Charity was a kind of sacred ritual, custom, tradition, norm of behavior.

The attitude of charity in the era of the formation of Christianity was directly subject - subjective in nature. It was a relationship between those who had surpluses and those who were deprived of the most necessary. Both participants in the relationship acted as a subject because a personal interaction arose between them, which involved gratitude and reciprocal good feelings and deeds. With the approval of Christianity, with its institutionalization, the relationship of charity is changing. They can be designated as: subject - subject - object. The subjects were the wealthy, who provides help, and the Church, who receives it. The needy were the targets. They accepted help from the Church as God's help, which was to strengthen their faith. But at the same time, charity, carried out through the mediation of the Church, did not require action on the part of those who needed help. This social feature of interaction in charity manifested itself with particular brightness in Orthodoxy, in Russia. The rich and the "wretched" carried a special mission before God. Wealth was burdened with the consciousness of sin, begging was associated with purity and innocence of thoughts. The poles of secular roles determined the static nature of interaction, the immutability of the content and form of the relationship of charity.

1.2 Development of philanthropy in Russia

Charity in Russia has historical roots that are associated with the formation and development of the Russian state.

Initially, charity was formed on the ideas of Christianity, and therefore the simplest and most ancient form of philanthropic activity in Russia was the distribution of alms to the poor and donations to the church. Church property was proclaimed the property of the poor, and the clergy were only managers of this property in the interests of the disadvantaged. Donations to the church also flowed under the influence of the view of charity as "protection from sins." It is quite natural that all this provided the church for a long time with a leading role in charitable activities. Charity was provided by the church through the monasteries, but it was expressed mainly in the free distribution of food and alms to the poor, which led to "an increase in the number of beggars instead of alleviating poverty."

The second, no less important source of charity was the folk tradition of mutual assistance, which was based not so much on moral and religious views, but on common sense and the experience of human society: anyone who helps a neighbor in trouble by giving him work and money knows that, if he finds himself in a similar situation, he can count on help from others. Mutual assistance determines the principle of equality of the giver and the receiver - both are equal before the blows of fate. Only such charity does not humiliate the taker.

Gradually, charity began to acquire an organized character. The history of charitable organizations in Russia can be divided into two stages. The first - from the middle of the XVI century. until 1862. This is the period of formation of charitable organizations in Russia. The second - 1862 - 1906 - is the heyday of Russian charity.

The first information about the emergence of organized charity in Russia can be traced back to 1551, when the Patriarch turned to the government with a request to organize almshouses for men and women in all cities and villages. And two hundred years later, in 1775, the Royal Decree appeared on the formation of private and public charitable organizations. Until the 18th century it is known about the existence of only 8 charitable societies, and their largest number was founded in 1851-1860, but even it did not reach 100.

The history of Russian culture, in my opinion, allows us to consider the patterns of relations in the field of charity. Cultural institutions, as a rule, arose and developed as an object of private property. In the XVIII - early XIX centuries, charity in culture was manifested in the fact that the public, the townsfolk were given the opportunity to visit and enjoy works of art for free, primarily spectacular - musical performances, opera performances, which was the subject of charity and had a considerable price. The backbone relationship of this type is private ownership of the created, developed and protected cultural object.

Organizations providing charitable assistance to those in need arose in Russia in the vast majority of cases on the initiative of class organizations, individual groups and individuals. For the establishment of charitable societies, each time the Highest Permission was required, which, according to official sources of that time, was extremely inconvenient.

In 1862, a special act was adopted, which stated: "in order to change the explained order, the establishment of societies for mutual assistance or for other charitable purposes, I grant the Highest, by agreement with the relevant departments, to the Minister of the Interior." Since that time, there has been a significant increase in the number of charitable institutions, and by 1890 about 2,000 new ones had been created.

Assistance to the needy was mostly provided by special charitable organizations. In some cases, this activity was carried out by organizations for which the provision of charitable assistance was only one of the secondary tasks.

Special charitable institutions consisted of two groups: charitable societies and charitable institutions

Charitable societies are voluntary associations of persons with the goal of helping those in need in one way or another. The activities of charitable societies were limited to helping those in need with money or things, as well as to the establishment and maintenance of various kinds of charitable institutions within the framework of the activities of the society. Charitable societies sometimes united in unions, and sometimes they had a rather complex multi-stage structure, headed by central bodies that gave direction to the entire system.

Charitable institutions, unlike societies, are institutions to meet the needs of the needy population within the walls of the institution, that is, those in need either lived in these institutions, or came to them for food, lodging, etc.

In Russia, by 1902, there were 11,040 charitable institutions (47 62 charitable societies and 6278 charitable institutions).

All charitable institutions that operated on the territory of Russia, despite their public nature, were under the jurisdiction and supervision of ministries and departments, such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Office of the Orthodox Confession, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Justice.

Charitable institutions in Russia provided assistance to adults and children by organizing cheap free education (schools, workshops, classes), accommodation (dormitories, apartments, rooms, hostels), food (canteens, tea rooms), employment (workhouses, needleworks), medical assistance ( hospitals, dispensaries, medical centers).

As a rule, one charitable organization provided several types of assistance at once.

special legislative act, common to all charitable organizations, was the "Charter on Public Charity" in Russia. It regulated the activities of charitable institutions created by private individuals.

The Charter provided that the creation of charitable societies and private charitable institutions should be carried out in a permissive manner (Article 175 of the Charter). The right to approve the statutes of charitable societies and private charitable institutions was granted to the Ministry of Internal Affairs in order, however, that the statutes be submitted to the Cabinet of Ministers in cases where they include any rules, benefits and benefits that are not provided for by the said legislation and require the Highest permission (Art. 443 of the Charter). Private charitable organizations, unlike state ones, “were not allowed to open until they had their own funds necessary for their maintenance” (Article 442 of the Charter).

The permissive procedure for establishing charitable societies and institutions was improved in 1897. Normal (exemplary) charters were developed, such as Approximate charter Society for the Benefit to the Poor, Charter of the Guardianship Society on the House of Diligence. After the adoption of these regulations, the procedure for creating charitable organizations became mandatory.

Regulatory statutes determined the general procedure for the organization and activities of charitable societies and institutions. The charters provided for the goals of the organization, the composition of members, the procedure for the formation of funds, management bodies, and the procedure for termination.

A charitable society could consist of an unlimited number of members who paid membership dues or pledged to contribute to the society by personal labor in achieving its goals. Members, depending on their participation in the affairs of the society, were divided into honorary, actual and competitors (employees).

Honorary recognized "persons who provide services to the society by outstanding donations or otherwise contribute to the successful development of the activities of the society." In some statutes they were called benefactors. Full members - persons who participated in the activities of the company with cash contributions not lower than a certain amount, which were paid at a time or annually.

Competitors - persons who annually transfer to the society a contribution in the minimum amount or "assist full members in the performance of their duties in the society." Moreover, both competitors and full members could be exempted from a monetary contribution in the case of the provision of free services or gratuitous participation in the activities of the society.

All full members formed the general meeting of the society, which was its highest body. The general meeting for the direct conduct of business elected the board of the company (committee, council) and the audit commission. Often, trustees of these institutions were elected to oversee certain institutions of the society.

The funds of the society were divided into parts, which were called "capitals". The capital, which was formed from donations with a precisely defined purpose, was called - special. Reserve capital - a part, for the formation of which amounts were deducted at the discretion of the General Meeting. Expenditure capital consisted of receipts not listed in special and reserve capital.

The composition of special capital could include inviolable capital, which was formed at the expense of receipts made under the condition of inviolability. It was possible to borrow funds from it only by special decision. general meeting members of the society. The rest of the capital was also spent by decision of the general meeting by approving the company's estimates for each year or by special resolutions. Part of the funds of charitable societies could turn into state or government-guaranteed interest-bearing papers.

Benefits were given to those in need from the funds of charitable societies. The decision on the issuance and the maximum amount of such benefits was taken by the general meeting. In exceptional cases, the allowance could be issued with the permission of the chairman of the board under his personal responsibility, with subsequent mandatory bringing to the attention of the board.

As of 1900, money capital prevailed in charitable societies - 74%, and in charitable institutions up to 43% of the funds was the value of real estate, which was estimated at 142 million 24 thousand 495 rubles.

With regard to spending cash receipts to charitable organizations, the right to revoke donations is of particular interest, as set out by the legislator as follows: “In case of impossibility, harm or complete uselessness of using the property and capital transferred for a certain need in accordance with the purpose indicated by the donor, these property and capital may receive another purpose ( if the donor has not made any instructions on this subject) only with the consent of the donor, and if he is no longer alive, then at the request of the Highest permission through the Cabinet of Ministers. If the property and capital donated for a specific need were turned to another use without the consent of the donor, then he has the right to claim for the return of the donated to him ”(Article 980 of the Civil Laws).

Charitable societies could also carry out their activities at the expense of incomes received from institutions and enterprises of the society, holding charity bazaars and lotteries, and other "entertainment events", since the charters provided for the right of charitable societies to open various kinds of organizations, including industrial and commercial nature. The only obligatory requirement for such organizations was their compliance with the purpose of the society, which was understood quite broadly. For example, the Moscow Orphanage, which was created in 1763 on the initiative of P. A. Demidov, the main trustee of this house, had a Loan and Safe cash desk, a kind of banking institution that provided interest-bearing loans secured by movable and immovable property. In the treasury of the Orphanage there was a special fund, founded by the will of Princess E. D. Golitsina.

By the middle of the 19th century, the motivation for patronage changed somewhat - it was enriched. In large numbers, the peasants who moved to the city, from whose midst many merchants and entrepreneurs of the new generation subsequently emerged, had an intuitive craving for knowledge, for literacy, for books. It was this thrust that, after two or three generations, gave rise to patrons of art among the merchants. The need for charity became one of the value orientations and a behavioral need. The enlightened nobility, and later the merchants, saw themselves in the role of cultural missionaries, whose task, on the one hand, was to introduce the people to art, and on the other, to involve wealthy fellow citizens in charitable activities. In Russia, this trend was interrupted by the October Revolution: after 1917, all cultural institutions became the object of state care, which did not allow society to participate in their development.

However, donations were still the main source of formation of the property of charitable societies.

In the opinion of E. D. Maksimov, who dealt specifically with this problem, certain rules should be adopted when regulating relations related to donations, and the first of them is the freedom of donations. He pointed to the unfortunate rule that when making donations from private individuals, one should pay attention to their behavior and former way of life, to the absence of their condition under trial and investigation, established by Art. 40 of the Charter on public charity. “No hesitation in accepting donations is desirable,” there should only be “mutual agreement between the capable donor and the charitable institution to which the gift is brought.” A necessary rule should also be the organization of the collection of donations and, finally, the possibility for the donor to control the use of the donation.

For control both on the part of donors and on the part of the state, two main forms of reports of charitable societies have been developed: a financial report and a general report on activities.

The financial report was drawn up at the end of the year and included two sections: "Income" and "Expense". The first section contained information on the composition of the company's capital and on the sources of their formation (by type). The second section included information on spending Money in the following areas: permanent and one-time benefits (with an indication of the composition of the needy), the maintenance of charitable and medical institutions, entertainment events, the maintenance of board members, the purchase of interest-bearing securities, debt repayments, etc.

The general report included, as a rule, the answers of charitable societies to 9 main questions: for what year information is given, types of institutions run by the society, number of members, amount of capital, income, expenses, amount of debts, number of persons using assistance from the society (in its establishments, outside its establishments), the number of denials of assistance (due to lack of funds, to check the financial situation, for other reasons).

Charitable societies and private charitable institutions, under Russian law, were provided with some benefits regarding payments, duties, fees and the administration of duties.

By the beginning of the 20th century, a system of public organized charity had been formed in Russia, which had a certain legislative base. However, this legislation needed to be improved. First, it required the creation of a clear organization of charity, since while for one type of assistance there were several societies and a relatively abundant influx of funds, for another type they either did not exist at all, or the funds were completely insignificant. Secondly, it was necessary to strengthen ties between charitable societies, since one person could receive benefits and assistance in 5 places at once, while the other was refused everywhere “for lack of funds” .

In this regard, a project arose to create an organization that coordinates the activities of charitable societies and takes measures to eliminate inappropriate and harmful forms of assistance (giving alms, especially money, to wandering beggars). It was envisaged that all charitable societies and institutions would be involved in the work in this organization. Such an organization could provide services for collecting information about those in need of help, new charitable societies with an analysis of their subsequent activities, as well as various organizational assistance in creating and interacting with their wards. For the theoretical development of charity issues, it was proposed to establish a Council consisting of several sections, in accordance with individual branches of charitable activity. There is no information in the literature about the implementation of this project. However, almost until the end of the 19th century in Russia, the Imperial Humanitarian Society performed the coordinating function in relation to charitable organizations. For this purpose, it was planned to create city charitable councils in Moscow and St. Petersburg, but in reality the city charitable council was created in 1895 in Moscow, it operated under the city government under the leadership of the mayor. The Council included representatives of city district trustees and the largest charitable societies. All other charitable institutions and societies were granted the right to authorize their representatives with a decisive vote to participate in the discussion of issues relating to these institutions and societies at meetings of the Charitable Council. The Council only to some extent coordinated the activities of charitable societies and institutions, since it acted without interfering in their internal life. He was engaged in the development of general issues related to the cause of charity, developed measures to coordinate the actions of city trustees with the activities of other charitable institutions, studied the needs for social assistance to various groups of the population and individual citizens.

In 1899, at the Charitable Council, a city reference department for charitable affairs was opened, which gave advice to people in need of help on where they should apply, kept a card file for all those who applied, and provided certificates to charitable organizations.

In 1900, there were several thousand operating charitable societies in Russia, both universal and specializing in certain types of assistance. Not only did the number of charitable institutions increase, the conditions and attitude to charitable activities changed, and the concept of society and the union of societies was defined. March 4, 1906 was adopted common law on similar organizations, which was called the "Provisional Rules on Societies and Unions". In these Rules, a society recognized "association of several persons who, not having the task of obtaining profit for themselves from the conduct of any enterprise, have chosen a specific goal as the subject of their joint activities", and the union "association of two or more such companies". In Art. 2 of these Rules determines the procedure for the formation of societies: "societies and unions can be formed without asking for permission from government authorities, subject to the rules set forth in the following articles."

To create a society, it was necessary to submit to the provincial and city Presence a written application in the prescribed form, which indicated the purpose of the society, the procedure for electing management bodies, the procedure for joining and leaving members. If no justified refusal was received within two weeks from the time the application was submitted, the society could “open its actions”. Registration of the company was carried out by entering into the register and publishing information about the registration of the company in the local press. After that, the society was considered established and it was granted the right to acquire and alienate real estate, form capital, conclude contracts, in accordance with the goals of the society, open institutions and enterprises, organize various events and collect donations.

The issue of terminating the society was decided by the provincial or city Presence at the initiative of the governor or mayor. Moreover, in the event of deviations from the conditions of activity indicated in the charter, the governor or mayor, before bringing the case to the Presence, could propose to the society itself, within the appointed time, to eliminate the violations (Article 34). The rules provided for the possibility of suspending the activities of the society by the governor's or mayor's own authority, "if the activities of the society threaten public safety and tranquility or take an immoral direction" with the subsequent transfer of the issue of closing the society to the permission of the Presence.

The charters of societies usually contained rules on the use of property left after the liquidation of the company. If there was no such indication, Art. 29 of the Rules, where it was stipulated that “upon the closing of the company, its property remaining for the satisfaction of debts goes under the jurisdiction of the Government for use according to the purpose that is most consistent with the goals of the company.”

The provisional rules on societies and unions of 1906 were the main legislative act for charitable organizations until 1917.

During the First World War in 1914, charity in Russia became even more widespread.

There was a large network of charitable organizations that were of a patriotic nature, providing assistance to Russian soldiers and officers (for example, the All-Russian Union for Assistance to Sick and Wounded Soldiers).

After the revolution of 1917 and in the first years of Soviet power, state bodies began to perform charitable duties. This was apparently due to the fact that the Soviet state, having arisen as a state of workers and peasants, assumed the function of the protector and guardian of all the "humiliated and insulted", "the grieving and suffering". At the end of 1917, the People's Commissariat of State Charity and the People's Commissariat of Social Security were formed, to which all powers in the field of public charity were transferred. Almost all charitable organizations operating in Tsarist Russia were abolished by decrees and resolutions of these people's commissariats, and new Soviet bodies were formed in their place - the Collegium for the Protection of Motherhood and Infancy (1918), the Fund for Providing for the Children of the Red Army (1918), the Commission for minors (1918) and others.

However, along with centralized system state charity, charitable societies continued to exist, emerging at the initiative of the public and private individuals. Among the societies of mutual assistance and assistance that operated in pre-revolutionary Russia, there are still the Literary Fund, which arose in 1859 as a Society for helping needy writers and scientists, and some creative unions.

So, in 1926 the All-Russian Society of the Deaf and Dumb was legalized, which began its activity even before the revolution, in 1923 - the All-Russian Society of the Blind. The Russian Red Cross Society in 1925 was renamed the Union of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. During the formation of Soviet power, most charitable functions were concentrated in the hands of state bodies - commissariats (later ministries) and various committees. Only a few charitable organizations continued to exist on a voluntary basis. The activities of these organizations were regulated until 1970. "Regulations on voluntary societies and their unions" adopted by the decree of the All-Union Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFR on July 10, 1932 and the Decrees of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR of January 6, 1930 "On the procedure for the establishment and liquidation of All-Union societies and unions that do not pursue the goal of making a profit" and dated September 27, 1933 "On the industrial and commercial activities and lottery work of voluntary societies."

For almost 60 years, these were the only normative acts of all-Union significance, which determined the organizational structure, functions, powers and other important issues of the activities of voluntary societies. The main defect of the legislation of this time was that voluntary societies could arise and exist under the strict control of the state. To register, a society had to pass an ideological test, to prove that it was acting in accordance with the goals of communist construction (clause 3 of the Regulations). The regulations introduced restrictions for members of societies: “Persons who have shown a hostile attitude towards the revolutionary movement of the proletariat cannot be accepted as members of a voluntary society,” stated in paragraph 4 of the named Regulations. It was also established that the state body conducting registration decided the question of the advisability of creating this society, of the compliance of its statutory goals with the “general tasks of this branch of socialist construction”, of the personal composition of the founders (moreover, it had the right to challenge individuals). In addition, state bodies had the right to give obligatory instructions to companies, and in case of deviation from the goals and objectives specified in the charter, “take any measures up to the liquidation of the company” (paragraph 20 of the Regulations). The Regulations determined that the charters of societies and unions, "the tasks of which are directly related to the activities of individual people's commissariats or central institutions of the RSFSR equated to them, are approved by the relevant people's commissariats or institutions" (paragraph 14).

In addition to this Regulation, the activities of charitable organizations were regulated by the Charters of specific voluntary societies, adopted and approved at various levels on an individual basis.

In historical analysis, we come to the need for a sociological study of this relationship. This relationship is built on a voluntary basis. That is, it is fundamentally different from the kinds of relationships that are dictated by the system's institutional connections; it develops between social institutions, communities or individuals who are aware of the need for connection. It is fundamentally different from relations that are purely economic or political in nature; it is polycausal, and by virtue of this circumstance it is holistic in its social effectiveness. In interaction, the attitude changes partners, and thus has a significant impact on the social structure of society. The attitude of charity is the interaction of social partners, which can take place in forms that allow a different measure of subjectivity in their minds and activities.

Any kind of social interaction presupposes the presence of objective and subjective factors. The study of charity reveals the role of subjective factors in social interaction.

Objective factors can include those that show the influence of the system on actors - actors of interaction. Subjective factors include those in which the choice, freedom of a social figure (actor) is manifested. Charity implies interaction, firstly, due to the objectively established need in the social system, the need of one of the acting parties for help, and secondly, the subjective desire of the other side to provide the necessary assistance.

2 CHARITY AS SOCIAL AND ROLE INTERACTION

2.1 Public charity - its organization, motives, goals

In ancient times, public charity was defined as an organized form of charity. In modern Russian, the word charity is forgotten. It is not mentioned in scientific publications or in legal documents. At the same time, the history of the formation and development of the social security system in Russia in the Soviet period and social protection today begins precisely with public charity.

The primary form of charity is giving alms to a beggar. Public charity differs from alms in organization, motives and goals. In public charity, the organizational side manifests itself in two ways: in relation to those who receive help and in relation to those who provide it. Almsgiving, in its essence, does not lend itself to an organizational principle. It is given to the one who holds out his hand. Public charity extends its help only to those who are not able to look after themselves and do not make a trade out of their need. Almsgiving comes from the subjective impulse of the giver. The subject of public charity is a collective person, and the motive is the awareness of civic solidarity between members of the community, the public interest, the concern of the state for the welfare of distressed citizens. In Russia, the impetus for the transition from alms to public charity was the development of begging and vagrancy in areas where generous alms were given.

2.2 The role of the state, church, charitable organizations on the way of transition from public charity to the social security system

Simple types of charity, which consisted almost exclusively in feeding the poor, were used in the most ancient times. As our chronicles testify, they were practiced by individual “poor-lovers”, among whom princes, clergy and the best people earth.

Being under the influence of the newly adopted Christian doctrine, they eagerly learned the great religious commandments, the main of which commanded to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. In practice, this meant feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, visiting the prisoner in prison, looking after at least one “one of these little ones” and, in general, one way or another, showing one’s mercy and love of poverty. Proceeding from such motives, charity was, according to the unanimous opinion of researchers, not so much an auxiliary means of social order as necessary condition personal moral health: the beggar himself needed it more than the beggar. For a benefactor, a beggar was the best pilgrim, a prayer intercessor, a spiritual benefactor. With such a view of charity, helping the poor was the work of individuals imbued with the ideas of Christian morality, and was not included in the circle of state duties. So did the princes, many of whom were praised by the chroniclers for their poverty. St. Vladimir, as the chronicler writes, allowed “every beggar and wretched” to come to the princely court to feed, and for the sick, who themselves could not come, he sent wagons loaded with bread, meat, fish, vegetables, honey and kvass. Some writers claim that under the same prince the first hospitals in Russia were established. Although there was no direct confirmation of this in the monuments of ancient writing, nevertheless, it is known that the sick during his reign received not only charity, but also, apparently, medical assistance. In addition to St. Vladimir, history also indicates a number of other Christ-loving and poverty-loving princes. Grand Duke Yaroslav Vladimirovich and his brother Mstislav are especially distinguished.

But more than others, after St. Vladimir, Vladimir Monomakh became famous as a beggar, who, according to his contemporaries, handed out money and essentials with both hands. From the successors of Monomakh, on the basis of charity, his son Mstislav is nominated, and then Rostislav, who distributed to the poor all the property of his uncle Vyacheslav, which he received by inheritance. Andrey Bogolyubsky, following the example of St. Vladimir, ordered to deliver life supplies through the streets and roads and distribute them to the poor and prisoners in dungeons. Alexander Nevsky spent considerable sums on the ransom of Russians from Tatar captivity, John Danilovich was nicknamed Kalita for the bag that he carried with him, distributing alms from it.

Proceeding in their charity from moral and religious motives, the princes were inclined to place it under the patronage of the church and entrust the implementation of the work itself to representatives of religion, i.e. clergy. Therefore, the latter was at the head of charity. The monks of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery and among them the monks Anthony, Daminian, Theodosius of the Caves and others were especially generous in this matter. d. The care of the clergy about doing good, in addition to religious motives, was conditioned by the relevant church decrees. So already in the Church Charter of 996. mention is made of the duties of the clergy to oversee and care for the care of the poor, and for the maintenance of churches, monasteries, hospitals, almshouses, a “tithe” was determined, i.e. a tenth of the proceeds from grain, livestock, court fees, etc. Similar contributions to the church and charity were also made by private individuals, the best people on earth. not only were they not produced, but were directly forbidden by the teachings of the holy fathers. During this period, public assistance for the sake of their own spiritual improvement did not pursue the goals of public improvement, but it had a moral and educational value for the then society.

The Stoglavy Cathedral (1551), assembled by John the Terrible, states the terrible development of beggary and at the same time indicates the absence of proper measures of charity. They still consider the care of the poor to be the business of society, which provides funds for it and, in the person of elected kissers, together with the priests, manages it. But, placing the care of the poor on the duty of society, the Council recognizes the need to regulate it by state measures, by law. For the majority of those in need, he recommends closed charity in almshouses, for the first time for this he distinguishes various categories of beggars and establishes special measures for each of them. Already in the division of ways of charity, the primary form of charity is denied - the indiscriminate distribution of alms, and a certain system of combating beggary is already outlined, which should be expressed both simply in charity in almshouses, then in benefits (gathering from home), and in the provision of voluntary, and perhaps even forced labor. Such views, in comparison with those according to which alms were distributed to all the poor without distinction, already represent a significant step forward, since they reflect not only the desire of the philanthropist to save his soul by a charitable deed, but also to bring public benefit, to help improve the community in the state . The cause of charity, obviously, is beginning to turn into a matter of public and state charity.

The idea of ​​public charity has only just emerged, but has not yet entered the minds of public and state figures. Therefore, the forms of caring for the poor remain the same for a long time, and only those clerics and kings who, like individual members of society, felt inclined to do so, continued to engage in charity.

Among the clergy, Metropolitan Macarius and St. Gury, Archbishop of Kazan. Of the monasteries in the same field, Sergievsky and Belozersky-Korniliyev differed, having established hospitals and almshouses on their own. Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich, who, according to the chronicler, was “a healer of the afflicted, the eye of the blind, the feet of the lame,” did a lot for the poor. Boris Godunov did even more, promising when he entered the kingdom that there would be "neither an orphan nor a poor" under him. Distributing a lot to the poor during all the years of his reign, he especially developed his activities during famine and pestilence already to a well-known system that far rose above mere charity. Under him, large-scale charitable activities of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra began, which developed to unprecedented proportions in troubled times.

New and this time undoubted signs of the concentration of charity work in central state institutions are found not earlier than the accession of the Romanov dynasty. Archimandrite (later patriarch) Nikon, boyars Matveev, Prince. Cherkassky, Rtishchev and others. Prince Yakov Cherkassky built a hospital with a church, and Fyodor Rtishchev, having established several such hospitals and almshouses, founded a monastery in which monks discharged from Little Russia taught those who wished various sciences. The king himself tried in every possible way to help the poor. But all these were measures caused by a personal initiative, more the desire for personal improvement and the fulfillment of religious instructions than for the organization of a care system. For the country, it was precisely the general systematic measures of a state nature that were needed. Of these measures for public charity, only the publication in 1649 of the Code, which established a widespread collection of money for the ransom of prisoners, was established for public charity. This money went first to the embassy prikaz, and then to the Polonian prikaz, and from there it was circulated for its intended purpose.

This, however, was a single measure of general significance. As for the rest, charitable activity under Alexei Mikhailovich bore the same character and did not depart much from the most ancient forms. However, the thought outstripped reality, and many figures, seeing that the indiscriminate distribution of alms does not reduce, but increases begging, began to treat this form of charity negatively. Since the time of the Stoglavy Cathedral, the idea has been prepared in the public mind about the need, in the form of public and state improvement, to move from charity to a system of public charity. At the same time, the charity system itself began to be more clearly identified, which was supposed to include not only help to the poor with alms and especially keeping them in institutions, but also providing the able-bodied needy with earnings, and later even punishment for parasitism.

The development of measures of public charity into a certain system belongs already to Emperor Peter the Great. Systematizing a vast number of his laws and orders, one cannot help but see that he touched on all the most important and basic issues of charity. He dwells at length on the need to distinguish those in need by the reasons for their need, and to determine aid according to that need. He points to the prevention of poverty as the best way to combat it; distinguishes from the needy able-bodied, professional beggars, and other categories of them. He takes decisive measures to regulate private charity, determines the organized assistance of society, establishes charity bodies and the means necessary for the development of the cause. Thus, the measures applied by him no longer constitute a series of scattered and unrelated attempts, but an integral system, distinguished by a certain consistency and consistency.

The charity system created by Peter the Great proved to be very strong and stable. In many ways, it was correct and appropriate to the needs of life. It was also important that it was an integral system, that is, it gave definite answers to all the basic and critical issues public charity.

The plans of Peter the Great for the widespread organization of charitable institutions, to a certain extent, were carried out by Catherine the Great. In 1767, she established the Orphanage. The “adjustment” of the insane and the arrangement of one almshouse in each of the 26 dioceses became preparatory measures for the systematic organization of public charity, the foundation of which was laid by the Decree of Catherine II of November 7, 1775 “On Institutions for the Administration of Provinces”. In accordance with this Decree, the composition of provincial institutions everywhere had to include a special order of public charity. These orders were entrusted with the care of education, treatment, charity and the fight against vice: the construction of public schools, orphanages, hospitals, asylums for the incurable, asylums for the insane, almshouses, workhouses and penitentiaries.

Three fruitful and remarkable principles were invested in the organization of public charity orders: the independence of local charitable institutions, the involvement of the local population in their management and the provision of more or less sufficient funds for them.

By the same Decree, the basic principle of public charity was introduced into Russian legislation: the rural and urban communities and parishes were entrusted with the duty to feed their poor, preventing them from begging, and the police authorities were charged with overseeing the implementation of the law.

The need to take state measures in public charity led to the establishment in 1892 of a special government commission, which prepared proposals, based on the ideas of state guardianship, to organize a number of state charity bodies under the name of rural and urban precinct county and provincial guardianships. Expenses for state aid or allowances were supposed to be covered from zemstvo funds according to estimates submitted by the trustees.

The draft Regulations on the Trustees of Public Charity with an explanatory note was prepared at the end of 1897 and at the beginning of 1898 was sent to various departments for conclusion.

At the same time, on the initiative of local authorities, the process of creating trustees was going on. So in the early 1890s, the Moscow City Duma filed a petition for the right to establish "district guardianships for the poor." The guardianships paid much attention to the housing needs of the poorest population, were engaged in bed and overnight apartments, children's sanatoriums and summer colonies. Following the example of Moscow, guardianships were organized in more than 60 Russian cities.

In 1895, the Trusteeship for Houses of Diligence and Workhouses was established, later renamed the Trusteeship for Labor Assistance.

The practice of Moscow district guardianships led to the idea of ​​uniting charitable societies and institutions. As a result, in 1897, a Charitable Council was established in Moscow, which sought measures to "coordinate and unify the activities of city guardians with the activities of all charitable institutions of the capital", and in 1899 - the City Information Department for Charity, which registers the poor and collects information about the nature of the activities of charitable organizations,

In 1909, the All-Russian Union of Institutions, Societies and Figures for Public and Private Charity was established, whose tasks included: studying issues of charity, promoting rational forms and methods of charity, uniting charitable activities and others.

In March 1910, the Union organized the 1st congress of charity workers. In May 1914, the second such congress was held.

By the beginning of 1910, there were over ten thousand charitable societies and institutions in Russia. According to the survey, 60% of them owned capital in the amount of 240.4 million rubles, the annual income was about 60.5 million rubles, and the expense was 50.5 million rubles. Only 25% of the entire budget of Russian charity was formed at the expense of the treasury, zemstvos, cities and class institutions, 75% were private donations.

By the second decade of the 20th century, a fairly developed public charity in Russia, in essence, was a series of completely independent and not subordinate institutions and departments. It was very important that in their activities they had the rights of self-government, the formation of unions, and broad decentralization. The Ministry of the Interior was assigned only the functions of supreme supervision over the regularity, but not over the expediency of establishing guardianship institutions and institutions. At the same time, with the development of guardianship and charitable activities, the need for state regulation public charity, but not in state interference in ongoing processes.

In Russia, there were the following most powerful independent charitable institutions: Empress Maria's patronage, which had 27 branches and 6 committees, which were in charge of educational homes for the care of infants, orphanages, 36 almshouses for adults;

the Imperial Philanthropic Society, which was in charge of 257 charitable organizations;

Guardianship of houses of industriousness and workhouses;

city ​​charities.

State management of public charity began to take shape under the Provisional Government. Thus, on March 21, 1917, a decree of the Provisional Government "On the Subordination of Independent Charitable Organizations to Subject Departments and Institutions" was adopted, which instructed the Advisory Commission on Charitable Institutions to determine which of the departments of the Ministries, Main Directorates, or public organizations should include those of the existing charitable organizations. institutions that acted independently, not being subordinate to any of the government bodies.

The Commission came to the conclusion that the activities of the All-Russian Guardianship for the Protection of Motherhood and Infancy can be continued on the same basis, because. it operates under its charter as a private charitable organization.

Having approved at a meeting on March 21, 1917, the conclusions of the meeting of Commissars regarding the activities of other charitable organizations, the Provisional Government decided to transfer them to the jurisdiction of the Military Department, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Public Education.

However, after the adoption of the decree of the Provisional Government of May 5, 1917 "On the formation of the Ministries: Labour, Food, Posts and Telegraphs and State Charity" all the above charitable institutions and guardianships were transferred to the newly formed Ministry of State Charity.

The Ministers of State Charity of the First, Second and Third Coalition Provisional Governments were, respectively, Prince D.I. Efremov, a member of the State Duma of the IV convocation, elected from the Don army (from July 24 to August 26, 1917) and N.M. Kishkin, a member of the Cadets party and a doctor by education (from September 25 to the October coup).

On June 29, 1917, the Provisional Government adopted a resolution "On the Establishment of the Provisional National and Local Committees for Assistance to the Military Injured", in accordance with which it was ordered to concentrate all the work of assistance to the military crippled in the Ministry of State Charity, formed for this purpose the above-mentioned temporary committees.

The Provisional National Committee was entrusted with the development of plans to help the military crippled and the discussion of measures for the widespread implementation of this assistance, its unification and coordination.

In areas where there are no local self-government bodies, the Ministry of State Charity was instructed to form, pending the introduction of local self-government, Provisional Committees for Assistance to the Military Injured, consisting of representatives of local public organizations and unions of the military disabled.

To unite the activities of zemstvos and cities that are part of the All-Russian Zemsky Union and the Union of Cities, in helping the military crippled, form a Conference of representatives from the Main Committees of both Unions with the participation of representatives from the All-Russian Union of crippled soldiers.

October 30, 1917 (old style), i.e. on the sixth day after the victory of the armed uprising, the Soviet government adopted an appeal to all working people on the preparation of decrees on the full social security of workers, urban and rural poor. Signed by the People's Commissar of Labor A.G. Shlyapnikov, this appeal was published in print on November 1, 1917.

On the same day V.I. Lenin signed a decree on the creation of the People's Commissariat of State Charity and its local departments on the basis of the Ministry of State Charity and the announcement that "The Republican Government of People's Commissars authorized Comrade A. M. Kollontai as Commissar of Public Charity."

On November 13, 1917 A.M. Kollontai, a meeting of elected representatives of the service personnel was appointed "to discuss the tasks facing the ministry in reorganizing state charity on the basis of amateur performance in the interests of the multimillion working masses and strengthening state power behind the democracy of Russia."

On January 26, 1918, the Board of Charity of Minors was established in the People's Commissariat of State Charity, and in early April 1918, a department for the protection of children was formed, which was responsible for registering and uniting under its leadership all orphanages, charitable societies, orphanages for refugee children. The organizational work was completed during the first half of 1918. Former "shelters" were rebuilt into orphanages, in which children received clothes, food, medical care, and education. Children from the orphanage were trained in ordinary labor schools. Schools at orphanages remained only where there were no conditions for education in the schools of the People's Commissariat of Education.

On March 6, 1918, the Council of People's Commissars adopted a decree "On the Formation of the People's Council for Social Security and the Accounting and Loan Committee for Social Security", which instructed the "Commissariat of Charity to take charge of accounting and settling all issues of pensions and benefits, for which the creation of the People's Council for Social Security ."

By this decree, the Commissariat of Finance was instructed to unite all pension capitals, forming the Accounting and Loan Committee of Social Security under the National Bank.

The Commissariats of Finance and Labor were ordered to work closely with the Commissariat of Charity.

On April 26, 1918, a decree of the Council of People's Commissars "On renaming the People's Commissariat for State Charity into the People's Commissariat for Social Welfare" was signed "due to the fact that the existing name of the People's Commissariat for State Charity does not correspond to the socialist understanding of the tasks of social security and is a relic of the old days when social assistance was in the nature of almsgiving and charity.

It is this date that is considered the date of the foundation of the social security system in Russia, although the question of such a renaming was raised at a meeting of the Council of People's Commissars on March 18, 1918. The People's Commissar of Social Security until the reorganization of the social security system during the NEP period was a professional revolutionary, St. Petersburg worker A.N. .Vinokurov, who previously worked in the Commissariat of Internal Affairs and was appointed on March 18 as the People's Commissar of Public Charity.

Speaking about the history of the formation and development of social security in Russia in the post-October period and social protection today, we must not forget that in Russia, in parallel with the system of public charity, which later grew into a social security system, compulsory social insurance developed. The insurance legislation, adopted in 1912 and supplemented in 1917, provided for compulsory insurance in case of illness and childbirth, and labor injury, which was carried out by sickness funds that were in charge of insurance for sickness and childbirth, and insurance partnerships that carried out insurance for industrial injury . In addition, in Russia, before the October Revolution, a network of various pension, emerital, auxiliary savings and other cash desks developed, providing pensions and other types of social protection for categories of the population established by law.

With the proclamation of a new political policy (NEP) in Russia, a new stage in the development of social security began, consisting in the rejection of a unified system of social security and the transition to providing the working peasantry in the form of mutual assistance, workers - in the form of social insurance and maintaining state social security for war invalids and for members of the families of Red Army soldiers, other categories of the population not included in the circle of persons subject to mutual or social insurance and in need of social support.

A complete transition to the principles of social security in 1918 was considered as a forced measure taken in the conditions of foreign intervention, civil war, famine and devastation and the practical possibility of providing security that needed only in kind on an equalizing basis at minimum standards. At the same time, the stage of social security, which formally lasted from 1918 to 1921, is of exceptional interest from the point of view of the conditionality of the nature of social protection by political, economic and ideological factors. Despite the brevity of the formal stage of social security in the development of social protection of the population in Russia, the ideology of the organization of social protection laid down in the resolution of the Sixth (Prague) Conference of the RSDLP and tested during the period of war communism determined the nature of its development in Russia throughout the entire Soviet period. The social security system in the Soviet period developed as a multistructural system based on state ownership, in which the types of social protection, the circle of persons to whom it applied, as well as the level of provision for certain categories of citizens were determined by state authorities in accordance with the priorities they set.

2.3 Social security is one of the important organizational and legal norms of the developing system of social protection

In the new economic conditions, the process of formation of a multi-structural system of social protection is underway, in which there should be a place for its various organizational and legal forms, which make it possible to effectively solve modern problems in the social sphere. The term "social security", as well as the term "public care" in its time, is falling out of use. It is no longer used in the name of social protection institutions, and the role of social security as a directly state form of social protection in its total volume is reduced. At the same time, the importance of such organizational and legal forms of social protection as social insurance, targeted social assistance and various organizational and legal forms of social protection of a private nature is growing. At the same time, the concept of "social security" is native and close to the employees of modern social protection institutions, not only as a historical symbol that characterized a certain stage in the development of the social protection system in our country, but also as one of the important organizational and legal forms of the developing multi-structural social security system. protection .

2.4 Problems of development of charity in Russia

The noble tradition that is being revived today, of course, requires new forms, which have not yet acquired either internal logic, or stability, or a worthy place in wanderings. modern culture. The artistic and scientific community, with a feeling of some kind of nostalgia, calls on the “new Russians” to look up to the Mamontovs and Tretyakovs, although it seems that they themselves have little faith in the fact that they really (if not today, then tomorrow for sure) will come and act in a role other than playing their card as sponsors, but as true benefactors. The fact is that today there are many problems that stand in the way of entrepreneurs who want to do charity work.

Today, in any act, the majority is looking for some secret meaning, subtext. "Do you help the poor? So, he gathered for deputies. Do you sponsor theater? Not only as an actress-mistress brought. I believe that the reason for this is the instability of the economy, which gives rise to uncertainty about the future and distrust of rich people who tend to “scatter” money.

So, an obstacle to charitable activity is the instability of the economy, which at any moment can turn into losses and require unplanned expenses and investments. Therefore, you should always have a reserve to cover losses. This means that an entrepreneur for charity may simply not have enough working capital.

Another problem is the imperfection of the legislation. I believe that if it were legally approved that the funds allocated for charity went to the expenses of the enterprise, thereby reducing taxable profits, then there would be much more contributions and donations. The law "On charitable activities and charitable organizations", adopted in 1995, provides for a tax relief for entrepreneurs of 3% of the amount of profits going to charitable purposes. But due to high taxes, it practically does not work. So, instead of developing incentives, legislation creates obstacles for philanthropists. The fact is that property donations are taxed, and if, for example, a commercial structure wants to transfer decommissioned computers to a school, then the state will have to pay for its impulse to mercy.

Another factor that has a negative effect is distrust of public organizations. Since everyone clearly remembers the vague times of perestroika, when a huge number of fraudulent enterprises were created. Today, charity is targeted (without intermediaries), because donors want to be sure that their help will reach those who really need it, they want to see who they help.

An important role in the decision to make donations is played by the recommendations of relatives, acquaintances, as well as information from associations of entrepreneurs themselves (for example, the Rotary Club). A small number of enterprises have relatively well-established contacts with institutions (mainly related to state care) that receive regular assistance.

Very often, donors prefer to purchase with their own money what they consider necessary for those in need. So they gain confidence that the money allocated for charity will not go anywhere to the side. Some enterprises provide financial assistance, but provide their services free of charge, the material values ​​​​at their disposal, goods, for example: put up advertising for schools for free, donate furniture to schools, provide churches and monasteries with seedlings, provide free protection of city events (City Day, May 1, 9) .

Thus, the real situation is not conducive to the development of charitable activities. And, probably, because of this, sponsorship and patronage today are largely determined by rational (or rationally formulated) motives. This is the desire to invest money directly, bypassing state institutions, in certain non-productive areas. The goals of such investments can be different - from the realization of personal interests or even eccentricities, to the creation of additional advertising, tax cuts, the development of certain areas of science or the training of specialists of a certain profile and quality. Even if this is in the nature of fulfilling a moral duty to society, it is to a rather small extent. A successful businessman, as it were, fulfills his moral obligation by creating additional jobs and paying taxes, thus redistributing income in favor of society as a whole. Sponsorship involves a specific program and justification of the goals and results of investing funds, reporting on expenses, etc. In some way, this financing is either with a distant benefit, or with a deliberately risky result. But still, this is, although a charitable, but to some extent a business enterprise.

But, nevertheless, I believe that, despite the presence of negative factors, Russian entrepreneurs have and will have a desire to help, since this is the movement of the soul of a Russian person.

At the same time, charity plays a large positive role in social relationships. The phenomenon of charity concerns such basic life-meaning social values ​​as "public justice", "good" and "evil". Charity, considered as a social whole, has a significant impact on the state of social tension in society or, as they sometimes say, on its moral and psychological climate. It removes, at least in part, the sharpness of the contradiction between the rich and the poor, the haves and the have-nots, who voluntarily give and accept these gifts at will.

Designated parties the contradictions noted above are resolved with the help of charity in the spirit of reconciliation of the parties, which is especially delicate in form and content. The voluntary nature of the gift and its acceptance relieves social tension, replacing it with a special state of spiritual intimacy, civic gentleness and reconciliation, social conformism and tolerance.

"I have to help these poor people: build a school building for their children, a hospital so that my workers and their children can be treated there for free," a modern Russian entrepreneur reflects. “Of course, he profits from our work, robs and robs us, does not pay us extra for our work,” argues a worker employed in a modern factory. “But I remember very well,” he continues to reflect, “that as long as he acquired our enterprise, we were not paid for months, and if they did, it was not with money, but with the products of the factory.And now we not only receive regular salaries, the factory is expanding, we and our children can be treated free of charge in the hospital built by our entrepreneur. How can we not thank him for this. We know how many unemployed people still exist in the city." Such and similar judgments regarding the numerous facts of charity and those who perform them are widespread in different cities Russian Federation.

Thus, charity makes a significant contribution to solving the problem of social justice. The point here is not only that multimillion-dollar charitable actions significantly equalize income levels, at least in the trend of philanthropists, ordinary workers and employees, but, above all, that they contribute to the establishment of principles of social justice in society.

Summing up, we can conclude that the current experience of charitable donations by entrepreneurs is mainly targeted. They want to see visible results from their participation, and therefore prefer to provide support directly to those who, in their opinion, really need it. Most often, the objects of charity are orphans, lonely elderly people, and the disabled. A common practice is to provide applicants with their services, material values, goods free of charge, most likely due to the fact that the process of official registration of charitable assistance is quite complicated, and it is difficult to report to the tax authorities that the assistance was actually provided. In this regard, many entrepreneurs would prefer to provide their services and material values ​​to public organizations free of charge or at a big discount.

Limited participation in charitable events is explained by the general unstable economic situation that requires reserve funds, their own limited opportunities, and an unfavorable taxation system. A serious barrier remains distrust of existing charitable foundations, organizations, uncertainty that the transferred funds will be effectively used and real results will be achieved.

Nevertheless, it is very important that representatives of commercial structures are, of course, ready to support programs designed for the main socially vulnerable groups of the population. Cooperation with public organizations, the assistance provided to them, in addition to very important moral satisfaction, can create additional advertising for donors, a more favorable image, and strengthen business reputation. Public organizations are expected to act as intermediaries between business and government. It is assumed that they could lobby for the adoption of more liberal tax legislation, other forms of accounting and encouragement of business philanthropy.

The very activities of public organizations should look transparent to donors.

That is, despite all the shortcomings of Russian reality that hinder the development of charity, it is an integral aspect of the behavior of entrepreneurs. AND hallmark charitable activities of domestic entrepreneurs is that they are guided, as a rule, by the motives of mercy, seek to satisfy their short-term interests and choose for this as partners not public organizations, but state structures. Of course, modern entrepreneurs are still far from the famous patrons of the past, and sometimes they are guided by completely different goals, but what they do is of great importance for society, and I believe that the state should in every possible way stimulate this kind of activity.

As for the prospects for the development of charity in Russia, it seems to me that they are quite favorable. This can be seen both in a general sociological sense, regarding the formation of an all-Russian moral and psychological climate as a whole, favorable towards the development of charity, and in a personal sense, regarding the social status of the class of entrepreneurs. Both of these factors interact with each other, providing, in combination, favorable prospects for the development of Russian philanthropy.

The rise of the economy, which began in recent years, the growth of the living standards of the people, which is still very slow, in the future, it seems to me, can lead to the creation of general favorable conditions for the development of this social phenomenon. Again, state support is very important here.

In addition, sooner or later entrepreneurs will face the question of "eternal life", which should also have a positive impact on the prospects for the development of Russian charity. I would also like to note that the children of modern Russian entrepreneurs are educated in the best educational institutions of the world, and culture, as you know, is one of the prestige conditions that compel entrepreneurs to engage in this humane, truly human activity.

CONCLUSION

Based on the above, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. Charity is a socio-role interaction, the content of which is determined by the type of socio-economic system and the nature of relations between the state and civil society, emerging in this system.

2. Charity in the pre-revolutionary history of Russia acquired social specificity, which formed a special patriarchal nature of role relations between the subject of charity (philanthropists) and the object of charity, i.e. those who needed and accepted their support.

Z. In Russia, which has been transforming since 1985, new philanthropic relationships are being formed, in which revived national traditions and technologies borrowed from the market West are combined. This synthesis, provided by the laws of succession, determines the coexistence and partnership in charitable activities of the bearers of different role attitudes.

4. The evolution of charity can be represented as the development of social-role interaction, in which the role representation of the carriers of the relationship in question changes.

The processes taking place in modern Russia - the stratification of society, the impoverishment of a significant mass of the population - force us to pay attention not only to the revival of the economy and the need to improve the welfare of the people, but also to study the experience related to the organization of current practical assistance to culture, in particular, charity, as a manifestation of concerns of the state about the moral health and intellectual potential of any society.

Under these conditions, the need for the study and scientific development of individual layers and phenomena of the social history of Russia acquires special significance. Knowledge of historical experience, both positive and negative, makes it possible to avoid mistakes and, along with the action of other important factors, ensure the worthy development of modern Russia. Thus, the interest of researchers at the present time in studying the experience of the past, the traditions of Russian charity, its socio-political aspects, in particular, is quite natural.

The modern post-Soviet socio-cultural space is characterized by a tendency to revive cultural traditions, interest in historical heritage, the need of society to form spiritual ideals associated with the peculiarities of the Russian mentality, and the desire to preserve its cultural identity.

The study of the cultural aspect of the phenomenon of "charity" allows not only to explain its place in the historical and cultural process of Russian society, but also to update the management and forecasting of this phenomenon.

In today's difficult times, people who find an opportunity to spend energy and money on solving acute social and cultural problems are truly worthy of respect.

Realizing the most important functions of culture, modifying in accordance with the existing society, charity, nevertheless, retains its immanent properties that make it an enduring value of society, a tool for solving specific problems.

The study of charity from the point of view of cultural knowledge, the analysis of new interesting forms of its interaction with other aspects of cultural and social activity seem to be very relevant.

We understand charity as a natural feature of the national culture, as a type of socio-cultural activity that develops under the influence of the outside world and factors aimed at implementing the cultural policy of the state. In addition, charity is an indicator of the attitude of society and the state to the culture of the nation, the people, an instrument for the formation of a culture of the individual.

The conducted historical analysis allowed me to conclude that the social and role interaction in the relations of charity has a universal, socio-economic and personal (special) content, helped me to better understand its inner essence, the relationship of social, economic, political, ideological, legal and mental principles of its development. In the conditions of market rationality and prudence, the orientation of public consciousness towards the phenomena of gratuitous charity also makes it possible to actualize the problems of the spiritual and moral component of social development. Our society especially needs now the transformation of moral education into a practical school of good manners.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

1. Federal Law "On charitable activities and charitable organizations" dated July 7, 1995

2. Comments on the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On charitable activities and charitable organizations" dated July 7, 1995

3. Complete collection of laws of the Russian Empire. Sobr. 3. T. 26. 27469. For example, the Decree of the Council of People's Commissars of 20. 02. 20 on the abolition of the Union of Invadads of War and Labor - SU. 1920. No. 11. Art. 72; Decree of the People's Commissariat of State Charity of 12/12/1917 - SU. 1917. No. 11. Art. 165; as well as SU. 1918. No. 13. Art. 193. No. 16. Art. 28 and 227; No. 56. Art. 688

4. Andreev V.S. The right of social security in the USSR. M., 1987

5. Anthology of social work. TT.1-3. M. Svarog. 1994-95

6. Aronov A.A. The golden age of Russian patronage. Moscow. 1995

7. Badya L.V. The feat of compassion (From the history of Russian charity)// Russian magazine social work. 1995. No. 1.

8. Charity in Russia. SPb., 1907

9. Charity in Russia. Social and historical studies. 2001 "Faces of Russia", St. Petersburg, 2007.

10. Charitable institutions of the Russian Empire. T. II. SPb. – 1900

11. Bokhanov. A.N. Collectors and patrons in Russia. M.; 1989

12. Buryshkin P.A. Merchant Moscow, M.; 1991

13. Vesnin V.R. Management. M.: TK Velby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2007

14. Weber M. Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism / / M. Weber. Selected works. M. 1990

15. Gavlin M.L. Russian Entrepreneurs: Spiritual Image, Patronage // History of Entrepreneurship in Russia. Book two. The second half of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th centuries. M .: ROSSPEN, 2007

16. Georgievsky P. Organization of private charity // Bulletin of charity. 1897. 6. S. 57; Maksimov E.D. Decree. op. P. 51. Vlasov P. Decree. op.

18. Goldstein G.Ya. Fundamentals of management. Taganrog: TRTU, 2007

19. Derevyagina T.G. Charitable organizations: experience of the past//Social work in Russia: past and present. Moscow - Stavropol, 1998. S. 68; GAKO, f. 24, op. 1. d. 43, l.

20. Dumova N.G. Moscow patrons. M.; 1992

21. Zhukov G.V. Charity in culture and its forms. / Russian culture of the XXI century through the eyes of young scientists. Materials of interreg. scientific - practical conf. graduate students and young scientists. - Krasnodar, 2007

22. Zhukov G.V. Charity as a feature of the mentality of the Russian people. / Materials of the 2nd Kaigorodovsky readings. - Krasnodar, 2008

23. Zhukov G.V. Charity as a cultural phenomenon. / Transnational problems of culture of the XXI century. All-Russian scientific - practical conf. - Krasnodar, 2008

24. Zhukov GV Functions of charity and their characteristics. / Development of the socio-cultural sphere. Regional scientific - practical conf. young scientists. - Krasnodar, 2008

25. Magazine "Maecenas" No. 1, 2008. "A little more and we will overcome the slippery slope from gangsters to philanthropists."

26. Magazine "Maecenas" No. 9, 2008. "Social portrait of a modern entrepreneur."

27. Ilyinsky K. Private companies. Riga, b. Mr. S. 372; Bulletin of charity. 1897. 9. S. 4. Ilyinsky K. Decree. op. P. 372. Ilyinsky K. Decree. op.

28. “Historical portraits”, V.O. Klyuchevsky, M., Pravda, 1990

29. Kabushkin N.I. "Fundamentals of Management", 1997

30. Kraeva N.M., Mineev V.N. Socio-economic features of Russian entrepreneurship.// Society and Economics, 2007, No. 9-10.

31. Korzhikhina T.P. History of state institutions of the USSR. M., 1986

32. Lenin's decrees on social security. -M., 1972

33. Maksimov E.D. Essays on private charity in Russia, Labor Help. 1897. 2. S. 212. Ilyinsky K. Decree. op.

34. Materials of the Yegorievsk Historical and Local Lore Museum. Lenin's decrees on social security. - M., 1972

35. Meskon M., Albert M., Hadowy F. Fundamentals of management. M.: Delo, 2000

36. Patrons and collectors. Almanac of the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments. M.; 1994

37. Orlov A.S., Georgiev V.A., Polunov A.Yu., Tereshchenko Yu.Ya. - Fundamentals of the course of the history of Russia: Proc. Benefit. – M.: Prostor, 1997

38. “Patriotic history of the twentieth century”, M., “Agar”, 1997.

39. Approximate charter of the society for the relief of the poor - approved by the Ministry of Internal Affairs on June 16, 1897. No. 17. Charitable institutions of the Russian Empire. T. 1. S. 18.

40. Rossokhina V.P. Opera House S. Mamontov. M.; Music. 1985

41. Code of Laws of the Russian Empire. 1892

42. Dictionary of legal and state sciences / Ed. A. F. Volkov and Yu. D. Filippov. T. 1. S. 1019. Encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron. 1873

43. Smirnov V.I. - We are Yegorievtsy, - M .: Encyclopedia of villages and villages, 1999.

44. "Social protection" No. 1, 1995

45. "Social protection" No. 2, 1995

46. ​​Sorvina A.S., Firsov M.V. Teaching materials for the course "History of social work in Russia". M. MGSU. 1995

47. Theory and methodology of social work. TT.1-2. M. Soyuz. 1994

48. Theory and practice of social work. Saratov. PF RTC. 1995

49. Firsov M.V., Fedorov E.S. “Anthology of social work”, M., “Svarog-NVF SPT”, 1994

50. Kholostova E.I. Genesis of social work in Russia. M. Institute of social work. 1995

51. Yarskaya V.N. Charity and Mercy as Sociocultural Values ​​// Russian Journal of Social Work. No. 2. 1995

"Patriotic history of the twentieth century", M., "Agar", 1997.

“Historical portraits.”, V. O. Klyuchevsky, M., “Pravda”, 1990

"National history of the XX century", M., "Agar", 1997

Gavlin M.L. Russian Entrepreneurs: Spiritual Image, Patronage // History of Entrepreneurship in Russia. Book two. The second half of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th centuries. M .: ROSSPEN, 2007 Magazine "Maecenas" No. 9, 2003. "Social portrait of a modern entrepreneur."

Research interest in understanding the motives of charitable activities is shown by many humanities, and each has its own answer. For example, philosophers and historians believe that charity, altruism, compassion, sacrifice, and fear of God act as motives for charity. Sociologists single out the motives of striving for public recognition and improve image self-esteem. In social psychology, the altruistic motivation of benefactors is noted, as well as the interpretation of charitable interpersonal interaction as a special "humanitarian deal". Some psychologists consider charity a manifestation of a spontaneous and emotionally colored impulse and help at the call of the soul and heart.

Among the most common reasons for private philanthropy, scientists usually include:

Personal attitude (the person who makes the decision to donate has faced a problem at some point);

Religious motives;

Moral and ethical motives (mercy, altruism, citizenship, patriotism, expressed in the formula "we must share");

Sympathy or pity;

Feeling of guilt before society for their activities;

Fashion (following someone else's example);

National/professional reasons;

Personal satisfaction from a charitable act;

The perseverance of the petitioner.

The corporate motives of business charity usually include:

Improving the company's image;

Promotion of a product - a product or service;

Targeted access to a specific market and its target groups;

Improving relations with local authorities;

Demonstration of the company's social responsibility (especially important when entering international markets);

Considerations of prestige;

Removing social tensions in local communities in the areas where the company operates;

Raising loyalty to the company (often found when working with children and youth);

Leisure activities for company employees, clients and partners (refers to supporting projects in the field of culture, art, sports);

Lobbying the interests of the company.

3. Charitable organizations and the main directions of their activities

To date, there are many charitable organizations that can be divided into groups.

The first and most massive group of benefactors are commercial structures. Their contribution to charity is expressed in material support of both needy citizens and non-profit organizations working with them. Usually this support comes from the profits of a commercial company.

The second active group of philanthropists are non-profit organizations (NPOs). The overwhelming majority of NGOs were created and operate to solve social problems. NGOs provide material assistance and free services to various categories of organizations and citizens, among which there is a significant proportion of socially vulnerable categories of the population. In many cases, non-profit organizations do not provide direct support, but in various ways stimulate the creation of conditions for solving economic and social problems. Often, NGOs involve volunteers in their work. NGOs usually do not have guaranteed sources of income and sometimes they themselves receive charitable support from citizens, Russian and foreign donors. In the developed countries of the world, the state increasingly delegates social functions to non-profit organizations, which indicates the effectiveness of the work of NGOs. The same trend is observed in Russia. The budget of an NPO can be formed both at the expense of grants, and at the expense of entrepreneurial activity. At the same time, unlike commercial organizations, according to the law, NCOs do not have profit making as the main goal of their activities and cannot distribute profits, if any, among participants.

The third group of benefactors are individuals, citizens of Russia or foreigners. They participate in charitable activities both through personal donations (philanthropy, almsgiving, the purchase of tickets for charity events, charitable deductions from the purchase of goods, bequest of an inheritance, etc.), and through voluntary (aka volunteer) work in non-profit organizations.

Charitable assistance is traditionally provided to individuals and organizations, the necessary assistance to which, for various reasons, the state is not able to provide or provides, but in insufficient volumes.

The main and most popular areas of charity in modern Russia are:

Culture and art - one-time or permanent support for theaters, orchestras, museums, galleries, libraries, as well as artists, literature, cinema.

Science - assistance to fundamental and applied science in the development of new technologies, innovative research, support for promising theoretical ideas, holding scientific conferences, symposiums, as well as supporting young professionals.

Church - as a rule, assistance in the construction or restoration of temples and monasteries.

Education - the establishment of scholarships and grants for teachers and students, payment for internships abroad, assistance in acquiring materials for the educational process.

Social sphere - assistance to socially unprotected categories of citizens: children, mothers, the elderly, the disabled, veterans, the poor and organizations uniting them.

Healthcare - assistance to both medical institutions (financing the purchase of equipment, medicines, paying for training and retraining of employees) and individuals (as a rule, financing expensive treatment).

Nature Conservation - financing of environmental programs to save endangered species of flora and fauna, support for nature reserves, environmental protection.

Sports - assistance to non-commercial sports and individual athletes in the acquisition of sports equipment, payment of transportation and accommodation costs, coaching services, rental of training facilities.

Fund support mass media– allocation of grants, as a rule, to regional and Internet media.

Research interest in understanding the motives of charitable activities is shown by many humanities, and each has its own answer. For example, philosophers and historians believe that charity, altruism, compassion, sacrifice, and fear of God act as motives for charity. Sociologists single out the motives of striving for public recognition and improvement of image self-assessment as dominant. In social psychology, the altruistic motivation of philanthropists is noted, as well as the interpretation of charitable interpersonal interaction as a special "humanitarian deal". Some psychologists consider charity a manifestation of a spontaneous and emotionally colored impulse and help at the call of the soul and heart.

Among the most common reasons for private philanthropy, scientists usually include:

· Personal attitude (the person making the decision about charity, he himself once encountered a problem);

· Religious motives;

· Moral and ethical motives (mercy, altruism, citizenship, patriotism, expressed in the formula "we must share");

Sympathy or pity;

Feelings of guilt before society for their activities;

Fashion (following someone else's example);

· National/professional reasons;

Personal satisfaction from a charitable act;

The perseverance of the petitioner.

The corporate motives of business charity usually include:

· Improving the image of the company;

Promotion of a product - goods or services;

· Targeted access to a specific market and its target groups;

· Improving relations with local authorities;

· Demonstration of the company's social responsibility (especially important when entering international markets);

· Considerations of prestige;

· Removal of social tension in local communities in the territories of the company's activities;

· Raising loyalty to the company (often found when working with children and youth);

· Organization of leisure activities for the company's employees, clients and partners (refers to supporting projects in the field of culture, art, sports);

· Lobbying the interests of the company Directory of Charity. Information Center "Charity in Russia". Infoblago.ru.http://www.infoblago.ru/charity/guide/.

The identified motives for providing charitable assistance can be grouped into three main groups:

Charity as a moral attitude of the donor (public duty, personal knowledge of the problems of people in need of help, understanding the need to support the state in the field of culture, science, education, etc.);

Emotional reactions (compassion, pity, desire to help those in need);

Practical benefits (creating a positive image of the company, advertising, improving relations with the authorities) Danakin N.S. The meaning and professional features of social work // Russian Journal of Social Work, 1995, No. 1, p.30..

In addition, charitable activities can be divided into charity, carried out through material investments, and charity through personal participation.

A closer look at the issue reveals the following:

spiritual charity involves the personal participation of the philanthropist in the process of implementing a charitable action;

charity through personal participation, unlike spiritual charity, does not always have an immaterial (spiritual) result; on the contrary, for example, a volunteer, personally performing work on the reconstruction of an object, discovers, upon its completion, the material result of Stepanova E.E. Charity in the sphere of culture: organizational and pedagogical aspects. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of pedagogical sciences. St. Petersburg, 2006..

It is clear that the motives for charitable activities differ among different representatives of society. If we consider the motives of the charitable activities of entrepreneurs, then in the first place they named socially approved and expected, mercy, public duty, altruism and the desire to help those in need.

One in ten indicated that charity helps to improve the image of the company, is used for advertising purposes, and allows you to work with target markets. Another 4.1% of respondents among the motives indicated that charitable activities help to improve relations with the authorities.

The distribution of answers presented in Figure 1 (Appendix 1) demonstrates the predominance of moral and emotional motives, the practical benefit is noted by the respondents last.

Questions about what a commercial firm actually receives as a result of charitable activities, and what it would like to receive, were asked at the end of the questionnaire, but the results should be presented here to compare them with motives. The most significant result (79.5% of responses) - moral satisfaction, practically coincides with the number of managers who make a decision to donate. It turns out that the leaders to some extent do charity "for themselves" in order to experience the satisfaction of having done a good deed, or to satisfy their ambitions, or to get rid of guilt. In second place is such a result as letters and responses from beneficiaries, which also give a sense of satisfaction to the philanthropist.

One in four (24.6%) prioritizes the importance of such a result as improving the company's image, one in ten notes an improvement in the climate within the team (10.6%). For a number of firms (6.6%), as a result of charitable activities, there was an improvement in relations with the authorities.

However, the results obtained, expressed mainly in moral satisfaction, are at a distance from the desired practically significant results that have a material equivalent. The most popular is the placement of the company's logo on advertising media during charitable events (36.1%), information in the media (28.7%), verbal informing of event participants (16.4%), organizing a special event to present the charitable activities of a particular commercial organization(5.7%). Until relatively recently, the prevailing opinion was that charity should not be demonstrated or advertised, but our study showed that the proportion of managers who share this opinion is rather small (6.6%).

In general, it can be noted that there has been a transition from understanding charity as a moral act to the fact that it is beginning to be considered as part of the business activity of the Kama Center for Social and Business Technologies "Razvitie". Section II. The results of a survey of heads of enterprises of the city. http://www.razvitie2002.ru/news.html..

The motives of individuals are somewhat different. Very often women do charity work. There are several categories of women who find their sphere of application in the emerging sector of non-governmental non-profit organizations.

1) Women who are personally interested in solving social problems.

2) Women with significant work experience who have become unemployed.

3) Women who are career-oriented, but who have not been able to realize themselves professionally.

4) The wives of the "new rich" who have higher education.

In practice, there is often a motivational complex that orients a woman to participate in the work of a charitable organization. However, the following main types of participation motives can be distinguished.

deprivation motive. The basis of participation is various forms of deprivation, that is, dissatisfaction caused by the discrepancy between the individual's expectations and the possibilities for their implementation. So, for example, a woman, left without a husband, or with a sick child, feels injured and becomes a member of a public organization that provides assistance and social protection to single-parent families or disabled children.

Relative deprivation is a psychological state associated with comparing the current situation with some model (with the position of the representatives of the reference group, the position of the leader of one's own group, with one's past experience) (Zdravomyslova 1992). This motive is most often found in women who have lost their jobs.

Deprivation, however, is neither a necessary nor a sufficient motive for participation. This is just one of the possible motives, but it is extremely common in a particular type of charitable organization, namely self-help organizations.

Value or ideological motive. In this case, participation in the work of the organization is conditioned by the participant's commitment to the goals-values ​​proclaimed by the organization, the realization of the idea of ​​women's destiny, or the struggle for the opportunity to play the corresponding role. Thus, in maternal (essentialist) and feminist organizations, leaders are, as a rule, women with a pronounced ideological motive.

A kind of ideological motive is the idea of ​​a specific female destiny, based on women's practices of caring for the weak and mercy, rooted in the Russian tradition.

solidarity motive. Many sociological studies show that a person feels the need to be involved in communities of his own kind (Yadov 1994). Crisis conditions force a person to strive for group protection, solidarity, and the search for stability. Solidarity as a motive for participation is typical for ordinary members of the organization or for volunteers. Solidarity, therefore, is an important stimulus-motive for participation in the movement and in its individual actions. An example is, in particular, self-help movements.

material motive. In some cases, the incentive - the motive for participation, is a certain type of material reward. This motive is typical for foundation organizations. Such a motive-stimulus can be getting a job with an appropriate pay for non-working women (participants in feminist initiatives whose activities are financially supported by Western funds; positions in charities whose work is paid). This is typical for those who work in senior positions in foundations, activists, and not for ordinary participants.

Another type of material reward may be receiving humanitarian aid, various benefits provided to public organizations, the possibility of traveling abroad.

The motive of self-realization. As the study shows, the possibility of self-realization acts, as a rule, not as a motive that encourages participation, but as a motive for continuing this work. For example, the leader of one of the children's organizations, a mother of many children with a sick child, created her own organization for the rehabilitation of sick children. Working in this organization helped her solve the problem with her child, i.e. restore his health. Thus, the motive for starting social activities was absolute deprivation associated with the illness of one's own child. However, gradually, charitable work becomes her permanent job, and the woman continues to do it professionally. At the same time, work in a charitable organization significantly increases the social status of a woman. Zelikova Yu. Women in charitable organizations in Russia (on the example of St. Petersburg) // Gender dimension of social and political activity in the transition period (collection of scientific articles) / Center for Independent Social Research. St. Petersburg, 1996. S. 82-95. http://www.a-z.ru/women/texts/zelikovar.htm#:%29.

The considered motives of charitable activity are most often found in modern life.