Institute of Concrete Social Research of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Development of the problem of the social structure of Soviet society

Grigoryan Karen Grachikovich PhD in Sociology Postgraduate student, the department of History and Theory of Sociology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Leninskie Gory, 1 Karenmsu@mail.ru Other publications by this author

The development of sociological science in the Soviet period can be called the most ambiguous and, to some extent, tragic page in the history of scientific thought in Russia. On the one hand, sociological research, especially regarding the social structure of Soviet society, has become in demand from both a political and an economic point of view since the emergence of the Soviet state. In a relatively short period in the young Soviet state, an extensive network of sociological laboratories was created, in which large-scale research was conducted in various directions.  On the other hand, the results of these studies, as well as the empirical conclusions that scientists were able to draw, necessitated the concentration of theoretical data into a single complex – sociology. This process was accompanied by sharp debates, which did not lose their relevance decades later, when the process of reviving sociological research began in the 1950s. The ideological vector that dominated at that time in the country as a whole, and science in particular, caused a rather ambiguous situation regarding sociology. The demand for scientific sociological knowledge, actively included in the process of reproduction of the basic ideological and political values of Soviet society, was not in doubt. Moreover, the authorities absolutely accurately represented the level of influence that was formed in the depths of sociological research and their consequences for the existing ideology. At the same time, it would be impractical for the country's economy to ban or limit the range of research. As a result, a "compromise" decision was made to divide the emerging science and transfer the theoretical part under the control of philosophy, and the applied part to the economic sciences. This situation, at the same time, did not stop the development of the sociological direction in science and the 1950s and 1970s, according to the absolutely fair remark of sociologists themselves, became the "golden age", the renaissance of sociology.

An important factor in the revival of sociology is the social order for the study of the social structure of society and the daily life of Soviet people, which scientists receive almost immediately after the end of the war (in the early 1950s). The fulfillment of this order marked the exit of historical materialism into "living life". To a certain extent, it was a revolution in the scientific discipline, a huge step towards the creation of empirical sociology ^[1]. As part of the research, various concepts of pre-war sociologists receive a "new life". In particular, large-scale research unfolds within the framework of the concept of "concrete methodology", the revival of which was initiated by the articles of F. Konstantinov ("Against Dogmatism and Childishness", 1950) and V.S. Nemchinov ("Sociology and Statistics", 1955; "Problems of Modern Sociology", 1956). The official version of the content vector of these studies was the study of the daily life of Soviet people - "living examples of the construction of communism" ^[5], in order to identify the facts of "dogmatism and nachetnichestvo" - "remnants of the past", which meant such samples of deviant business behavior - Talmudism, nachetnichestvo. However, the works of F. Konstantinova and V. S. Nemchinova were of critical importance, as they marked the vector of a new stage in the development of sociology, a new sociological paradigm - "social engineering".

The end of the 1950s - the beginning of the 1960s became the frontier of the institutionalization of sociological science. The ideological barriers that separated the theory and practice of sociology, at the same time, determined a springboard for the development of the empirical base of sociological research, which is beginning to be conducted within the framework of research on labor economics and the sociology of public life. During this period, scientific sociological organizations are being created. A landmark phenomenon was the Resolution of June 13, 1958 of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences on the creation of the Soviet Sociological Association (hereinafter – the SSA), which united sociologists who worked at the Research Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences and branch institutes that had sociological laboratories, university teachers. The Association also included members of the party apparatus (CPSU) engaged in ideological work and some journalists. Yuri Pavlovich Frantsev was elected Chairman, and Gennady Vasilyevich Osipov was elected his deputy ^[9].

At the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences, a "Research Sector for new Forms of Work and Life" was created (1960, headed by G. Osipov), at the Faculty of Philosophy of LSU - a Laboratory for Concrete Social Research (1961, V. Yadov and A. Zdravomyslov). The same institutions are opening in Novosibirsk, Sverdlovsk, Kiev, Tartu and other cities of the country, creating a single scientific sociological network.

The "Sector of Research on New Forms of Work and Life" (hereinafter referred to as the Sector) became the first scientific sociological unit in the country. A. A. Zvorykin, I. I. Changli, A. I. Sobolev, V. V. Kolbanovsky, Yu. N. Kozyrev, V. N. Shubkin and others worked under the leadership of Gennady Vasilyevich Osipov.

Their research, reflected in publications, marked the beginning of modern inductive methods. In particular, the works of G. V. Osipov in the field of methodology of sociological research in 1962-1963 – "On some theoretical principles, problems and methods of sociological research", "Marxist sociology and the place of concrete sociological research in it", "Tasks and methods of concrete sociological research", "Concrete sociological research in the USSR" became a landmark phenomenon.

A wide range of applied research is carried out within the Sector, the most important of which are studies in the sociology of labor and production. It should be noted that G. V. Osipov was one of the pioneers of the "technocratic age". Back in the 1950s, in his works ("Technology and Social Progress", 1959; "Technical progress and the Society of Managers", 1959; "The main direction of Technical progress", 1959; "What is technocracy?", 1960; "The role of technology in modern society", 1960; "Automation in the USSR", 1961; "The social significance of technological progress", 1961) G. V. Osipov expressed the concepts of technocratic theory, in many ways ahead of the representatives of the world scientific thought.

The activity of the Sector was not narrow-profile and autonomous. Scientists have conducted unique empirical studies in various fields. A big event was the field research (questioning, interviewing) in the village of Kopanka in the 1960s, initiated by G. V. Osipov ("Kopanka 25 years later"). The uniqueness of this monographic survey was that it was, in fact, the second stage of the research of this village. The first stage was carried out in the 1930s by the Romanian sociologist D. Gusti and the new survey conducted in the 1960s became one of the most significant in its influence on the revival of not only rural, but also the entire Soviet sociology. The study was conducted by a large team of Russian and Moldovan social scientists and local activists. The leaders of the team from the Russian side were G. Osipov and V. Shubkin, from the Moldovan side - in Chisinau D. Ursul, directly in Kopanka - V. Ermuratsky and G. Entelis ^[12].

The Sector carried out active scientific work, within the framework of which an important direction was the creation of a methodological base for empirical research. The experience of field surveys conducted both by the Sector itself and by other sociological departments and laboratories was summarized and analyzed. The result of this activity was the improvement of existing sociological tools, the creation of qualitatively new methods and techniques of empirical research, the expansion of branch theoretical research, the experience of which was accumulated in the two-volume monograph "Sociology in the USSR" published in 1966. The monograph became an illustrative example of both the multi-scale nature of young science and the integration of sociologists - 50 authors representing various schools and areas of sociology took part in the preparation. The publication "Sociology in the USSR" received a wide response not only in the USSR, but also abroad. In particular, in an expanded version, the two-volume book was published in England.

Another important and great event in sociology was the organization in 1965 within the framework of the activities of the Sector of the journal "Social Research" (journal of the SSA). The journal has become a printing body that has united the efforts of sociologists and has done a lot to disseminate scientific and methodological experience.

The active and effective activity of the Sector allowed in 1966 to organizationally expand this sociological institution.

On February 25, 1966, the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences decided to transform the Sector into the Department of Sociological Research of the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences (hereinafter the Department). The department was a fairly large structural division of the Institute of Philosophy, which united 7 sectors.

Almost two years later, on June 14, 1968, by a resolution of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU under the heading "top secret" on the basis of the Department, the Institute for Concrete Social Research of the USSR Academy of Sciences (ICSI) was created.

The first sociological institute in Russia, from the moment of its opening until 1972, was headed by Academician A.M. Rumyantsev – in those years, Vice-president of the USSR Academy of Sciences, responsible for social sciences (1967-1971). The creation of ICSI was preceded by heavy and serious organizational work, which was complicated by political and ideological conflicts, which manifested themselves in the fall of 1967, when a meeting of the Department of Science and Universities of the Central Committee of the CPSU discussed the report of G. V. Osipov "The state and tasks of further development of specific sociological research in the USSR". As a result of numerous debates, a decision is made on the need to create a sociological institute. This decision was supported by the President of the USSR Academy of Sciences M. V. Keldysh, who recommended A.M. Rumyantsev for the position of Director of ICSI.

The structure of the ICSI included two areas that can be called divisions: sociological, which was headed by G. Osipov, and political science, which were supervised by F. Burlatsky.

The Sociological direction continued the activities that were carried out in the Sector and Department, significantly expanding the range of its research. Such well-known sociologists as Yu.A. Levada (headed the Department of Theory and Methodology), I.S. Kohn (headed the Department of Sociology of Personality), B. A. Grushin (headed the Department of Public Opinion), A. A. Zvorykin (headed the Department of Sociology of Science), V. G. Vasiliev (headed the Department of Operational Social Research) worked at ICSI; V. V. Kolbanovsky (headed the department of organization and methodology of concrete social research), B. S. Orlov (headed the information department). N. S. Mansurov and N. I. Lapin also became heads of ICSI departments. The whole color of Soviet sociology took part in the work of ICSI - V. A. Yadov, A. A. Galkin, A. G. Zdravomyslov, V. N. Shubkin, I. V. Bestuzheva-Lada, V. D. Patrushev, O. I. Shkaratan, G. M. Andreev and many others. Scientists from other organizations were involved in the research.

ICSI became the center, the "head" organization of Soviet sociology, which became the coordinator of research in various areas.

The main directions of the work of the ICSI of the USSR Academy of Sciences were determined by the Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences "On the organization of the Institute of Concrete Social Research of the USSR Academy of Sciences" dated 06/14/1968, the Resolution of the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the CPSU dated 12/10/1968 and were related to:

1) conducting systematic concrete social research…;

2) the study of theoretical, methodological and methodological problems of specific social research;

3) coordination of specific social research conducted by laboratories, groups, sectors and departments of institutions of the USSR Academy of Sciences;

4) training of specialists through postgraduate studies and internship system, creation of teaching aids, active participation in the promotion of knowledge on methodology, methodology and technique of specific social research ^[4]. 

ICSI conducted large-scale research, which was based on the "project" principle and, accordingly, ICSI had a design-matrix structure. That is, within the framework of the approved topic, a project group with relative autonomy was created, which for a certain period (from 4 months to a year) conducted research and summarized their results, which were used, including for analytical documents of the Central Committee of the CPSU.

One of the most productive areas of research, including project research, was the study of the social structure of Soviet society. This direction had an important feature, since, not being narrowly specialized, it, in fact, concentrated in itself the whole complex of information data provided by research in other areas - life and leisure of various population groups, city -village, family, age, income, etc.

An important aspect in understanding the dynamics of the social structure was the factor of social differentiation, based on the trends of socio-economic development, scientific and technological progress and the increased qualification of labor. The rapid development of the "intellectual labor sector", which led to an increase in the number of highly qualified specialists in production, an increase in the number of researchers, an increase in the social prestige of higher education and scientific activity became the main factors of the social life of Soviet society, which changed its structure ^[3]. These trends affected both industrial production and agriculture and led to a revision of the ideology of the structural "three-member" (working class, peasantry and intelligentsia). The legitimacy of the course of the new vector of research took shape during the discussion at the Minsk Scientific Conference "Changes in the social structure of Soviet society" (January, 1966).

Within the framework of the new scientific paradigm, comprehensive studies of the socio-stratified structure of society (sociological terminology of that time) are carried out, among which the work of groups led by O. I. Shkaratan, L. N. Kogan, V. N. Shubkin, Yu. V. Harutyunyan and other researchers-sociologists can be distinguished.

In particular, the main direction of research under the leadership of O. I. Shkaratan was the problem of studying the structure of the working class. In the mid-1960s, surveys of Leningrad machine-building enterprises (1965) were carried out, which made it possible to trace the dynamics of changes in the intra-class structure of the working class, to identify new groups in the structure of the working class (engineering and technical intelligentsia, administrative and managerial personnel, workers without professional training and specialization, and other social strata). The problems of social differentiation of the working class and its relativity to general changes in the social structure of Soviet society and to socio-economic transformations identified in the course of research are considered by O. I. Shkaratan in the book "Problems of the social Structure of the working Class" (1965).

The research conducted under the leadership of L. N. Kogan (1963) was a comparative analysis of the cultural needs of the rural and urban population of the Urals, and also revealed new social strata in the structure of Soviet society.

Large-scale surveys of the life of the rural population (project manager Yu. V. Harutyunyan), based on the methodological principles of multicriteria allocation of social strata, allowed us to establish universal socially forming signs of quantitative proportions of individual strata of the rural population.

A qualitatively new direction of research, which provided extensive material for studying the social structure of Soviet society, was the problem of social mobility (there were no studies of social mobility in the USSR until the 1960s), or, as this problem was designated at that time - using the concepts of "social mobility", "social movement", "social displacement". The term "social displacement", first voiced by I. V. Stalin in 1936 in the report "On the draft Constitution of the USSR" ^[11], and later in the work "Questions of Leninism" ^[10] and revived by M. N. Rutkevich and F. R. Filippov, became the "Soviet version" of the concept of social mobility.

In the second half of the 1960s, the first studies in this direction began, which were conducted under the leadership of N. A. Aitov, V. I. Staroverov, M. N. Rutkevich, F. R. Filippov, M. H. Titma, E. A. Saara and others.

The beginning of these studies was the study of the movement of labor and staff turnover at the enterprise. The results of the research made it possible to position the reproduction of the class structure of Soviet society as a process of movement of individuals from one social class/strata to another, from village to city, from one region to another, which had both a mass and individual ("individual mobility") character.

At the same time, large-scale surveys of social mobility among young people are being conducted (A.V. Kirkh, M. H. Titma, V. N. Shubkin, E. A. Saar), which were considered in the context of reproduction of the social structure of Soviet society and intergenerational social movements. Within the framework of these studies, factors of youth displacement were identified, related to both socio-economic and socio-cultural aspects that cause inequality in the life chances of individual groups of young people.

Studies of social mobility have allowed us to develop a number of classifications for various purposes:

- classification of labor mobility of O. I. Shkaratan:

types - social, intersectoral, intra-industrial, territorial, interprofessional and local labor movement;

forms - demographic; the transition of the population from the sphere of personal subsidiary and household to enterprises and back; the departure of young people to the army and its return to production ^[2];

- classification of N. A. Aitov:

types: demographic; social; movements related to technological progress and changes in the structure of the economy, as well as staff turnover

- M. H. Titma's classification divides social mobility according to the regional characteristics of the population's life activity, the nature of cultures and the level of economic development of regions, the dynamics of the social status of individuals in the process of professional and life self-determination.

The results of the research were numerous publications of ICSI employees, which were important, both within the framework of their content, and for the development of methodology, methods and techniques of sociological research. In particular, in 1970, the first scientific publication devoted to the problems of social mobility was published, which summarized the empirical experience of project surveys in certain regions of the country (the Urals and the Sverdlovsk region) in the second half of the 1960s - the book by M. H. Rutkevich and F. R. Filippov "Social movements" ^[8].

An important result of the scientific activity of the ICSI staff was the activity that made it possible to formalize the methods and techniques of empirical research into scientific and educational content ^[7]. For example, the book "The Sociologist's Workbook", published in 1976 under the editorship of G. V. Osipov, has not only become a popular scientific and methodological practical guide for Soviet sociologists, but has not lost its relevance at the present time.

In 1972, due to the circumstances, A. M. Rumyantsev left the post of head of ICSI. The reasons were "the case of ideological errors in lectures", fabricated against the secretary of the party bureau and head of the Department of Theory and Methodology of ICSI Yu. A. Levada, "the case of G. V. Osipov" (criticism of the monograph edited by G. Osipov and N. Moiseev "Modeling of social processes", 1970) and "the case of the signatories" (L. Annensky, Y. Davydova, L. Sedova, A. Burtina, Z. Krakhmalnikova, etc.).

Nikolai Ivanovich Lapin recalled in an interview that after the incident with Yu. A. Levada, "opposition in the Central Committee was growing, and it focused on Alexei Matveevich Rumyantsev as a key figure. The suspicious attitude towards the institute and its director increased… As a result, Rumyantsev was forced to resign simultaneously from two posts - both director of the Institute and vice-president of the Academy of Sciences" ^{[6, p. 150]}. After the departure of A.M. Rumyantsev, more than 100 employees left ICSI, among whom were Yu. A. Levada, F. M. Burlatsky, I. S. Kon, V. N. Shubkin, A. A. Galkin, V. B. Olshansky, A. I. Prigozhin, N. I. Lapin, V. A. Yadov, B. A. Grushin, etc.

In 1972, ICSI was reorganized into the Institute of Sociological Research.

The activities of ICSI and its predecessors - the Sector of Research on New Forms of Work and Life and the Department of Sociological Research of the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences – allowed Soviet sociologists to unite into a team of like-minded people, and, despite ideological prohibitions and sanctions, to formalize sociological research into a multi-scale and complex theoretical and methodological basis of sociology.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.