Міжнародна та національна безпека: теоретичні і прикладні аспекти
Досвід сучасних суспільних трансформацій Литви для процесу євроінтеграції України
We can note that there is currently a natural process of humanity’s transition into a new quality: from a “reasonable person” to a “spiritual person”. Being guided in any situation by a system of values based on moral principles, it is possible to find harmony in relations with nature and people.
The main political and legal prerequisites for the European integration of Ukraine are related to the accumulated regulatory complex of cooperation in various spheres of interaction between Ukraine and the EU.
The first such legal document, the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, was signed in June 1994 and entered into force after four years of ratification. It was replaced by the Association Agreement and the Free Trade Area Agreement of 2014, which formalized political and legal and other aspects of relations between Ukraine and the European Union [1, c. 58-60].
Ukraine is cooperating with the European Commission on agreeing the procedure for negotiations on joining the European Union. The European Union has different strategies for negotiating the accession of new countries. Accession negotiations with Austria, Sweden and Finland were record-breaking [2, c. 63].
They began in 1994 and ended with the accession of these countries to the EU on January 1, 1995. Concrete negotiations on the accession of the Baltic countries and the Visegrad Four to the EU began in 1998 and were successfully completed on May 1, 2004. Instead, negotiations on the accession of Turkey to EU began in February 2005 and are still ongoing [2, c. 66]. Strategy, as well as negotiation tactics, should be rationally constructive. It is advisable to define the range of issues at the negotiations (corruption, judicial reform) so as not to lose the high pace of the negotiations and to see the final goal. Ukraine aims to put an end to wars in the European Union forever.
Lithuania had a certain development of sociology before the beginning of the Second World War. It was taught at Vytautas the Great University. Scientific work by L. Gumplovich “Fundamentals of Sociology”, the well-known at that time, was translated. P. Lionas published an original textbook on sociology. A lot of sociological scientific literature was translated. Among them there was, for example, M. Weber’s work “History of the Economy”. Sociological research was conducted on the issues of working conditions, wages, health and others, which, however, were only episodic.
War and occupation interrupted the development of sociology for decades. The revival of sociology in Lithuania began during the Khrushchev “thaw”- the short period of cultural and political freedom. The first sociological laboratories were created in Vilnius University, Kaunas Polytechnic Institute, Kaunas Medical Institute, other higher educational institutions. Leonavicius, Yu. Mitrikas A., Solovyov N. and other prominent Lithuanian sociologists worked fruitfully there.
A significant step in the development of sociology in Lithuania was the creation of the Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law in 1977. The Institute became the center of sociological research in Lithuania. In research activities, attention was focused on various aspects of work. With the active participation of R. Grigas, the Republican Council for Social Planning was created. On this basis, the practice of social planning was successfully implemented: the working and rest conditions of workers were significantly improved at many enterprises. A specialized council for the defense of doctoral and candidate theses was created at the institute with help of the defense of doctoral theses by R. Grigas, A. Matulionis and A. Balsis. Dissertations not only of Lithuanian sociologists, but also of other republics, including Belarus, were defended at this council. In Lithuania the institute became the base of the Baltic branch of the Soviet Sociological Association. The heads of the department were Y. Macyavichyus and A. Matulionis.
Since 1974, Lithuanian sociologists have taken an active part in the work of the World
Sociological Association. In 1982, Lithuanian sociologists initiated a specialized group to participate in the work of the World Sociological Congress in Mexico City. Many collections of reports were published for world congresses.
The professional training of sociologists was another significant step in the development of sociology in Lithuania. In 1989, the training of sociologists was started at Vilnius University and at the revived Vytautas the Great University in Kaunas.
Radical changes took place after the revival of statehood in Lithuania. After the structural and systemic changes that occurred in all spheres of social life, the need for the practice of social planning disappeared, but the need for research on social life arose.
The system of education, especially higher education, has also fundamentally changed. According to bachelor’s and master’s programs, sociologists are trained at Vilnius University, Vilnius Pedagogical University, Kaunas University of Technology and Vytautas the Great University.
Sociology has not found a place in the culture of Ukraine and Lithuania because it is by its nature a rational form of social self-awareness and can develop only as a culture of optimal understanding of socio-cultural processes.
Meanwhile, as postmodernism in its spirit gravitates towards irrational ways of spiritual mastering of the world, including social relations, that is why this culture rejects sociology as such or turns it into a multiparadigmatic social discourse, which is tantamount to the denial of social science [3, c. 89].
Non-classical sociology is the cultural form of modern sociology that it acquires in the context of postmodernism. However, postmodern culture is one of the stages of the unfolding of the general crisis of the modern culture of Ukraine and Lithuania, the way out of which is so uncertain that none of the elements of this crisis culture has more certainty in the possibility of overcoming the crisis than the whole culture in general. One of these elements of the general crisis of culture is postmodern sociology, which exists only because it publicly announces its death [2, c. 18-22].
Paradoxically, but this is a fact: sociology continues to live, simulating its death. And, nevertheless, we are dealing with the third level of the development of sociology, the cultural level, which replaces the second level, to which sociology realized its role as a form of social self-awareness.
But since this third level of the historical ascent of sociology has not yet acquired an adequate cultural form, in fact there is not a forward movement, but a backward movement, when sociology ceases to fulfill the function of universal social thinking and it barely manages to maintain its position at the first level, when sociology is recognized as a science [3 , c. 75].
It is difficult, because objectively, sociology is meant to be a scientific form of social selfawareness and thanks to this to be organically included in culture as one of its spiritual foundations. And since sociology does not fulfill its historical vocation and does not become the spiritual basis of the development of culture and society, it cannot realize itself as a science.
Thus, as some scientists think, in the eyes of the whole society sociology commits suicide, going into mildly rationalized forms of interpretation of phenomena or into their beautiful descriptiveness. These are discursive changes inherent in non-scientific forms of social consciousness: philosophy, art, morality, religion, etc. However, the scientists emphasize this scientific scandal is mostly ignored by society, as it is also prone to suicidal mood.
According to some specialist in this area of knowledge sociology itself often does not notice this, evaluating the change in its form only as an exciting transition of science into a nonclassical form, a transition that occurs in modern science in general [3, c. 91-94].
So, the essence of this transition, in which sociology becomes an element of culture, its spiritual component, remains in the shadows. Sociology is ready to accept any coloring coming from the world of culture, but does not want to openly admit its transition into the sphere of culture. Sociology in Lithuania and Ukraine considers its cultural shell only as an internal change, not considering it as one of the general parameters of modern culture, not considering it as one of the links of the development of this culture.