The article considers two main subjects: the author’s perception of sociality and the results of his research of formation and three main stages (Antiquity, Middle Ages, Modern Age) of development of the European sociality. The understanding of sociality is set by means of the characteristic of the sociological approach where four main specific features are distinguished. The first one is an axiological representation of sociality (fairly/unfairly, compliance/non-compliance with an ideal reference) and focus on alteration or improvement of sociality. The second one is the analysis of mass behaviour and social order. The third one is studying of sociality, since ancient culture; nature of sociality and revealing its laws. A dilemma is formulated: what studies or, more precisely, has to study the sociology – modernity or postmodernity? The fourth one is that sociology considers sociality as a modernity phenomenon, i.e. studies mass behaviour of people as such, beyond historical and cultural context. Stating the results of studying of formation and development of the first stages of the European sociality, the author distinguishes protosociality by which he means the previous state and prerequisites of sociality where there were no specific forms of its understanding yet and sociality as such. The author considers characteristics of three main types of sociality: antique one, presuming decision-making by free citizens within a city-state; imperial one, subordinating polis sociality to the centralized emperor management, and medieval one, fancifully combining these two types of sociality. The article raises the issue of the interrelation of social studying and social action. Today, it is not a matter of social laws, but of nonlinear processes which are described with the use of a system approach and synergetic. A social engineer relies in this case on knowledge gained during studying sociality, on the reconstruction of the specific history of sociality, modern social trends. The author sets a task to characterize the relations between such aspects of sociality as economy, state, society, power, masses, culture. He demonstrates that sociality may be presented as consisting of three spheres. In the first one, three main subsystems are distinguished: state, society, and economy, the constituting element being the state. In the second sphere (anthropological one) the author identifies a new European personality, communities, masses, as well as society, but in this case, understood in the anthropological plan. Persons and communities in the anthropological sphere function as a rule in two modes – standard and parasitic ones (rent income, misuse of social structures, etc.). In the third sphere covering two others, sociality is considered in a population context. The point is that the state and the society are not unique, there are a lot of them, and they engage in the various relationship (fight for the territory and resources, competition, assistance to each other, various exchanges, etc.). The author identifies and characterizes the main processes of sociality: globalization and modernization, implementation of social schemes and concepts, “post” and “counter” processes, processes of setting and resolving problems (“challenges” and “responses” thereto). In the last part of the work, the author suggests his reconstruction of the specific history of sociality, as well as social trends of our age.
The Influence of Intellectual Intelligence and Learning Motivation Against Student’s Mathematics Learning Outcomes In Region 3 Kelurahan Pegadungan Jakarta Barat
