Sociological Research ISSN: 1061-0154 (Print) 2328-5184 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/msor20 The Axiological Grounds of Social Engineering: Prospects for the Modernization of Russian Society Vladimir Igorevich Przhilensky & Aleksandr Iur’evich Ogorodnikov To cite this article: Vladimir Igorevich Przhilensky & Aleksandr Iur’evich Ogorodnikov (2017) The Axiological Grounds of Social Engineering: Prospects for the Modernization of Russian Society, Sociological Research, 56:1, 53-66, DOI: 10.1080/10610154.2017.1338399 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10610154.2017.1338399 Published online: 07 Sep 2017. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 4 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=msor20 Download by: [Australian Catholic University] Date: 25 October 2017, At: 03:56 Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 Sociological Research, vol. 56, no. 1, 2017, pp. 53–66. © 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1061-0154 (print)/ISSN 2328-5184 (online) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10610154.2017.1338399 VLADIMIR IGOREVICH PRZHILENSKY AND ALEKSANDR IUR’EVICH OGORODNIKOV The Axiological Grounds of Social Engineering: Prospects for the Modernization of Russian Society This article analyzes the problem of the connection between values and knowledge in the social engineering process. It examines the limitations and possibilities for interference in the natural functioning of social orders in the context of the modernization of society. Using materials from sociological studies, this article looks at the cognitive and methodological potential of a model of interaction between values and knowledge and discusses an algorithm for how this model might be applied in administrative and educational practice. Our analysis of the results of the survey revealed the social determinants of Russian youth that form the value structures and models of social practices. It also revealed young people’s ideas about Russian society, paths to its modernization, English translation © 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, from the Russian text © 2016 “Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia.” “Aksiologicheskie osnovaniia sotsial’nogo inzheneringa: perspektivy modernizatsii rossiiskogo obshchestva,” Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, 2016, no. 4, pp. 65–74. Vladimir Igorevich Przhilensky is a doctor of philosophical sciences and a professor at Kutafin Moscow State Law University, Moscow, Russia. Aleksandr Iur’evich Ogorodnikov is a candidate of philosophical sciences and an expert at the Center for Strategic Studies, Kutafin Moscow State Law University, Moscow, Russia. This article was prepared as part of the project portion of the state assignment to conduct research and development under project 942 of the Ministry of Education and Science. Translated by Lucy Gunderson. 53 54 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH and mechanisms for relating terminal values to instrumental values. Finally, it shows the contradictions between individual concepts of social reality and ideas about Russia’s development. This kind of imbalance could hinder the social engineering of reality. Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 Keywords: values, social activity, social engineering of reality, subjective social participation, social order Studies on the values of Russian society give us some idea of the complicated and contradictory nature of their analysis. On the one hand, most Russians prefer a society of social justice and equality and support the value of freedom, believing that these concepts bring a purpose to life. On the other hand, they demonstrate the contradictory nature of consciousness, the dualism of worldviews, and the insurmountable boundary between reality and the ideal. “Even though there is an overall positive relationship to individualism, its implementation in practice seems unlikely to the population and even undesirable for many. It is difficult to precisely assess the role played by the unique features of consciousness (a desire not to follow the Western example and a belief in Russia’s special path) and the role played by external institutional conditions that determine the population’s selection. . .” (Mareeva, 2013, pp. 120–21). Values play a tremendous role in ensuring social engineering and maintaining institutional order. The integrity, reproduction, and self-organization of this role are based on the transfer of established models of behavior and the meanings of social participation. Values help people learn how to participate by dressing these models and meanings in a cultural form that is “native” to the individual. In this process, values are an indicator that establishes the scale of an individual’s sociality: the degree of the conscious and purposeful display of social qualities compared to the habits and influence of manipulators. For individuals and society, values act as symbols or codes that identify fundamental qualities required for society’s selforganization. The Sociology Center of Kutafin Moscow State Law University conducted a sociological survey to reveal the interrelation between the interiorization of values and the reproduction of institutional order. Data was collected from February to April 2014 from Russians aged 17 to 30. The size of the sample at each stage of the selection was large enough to obtain a statistically significant distribution characterized by qualitative and quantitative features of all the young people in each age group. The total number of people in the sample (N = 664) guaranteed sufficiently significant results, Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2017 55 since the statistical error in this case did not exceed 6 percent. Respondents ranged in age from 16 to 30. Forty-four percent were men and fifty-six percent were women. They resided in Moscow, Omsk, Novosibirsk, Stavropol, Ekaterinburg, and small towns and villages of Moscow, Sverdlovsk, Omsk, and Tyumen regions and Stavropol Krai. The sample included students in the humanities and technical specializations, as well as respondents who were employed and unemployed. The content-related part of the questionnaire consisted of three blocks of questions: the hierarchical correlation among ontological, concrete-historical, and personal (terminal and instrumental) values, a determination of the weight of the social determinants of Russian society that have an impact on the interiorization of values, and a measurement of protest activity and the nature of social activity. Since values are one of the most complicated phenomena of personal and social existence, the study of values requires the use of special projective techniques we developed to reveal the latent, poorly reflected worldview component of the ideas and orientations of young people. To ensure that the study was representative, we used two-stage quota sampling and a random sample of respondents at the final stage of the sampling’s formation and implementation. In order to determine the mechanism for how values function in the process of reconstructing the social order, we researched the typology of value structures on the basis of the interrelation between their three levels: ontological, concrete-historical, and personal. The grouping of values into terminal and instrumental was found to be insufficient for resolving these tasks. Instead, values were classified with account for their roles in society’s reproduction of them. In the context of society’s reproduction of ontological values, the concept of self-image forms and the individual’s need to realize common human qualities is actualized. The level of the objectification of social participation and the achievement of a unity of ideas about the goals of individual development and the social conditions for such development even in the unstable conditions of a crisis depends on the depth of the interiorization of these values. Concrete-historical values determine the significance of the sociocultural context of a subject’s existence and the framework and opportunities for self-actualization in social reality. The personal level, which consists of terminal and instrumental values, impacts the understanding of the singularities of an individual’s daily life as a special part of social life that creates a field for self-affirmation and the crystallization of experience and its application in practice. A correlational analysis of these three levels and the social determinants of the interiorization of values showed a change in the connection of individual values and the concrete social process controlling its Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 56 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH interiorization, depending on its rank in an individual’s value structure. Consequently, an individual’s reaction to social processes, orientation towardssupport, and reproduction or blocking of social changes depend not just on the selection of values or their interrelation. The unity of perception of social life as a field for individuals to realize their common human essence lies at the foundation of this action. Awareness of this essence takes a definite shape in personal values, where the absolute values determining the end and self-contained goal of development integrate other secondary values, for which the significance is determined by their ability to create conditions for the actualization of absolute values. It makes sense to consider the mechanism for the crystallization of values at the personal level and at the scales of social community. In the structure of identity, the stable hierarchical connections of an individual’s values make it possible to include the engineering of reality in the reproduction of social institutions or in their transformation. The absence of hierarchical connections between values results in a misalignment of the subject’s participation in social development and contributes to anomie, and, ultimately, the deterioration of institutions all the way up to their destruction. According to data from our study, the function of values in forming the subjectivity of the agent is poorly actualized. Thirteen percent of respondents felt that their activities affect all of society, 19 percent felt that they influence colleagues and their organization, while another 38 percent believe that their actions impact a wide circle of acquaintances. The majority (60 percent) stated that their actions were only important for their close circles and for people with whom they have established direct contact. The rest of space is seen as something foreign, something different. Fifteen percent of young people have a sense of the integrity and interrelation of all phenomena in the world and an aspiration to improve and develop all the qualities inherent in society. Moreover, 54 percent of young people recognize the need for freedom in making crucial decisions and selecting strategies for social participation. The institution realizes universally important functions through a single model of actions that is autonomous from the individual. These actions are perceived by individuals with varying degrees of awareness. Active joint participation by group members (a community) in institutional relations presumes that agreement and consensus have been reached. However, this agreement and consensus is only possible given the united, i.e., common, integrated value foundations of those who state that the given society has an essential basis. If the foundations are significant for everyone and, at the same time, clear to the individual, then they do not contradict individual Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2017 57 interests and needs and are perceived by subjects as corresponding to personal characteristics and relevant to the social situation. But viewing values through the prism of the objectification of individual or group ideas leaves unresolved the problem of legitimizing their functions, if the values themselves are dependent on objective social conditions and cannot be reduced to these conditions. This problem can be resolved by studying the structure of values. As we found, the totality of values is structured. Changes or a transformation in the social order may temporarily disturb this structure and lead to contradictions among its levels. However, this situation cannot be lost for long, since disturbances to the structure make integration and subjective participation in social engineering difficult, and ultimately lead to the instability of the social order. Social changes that breach the value hierarchy cannot be reproduced for long (since the process of the conscious, subjective engineering of reality is violated). A restoration of the strict hierarchical structure of values (specifically the structure and not an outdated set of values) also restores the legitimizing function of values. Social activity is one-and-a-half times higher in people who have interiorized absolute values. In this case, the nature of social activity also changes. In groups that lack absolute values, the difference in coefficients of constructive and destructive social activity amounts to 0.13, while this figure amounts to –0.24 in groups that have appropriated these values. In other words, the difference almost doubles between these two groups. Thus, the relativism of values cannot be retained over a long period of time, since this disrupts the social foundations of society. Thanks to values, social institutions maintain stability even when there are substantial changes in the social situation (political order, changes in the agents of government or economic impact, technology, information, or legal fields). By realizing the function of legitimization, values cement norms and examples of action into a single whole within the framework of the institution. This study made it possible to identify a core of social determinants affecting the process of the interiorization of values among over 70 percent of respondents. The determinants of the core characterize the ambivalence of the social mood. The core displays both uncertainty in the effectiveness of how political subsystems function and a belief in the resiliency of society. As a result, notions about society’s survival in crisis situations is not connected with certainty about one’s own well-being and personal life, which may be sacrificed for the historical process. An individual’s inability to recognize intrinsic mechanisms of social stability and development renders meaningless the individual’s social participation and inclusion in Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 58 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH decision-making procedures within the framework of institutions of civil society. Social processes appear to be a solid mass independent of citizens’ individual activities that follows sacral, unknown laws: Everything proceeds as it should regardless of the actions of any individuals. Individual, atomistic activity loses any point in the face of the scale of the pervasive attractors of social structure. The unfolding of individual strategies for life planning and their purposeful, pragmatic inclusion in generally important processes in Russian society occur more out of inertia and indifference. However, activity that is the source for universally important, sacral, timeless ideas that cannot be reduced to a pragmatic reality or concrete goals, or ideas that can encompass thoughts and will and give sense to outwardly meaningless social contradictions, have great potential. Today, in most cases young people do not find this idea in political space. A discrepancy forms between the need to actualize creative potential, the desire for consolidation and inclusion in leading creative transformations and programs, and confidence in one’s own abilities, on the one hand, and, on the other, a lack of confidence in the means for using one’s abilities, a high degree of uncertainty, the inability to predict and understand authentic trends in social transformations, and the inability to add sense to social cataclysms or to understand what an individual’s sacrifice to society actually means. Table 1 lists the most widespread concrete-historical values among young people. There was a high correlation with core determinants.1 At the level of personal values, core determinants were found to have a high correlation with the values of health (92 percent), family (89 percent), justice (80 percent), purpose of life (80 percent), social stability (73 percent), social status (65 percent), and a feeling of debt (60 percent). At the level of instrumental values, there was a correlation with resiliency (83 percent), rationalism (78 percent), sacredness (68 percent), and social orientation (65 percent). This configuration of values forms a contradictory and unstable hierarchy, which limits the ability of society to consolidate on the basis of integrated values. For example, the value of equal justice does not correlate with the values of market competition and high vertical mobility, the value of morality does not correlate with corporatism, etc. The main contradiction forms around the understanding of a person’s role in the social process. The social transformations of the past decades, the change in political course, and the high dynamics of the social order have given rise to numerous alternatives for self-definition and expanded the spectrum of identification and the selection of forms of social participation. The discourse on the formation of strategies and the JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2017 59 Table 1 Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 Concrete-Historical Values (percent of total respondents) Sphere of society Cultural Value Protection of cultural space Culture of speech Morality Accessibility of cultural values Societal Justice Corporatism Equality of status opportunities Solidarity Social mobility Individual success Political Leadership Civilizational identity Consensus of generations Law and order Social security Defensive capabilities Patriotism Territorial integrity Priority of the state over the individual Economic State regulation of business High organizational hierarchy Environment Country’s economic independence Decentralization of business Market competition Professional responsibility In the group where core determinants have a high impact In the group where core determinants have a low impact 59 59 57 50 82 76 74 68 65 61 97 85 83 72 70 67 65 56 52 81 70 70 65 61 56 46 49 48 38 40 66 63 64 57 51 47 87 74 67 52 58 52 47 46 43 59 59 62 51 50 41 35 ideology of the development of society and methods for managing it are unfolding right in front of young people’s eyes, social positions and assessments of social transformations are becoming polarized, and the relationship of social groups to changes in Russian society are 60 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH % 60 50 30 20 Trust in information Understanding of the ability to express one’s own socio-political… Awareness of respect for the individual by the state Ability to protect and stand up for one’s rights Correlation between law-making and social needs Socio-political activity Determination of a positive influence of the media on personal development Understanding of political goals Awareness of paths to professional realization Feeling of social protection Interest in political life 10 Long-term life planning Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 40 In the group where core determinants have a low impact In the group where core determinants have a high impact Figure 1. Factors of the Subjective Engineering of Social Reality. crystallizing. As a result, young people have less trust in information, assessments of the meanings of social participation are becoming more relative, and an individual’s contribution is losing its meaning against a backdrop of inconsistent criteria of social transformations (see Figure 1). This position of young people is defined by the fact that the core of their value structures is comprised of determinants of a defensive nature— protection from unforeseen changes and threats to moral principles and convictions based on historical experience. This is why young people mainly focus their attention on the agents of power that have authoritarian Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2017 61 resources and a will to make decisions that may be aimed at maintaining or changing the values integrated by society. The institutional environment is viewed as unstable and forming, where processes are completely dependent on the agents of power and are beyond the realm of the normative decisions of strong individual personalities. In this case, the criteria for productive social activity are acknowledgment of merits and achievement of a high social status. Our data show that there are substantial barriers to institutional innovations and the reproduction of successful sociocultural experience. Figure 2 shows that no less than half of the members of Russia’s younger generation are unable to find a balance between reforms and cultural continuity and reliance on experience, traditions, and fundamental Russian sociocultural values, and experience difficulty trying to connect reforms with society’s innovative development and the introduction of modern methods of social organization. Fifteen percent of young people are convinced of the need for extreme forms of social reproduction: absolute conservatism or radical reformation. An interpretation of this data raises the question of the future management of the institutional field by using the legitimized function of values to stabilize the normative order. It becomes tempting to take on social technologies of total social reconstruction and neutralize any contradictions revealed. As the study shows, the growing (up to 15 percent) latent potential of an individual’s destructive social activity when the individual has little involvement in social reproduction creates substantial risks for the projected and planned development of society. So, to what extent are there grounds for using social technologies and on what scale should they be used? Social technologies are written about with much less frequency and much greater care than two decades ago, to say nothing of the Soviet past, when questions of applying a technological approach to managing society and, more importantly, to transforming it, appeared to be a promising way to achieve the stated social ideal. Social technologies or social engineering appeared to be an auspicious sphere for developing knowledge (Reznik, 1994, p. 88). However, today it is more and more problematic to see a special sphere of sociological knowledge in social technology, to say nothing of applying the results of these studies in practice. After all, we cannot call social engineering the application of results of the theoretical generalization of empirical data when compiling recommendations for government and business officials and managers. In contemporary literature, a discussion of social engineering is connected with the specific nature of the period the country is experiencing, -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0 0.20 0.40 0.60 Mercantilism Institutionality Protectionism Figure 2. Social Determinants * Institutionality. Core Liberalism Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 62 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2017 63 when a quarter century of research and disappointments has forced Russian scholars to reread what K. Popper, one of the leading theoreticians in this area, wrote, as well as an article on social engineering written by V.A. Kolpakov and V.G. Fedotova that defends the idea that many of our misfortunes and failures are a result of the selection of the revolutionary model of modernization by policymakers. The methodological basis of this model was so-called utopian social engineering (Kolpakov and Fedotova, 2013, p. 64). K. Popper’s main idea about social engineering is formulated as the distinction between its two types—utopian and piecemeal. Piecemeal, gradual, consequential—these are the adjectives that the founder of critical rationalism uses to characterize the non-utopian type of social engineering. The main difference between piecemeal and utopian engineering is the refusal to reorganize society according to a certain plan in order to improve certain of its parts and elements. This is a fundamental difference, since utopian engineering can lead to amplified human suffering, while piecemeal social engineering is aimed exclusively at reducing this suffering (Popper, 1992, p. 200). From the methodological standpoint, here continental holism and rationalism are sacrificed to the English-language traditions of nominalism and empiricism. Empirical induction and even pragmatic abduction are becoming the standards for social engineering by casting aside pretenses of Cartesian deduction. V.A. Kolpakov’s and V.G. Fedotova’s argument is convincing. In substance, it signifies a choice in favor of the political, economic, and sociocultural traditions of the English-speaking world Indeed, why not make use of experience that has so much to recommend for itself in the sphere of the enforcement of the law, where case law has successfully held society back from revolutionary experiments. Popper’s anti-Platonism combines with the principles of a cautious and caring attitude toward the existing social order, which is better improved than changed. In the choice between priorities, stability is more important than efficiency or justice. Here it should be noted that it is only possible to call post-Soviet methods of reforming utopian social engineering with a number of stipulations. It is one thing to build a communist society, but an entirely different thing to try to copy contemporary Western society. But if we follow K. Popper’s logic, only the singular needs to be changed and then the universal will change. It is specifically this type of social engineering that is appropriate, whether it refers to reforming the economy or modernizing education and science. N.I. Lapin stands with these ideas. He proposes a strategy of Russia’s piecemeal modernization based on the principles of non-utopian social engineering. Moreover, focus is placed on the modernization of Russian Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 64 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH regions controlled by the state as a top priority. “In contemporary society,” he writes, “the accomplishment of modernization presumes targeted action from the state and other political forces in society. The spontaneous development of modernization and a lagging, a slowing down of changes to its institutional-regulatory and sociocultural components is frequently accompanied by revolutionary upheaval” (Lapin, 2014, p. 14). However, the author himself states with disappointment that modernization programs are developed by bureaucrats. These programs generally come down to a selection of orders, which is the source of the corresponding effectiveness. The Swedish economist G. Myrdal has devoted some thought to the fact that social engineering is the key to the planned development of society and to improvements in its structure and institutions. The problems of economic development in post-war America prompted him to view social engineering as a necessary and effective means of preventing a new depression in the economy and industry. As he noted, “We are now in a deeply unbalanced world situation. Many human relations will be readjusted in the present world revolution. . .. As always in a revolutionary situation when society’s moorings are temporarily loosened, there is, on the one hand, an opportunity to direct the changes into organized reforms and, on the other hand, a corresponding risk involved in letting the changes remain uncontrolled and lead into disorganization. To do nothing is to accept defeat. From the point of view of social science, this means, among other things, that social engineering will increasingly be demanded” (Myrdal, 1944, pp. 1022–23). G. Myrdal recognizes that social engineering is not capable of determining the direction of the changes that occur because of it: These changes are in the sphere of values. In this we see the obvious influence of the methodological ideas of positivism and functionalism in relation to the separation of the theoretical and the practical in sociology. This looks somewhat naive today, but it is still entirely productive. G. Myrdal formulates the problem quite clearly: For social engineering, values must be joined with sociological knowledge that is free from judgement. But before including values or judgements in the structure and content of social engineering programs, they must be appropriately prepared, reformulated, and decrypted. Generally, this refers to the in-depth interpretation of meaning and sense, which may be derived from value preferences and beliefs. “The relations established in theoretical research are simply causal. In practical research the causal relations are transposed into purposeful relations. The sequence in theoretical research—from cause to effect—is in social engineering turned into the reverse order from ends to means. In practical research the causal relations established by theoretical research are taken as facts” (Myrdal, 1944, p. 1059). Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2017 65 And here the question arises of how ready society and, accordingly, social engineers (policymakers, sociologists, experts) are to connect values with the most objective theoretical and empirical knowledge in order to build a program using social technology on their foundation. Of no less significance is the search for the answer—and the extent to which the concepts of humanism, patriotism, collectivism, individualism, freedom, and justice are operationalized. In sum, we can conclude that the potential for social activity in contemporary Russian society is insufficient for systematic transformations, innovative development, and the reorganization of society. In our opinion, in the next five years no more than one-quarter of young people will become involved in the social engineering of Russian society as agents at their own initiative. One of the positive conclusions of our study is the institutional nature of social activity among young people. We found that young people aspire to changes and that these aspirations will only grow in the coming years, unlike in the past decade. Moreover, we can predict that young people’s desire to realize their social activity will occur in creative forms that do not break down existing institutional boundaries. The important conclusions are as follows. First of all, ontological values encourage the formation of an entire system of values. It is only when deeply interiorized ontological values and an ontological consciousness are present that stable and consistent productive social activity that encourages the achievement of an individual’s high spiritual development, the continual reproduction of moral principles, and objectively necessary institutional norms and subjective engineering of the institutional order is possible. Second, the effective functioning of ontological values is possible only for a developed individual who is capable through his own social participation of consciously participating in managing social affairs and furthering the progress of institutional relations. This, then, refutes the thesis on how useful the subjective participation of all citizens and the involvement of each person in making political decisions are for society. Only a few are capable of this, and their share among young people amounts to 15 percent, which reaches the highest level of correspondence between stated and actualized values. Third, the crystallization and realization of personal and social values in society is limited, and there are objective grounds for this. These grounds include the external environment (nature, culture, etc.), trends in the development of society and its needs, the power structure, economic and professional labor relations, the development of technology, and so forth. Restrictions may originate with the individual himself due to contradictions between the individual and his social surroundings. Upon encountering Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:56 25 October 2017 66 SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH social restrictions, the individual approaches the problem of perceiving the essential grounds of social order. Separating essential and external restrictions helps the individual determine his own targeted, subjective, and responsible participation in engineering social reality: norms, relationships, structures, models of actions, roles, etc. Thus, by realizing values within the framework of a social role, the individual is capable of determining which actions reproduce the norms and relationships necessary for a social institution, which actions support or develop this institution, and which actions threaten institutional frameworks. The individual possesses criteria for assessing phenomena that hinder or encourage the existence and development of the institution. Subjectivity and the conscious engineering of institutional relationships are manifested in this participation. Herein lies the personal aspect of the realization of values in the process of social engineering. Therefore, G. Myrdal’s formula will not work in Russia in terms of social planning or in terms of social engineering. We do not have a ready set of values that cannot be varied by social determinants or collective purposefulness. Society represents a communicative process during which new goals and values form and previous ones undergo a critical rethinking that sets the possibilities and limitations of social engineering. Note 1. The high coefficient of correlation shows the impact of social determinants on the actualization of these values. References Kolpakov, V.A., and V.G. Fedotova. 2013. “Tekhnologiia postepennykh sotsial’nykh preobrazovanii ili sotsial’noi inzhenerii K. Poppera.” Epistemologiia i filosofiia nauki, no. 4, pp. 62–71. Lapin, N.I. 2014. “Problemy formirovaniia kontseptsii i chelovecheskikh izmerenii strategii poetanpnoi modernizatsii Rossii i ee regionov.” Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, no. 7, pp. 8–19. Mareeva, S.V. 2013. “Dinamika norm i tsennostei rossiian,” Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, no. 7, pp. 120–21. Myrdal, G. 1944. An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. New York: Harper & Row. Popper, K. 1992. Otkrytoe obshchestvo i ego vragi, t. 2. Moscow: Feniks. Reznik, Iu.M. 1994. “Sotsial’naia inzheneriia: predmetnaia oblast’ i granitsy primeneniia.” Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, no. 2, pp. 87–96.