No 1 (2025)

The article explores the society of trauma concept by Zh. T. Toshchenko with reference to specific sociological and psychological research of recent years. The proposed reflections immerse it in the context of socio-philosophical and existential-literary discourse showing the historical importance of studying trauma in social sciences and humanities, as well as for understanding modern social processes. Scientific discourse integrates cultural forms of understanding traumatic events. It works in an interdisciplinary field, predicts risks and negative consequences of social development, and develops ways to overcome them. Thus, it manifests and implements critical and heuristic functions of scientific knowledge. The civilizational meaning of the phenomenon of the society of trauma is emphasized. It addresses the understanding of cultural gaps, radical changes in the activities of social institutions, sharp fluctuations of the lifeworld. Traumatization as a social phenomenon is associated with violations of the continuity in socio-cultural development, its purposefulness and controllability. It generates a long-term negative trace in relation to the socio-psychological well-being of the population. It also causes experienced instability, uncertainty of existence, and a crisis of wellness. In this regard, the article compares the data of different studies to exhibit the features and dynamics of the subjective response to trauma.The analysis carried out in the context of the society of trauma concept indicates a pronounced ambivalence of the public consciousness in modern Russia with its orientation towards a search for stable foundations of a civilized identity. The existing contradictions draw attention to the importance of integrating various parts of public consciousness to avoid new rounds in collective traumatizations.

The article, which could not avoid few elements of memories, was intended to outline the path of Zh. T. Toshchenko in the academic profession as climbing the eight–thousandth peak to membership in the Academy of Sciences of Russia – war, school, university, two dissertations, etc. For almost 20 years, the Academy of Social Sciences of the Central Committee of the CPSU became his main place of work, where he was entrusted first with the creation of a department, and eventually a Center for sociological research and sociologists’ training. Considerable attention is paid to characterizing the environment and contexts of his activies. One of the sections of the article is devoted to the characteristics of Zh. T. Toschenko as a leader of research teams. Yet, the central topic of the article is Toshchenko’s contribution to important sections of sociological knowledge, to formation of a considerable group of his followers, and more and more new research in key issues of social and sociological knowledge, the preparation of scientific monographs, election to the Academy and conquering thus heights of theoretical sociology in the form of offering to the scholarly community a “grand”, or general, sociological theory, ripe by the early 1990s, the “sociology of life” theory.

The article presents an analysis of the research of agricultural scientists, primarily sociologists, on the state of the social living space in the village over the past decade. The article examines the trends in the self-development of the Russian village and the participation of domestic sociologists in their comprehension. The main idea of considering the development of the agricultural sphere is the recognition of the need for a more fundamental connection: social through economics, economics through social. However, there are still gaps in this: the main participants in the production of agricultural products – skilled physical workers – are not included in collaboration with management in the creative development of innovations and do not have participatory functions. Opportunities for upward mobility and career growth are practically nonexistent for them. The article analyzes innovative concepts, methodological approaches of researchers from the main sociological centers of the country, taking into account an increasingly complex social reality and changes in science itself. The authors offer their own views on the fullness with which sociological thought covers and explain the objective contradictions of the modernization of economic and social and cultural connections and relations in the life of the Russian village at the beginning of the 21st century, as well as the ways of its entry onto the trajectory of movement towards a new level of development. Research of rural realities in their dynamics shows that, despite high economic achievements of the agricultural sector as a whole, the level of income of rural residents remained lower than in the city throughout the post-reform period. Self-employment of rural families is limited by the actions of large and super-large agricultural enterprises. The land concentration in rural families increases the high unemployment. Modernization in the village, displacing excess workers, is not correlated with the creation of new jobs. In this regard, the article shows positive practices described in sociological publications. The main attention is paid to those studies in which these problems are solved in a comprehensive manner. The problem of rural population reproduction is becoming especially urgent. Both material and non-material factors influence the choice of life plans by rural youth. Research shows that rural residents, rooted in the rural way of life and engaged in agricultural production, more often than others orient their children towards work in small-scale agricultural production and living in rural areas. An examination of real subgroups within rural society shows that each of the identified groups is defined in the social and structural sense by a specific combination of features. An employee of an agricultural organization and his colleague, who terminated the employment relationship and became the owner of a commercial private farm perform similar labor operations, but are representatives of different social groups. The actual problems to be solved by organizations responsible for the life of the Russian countryside are related to overcoming the uneven availability of channels for ensuring the economic and social well-being of the rural population. Understanding ways to improve the functioning of the agro-industrial complex and rural life is an interdisciplinary task, relevant for research by economists, geographers, historians, psychologists, and social doctors. But despite the differences in theoretical approaches and methodological features, most scientists agree on one thing: Russian village faces challenges that actualize the need for transition to a new development paradigm.

The article offers a brief excursion into the history of the of global environmental sociology and its formation in Russia. The reasons for its emergence as a separate discipline and the key approaches that form its core are described: the New Ecological Paradigm, eco-Marxism, concepts of socio-ecological metabolism, ecological and reflexive modernization, sustainable and noospheric development, etc. It is concluded that conditions for the development of Soviet and then Russian environmental sociology differed significantly from American and European cases by the presence of such barriers as the lacking interdisciplinary and international connections between scholars, scientific reflection, open information on the state of the environment, etc. Nevertheless, theoretical background, developments of domestic scientists, albeit in a truncated form, made it possible to foster the same research areas within the discipline as in the West, namely: interaction of nature and society, environmental consciousness, environmental movements, political economy, technological risks. In conclusion, an analysis of the reasons for the lag of Russian environmental sociology behind global trends and some prospects for its development are offered.

The paper is based on the analysis of works focusing on Russian identity and reveals conceptual framework and tendencies in the dynamics of research: the predomination of holistic approach to the scientific analysis, as well as its vertical (top-down) development strategy. Only a small number of works is devoted to personality problems connected with self-identification. Some contradictions have been found between statements about positive dynamics of all-Russian identity and the data on the growth of anxiety and mistrust, or misalignment of mass behaviour with claimed values). The research, conducted in terms of social stability of a macrosystem, enabled to draw some conclusions about prospects of this type of identity for preserving the integrity of the country. “Consolidation” can only be achieved in the short term in such a way. In the long term, this strategy may reproduce an unstable type of identity that only assumes formal recognition of the state as “one’s own”. Suppression of the subjective principle in identity choice makes this strategy prospectless: it may form an explosive “counter-identity” that threatens to cancel itself. A particular problem is that national identity is substantively connected with the state so there appears the danger of disintegration in case of a deep crisis. Theoretically, identity is interpreted as a social relation, and its study demands not only the use of social surveys, but also the analysis of the social structures dynamics.

This study investigates the construction of collective memory through social media platforms by examining red tourism advertising in Chinese social media (2018–2023). Through multimodal analysis of 237 advertising materials, the author explores how digital platforms transform traditional mechanisms of historical memory transmission. The study employs an integrated methodological framework combining multimodal discourse analysis with user reception studies to examine how different semiotic resources interact in digital memory construction. The findings demonstrate that integrating of textual, visual, and audial modalities in social media creates an effective environment to transmit and internalize historical experiences. Analysis reveals how multimodal discourse in social platforms fosters new memory ecology, where the converging semiotic resources enable deeper assimilation of collective experiences. User reception analysis confirms that multimodal content organization, combining rational comprehension with emotional engagement, significantly enhances mnemonic identification processes. This paper contributes to understanding how digital platforms are transforming collective memory construction, offering insights into the potential of multimodal discourse in social media for preserving and transmitting historical heritage in the digital age. The findings advance theoretical perspectives on digital memory studies while demonstrating how traditional historical narratives may be effectively adapted to modern communication formats.

The ethical dimensions of sociology encompass both the principles of scientific ethos in the empirical domain and the examination of moral foundations underlying sociological theories. The philosophical underpinnings of sociological concepts significantly shape their ethical implications. A key outcome of sociologists’ rejection of metaphysical approaches (notably Christian traditions) in favor of scientific rigor and emphasis on the biological nature of humans and society has been a departure from the principle of equality in spiritual worth, leading to moral relativism and the potential endorsement of the superiority of certain individuals over others based on natural attributes. This raises a critical question: is it possible for sociology to develop independently of moral considerations? In conclusion, it is emphasized that sociology, while maintaining scientific objectivity, should remain a humanistically oriented discipline, fostering the protection of vulnerable social groups and promoting overall societal well-being.

This review presents a critical evaluation of the methodological techniques used by the authors to summarize differing measurements of public opinion and expert opinion on the Russians’ attitudes to special operation. It is necessary to apply correct formulations of questions to study the attitude of the population towards a military conflict. Analytical conclusions of V. B. Zvonovsky and A. V. Khodykin are based on methodological and research triangulation. In their work, the authors apply techniques to reduce the sensitivity of survey instruments, assess the representativeness of the surveys conducted in Russia, and compare the results of different research companies. Attention is focused on tools and analytical techniques that deserve attention in a situation of state censorship and self-control over the safety of researchers. It is emphasized that the transparency of methodological procedures protects against manipulation of sociological information. The access to objective information about public attitudes and social tension in global transformations remains an acute issue for students.