Alienation in the Encyclopedic Dictionary:
Alienation - in civil law - the transfer of property into the ownership of another person. one of the ways the owner exercises the right to dispose of his property. There is a distinction between alienation (purchase and sale) and gratuitous alienation (donation).
designation of a social process in which human activity and its results turn into an independent force that dominates and is hostile to it. It is expressed in the lack of control over the conditions, means and product of labor, in the transformation of the individual into an object of manipulation by dominant social groups. Alienation also receives a certain reflection in the consciousness of the individual (the perception of social norms as alien and hostile, a feeling of loneliness, apathy, etc.). The concepts of alienation go back to T. Hobbes, J. J. Rousseau, they were developed by G. W. F. Hegel, K. Marx. In philosophy, sociology and social psychology of the 20th century. individual aspects of alienation were studied.
Meaning of the word Alienation according to the Financial Dictionary:
Alienation is in civil law the transfer of property into the ownership of another person. one of the ways the owner exercises the right to dispose of his property. ALIENATION differs between paid (purchase and sale) and gratuitous (donation). It is carried out mainly at the will of the owner on the basis of an agreement concluded by him with the purchaser of the property. In cases provided for by law, ALSO is carried out against the will of the owner (i.e., forcibly).
Alienation of property of a minor
In this case, the alienation of property is operations also carried out in accordance with the requirements of Art. 26, 28 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which determine the degree of legal capacity of minors depending on their age category.
Note! Transactions with the property of persons under 14 years of age are carried out only by their parents, adoptive parents or guardians (clause 1 of Article 28 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), with the exception of small household transactions.
Important! Transactions by minors over 14 years of age are made with the written consent of their legal representatives (Clause 1 of Article 26 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), with the exception of cases regulated by law.
Source: RusLawyer
Definition of the word “Alienation” according to TSB:
Alienation is an objective social process inherent in a class-antagonistic society and characterized by the transformation of human activity and its results into an independent force that dominates and is hostile to it. The origins of O. are in the antagonistic division of labor and private property. O. is expressed in the dominance of materialized labor over living labor, in the transformation of the individual into an object of exploitation and manipulation by dominant social groups and classes, and in the lack of control over the conditions, means, and product of labor. O. is a historically transitory form of a person’s objectification of his abilities and is associated with the reification and fetishization of social relations. O. also receives a certain psychological expression in the consciousness of the individual (the gap between a person’s expectations, desires and the norms prescribed by the antagonistic social order, the perception of these norms as alien and hostile to the individual, a feeling of isolation, loneliness, the destruction of norms of behavior, etc.). In O., the contradiction between the individual and social institutions, common to all class-antagonistic societies, is complemented by a specific perception of the social and cultural world as alien and hostile to the individual. This is especially aggravated with the emergence of bourgeois relations, which led to the collapse of traditional patriarchal social ties, where the individual is dissolved in the social whole, and to the formation of Individualism, with its characteristic contrast between the individual and social institutions. O.'s processes were interpreted in the history of social thought primarily in line with the romantic criticism of capitalism. Social contract theorists (T. Hobbes, J. J. Rousseau and others), interpreting the emergence of society as an act of a person transferring his rights to a political body, saw in this the source of man’s enslavement, his loss of his original freedom. F. Schiller, stating the internal fragmentation of modern man, views it as a consequence of the division of labor and sees in the aesthetic sphere a path to restoring lost integrity. This line of aesthetic criticism of bourgeois society and the art associated with it was developed by German and French Romanticism, which contrasted the world of art with the ideal of an integral patriarchal communal life. The category O. is one of the central ones in Hegel’s philosophy. It is a way of constructing his philosophical system: nature and history are the essence of objectification, the O. of the absolute spirit. In addition, the category of O. characterizes Hegel’s specific attitude to the reality he created in the conditions of a bourgeois legal society. In “Phenomenology of Spirit”, analyzing bourgeois society - the world of “spirit alienated from itself”, Hegel notes that reality appears here for the individual as “... something directly alienated...”. self-consciousness “... creates its own world and treats it as some alien world, so that from now on it must take possession of it” (Soch., vol. 4, M., 1959, pp. 264, 263). Real O. is interpreted by Hegel as the O. of the spirit, and overcoming O. - as a theoretical awareness of the untruth of O. This is the “uncritical positivism” of Hegel, which was noted by K. Marx. Hegel does not distinguish between objectification and O.; he identifies O. with the objectification of human abilities. L. Feuerbach, in his criticism of Hegel, gives an anthropological interpretation of O. Considering religion as the O. objective-sensual essence of man, he sees the reasons for this O. in psychological states - a feeling of dependence, fear, etc. The sensual nature of man is interpreted by him as “ inalienable” foundation of human life and is contrasted with the untrue world of O. - idealism, theology, etc. This line of opposition between the “true” and “untrue” state, the world of O. and love is even more intensified among the Young Hegelians (B. Bauer, M. Hess ), from various petty-bourgeois ideologists of the 40s-50s. 19th century (P. J. Proudhon, M. Stirner, etc.). The Marxist understanding of philosophy was formed in polemics with both the objective-idealistic concept of philosophy and its anthropological and psychological interpretation. Criticizing the romantic-utopian, moralistic ideas about philosophy, the founders of Marxism contrasted this with a view of philosophy as an objective social process. As the materialistic understanding of history developed, the understanding of philosophy deepened. From the analysis of philosophy in the sphere of spiritual life (religion, idealistic philosophy), K. Marx and F. Engels moved on to the study of philosophy in political life (bureaucracy, the role of the state), and then to understanding the processes of accounting in the economic sphere. In the works of the early 1840s. The problem of alienated labor is analyzed: the identity of the worker from the process and results of labor, the worker’s identity from his generic, social essence, and, finally, the worker’s identity from himself. If in these works Marx and Engels still derived economics from the worker’s relationship to his work, then already in The German Ideology (1845-46) and especially in Marx’s economic works of the 1860s-70s. The sources of O. are profound socio-economic changes—the capitalist division of labor, the spontaneous nature of aggregate social activity in conditions of antagonistic formations, the dominance of private property and commodity-money relations, the transformation of labor into a means of subsistence, partial social functions into the lifelong vocation of certain individuals, layers, classes. The analysis of O. was based on a scientific foundation—the economic theory of Marxism and the doctrine of commodity fetishism. The works of Marx and Engels reveal the following main points of labor in a capitalist society: 1) Human activity itself, which emerges from the labor process impoverished and devastated, “... alienation of the content of labor in relation to the worker himself...” (K. Marx, see Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 46, part 1, p. 440). 2) O. working conditions from the work itself. “... Objective conditions of labor are acquiring increasingly colossal independence in relation to living labor, independence expressed in their very size... social wealth in ever more powerful accumulations confronts labor as an alien and dominant force” (ibid., part 2, p. . 346-47). The worker is confronted in an alienated form as capital not only by the material but also by the intellectual conditions of his labor. This is especially obvious in the philosophy of production management and in the science of worker science. “Science appears as an alien force, hostile to labor and dominating it...” (ibid., vol. 47, p. 555). 3) O. results of labor from the hired worker, leading to the fact that “... the wealth created by him is opposed as alien wealth, his own productive power - as the productive power of his product, his enrichment - as self-impoverishment, his social power - as the power of society, ruling over him” (ibid., vol. 26, part 3, p. 268). 4) Alienation of social institutions and the norms prescribed by them from workers. Thus, in the state, the common interest “... takes an independent form, divorced from real—both individual and joint—interests, and at the same time the form of an illusory community” (ibid., vol. 3, p. 32). In the process of historical development, the orientation of the exploitative state from actual individuals deepens, social institutions turn into bureaucratic systems built on a hierarchical principle. 5) The gap between the values preached by the official ideology and the real opportunities provided by society. The impact of ideology on life leads to the fact that it forms a level of claims, desires and expectations among members of society that does not correspond to the actual capabilities of society. Thus, the ideological values proclaimed by bourgeois society: freedom, equality, enterprise - increasingly came into conflict with the real life of bourgeois society, with its economic inequality and exploitation. O. also characterizes the spiritual life of a class society, specific forms of ideological O. are formed (from religion to authoritarian ideologies), and within the culture itself the gap between “mass culture” and the culture of the elite deepens. The understanding of labor as a social phenomenon was further concretized in the doctrine of the absolute and relative impoverishment of the working class, of exploitation as a “real manifestation” of labor (see K. Marx, in the book: K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, 2nd ed., vol. 26, part 3, p. 520), in the Marxist interpretation of social institutions and personality. A sharp ideological struggle unfolded around the Marxist concept of philosophy, the most characteristic features of which are: the opposition of the young, “humanistic” Marx, who analyzed the problems of philosophy, with the mature Marx, who allegedly took a non-humanistic, scientistic (see Scientism) position. interpretation of Marxism as a type of irrationalist anthropology and its rapprochement with existentialism. theological interpretation of O., identifying O. with the Fall. Attacking the practice of socialist construction, right-wing and “left-wing” revisionists (R. Garaudy, E. Fischer, and others) argue that socialism strengthens the ownership of the individual and creates new forms of ownership related to public property and the role of the state under socialism . Criticizing the bourgeois and revisionist concepts of philosophy, Marxists in various countries emphasize that socialism destroys the root sources of culture and that the leading tendency of socialism is to overcome poverty, which is carried out in full and final measure along with the building of communism. The general ways to overcome poverty, identified in the theory of scientific communism, consist in the abolition of exploitation, the comprehensive development of social wealth and socialist social relations, in overcoming the opposition between mental and physical labor, city and countryside, in the development of communist consciousness, democratization of management and all public life socialist and communist society. The specific ways and methods of overcoming poverty and the pace of this process depend on the specific characteristics of the countries building a new society, on the level of their development, and on the consciousness of the working class of these countries. The position of Marxism, which emphasizes the socio-historical, transitory nature of O., is opposed to the positions of modern bourgeois ideologists who see in O. an eternal characteristic of human life. Common features of the understanding of O. in modern bourgeois philosophy and sociology are anti-historicism, psychologism in the interpretation of the causes of O., and the transformation of O. into an essential characteristic of human existence. Considering many phenomena of O. from the standpoint of O. itself as irreducible moments of social life in general, bourgeois philosophers inevitably come to a tragic perception of the history of society and culture. Already G. Simmel saw the “tragedy of culture” in the contradiction between the creative process and objectified forms of culture. The description of O. in the philosophy and fiction of Existentialism is painted in tragic tones. In bourgeois sociology of the 20th century. a number of aspects of the problem of O. were analyzed (without using the term “O.”) in connection with the problem of bureaucracy (K. Mannheim, M. Weber - Germany), social anomie (E. Durkheim - France, R. Merton - USA). In the 1960s In connection with the strengthening of romantic criticism of capitalism, interest in the category of O. as a way of analyzing bourgeois society has revived. This found its expression in the ideology of the so-called “new left” (G. Marcuse - USA, etc.). Many representatives of bourgeois sociology interpret O. as the only possible way of organizing human relations, contrasting it with “small” and “informal” groups deprived of O. In modern American sociology, attempts are being made to empirically study O. M. Seaman proposed 5 criteria for the empirical interpretation of O. (lack of power, loss of meaning in one’s work, lack of norms, isolation, self-alienation), which became a program of sociological research (R. Blauner and others). However, in general, the analysis of real. social conditions and causes O. is replaced in bourgeois philosophy and sociology by a description of the consciousness and psychology of the individual living in the world of O. Lit.: K. Marx and F. Engels, From early works, M., 1956. them, Capital, Op. , 2nd ed., vol. 23-25. Lenin V.I., State and Revolution, Complete. collection cit., 5th ed., vol. 33. Davydov Yu. N., Labor and Freedom, M., 1962. Ogurtsov A. P., Alienation and Man. Historical and philosophical essay, in the collection: Man, creativity, science, M., 1967. “Capital” of Marx, philosophy and modernity, M., 1968. Oizerman T.I., The problem of alienation and the bourgeois legend of Marxism, M., 1965. Alienation: the cultural climate of our time, ed. G. Sykes, N.Y., 1964. Alienation: a casebook, ed. DJ Burrows, FR Lapides, NY, 1969. Geyer RF, Bibliography alienation, 2 ed., Amst., 1972. A. P. Ogurtsov.
Alienation
The meaning of the word Alienation according to Efremova: Alienation - 1. The process of action according to the meaning. verb: alienate (2*1a1), alienate. 2. Termination of intimacy, close relationships between someone; alienation.
Alienation in the Encyclopedic Dictionary: Alienation - in civil law - transfer of property into the ownership of another person; one of the ways the owner exercises the right to dispose of his property. Alienation differs
compensated (purchase and sale) and gratuitous (donation).
designation of a social process in which human activity and its results turn into an independent force that dominates and is hostile to it.
It is expressed in the lack of control over the conditions, means and product of labor, in the transformation of the individual into an object of manipulation by dominant social groups. Alienation also receives a certain reflection in the consciousness of the individual (the perception of social norms as alien and hostile, a feeling of loneliness, apathy, etc.). The concepts of alienation go back to T. Hobbes, J. J. Rousseau, they were developed by G. W. F. Hegel, K. Marx. In philosophy, sociology and social psychology of the 20th century. individual aspects of alienation were studied. The meaning of the word Alienation according to the Financial Dictionary: Alienation is in civil law the transfer of property into the ownership of another person; one of the ways the owner exercises the right to dispose of his property. ALIENATION VARIES
compensated (purchase and sale) and gratuitous (donation).
It is carried out mainly at the will of the owner on the basis of an agreement concluded by him with the purchaser of the property. In cases provided for by law, ALSO
is carried out against the will of the owner (i.e., forcibly).
The meaning of the word Alienation according to Ushakov’s dictionary: ALIENATION
alienation, plural
no, cf. 1. Action according to verb. alienate-alienate (official). Confiscation means the alienation
of property without compensation.
Lenin. 2. Termination of intimacy between someone, distance (book). Mutual alienation.
Right-of-way (RW) - a section of a certain width along a railway line that is under the jurisdiction of the railway.
The meaning of the word Alienation according to the Brockhaus and Efron dictionary: Alienation
(legal) - see Expropriation.
Definition of the word “Alienation” according to TSB: Alienation
- an objective social process inherent in a class-antagonistic society and characterized by the transformation of human activity and its results into an independent force that dominates and is hostile to it. The origins of O. are in the antagonistic division of labor and private property. O. is expressed in the dominance of materialized labor over living labor, in the transformation of the individual into an object of exploitation and manipulation by dominant social groups and classes, and in the lack of control over the conditions, means, and product of labor. O. is a historically transitory form of a person’s objectification of his abilities and is associated with the reification and fetishization of social relations. O. also receives a certain psychological expression in the consciousness of the individual (the gap between a person’s expectations, desires and the norms prescribed by the antagonistic social order, the perception of these norms as alien and hostile to the individual, a feeling of isolation, loneliness, the destruction of norms of behavior, etc.). In O., the contradiction between the individual and social institutions, common to all class-antagonistic societies, is complemented by a specific perception of the social and cultural world as alien and hostile to the individual. This is especially aggravated with the emergence of bourgeois relations, which led to the collapse of traditional patriarchal social ties, where the individual is dissolved in the social whole, and to the formation of Individualism, with its characteristic contrast between the individual and social institutions. O.'s processes were interpreted in the history of social thought primarily in line with the romantic criticism of capitalism. Social contract theorists (T. Hobbes, J. J. Rousseau and others), interpreting the emergence of society as an act of a person transferring his rights to a political body, saw in this the source of man’s enslavement, his loss of his original freedom. F. Schiller, stating the internal fragmentation of modern man, views it as a consequence of the division of labor and sees in the aesthetic sphere a path to restoring lost integrity. This line of aesthetic criticism of bourgeois society and the art associated with it was developed by German and French Romanticism, which contrasted the world of art with the ideal of an integral patriarchal communal life. The category O. is one of the central ones in Hegel’s philosophy. It is a way of constructing his philosophical system: nature and history are the essence of objectification, the O. of the absolute spirit. In addition, the category of O. characterizes Hegel’s specific attitude to the reality he created in the conditions of a bourgeois legal society. In “Phenomenology of Spirit”, analyzing bourgeois society - the world of “spirit alienated from itself”, Hegel notes that reality appears here for the individual as “... something directly alienated...”; self-consciousness “... creates its own world and treats it as some alien world, so that from now on it must take possession of it” (Soch., vol. 4, M., 1959, pp. 264, 263). Real O. is interpreted by Hegel as the O. of the spirit, and overcoming O. - as a theoretical awareness of the untruth of O. This is the “uncritical positivism” of Hegel, which was noted by K. Marx; Hegel does not distinguish between objectification and O.; he identifies O. with the objectification of human abilities. L. Feuerbach, in his criticism of Hegel, gives an anthropological interpretation of O. Considering religion as the O. objective-sensual essence of man, he sees the reasons for this O. in psychological states - a feeling of dependence, fear, etc. The sensual nature of man is interpreted by him as “ inalienable” foundation of human life and is contrasted with the untrue world of O. - idealism, theology, etc. This line of opposition between the “true” and “untrue” state, the world of O. and love is even more intensified among the Young Hegelians (B. Bauer, M. Hess ), from various petty-bourgeois ideologists of the 40s-50s. 19th century (P. J. Proudhon, M. Stirner, etc.). The Marxist understanding of philosophy was formed in polemics with both the objective-idealistic concept of philosophy and its anthropological and psychological interpretation. Criticizing the romantic-utopian, moralistic ideas about philosophy, the founders of Marxism contrasted this with a view of philosophy as an objective social process. As the materialistic understanding of history developed, the understanding of philosophy deepened. From the analysis of philosophy in the sphere of spiritual life (religion, idealistic philosophy), K. Marx and F. Engels moved on to the study of philosophy in political life (bureaucracy, the role of the state), and then to understanding the processes of accounting in the economic sphere. In the works of the early 1840s. The problem of alienated labor is analyzed: the identity of the worker from the process and results of labor, the worker’s identity from his generic, social essence, and, finally, the worker’s identity from himself. If in these works Marx and Engels still derived economics from the worker’s relationship to his work, then already in The German Ideology (1845-46) and especially in Marx’s economic works of the 1860s-70s. The sources of O. are profound socio-economic changes—the capitalist division of labor, the spontaneous nature of aggregate social activity in conditions of antagonistic formations, the dominance of private property and commodity-money relations, the transformation of labor into a means of subsistence, partial social functions into the lifelong vocation of certain individuals, layers, classes. The analysis of O. was based on a scientific foundation—the economic theory of Marxism and the doctrine of commodity fetishism. The works of Marx and Engels reveal the following main points of labor in a capitalist society: 1) Human activity itself, which emerges from the labor process impoverished and devastated, “... alienation of the content of labor in relation to the worker himself...” (K. Marx, see Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 46, part 1, p. 440). 2) O. working conditions from the work itself. “... Objective conditions of labor are acquiring increasingly colossal independence in relation to living labor, independence expressed in their very size... social wealth in ever more powerful accumulations confronts labor as an alien and dominant force” (ibid., part 2, p. . 346-47). The worker is confronted in an alienated form as capital not only by the material but also by the intellectual conditions of his labor. This is especially obvious in the philosophy of production management and in the science of worker science. “Science appears as an alien force, hostile to labor and dominating it...” (ibid., vol. 47, p. 555). 3) O. results of labor from the hired worker, leading to the fact that “... the wealth created by him is opposed as alien wealth, his own productive power - as the productive power of his product, his enrichment - as self-impoverishment, his social power - as the power of society, ruling over him” (ibid., vol. 26, part 3, p. 268). 4) Alienation of social institutions and the norms prescribed by them from workers. Thus, in the state, the common interest “... takes an independent form, divorced from real—both individual and joint—interests, and at the same time the form of an illusory community” (ibid., vol. 3, p. 32). In the process of historical development, the orientation of the exploitative state from actual individuals deepens, social institutions turn into bureaucratic systems built on a hierarchical principle. 5) The gap between the values preached by the official ideology and the real opportunities provided by society. The impact of ideology on life leads to the fact that it forms a level of claims, desires and expectations among members of society that does not correspond to the actual capabilities of society. Thus, the ideological values proclaimed by bourgeois society: freedom, equality, entrepreneurship - increasingly came into conflict with the real life of bourgeois society, with its economic inequality and exploitation. O. also characterizes the spiritual life of a class society, specific forms of ideological O. are formed (from religion to authoritarian ideologies), and within the culture itself the gap between “mass culture” and the culture of the elite deepens. The understanding of agriculture as a social phenomenon was further concretized in the doctrine of the absolute and relative impoverishment of the working class, of exploitation as a “real manifestation” of agriculture (see K. Marx, in the book: K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, 2nd ed., vol. 26, part 3, p. 520), in the Marxist interpretation of social institutions and personality. A sharp ideological struggle unfolded around the Marxist concept of philosophy, the most characteristic features of which are: the opposition of the young, “humanistic” Marx, who analyzed the problems of philosophy, with the mature Marx, who allegedly took a non-humanistic, scientistic (see Scientism) position; interpretation of Marxism as a type of irrationalist anthropology and its rapprochement with existentialism; theological interpretation of O., identifying O. with the Fall. Attacking the practice of socialist construction, right-wing and “left-wing” revisionists (R. Garaudy, E. Fischer, and others) argue that socialism strengthens the ownership of the individual and creates new forms of ownership related to public property and the role of the state under socialism . Criticizing the bourgeois and revisionist concepts of philosophy, Marxists in various countries emphasize that socialism destroys the root sources of culture and that the leading tendency of socialism is to overcome poverty, which is carried out in full and final measure along with the building of communism. The general ways to overcome poverty, identified in the theory of scientific communism, consist in the abolition of exploitation, the comprehensive development of social wealth and socialist social relations, in overcoming the opposition between mental and physical labor, city and countryside, in the development of communist consciousness, democratization of management and all public life socialist and communist society. The specific ways and methods of overcoming poverty and the pace of this process depend on the specific characteristics of the countries building a new society, on the level of their development, and on the consciousness of the working class of these countries. The position of Marxism, which emphasizes the socio-historical, transitory nature of O., is opposed to the positions of modern bourgeois ideologists who see in O. an eternal characteristic of human life. Common features of the understanding of O. in modern bourgeois philosophy and sociology are anti-historicism, psychologism in the interpretation of the causes of O., and the transformation of O. into an essential characteristic of human existence. Considering many phenomena of O. from the standpoint of O. itself as irreducible moments of social life in general, bourgeois philosophers inevitably come to a tragic perception of the history of society and culture. Already G. Simmel saw the “tragedy of culture” in the contradiction between the creative process and objectified forms of culture. The description of O. in the philosophy and fiction of Existentialism is painted in tragic tones. In bourgeois sociology of the 20th century. a number of aspects of the problem of O. were analyzed (without using the term “O.”) in connection with the problem of bureaucracy (K. Mannheim, M. Weber - Germany), social anomie (E. Durkheim - France, R. Merton - USA). In the 1960s In connection with the strengthening of romantic criticism of capitalism, interest in the category of O. as a way of analyzing bourgeois society has revived. This found its expression in the ideology of the so-called “new left” (G. Marcuse - USA, etc.). Many representatives of bourgeois sociology interpret O. as the only possible way of organizing human relations, contrasting it with “small” and “informal” groups deprived of O. In modern American sociology, attempts are being made to empirically study O. M. Seaman proposed 5 criteria for the empirical interpretation of O. (lack of power, loss of meaning in one’s work, lack of norms, isolation, self-alienation), which became a program of sociological research (R. Blauner and others). However, in general, the analysis of real; social conditions and causes, O. is replaced in bourgeois philosophy and sociology by a description of the consciousness and psychology of the individual living in the world of O. Lit.: K. Marx and F. Engels, From Early Works, M., 1956; them, Capital, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 23-25; Lenin V.I., State and Revolution, Complete. collection cit., 5th ed., vol. 33; Davydov Yu. N., Labor and Freedom, M., 1962; Ogurtsov A.P., Alienation and man. Historical and philosophical essay, in the collection: Man, creativity, science, M., 1967; “Capital” by Marx, philosophy and modernity, M., 1968; Oizerman T.I., The problem of alienation and the bourgeois legend of Marxism, M., 1965; Alienation: the cultural climate of our time, ed. G. Sykes, NY, 1964; Alienation: a casebook, ed. DJ Burrows, FR Lapides, NY, 1969; Geyer RF, Bibliography alienation, 2 ed., Amst., 1972. A. P. Ogurtsov.
Alienate Alienation Alienated
