Abstract: The object of the authors' research is the theory of social progress in the works of such prominent historians as N.I. Kareev, M.M. Kovalevsky and I.V. Luchitsky. To analyze the problem, the comparative method, a systematic approach and the principle of individuality of B. Russell are used in the work. The authors pay special attention to the methodological prerequisites for the rejection by Russian historians of the positions of G.V.F. Hegel for the development of theories of social dynamics and the transition to the foundations of positivism. The article highlights the main theoretical differences between historians of the "Russian School" and other domestic concepts of social progress at the end of the XIX century.   The novelty of the research lies in the fact that the authors of the article clearly show the contradictions in the theories of social progress of representatives of the "Russian School". The article demonstrates that despite the denial of the scientific nature of empirical and metaphysical concepts of historians such as M.N. Petrov and V.I. Guerrier, prominent representatives of the "Russian School" could not refuse the criteria of social development proposed by them. In conclusion, the authors emphasize the importance of the dispute between N.I. Kareev, M.M. Kovalevsky and I.V. Luchitsky about the role of the statistical method, the Marxist approach to history, the relationship between history and sociology for understanding the general and special in their interpretations of social progress.

Abstract: In the present paper from the positions of dialectical method and comparative-historical analysis the problem of culture and law in relation to social progress and its study by modern domestic Marxists is considered. The authors prove that the study of social transformations at the level of theoretical generalizations or specific conditions of development of systems of social relations by modern authors is based on the original ideas of historians and philosophers of the 1960s. The paper focuses on the analysis of the interaction between culture and law in the spatial and temporal dimensions. Particular attention in the article is paid to methodological contradictions in approaches when analyzing social progress in the society of "real" socialism. The authors consistently prove why the conclusions of representatives of the neo-Marxist school of T. Adorno and H. Marcuse about the forms of human alienation of late capitalist society cannot be considered fair to societies at the legal level that deny private property. According to the conclusions of the article, culture and law in the idea of social progress in the theory of modern domestic Marxists develop on two levels. The first level is characterized by theoretical rethinking of the category of socio-economic formation and statement of social progress in the analysis of large historical epochs. The second level focuses on the development of Marx's humanistic ideas, which are based on the principle of identifying social progress with man's acquisition of full freedom.