Abstract: In the present work the concept of social progress in the works of historian M. N. Petrov is considered from the positions of comparativist method, system-historical aspect of systematic approach and B. Russell's principle of individuality. The work describes the theoretical and methodological basis of the concept, its application to the study of historical process and moral education of man. In the work it is pointed out that in spite of the originality of his approach the historian does not go beyond the general problems of Russian philosophical thought on social development, referring to the ethical comparison of the progress of man and humanity, as well as the question of justification of violence for the benefit of the future. The article analyzes similarities and differences with the views of such prominent contemporary historians as V. I. Herier, N. I. Kareev, M. M. Kovalevsky, and I. V. Luchitsky. According to the conclusions of the article, the evolution of historiosophic knowledge in the Russian historical science led to a rapid transition from empirical and metaphysical views to empirical and ethical ones and fading of interest to the concept of M. N. Petrov. The paper proves that the criteria of social progress, developed by the scientist of Kharkov University, formed the basis for the study of progress by Russian religious philosophy and Eurasianism.

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.