ispcjournal.orgispcjournal.org/journals/2016/phc_2016.docxweb viewispcjournal.org

Kyiv, 2015

INTERNATIONAL SOCIETYOF PHILOSOPHY AND COSMOLOGY

UKRAINIAN PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATION

PHILOSOPHY&

COSMOLOGY

2015

(Vol. 15)

Kyiv, 2015

Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Vol. 15)The Academic Journal

ISSN 2307-3705State registration certificate of the print media КВ №20780-10580Р, 25 June

2014http://ispcjournal.org/

e-mail: [email protected]

Printed in the manner of scientific-theoretical digest «Philosophy & Cosmology» since 2004.

Printed in the manner of Academic Yearbook of Philosophy and Science«Философия и космология/Philosophy & Cosmology» since 2011.

Printed in the manner of Academic Journal «Philosophy & Cosmology» since 2014 (vol. 12).

Printed according to resolution of Scientific Board of International Society of Philoso- phy and Cosmology (minutes of meeting № 57 from

June 15, 2015)

Editor-in-ChiefOleg Bazaluk, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor

Editorial BoardGennadii Aliaiev, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Deputy Chief Editor,

Ukraine);Anna Brodsky, Doctor of Philology, Professor (USA);Kevin Crotty, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (USA);

Leonid Djakhaia, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Georgia);Viktor Zlokazov, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor (Russia);

Sergey Krichevskiy, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Russia);Georgi Gladyshev, Doctor of Chemistry, Professor (USA); Arkady Ursul, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Russia);

Panos Eliopoulos, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Greece); Viktor Okorokov, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Ukraine); Sergey Proleev, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor (Ukraine);

Denys Svyrydenko, Doctor of Philosophy (Ukraine); Aleksandr Khazen, Ph.D. of Physics and Mathematics (USA);

Ruano Javier Collado, Ph.D. (Brazil);Olga Nezhyva, Ph.D. (Ukraine);

Tracey I. Isaacs, Candidate Ph.D. (South Africa)

The Journal is abstracted and indexed in the following international databases:

Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory; Russian Science Citation Index and SCIENCE INDEX; ResearchBib; Open Academic Journals Index;

Google Scholar; Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR); the Directory of Open Access Repositories

(OpenDOAR); WorldCat; Index Copernicus; Citefactor; Journals Indexing (DRJI); Polish Scholarly Bibliography; EBSCO; ERIH PLUS; DOAJ

International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology: http://www.bazaluk.org/

Ukrainian philosophical foundation:http://www.philosophy.ua/ua/institute/ukrainskiy-filosofskiy-fond/

© International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology, 2015

© Bazaluk Oleg (Ch. Editor), 2015

Київ, 2015

МІЖНАРОДНЕФІЛОСОФСЬКО-КОСМОЛОГІЧНЕ ТОВАРИСТВО

УКРАЇНСЬКИЙ ФІЛОСОФСЬКИЙ ФОНД

PHILOSOPHY&

COSMOLOGY

2015

(Том 15)

Київ, 2015

Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Том 15)Науковий журнал

ISSN 2307-3705Свідоцтво про державну реєстрацію друкованого засобу масової

інформації — КВ №20780-10580Р від 25 червня 2014 р.http://ispcjournal.org/

e-mail: [email protected]

Видається як науково-теоретичний збірник «Філософія і Космологія» з 2004 року;

як науково-теоретичний щорічник «Філософія і Космологія / Philosophy & Cosmology» -

з 2011 року; як науковий журнал «Philosophy & Cosmology» — з випуску 2014 (Т. 12)

Друкується за рішенням наукової ради Міжнародного філософсько- космологічного товариства (протокол № 57 від

15 червня 2015)

Головний редакторО. О. Базалук, доктор філософських наук,

професор

Редакційна колегіяГ. Є. Аляєв, д. філос. н., проф. (зам. головного редактора, Україна);

А. Бродски, доктор філологічних наук, професор (США);К. Кротті, доктор філософії, проф. (США);Л. Г. Джахая, д. філос. н., проф. (Грузія);

В. Б. Злоказов, д. фіз.-мат. н., проф. (Росія);С. В. Крічевський, д. філос. н., проф. (Росія);

Г. П. Гладишев, д. хім. н., проф. (США);А. Д. Урсул, д. філос. н., проф. (Росія);П. Эліопоулос, доктор філософії (Греція);

В. Б. Окороков, д. філос. н., проф. (Україна);С. В. Пролеєв, Д. філос. н., проф. (Україна);Д. Б. Свириденко, д. філос. н. (Україна);

О. І. Хазен, к. фіз.-мат. н. (США);Р. Х. Колладо, доктор філософії (Бразилія);

О. М. Нежива, к. філос. н. (Україна);Т. І. Ісаакс, дослідниця (Південна Африка)

Журнал індексується в наступних міжнародних базах:Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory; Russian Science Citation Index and SCIENCE INDEX; ResearchBib; Open Academic Journals Index;

Google Scholar; Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR); the Directory of Open Access Repositories

(OpenDOAR); WorldCat; Index Copernicus; Citefactor; Journals Indexing (DRJI); Polish Scholarly Bibliography; EBSCO; ERIH PLUS;

DOAJ

Міжнародне філософсько-космологічне товариство:http://www.bazaluk.org/

Український філософський фонд:http://www.philosophy.ua/ua/institute/ukrainskiy-filosofskiy-

fond/

© Міжнародне філософсько- космологічне товариство, 2015

© Базалук О. О. (гол. ред.), 2015

Киев, 2015

МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕФИЛОСОФСКО-КОСМОЛОГИЧЕСКОЕ

ОБЩЕСТВО УКРАИНСКИЙ ФИЛОСОФСКИЙ ФОНД

PHILOSOPHY&

COSMOLOGY

2015

(Том 15)

Киев, 2015

Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Том 15)Научный журналISSN 2307-3705

Свідоцтво про державну реєстрацію друкованого засобу масової інформації — КВ №20780-10580Р від 25 червня 2014 р.

http://ispcjournal.org/ail: [email protected]

Издаётся как научно-теоретический сборник «Философия и космология» с 2004 года;

как научно-теоретический ежегодник «Философия и космология/Philosophy & Cosmology» —

с 2011 года; как научный журнал «Philosophy & Cosmology» — с выпуска 2014 года (Т. 12)

Печатается по решению научного совета Международного философско- космологического общества (протокол № 57 от 15

июня 2015 г.)

Главный редакторО. А. Базалук, доктор философских наук, профессор

Редакционная коллегияГ. Е. Аляев, д. филос. н., проф. (зам. главного редактора, Украина);

А. Бродски, доктор филологических наук, професор (США);К. Кротти, доктор философии, проф. (США);Л. Г. Джахая, д. филос. н., проф. (Грузия);

В. Б. Злоказов, д. физ.-мат. н., проф. (Россия); С. В. Кричевский, д. филос. н., проф. (Россия);

Г. П. Гладышев, д. хим. н., проф. (США);А. Д. Урсул, д. филос. н., проф. (Россия);

П. Элиопоулос, доктор философии (Греция); В. Б. Окороков, д. филос. н., проф. (Украина); С. В. Пролеев, д. филос. н., проф. (Украина); Д. Б. Свириденко, д. филос. н. (Украина);

А. И. Хазен, к. физ.-мат. н. (США);Р. Х. Колладо, доктор философии (Бразилия);

О. Н. Нежива, к. филос. н. (Украина);Т. И. Исаакс, исследователь (Южная Африка)

Журнал индексируется в следующих международных базах данных: Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory; Russian Science Citation

Index and SCIENCE INDEX; ResearchBib; Open Academic Journals Index; Google Scholar; Registry

of Open Access Repositories (ROAR); the Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR); WorldCat; Index Copernicus; Citefactor;

Journals Indexing (DRJI); Polish Scholarly Bibliography; EBSCO; ERIH PLUS; DOAJ

Международное философско-космологическое общество:

http://www.bazaluk.org/

Украинский философский фонд:http://www.philosophy.ua/ua/institute/ukrainskiy-filosofskiy-fond/

©Международное философско- космологическое общество, 2015

©Базалук О. А. (гл. ред.), 2015

ISSN 2307-3705. Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Vol. 15)

7

ContentsSECTION І. INERT MATTER.................................................9

Avchenko Oleg. Quantum paradoxes and thecollapse of orthodox materialism basics.............................................................9

Bazaluk Oleg. The theory of evolution..............................................................25

Chen Jie. Identity between space-timeand physical substance’s extension..................................................................34

Haitun Sergey. Gaussian/non-Gaussian distributions and theidentification of terrestrial and extraterrestrial intelligence objects..............39

Kirsh Marvin E. The spaces in the lookingglass: stilling the frame/framing the still.........................................................62

Nazaretyan Akop P. Mega-History andthe 21st century singularity puzzle.................................................................................84

Okah-Atenga Pierre-Paul Cosmologyand philosophy: in relation to the world........................................................99

Ursul Arkady, Ursul Tatiana. Towardsa global sustainable future.............................................................................110

SECTION II. LIVING MATTER..........................................161

SECTION III. INTELLIGENT MATTER..........................162

Arpentieva Maryam. Xenopsychotherapy: space traveland transformation in sci-fi works...............................................................163

Gaievska Oksana. Generally civilized context ofgoverning the social organization of the world.................................................182

Voronkova Valentina. The civil society as a paradigm,concept and social construct philosophical discourse............................................198

SECTION IV. COSMOLOGY IN PERSONS...............................................216

Kononov Alexander. Nikolay Fedorov’s “The Philosophyof Common Task” and the problem of salvation of human race …….............……………

216

Authors............................................................................................................225

Information for Authors..................................................................................227

International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology (ISPC)............................233

8 ISSN 2307-3705. Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Vol. 15)

СодержаниеРАЗДЕЛ І. КОСНАЯ МАТЕРИЯ..................................................................9

Авченко О. В. Квантовые парадоксы икрахортодоксальногоматериализма.............................................................................................................................9

Bazaluk Oleg. The theory of evolution.............................................................25

Chen Jie. Identity between space-timeand physical substance’s extension..................................................................34

Haitun Sergey. Gaussian/non-Gaussian distributions and theidentification of terrestrial and extraterrestrial intelligence objects................39

Kirsh Marvin E. The spaces in the lookingglass: stilling the frame/framing the still.........................................................62

Nazaretyan Akop P. Mega-History andthe 21st century singularity puzzle...................................................................................84

Okah-Atenga Pierre-Paul Cosmologyand philosophy: in relation to the world..........................................................99

Ursul Arkady, Ursul Tatiana. Towardsa global sustainable future.............................................................................110

РАЗДЕЛ II. ЖИВАЯ МАТЕРИЯ............................................................161

РАЗДЕЛ III. РАЗУМНАЯ МАТЕРИЯ...................................................162

Арпентьева М. Р. Ксенопсихотерапия: космические путешествияи трансформации в научно-фантастических произведениях......................163

Gaievska Oksana. Generally civilized context ofgoverning the social organization of the world.......................................................182

Воронкова В. Г. Гражданское общество как парадигма,концепт и конструкт социально-философского дискурса...................................198

РАЗДЕЛ IV. КОСМОЛОГИЯ В ЛИЦАХ...............................................216

Кононов А. А. «Философия общего дела»Н. Ф. Федорова и проблема спасения человечества …………………….................……

216

Об авторах......................................................................................................225

К сведению авторов.......................................................................................227

9ISSN 2307-3705. Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Vol. 15)

Международное философско-космологическое общество (МФКО).........233


9

РАЗДЕЛ І

INERT MATTER КОСНАЯ МАТЕРИЯ

Inert matter is a cosmological value indicating the initial state of matter and field, as the two main forms of matter that have arisen as assumed in the Big Bang.The symmetry of a molecular structure of the internal material-power environment, convertibility of processes, as well as variety of building mixes of isotopes are characteristic for inert matter. Inert substance is a set of inorganic and organic combinations expressed in an elementary chemical compound, weight and energy. The field of inert matter is a kind of matter having zero weight of rest, or otherwise, it is a geometrical space with infinite number of degrees of freedom. Inert matter in the Universe is represented by forms of various combinations: from space vacuum to planets, stars, galaxies, etc., in various states: solid, liquid, gaseous, etc. By and large, the system of inert matter is the Universe in all the variety structure.

Косная материя — это космологическая величина, обозначающая первичное состоя- ние вещества и поля, как двух основных видов материи, возникших, как предполагается, в результате Большого Взрыва. Характерными для косной материи являются симме- тричность молекулярного строения внутренней материально-энергетической среды, обратимость процессов, а также многообразие строительных смесей изотопов. Косное вещество — это совокупность неорганических и органических соединений, выраженная в элементарном химическом составе, массе и энергии. Поле косной материи — это вид ма- терии, имеющий нулевую массу покоя, или иначе, геометрическое пространство с беско- нечным числом степеней свободы. Косная материя представлена в Мироздании в формах разнообразных соединений: от космического вакуума до планет, звезд, галактик и др., в различных состояниях: твердом, жидком, газообразном и т. п. По большому счету, систе- ма косной материи — это Вселенная, во всей многообразной структуре.

КВАНТОВЫЕ ПАРАДОКСЫИ КРАХ ОРТОДОКСАЛЬНОГО МАТЕРИАЛИЗМА

О. В. Авченко — д. геол.мин. н., проф., Дальневосточный геологический институт

ДВО РАН (г. Владивосток, Россия)

E-mail: [email protected]

Рассмотрены три квантовых парадоксальных эксперимента — двухщелевой (1), с от- ложенным выбором (2) и ЭПР-парадокс (3). Эти эксперименты с определенностью указыва- ют на недостаточность

10


материалистической парадигмы. Материалистическая доктри- на не может описать, объяснить и предвидеть странности и феномены квантового мира, а понятие материи оказывается противоречивым на квантовом уровне. Несомненные с точки зрения материалистического подхода два положения о том, что физические свой- ства системы существуют сами по себе, они объективны и не зависят от измерения (1) и

© Авченко А. В., 2015

Авченко О. В. Квантовые парадоксы и крах ортодоксального материализма


11

измерение (наблюдение) одной системы не влияет на результат измерения (наблюдения) другой системы (2) не подтверждаются последними экспериментами, утверждающими так называемую квантовую нелокальность или нелокальный реализм (non-local realism). В связи с этим мы должны сомневаться и в истинности материалистической онтологии, с уверенностью отрицающей существование трансцендентных объектов или любых экс- трасенсорных феноменов. Для материалистической парадигмы устанавливаются грани- цы, за пределами которых она не может быть принята. В качестве мировоззрения, схва- тывающего одновременно материальный и квантовый мир предлагается полионтичная парадигма, рассматривающая сущее на двух модусах — потенциальном и актуальном. Единство мира не отрицается, но в нем выделяется два структурных этажа — два модуса бытия, что может свидетельствовать о двойственной природе Вселенной.

Ключевые слова: квантовые эксперименты, материалистическая онтология, кванто- вая нелокальность.

QUANTUM PARADOXES AND THE COLLAPSE OF ORTHODOX

MATERIALISMOleg Аvchenko — Doctor of Geology-Mineralogical Sciences,

Professor, Far East Geological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (Vladivostok, Russia)

Three quantum paradoxical experiments — (1) double-slit, (2) delayed choice, and (3) EPR paradox ones are considered. These experiments definitely indicate the inadequacy of the materialist paradigm. The materialist doctrine can not describe, explain and predict phenomena and strangeness of quantum world, and the concept of matter is inconsistent at the quantum level. Doubtless, from the materialistic point of view, two propositions saying about that the physical properties of the system are in themselves, they are objective and independent of measurement(1)and measurement (observation) of one system does not affect the result of the measurement (observation) of another system (2) are not verified by the recent experiments confirming so- called quantum non-locality or non-local realism. In relation to this, we have to doubt the truth of materialist ontology which denies the existence of transcendental objects or any extrasensory phenomena with certainty. There should be set boundaries for the materialist paradigm, beyond which it can not be accepted. The poliontichny paradigm that considers reality in potential and actual modes is proposed as an alternative world view embracing both material and quantum world. The unity of the world is not denied but it can be distinguished by two structural levels — two modes of reality evidencing the dual nature of the Universe.

Key Words: quantum experiments, materialist ontology, non-local realism.

ВведениеСреди множества философских направлений философия

материализма и вытекающий из нее материалистический подход к анализу природных зако- номерностей считается sine qua none (непременным условием) любой научной деятельности [Clayton, 2010]. Особое значение материалистическое направле- ние имеет в

Раздел І. Inert Matter/ Косная материя

12


развитии философской антропологии Нового времени — в раз- витии теории сознания и понимании цели и смысла существования человека [Философия, 2004]. Следует также подчеркнуть, что мировоззрение классиче- ской физики — физический реализм соответствует философии материализма и эта философия остается общепринятой, несмотря на новые парадоксальные принципы появившейся в XX веке квантовой механики. Поэтому задача рас- смотрения и сопоставления принципов материализма и квантовомеханиче- ских представлений является актуальной в философии и представляет собой задачу этой статьи. В статье рассматривается три чрезвычайно важных кван-


11


товых эксперимента, которые, как будет показано, невозможно понять с мате- риалистических позиций.

Материалистическая парадигмаИз анализа философской литературы [Clayton, 2010; Философия,

2004; Марксистско, 1968; Госвами, 2008; Ленин, 1961] можно вывести следующие по- ложения, описывающие материалистическую парадигму:

1.Принцип физического или материального монизма — все в мире, включая ум и сознание, состоит из материи, наш мир полностью материален.

Определение материи берется по В.И. Ленину: «Материя — есть фило- софская категория для обозначения объективной реальности, которая дана человеку в ощущениях его, которая копируется, фотографируется, отобража- ется нашими ощущениями, существуя независимо от них» [Ленин, 1961]. Все сложные объекты — агрегаты материальных фундаментальных частиц и их движение и поведение может быть понято в терминах фундаментальных фи- зических сил, действующих на них. Все существующее — продукт этих частиц и сил. Нет никаких уникальных (особенных) биологических сил (витализма или энтелехии), нет сознательных сил (дуализм отрицается) и нет божествен- ных сил.

2. Принцип причинного детерминизма — движение объекта и его по- ложение в любой момент в будущем, может быть предсказано на основании знаний законов движения и начальных параметров, определяющих положение, скорость и ускорение объекта.

3.Принцип локального реализма — все взаимодействия между матери- альными объектами должны быть локальными — передаваться через простран- ство с конечной скоростью. Наивысшая скорость в природе — скорость света. В расширенной интерпретации этот принцип соответствует принципам объек- тивной локальной теории, согласно которой:

а) физические свойства системы существуют сами по себе, они объективны и не зависят от измерения;

б) измерение (наблюдение) одной системы не влияет на результат измерения (наблюдения) другой системы;

в) поведение не взаимодействующей с окружением системы зависит лишь от условий в более ранние моменты времени.

Вполне очевидно, что пункты а), б), в) объективной локальной теории на- ходятся в полном соответствии с принципом материального монизма и опреде- лением материи, приводимыми в положении 1. Поэтому, если мы будем иметь данные экспериментов, не соответствующие принципу локального реализма и его подпунктам а), б), в), то положение 1 не будет истинным, по меньшей мере, для тех условий, в которых осуществляются эти

14



эксперименты.4. Принцип эпифеноменализма — все ментальные или

духовные явле- ния, в отличие от материальных, существуют только как вторичные, произво- дные от материальных явлений и находят свое выражение в понятии «созна- ние». Иначе говоря, все духовные феномены — это вторичные феномены той же материи на определенном уровне ее развития.

Тезисы 3 и 4 являются по сути расшифровкой принципа материального мо- низма, сформулированного в пункте 1.



11

Доктрина материализма занимает четко выраженную онтологическую по- зицию. Принимая эту позицию можно утверждать, что может быть и чего не может быть. На основе материалистического подхода отрицается Бог и бытие любых трансцендентных объектов или ноуменов в духе философии Канта. От- рицаются явления телепатии, телекинеза, ясновидения и любых экстрасенсор- ных феноменов. Последовательный философ-материалист может быть только атеистом. Но в какой мере материалистическое мировоззрение является пол- ным? Можно ли на основе материалистического подхода описать и объяснить странности и феномены квантового мира? Попытаемся вдуматься в результа- ты трех замечательных квантовых экспериментов, и понять то, о чем они сви- детельствуют.

Три замечательных квантовых эксперимента1. Знаменитый двухщелевой эксперимент.Этот эксперимент хорошо известен и многократно описывался в

литерату- ре. Наиболее подробное и ясное его описание приводится в работе Р. Фейнмана [Фейнман, 1987]. Согласно Фейнману, он «заключает в себе сердце квантовой механики». Экспериментальная установка состоит из источника электронов (электронной пушки), непроницаемой стенки с двумя щелями (1, 2, рис.1), и

Рис. 1. Двухщелевой эксперимент с электронами. 1, 2 — щели, 3 — источники света, 4 — фотоприемники

второго экрана (поглотителя), куда попадают электроны,


16


прошедшие через две щели первого экрана (стенки). Если открыта щель 1 , то больше всего электронов попадает на поглотитель прямо напротив щели 1. Распределение вероятности попадания электронов в разные точки второго экрана дается кривой Р1, с макси- мумом напротив щели 1. Если открыта щель 2, то больше всего электронов по-


13


падает в поглотитель напротив этой щели, а вероятность попадания электронов в этом случае описывается кривой Р2, с максимумом

против щели 2. Электроны ведут себя, в этих случаях подобно нормальным частицам, вылетающим из ис- точника. Казалось бы,

если открыты обе щели, то распределение вероятностей попаданий электронов на второй экран должно представлять собой простую

сумму вероятностей попаданий: Р12 = Р1 + Р2 (пунктирная плавная кривая Р12 на рис.1). Но электроны и другие элементарные частицы

ведут себя совершен- но иначе. Распределение вероятностей попаданий электронов на второй экран описывается кривой Р12*, с

минимумами и максимумами, что характерно для интерференции волн. То есть дело обстоит так, что бывшие явные частицы в том

случае, когда мы открывали щели по очереди, вдруг обнаружили волновое по- ведение, когда открыты обе щели. Электроны начали

проходить сразу через две щели, что и привело их к интерференции. Однако, в поглотитель электроны по- падают всегда строго

дискретно, отдельными порциями, поэтому волновая кар- тина складывается (т.е. кривая Р12*) по сути дела из статистики

попаданий мно- жества электронов в поглотитель. Или в явном, физическом виде электронные волны остаются ненаблюдаемыми.

Очень важно заметить, что интерференция электронов наблюдается и в случае, если выпускать электроны из источника бук- вально по

одному. Подобный эксперимент провели в 1989 г. в университете Гаку- шуин в Токио А. Тономура, Ж.Эндо, Т.Матсуда, Т. Кабасаки и

Х. Ехава [Tonomura, 1989]. Подробное описание этого эксперимента приводится в большой интерес- ной монографии Дж. Гринштейна, и

А. Зайонц [Гринштейн, 2008]. Тономура и др. сделали свой источник электронов настолько слабым, что электроны прохо- дили

по одному через их систему и можно было говорить о том, что электрон от электрона разделяет расстояние в 100 километров. Тем

не менее, интерферен- ционная картина возникала, когда через установку до поглотителя проходило по очереди примерно 70000

электронов. Электрон действительно был способен быть сразу в двух местах одновременно! Попытаемся узнать, через какую щель 1 или

2 проходят электроны, когда щели открыты одновременно. Для этого вбли- зи щелей 1 и 2, сразу за первым экраном, поставим

источники света 3 и фотопри- емники 4, которые будут регистрировать свет, рассеянный электроном (рис.1). Если электрон проходит через обе щели, то должны сработать оба фотоприем- ника

4 одновременно, если же электроны проходят только через одну щель — первую или вторую, то должен срабатывать только один

фотоприемник из двух. И вот вновь возникает парадокс. Оказывается, что никогда не срабатывают оба фотоприемника одновременно, хотя открыты обе щели. Фотоприемники вклю-

чаются по очереди и получается, что электрон проходит только через одну щель. При этом интерференционная картина,

естественно, исчезает и вероятности по- падания электронов на

14



поглотитель описываются вновь кривыми Р1 и Р2. Когда мы пытаемся «подглядеть» через какую щель прошел электрон, ничего

не вы- ходит. Подчеркнем при этом, что фотоприемники и источники света в установке для «подглядывания» стоят после

экрана (стенки) с двумя щелями, то есть мы хотим подсмотреть за такими электронами, которые уже прошли через две щели и,

казалось бы, наша установка (3 и 4 на рис.1) не должна влиять на условия прохождения щелей электронами и разрушать

интерференционную картину.В двухщелевом эксперименте возникают вопросы, на которые

трудно или невозможно ответить с точки зрения материалистической парадигмы:



15

1. что собой представляет электрон, — волну или частицу, когда он не взаи- модействует с экспериментальной установкой?

2.с какой стати мы не можем «подглядеть», как проходят электроны через две щели? Почему разрушается интерференционная картина при «подгляды- вании», когда, на первый взгляд, мы абсолютно не влияем на условия прохож- дения щелей электронами?

2. Эксперимент с отложенным выбором (delayed choice experiment).Этот эксперимент был предложен в 1978 г. профессором

Массачузетского университета Джоном Арчибальдом Уилером [Wheeler, 1978]. Схема экспери- мента, подробно описанная в работе [Гринштейн, 2008], показана на рис. 2. Суть этого интересного опыта такова. В этом опыте применяют интерферометр

Маха — Цендера с двумя делителя- ми фотонного луча BS1 и BS2. Сла- бый лазерный импульс попадает в интерферометр через светодели- тель BS1, в котором он делится на две части, так что одна половина проходит через BS1, а вторая от- клоняется под прямым углом к первоначальному направлению. Во втором светоделителе BS2 оба луча могут объединиться, давая интерференцию (рис.2). Единич- ный фотон может двигаться двумя маршрутами X и Y и, если второй делитель луча BS2 отсутствует,

Рис. 2. Эксперимент с отложенным выбором. BS1, BS2 — полупрозрачные зеркала; М — непрозрачное зеркало;

Dx, Dy — детекторы x, y.

то детекторы Dx и Dy позволя- ют определить, по какому пути X или Y двигался свет. В этом случае можно говорить о том, что фотон проявляет свойства частицы. Если

же мы вставляем BS2, то мы теряем информацию — по какому пути проходил фотон, но наблюдаем интерференцию. В этом случае, нам приходится считать, что фотон шел двумя маршрутами одновременно, проявляя свойство волны. Идея Уилера состояла в том, чтобы вставлять BS2 уже после того, как фотон пройдет первый светоделитель. Если фотон проходит BS1, а BS2 еще не


16


стоит, то фотону надо быть частицей и начать движение по одному из двух путей X или Y. Поскольку BS2 вставляется уже после начала движения и не может по- мешать распространению фотона по тому или другому пути, то получается, что интерференция в этом случае не должна наблюдаться. Что же показал экспе- римент? Поведение фотона оказалось парадоксальным. Оказалось, что всегда, когда вставлялось BS2, то наблюдались волновые свойства, (т.е. наблюдалась интерференция), а если BS2 отсутствовал, то наблюдались свойства частицы, причем срабатывал только один детектор. Или фотон смог переключаться от одного поведения к другому в любой момент времени. Иначе говоря, фотон как бы «предвидел» действия экспериментатора. Эксперименты, подтверж- дающие такое поведение фотонов, были проведены несколькими группами



17

исследователей [Hellmuth, 1987; Kaiser, 2012; Jacques, 2007]. Эксперимент с отложенным выбором вновь задает вопросы, на которые нельзя ответить, если мы придерживаемся материалистической парадигмы:

1.что собой представляет фотон, — волну или частицу, если мы его не на- блюдаем с помощью той или другой экспериментальной установки?

2. каким образом фотон «узнает» о том, чем ему надо быть перед глазами экспериментатора?

3. ЭПР парадоксБольшое значение этого парадокса состоит в том, что он

противоречит всем пунктам а), б) и в) принципа локального реализма (см. выше раздел 3) и, сле- довательно, основным положениям материалистической парадигмы. Подроб- ное рассмотрение ЭПР парадокса совместно с теоремой Белла в данной работе невозможно из-за сложности вопросов и чрезвычайно обширной специальной литературе, посвященной их рассмотрению. Но показать суть парадокса для ре- шения поставленной в статье проблемы вполне возможно и даже необходимо.

В 1935 году А.Эйнштейн, вместе со своими коллегами Б.Подольским и Н.Розеном опубликовали знаменитую статью [Einstein, 1935] в которой ставил- ся вопрос: можно ли считать полным квантово-механическое описание физи- ческой реальности? Перевод этой статьи на русский язык и ответ на нее Н.Бора был опубликован в советской печати уже в 1936 г [Фок, 1936].

А.Эйнштейн, Б. Подольский и Н. Розен сами не сомневались в существо- вании объективной реальности и дали для нее такое определение: «если, без какого-либо воздействия на систему, мы можем предсказать с определенно- стью (т.е. с вероятностью, равной единице) значение физической величины, тогда существует элемент физической реальности, соответствующий этой ве- личине». Добавим к этому, что из многих писем и высказываний Эйнштей- на ясно, что он всю жизнь представлял себе мир, в котором субмикроскопи- ческие объекты должны обладать реальными, объективно существующими параметрами. Нетрудно видеть, что определение объективной реальности по Эйнштейну данное выше в кавычках и добавление полностью соответствуют пункту а) принципа локального реализма (см. выше, раздел 3). Иначе говоря, вселенная Эйнштейна — это полностью материальная Вселенная, мир реаль- ных объектов с реальными, определенными параметрами.

Парадокс, к которому пришли А.Эйнштейн, Б.Подольский и Н. Розен состоит в следующем. Пусть две субатомные частицы № 1 и № 2 (ЭПР — пара) взаимо- действуют в какой-то точке и разлетаются. После этого проследим за одной из этих частиц, находящейся сколь угодно далеко от места взаимодействия и вы- берем координату или


18


импульс этой частицы для измерения. Мы знаем, что по принципу неопределенности Гейзенберга нельзя одновременно измерить то или другое. Но закон сохранения импульса работает и для квантовых частиц. Поэтому мы, если сможем измерить импульс частицы № 1, то будем знать и им- пульс частицы № 2. Когда мы измеряем импульс частицы № 1, мы вносим нео- пределенность в ее положение, но она находится далеко от частицы № 2, поэто- му измерение импульса частицы № 1 никак не может повлиять на положение частицы № 2. Поэтому, измеряя положение частицы № 2, мы обходим принцип неопределенности Гейзенберга, поскольку нам одновременно становится из-


19


вестным и импульс и положение частицы № 2! А отсюда вытекает вывод не- полноты квантовой теории. В этом состоит суть парадокса ЭПР. Логика пара- докса ЭПР основана на двух допущениях, имеющих принципиальное значение. Первое допущение состоит в том, что измерение, проведенное в одном месте, не может мгновенно повлиять на вторую частицу, находящуюся сколь угодно дале- ко от первой. Например, два электрона, разделенные расстоянием в несколько световых лет, не могут мгновенно повлиять друг на друга. Ведь никакой сигнал или взаимодействие, согласно теории относительности, не могут распростра- няться выше скорости света. Второе допущение связано с существованием «объ- ективной реальности» в смысле понимания А.Эйнштейна. Такие характеристи- ки квантовой частицы, как ее положение и импульс по А.Эйнштейну существуют объективно, даже если они в данный момент не наблюдаемы. Именно в этом вопросе А.Эйнштейн расходился с Н.Бором, который полагал, что квантовой ча- стице нельзя приписывать характеристики положения или импульса, если нет возможности их наблюдать.

Вопрос свелся, таким образом, к выбору между двумя точками зрения: действительно ли квантовая механика (1) не способна дать полное описание объективной реальности или (2) объективной реальности в смысле А.Эйнштейна, Б. Подольского, Н. Розена просто не существует?. Первая точка зрения или позиция Эйнштейна известна в литературе как «реализм» и она соответствует материалистической парадигме (пунктам а), б), в) принципа локального реализма). Вторая точка зрения отражает позицию Н. Бора в так называемой «копенгагенской интерпретации» квантовой теории. Проблема оставалась открытой в течение десятилетий до тех пор, пока в 1964 и в 1966 ирландский физик Джон Белл не опубликовал две важные теоремы. Хотя упоминание об этих теоремах приводится во многих работах, наиболее полное их рассмотрение, повидимому, дается в работе Дж. Гринштейна и А. Зайонц [Гринштейн, 2008]. Вполне доступное и понятное изложение теорем Белла приводится в работе Н. Мермина [Mermin, 1985]. Джон Белл на основе двух допущений А.Эйнштейна о невозможности распространения сигналов выше скорости света и о существовании объективной реальности, получил так называемые неравенства Белла для вероятностей различных результатов измерений над квантовой ЭПР парой. Эти неравенства были сформулированы таким образом, что если истина стоит за точкой зрения А.Эйнштейна, то результаты эксперимента должны подтвердить неравенства Белла. Если же прав Н.Бор, то неравенства Белла выполняться не будут. Теперь слово осталось за постановкой и результатами решающих экспериментов.

Эксперименты начали выполняться уже в 70-е годы прошлого века, но были недостаточно точны. Ведь необходимо было провести

16



измерения за миллиард- ные доли секунды! Однако, Ален Аспект в Париже сумел преодолеть эти труд- ности и выполнил эксперименты [Aspect, 1981; Aspect, 1982a; Aspect, 1982b], которые дали недвусмысленный ответ на поставленный вопрос. Сомнений как будто не оставалось. Точка зрения А.Эйнштейна оказалась неверной. Пред- ставление о реальности частиц, обладающих четко определенными свойства- ми до производства наблюдений над ними, потерпело крах. Но дело не только в этом. Опыты над ЭПР-парой интересны тем, что они явно демонстрируют так называемую «квантовую нелокальность» или нелокальный реализм (non-local



21

realism): измерение, проведенное над одной частицей, определяет результат измерения над второй частицей, которое проводится в тот же момент време- ни в другой точке пространства. При этом частицы могут быть разделены та- ким расстоянием, что передача светового сигнала от одной частицы к другой исключается. [Белинский, 2003; Менский, 2000]. Эту связь между частицами называют запутанной (entangled), а частицы сцепленными. Физические экс- перименты по проверке нелокального реализма проводились неоднократно и все они свидетельствуют о том, что наши интуитивные представления о ло- кальном реализме, как они сформулированы в пункте 3 материалистической парадигмы, не согласуются с опытом [Simon, 2007].

Впечатление, которое производят результаты этих экспериментов на фи- зиков, видно из следующей цитаты (цитируется по Дину Радину [Radin, 2006: стр. 231]): «Самый удивительный вывод из этих опытов тот, что Эйнштейн ока- зался неправ и существует странная, сверхъестественная и сцепленная связь между объектами здесь и объектами там… Это потрясающий результат. Он за- хватывает дыхание». Таким образом, представленные эксперименты демон- стрируют удивительные, загадочные и до конца непонятные свойства кван- тового мира, кардинально отличающиеся от свойств того мира, который нас непосредственно окружает.

Интерпретация экспериментовСтрогое рассмотрение экспериментов на основе понятий

квантовой меха- ники — принципа суперпозиции, вектора состояния, матрицы плотности — эта работа не преследует. Мы стремимся только показать, что квантовые парадок- сы не укладываются в принятое здравым смыслом материалистическое миро- воззрение. Одна из интересных и увлекательных книг на эту тему с более глу- боким изложением написана С.И. Дорониным [Доронин, 2007]. Она во многом стимулировала написание данной статьи.

В 1924 г. французский физик, маркиз Луи де Бройль ввел понятие о волнах

«материи», т.е. с каждым микрообъектом, по де Бройлю, связаны как корпу- скулярные, так и волновые характеристики. Эта идея нашла подтверждение в опытах по дифракции электронов, выполненных в разных лабораториях. Хорошо известно, что понятие о волнах «материи» описывается уравнением Шредингера для волновой функции — y (r,t)., которая является комплексноз- начной функцией, то есть содержит действительную и мнимую части. Но ка- кой физический смысл она в этом случае может иметь? Ответ на этот вопрос получил М. Борн в 1928 г., который показал, что волновая функция задает ве- роятность обнаружения частицы dW в данном объеме пространства dV. Иначе говоря, квантовая механика


16


позволяет определять не сами координаты части- цы, а только вероятность того, что эти координаты лежат внутри определен- ного объема. Волны «материи» уступили место волнам «вероятности». Уже в те годы стало ясно, что волновую функцию нельзя понимать как амплитуду некоторого материального поля (подобно электромагнитному или гравитаци- онному). М. Планк писал о природе волновой функции в 1928 г. [цитируется по Тарасов, 2013: стр. 266.]: «То, что эта величина не может быть представлена наглядно в обычном смысле, но имеет только непрямое, символическое зна- чение, следует уже из того, что волны движутся вообще вовсе не в обычном

18



трехмерном, а так называемом конфигурационном пространстве, размерность которого определяется числом степеней свободы рассматриваемой системы».

В этой связи можно привести высказывание еще А.Ю. Севальникова: «вол- новые функции, — y, фигурирующие в уравнениях квантовой механики, дей- ствительно являются ненаблюдаемыми. Эта «ненаблюдаемость» связана с их существованием, отнесенностью их к модусу бытия потенциального» [Севаль- ников, 2009: стр. 157].

Лишь только значительно позже, в 50-х годах прошлого века, сам Шредин- гер присоединился к вероятностной трактовке сущности волн де Бройля. Таким образом, волны «материи», связанные с микробъектами, оказались нематери- альными или трансцендентными. Вопрос о природе волн де Бройля хорошо разобран в учебнике Л.В. Тарасова [Тарасов, 2013], в специальном разделе —«Те ли это волны? Или еще раз о волнах в квантовой механике». В этом раз- деле учебника Л.В. Тарасов обращает внимание на не совсем удачную терми- нологию, использующую понятие «волна», которая сложилась в исторических обстоятельствах развития квантовой механики — корпускулярно-волновой дуализм, дебройлевские волны, волновая функция, волновое уравнение. Л.В. Тарасов, к примеру, подчеркивает, что волновой вектор и длина волны элек- трона не являются параметрами некоей классической волны, а представляют собой просто волновые характеристики микрообъекта или, другими словами, классические электронные волны не существуют в принципе. С фотонными волнами дело обстоит сложнее, но и здесь классическая или электромагнитная волна появляется только в случае достаточно большого количества фотонов, а для единичных фотонов этой классической волны нет. Таким образом, класси- ческая интерференция света, которую наблюдали гораздо раньше, чем интер- ференцию электронов, принципиально отличается от квантовомеханической интерференции электронов и других элементарных частиц. Классические ма- териальные волны в квантовом мире не существуют.

Чтобы не путаться с имеющейся не совсем удачной сложившейся термино- логией квантовой механики в отношении волновой функции и корпускулярно- волнового дуализма, введем понятие трансцендентной квантово-информа- ционной волны или частицы. Под этим термином будем понимать потенциаль- ное бытие квантовомеханической частицы до взаимодействия ее с эксперимен- тальной установкой, а сам термин нам необходим только для удобства изложе- ния парадоксов квантовой механики на обычном языке. Далее зададим вопрос: когда в квантовом мире появляются реальные, материальные корпускулы? Ког- да можно говорить об определенном числе этих материальных корпускул или


19


частиц? Очевидно, только после взаимодействия трансцендентной квантово- информационной волны с той или другой измерительной установкой. Именно в процессе измерения или взаимодействия с окружающей средой рождается ма- териальная корпускула — частица со вполне определенными свойствами. Джон Арчибальд Уилер [Wheeler, 1978] в связи с этим при рассмотрении вышеопи- санного опыта 2 с отложенным выбором, говорил, что сами по себе квантовые явления не имеют ни волнового, ни корпускулярного характера и то, что будет наблюдаться не определено вплоть до самого момента измерения. «никакой квантовый феномен не может считаться таковым, пока он не является наблю- даемым (регистрируемым) феноменом». Этот момент неоднократно подчерки-


20


вался А.Ю. Севальниковым: «не только какие-то динамические характеристики объекта отсутствуют, но и сам этот объект реально, актуально не существу- ет до измерения» [Севальников, 2009]. В наиболее известной копенгагенской трактовке квантовой механики, сформулированной, главным образом, Н. Бо- ром, указывается, что мы можем знать «как реальные» только результаты из- мерений. Иначе говоря, нельзя задавать вопрос о том, что собой представляет электрон или фотон, когда фактически не производится его наблюдение (изме- рение) с помощью экспериментальной установки того или другого типа. Такая точка зрения запрещает спрашивать о сущности квантового феномена до изме- рения. Только регистрированные феномены объявляются реально существую- щими, и никакой другой более глубокой реальности нет. Но ведь на самом деле эта более глубокая реальность объективно существует! Просто существование носит иной характер, причем существование квантовомеханических частиц в таком состоянии (до взаимодействия с экспериментальной установкой) таково, что нельзя говорить априори даже о числе частиц [Белинский, 2003]. Как от- мечает в своей монографии А.Ю. Севальников [Севальников, 2009]: «понятие существования значительно расширяется. Необходимо рассматривать некий трансцендентальный слой реальности, на котором существуют квантовомеха- нические частицы до их актуализации». Электрон, вылетающий из электрон- ной пушки, но не долетевший до экрана со щелями в первом вышеописанном эксперименте, существует потенциально, но не актуально, и его поэтому нельзя понимать в виде локальной, ограниченной частицы со вполне определенными свойствами. Также объективно существует и фотон во втором эксперименте, когда он еще незарегистрирован экспериментатором, но его тоже, строго говоря, нельзя понимать в виде какой-то материальной корпускулы до самого момента регистрации. Только после взаимодействия с экспериментальной установкой того или другого типа фотон приобретает свои свойства. Для квантовомеханиче- ских частиц в состоянии до измерения, на наш взгляд, ближе подходит название трансцендентной квантово-информационной волны или частицы (определе- ние которой дано выше). А теперь попытаемся ответить на поставленные вопро- сы в первом и втором опыте.

Ответы на вопросы первого опыта (двухщелевой эксперимент) выглядят та- ким образом:

1 — электрон до взаимодействия с экспериментальной установкой не суще- ствует ни в виде локальной, материальной частицы, ни в виде материальных волн, а существует только в потенции в виде трансцендентной квантово- информационной волны или частицы, несущей информацию об электроне; сама экспериментальная установка или точнее ее конфигурация определяет какие свойства трансцендентной электронной волны


21


будут наблюдаться — свойства волны или свойства частицы;2. — разрушающий интерференцию эффект измерения

(наблюдения) при прохождении электронной (или фотонной) трансцендентной волны через две щели нельзя устранить в принципе, потому что трансцендентные волны пре- вращаются в материальные частицы в процессе взаимодействия с эксперимен- тальной установкой того или другого типа. Интерферируют трансцендентные (ненаблюдаемые) волны или частицы, вызывая статистическую волновую кар- тину распределения материальных частиц на экране — поглотителе.


22


Ответы на поставленные вопросы второго опыта (эксперимент с отложен- ным выбором) таковы:

1.фотон до взаимодействия с экспериментальной установкой существует только в потенции в виде трансцендентной квантово-информационной вол- ны, несущей информацию о фотоне;

2.экспериментальная установка того или другого типа определяет в момент взаимодействия с фотонной трансцендентной волной, какие свойства фотона будут наблюдаться.

Вернемся к проблеме, поставленной в заголовке нашей статьи. По- видимому, из описания трех опытов и данной интерпретации уже стало ясно, что на основе материалистической парадигмы, как она выше сформулирована в трех принципах, объяснить и понять квантовые эксперименты невозможно. Ведь понятие материи, как оно сформулировано в принципе 1, на квантовом уровне ясно обнаруживает внутреннюю противоречивость. В самом деле, если квантовый феномен существует независимо от наблюдения (измерения), то можно говорить только о его трансцендентном, потенциальном существова- нии. В актуальном, материальном виде до взаимодействия с эксперименталь- ной установкой квантовый феномен не существует. Если же мы пытаемся ощутить (наблюдать, измерять) квантовый феномен, и понять, чем он явля- ется, то вид этого феномена определяется типом экспериментальной установ- ки и, таким образом, он не является независимым. К тому же ЭПР-парадокс и установленная в опытах квантовая нелокальность полностью опрокидывает сложившиеся представления локального реализма (пункты а), б), принципа 3 материалистической парадигмы), а известный принцип неопределенности Гейзенберга нарушает принцип причинного детерминизма (принцип 2). От- сюда видно, что сама ортодоксальная материалистическая парадигма на кван- товом уровне терпит крах, и поэтому мы должны сомневаться в справедливо- сти принципа эпифеноменализма и всей материалистической онтологии. От- сюда следует, что нельзя с уверенностью отрицать существование Бога, транс- цендентных объектов или любых экстрасенсорных феноменов, как принято в материалистической парадигме. Острота противостояния науки и религии может постепенно уйти в небытие.

Полионтичная парадигмаНа смену сугубо материалистическому мировоззрению А.Ю.

Севальниковым предлагается полионтичная парадигма. В этой парадигме «рассматривается два модуса сущего — потенциальное и актуальное. Потенциальное — это то, что опи- сывается квантовой механикой и проявляется в соответствующих квантовых фе- номенах, а актуальное — это непосредственно нам данное, точнее описываемое классической физикой» [Севальников, 2009]. В этом же ключе природу мира рассматривает и С.И. Доронин: «сейчас квантовой теории осталось сделать со- всем небольшой шаг, причем



23

даже не теоретический, а чисто психологический: немного изменить терминологию и более доступным языком рассказать о до- стигнутых результатах. В том числе о двойственной природе всех окружающих объектов — нелокальной (духовной, нетварной) и плотной (материальной, твар- ной). О том, что в основе классического мира лежит нелокальный квантовый источник реальности, который находится вне пространства и времени, который


24


нематериален». Последнее предложение С.И. Доронина по смыслу полностью совпадает с двумя модусами бытия — потенциальным (нелокальным) и актуаль- ным (плотным). В последние два десятка лет разрабатывается экзистенциаль- ная интерпретация квантовой механики, основанная на теории декогеренции [Zurek; Joos, 2006]. Классическая реальность, согласно данному подходу, воз- никает из квантовой при наличии взаимодействия между объектами и переда- чи квантовой информации экспериментальной установке, наблюдателям или любому другому окружению. Обратимся, к примеру, к двухщелевому экспери- менту. Как только мы получали информацию, через какую из щелей прошла квантово-информационная волна, она превращалась в материальную частицу с нарушением интерференции. Эта интерпретация квантовой механики нахо- дится в рамках полионтичной парадигмы. В развиваемом подходе отнюдь не отрицается материалистический подход как таковой и материальные объекты, а только устанавливаются им границы, за пределами которых реализуется и су- ществует квантово-информационный мир.

Заключение1. Рассмотрение трех квантовых парадоксальных экспериментов

— двухще- левого (1), с отложенным выбором (2) и ЭПР-парадокса (3) определенно ука- зывают на недостаточность материалистической парадигмы. Эта доктрина не может описать, объяснить и предвидеть странности и феномены квантового мира. Понятие материи становится противоречивым на квантовом уровне. В связи с этим мы должны сомневаться и в истинности материалистической он- тологии. При этом сам материалистический подход не отрицается, но ему уста- навливаются границы, за пределами которых он не является справедливым.

2.В качестве мировоззрения, схватывающего одновременно материальный и квантовый мир, может утвердиться полионтичная парадигма, рассматрива- ющая сущее на двух модусах — потенциальном и актуальном. Единство мира не отрицается, но в нем выделяется два структурных этажа — два модуса бы- тия, что может свидетельствовать о двойственной природе Вселенной.

ReferencesАвченко, 2005 — Авченко О. В. Прозрение Пьера Шардена /

Philosophy and Cosmology 2005, part 2 (Vol.4) — С. 12-34Белинский, 2003 — Белинский А.В. Квантовая нелокальность и

отсутствие априорных значений измеряемых величин в экспериментах с фотона- ми. // УФН. Том 173, № 8, стр 905-909, 2003.


25


Госвами, 2008 — Госвами Амит. Самосознающая вселенная. Как сознание соз- дает материальный мир. М. Открытый мир, Ганга, 2008. 448 с.

Гринштейн, 2008 — Дж. Гринштейн, А. Зайонц. Квантовый вызов. Современ- ные исследования оснований квантовой механики. Пер. с англ. Учебное пособие. Издательский дом «Интеллект», 2008. 400 с.

Доронин, 2007 — Доронин С.И. Квантовая магия. 2007. 336 стр. Электронная библиотека Kodges.ru

Ленин, 1961 — Ленин В.И. Материализм и эмпириокритицизм / Полн. собр. соч. Т. 18. М., 1961. Стр. 131.


26


Марксистско, 1968 — Марксистско-ленинская философия, диалектический материализм. Ред. коллегия: А. Д. Макаров и др. М., «Мысль», 1968. 367 стр.

Менский, 2000 — М.Б. Менский. Квантовая механика: новые эксперименты, новые приложения и новые формулировки старых вопросов.// УФН. Том 170, № 6, , стр. 632- 648, 2000

Севальников, 2009 — Севальников А.Ю. Интерпретации квантовой механики.

В поисках новой онтологии. М. 2009, 192 с.Тарасов, 2013 — Тарасов Л.В. Основы квантовой механики. Учебное

пособие для Вузов, 2013. 273 стр.Фейнман, 1987 — Фейнман Р. Характер физических законов. М.: Наука, 1987.

Библиотечка «Квант», вып.62.Философия, 2004 — Философия: Учебник / Под ред. проф. В.Н.

Лавриненко. — 2-е изд., испр. и доп. — M.: Юристъ. 2004. 511 стр.

Фок, 1936 — Фок В.А., Эйнштейн А., Подольский Б., Розен Н., Бор Н. Можно ли считать , что квантово-механическое описание физической реальности является полным?// УФН том 16, вып. 4, 440- 457, 1936.

Aspect, 1981 — Aspect A., Grangier P., and Roger G. Experimental test of realistic local theories via Bell’s theorem. //Phys. Rev. Lett.Vol. 47., 460-463, 1981.

Aspect, 1982a — Aspect A., Grangier P., and Roger G. Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedanken experiment: A new violation of Bell’s inequalities.// Phys. Rev. Lett.Vol. 49., 91-94, 1982.

Aspect, 1982b — Aspect A., Dalibard J., and Roger G. Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Phys. Rev. Lett.Vol. 49., 1804-1808, 1982.

Clayton, 2010 — Philip Clayton. Unsolved dilemmas: the concept of matter in the history of philosophy and in contemporary physics.- Information and the nature of reality. From Physics to Metaphysics. Edited by P. Davies and N. H. Gre- gersen. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom. 2010. 382 p.

Einstein, 1935 — Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N. Can Quantum-Mechanical De- scription of Physical Reality be Considered Complete// Physical Review, 47, 1935, P.777.

Experimental realization of Wheeler’s delayed-choice GedankenExperiment// Sci- ence 315, 5814 (2007) 966 ; Доступно в

Интернете : arXiv:quant-ph/0610241 Hellmuth, 1987 — Hellmuth Т, Walther Н., Zajonc А. and Schleich W: Delayed- choice experiments in

quantum interference. Phys. Rev. А. Vol. 35. Рр. 2532-2541. 1987.

Jacques, 2007 — V. Jacques, E Wu1, F. Grosshans1, F. Treussart1, P. Grangier, A. As- pect, and J.-F. Roch.



27

Joos, 2006 — Joos E. The Emergence of Classicality from Quantum Theory. In: The Re-Emergence of Emergence. Edited by P. Clayton and P. Davies. Oxford. University Press. 2006. 330 p.

Kaiser, 2012 — Florian Kaiser, Thomas Coudreau, Pérola Milman, Daniel B. Os- trowsky, Sébastien Tanzilli. Entanglement-Enabled Delayed-Choice Experi- ment// Science 2, November 2012: Vol. 338 no. 6107 pp. 634-637.

Mermin, 1985 — Mermin, N.D. Is the moon there when nobody looks? Reality and the quantum theory. // Physics Today, April 1985, p. 38-47.


28


Radin, 2006 — Radin, Dean I. Entangled minds: extransensory experiences in a quantum reality. Paraview, 191 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10011, P. 357. 2006.

Simon, 2007 — Simon Groblacher, Tomasz Paterek, Rainer Kaltenbaek, Caslav Brukner, Marek Zukowski, Markus Aspelmeyer, Anton Zeilinger. An experimental test of non-local realism.// Nature, Vol. 446, Pp. 871-875. , 2007.

Tonomura, 1989 — Tonomura A., Endo J., Matsuda T., Kawasaki T. and Exawa

H. Demonstration of single-electron buildup of an interference pattern. Amer. J. Phys. Vol. 57. Pp. 117-120. 1989.

Wheeler, 1978 — Wheeler J.A. In Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechan- ics. New York: Academic Press, Pp 948, 1978.

Zurek — Zurek W. H. Decoherence and the Transition from Quantum to Classical. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0306072

ReferencesAvchenko О. V. Prozrenie Piera Shardena / Philosophy and Cosmology

2005, part 2 (Vol.4) — P. 12-34Aspect A., Grangier P., and Roger G. Experimental realization of

Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen-Bohm Gedanken experiment: A new violation of Bell’s inequalities.// Phys. Rev. Lett.1982, Vol. 49., -Pp. 91-94.

Aspect A., Grangier P., and Roger G. Experimental test of realistic local theories via Bell’s theorem. //Phys. Rev. Lett.1981, Vol. 47, — Pp. 460-463.

Aspect A., Dalibard J., and Roger G. Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Phys. Rev. Lett., 1982, Vol. 49, — Pp.1804-1808.

Belinski A.V. Kvantovaya nelokalnost i otsutstvie apriornich znacheni ismeraemich velichin v experimentach s fotonami [Quantum unlocality and absence of a priori values of measurands in experiments with photons] // UFN, 2003, 173,№ 8, —. Pp. 905-909.

Doronin S. I. Kvantovaya magiya. [Quantum magic] — E-library Kodges.ru, 2007.Dj. Grinsthein, A. Zaionc. Kvantovi visov. Sovremennie issledovania

osnovanii kvantovoi mechanici. [A quantum call. The modern researches of grounds of quantum mechanics] «Intellect», 2008.

Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N. Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete// Physical Review, 47, 1935, — P.777.

Fok V. A., Einstein A, Podolski, B. Rosen N., Bor N. Mojno li schitat, chto kvantovo- mechanicheskoe opisanie physicheskoj realnosti yavljatsya polnim? [Whether it is possible to consider that quantum — mechanical description of physical reality is


29


considered complete] // UFN ,1936, 16, producing 4, — Pp. 440-457.

Florian Kaiser, Thomas Coudreau, Pérola Milman, Daniel B. Ostrowsky, Sébastien Tanzilli. Entanglement-Enabled Delayed-Choice Experiment // Science 2, November 2012: Vol. 338 no. 6107 pp. 634-637.

Gosvami, Amit. Samososnaujya vselennaya. Kak sosnanie sosdajt material mir. [Conscious Universe. As consciousness creates the material world] Open world. Ganga — Мoscow., 2008.

Hellmuth Т, Walther Н., Zajonc А. and Schleich W: Delayed-choice experiments in quantum interference. Phys. Rev. А. Vol. 35. Рр. 2532-2541. 1987.


30


Joos E. The Emergence of Classicality from Quantum Theory. In: The Re-Emer- gence of Emergence. Edited by P. Clayton and P. Davies. Oxford. University Press. 2006. 330 p.

Lenin V.I. Materialism i empiriocritizim.[ Materialism and empiriocritizim] — T. 18. — Moscow, 1961

Marksistko-leninskaya philosophy, dialektichesky materialism. [Marx-Lenin philosophy, dialectical materialism] Release: A.D. Makarov .

«Idea»,. — Moscow, 1968.Mermin, N.D. Is the moon there when nobody looks? Reality and

the quantum theory. // Physics Today, April 1985, -Pp. 38-47.M.B. Menski. Kvantovaya mechanika: novie experiments, novie

prilozhenia i novie formulirovki starich voprosov [Quantum mechanics: new experiments, new applications and new formulations of old questions] // UFN, 2000, 170,№ 6, — Pp. 632-648.

Pheiman R. Charakter physic zakonov. [Character of physical laws ] — Science, —

a library is a quantum, producing 62., Moscow , 1987.Philip Clayton. Unsolved dilemmas: the concept of matter in the history

of philosophy and in contemporary physics.- Information and the nature of reality. From Physics to Metaphysics. Edited by P. Davies and N. H. Gregersen. — Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom, 2010.

Philosophy: Uchebnik/ Pod redaction prof. V.N. Lavrinenko [Philosophy: textbook.

Release of prof. V. N. Lavrinenko] . Lawyer. — Moscow, . 2004.Sevalnikov A. J. Interpretacii kvantovoj mechaniki. V poiskah novoj

ontology. [In- terpretations of quantum mechanics. In search of new ontology] — Moscow. 2009.

Tarasov L.V. Osnovi kvantovoj mechaniki. [Bases of quantum mechanics] - Moscow 2013.

Tonomura A. , Endo J., Matsuda T., Kawasaki T. and Exawa H. Demonstration of single-electron buildup of an interference pattern. Amer. J. Phys. Vol. 57. Pp. 117-120. 1989.

Radin, Dean I. Entangled minds: extransensory experiences in a quantum reality. — Paraview, 191 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10011. 2006.

Simon Groblacher, Tomasz Paterek, Rainer Kaltenbaek, Caslav Brukner, Marek Zu- kowski, Markus Aspelmeyer, Anton Zeilinger. An experimental test of non- local realism.// Nature, 2007,Vol. 446, — Pp. 871-875.

V. Jacques, E Wu1, F. Grosshans1, F. Treussart1, P. Grangier, A. Aspect, and J.- F. Roch. Experimental realization of Wheeler’s delayed-choice Gedan- kenExperiment // Science 315, 5814 (2007) 966 ; Internet : arXiv:quant- ph/0610241

Wheeler J.A. In Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Academic Press, Pp 948, 1978.



31

Zurek W. H. Decoherence and the Transition from Quantum to Classical. http://xxx. lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0306072


25

THE THEORY OF EVOLUTIONOleg Bazaluk — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor,

International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology(Kyiv, Ukraine)


The book The Theory of Evolution: from the Space Vacuum to Neural Ensembles and Moving Forward, an edition of 100 copies, was published in Russian language, in December 2014 in Kiev. Its Russian version is here: http://en.bazaluk.com/journals.html. Introduction, Chapter 10 and Conclusion published in English for the first time.

Since 2004 author have been researching in the field of theory of Evolution, Big History. The book was written on the base of analysis of more than 2000 primary sources of this research topic. The volume is 90,000 words (with Reference). The book is for a wide range of professionals, from students to professors and researchers working in the fields of: philosophical anthropology, philosophy, Big History, cosmology, biology, neuroscience and etc. In the book, the author defines the evolution as continuous and nonlinear complication of the structure of matter, the types of interaction and environments; analyzes existing in modern science and philosophy approaches to the research of the process of evolution, degree of development of the factors and causes of evolution. Unifying interdisciplinary researches of evolution in cosmology, biology, neuroscience and philosophy, the author presents his vision of the model of «Evolving Matter», which allows us to consider not only the laws of transition of space vacuum in neural ensembles but also to see our Universe as a complication, heterogeneous organization. Interdisciplinary amount of information on the theory of evolution is systematized and a new method of world perception is proposed in the book.

IntroductionIn the previous works, more than a decade, the author had been

perfecting the argumentation of the model of evolution of the world — «The Evolving Matter» developedbyhimsince 2000 year. Thepeculiarresultoftheseresearcheswastheworks:«Cosmic Travels — Travelling Mind» and «Philosophical Problems of Cosmology» [Bazaluk, 2012; Bazaluk, 2013], in which the author presented the latest versions of the model. Approbation of the ideas took place at many scientific and philosophical meetings of various formats. However, the main discussions took place in the course of communication with members of Philosophical and Cosmological Society (organized in 2004) (http://www.bazaluk.com/) and in the journal “Philosophy and Cosmology» (http://ispcjournal.org/) (published since 2004).

Inthesuggestedresearch, theauthoranalyzestheexistingapproachesinthemodern science and

26



philosophy as to researching of evolution, the degree of development of its factors and causes. Unifying interdisciplinary researches of evolution in cosmology, biology, neurobiology and philosophy, the author presents his vision of evolution in the model of «Evolving Matter». The author defines «evolution» as continuous and nonlinear complication and presents it as a formal model. The formalization of the factors and causes of evolution allowed operating by them in constructing of certain logical models (schemes) that led the author to the debatable conclusions, which are essentially differ ent from modern ideas of evolution of our Universe.

© Bazaluk Oleg, 2015

Bazaluk Oleg. The theory of evolution


27

In the course of writing the book, the author solved the following tasks:1. Carry out a general historical-philosophical analysis of the theory of

evolution incosmology, biology, neurobiology, and philosophy;

2. Clarify the meaning of the concept of «evolution»; define evolution as blocks of continuous and nonlinear complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments; argue characteristics of this definition;

3. Unify the factors and causes of evolution of the Universe, biological life and

humanity; show their universality in the scale of evolution of any state of matter;

4.Prove that evolution of Material World is a consequence of the variability of the factors and causes of evolution («Evolution of Evolution»);

5. On the basis of the unified and variable factors and causes of evolution, offer the systematization of knowledge in models of evolution of inert, lively and intelligent matter;

6.Having taken as the basis, features of construction of evolution models of inert, lively and intelligent matter; formalize and extrapolate them in the scale of Cosmos. The results are represented in the model of «Evolving Matter».

Unfortunately, perform tasks within the framework of the scientific methodology it is not feasible. Therefore, in cases of retrospection and extrapolation of cosmic scale, we used philosophical methodology that performs the function of intellectual intelligence in cognition, and also admits more arbitrary interpretation of scientific facts as applied to the scale of the Universe. Thus, the logic of the book is based on scientific and philosophical methodology [Bazaluk, 2012], which, in our opinion, allows us to consider evolution of Material World, even in the scale of our Universe.

Structure of the Universe:the model of «Evolving matter» (Chapter 10)

Having considered the model of evolution of inert, living and intelligent matter, and two transition states of matter — bioinert and bio-intelligent matter [Bazaluk, 2014], we came very close to the author’s understanding of evolution of the Universe.

Preliminary, summarize known facts:1. Complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and

environmentsin the Universe are effected by centers, continuously and nonlinearly, approximately13.7 billion years.

2. Complication of structure and functions of the Universe happens under the


28


influence of the same (Universal) factors and causes of evolution.The author distinguishes three main factors of Evolution as complication:

a) Continuity of self-complication structure, types of interaction and environments of any state of matter, which is supplemented by:

– Blocks of continuous self-complication;– Principle of dominance of blocks of continuous self-

complication;b) Nonlinear complication of structure, types of interaction and

environmentsof any state of matter, which is specified by factors:

– Hierarchical nonlinear complication;– Direction of nonlinear hierarchical complication;

c) Isolation of complication.The author considers that the causes of evolution as complication are:

a) Active principle, which is inherently the basis for the initial elements of any


27


state of matter, and forms a self-complication;b)Natural selection as the impact of external environment.

The author believes that in the course of evolution there is complication of the factors and causes, which lead to the formation and development of a definite number of states of matter.

3. Each state of matter is a new level of complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments. As a result of complication of each new state of matter is the formation of invariant hierarchies, providing fixation of the state of matter in the structure of the Universe and its co-evolution with other states of matter. Each new state of matter it is new opportunities in the organization of cycling of matter, energy and information, as well as ways of moving in space.

4. On an example of the Solar System it can be clearly seen only one sequence complication of the structure of the Universe: inert → living → intelligent matter. Or: inert → bioinert →living → bio-intelligent →intelligent matter. The modern understanding of evolution and co-evolution of these states of matter in varying degrees is considered in the standard model of the Universe, the synthetic theory of evolution and concepts of noogenesis.

5.In the scale of the Solar System, states of matter have been formed sequentially, at intervals of approximately 3 billion years:

A) Approximately 6 (5.5) billion years ago the Solar System had formed (a system of inert matter);

B)Approximately 3.5 (3) billion years ago, as a result of the geological evolution, on one of the planets of the Solar System the first biological organisms emerged and gained a foothold. For 3 billion years the modern biosphere had been formed (a system of living matter);

C)Approximately 5 (2) million years ago, as a result of neuroevolution, on the basis of the highly advanced biosphere of the Earth, the first structures of intelligent matter appeared. The Noosphere started forming (a system of intelligent matter).Thus, three states of matter known to modern science (on an example

of complication of the Solar System) can be represented as follows relative to the arrow of time (Fig. 1):

30



Figure1. Inert matter — 1; Living matter — 2; Intelligent matter — 3. The bases of nesting cones are bifurcation points, to which are suitable transitional

states of matter, but they overcome the structures of matter, types of interaction and environments which are not typical for “mother systems” of

functions.



27

Extrapolate the received results in the scale of the Solar System on the structure of the Universe. In the base of the model, complication of the Universe (the model «Evolving matter»), the universal factors and causes of evolution which were established by us are laid down, their ability to variability, as well as observations and conclusions resulting from the modeling of continuous and non-linear complication of the structure, types of interaction and environments, inert, living and intelligent matter in the scale of the Solar System [Bazaluk, 2014]. As a result of the formalization of the information, which is known to Modern Science and various combinations with this information, we get the following conclusions:

1. Inert matter is not the initial state of matter. Apparently, it was preceded by another state of matter, which is represented by the concept «dark matter» in modern cosmology. Our Universe as «daughter» state of matter is nested in «dark matter» and complicated under its direct influence.

Thus, it is more correct Evolution of our Universe to be portrayed as continuous and

non-linear complication of the four states of matter (Fig. 2).2.As we know from the previously considered transient states of

matter (bioinert and bio- intelligent matter) [Bazaluk , 2014], «daughter» state of matter at the earliest stages of its development includes certain elements of the structure, types of interaction and environments of the “mother” state of matter. Following the regularity, we assume that the space vacuum as the initial and determining space of inert matter consists of the manifestations of the state of matter Y, from which, and in the scale of which, is carried out the continuous and nonlinear complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments in our Universe. The author admits that different states of plasma and other manifestations of «dark matter» are environments of the state of matter Y.

3.Given the facts that virtually the whole volume of knowledge about the structure and the Evolution of the Universe was received as a result of the research of the past, we suppose that the number of processes and phenomena are ascribed to our Universe, and features of its complication, in fact, belong to the system state of matter Y, in the scale of which our Universe is becoming more complicating. Among them, it is gravitation, etc.


32


Figure 2. Y — state of matter which was preceded of our Universe (so-called «dark matter»), 1 — inert matter (our Universe), 2 — living matter, 3 — intelligent matter.

1


29


4.The author believes that the Universe under the influence of the «mother» state of matter Y and the universal factors and causes of evolution, just as (by analogy) as observed in the scale of the Solar System states of matter, is complicated not in general but peculiar «centres». In some parts of the Universe the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments are in one evolutionary state (e.g., as in the scale of the Milky Way and the Solar System in particular), in another part, in a state of greater or lesser complication.

If we extrapolate the numerical values of complication of states of matter in the scale of the Solar System to the scale of the Universe (more precisely its separate «centres»), we obtain the figures and conclusions which may undermine any scientist’s reputation. However, as in our research we use the scientific and philosophical methodology and do not affirm, but only make assumptions as part of the formal model, we can announce the results. If the age of the Universe, which naturally arose in the preceded («mother») state of matter Y, is 13.7 billion years, that on the average, every three billion years, in its separate “centres” new state of matter appears (in the result of variability of the factors and causes of evolution). After the simplest calculations, it turns out that intelligent matter which is in the scale of the Solar System only begins to be formed; in other parts of the Universe it complicated by more than 3 billion years. Moreover, on its basis the fourth state of matter arose (called Х ), which had also been developing for 3 billion years and lay the basis for the formation and development of the fifth state of matter.

Thus, it is more correct to represent evolution in which involved our Universe as

consistent complication of five states of matter (Fig. 3).5.Extrapolation of observations over complication of states of matter

in the scale of the Solar System on the structure of the Universe arrives to one more conclusion. Continuous and nonlinear complication of structure of matter, types of interaction and environments may promote understanding of the concept of dark energy, which, according to modern representations, is 74% of our Universe. Pay our attention how in the scale of biosphere and then noosphere, cycling of matter, energy and information as concentrated, are reduced to the notorious singularity point from which is supposed to have originated our Universe. Assume that intelligent matter of the Earth will really have been evolving for 3 billion years. However, as cosmologists predict that in 1 billion years a biological life on the Earth, in modern understanding, by the reason of the Sun heating (whose activity increases by about 10% every billion years) will become basically impossible. Therefore, in the struggle for existence, intelligent matter of the Earth has to reach to new, cosmic scale. As the future of intelligent matter is connected with the cosmic scale, it is possible to conclude that in the next state of matter X , and especially Х , which arise on the basis of intelligent1 2

30



matter, possible processes will be happening and bring to the formation of the newUniverse (or states of matter Y which was preceded of our Universe)?!

Following the logic of formalization and combination of obtained elements of a formal model, we postulate that the so-called «new universes» are born in certain periods of time. If it is assumed that the cycle of continuous and nonlinear complication of states of matter in the separate centres consists of six variant transitions of the factors and causes of evolution (perhaps a little less or a little more), it can be assumed that «new universes» are born approximately every 18 billion years, without cancelling the «old universes».

1



31

Figure 3. Y — state of matter which preceded our Universe (so-called «dark matter»), 1 — inert matter, 2 — living matter, 3 — intelligent

matter,X — state of matter which follows after intelligent matter.

6. If it is assumed that the variability of the factors and causes of evolution really differs in different centres of the Universe, the view of our Universe changes significantly. It turns out that the Universe, which is «observed» by a man, is no more than a fragment of heterogeneous space «universes» which are in different stages of complication. While the Milky Way with the adjacent space passes one stage of continuous and nonlinear complication, in other centres of the Universe, the structure of matter, types of interactions and environments are in other stages of complication. That, what a person observes in Cosmos, is not accelerating expansion of our Universe, and accelerating expansion of «universes» — various «centres» of complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments.

7. According to modern concepts accelerating expansion of the Universe began about 6-5 billion years ago. We assume that the birth of each new state of matter influences (or at least — is connected with) on the accelerating expansion of our Universe.

ConclusionOn the basis of our research, based on the main results of the

universal theory of evolution, presented in the model «Evolving matter», we will sum up those objectives which were set at the beginning of the monograph [Bazaluk, 2014]:

1. In the first chapter of the monograph, we have carried out a historical — philosophical analysis of the concept of «evolution», and also considered the degree of development of the theories of evolution in cosmology, biology, neurobiology and philosophy. As a result of our


32


analysis we have found that, despite the recognition of the fact of evolution in science and philosophy, the concept of «evolution» is understood differently; in a different way the factors and causes of evolution are defined; not decided as for reducibility or irreducibility of micro and macro evolutionary processes, etc. Between scientific and philosophical theories of evolution there is no continuity and correlation of the main results. Each scientific discipline



33

and philosophy researches the evolution through its specialization, and considers its understanding as absolute truth.

2. In the theory «Evolving matter», the author has decided to consider evolution not as the development “evolutionary” or “revolutionary”, but as a complication. The author defines the evolution as complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments and in unity and conflict of opposites. Speaking about evolution as complication of the world, the author means complication of three components of physical reality: 1) the structure of matter; 2) types of interaction (relations) between the structure of matter; 3) environments, in which complication of these structures and interactions, are carried out, and in a varying degree, determines the characteristics of the environment. The complication of three components of physical reality occurs according to the law of dialectics established by Friedrich Engels: «The movement and development in the nature, society and thinking due to the split single interpenetrating opposites and a resolution of the contradictions which arise between them through the struggle».

3. Having considered all factors and causes of evolution in the scientific and philosophical theories, the author chose three main factors and two causes of evolution, which, in his opinion, determine complication of any state of matter (known to modern science or not discovered yet). At the same time, the author believes that namely complication of the factors and causes of evolution (evolution of evolution) makes the transition from one («mother») state of matter to another («daughter»).

To the factors of evolution as complication, the author attributed:a)Continuity of self-complication structure, types of interaction

and environments of any state of matter, which is supplemented by:– Blocks of continuous self-complication;– Principle of dominance of blocks of continuous self-

complication;b)Nonlinear complication of structure, types of interaction and

environmentsof any state of matter, which is specified by factors:

– Hierarchical nonlinear complication;– Direction of nonlinear hierarchical complication;

c) Isolation of complication.The author considers that the causes of evolution as complication are:

a)Active principle, which is inherently the basis for the initial elements of any

state of matter, and forms a self-complication;b)Natural selection as the impact of external environment.

Interaction of internal active origin of any state of matter with natural selection, as the influence of the environment, forms a regulatory compromise, which is manifested in invariant states of the


34


structure of matter, types of interaction and environments of any state of matter.

According to the author’s research, all material facts, which is used by modern science and philosophy, is explained by the established factors and causes of evolution, which allow speaking about their universality in the scales of complicating matter.

4. Studying the modern scientific and philosophical theories of evolution, the author discovered the unity of micro and macroevolutionary processes. The basis of this unity is the variability of the factors and causes of evolution. The transition from the Microcosm to the Macrocosm in inert, living, intelligent and any other states of



35

matter (Y, X , X , etc.) are a consequence of the impact of regulatory compromise and

1 2variability of the factors and causes of evolution which are complicated during thetime, complicate the structure and functions of the Universe.

5. Based on the formulated universals of evolution, the author reviewed the material facts, which are used by modern science, considering the evolution of the Universe and biological organisms, and offered his understanding of evolution models of inert, living and intelligent matter. At the same time, if the consideration of the main stages of complication of inert and living matter was greatly facilitated thanks to achievements of evolutionary theories in these fields, the author made the model of complication of intelligent matter (noogenesis) «start from scratch», that was impacted on its quality.

Systematizing available material facts to modern science, the author has proved:

1) despite the apparent incompatibility of evolution of the Universe, biosphere and noosphere, in fact it is unified process of complication of the structure of matter, types of interaction and environments; 2) all complication of matter that observed in the scale of the Solar System follow the same factors and causes of evolution; 3) transitions one state of matter to another: inert matter → living matter → intelligent matter, observed in the scale of the Earth, are caused by universals of the evolution and their variability; 4) complication of each state of matter begins with the initial and defining space, lasts about 3 billion years and has its limits; 5) having reached a limit of self-complication of structure, types of interaction and environments, the system of any state of matter creates conditions for the formation of new «daughter» state of matter. In consequence of full potential of opportunities cycling of matter, energy and information, «mother» state of matter is spent on co-evolution with«daughter» state of matter.

6. During the work on the models of evolution of states of matter, the author discovered and considered transitional states of matter. Their importance lies in the fact that: 1) namely, they complicate the systematization of researches, because, on the one hand, they are the highest structures of «mother» state of matter, on the other hand, they are included in the more perfect blocks of «daughter» state of matter, partially manifesting the functions in its activity; 2) Transition states of matter is maximum admitted limit of continuous and nonlinear complication of«mother» state of matter. Modern science does not know examples of complication of the structure, types of interactions and environments in «mother» state of matter to go beyond hierarchy of transition state of matter.

7. Having taken for a basis of features of complication of structure of matter, and types of interaction and environments in scales of the Solar


36


System (inert matter → living matter → intelligent matter), the author extrapolated the obtained results to the scale of the Cosmos. The author presented the obtained results in the model of«Evolving matter». What new does the author offer in his model of understanding of the world?

The first, as minimum, five states of matter are evolving in the scale of the Universe. One of unknown states of matter to modern science is «mother» state of our Universe. The Universe is developing in it, and probably separate features which are attributed by humanity to the Universe (e.g. gravitation) are actually manifestations of states of matter Y. The second, unidentified state of matter by humanity was born on the basis of highly developed intelligent matter. In the model, it is indicated as the



37

state of X . The model admits the state X , from which is probably formed the stateY — so-called «new universe» is born. These successive stages of complication ofstates of matter can include a certain number of chain links, but the result is one — the birth of «new universe» saving «old Universe».

The second, the Universe which is perceived by humanity, is a fragment of space in which continuous and nonlinear complication of structure of matter, types of interaction and environments are happening. This complication is happening by«centers», and the structure of matter, fields of interactions and environment in them, are at different stages of complication. Therefore, speaking about the observed Universe as «our Universe» from the author’s point of view, it is incorrectly. «Our Universe» is nothing other than a plurality of universes which are observed by us in this or that state of complication.

The third, noosphere of the Earth is only the beginning of noogenesis. In future, as minimum 3 billion years of continuous and non-linear complication are expected. Humanity will expect big changes. About the scale of changes we can judge on the example of complication inert and living matter in the scale of the Solar System. Inert matter had been complicated for 3 billion years from quarks to polymers, living matter from RNA molecules to mammals. Complication of intelligent matter of the Earth began with neural ensembles of subconsciousness, which separates out the family of the most progressive primates (hominid) from the animal world. For 5 million years neuroevolution, socio-cultural evolution and evolution of technologies of the most ancient hominids have reached to the mastering of near Cosmos. Taking into account that in 1 billion years the condition of the Earth will be unsuitable for biological life due to physical changes in the sun, a strategy of evolution of intelligent matter becomes clearer:

a) Maximum full liberation from factors of the biological environment; substituting them with more reliable and controlled artificial constructs;

b) Mastering of near and far Cosmos; complication of the socio-cultural

environment and technologies to the level which allow providing noosphere fromthe destructive influence of Cosmos.

ReferencesBazaluk, 2012 — Bazaluk Oleg Space Travels — Traveling Mentality:

the course of lectures — Kiev: KNT, 2012. — 424 p.Bazaluk, 2013 — Bazaluk Oleg, Vladlenova Iliana Philosophical

Problems of Cosmology: monograph — Kharkov: NTU «Kharkov


38


polytechnic institute», 2013. — 190 p.Bazaluk, 2014 — Bazaluk O.A. The theory of Evolution: from the space

vacuum to neural networks and moving forward: Monograph. − Kiev: ISPC, 2014. − 312 p.

Bazaluk, 2015 — Bazaluk Oleg. The basic postulates of the universal evolution model

«Evolving matter» / Philosophy and Cosmology 2015 (Vol. 14) — Kyiv: ISPC, 2015. — P. 11-20

34


IDENTITY BETWEEN SPACE-TIME AND PHYSICAL SUBSTANCE’S EXTENSION

jie Chen — PhD CandidateDepartment of Philosophy, Peking University

(Beijing, China)

E- mail: [email protected]

This paper argues the identity between space-time and physical substance’s extension following Descartes and Einstein. Field and particles’ distinct spatiotemporal attributes are derived from their different extension types. Through elucidating the continuous space-time of the field world, we can supersede the genesis of the universe by the beginning of the particle world. Given two proposals: (i) any fundamental particle is finite but unbounded, (ii) a singularity is the only site for transformations of two extension types of physical substance, and then by the general theory of relativity, we determine the flexible intertwined structure of the cosmological time and its irreversibility. The thermodynamic entropy can only be applied in the particle world, which indicates that the thermodynamic time is a constituent part of the cosmological time. The indestructibility of physical substance reveals that the reciprocal transformations of two extension types of physical substance enable a self-sufficient universe.

Key Words: Identity, Space-time, Physical Substance, Extension, Self-sufficient Universe

1.IntroductionAfter Descartes, Einstein argued the identity between space (space-

time) and physical reality’s extension. The word body used by Descartes means corporeal substance. Thus a vacuum, nothing in it, is impossible

from the view of Descartes [Descartes, 1988: p.185- 186]. By the general theory of relativity and the definition of field, Einstein interpreted the

concept vacuum as the space ‘empty of field’ and declared that space-time cannot exist independently, but works as ‘a structural quality of the field’

[Einstein, 2001: p.139-158].Field and particles, both derived from one and the same physical

substance, should be differentiated by their contrary extension types, i.e. continuousness and discreteness. Considering the strict opposition of these two extension types, we can separate the universe as a physical object into the field world and the particle world, and then analyze their spatiotemporal attributes by turn.

2.Field worldField extends spatially and continuously. Continuity means

indivisibility. Although there are many appellations for ‘different’ fields, changing field strength cannot be interpreted as localizing or separating a kind of field from the whole field world. The field world


35


could be treated as the only total field in this sense.Considering the field’s extension only, all physical concepts based on

discrete statistics, or dependent on references, lose their efficacies. Imagining an unbounded space without any particle, all sorts of terms about locations like length, distance, and volume cannot be applicable anymore. Then so-called movements and velocities are no point in a pure field world.

© Jie Chen, 2015


36


Although information takes rank with energy, it is hard to be defined. In view of quantization of energy, we can endow information with physical substantiality. Information could be to field as energy is to particle. A signal differs from information in existing in the particle world. In appearance we discuss the propagation velocity of a signal, but in reality what we mean is the movements of particles as the carriers of information in the particle world. Information is no-local and unconcerned with movements or velocities. No-local effects do not require a superluminal hypothesis, even any hypothesis associated with velocity.

3.Particle worldUsually the spatial form of a fundamental particle is supposed ideally

as a point without volume or a micro-sphere without inner structure. Before analyzing its spatial attributes, we need introduce two premises: (a) the proposal of a finite but unbounded universe, first propounded by Einstein [Einstein, 2001: p.110-114]; (b) the existence of singularities.

By the definition of discreteness, strictly and thoroughly, i.e. no continuousness at any level, the premise (a) could be extended as: any fundamental particle is finite but unbounded. That means:

(i) Accordingtothedifferentiationoftwoextensiontypes,‘finitebutunbounded’ is confined to the discrete distribution state of physical substance, i.e. the particle world only.

(ii) The idea of micro-sphere without inner structure should be abandoned. This hypothesis equals the description of a localized field. The bounded continuous spatial distribution state implies a paradox that discreteness occurs in a continuous distribution.

(iii) The idea of ONE point without volume is untenable also. It does not agree with observed data and can be applied in approximate calculation only.

(iv) There are endless spatial levels in the discrete distribution state of physical substance. Or there are endless sequences on scale in the particle world. Every particle world is a fundamental particle of the particle world on the upper level, and vice versa.

(v) No two absolute identical particles. The articulation of particles of a kind isonly an approximate argument.

(vi) Space roots in the coexistence of two extension types of physical substance. Volume and distance result from discreteness against a background of continuous distribution, infiniteness results from the contrary. The discrete distribution state of physical substance does not possess volume.

(vii) Unlike Einstein’s interpretation of a finite but unbounded universe by ‘the closed spaces without limits’ [Einstein, 2001: p.141], ‘finite but unbounded’ in this study corresponds with

Chen Jie. Identity between space-time and physical substance’s extension


37

the concept discreteness. The word finite implies metric relations for the discrete distribution state of physical substance. Another word unbounded comes from the endless sequences on scale discussed above. Strictly, the common concept bound cannot be used in our analyses of two extension types of physical substance.

By the existence of singularities, in combination with our analyses about two extension types, we suggest that a singularity is the only site for transformations

36



between these two types of physical substance. This inference bases on the law of indestructibility. It means:

(i) The idea of indestructibility refers conservation. Now we understand the law of the equivalence of mass and energy. By the foregoing extension analyses, the concepts of ‘mass and energy’ are on the side of the discrete distribution state of physical substance. This analysis radicalizes opinion on the law of indestructibility to both extension types of physical substance.

(ii) The semi-discrete or semi-continuous distribution state of physical substance cannot claim its existence.

(iii) The particle world which we have been resident in, not the whole universe,was born from a singularity.

(iv) Any fundamental particle referred in this study means that it is born from asingularity directly.

(v) Transformations of two extension types of physical substance cannot be described by the transformations of the coordinates in the general theory of relativity. It is reasonable to say those transformations admitted need to be ‘free from singularities’ [Einstein, 1950: p.81].

4. TimeTime is the abstract presentation of changes in a spatial

distribution state of physical substance. Therefore, space can be taken as the first-order attribute of physical substance and time as the second-order.

The intrinsic time of a fundamental particle is its time maintaining as the discrete distribution state of physical substance. It is finite, starts at a singularity and will also end at a singularity. This period cannot be treated as continuous. We know that a fundamental particle is a particle world on the lower level, then the intrinsic time of this fundamental particle is constituted by the intrinsic time of all fundamental particles of that lower particle world. Additionally there are endless levels downward. When physical substance exists in the discrete spatial distribution state, its intrinsic time is discrete.

The relativity of simultaneity caused by light spreading from multiple locations is just suitable for the particle world, not for the field world. Since the concept location cannot be usable in the field world anyway, the simultaneity in the field world should be absolute. Furthermore, the concept simultaneity implies comparisons among different locations and cannot be applied in the field world either. Thus the exact statement is: there can be but one time in the field world, and this time does not refer to simultaneity.

To the discrete category belong beginning, interval, end, etc. By the continuity attribute, we cannot claim a field’s born after a


39


fundamental particle’s arrival at a singularity or a field’s end after a fundamental particle’s born. As the only total field, the field world has a sole continuous time, no beginning or end. In other words, the field world has no origin or finality. It exists eternally.

5.Irreversibility and time directionAfter discussed identity between two distinct spatiotemporal

attributes and physical substance’s different extension types, we can further analyze how irreversibility and time direction lie on spatial attributes of physical substance.

d

c

c

c

d


36


One-way membrane regions surrounding singularities ensure that no particle can experience its life in the reverse way. That results in two related conclusions.

On one side, in combination with the proposal ‘any fundamental particle is finite but unbounded’, the possibility of time reversal in a particle world is completely rejected. From a movement point of view, any fundamental particle is of endless discrete levels, thus the REAL time reversal of a fundamental particle must include the reversal of the motion direction in any one-way membrane region of this particle world on endless levels downward. The T of CPT theorem means the reversal of the motion direction of every particle. As we discussed, the reversal of the motion in normal visual space does not equal the REAL reversal of the direction of time. Hence the T of CPT theorem is untenable under this proposal. From a physical substance point of view, there does not exist two absolute identical particles, and each particle has its unique intrinsic space-time. Consequently the particle dropped in a black hole cannot be equivalent to any particle of the same kind ejected from a white hole. Neither black holes nor white holes can be treated as mutual time reversal. Then definitely the general theory of relativity shows the time direction by joining this proposal.

On the other side, the changes in the field world actualize by reciprocal transformations between field and particles. One-way membrane regions prohibit the reverse time of any particle, thus reciprocal transformations can be realized in only one way. That means the intrinsic time of the field world has but one direction.

Under the framework of reciprocal transformations between field and particles,

we have two times with certain directions: the discrete time t for particles with thedirection from the discrete distribution state of physical substance to the continuousdistribution state; the continuous time t for field with the inverse direction. Onetime direction cannot be treated as the other’s reversal. These two times, t andt , are the component parts of the cosmological time T. The irreversibility of thedccosmological time T depends on that of t and

t. Their directions can be described

as: T is in the same direction with t

cdor t dc, and t in the opposite direction with t .

dc cd dc cdAn intuitive explanation is that t

and t intertwine like a linear double strand DNA

chain. This intertwinement mode is flexible. One can be straightened as the other is compressed. Accordingly, one can be regarded as straight enough when the other is compressed to a very slight scale, i.e. Planck scale.


41


6. Entropy and thermodynamic timeThe thermodynamic time has internal coherence with the

cosmological time analyzed above. The well-known thermodynamic entropy can be interpreted as a measure of disorder in statistical mechanics. This concept is only for the discrete distribution state of physical substance. The thermodynamic time is a certain articulation of a particle world’s intrinsic time from a disorder point of view and is a constituent part of the cosmological time also.

Since the field world does not refer to disorder, or its disorder value can be treated as zero, the entropy of the field world can be endowed with zero value. Based on no thermal motion, the temperature of field

world can be considered as absolute zero also. Reciprocal transformations between field and particles exist in any isolated

system. The universe is always treated as a perfectly isolated system. Indeed, the universe, including the unique field world and all particle

worlds in endless levels,

38



is the total of physical substance and also an absolute isolated system. Any particle world combines the field world to form an ultimately isolated system. The change of entropy of our particle world results from the cosmic evolution, and they keep the same direction in appearance. But in fact, both of them are determined by the way of reciprocal transformations of two extension types of physical substance. Once the part transformed from field to particles is less than the part transformed in the reverse direction, our particle world will be in a contracting phase, as the entropy of our particle world will reduce and time will maintain its original way.

7. self-sufficient universe and singularitiesHere we propose a kind of thought based on the indestructibility

of physical substance. The universe is the intelligible physical substance itself. Every deviation from the base of two extension types of physical substance endangers our understanding about space-time. Any attempt to treat either of field and particles as the only fundamental state of physical substance ignores the other’s space-time nature unavoidably.

It is inaccurate to use discreteness terms to describe the whole universe. We need to supersede the genesis of the universe by the beginning of the particle world and the eternality of the field world. Although the birth and death of any particle world through singularities are required by discrete attributes, the law of indestructibility of physical substance shows that a particle world does not come from NOTHING. With singularities acting as the key role, the universe realizes self-sufficiency by reciprocal transformations between two extension types of physical substance.

8. SummarySpace-time equals physical substance’s extension rather than

physical substance itself. By the identity analysis of two kinds of spatiotemporal attributes corresponding to two extension types of physical substance, our study showed the imperfection of the articulation about the genesis of the universe, and revealed the flexible intertwined structure of the cosmological time and the self-sufficiency of the universe. It improves our knowledge about this universe in an easy-to-understand way.

ReferencesDescartes, 1988 –Descartes R., trans. J. Veitch, The Meditations and

Selections from the Principles, Open Court, La Salle, IL., 1988.Einstein, 1950 — Einstein A., Out of My Later Years, Philosophical Library, New York,

1950.


39


Einstein, 2001 — Einstein A., trans. R. W. Lawson, Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, 15th Edition, Routledge, New York, 2001.


40


GAUSSIAN/NON-GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTIONS AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF TERRESTRIAL AND

EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE OBJECTSsergey Haitun — Candidate of Physics and

Mathematics, Institute for the History of Science and Technology (Moscow, Russia)


Statistical criteria used today in the analysis of radio signals suspected on reasonable extraterrestrial origin, are based on the assumption that all the radio signals of natural origin are described by a Gaussian distribution, which is traditionally understood as the Gauss distribution. Usually the normal (Gauss) distribution is opposed to all the others. However, this is difficult to recognize the reasonable, because in nature there are many different distributions. The article offers a more realistic dichotomy: the Gaussian distributions, obeying the central limiting theorem, dominate in nature, while non-Gaussian ones, obeying the Gnedenko-Doeblin limiting theorem, are generated by intelligent beings. When identifying objects belonging to an extraterrestrial civilization described by a non-Gaussian distribution is preferable to use the rank form distributions. Using this criterion is associated with certain difficulties: (1) in nature there are also non-Gaussian distributions; (2) in their activities animals generate non-Gaussian distributions like humans; (3) the identification of non-Gaussian distributions in the rank form is hampered sometimes by the rank distortion effect of mathematical nature.

Key Words: SETI, Gaussian distribution, non-Gaussian distribution, the central limiting theorem, the Gnedenko-Doeblin limiting theorem, the Zipf distribution, Zipfian distribution, frequency distribution, rank form distribution, the rank distortion effect, ants.

IntroductionThebeginningofthe Global Project SETI(Searchfor Extra-Terrestrial

Intelligence) is sometimes connected with publication of the article [Cocconi, Morrison, 1959]. If you rely on this date, the SETI is more than 55 years old, but, as we know, the positive results have not been obtained so far.

A common view is that we do not know whether there is an intelligent life in the Universe. Personally, I think [Haitun, 2005: p. 280–285; Haitun, 2006: p. 210– 215], that due to infinity of the Universe, an intelligent life beyond the Earth exists definitely, and that, moreover, the number of its centers is infinite. The question is: how far these centers are spaced from each other? There are two opportunities: if the Earth noosphere is the only one in our Metagalaxy, then we are doomed to cosmic solitude, but if there are millions similar noospheres in our Metagalaxy, then our chances of meeting with


41

colleagues in the mind are quite real.Although we do not know today what is the real situation, we should

be ready for such a meeting, as if we knew for sure that this meeting awaits us (future planning should be alternative). Among other things, we should learn how to recognize extraterrestrial civilizations. So in general terms the SETI strategy seems quite correct. However, there are certain claims to the SETI means (tools) of recognition.

© Sergey Haitun, 2015

Раздел І. Inert matter/ Косная материя

40


According to the well-known monograph [Gindilis, 2004], scientists working in the SETI, in many respects rely on search of meaningful radio signals from the space. This, of course, is reasonable, and the search for meaning in the space signals can be successful if these signals will be certainly meaningful (meaningful to a large extent),i.e. if, say, we will receive a sequence of prime numbers, or something like that. But one cannot rely only on this scenario. What if the signals are only partly meaningful,i.e. they are partly meaningful and partly meaningless? It could be possible that an extraterrestrial civilization, from which the signal comes, has entirely different meaning than we have. The concept of meaning has the flaw that it is irreproducible,

for one researcher this signal may seem sensible, and for another it is senseless.

Thus, we come to a conclusion, that we need formal criteria which allow us to identify natural objects which have arisen without the mind, and artificial objects without appealing to their meaningfulness or meaninglessness.

Such are the statistical criteria, also used in the SETI, but it is not all right with them. The fact is that, according to [Gindilis, 2004], using a statistical criterion in the framework of the SETI is based on the dichotomy: Gaussian/ non-Gaussian distribution, which appears to be correct. However, a Gaussian distribution is understood simply as the normal distribution, and under a non-Gaussian distribution (without mentioning that) is understood any distribution other than the normal one. The normal distribution associated with the objects of natural origin, is opposed to all other distributions. This is difficult to accept when we distinguish natural objects from artificial objects, because in nature there are many distributions other than the normal one.

In my opinion, the other, more general dichotomy: Gaussian/non-Gaussian distributions, is more rational. These are two large classes of distributions. Gaussian distributions are subject to the central limiting theorem, and non-Gaussian ones obey the Gnedenko-Doeblin limiting theorem. I would argue that the first dominate in nature, while artificial objects (created by the mind) are described by distributions of the second class [Haitun, 1982; Haitun, 1983; Haitun, 1989]. It is suggested to determine objects of the earthly or unearthly nature in accordance with distributions describing them (Gaussian or non-Gaussian).

As you can see, the suggested idea sounds simple enough. However, its implementation requires a mastery of the relevant apparatus.

1.Gaussian/ non-Gaussian probability distributionsThe dichotomy: Gaussian/non-Gaussian distributions has a different

meaning depending on about which distributions we talk, because we could talk about probability distributions, built on samples from infinite volume, or about statistical distributions, built on samples from a final

Haitun Sergey. Gaussian/non-Gaussian distributionsand the identification of terrestrial and extraterrestrial intelligence objects


41

volume.The modern theory of probability and mathematical statistics are

built on the limiting theorems on convergence of distributions of sums of identically distributed random independent variables with increasing sample size to the so-called stable distributions. We divide distributions converging to stable ones into two classes — Gaussian and non-Gaussian distributions. Distributions belonging to the first class obey the central limiting theorem, while those belonging to the second class obey the Gnedenko-Doeblin limiting theorem [Gnedenko, 1939; Doeblin, 1940].

It is easy to understand why the limiting theorems on convergence of distributions

to stable distributions are so important for scientific studies. If a distribution of


42


measured objects does not converge to a stable one with increasing sample size, it means that this distribution does not have a specific form, i.e. its form depends on a sample size. In this case the parameters of such a distribution (the mean, median, dispersion, quantile et al.) which are determined by its form do not have certain values. Such a measurement is not reproducible, that is not allowed by a scientific research. We (scientists) restrict ourselves by reproducible measurements and therefore we work only with distributions obeying the central limiting theorem or the Gnedenko-Doeblin limiting theorem. So any distribution which is really interesting to science can be either Gaussian or non-Gaussian distribution, and no middle ground.

The central limiting theorem applies to distributions converging in the above sense to the Gauss distribution, i.e. to the normal distribution. According to this theorem, a necessary and sufficient condition for a distribution to converge to the Gauss distribution is that the mean and dispersion of such a distribution be finite. Such distributions we call Gaussian. Note that the theorem says nothing about the form of Gaussian distributions.

I would like to say a few words about terminology. In the scientific literature, the terms «Gaussian distribution» and «the Gauss distribution» are not distinguished (following the language rules). Usually they both refer to the same distribution, which is also called the normal one. For our goal, however, it is important to distinguish them. Therefore, we use the term a Gaussian distribution in the case that this distribution obeys the central limiting theorem (and there are a lot of such distributions), while the Gauss distribution is the one and only one which is also called the normal distribution. The Gauss distribution is one of Gaussian distributions, but a Gaussian distribution, in the general case, is not the Gauss distribution. In other words, we prefer to break a bit language rules to ensure the required accuracy of terminology.

The Gnedenko-Doeblin limiting theorem applies to a distribution, not converging (in the sense described above) to the Gauss distribution, but converging to another stable distribution. For this it is necessary and sufficient that the distribution f(x) for large values of the random variable x has the form of the Zipf distribution (up to a slowly varying function)

Cn(x)

,x1

0 x0 x J ,

0 , (1)

with 2 . Here n(x) is a frequency; α is the Zipf distribution characteristic exponent; the parameter C provides the distribution



41

normalization, i.e. n(x) N where N is the sample size.A distribution which for large values of the variable has a form

of the Zipf distribution with any α we call a Zipfian distribution.I would like to say a few words about terminology again. In the

literature the terms “a Zipfian distribution” and “the Zipf distribution” do not differ. They both are used for the same distribution given by Eq. 1. However, for our goal we need to distinguish between them. A Zipfian distribution is a distribution which has


44


the form of the Zipf distribution (there are many such distributions) at large values of the variable, whereas the Zipf distribution is the only one distribution given by Eq. (1). The Zipf distribution belongs to the Zipfian distributions, however a Zipfian distribution, in the general case, is not the Zipf distribution. In other words, we prefer again to break a bit language rules to ensure the required accuracy of terminology.

In the logarithmic coordinates a Zipfian distribution at large values of the variable

x is inclined to the horizontal axis at an acute angle whose tangent determines the Zipf distribution characteristic exponent α

limx→∞

d ln n( x )d ln x

=−(1+α )x. (2)

(see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Examples of Zipfian frequency distributions in logarithmic coordinates. The curve

1 is the generalized Pareto distribution n(x) N / x 21/eb / x 1, x 0 . The curve 2 is the Cauchy distribution n(x) 2N / d /1(x / d )2 , x 0 .

The curve 3 is the Zipfdistribution. In these coordinates Zipfian distributions for x have

asymptote inclined to the horizontal axis at an acute angle whose tangent determines the Zipf distribution characteristic exponent α

It is not difficult to see that for the Zipf distribution moments of the order n are

infinite for n , i.e. the mean, or the first-order moment, is infinite for 1, the

dispersion or the moment of the second order, is infinite for 2 . The same is true



41

for Zipfian distributions. For instance, at 1 the mean and dispersion are infinite,

and at 1 2

the mean is finite, while the dispersion is infinite; at 2

the

mean and the dispersion are both finite.Thus, we can say that (up to slowly varying functions mentioned in the Gnedenko-

Doeblin limiting theorem) a non-Gaussian probability distribution is a Zipfiandistribution at 2 (although at

1 2the mean is finite), while a

Zipfian

distribution is a Gaussian distribution at 2 .

Gaussian non-Zipfian distributions (Gauss, Poisson, and others) can be also

presented in the logarithmic coordinates. For these distributions

limx→∞

d ln n( x )d ln x

=−∞. (3)

Comparing with Eq. (2), we see that. (4)

In other words, in these coordinates a Gaussian non-Zipfian distribution has the

asymptote (at x ) inclined to the horizontal axis at the right angle

(see. Fig. 2).Fig. 2. Examples of Gaussian non-Zipfian frequency distributions in the logarithmic coordinates. The curve 1 is the “right” Gauss distribution

f ( x )= (2 /σ √2 π ) exp [−x2 /2 σ2 ] , x≥0 . The curve 2 is the Poisson distribution f ( x )=[exp (−λ )] ( λx/ x ! ) , x≥0 . The Curve 3 is the lognormal distribution


46


f ( x )= 1xσ √2 π

exp [−12 ( ln x−μ

σ )2 ]

, x≥0 . In these coordinates Gaussian non-Zipfian distributions are tangent inclined to the horizontal axis at right angles at

x→∞

2.Gaussian / non-Gaussian statistical distributionsThe finite/infinite dispersion and the threshold value of the

parameter α serve criteria to distinguish between the Gaussian and non-Gaussian distributions only in the case of probability distributions. Meanwhile, a probability distribution is nothing more than a mathematical abstraction, which assumes an infinite general population from which samples of infinite size are taken. In contrast, in this paper we are mainly interested in empirical distributions which are based on finite-size



43

samples taken from finite general populations. It is clear that the dispersion and other moments of distributions based on such finite general populations and finite samples are themselves finite. In this situation, the dichotomy of Gaussian/non- Gaussian distributions becomes the dichotomy of Gaussian/non-Gaussian general populations

If for a given general population the dispersion increases significantly with the sample size, then this general population we call non-Gaussian, in the opposite casewe call it Gaussian. The less the parameter α, the more substantial this

dependence.Thus, for statistical distributions the transition from Gaussian

distributions to non-Gaussian ones occurs continuously: for small parameters α (say, for α about 3 or less) Zipfian distributions are non-Gaussian and for large α (say, for α greater than 10 or 15) they are Gaussian. For intermediate values of α (for 3<α<10 or for 3<α<15) we have an intermediate situation.

We see that the Zipfian distribution characteristic exponent α plays the central role in determining the character of distributions (Gaussian/non-Gaussian). The form of a distribution of sample values of any distribution statistic (including α), is determined, as is known, by the method chosen to calculate sample values of this statistic. If the maximum likelihood method is chosen to determine the parameter α, then the distribution of the α sample values is asymptotically normal. In the case of the Zipf distribution

σ α=α

√N , (5)

where N is the sample size [Kramer, 1948: p. 547].Not being a professional mathematician, first, I cannot say how

sample values of α are distributed and second, what is the error of these values when using other methods of determining them, for example, when we use the graphic method together with rank form distributions (see next section). It seems, however, that the estimate(5) overestimates the error calculated by the graphic method.

3.Rank form of statistical distributionsWhen working with non-Gaussian distributions is often fruitful to

employ rank form distributions, which, from my point of view, is the most convenient for using the statistical criterion discussed in this article.

The rank form exists for all statistical distributions, i.e. for all discrete distributions built on samples of finite size. The advantage of the rank form distributions compared to frequency distributions is due to the possibility to work with small sample sizes, say 3, 4, 5. The statistical accuracy required here is achieved by increasing the


48


accuracy of measurement values of the random variable. For frequency form distributions sufficient statistical reliability is ensured only by a large sample size, which is practically not always possible.

A frequency form distribution determined by the frequency n(x) with which a given value of the random variable x occurs in a sample of the volume N:

∑x=x 0

J

n( x )=N

, (6)where x and J are the minimum and maximum sample values of x.

A rank form distribution is determined by

r ( x )=∑ξ= x

J

n( ξ ). (7)

The rank r means a sequence number of a given value of the random variable x, when these values are arranged in order of decreasing x. For a sample of size N, we have N ranks. Equal values of x have different ranks.

The frequency differential form of the Zipf distribution is determined

by Eq. (1).The frequency integral form of the Zipf distribution is given by

F (x )= Cα N ( 1

x0α −

1xα )≈1−

x0α

xα. (8)

The rank differential form of the Zipf distribution is given by

x (r )= A(r+B )γ , γ= 1

α, A=( N−1

1/ x0α−1/J α )

1 /α

, B= N−1( J / x0 )

α−1−1

. (9)In logarithmic coordinates a Zipfian rank distribution is a straight

line, inclined to the axes at an acute angle at large values of the random variable x (i.e. for ranks 1, 2, 3, …) (see Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Examples of Zipfian distributions in the rank form (in logarithmic coordinates). The curve 1 is the generalized Pareto distribution, the curve 2 is the



43

Cauchy distribution,the curve 3 is the Zipf distribution. At x the rank Zipfian distributions have asymptote inclined to the vertical axis at an acute angle. The value of thisangle determines the Zipfian distribution characteristic exponent α. For clarity, we consider the case when the rankdistortion effect (see. Sec. 10) is absent.


50


4. Non-Gaussian nature of social phenomenaSocial phenomena are non-Gaussian. The author established this

fact working with a random sample of 190 social stationary (independent of time) distributions. Figures 4 and 5 show 18 of such distributions, Fig. 6 shows the resulting distributions.

Fig. 4. Stationary scientometric distributions which cannot be approximated by the Zipf distribution (according to data of literature sources): 5.1. Rank

distribution of periodicals by their citation. The Gauss distribution with the same sample size and mean and mean quadratic deviation is presented for comparison; 5.2. Rank distribution of countries by the number of scientific journals; 5.3. Distribution of the number of authorships by the number of

authorsfor an article; 5.4. Rank distribution of periodicals by the number of annual

library requests;5.5. Rank distribution of scientists by partial productivity (for an article with n

authors each receives the mark 1/n); 5.6. Rank distribution of 152 journals from



45

the whole world, whose publications of 1967–1968 were most often referred to in 1969; 5.7. Rank distribution of nine subject fields by the number of references per 100 pages of periodicals; 5.8. Rank distribution of the names of scientists by the frequency of occurrence in eight textbooks of psychology; 5.9.

Distribution of publications by the number of authors. Coordinates are logarithmic


47


Fig. 5. Stationary non-scientometric distributions of human activity (according to data of literature sources): 6.1. Rank distribution of the Russian alphabet letters by the frequency of occurrence; 6.2.

Rank distribution of countries by thecapita electricity production; 6.3. Rank distribution of Soviet Republics by

cement production in the USSR in 1975; 6.4. Rank distribution of 27 enterprises of British electrical engineering industry by unit out of production in 1933–1934; 6.5. Wage distribution of population; 6.6.

Distribution of the USA population by private income;6.7. Distribution by annual income of persons in the United Kingdome

surtaxed during a year beginning from April 6, 1950; 6.8. Rank distribution of nationalities in the USSR by their numbers in 1970; 6.9. Cumulative frequency distribution of billiard

scores in 50 services. Coordinates are logarithmic.


48


Fig. 6. The rank distribution of 190 empirical distributions of human activities in dependence of the Zipfiian distribution characteristic exponent

α (in logarithmic coordinates).

It turns out that it is possible to approximate all considered social distributions by the Zipfian distributions with predominantly small values of the parameter α and only in 6 cases from 190 we have obtained α > 10. The distribution of the values of the parameter α itself is also the Zipfian distribution with α ≈ 1,31. All this allows us to talk about non-Gaussian nature of social phenomena, actually about domination of non-Gaussian distributions among stationary distributions describing reasonable activities.

5.Clarification 1: non-stationary distributions are notconsidered

Social distributions can be divided into two categories: stationary distributions not involving time dependence and non-stationary ones which contain the time. It turns out that social phenomena described by non-stationary distributions have non-Gaussian nature, while, as shown by empirical data, social phenomena described by stationary distributions can have different forms of Gaussian and non-Gaussian nature as well. We have established the phenomenon of non-Gaussian nature of social phenomena only after having identified social stationary distributions in a special class.



49

Naturally that the radio signals coming from the space, analyzed for their “reasonableness”, are distributed in time. This does not mean, however, that they cannot be analyzed using the criterion of Gaussian/non-Gaussian distributions. Of course, it is possible, but in this case the time cannot be the random variable with


50


which a distribution is built. For example, we have a radio signal recorded during the time interval T. We have the right to consider this signal as a set (a general population) of values of signal amplitude, without associating these values with time. Then we build our distributions on this general population taking from it random samples of amplitude values. The resulting distributions, rank or frequency ones, will be stationary as required.

6. Clarification 2: We do not take into account distributionsconstructed with using closed scales

When establishing that social phenomena have non-Gaussian nature we have also deliberately excluded empirical social stationary distributions constructed with help of points, bounded above by the measurement procedure, i.e. with help of the closed scales. All such distributions are Gaussian distributions, for example, the distribution of individuals by the IQ (see. Fig. 7).

Fig. 7. The distributions of individuals by the IQ. The linear coordinates. It is often

approximated by the Poisson distribution.

The distribution of individuals by the IQ has a short tail and is approximated by a usual Gaussian non-Zipfian distributions including the Poisson distribution. How does this consist with the thesis that social distributions are non-Gaussian?

The point is that the closed scales are incorrect in principle. They generate non- additive variables. Each of these variables forms a set of its values on which the operation of addition does not work.



51

At the same time the operation of addition is the basis of quantitative mathematics (the quantitative mathematical operations — subtraction, multiplication, division, differentiation, integration, etc. — are based on addition). It is considered in details in the monograph [Haitun, 1989]. Here only the main points of our analysis are given.


52


Today the perception of non-additivity of a variable as an objective property, i.e. independent on a subject of measurement, is common to all researchers. To shake this belief, we will pay attention to the following observation: non-additivity arises when short-tailed distributions are used.

Let us illustrate this with the example of the scientific output of a researcher which is measured often by a number of citations. The distribution of scientists on the number of citations is non-Gaussian (long-tailed), while the measurement result is additive. We can sum the numbers of citations. You can, however, ask experts to assess the scientific output of researches, say, on the five-point scale. In this case the distribution of researchers will be short-tailed (Gaussian), while the measurement result is not additive because there is no sense to sum the received points. However, in these two cases we have measured the same value — the scientific output of a researcher. Thus, we can see that non-additivity is generated by the measurement procedure.

The same would happen if we, for example, ask some experts to estimate the mass or weight of physical bodies using the five-point scale. The results of such measurements would also be non-additive. The point is certainly not in the variable “weight” or “mass”, it is and in the procedure of expert measurement.

In the measurement theory the variables “weight”, “mass” or, say, a “scientific output of a researcher” are called latent variables or shorter latents (introduced by the author), i.e. directly unobservable variables, which is reflected in their name: latent (i.e. this variable is not possible to measure directly). Therefore, the values of quantities, directly observable, called the indicators, are always measured. But their values characterize the latent values indirectly. As indicators can be the number of citations, the expert score, the displacement of the arrow of the spring balance, etc. It looks as if indicators and latents live in different planes, never crossing.

Obviously, the properties of the indicator must reproduce the latent properties. In particular, the form of indicator distribution (i.e. the distribution of indicator values built with the sample of measurement objects) must coincide with the form of latent distribution. If a latent is additive, than non-coincidence of forms of the indicator distribution and the latent distribution makes the indicator non-additive. This is what happens when you use closed scales which deform the indicator scale with respect to the latent scale in the region of large values of the indicator values (see. Fig. 8).

To eliminate the indicator deformation relative to the latent we should open closed indicator scales. But then most social stationary distributions built with their help will become long-tailed (non-Gaussian). In saying this, we rely on the fact that such distributions are obtained when the open indicator scale is used for the social latent.

7. How to apply the discussed statistical criterion



53

First, we are building the rank distribution of the analyzed object of unknown origin in logarithmic coordinates, second, we are approximating the empirical points by the straight line (if it is possible), or are building the asymptote for large values of the random variable x (that is always possible), third, we are looking for the sample value of the parameter α by the tangent of the angle of inclination of the straight line or by the asymptote to the ordinate axis (or by the cotangent of the


54


Fig. 8. Deformation of indicator values

angle of inclination to the horizontal axis). If α is small, say, α < 3 , we believe that this object has a reasonable origin, if α is large, say, α > 10 or α > 15, the object has a natural origin, and for intermediate values of α, 3 < α < 10 or 3 < α < 15 , (it is our choice), the nature of the object is unknown to us.

Let us consider two examples of calculation of the two real objects.The window 1 in my apartment. There are three main window

parameters: 151 cm (height), 87 cm (width of the main window sash) and 37 cm (width of the window leaf). We arrange these parameters in the descending order (151, 87 and 37) and assign rank values to them 1, 2, 3. Then we put the rank values on the horizontal axis, and the window parameters on the ordinate axis. Thus we have received three points on the graph (see. Fig. 9).



55

Fig. 9. The window 1. The logarithmic coordinates.


56


The window 2 in my apartment is larger than the first one, so it has four basic parameters: 151 cm (the height), 71 cm, 71 cm (two window sashes have the same width), and 37 cm (the window leaf width). The corresponding ranks are 1, 2, 3 and4. The four points of the graph for this window also lie on a straight line with a small spread around it. But the angle of inclination of this line to the horizontal-axis is slightly smaller than the previous one (see. Fig. 10).

Fig. 10. The window 2. The logarithmic coordinates.

Small values of α confirm that the windows in my apartment are of human (reasonable) origin, for sure they are not of natural origin. So that the demonstrated examples speak for the use of the discussed statistical criterion.

8. the first pitfall: in nature there are also non-Gaussiandistribution

There are Zipfian distributions with small values of the parameter α in the inorganic and organic worlds. For instance, distributions of anions and cations by the occurrence in seawater have such form. Having used the data contained in the book by Yu. Odum [Odum, 1986: p. 286], we have built the rank distribution of 5 anions according to their number in 1 kg of seawater (the Zipfian distribution with α ≈ 0,19) and the similar distribution of 4 cations (the Zipfian distribution with α ≈ 0,37).

Distributions of chemical elements according to their occurrence in the earth crust and in our Metagalaxy are also non-Gaussian. Using the



57

table in the book [Folsom, 1982: p. 16], we have built the rank distribution of 15 chemical elements according to their prevalence in our Metagalaxy (the Zipfian distribution with α ≈ 1,18).

Distributions of cosmic bodies by mass [Trubnikov, 1993, 1995] and cosmic

particles by energy are also non-Gaussian. The distribution of earthquakes by

ln M ()ln M (ε)


58


energy is the Zipf distribution [Kapitsa, 1997: p. 112]. Numerous examples of the Zipf distributions in the inorganic world are given in [Kudrin, 1995].

The distributions of individuals of given species on the Earth surface are non- Gaussian. We have built four distributions using the data taken from the book [Odum, 1986]: (1) the rank distribution of 8 square areas of 0.1 hectares on Earth’s surface according to the number of wolf spiders Lycosa timuqua (the Zipf distribution with

α ≈ 0,7), (2) the rank distribution of 4 square areas of 0.1 hectares on Earth's surface

according to the number of wolf spiders Lycosa carolinensis (the Zipf distribution

with α ≈ 1,0), (3) the rank distribution of 6 square areas of 0.1 hectares on Earth's surface according to the number of wolf spiders

belonging to 3 species, including two previous (the Zipf distribution with α ≈ 1,01), (4) the rank distribution of 22 species of birds by their

prevalence in the pine forest (the Zipfian distribution with α ≈ 1,0). The distributions of plant species in the forest by their biomass (the

domination- diversity curves) are non-Gaussian. Yu. Odum [Odum, 1986: p. 132] gives such

distributions for the four types of forests.Today, it is getting clear that the prevalence of non-Gaussian

distributions is closely related to the fact that the observable world [Haitun, 2005: p. 154–157] is fractal. Non-Gaussian nature of

distributions is the immanent property of fractals. Let us demonstrate how fractals generate non-Gaussian distributions. Here we talk about

distributions of fractal (sub)systems by their sizes and distances between

them. The fractal dimension is defined by [Mandelbrot, 1977: p. 43]

D

ln(1 / )

. (10)

Here Ì () is the number of measurement D-dimensional «cubes», by which we

cover a fractal set when determining its measure; ε is the edge length of a «cube». From this expression we obtain the number of substructures n(x)

n(x) ~ 1, (11)

x D

where x is a substructure linear size. This is the Zipf distribution with α = D − 1. In the expression (10) is replaced by x and M() is



59

replaced by n(x). The smaller the parameter α, and, consequently, D, the more this distribution is non-Gaussian. Since, in spite of the point of view coming from the father of fractals B. Mandelbrot, the fractal dimension D is less than the topological dimension of the fractal (the dimension of the space in which it is placed), the dimension D of fractals, located in our three-dimensional space, is less than 3. Therefore, the parameter α of the Zipf distributions generated by these fractals is less than 2, and these distributions are essentially non-Gaussian. (One can read about the Zipf distributions generated by fractals in [Timashev, 1995; Malinetsky, Potapov, 1996]).

It is surprising that in the observed world together with non-Gaussian distributions there are many Gaussian distributions, especially in the natural environment surrounding us. For example, distributions of individuals by weight, size and by many other parameters are Gaussian. It seems that this is largely due to gravity acting on the Earth, which limits sizes of terrestrial objects. In general, the


60


distribution width, i.e. the degree of their non-Gaussivity, is determined not only by gravity but also by other interactions. Provided these external constraints are absent, distributions of objects are non-Gaussian, as is, for example, the distribution of cosmic bodies by mass, mentioned in this section.

As you know, in the process of evolution entropy is increasing. In the case of a single distribution we see the following: the wider the distribution (hence its form is more simple) the more its entropy. Distributions with greater entropy have longer tails, i.e. they are more non-Gaussian, that corresponds to greater variety of forms. Thus, the evolution towards distributions with increasing entropy means the evolution towards more and more non-Gaussian phenomena. More precisely, we can say that during the evolution a share of distributions with greater entropy is increasing. In other words, with the course of evolution general populations of distributions are getting more non-Gaussian.

It seems in particular, that in the organic world a proportion of mental factors is lower than in the social life. I believe that if for the organic world a random sample of stationary distributions was built and for each such distribution the parameter of a Zipfian distribution was obtained, than the "organic" distribution of the parameter would be less non-Gaussian than the corresponding distribution which we have builtfor the social world with α ≈ 1,31 (see . Fig. 6).

In broader terms: if for all distributions of the observed world we could build a distribution of values of the parameter characterizing these distributions, then with the course of evolution this distribution would become more and more non-Gaussian, i.e. characterized by greater value of entropy and lower value of α.

Now we should return to the subject of this article. In spite of prevalence of non-Gaussian distributions, I think that all of them describe macrosystems. For systems, the scale of which is characteristic for human beings (and, presumably, for hypothetical intelligent beings on other planets), i.e. for mesoscale systems, in my opinion, we can identify quite confidently Gaussian systems with natural world and non-Gaussian systems with artificial objects.

In support I will tell on the results of the statistical analysis [Haitun, 1988] of the article published by one of my critics, M. Kunz [Kunz, 1988]. But first, a few words about the “ideology” of this analysis.

Distributions of people by weight, height, etc., as already mentioned, are Gaussian, while distributions by creative abilities, preferences, etc. are non-Gaussian (that is why there is a phenomenon of non-Gaussian nature of social phenomena). Neural structure of the human seems to generate exclusively non-Gaussian distributionswith small values of the parameter α (the order of unity). Gaussian components



61

in human activities are explained, in my opinion, by natural and physiological environment in which a human brain operates. The degree of non-Gaussivity of a distribution is determined by the degree of brain’s involvement in a mixture of factors that determine its (distribution) form.

We have built four distributions analyzing the paper by M. Kunz (Figs. 11–14).


62


Fig. 11. Distribution of words in Kunz’s article by the number of letters in a word

(mathematical symbols were not taken into account). Logarithmic coordinates.

Fig. 12. Distribution of sentences in Kunz’s article by the number of words



63

(mathematicalsymbols were taken into account). Logarithmic coordinates.


64


Fig. 13. Distribution of words in Kunz’s article by the frequency of occurrence: (a) frequency form; (b) rank form. Logarithmic coordinates.

Fig. 14. Rank distribution of words with 3 letters by the frequency of occurrence in Kunz’s article. Logarithmic coordinates.



65

These distributions are presented, as I believe, in the order of increasing the degree of brain’s participation in their formation. A number of letters in the word is limited largely by the vocal apparatus, so that the role of the brain in the formation of the first distribution is relatively small. The number of words in a sentence is determined by the vocal apparatus to a lesser extent. It seems that the role of the brain is more important here. The form of the distribution according to the frequency of occurrence of words is already largely determined by the brain while the role of the vocal apparatus reveals here only by relative frequency of using words of different lengths. This restriction has been removed in the last distribution. Thus, if our hypothesis is correct, these four distributions are constructed in the order of increasing degree of their non-Gaussian nature, i.e. in the order of decreasing α.

It is easy to see that the parameter α is decreasing.

9. The second pitfall: animals also generate non-Gaussian distributions in their activity

It is interesting that animal’s behavior is no less non-Gaussian than human’s behavior. Having used the data given in the monograph [Resnikova, 1883], we have constructed distributions characterizing ant’s behavior [Haitun, 1998: p. 145–146]. It turns out that they are the Zipf distributions with the characteristic exponent α < 1 (see Figs. 15 and 16).

Fig. 15. The rank distribution of three ant species by the rate of their


66


research activity determined by the ratio of the time spent on inspection of models (underground labyrinth, brush, parallel plates) of real natural

situations (underground passages,crevices between the stones, grass thickness), to the time spent on staying on the exposed surface. The logarithmic

coordinates.



67

Fig. 16. The rank distribution of various elements of ant’s behavior (intermittent running,

orienteering with the survey of “hills”, detailed survey of small areas of soil, etc.) of a certain kind of ants by the percentage of time for

the behavioral ensemble “near-nest exits”. The logarithmic coordinates.

Note that, for example, the distribution of scientists by the number of publications is described by the Zipf distribution with the parameter α ≈ 1, and the distribution of scientific slang words by the frequency of their occurrence in §§ 6 and 9 of Einstein’s article on the special theory of relativity (2005) is the Zipf distribution with α ≈ 0,43 [Haitun, 1983: p. 258, 275].

It isimpressive that the brain of animals, includinginsects, generates distributions, comparable to the degree of non-Gaussivity with

distributions generated by human beings. Presumably, this means that in the social and organic areas of human’s and animal’s activity these

non-Gaussian distributions are generated by neural structures. Thus, if on a particular planet (on the Earth or any other) an object of unknown

origin described by a non-Gaussian distribution would be detected, it could mean that this object could be created either by a highly

developed civilization or by animals as well. However, this suggestion cannot be applied to the cosmic radio signals because

it is difficult to imagine that animals are able to send radio signals into the space.

10.The third pitfall: the rank distortion effect


68


In contrast to the frequency form of the Zipf distribution (1), there is the factor B in the rank differential form of the Zipf distribution (9). Due to this factor the distribution (9) can deviate from the straight line for the first ranks, i.e. at large values of the random variable x. The larger the sample value of B, the greater is the deviation (see Fig. 17)



69

Fig. 17. The rank form of the Zipf distribution with taking into account the rank distortion effect: B = 0 for the curve 1, B = 1 for the curve 2, B = 2 for

the curve 3, B = 5 for the curve 4, B = 10 for the curve 5, B = 50 for the curve 6. The logarithmic coordinates.

The rank distortion effect is necessary to take into account while determining empirical values of the parameter α and while determining whether a given distribution is Gaussian or not. As one can see, this effect has purely mathematical nature, and it is calculable with help of the expression for the factor B given by (9).

It can be shown on the well-known Bradford distribution. To approximate this distribution, for the first time the Zipf distribution was used [Haitun, 1983: p. 388– 390] to take into account the rank distortion effect (see Fig. 18).


70


Fig. 18. Distribution of journals by the number of papers on a given topic (the Bradford distribution): on the left hand — frequency form; on the right hand —

rank form.



71

11. SummaryThe statistical criterion discussed here (the dichotomy Gaussian /

non-Gaussian distributions) can be used for recognition of objects of artificial origin (terrestrial or extraterrestrial), although not with absolute reliability. However, one hundred percent reliable statistical criteria do not exist.

ReferencesCocconi, Morrison, 1959 — G. Cocconi, P. Morrison, Searching for interstellar

communications // Nature. — 1959. — Vol. 184. — P. 844–846.Cramer, 1948 — H. Cramer, Matematicheskiye metody statistiki

[Mathematical Methods of Statistics]: Uchebnik. — M., 1948. — 632 p.

Doeblin, 1940 — W. Doeblin, Sur l’ensemle de puissonces d’une loi de probabilité // Studia math. — 1940. — Vol. 9. — P. 71–96.

Folsome, 1982 — C.E. Folsome, Proiskhozhdeniye zhizni: Malen’kiy tyoply vodoyom [Origin of Life: Small Warm Pond] — M., 1982. — 158 p.

Gindilis, 2004 — L.M. Gindilis, SETI: Poisk vnezemnogo razuma [SETI: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence]: A Monograph. — M.:, 2004. — 648 p.

Gnedenko, 1939 — B.V. Gnedenko, K teorii predel’nykh teorem dlya summ nezavisimykh sluchainykh velichin [On the theory of limit theorems for sums of independent random variables] // Izvestiya AN SSSR. Ser. matem. — 1939. — P. 181–232; 643–657.

Haitun, 1982 — S.D. Haitun, Stationary scientometric distributions // Scientometric. — 1982. — Vol. 4. P. 5–25; 89–104; 181–194.

Haitun, 1983 — S.D. Haitun, Naukometrita: Sostoyaniye I perspektivy [Scientometrics: State and Prospects]: A Monograph. — M., 1983. — 344 p.

Haitun, 1983 — S.D. Haitun, The “rank-distortion” effect and non-Gaussian nature of scientific activities // Scientometrics. — 1983. — Vol. 5. — P. 375–395.

Haitun, 1988 — S.D. Haitun, On Kunz’s article “A case study against Haitun’s conjectures” // Scientometrics. — 1988. — Vol. 13. — P. 35–44.

Haitun, 1989 — S.D. Haitun, Problemy kolichestvennogo analiza nauki [Problems of Quantitative Analysis of Science]: A Monograph. — M., 1989. — 280 p. / S.D. Haitun, Kolichestvenny analiz sotsial’nykh yavleniy: Problemy i perspektivy [Quantitative Analysis of Social Phenomena: Problems and Prospects] — M., 2005. — 277 p.

Haitun, 1998 — S.D. Haitun, Moi idei [My Ideas]: A Monograph. — M., 1998. —


72


240 p.Haitun, 2005 — S.D. Haitun, Fenomen cheloveka na fone

universal’noy evolutsii [The Phenomenon of Man on a Background of Universal Evolution]: A Monograph. M., 2005. — 533 p.

Haitun, 2006 — S.D. Haitun, Sotsium protiv cheloveka: Zakony sotsial’noy evolyutsii [Society Against the Man: The Laws of Social Evolution]: A Monograph. — M., 2006. — 336 p.

Haitun, 2006 — S.D. Haitun, Ot ergodicheskoy gipotezy k fraktal’noy katrine mira: Rozhdeniye i osmysleniye novoy paradigmy [From the Ergodic Hypothesis to the Fractal Picture of the World: The Birth and Comprehension of the New Paradigm]: A Monograph — M., 2007. — 256 p.



73

Haitun, 2014 — S.D. Haitun, Сosmological Picture of the World Resulting from Hypothesis of Fractal Universe / Philosophy and Cosmology 2014 (Vol. 12) — Kyiv: ISPC, 2014. — P. 119-150

Kapitsa, 1997 — S.P. Kapitsa, S.P. Kurdyumov, G.G. Malinetsky, Sinergetika i prognozy budushchego [Synergetics and Predictions of the Future]: A Monograph. — M., 1997. — 285 p.

Kudrin, 1997 — B.I. Kudrin, Antichnost’. Simvolism. Tekhnetika [Antiquity.

Symbolism. Tehnetika]. — M., 1995. — 120 p.Kunz, 1988 — M. Kunz, A case study against Haitun’s conjectures // Scientometric.

1988. 1988. Vol. 13. P. 25–33.Malinetsky, Potapov, 1996 — G.G. Malinetsky, A.B. Potapov,

Nelineinost’. Novye problemy, novye vozmozhosti [Nonlinearity. New challenges, new opportunities] // Novoye v sinergetike. Zagadki mira neravnovesnykh struktur [New in Synergetics. Mysteries of the World of the Nonequilibrium Structures]. — M., 1996. — P. 165–190.

Mandelbrot, 1977 — B.B. Mandelbrot, Fractals: Form, Change, and Dimension: A

Monograph. — San Francisco, 1977. — XVI+365 p.Odum, 1986 — Eu. Odum, Ekologiya [Ecology]. T. 2. — M., 1986. — 376 p.Reznikova, 1983 — Zh.I. Reznikova,

Mezhvidovyeotnosheniyamurav’ev[Interspecies Relationships of Ants]: A Monograph. — Novosibirsk, 1983. — 206 p.

Timashev, 1995 — S.F. Timashev, Proyavleniya makrofluktuatsiy v dinamike nelineinykh sistem [Manifestations of macro fluctuations in the dynamics of nonlinear systems] // Zhurn. fizich. khimii. — 1995. — T. 69. — № 8. — P. 1349.

Trubnikov, 1993 — B.A. Trubnikov, Zakon raspredeleniyy konkurentov [Distribution law of competitors] // Priroda. — 1993. — № 11. — P. 3–13.

Trubnikov, 1995 — B.A. Trubnikov, O zakone raspredeleniya konkurentov [On distribution law of competitors] // Op. cit. — 1995. — № 11. — P. 48–50.

62


THE SPACES IN THE LOOKING GLASS: STILLING THE FRAME/ FRAMING THE STILLMarvin E. Kirsh — PhD Biochemistry,

Department of Anthropology California State University Los Angeles (Los Angeles, USA)


The purpose of this writing is to propose a frame of view, a form as the eternal world element, that is compatible with paradox within the history of ideas, modern discovery as they confront one another. Under special consideration are problems of representation of phenomena, life, the cosmos as the rational facility of mind confronts the physical/perceptual, and itself. Current topics in pursuit are near as diverse and numbered as are the possibilities for a world composed strictly of uniqueness able to fill infinite space; it is assumed that not all of the paths chosen in contemporary pursuits will produce coherent determinations in an appropriate frame able to accommodate a world of nominals in motion, containing motion, and is commensurate with basic physical law and the propagation of form, change from within. Intended as a potential guiding post for the aim of reason seeking to select, define and capture topics, chosen as special examples are the works of logistician/mathematician Lewis Carroll as he presents a paradox of actuality verses the reality of perception in Alice in Wonderland, the theory of relativity of Albert Einstein as he fails to elaborate a mathematics to communicate an inertial frame of reference, and the reconstruction ideas of Jacques Derrida as he refers for contrast with the scientific world view constructed of dualisms, monisms that are conceived to have no opposites. Supporting discussion is evolved from the works of Bertrand Russell, Erwin Schrodinger, Jurgen Habermas, Bronislaw Malinowski, Michel Foucault.

Key Words: rationality and imagination, nihilism, first/third perspective, number/mass, supervenience, social and natural evolution, shape/form, ‘the concept’, natural ethic

PrologueAbout the existence of the Nihilist/ the given existence of mass

rather than light harbors grounds for existence....The world is here conceived as (life) time brought about from the

containment of truth to a leash, to shorten lifetime change to inheritable factors from the mother, the past, must be willed. From within this perspective consuming the cosmos in whole or in part, all can be seen as stable and to propagate stably without out challenge to the laws of science but to the means of arriving at thermodynamic conclusions. Accordingly if humans imitate, are able to imagine and effect, as if themselves and nature with equal license, alteration to nature in projected cure for their ills, they enact, as if nature themselves, to contain death with truth attached to a leash. A product of nature, now imitator, are humans themselves becoming unfree, a new truth on a


63


leash as a cure for a pathology consequented to nature by self-possession in which men/women hold themselves as measure of all things, instead men a measure of the world?

If there are things that are beyond unaided witness range, there is motion; everything is in motion, ubiquitously lies about its’ complicity with the processes and actions familiarly associating it with its’ environment. Nature lies, we take serious our own lying, we ourselves are of a serious nature if nature, our composing parent,


64


is to be a serious topic. In simplest view nature is comical, it might put whatever convenient so and so small and deadly agent on whatever convenient so and so leash, so to scare more order to the proximal and orderly subjects that cannot but produce simultaneously toxicity and order. Vitamins, enzymatic cofactors, for example, possess toxic components, energy wells, are mobile and conceptually able to produce either null if given a free unlimited range of influence, or to effect the continuance of order and substance if restricted physically by attachment; in the naturally occurred state vitamins and cofactors are physically attached to larger entities and able to adjust physically according to circumstance as necessary agents in enzymatic catalysis.

For the philosophical and scientific mind there is not a ‘why’, just a ‘how’; a comedy of wheels, a comical series of reactions (it is not intended, in parallel to Shakespeares “A Comedy of Errors”, to imply that the wheel, a ubiquitous installment of the mind into humanly engineered produce, is invented in error, though eternal, without physical end, in the world as proposed the circle is not round or formed of continuous points and is different place to place).

It should be so if truth exists that either true things are true or all things including the self are wholly composed of lies, are out of place within a containing whole that is established by “misfits” ruled and governed by leashes. If one should claim that the truth is wholly a manifestation of lies in that it is never still, he/she cannot be lying if endowed in all corners and aspects with motion.

At this point, distant to and distinct from the serious occupations, seeking, eating, sleeping, sex, freedom from pain and disease, ‘seriousness’ itself suffers a second and rightful birth, the “liars’ paradox”, bears animos and worldly range, a universality that exists neither for the species including man nor the leash that contains either to a niche. An understanding of “there is” has come about...

Schrodingers’ wave is incomplete without visualizing life to exist only in the wake of the collapsed wave; life is attached to a leash.

Expansion cosmology is not viable unless the velocity of light is attached to a motion vastly in excess of the constant velocity it passengers.

It becomes obvious that the existence of numbers/amounts/mass/sequence precedes and is maintained of-itself via the proximal accumulation of species-on- leashes by species-on-leashes, of mass by mass.

If this description is indeed universal, the world should be ‘fool proof’, ‘air-tight’: as water is ‘water proof’: world/life/universe perceived as a phenomenon of death on a leash cannot suffer death. Though should men/women define and effect inheritable paths envisioned from the modification of naturally found toxic agents/toxic genes/ enzymes etc. it is conjectured possible to cause displacement of all that is familiar upon exclusion of the defective, seemingly detouring, agent.

Kirsh Marvin E. The spaces in the looking glass: stilling the frame/framing the still


65

Nature must be viewed specifically other than generally in terms of rational mechanics, to possess as its’ only matter, frictionless, conserved momentum, course towards the new and open. It is a willfully sustained and transmitted agnosticism and/or fear of either the existence or findability of a hand that weaves what is unpredictable, whimsical, unsubstantial/flimsy, that harbors Nihilism to corners within. The existence of Nihilism is stretched from witness by the rationale seeking perfection that is able to contemplate nothingness, the absence of space, and neither comes from nor exists innately to processes existing to the mind or physiology, internally or externally.


66


IntroductionAs far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not

certain; and asfar as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.

Albert Einstein [Einstein, 2010]

....Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps

dragging us around by the nose....

Albert Einstein [Archer, 2010]

In philosophy and science efforts are stymied to bridge mind and matter, the spiritual and physical, to elaborate human experience from the first perspective. Current ideations employ criteria adopted from religious and theological domains that are not accessible to the rationale to comply with demands imposed for logical analysis. It is here argued as a condition for eternality, a world that can possess no end or physical edge, that number supervenes over all else, whether it is number-bearing sequence, or number referring to amount or mass, direction-bearing time, number to the order of words in sentences, the order of events in history, science history or number contained to theory and method, amount and parameter possessing accomplished path, unalterable, are prerequisite to meaning. The mind and spirit both contain and precede temporally/historically science, cannot be contained to it. Albert Einsteins’ theory of relativity, topics from Bertrand Russell philosophy of deleted middle meaning and self belonging, meaning in Lewis Carrolls’ Alice in Wonderland, Jacque Derridas’ philosophy of opposites, deconstruction, will be discussed and maintained as threaded through discourse intended to highlight the potential forces that influence history and the evolution of ideas. Accounting, either referring to numbering or measuring or order, is elaborated to be the singular and exclusive activity of all species, living or inert. Einstein, in frustrated effort to elaborate an inertial frame of reference, is concluded to have mistakenly made the existence of light rather than mass the constructing axiom of elaborations; a motionless mass is presumed not to exist.

Jurgen Habermas [Habermas, 1991] in critical philosophical/sociological dis-

course finds a pessimism in which rhetoric evolved from humanly created structure,i.e. economic/political systems, is stymied to contain Judeo-Christian ethics to concepts that capture eternality and infinity to life experience, leans towards overtaking the life sphere of the individual.



67

In pursuit of the rational with the imagination the following statement in Lewis Carrolls’ “Alice in Wonderland” [Carroll, 1995], appears to be nonsensical.

Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not other wise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.

With the application of imagination to identify the referrals of phrases, pronouns,

the following meaning might be attached to Carrolls’ statement:Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what you might

appear as to others.What you (thought you) were or might have been was otherwise than what you

had been.What you had been would have likewise have appeared to others to be otherwise.


68


In example, a real you, world exists, what you had been, but the imagination must know that it is not only different from the world of appearances but is a moving world confined to the mind, minds of others, of relations determined by perceptions and memory, i.e. what you were or might had been was otherwise than what you had been. In retrospect Carroll might not had written otherwise.

Though claiming the world as a world of appearances with a hidden unknowable reality seems appropriate to all settings, we cannot take this lesson along everywhere. Parmenides an ancient Greek philosopher expressed in poetry a road that itself is ‘unknowable’, but ‘has a oneness’ [Palmer, 2012]; in centuries following Aristotle describes a universe that bears ‘An Unmoved Mover’ [Shields, 2014] that both governs and is governed by the same laws that govern all in the sense that if there is one there is all. Here visualized to reside at the intersection where a science of measuring departs from the world as an indivisible whole, the real self, what I had been might be un-measurable as the imagination measures, but in some context something that is a product of noun and verb, not identical to, but composing the self, might not be otherwise. Lewis Carroll plays on noun and verb, name and action, to allude to a self that cannot be measured, estimated or captured to visualized description.

It is logical to infer that nature should be immune to action from the processes that comprise it, western ideologies are deeply infiltrated with the notion that an action cannot act upon itself. As explanation is eternally doomed to account for the energy needed to accomplish and maintain order from knowledge about machines and laws of matter and energy, an of-itself-ness alone observed to nature becomes the simplest reducible unit of nature that can be construed as ‘universe’. ‘World’ is construed to contain within each division the irreducible unit universe; ‘order’ of ‘universe’ brings about the actions of the world that in turn transmit the ‘order’ of the ‘universe to create new world order in the same manner that the specificities and likenesses of digestion apparatuses to ingested food enable muscle movement and thought processes to result in language that is different according to the different experiences and settings of individuals. A broadened meaning for “1/2 life”, familiarly used to describe radioactive decay, is visualized to elucidate criteria necessary for eternality, to involve stability with respect to numerical rate, e.g. according to accelerating, decelerating, or linear rates of change; eternality, here demonstrated within generated egg forms, is associated with memory that occupies, in retrospect, 1/2 accomplished path distance to the present and a linear rate of progression. It is proposed that upon the introduction of inheritable physical change to worldly entities it is possible to change the world from its evolved place, to change the world into something else.

Materials and MethodsCalc-3-D pro, used to create the discussed egg form, constructed



69

by Andreas Greuer, is available free of charge from http://www.calc3d.com.

DiscussionFrom the first perspective distance is all that can be validly inferred

in the construction of a ‘physically self-belonging’ world of volume contained to volume. If it is considered that volumes as well as discrete times overlap one another in cogent assessment, a world composed strictly of the heterogeneous results that is very different from possibilities that divide the whole unendingly into parts; methods


70


that construct strictly with lines rather than volumes are the only possible means to conceive the unconceivable uncontained substance. Science is descended from a rational mind that is unbound to either the spirit, morals or ethics, does not advance to cognitive attention an unwitnessible universe. The axiom A+B=B+A is false in interpretation involving actual nature; likewise, C(t) = A(t) + B(t) = B(t)+ A(t) is ubiquitously false. Interpretation is here proposed bearing only the verb that bears, receives, and transmits the capacity for language, an intercoursing unity, shape, prison of volume in motion that exists to the transcendental, and is bound to the inert, living and the (witnessible) propagation of open (biological) structure. A mathematical/numerical method for the graphical creation of egg images is presented and the criteria of a ethic for the continued propagation of motion is proposed to reside at the interface of the scientific volumetric unit and evolved identity as a composite of the actions of temporally and physically overlapping motion-bearing egg shaped volumes. A chasm between historically old and new meaning, evolving ideology is proposed; a propensity has evolved to claim a universal existence of cause to all witnessed events as a captureable and measureable containment of nature, to exclude the opposite, i.e. ‘it decided to rain’.

It is here proposed that acceptable path arbitrations to achieve a best lifetime are contained to eccentrically varying-radii, to pointing forms that proceed contiguously physically and conceptually from past to future in which points of witness encounter lay an open but containing, apparent closed, surface along the path of progress. In this way structure and organization is achieved in the form of longest lifetime indicated from the maximized plot path of sequentially connecting points to a surface achieved from progression along a straight line; i.e. volume to surface area is minimal. A universal geometrically eccentric form in motion is entailed that is occupied 1/2 of the time by memory, viewing in the historical reverse direction, and 1/2 of the time along the line of temporal progress: for example memories ensuing from age 17.5 are predicted to bear a maximal influence on path direction, survival vigor at age 35; maximal survival vigor an effect of appropriate accounting and reaction ensuing from accomplished order to accomplish new order, the universal task for all existences in all settings. Maximal life time is entailed to faithfulness in adherence to established order and direction accomplished from appropriate reaction to preceding accounting such that memory is not compromised by de novo action, physical impulse opposing acquired structure reflected from the intercourse of spaces to change their influence upon contemporary accounting tasks, pathologically occupying temporally other than 1/2 of the accomplished age of the individual. In the described model, existence that is eternal is dependent on meaning related to survival based decision making, viable



71

syntax, that is universally coherent with respect to agent and environment. A steady or linear rate of motion or change, i.e. a constant velocity such as that of a free falling body in orbit around a planet, is an inherent property of the described model; otherwise either the path of the agent veers to cross in description from that involving an appropriate role of memory, unpredictability, to predictable loss of form in the future direction, i.e. the 1/2 life of radioactive material such as uranium, or to a decline, loss of amount, approach to death, descent from an orbit maintained by forces that are tangential to the line of motion. The first order rate of motion of a sphere along a line, the use of sine and cosine to express an opposition of kinetic and potential energy produces a egg shaped prison of volume/space under the influence


72


of causes likewise modulated; energy is conserved, momentum is conserved from the perspective of the occupants of a world in which atemporal physical displacement is associated with the witness pair from the first perspective and time relates from the third perspective observation of the (atemporal at the first perspective) interval associated with the intercourse of witnesses in pairs that precedes change produced from encounter. To accommodate the difference between first and third perspective:

force = mass X acceleration(becomes)

(force) X (time)^2 (third perspective) =mass X displacement (first perspective)

In analogy theory and observation in quantum mechanics, Schrodinger wave mechanics, the ‘particle in the box’, [Freiberger, 2012] can be accommodated into a perspective composed of distances/volumes and a common time shared to witness. Yet if it is considered that the inert representation yields, rather than path contour and open spaces, atemporal displacement as output, though quantum creations bear a large latitude for produce, capital operators able to create case related operators producing specific outputs, they are mechanical and contrived in the language of ‘null’ based statistics. Open space should be construed to be the ordinary consequence of other than a general case but a specifically evolved path of progression. Polynomial multiplication of the type:

[Δ(C, c) (+/-) Δ(V, v)]^2 * [(Δ(C, c) or Δ(V,v)] (C, c; V, v in correspondence to Schrodingers’ mechanism of creating wave operator q from Q)

can be parsed into terms representing volume(^3), area(^2), or distance (^1...), partial derivatives, in resemblance to Schrodingers’ relations, to produce a relation for volume that is qualified by a dangling operator of units of area or distance in attempt to capture ‘uniqueness’ (if it inferred that neither Q nor q are unique, the Q/q operation accommodates uniqueness in a ‘pseudo’ sense). Timeless, from the first perspective, displacement is entailed, the particle has a finite probability of being on either half of the box and zero probability of being in the center.

A supposed emerged product of an unimaginable, undetectable by either aided or unaided senses, slowly proceeding history of an unwitnessible vast and eternal whole, the intellect is tested to be stymied to divide whole volume finitely to distinct and open heterogeneous spaces, faces absolute relativism that dampens on rational dissection to circularity/nullnessness. Schodingers’ mathematics might be ranked among the most accomplished in scope, yet it itself entails a displacement from the life bearing to inert lines on drawing paper that divide the real and unwitnessible particulate,



73

witness, itself gauging by displacement, the absolute source of cognition where experience begins and the buck must stop in accountings. Invention/artifact of the rational seeking to employ recursives to capture order raises concerns about nature and the artificial, sociological construction that falsely estimates a void arisen from conflict between want and need, paradox at the intersection of men verses nature and men-as-nature verses nature.

At the level of universe as it is contained by worldly contents, the rate of mutation is necessarily and approximately linear, potential and kinetic energy bear a temporal lag, change occurs from within the free floating orbiting condition that is of itself.


74


Envisioned is an egg shaped seas of egg shaped forms that delineate of itselfness, universe evolution with time in which the experienced material world is the product of the proximity of volume possessing number/mass. Consciousness, expressed in the phrase “I am aware that I am aware of myself” is not universal but a special product of proximities of appropriate diverse spaces, e.g. the left half of the brain in position to the right half of the brain births a ‘world’ rather than a ‘universal’ phenomenon, consciousness.

In contrast to perspective defined by spherical radii and plural possibilities in definitions that escape confinement to the specifics of history, the temporally and physically progressing first perspectives contained to the described eccentrically shaped, pointed forms, entail a world that is in perceptually comparable motion with first perspectives that are each unique. Nature, defined as motion, a verb, time and change bearing, is a completeness in the sense that a language is maximally complete if the applied rules for syntax, i.e. momentum, eccentricity ratio, orientation, setting, consistently without exception result in coherent meaning, i.e. the imprisonment of volume as closed appearing surfaces that results in structure.

Inherent with the attribute description “face” as a substitute for the parametrically contained/closed volume is cause to suggest an inherent logic that constructs both the cognitive and physical. The faces of processes are made into existence alike the split image attached to a range finder on a camera that brings into focus a coherent view from flexible divides that are willed into meaning by the operator of the camera. As in Lewis Carrols’ Alice in Wonderland, a fluid construct of verb and noun, ‘what I had been’, the actual emanation of disposition in reciprocation with dynamic temporal/ physical settings of the same, diverges from ‘what I thought I had been’, estimation verses actual change are logically distinct. Intuitively perceivable nature, plausibly captureable in description only to the recursive “of-itself-ness” does not entail the uniquely existing product of disposition and behavior that unite setting and universe to compose history. Mind and matter, spirit and physiology are thus become rigidly separated immiscibly in studies; the null, nothingness, endures to remain unfilled, nihilism, as invisible as a potential bearing recurring form, infiltrates vision that has been purged of the unwitnessible to fill spaces otherwise attributable to tangible disparities existing between tangible substances. What is perceived to be still and inert remains qualified to be fixed/unreflective; nature rather than men, becomes the irrationally explained and logically unacceptable bias of cognitive reflection that holds no account of its’ own unavoidable attachment to the properties of the evolved physical world from which it is birthed, as it is this exact physical world within which it can only be testified to function. The search for comprehension becomes circular with the revelation that history, unknowable history, is all that might be applied for understanding.



75

If world facets must be both parametric in character and historically tied to the particulars of place and setting, emergence, the parameters of physical path remain as the only tool with which to describe and interpret; ironically, exclusively, space filled with what it is filled with must be applied in pursuit of the same for concepts and understanding, thus with which to pursue the mind and the physical for understanding/association with nature. A rock possesses a parametrically definable path, it can heat, cool, strike another object and shatter, is governed by a unique disposition, laws of behavior, possesses an identity, uniqueness delineated by a


76


physically contiguous path and remains a (unique) rock as long as it is accounted for by the disposition/laws associated to its’ identity; a rock accounts for itself as its’ means of existence. If it can be inferred that ‘an accounting’ is logically the same as ‘a concept’ then the world likewise can be inferred to be exclusively filled to completeness with ‘concepts’ that comprise all identities, occur faithful to their existence only at the position of the first perspective. If mass and light are each born of the other and it is that neither can emerge as but one or the other then a motion cannot be parallel to the path of a light ray connecting witnessing masses if light and mass share a common point of inception, the path of a line connecting witnesses cannot either be straight if all is in disparate motion. Thus if but one straight line is employed in description all lines are necessarily straight. If it is simpler to infer that line, concept and motion are identical it follows that the proposed “line of universal expansion” following the big bang refers universally neither to light nor mass but to a frustrating paradox, the means for existence of something in a world ruled by “equal reaction for each action”.

If ‘something’ is made from ‘nothing’, i.e. the universe, it is not unreasonable that it must be petty in nature, it follows either that the modern mind is obsessed with pettiness, or, if nature threatens human life, that either one or the other is petty, or, if it is the case that both are petty, a common ground, inalienable right for either to contest the other is inferred. If confrontation entails fear, it also potentially follows that if the actual world should be pettily/whimsically constructed then it is an apparent fear of pettiness that ubiquitously motivates human behavior in response to threat. Humans reserve an ‘absence of straightness’ to communication, to abstracted definition for all that is not proximal, directly touchable by the senses, simultaneously as straight lines are realized to tangible substance in statistical/null oriented engineering/navigation, prosthetics; devices constructed of emptiness/ holes are here supposed able to realize emptiness/holes in material substance. If “an eye for an eye” is the foundation ideology, as if the world is only the consequence of soldiers in confrontations, modern jurisprudence has been granting license to engineered substance realized likewise. Obvious in example is the death penalty among others such as genetic engineering, high energy physics experiments, the engineered transport of materials from space; each entail the forceful displacement of shape and motion from niches constructed of familiarity that is indigenous.

If the entity ‘volume’ frames the paradox of mind and matter, it is reasonable to seek to attain a description of the dynamic volume of space as it seems obviously not to have been accomplished successfully to consider to address the history of places and entities despite the convincing successes of technology derived from science theory and method applied to the human condition.



77

Amidst interpretation that renders parts of the world from observation through a microscope or telescope, e.g. studies in biology, physics or astronomy, objectivity to encompass both the self and the external is grossly slanted to attach the ‘verb’ only to the external, the self fixed in position in the act of observation, bearing reasoning ability from a capacity to arbitrate that is apriority assumed to be absent from the list of properties of the interacting spaces attributed to observed objects. An ancient world dominated by the action of gods, animos, has modernly been translated from discovery of real geometries and more apparent associations into mechanisms likened to adding machines run by battery power. Division of the world into energy


78


potentials produced from divides of either the internal spaces of the self, those of the external, is ultimately not satisfactory: the possession of skin, the delineation of boundaries between distinctly emerged spaces, has been given a secondary position in interpretation that focuses strictly on the delineation of processes of the standard volume of space based on established general laws of motion; ‘time’, entailing the verb or action, here held as a distinct entity at each point of reference has become redundantly treated in a world here construed to be composed strictly of witness pairs that share a common time [see Malinowski, 1922]; ‘verbs’, denoting dynamic aspects inherent to all spaces, observer and observed, have subsequently become absent one place or another and surface deceptively as static nouns in false comprehensions: upon identifying a putative “god particle” physicists are now challenged to find an elongation particle, ad-infinitum.

In the theory of relativity [Einstein,1986] established the velocity of light as a constant, an unchanging verb, in essence a noun; he could not elaborate a personally satisfactory account of an inertial frame of reference, the motions of the physical are difficult to contain cognitively to a universe that contains both the physical together with the mind.

Confusion involving test of the imagination to experience, surfacing in attempts to separate artifact from real, runs a circle to define from imagination without encounter, though imagination, like nature, paths from physical experience towards the open possibility.

If emerged structure is inferred to possess rational criteria, there should be a 1+1=2 defining paradigm to describe processes and relations. A universal paradigm must be unalterable and does not itself emerge. Interpretation dictates that 1 volume=A plus 1 volume=B may not always add up to exactly 1 + 2 volumes=A+B as volumes intercourse; more accurate for description is “action 1 plus action 2 produces action 3”, each action attached respectively to discrete volumes that are emerging and intercoursing with time. Nature itself has only actions to consider within the individual setting, the gauging of enduring forces emerged from disparity.

The law of action and reaction, as it is an elementary facet in all scientific interpretation, cannot be excused to deny that the intercourses of mankind do not necessarily impart momentum on both the physical and conceptual self, the other, and the external; all intercourses entail disparate motions, however slight, involving witness pairs, upon the physical volumes of perception apparatuses, external objects, as conceptual energy is redeemed for both the conceptual and physical, deliberation of new concepts and survival action.. The common scientific perspective, hoped to successfully delineate artifact of the imagination from the real within conceptions and behaviors, has not evolved the ability to elaborate the products of synergy. If the possession of unique identity is the most sacrificed criteria evolved to scientific modeling, identity, alluding to the characteristics of recognition, familiarity, disparity, to form possessing both dimension



79

and motion, has to be accounted for philosophically in advance of corner cutting methods employed for the purpose of the engineering of nature.

Framed within the philosophy of Bertrand Russell [Russell and Whitehead, 1962] the ‘set of all faces’ does not belong to itself, it does not have a face or recognizable nature, but conceptual existence that is distinct from the ‘physically’ self belonging set of


80


scientificallyelaboratedvolumes’ employedinattemptstoproducerulesabletoelaborate the nature of entities. The supposed existence of undifferentiated, faceless ‘volume’ cannot be validly addressed with sets that have members in the same manner that the set = ‘material nature’ might be conceived to be composed of unique distinct entities, (though Einstein nearly circumvented this issue in the General Theory of Relativity as it is thought a necessity for general theory.) In this same light, ‘consciousness’ or ‘awareness’ is considered to be self-belonging; ‘I am aware that I am aware of myself’’; a parallel of consciousness as ‘aware awareness’ to that of the physically self-belonging ‘volume’ of science method seeking universal rules for the behavior of energy contained to volume raises the topic of consciousness to that of a category-less study, a set with no members. In contrast, the action or motions of a state acquired from memory or path accomplished in synergy with the contemporary setting, i.e. cognition, consciousness can be conceived to represent a unique special, worldly, historically evolved case of the behavior of matter and energy contained to face-bearing volume. A better perspective makes for ‘universal cognition’ rather than ‘universal consciousness’. The human mind can thus be postulated to be both a special case of the special case of nature, referring to the capacity to self-reference self reference, and a general case of the special case of nature referring to the ability to react, arbitrate. Physical ratio has the major role, the mind is unable to visualize concretely the vastness meant by the noun ‘universe- bearing world’, the eternal cannot be given physical size to be imagined, but with method that concedes a relation between the physical and memory containing paths in which existence is accounted for as a familiarity of the dimensions of motions of self and causes, the possession of mathematically enumeratible meaning when held in ratio. The shorter chain of cause and effect perception by animals, such as the dog, can be seen to be similarly self containing and self-defining, neither contents nor container able to exceed one another. Definition and exclusion of “null” or” “infinite”, whatever is unconditionally unwitnessible, as non-existent, precludes the concept of “universal consciousness”, as well as null based human engineering that paths towards physical and conceptual oppression via the ultimate realization of the motionless state. The imagination is not held to the contiguities possessed to history.

Fromthisperspectivecenteredonvolumeas‘self-belonging’, containingoftheworld, an ethic surfaces at the interface of the imagination and the actual, undifferentiated volume and face possessing identities, or between undifferentiated possibility and an actual path of the physical, reasoning and discourse. A natural ethic then contains, as identity or history contains, to honor an of-itselfness of the motion of elements, agents, entities, volume associated with each; bearing neither numbers nor elaborated discourses on right and wrong but necessary criteria regarding setting, path, direction and decision making, it is



81

inferred to be what is yet uncaptured that precedes language elaborated morality.

As intercourse entails overlap, within the presented formula for intercoursing volumetric shape in motion is description of synergy, an accounting for redundancy introduced to the whole that has been explained in terms of the assembly of parts given equal legal status and jurisdiction; the relative motion of existing perspectives is here resolved in terms of shared time and displacement, time cannot be captured for comparative perspective dependent mathematical comparison. In this setting, though a single motion affecting many agents over a common time is considered, the radii of volumes are otherwise than fixed and might be inferred to decrease on the average as


82


energy shrinks to the dimensions of matter in a manner that is strictly beyond the ability

of perception apparatuses because it similarly effects, via disparity, their existence.

A template for the egg structure is depicted in figure 1.

Figure 1: An oval template for the generation of an egg shape (Fig 2): the light beam occupies half of the elapsed time pointing in the reverse

direction, half in the forwards direction.

The egg (Figure 2) is evolved from a linear motion (v) from which light (c) is projected simultaneously in the x-y and x-z planes. An individual walking a straight line and simultaneously turning a light in his hand 360 degrees in each plane (X-Y and X-Z planes) would produce light that opposes his direction and light that compliments his direction, each 50% of the time respectively.

Figure 2: An egg shape from trigonometric functionsE/m= ΔV Slow Velocity^2/2 + ΔC Light Velocity^2V=velocity of motion, C =Velocity of light (is applied as a variable) R(a) Sin @ = Slow Velocity, R(a) Cos @ = Δ



83

Velocity of lightRadius(egg)/Radius(a) = [[(Sin theta)-(Cos theta)]^2 + (Cos theta)^2+(Cos phi)^2]^(1/2) 10^14< theta,phi <10^17d(theta,phi) =(10^17 — 10^14)/500 = 2.02 X 10^14


84


The model requires a graphing apparatus and programming function that can produce a moving origin and was not available for experiment. However, it was found that with the employment of graphing periods unevenly divisible by pi, that the unique set of points, no longer resembling the waves of functions employed to generate data, produced an egg shape from an initial postulation that a relation of potential and kinetic energy had spherical description, demonstrated the existence of a phase lag brought to motion resulting in curvature to produce closed and continuous looking eccentric surfaces. It is conjectured that a constant motion is introduced to data in the form of the special sets of quasi-random points generated from the method of period of revolution definition, possibly in conjunction with algorithms used to estimate trigonometric values, the rounding approximations used to estimate output, the imperfect structure of 3D surfaces in computer processors, if it is not also evident that communication within processing is modulated by the velocity of light. The egg figures that are produced appear life like, resembling farm eggs; other closed appearing surfaces (not shown) are also discovered depending on the manipulation of graphing parameters and equations. A linear motion seems to have surfaced serendipitously from within mathematical modeling methods and wisdoms to result to mimic to produce nothing other than what has been elusive to conceive of or capture. It is also noted that the resulting visual surface is the product of a discontinuous plot path and is consistent with more cogent philosophical assessments that the future of processes is not predictable and appears so only on occasion related to an unlikely probability that the extended path of progression will suffer a change in course. Mathematical analysis such as calculus applied to determine surface areas or volume is also not possible; the egg surface generated is more like a painting attached to a setting than a mathematical space surface. If the degree of openness of path is considered an indication of best survival, the simple linear motion along the Y axis (sin(theta) + 2cos(theta), an open straight line is envisioned to embody a maximum natural survival age. The egg can be envisioned to make its’ way linearly forwards within a tree and forest ubiquity that is contained to the dynamic ratio ∆C/C, where C represents a vast universe-age related radius, ∆C a perceivable radius that is pertinent to encounter within the progressing perspective, reflected from, but not identical to, similarly evolved ‘experiences’ of influencing causes (Figure 3). Arguing that the light wave has greater complexity than revealed by the one dimensional description modernly given it, it is recently reported (Gionannini et. al, 2014) that the measured velocity of light is variable depending on an experimentally manipulated shape given to the defining wave of the photon.

The path to open space at familiar perspectives is postulated to be calibrated from distal causes that give birth to structure where change, i.e. (∆C/C ), possesses a wide open range or ‘vision’ that is slight in



85

comparison to that of the accomplished path of causes, e.g. a vast size distal egg shape (C) and an egg size compatible with proximal perception (∆C) mutually exist for causes and effects, ad-infinitum, such that found familiar diversities and complexity exist for perception only within spaces proximal to witness; witness of the reflection of a reflection of the self in a mirror requires an absolute proximity of the mirrors to the self. The grounds for existence becomes but the whimsical and flimsy self obstruction to its non existence, all is but the suffered motion of shadow cast from the past that suffers yet additional motion from witness-based displacement. Relations do not align exactly with the shadow


86


Figure 3: The familiar open path A-B resembles the place of open path existing to the path of distal causes (-A-+B). (the actual size of A-B is diminished rather than enlarged, as depicted, with respect to A-B of causes; resembles it only in shape). The openness of space at the place of distant causes insures existence at places of associated effects. Other

than dependence on the possibility for the existence of open space that is cause dependent, control over survival resides at the locus of the first

perspective; arbitrations cannot challenge physically substance acquired to accomplished path. Survival intuition, the complexities of emotion, behavior, related to encounter, physical substance and memory, can be uncapturable to rational understanding but in the case of shared familiarities, familarities of

accomplished path, as each leads from the past.

casting occlusions that precede or proceed from them. It is not the exact origin of the illumination, nor details of the occlusion, but their occurrence that should be the topic of rational investigation. In the first perspective the path of survival is based on memory, learning and intuition gathered from the past, resembling only and not equal to that of the path at the site of distal causes; though number/counting/ sequence, the modus operandi of the rationale, supervenes universally, emotion and mood guided behavior may not so easily be understood in rational terms as they follow from past events. Cognition in this sense is interpreted to be the result of confrontation of past to projected path from present. No matter how difficult, the possibility of navigation from present to future is insured if it exists for causes, ad-infinitum, precluding that alteration has not been made via the mechanical introduction of change to inheritable elements or serious potential-discontinuities of paths have not occurred, i.e. surface life has not suffered large discontinuous displacements such as propagation upon traveling in space ships to



87

other planets or to deep sea habitats.Instinct is accommodated in this model as the product of a

suitability-to- possibility emanating from the propagation of motion, conservation of momentum, within internal structure, physiological structure, the external, identity to identity: all is modulated by familiarities, disparities and discovery.


88


If the transcendental (Kant, 2005), like material substance, has actual potential as proposed, energy bound to its’ existence, in addition it is here argued to be ‘seen’ as an unwitnessible universal shape. Substance, tangible or intangible, born of experience has volume that bears potential and witness, potentials new witness.

Though a natural idea of path, in contrast to the flimsy notion of an invisible form, is reflexively understood ubiquitously; it becomes plausible to suggest that the controlling element in the advancement of humanity has been fear of flimsiness. Were it not for legislative law restricting the right to political office, designed to guard the sovereignty of cultures, there might be little existing evidence within western cultural activities to indicate an understanding of natural processes. Likewise it can be projected that endogenous materials from space bearing different histories from indigenous earth elements, on displacement and encounter might consequent an unpredictable change in disposition to the innately familiar to consequent pathologies in a world where chirality and orientation are temporal characteristics, physical displacement results from witness events that are atemporal.

Form contained to the propagation of disparity, possessing asymmetry as proposed, though originating from miniscule angular

motions, is perceived to possess direction at the point of witness; it has restricted latitude and cannot point, blunt end to nose, too far astray from the past to present to future, forward path it emanates from. A

conceptual trail that dissects men and nature into machine like excessively complex components in order to account for observed

diversity, realizes reduced diversity (see Baudrillard, 1994); the potential for diversity of machines and their products, even the most

complex, does not match that of the products of nature.The definition of an absolute natural ethic for the perpetuation of

motion based on form refers to direction, asymmetry, continuity; the character of moral behavior may depend on physical continuity, i.e. the displacement of elements of black culture, much older, hence slower moving in ratio to that existing in new environments with a younger white culture, resulted in perceptions that they were less intelligent, inferior, subsequently resulting in a loss of capable and reasonable moral attitudes and judgments. An inertia that is bound to mass is suggested to exist, past towards future that can be frustrated in encounters, within navigation through unfamiliar terrains, un-encountered adaptations and rates of change, to cause pathological potentials.

Perhaps human civilization is plagued with bottlenecks that elude the senses in the choice of open paths; Eve is known from genetic analysis to have married a second Adam, the original still present genetically as it is present in all [Callaway, 2013]. A genetic marker for cannibalism has also been detected that is ubiquitous throughout mankind [Roach,2003]. It is plausible that men are partly blind to their own species as a result and choose forward directions that are less



89

than optimal. Examples in current history are numerous.In scientific methods, willfully, experimentally, imposed proximities

necessarily offset balances to threaten existence via the application of a created force emanated from the hands of entities whose dimensions themselves, as well as the parameters of forces applied, can be disparate to the facets of the elements that are manipulated. A David and Goliath approach reduces men cruelly to the size of mice that are able to navigate narrows: physical laws are constructed from tunnel views, terminology for artificially constructed fields of view has recently adopted the phrase ‘thinking inside


90


or outside the box’; it is possibly questionable whether it is understood that there is philosophically but one box, or amidst growing complexities the idea of but one ‘box’ has been dismissed. In discussion of frustrations and failures associated with the evolution of the penal system [Foucault, 1977], punishment of the soul via application to the body, penal application is described to have changed focus historically towards the education of the soul in order to train the body; this appears to consequent from definition in theory and interpersonal meeting, in reverse of incentives, a confining of the spirit that is effected from the same tendency shared with the natural sciences to reduce to homogeneity for study. Attempts to contain conceptually natural, necessarily and ubiquitously existing eccentricity are endeavored modernly with the imposition of roundness that produces confined, oppressed spaces in whole areas where space may be more abundant than perception suggests, or behavior reflects [Kirsh, 2011; Kirsh, 2012; Kirsh, 2013].

Survival proceeds from an ‘insurance of nature’ (from which insurance companies and economies establish their survival) that is established as a fact of civilization accomplishment past to present; it is contingent on low parametric levels of mans’ cruelty to himself, allowing granted freedoms that do not pin him obsessively- compulsively to the walls of encountered narrows to further occlude views, result in the blind reliance on contrivance and perspective constructed from a rationale that sequesters the world absolutely into distinct spaces, specific and general, within and without, the absence of a concept of space that unites. The failure of individuals to conceive of the prison as a natural aspect of all that exists can lead to legal corruption in which violators not only escape the penal system, but depending on the nature and extent of unrecognized offenses, jurisdictions can be lead on a criminal path towards the premature closure of spaces. It is not impossible that a major contributor to modern environmental difficulties leading to concerns of sustainability are the consequences of behavior associated with failed conceptual understanding.

Processes, producing synergies for application, in analogy to an engine that both produces and is produced from cultural processes, are resembling of the above rendition that is modulated by form. A balance should be sought in productive intercourses to maximize lifetimes that are established within the confrontation of energies from an absolute past accomplished path, blunted end, and future realizations, pointed end, at the apex of forwards motion, as setting dependent traits and character become positioned and inherited. A natural ethic can be visualized to exist within fields constructed strictly of inequality (one place to the next, one day to the next are not equal), and physical discontinuity, displacement, that must exist in its’ minimalized state so that terrain accomplished, forming the folds of history, is composed of terrain that is not bypassed in the course of



91

progression.Modern ideology assumes multiple forms that interface eternally

with world views of the citizen, cannot be detached from the ethnic backgrounds of citizens or from meaning that refers to religion and hence world views, no matter how deeply reflected states can never be ideally secular [Molla and Dastagir, 2013]. Ideology thus emerges from within the same perception based values as those from which the citizen finds his place of interaction with the self, the other, social and political institutions as the effects of influencing factors cast inexactly aligning shadows to compose the immediate environment. It is plausible that within the wake of environmental/physical displacements occurring over the course of natural history,


92


a devout seeking has occurred to attach explanation to the physically witnessible and measureable and to sequester questions of being itself, the mind, the spirit, to myth, though both the mind and nature find path from a synthesis of new from old, ‘the speaking hand of nature’, able to account for either the physical or conceptual might be construed by neither the most prolific philosopher nor scientist to be endowed with humanly describable cause, contingency causes contingency. Presented is a proposed language of lines, time, direction, amount, form and motion, equality and disparity that captures the transcendental in terms of the union of encounter, memory of encounter, possible future structure, existence to itself, though not to a playground of disposition that births ideology. Nature and language can be viewed to each possess a syntax in whose underlying the possession of an of-itself transcendental form in motion supervenes as a requirement for the eternal.

In modern conceptions derived from relativity the existence of light rather than mass or number is given as an axiom though a volume bearing shape is a countable unit and is thus suitable for the pursuit of cognition. It is philosophical sound to consider that mass universally precedes light, number precedes the energy of action, to consider that mass/number is contained to a prison as discourse contains, communicates and transmits via familiarity [Foucault, 1977; Kirsh, 2013]. Explanation made in an allegory to wealth that is dependent on ratios and is independent of currency denomination [Russell, 1955] offers in description a man traveling in a balloon who had lost his memory and lives in world of images absent of actual touch, it can account only for a history-less world; though shape can be construed in the absence of time all that might be construed to exist is time/shape in motion, e.g. history.

Between two events which are not too remote from each other there is, in the general theory as in the special theory, a measurable relation called ‘interval’, which appears to be the physical reality of which lapse of time and distance in space are two more or less confused representations. Between two distant events, there is not any one definite interval. But there is one way of moving from one event to another which makes the sum of all the little intervals along the route greater than by any other route. This route is called a ‘geodesic’, and it is the route which a body will choose if left to itself [Russell, 1955: p. 150].

It is plausible that Einstein meant to infer that if he and others were conceived to be equal and identical it is only a disparity of experience, behavior/motion that divides us; albeit all earthly life is underlined by a shared familiarness as a constant element, the unreflected life, unreflected universe, makes one less wise than those whose thoughts remain fixed; age cannot be related to parameters of physical motion held in ratio to a constant. It is more logical that light has content pertaining only to the witness of force produced by numbers/amounts,



93

serial propagation, displacement and new transmission, and nothing other than to consider what is reflected upon to be simultaneous with what is experienced to reflect into the eye and is simultaneous with events responsible for it. It is motion of the imagination that is either young or old, open or closed but never still. It is not surprising that Einstein evolved the track to general theory based on perplexing physical observation.

Humans are obviously emotional, passionate, gregarious, and persistent, behavior that might be expected from masses bearing for life a humanly determined historical inertia composed of accumulated mass. It is potentially the making of


94


authority in the imagination to be physically powerful, larger than the self that leads the mind to consider the existence of a vast universe that contains the world, rather than a vast world that contains a number-accounting, form-bearing universe in each part, reciprocally demanding that it is accounted for likewise as a condition of mutual existence. Evidenced by Lewis Carroll in Alice in Wonderland, it is only the contrast of unwitnessible intersections of the fast moving fleeting shadows of those masses made familiar to us from our discourses that form the tangible substance of illuminated reflection; it is not a wonder, if it is particulars of masses that continually elude historical description, that light might be chosen as author and measure to rule world dimensions.

In symbolic logic the conditional action finds difficult expression and accommo- dation for analysis, verbs and motion as they have application to beliefs [Valaris, 2014], representation [Kimble, 2014], tangible world facets, or thoughts and inten- tions are difficult to consider in discussions [Starr, 2014; Korzukhin, 2014]. Divi- sion of the world according to inside and out is not logically coherent in the search for universals. It is here contended that a set of phrases or statements first must be containable to a (universal) truth condition. Employing a logically sound statement, motion and time can be envisioned to be induced with the substitution of falsehoods to whatever given phrase in a statement is chosen. An example of motion and change induced from ill fitting units can be witnessed in nature in the example of incorpora- tion of uracil falsely to cause mutation into DNA. It has been determined that uracil is detected and removed from DNA by an excision repair action that, other than reading DNA information content, functions by detecting a distortion caused by the ill fit and applies the force of torsion imposed as a source of energy to excise the falsely incorporated uracil base. If I know John believes that all cool objects are blue and I show John a cool object and ask him the color, I might assume only that John will say blue if I can also say that John will not under any circumstance have a change in his belief and will also always say what he believes; these conditions are difficult to establish. However if it is universally true that all cool objects are blue and I find a cool object I present to John as red, it is likely that John, knowing all cool objects are blue, will intend to pursue an according ‘reaction’ in response to the necessary truth of the color of the cool object. In this presentation witnessibility is given to be a universal property of matter, the universal agent of barter, conditional at the first perspective, itself is the universal condition for existence. The universal condition of motion of both mind and matter is advanced here to be the consequence of stress to closed appearing structure entailed by a universal case of unconditional witnessibility in a universe of restricted witnessibility as the source of processes, the means of sensation.

With an infinite number of members, the prime numbers, divisible



95

only by themselves and “one”, each finite and unique, has the same character as world interpretation that infers an infinite heterogeneous field of excusively unique identities, a continuous line that is not neesessarily infinitely divisible in a world of amounts and temporal order involving the sequential evolution of distinct spaces. Framing latitude inherent to rational facilities is able to invent from unique/prime apriorily open spaces of the world, closed space without a future, depending on whether perspective is mechanically displaced from the first person perspective that bears actual witness to space that is, other than statistically ruled, finitely and


96


uniquely divided. Displacement of the position of perspective employing scientific theory and measurement to the different position of prosthetic devices can be envisioned to produce non-prime gaps to points of surfaces to evolve redundant, soldier like, rather than unique identities in interpretation, surface evolution in the direction of the closed state with respect to the status quo existing at the point of direct sensory experience. The stars and constellations in the night sky, objects in microscopes, the points constituting rendered surfaces are here described to each be uniquely associated with unique causes. The physical proximity of points that create witnessible geometrical form in either scientific models, physical settings or artwork, is artifact and does not entail meaning that is other than individual, bearing no actual details of history. If it can be assumed that the knowledge of form is exclusively from life experience, the world can be contained subjectively as either Rorschach-blot like mirage of unknowable actual content composed of amounts and distances that are incomensurate with cognitive counting, visualization capabilities, or as what is directly known/knowable from proximal experience; categorizations of shape and form for understanding, explanation entailing cause and effect, occurs within the personal space of the individual, though in all cases it is the same entity volume, defined scientifically in terms of distance, that constructs, visualizations whose sorting is plastic to reflection, rereflection. history.

This then is demonstratable, but it is an axiom that every continuum is divisible; hence a finite line, being continuous, is divisible. This is the notion that the author of the Elements uses in bisecting the finite line, and not the assumption that it is divisible to infinity. That something is divisible and that something is divisible to infinity are not the same thing. [Morrow, 1970].

If is the case that nature arbitrates rather than acts rigidly according to law, a world made of the dynamics of closed appearing form in motion can be wholly captured as an embodiment of the transcendental and disposition respectively; to be a consequence of the variability of the parameters of acquired-path effected behavioral dispositions attached to self and encountered entities/spaces upon arbitrating what is either physically nearby or far to witness, proximal or distal to familiarity. The existence of a third perspective and a witness pair is universal. Combined, the transcendental and disposition ultimately descend upon to arrive at an existing truth of nature though neither are tangible nor witnessible, but accountable facets of the world.

A headless but eccentricity ridden state of nature, able to accommodate eternality and physical endlessness, births the perspective, in common with the self it proceeds towards death, the universal headless state of nature, the null: the head, framing centrically what is ubiquitously eccentric, itself the product of disparity, constructed of disparity, creates disparity from experience, is transcendental in nature. Continuity, always present temporally to



97

produce possibility, is not prerequisite to physical progression with time: a dedicated path can be imagined that universally approaches a ‘chicken-with-its-head-cut-off’ like situation, its’ head nearly blended in uniformly with the background, effortlessly navigating, able to ‘walk’ blindly: a creature able to assimilate complex chains of cause and effect reflexively can be imagined to master its’ evolved environment so methodically to appear headless in its niche, and in new proximities to suffer challenges to now near sentient reflexes that it can for example walk horizontally navigating a vertical narrow with hands and feet that potentially emerge as wings that are permissive to flight without containing


98


walls. The physical state of an entity might in this way become the developmental stage of another, what once a head now the controlling nerve of wing, or an eye that develops independently in different settings based on shaping forces emanating via familiarity and possibility shared between distinct circumstances.

An incomplete whole view employing perfect roundness is not redeemable for new possibility: what (you thought) you had been, were, or might had been, in the language of Lewis Carroll, is not measureable in the same sense as science measures the world to define and construct; a mirror can only produce a mirror image of opposite chirality, but likewise to the original reflected object or ‘actual’ self, bears only ratio, no measureable dimensions or additional extractable facets.

Though one is left with no beginning, end or grounds for existence of the universe other than ‘if there is one (transcendental volume shape) there are all (transcendental volume shapes)’ and nothing but, the deconstructionist philosophy of Derrida [Derrida, 1991] might be extended to give the self grounds to exist if dualisms evolved into world views are accepted as apparitions of the particulars of frame construction. If it is inferred that criteria for a continuing world entail inexactly aligned motion of the shadow with its cause, image with its’ mirror image, it is intriguing to consider that the eccentric, motion possessing monism, ‘flame’, centrically, statically, ‘frames’ a world that is also eccentric: The near but necessarily inexact alignment of flickering light and motion/heat with that of other identities is centrically framed by the first perspective that moves in unison with it, bears a capacity to arbitrate, perceive, conceive, existence itself that is unwitnessibly contained to disparities of flickering light, flickering frames of view that produce the same as if they are, from the third perspective, the product of a varying wind that flows from eternally misaligned structure and shadow. An illusion exists from inclinations to abstract; paradox that resists resolution surfaces in interpretations when measureable physical distance between substance and shadow is the inferred case of necessity in the search for earth bound/practical meaning [Kirsh, 2012].

Referring to the eccentric egg shape either

[(the eccentric, egg shape) +/- (the centric first perspective) + (time)]

or[(universe/eccentric form in motion) +/- (centric/stationery first perspective)]

= [(eccentric form in motion]The entity “What I had been” in Lewis Carrolls’ Alice in Wonderland,

history itself, can be inferred to be understandable logically employing abstraction that refers to transcendental form/shape though it is



99

universally inaccessible/uncaptureable to witness, unknowable parametrically.

ConclusionA more creative approach of men to their own creations should be

endeavored so that falsely construed ideas of proximities assumed in relations, from the mass media, from a shared world library, are not propagated by proximal inheritance, though from a distance to effect mutation to perceptual and conceptual interpretation at the locus of the first perspective, to cause a loss of sound and coherent meaning within relations confined necessarily to a physical reality of


10


sense based navigation, weight, forms, and sizes, etc. consequented strictly from the emerged properties of masses within settings that are proximal. If the processes of culture and civilization form an almost exact model of natural evolutionary processes a danger of interpretation and action exists from a misconstrued single meaning attached simultaneously to an insufficiently understood hand of nature and self-licensed human hand. It is plausible that a transient, oppressing but chronic weather effects confused accounting that inaccurately discriminates universe and world to cause a violation of naturally evolved sovereignties, destabilized steady linear rates of change that is reflected in assessments as depletions of actual individual space and elapsed time, i.e. the world is actually grown smaller and moves faster. If the wind is found to keep blowing either proximally or universally when a mechanical system of universals and differentials is assembled so its’ forces oppose themselves, remaining proximal and still evident is but the misleading, economically stimulating, energy capturing and transforming, mechanical produce of the pursuit of paradox. Universally, cause and effect in all reactions, as in genetic reactions, depend on setting characteristics that entail together the species, its’ environment, and a perspective-defined, cancer-potential bearing, mountain of paradox- together are not impossibly, simultaneously displaceable to an absolutely unknowable elsewhere. It might be s0 that a reversible physical chirality and arrow- of-time can be imagined impossibly to point according to whim at an intersection of body and mind, material and transcendental, only when the hand reaches for structure for balance the naked eye cannot discern.

ReferencesArcher, 2010 — Archer, Peter, The Quotable Intellectual, Adams Media, 2010. page

81. http://books.google.com/books?id=QnDvIsNKNIwC&dq=....+Mathema tics+are+well+and+good+but+nature+keeps+dragging+us+around+by+the+nose....&output=html_text&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Baudrillard, 1994 — Baudrillard, Jean (1994), Simulacra and Simulations, Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Callaway, 2013 — Calllaway, Ewen, Genetic Adam and Eve did not live too far apart in time, Nature International Weekly Journal of Science, August 2013. http:// www.nature.com/news/genetic-adam-and-eve-did-not-live-too-far-apart-in- time-1.13478

Carroll, 1995 — Carroll, Lewis, The Complete, Fully Illustrated Works, New York, Gramercy Books, ISBN 978-0-517-10027-1, 1995.

Derrida, 1991 — Derrida, Jacques, G., Of Spirit : Heidegger and the Question, transl



10

Geoffrey Bennington and Rachel Bowlby, University of Chicago Press, 1991.

Einstein, 1986 — Einstein, Albert Physics and Reality Journal of the Franklin Institute 221:3 359-382March 1986.

Einstein, 2010 — Einstein, Albert, Albert Einstein, Douglas editions, Google e-books 2010. http://books.google.com/books?id=A-kMTe0kq_gC&dq=as+ far+as+the+laws+of+mathematics+refer&output=html_text&source=gbs_ navlinks_s

Foucault, 1977 — Foucault, Michel, Disciple and Punishment :The Birth of the

Prison, Alan Sheridan trans, Vintage Books New York 1977.


10


Freiberger, 2012 — Freiberger, Marianne, Schroedinger’s equation = what is it?,

+Plus magazine, May 2012. http://plus.maths.org/content/schrodinger-1 Gionannini, Daniel, Romero, Jacquiline, Potocek, Vaclav, Ferenczi, Gergely,

Speirits, Stephen, Barnett, M., Daniele, Faccio, Padgett, M.J., Photons that travel in free space slower than the speed of light, 2014. http://arxiv.org/ abs/1411.3987

Habermas, 1991 — Habermas, Jürgen, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought), The MIT Press, 1991.

Kant, 2005 — Kant, Immanual, “The Critique of Pure Reason”, translated by J.M.D Meiklejohn NuVision Publications, LLC 2005.

Kimble, 2014 — Kimble, Kevin, Varieties of Representationalism and their approach to sensory experience, Philosophical Papers and Review, vol 5 no 1, pps 1-12, 2014. http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/PPR/article- abstract/62F17B843664

Kirsh, 2011 — Kirsh, Marvin, E., Evolution at the Surface of Euclid : Elements of A Long Infinity in Motion Along Space, International Journal of Arts and Science, Vol 4 No 2 pps. 71-96, 2011. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1575622

Kirsh, 2012 — Kirsh, Marvin, E. Science, the Virtual and the Actual: A Real Stand- off, International Journal of Science in Society, vol. 3 issue 3 pgs. 159-169, 2012. http://MarvinKirsh.cgpublisher.com

Kirsh, 2013 — Kirsh, Marvin E., Determining the Determined State : A Sizing of Size From Aside/the Amassing of Mass by a Mass, Philosophical Papers and Review, Vol. 4 no. pps 49-65, September 2013. http://www.academicjournals. org/journal/PPR/article-abstract/51B4FE541410

Korzukhin, 2014 — Korzukhin, Theodore, Dominance, Conditionals and the Newcomb Problem, Philosophers Imprint, vol. 14 no 9, pps. 1-20, 2014. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx/dominance-conditionals- and-the-newcomb-problem.pdf?c=phimp;idno=3521354.0014.009

Malinowski, 1922 — Malinowski, Bronislaw, Argonauts of the Western Pacfic, George Routledge and Sons Ltd, New York, E.P. Dutton and Co. 1922.

Molla and Dastagir, 2013 — Molla, Rafiqul Islam and Golam Dastagir. “Faith-based ethical reform for social stability and sustainable development.” Philosophical Papers and Review 4, no. 1 (2013). http://academicjournals.org/journal/ PPR/article-abstract/2AFC4F7556

Morrow, 1970 — Morrow, Glen, R., (transl) PROCLUS: A commentary on the first



10

book of Euclids’ Elements’, Princeton University Press, 1970. p 217.

Palmer, 2012 — Palmer, John, “Parmenides”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.) http://plato. stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/parmenides

Roach,2003 — Roach, John, Cannibalism Normal For Early Humans, National Geographic News April 10 2003 on line http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ news/2003/04/0410_030410_cannibal.html

Russell, 1955 — Russell Bertrand, ABC of Relativity, Fourth Revised Edition edited

by Felix Pirani, Chapter 1 pages 5-12, London,Russell and Whitehead, 1962 — Russell, Bertrand, Whitehead, Alfred North,


10


Principia Mathematica , second edition Cambridge University Press 1962.

Shields, 2014 — Shields, Christopher, “Aristotle”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato. stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/aristotle/

Starr, 2014 — Starr, William, B., What “if”?, Philosophers Imprint, Vol. 14 no. 10,

pps. 2-27, 2014. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx/what-if.pdf?c=phimp;idno=3521354.0014.010

Valaris, 2014 — Valaris, Markos, Self Knowledge and the Phenomenological Transparency of Belief, Philosophers Imprint, vol 14 no 8, pps. 2-17, 2014. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx/self-knowledge-and-the- phenomenological-transparency.pdf?c=phimp;idno=3521354.0014.008

84


MEGA-HISTORY AND THE 21ST CENTURY SINGULARITY PUZZLE

Akop P. Nazaretyan — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Eurasian Center for Big History &

System Forecasting (Moscow, Russia)


A series of calculations carried out independently by the Australian, Russian and American researchers have demonstrated that a crucial global polyfurcation is expected near the middle of the 21st century. This result is drawn by extrapolating into the future the logarithmic acceleration law, which involves the phase transitions in the evolution of biosphere and anthroposphere. The paper investigates the palliatives of the planetary civilization beyond the big evolutionary Singularity in the context of Mega-history and complexity theory worldviews. It gives the mathematical deduction a universal ground and besides, helps involve some recent discoveries in psychology and cultural anthropology to tracing the forecasting attractors and scenarios. The destiny of the Earth (as well as any other planetary) civilization may conclusively depend on whether or not the intellectual ac- tor succeeds in developing his inner regulation to balance the potentially unlimited developments in technological power. Particularly, this includes overcoming the macro-group identities, religious and quasi-religious ideologies, which always suggest a friend-or-foe discrimination matrix.

Key Words: Mega-history, universal evolution, arrows of time, vectors, acceleration, phase transitions, techno-humanitarian balance, the 21st century, singularity, attractors, scenarios, religion, ideology.

The constructs of world,global and Universal (Big; Mega-) history

Three competing patterns kept on the agenda in the historical discussions throughout the 19th–20th centuries. One was a Eurocentric, linear and teleological view of history as a consistent progress “from the worse to the better” aimed at the perfect future condition. Another (unintentionally fortified by thermodynamics) was a descent from the deific past to an atheistic chaos. The third one was that there had never been a “human history” but the cycles of ascent, flourishing and descent of regional civilizations without causal successions or universally valid events.

Meanwhile, multiple discoveries in the 20th century sciences made it possible to single out no less than seven crucial landmarks in panhuman history and prehistory (like the Neolithic Revolution or the Axial Revolt, etc.) and a distinct succession in humankind’s development in spite of never-ending cycles in regional stories. More than that, the prevailing vectors in social evolution continue those observed in the evolution of biosphere and after all, the cosmo-physical evolution of Metagalaxy.


85


From there, we can discriminate between the subjects of world history, global history and Universal (Big or Mega-) History, which together give us an integral view of the past so far as it is traceable today and a context for careful anticipations. In continuation, adapted fragments from the monograph [Nazaretyan, 2015] are exposed with minimal references. For more detailed arguments, examples and bibliography see the author’s publications available in English [Nazaretyan, 2005a; 2005b; 2009; 2010a; 2010b; 2014a; 2014b].

© Akop P. Nazaretyan, 2015


86


The world history paradigm was formulated by the end of the 18th

century, together with the national histories, under the influence of the ideas of humanism and progress. It is based on the evolutionist methodology, and nowadays involves all of social and cultural events since the Paleolithic up to modern times.

The global history concept is a product of the first half of the 20th

century, as the close mutual influence of geological, biotic and social processes was discovered. It studies successive births and transformations of the planet’s spheres in which first biota and thereupon culture became the leading agents. The global history founders, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and especially Vladimir Vernadsky, like most of their con- temporaries, believed that Earth and Solar system were the maximum domain of evolution, for the universe was infinite in space and time, invariant and therefore deprived of history.

Later on, cosmology expelled the stationary model and so the integral image of the past enlarged up to the evolving Metagalaxy. Final crystallization of Mega-History subject is due to the discovery of one more crucial fact: we can distinctly trace back the common vectors for the successive transformations in cosmic Universe, Earth’s crust, biosphere, society and intelligence. For all that, though no direct contradictions with the physical irreversibility laws are found, the orientation of the vectors discord with the classical natural science paradigm.

Namely, the Metagalaxy has been successively evolving from the more probable random states (or “natural” ones, from the “entropy” point of view) to the less probable (“unnatural”) ones, so that the histories of biosphere and anthroposphere are the localized phases of the single universal process. To give it a sharp graphic form, the pivotal evolution vector may be drawn as “moving away from the natural state”. The growing complexity mega-trend so apparently contradicts the suggestions inferring from the classical natural history (time as growing entropy; heat death theory) and so reliably corroborated by the empirical data of modern sciences and humanities that the astrophysicists have to distinguish between the thermodynamic arrow of time and the cosmological arrow of time and look for their causal relations [Chaisson, 2006] (see Fig.1).

Nazaretyan Akop P. Mega-History and the 21st century singularity puzzle


87

Fig.1. The stages of cosmic evolution(from http://www.eskesthai.com/2010/07/cosmic-evolution-and-powers-of-

ten.html).The picture is published by the courtesy of its author Eric Chaisson.

86



A question at the heart is why the evolution has gone in such a strange direction; we find various answers up to the obviously teleological and theological ones in relevant literature. An effective background for cross-disciplinary patterns free from the divine and/or telic assumptions is provided by modern complexity theories (their equiva- lents are called synergetics in Germany and Russia, non-linear thermodynamics in Belgium and France or dynamic chaos theory in USA). Such theories allow seeing the perfection of negentropy mechanisms not as the aim but as a means for non-equilibrium systems’ (nature and society) resistance in the conditions of decreased sustainability. Thus, in the self-organization pattern, “human history is the story of one… system, which exists on the scale of a million or so years” [Christian, 1991: 238], and has to evolve to sustain itself.

However, is it true that the vectorial model correctly describes the empirical data of social history? The heated discussions around these problems are mainly due to the opponents’ unwillingness to alternate the distances, the exposures and the optic instruments in order to vary the pictures.

Many details are perceived through the microscope, whereas perspectives and tra- jectories vanish. Wide-angle lens shows how civilizations, tribes and families grow, flourish and degrade, and how all the lines break, branch out and often curve down. At the same time, in this case the researcher finds no correlation between the parameters of social transformation in different local objects and comes to the conclusion that history is multiline or cyclic. He notices separate trees, bushes, branches and leaves, each of which is mainly original, but a wide-angle lens captures no long-term trends or regularities.

Not to miss the forest for the trees, a telephoto lens is required, which opens the smallest scale and thus very large time and space blocks. It makes possible to compare the states of society for highly remote time sectors. In this case, we may observe a set of reliable correlations, and also reveal that neither tribes or states, nor “civilizations” but the humanity in its broadest sense, and even the whole hominidae family, has been the subject of evolution. Similarly, to discover the global biological evolution one should de-emphasize separate populations, species or even ecosystems and compare the conditions of the biosphere at different levels of the geological time table; this way the successive growth of morphological and behavioral diversity and “intellectual” qualities, and the increasing influence of the biota on the geological processes are evident.

Since hominids have once and for all turned to tool making, in spite of countless divergences, migrations and isolations, culture as a super-natural reality has been a single and common planetary phenomenon, which is proved by multiple particular observations. As to the explosive growth of local varieties since the Middle Paleolithic, it was a typical process of the evolving system’s inner diversification.

Turning to the telescopic retrospection, it makes obvious the fact of


89


directional social transformations in the sweep of time, as well as the conjugation of the vectors, which can hardly be shown on the scale of separate societies. We have singled out six conjunct social evolution vectors: growth of world population, technological power, organizational complexity and information capacity of the intelligence, perfection of mechanisms for cultural regulation and growing specific weight of virtual realities.

The first three vectors are deduced as “empirical generalizations” and may be easily supplied with mathematical figures. The other three have been traced back by special methods and arguments. However, all of them keep within the integral grotesque for-


86


mula “moving away from the natural state”, i.e. the integral society-nature system has been successively withdrawing from the “natural” (“wild”) condition, assuming more and more anthropomorphic and culture-centered qualities; the degree of tool (including sign) mediation in society-nature and intra-social relationships and individual psychic reflection has been increasing. So the kernel of global causalities was successively shifting towards the mental phenomena, especially after the first Neolithic agro- cenoses marked the initial regeneration of the wild biosphere into the anthroposphere or Noosphere — an integral nature-culture system.

Leadership in the many-thousand-years marathon has intermittently shifted from one region or continent to another including Australia (the first cave pictures, stone tools with polished handle and blade, and the first boats were invented there); Europe and then North America were preeminent for the latest centuries.

The most paradoxical fact is discovered as the anthropogenic crises, especially the global ones, are analyzed. In spite of some modern ecologists’ slogans (“Back to the Nature!” etc.), each aggravation in society-nature relations has been radically overcome not by convergence between society and nature but vice versa, by a next spire of “denaturalization” of the society together with its native habitat.

We may easily reveal this fact by comparing the hunter-gatherer economy with the food production, or the industrial civilization with the agricultural one, or the information society with the industrial one. Each leap was foregone by a complex crisis of the former activities and accompanied by transformations of all the conjunct parameters. As a result, humans’ ecological niche broadened and deepened, the population increased, along with technologies, needs and ambitions, and… the way towards the next crisis continued.

The pattern of techno-humanitarian balanceDuring the World War II, the German philosopher and sociologist

Norbert Elias, a Jew who had lost his relatives in the Holocaust, demonstrated with figures that the “civilizing process” had been reducing the percentage of violent deaths [Elias, 2000]. Later on, this suggestion was confirmed by the comparative calculations made by Brit- ish, American [Pinker, 2011] and Russian scholars. Thus, we used a cross-cultural index — Bloodshed Ratio (BR), or the ratio of the average number of killings (K) per unit of time to a population size (P) during a given period (Δt). The number of killings included wars, political repression and everyday violence:

K t BR P t

(I)


91


A more specified formula is applied to consider the BR per centuries. In a whole, specific estimates have demonstrated that over the course of millennia the violent death rate has been non-linearly but successively decreasing while both the destructive potential and population densities have had a distinctly upward trend1.1 Thus, the 20th century does not look as incomparably sanguinary as we usually see it proceeding from the habitual Eurocentric position. In fact, Europe had lived relatively unworried (compared to other regions) during 266 years between the Westfall Peace Treaty (1648) and the World War I (1914), till the outside world remained a large reservoir for the aggression-overshoot. As we consider globally, the 19th century is not inferior to the 20th century even in the absolute figures of war, genocide and everyday violence (the Chinese historians indicate that from 60 to 100 million people perished in sum of the Opium Wars and the Taiping Insurrection [Wang, 1993; Cao, 2001]) and exceeds it several times in relation to

88



It can hardly mean the humans’ “lowering aggressiveness”: inversely, the psychological experiences show that population densities beyond the natural ecological niche make humans like the rest of animals increasingly aggressive. To explain the contrast- ing combination of the long-term trends, we should assume a more likely factor, which has compensated for the growth in tool potential. A hypothesis to explain its essence arises from different empirical data; in fact, our calculations are conducted to check a corollary of the hypothesis.

Summing up diverse information from cultural anthropology, history and historical psychology concerning anthropogenic catastrophes, we find a regular relation between three variables: technological potential, quality of cultural regulation and social sustainability. The law of techno-humanitarian balance states that the higher the power of production and war technologies, the more advanced behavior-restraint is required to enable self-preservation of the society.

What we refer to as the law is inferred from empirical observations. Respective hypothesis claims that this has been a selective mechanism of viable social systems over the time of human history and prehistory.

The circumstances of the early hominids’ existence were of the kind that only an essential development of tool intelligence gave them a chance to survive. Meantime, having begun tool making, they dramatically interfered with the ethological balance between the force of wild animals’ natural weapons and the instinctive inhibition of intra-species killing. The power of artificial weapons rapidly exceeded the power of instinctive aggression-inhibition (the Homo habilis in the Olduvai Gorge used to crush one another’s skulls with their choppers), and the proportion of mortal conflicts grew to the extent incompatible with the original tool-makers’ further existence. This can be the main reason for the fact demonstrated in archeology: many groups seem to have been on the borderline between animals and proto-humans, yet very few could have crossed it.

Since the individuals with normal animal motivation were doomed to mutual destruction in the new unnatural conditions, certain psychastenic and hysterical individuals got selective privileges. Their survival required artificial (beyond biological instincts) collective regulation, which was paradoxically provided by pathological changes in the psycho-nervous system, abnormal mental lability, suggestibility and phobias. Thus, the origins of animism and irrational fear of the dead and posthumous revenge is supposed to strongly restrain in-group aggression and stimulate care for the handicapped: archeology gives us evidence of such biologically senseless facts in the Early Paleolithic.

The assumption of a “herd of neurotics” as our remote ancestors has been thoroughly argued by neurologists, cultural anthropologists and psychologists. Here, the relevant point is that the initial forms of proto-culture and proto-morals emerged as an outcome of the first existential crisis in human prehistory.

From the Habilis on, hominids’ unnatural intra-species killing facility


89


seems tohave been a key problem of pre-human and human history: the ways of solving this ex-the population sizes. As we compare remote historical époques (even coexisting in time), the difference achieves orders of magnitude [Keeley, 1996].

Recent discoveries in paleontology, biophysics and cosmology have reinforced the hypothesis of the cosmic origin of life: the first organisms supposedly emerged somewhere in the Galaxy, were carried by meteorites and nestled all of suitable planets during 215 million years (one Galactic year). In particular, their first signs on Earth precede the appearance of the oceans [Rosanov, 2009].


90


istential problem influenced essentially the forms of social organization, cultural and spiritual processes. So far as further life of the hominidae family (including our own species, the Neoanthropes) has not had a natural background any longer, it was to a great extent enabled by the adequacy of cultural regulation with technological power. As the tool makers were increasing their power and aggressiveness, culture developed more and more intricate means of aggression-sublimation to adjust to the growing destructive facilities; the mechanism of techno-humanitarian balance was discarding social organisms that could not adapt to their tools’ power.

The pattern resolves the paradox of decreasing physical violence versus growing destructive resources. Besides, it helps explain causally both the sudden collapses of flourishing societies and the breakthroughs of humanity into new historical epochs (which often look still more mysterious).

For an initial and rough guide, a formal apparatus distinguishes between internal and external sustainability. The former Si expresses the social system’s capability to keep away from endogenous catastrophes. The latter Se is capability to withstand fluctuations in the natural and geopolitical habitat.

If we refer to the quality of cultural regulation as R, and technological potential as

T, a simple equation represents the pattern:

Si f1 Rf2 T

(2)

It stands to reason that T > 0, for in case of no technology at all we are dealing with a herd (not a society) where biological causalities are effective. If technological potential is very low, primitive regulation means is sufficient, as in case of the Pa- leolithic tribes (like the regular infanticide to prevent demographic overflow). A system is highly sustainable, up to stagnation, as cultural regulation quality exceeds the technological might (Medieval China is a textbook example). Finally, the denominator growth raises the probability of anthropogenic crises if it is not compensated by the numerator growth.

The aggravating misbalance usually provokes the psychological effects, which entail a crisis-causing behavior. Shortly, once the new technologies exceed the former cultural restrictions, public attitudes and sentiments get peculiar features. A sense of omnipotence and permissiveness is intensified together with the increasing needs and ambitions. Success euphoria produces an impatient expectation of new successes and an irrational thirst for “small victorious wars” — a mass complex of catastrophophilia, in terms of Peter Sloterdijk [Sloterdijk, 1983]. The subjugation process and a search for new moderately resisting enemies are getting self-valuable, while as we know from the specific experiments [Petrenko, 2010], strong emotions flatten the worldview (reduce the semantic space dimensionality). A more


89


primitive worldview entails impul- sive decision-making, and the numerator index in equation (2), instead of increasing in proportion to the denominator’s growth, is falling. Thus the cultural imbalance low- ers the society’s sustainability.

Abstracting here from more psychological details, suffice it to note that the unbal- ance is fraught with ruinous effects either in case of war or production technologies. For instance [Toynbee, 1987], cited various examples to illustrate the inverse relationship between “military and social progress” and was puzzled by the fact that this was true about production tools as well as weapons. William McNeill wrote: “It certainly


92


seems as though… every heightening of efficiency in production were matched by a new vulnerability to breakdown” [McNeill, 1992: 148].

Numerous facts gathered in relevant papers testify to the distressing destiny of societies that could not anticipate the delayed effects of their economic activities. In spite of all peculiarities, a common script was simple: increasing intervention into the ecosystem → landscape destruction → social catastrophe.

In contrast, particular studies of wars and natural hazards have demonstrated that

the external sustainability is the technological potential’s positive function:

Se = g (T...) (3)Hereby, growing technological potential makes a social system less

vulnerable to external fluctuations and more vulnerable to the internal ones, i.e. mass mental states, failed decisions of influential leaders or other destructive individual activities (less “fool-proof”).

One more conclusion is that the specific weight of anthropogenic crises versus the ones caused by outside factors (spontaneous climate fluctuations, geological or cosmic cataclysms, aggressive nomads, and so on) has been historically increasing. Accord- ingly, time intervals between the global man-made crises in history have been successively shortening. What is still more remarkable, this trend keeps on the biospheric trend of evolution-acceleration.

The Singularity puzzleThe cosmological arrow looks rectilinear on Fig.1; yet, the

cumulative changes have not been uniform. The first billions of years after the Big Bang, the evolution was slow- ing down until heavy elements were synthesized in the depths of the first generation stars and ejected into the cosmic space by supernova explosions. This initiated an additional self-organization mechanism with competition for free energy (the heavy elements unlike the light ones need energy feed from outside). Thus about 10 billion years ago, as the evolution went its way towards organic molecules and living matter, the slowdown changed into acceleration [Panov, 2005b] (see Fig. 2).



89

Fig. 2. The two hoses of universal evolution(by Alex Pinkin). From (Nazaretyan 2015).

94



Solar system emerged near 4.6 billion years ago, and the first signs of living organisms on Earth are recorded since about 4 billion years ago1; thus our planet was one of (probably various) points, on which further cosmic evolution was localized. Although the fact of its consecutive acceleration is obvious for any global analyst, an additional and wonderful discovery belongs to the latest decades. The Australian economist Graeme Snooks [Snooks, 1996], the Russian physicist Alexander Panov [Panov, 2005a; Panov, 2005b] and the American mathematician Raymond Kurzweill [Kurzweill, 2005] independently on different sources and with different mathematical apparatus compared the successive time intervals between the phase transitions in biospheric, pre-social and social evolution. The calculations demonstrate that the intervals have been shortening in accordance with a rigorous decreasing progression, and thus the evolution on Earth has been accelerating under the logarithmic law (see Fig. 3).

Fig.3. Scaling law in the phase transitions. From [Panov, 2005b].

Like all of the fundamental discoveries, the scale is highly counter-intuitive, i.e. it strongly conflicts with the intuitive suggestions. Traditionally, the researchers tended to explain the global catastrophes (like the pangolins’ extinction on the boundary of the Mesozoic and the Cenozoic or the megafauna extinction on the boundary of the Pleistocene and the Holocene) by appealing to some outside challenges: large meteorites, powerful volcanoes, climate changes etc. Those versions are extremely vulnerable in each particular case, but the table of hyperbolic acceleration debunks this approach for good and all.

Continents have been drifting, meteorites falling down, volcanoes erupting and climate changing during the 4 billion years; later on, the wayward Homo sapiens inter- vened with their free will and never-

91



ending extravagances, and near 10 thousand years1 Recent discoveries in paleontology, biophysics and cosmology have reinforced the

hypothesis of the cosmic origin of life: the first organisms supposedly emerged somewhere in the Galaxy, were carried by meteorites and nestled all of suitable planets during 215 million years (one Galactic year). In particular, their first signs on Earth precede the appearance of the oceans [Rosanov, 2009].


96


ago (the Neolithic) the Noosphere started to arise. Nevertheless, the global transitions, which were foregone each time by crises and catastrophes, followed as if there were a schedule. This paradoxical fact turns us to the synergetic pattern, which appeals to accrual entropy accumulation and progressive perfection of anti-entropy mechanisms enabled by the growth of complexity.

Particular analysis of the crucial episodes — or transitory singularities — shows that the events could have developed otherwise in each case: the evolution of biosphere and then anthroposphere could have suspended (in compliance with the Lotka — Volterra oscillation circuit in ecology) or the sustainable non-equilibrium system could have collapsed in a global catastrophe. In synergetic terms, we call simple attractor the scenarios related to system’s intensive degradation and simplification after the polyfurcation phase. Those related to suspension (interim stabilization on the achieved level of non-equilibrium without complication, which is fraught with system’s gradual degradation in a long-term perspective) refer to the horizontal strange attractor. Yet, you and me live on this planet and enjoy the fruits (and experience the troubles) of postindustrial civilization thanks to the fact that evolution has gone towards the vertical strange attractors in all the turning points, i.e. global sustainability was each time reestablished on a higher level of non-equilibrium and complexity.

One more consideration is originated in the system theory and its implementation principle: all of the possible events do happen. From there, we must assume that there are multiple hearths of evolution in the Universe in which all possible scenarios are realized. Very few of them achieve a level comparable to the one we find on Earth while the others implement all of the dead-end scenarios.

Finally, having extrapolated the curve into the future, the researchers came to a unanimous and still more striking result: around the mid 21st, the hyperbole comes to the final singularity point. It turns into a vertical, i.e. the speed of the evolutionary processes tends to infinity and the time intervals between new phase transitions tend to zero.

How can we interpret this mysterious mathematical result? Obviously, the evolution on Earth cannot continue the algorithm it has followed for the latest 4 billion years and a conclusive phase transition comparable to the emergence of life is to occur over the 21st

century. In other words, the planetary history intrigue is expected to be resolved in this or that way during the next decades!

The most elementary suggestion is that the anthroposphere is approaching the top of possible complexity after which evolution passes into its “descending brunch”: the anthroposphere will degrade to an unmanned biosphere with further degradation to the sphere of equilibrium. Thus the kernel of the simple attractor is that with a lapse of time Earth will become a “normal” cosmic body like Moon or Mars free from res cogitans and living matter at all. We can trace various



91

scenarios in the network of the same attractor and the duration of the degradation process depends on how exactly the events will go on.

It is always more problematic to trace the strange attractors beforehand or even to clear up whether or not they do exist beyond this Singularity. The horizontal one might be seen as a kind of Hegelian-like “End of history”. Although the details of a long-term stabilization on the peak of complexity are now hardly imaginable, we must assume its compromise status: sooner or later, the known natural mechanisms will bring the anthroposphere to collapse.

98



Still more difficult is to imagine a vertical strange attractor. In this context, we pay attention at the remarkable turn in modern cosmological thinking. In the 20th century, only some of the Soviet astrophysicists (or the descendents from the USSR) influenced by the “Russian Cosmism” dared to assume human’s potential intervention in the cosmic-scale processes and perspectives. In contrast, serious Western scholars shared the belief that life, society, culture and mind were nothing but epi- phenomena (side effects) of spontaneously evolving material structures without any mutual influence on the cosmic processes and doomed to traceless vanish with time. The Nobel Prize winner Steven Weinberg [Weinberg, 1993] expressed this common belief by noting that only the awareness of the unavoidable end imparts a tint of a “high tragedy” to the “farce” of human existence.

Meanwhile, those “naturalist” scenarios lost their popularity by the beginning of the 21st century: following recent publications, we can note a radical change of mind. Assertions about consciousness as a “cosmologically fundamental fact”, the conclusive influence of the developing knowledge on subsequent evolution of the Metagalaxy and the perspectives of “living cosmos” are widespread among physicists up to an exotic idea of deliberate creation of new universes with preset parameters for posterior emergence of life etc. (see [Deutsch, 1997; Rees, 2003; Davies, 2004; Smolin, 2006; Kaku, 2010] and others).

We also appeal to the studies in gestalt-psychology and heuristics, which have demonstrated that any boundaries imposed on engineering by physical laws, are sur- mountable by a change of the cognitive meta-system. Specifically, those parameters of the problem that are uncontrollable constants inside one model become manageable variables within a more complex meta-model; this implies that the potentiality of intellectual control may be potentially unlimited. From there, the implementation principle suggests one more conclusion. If the intelligence originated on Earth destroys itself before it realizes those potential universal developments, the role will be fulfilled by another, “presumably some extraterrestrial intelligence” [Deutsch, 1997: 353].

Earlier, by extrapolating some arguments derived from the evolution of creative intelligence and its growing intervention into the mass-energy processes on Earth, we supposed that humanity is now unwittingly participating in a universal natural selection of planetary civilizations [Nazaretyan, 1991]. As we have assumed that very few of the local hotbeds of evolution achieve the level comparable to the one we find on our planet, it implies a following suggestion. Only those of technologically advanced civilizations (perhaps a single one), which succeed in progressive adjusting their aggression-regulation to unlimitedly growing power, can break out to the cosmic stage of evolution. The rest remain universal evolution’s active storage as well as the planetary bio- and Noospheres, which interrupt their evolution at earlier stages. Thus the mechanism described in the pattern of techno-humanitarian balance might remain the determinant at the conclusive

93



stage of civilizations’ planetary histories to enable their selective cosmic relevance.

Here, it goes without saying that the humanitarian intelligence has potentially unlimited capacity to perfect its self-control in compliance with the growing technological power; yet, this belief is not indisputable for a psychologist. It may turn out that some intrinsic attributes (like the innate gestalts) restrain mind’s flexibility and thus the range of self-control is narrower than the range of technological ingenu- ity. For instance, the analysis of the historical episodes makes us suspect that both


10


human and perhaps “post-human” (symbiotic; man-machine) intelligence needs an image of enemy for effective group solidarity (“them — us” archetype) and a strategic meaning formation is hampered by prolonged lack of competing agents. Emotional ambivalence programmed in the limbic structures of our brain intermittently in- duces an unconscious search for the “negative” experiences like fear and hatred and provokes corresponding activities. Although since the most ancient times culture has been developing measures like rituals, art, sports, TV programs or computer games to relieve those functional drives, sooner or later people feel bored with the sublimation measures and the longing for the “not for fun” passions is activated. Grotesque- ly, it looks as if there were a kind of natural self-destruction program embedded in the mind’s base plate to prevent a cosmic outburst of intelligence.

If no measures to effectively overcome those irrational fluctuations are possible, we must suggest that the evolution of complexity on any planet has an extreme boundary and no planetary Noosphere can escape conclusive self-destruction; thus the “Silence of Cosmos” gets a most trivial and pessimistic explanation. This would mean that in spite of our intuitive beliefs, the mental realities are more rigid than the physical ones. In other words, the intellectual agent has potentially more power over the mass-energy world than over his own mental conditions and what is feasible from the physical point of view is excluded by the immanent laws of psychology and cultural anthropology. If it is so, this unexpected circumstance can play a fatal role in civilizations’ destiny: just because of it, life and intelligence are indeed no more than epiphenomenal effects and the future cosmic developments are exhaustively described in the naturalist scenarios.

In case we still accept that mind’s self-regulating capacity is potentially commensurate to its unlimited technological evolution, we get back to the hypothesis of universal natural selection. So, the nodal question shifts to another realm: whether or not the Earthly intelligence will succeed in upgrading its self-regulation to balance the accelerating breakthrough in technologies prior to their destructive effects become irreversible.

As the latest biophysical and paleontological researches have shown (see in particular footnote 2), a spontaneous emergence of a living cell is too highly improbable to happen repeatedly on various planets: once appeared, the biota have most probably “infected” all of the available points in the cosmic space. In all likelihood, if the formation of a Cosmic intelligence is possible, it must be just as unique in its degree and might occur only once at certain stage of the universal evolution.

How high are the chances of the Earth civilization to implement this unique opportunity? More than ten years ago, the famous English astronomer Sir Martin Rees [Rees, 2003] estimated its chances to survive the 21st century (and get a cosmic relevance) as 50/50. This corresponded to our own estimation at that time, but now it looks too



93

optimistic.Humanity set up a historical record of nonviolence in the first decade

of this century: by the UN and the WHO data, from 2000 to 2010, the total sum of violent deaths in the world (armed conflicts, political repressions and everyday violence) numbered about 500 thousand a year, while population was verging on 7 billion [Krug et al. 2002; Global… 2011]. Although the number of killings looks terrible, this Bloodshed Ratio is unprecedentedly low (lower than the yearly number of suicides in the same period). Some regions show indexes of one and less killings a year for 100 000 habitants.


95


The encouraging facts gave the analysts a timid hope that the trend of virtualization (violence was prevailing in the media news, films and computer games) would continue. We expected something like the advanced computer programs for the user’s multisensory involvement in virtual battles to undergo intensive emotional experiences and thus relieve the psychological tensions by means of substitute activity and so on.

Perhaps, we underestimated the dynamism of the irrational moods fluctuations among both political leaders and the mass. Unfortunately, since 2011, the situation has taken a turn for the worse. The euphoria and catastrophophilia symptoms were first manifest yet since the late 1990s in USA (as a result of the victory in the “Cold War”) and in some Muslim regions. Lately, the nostalgia for “small victorious wars” has infected other regions and become a relevant motivation. The political leaders’ intellectual qualities and readiness to estimate the delayed consequences are decreasing (compared to their forerunners in the 1970-80s), the international law is being abandoned and the global geopolitical system is losing its sustainability.

The Earth civilization successfully completed the 20th century for it had managed to solve the global menaces of those times. Actually, we have anyhow learned to deal with the population growth and ecological contaminations and psychologi- cally adjusted to the nuclear weapon, but are facing the new global problems. In Bill Joy’s (2000) words, the century of weapon of mass destruction was changed by the century of knowledge-enabled destruction. The boundaries between the states of peace and war as well as between war, production and everyday technologies are diffusing (so it was in the Paleolithic), while spreading access to education makes the destructive means every year cheaper and more easily accessible. So the “sophis- ticated” weapons are slipping out of governments’ control and falling in hands of irresponsible groups and individuals free from the habits of long-term and system anticipation.

Another aggravating crisis is still more paradoxically related to the greatest successes in the humanist culture. In the early 19th century, 1/3 of English children out- lived the age of five years, while current children’s mortality in the post-industrial regions is less than 1%. The integral longevities have increased four times during the two hundred years and the pay-off for the unprecedentedly high value of individual lives in modern societies is genetic load exponential accumulation. The humans’ biological wellbeing depends more and more on life comfort, perfecting medical care and other artificial conditions. A linear extrapolation shows that the trend of biological degeneration can irreversibly affect human brains around the mid 21st if effective contra-measures are not undertaken. Thus, without genetic engineering and other technological interventions into the most intimate foundations of the humans’ existence, our species is doomed to peter out, whereas the newly developing technologies carry new menaces of both

96



destructive errors and abuse.Researching the global dangers, we find one that may be the pivotal

problem in the next decades; it is related to the meaning formation. Over millennia, humans have been seeking their meanings of life in the context of religious or quasi-religious ideologies, which are always built in the matrix of friend-or-foe discrimination. Tribes and states, confessions, nations and classes have been designing their inner solidarity (in-group aggression-sublimation) by means of shared aversion to the “strangers”. Service to the macro-group sacred idols and expected reward for



97

the confrontation against the alien (“hostile”) ones has made the background for the group and individual life meanings. As soon as an ideological content with similar group identity involved a vast geographical and cultural region, next discriminations followed (by religious sects and movements, nations and sub-nations, testament or class confrontations) to abate in-group aggression by venting it outside. This anti- entropy mechanism has worked effectively throughout history.

Meanwhile, the synergetic law of delayed dysfunction claims that the productive mechanisms at the previous stages of system’s development turn destructive (fraught with a catastrophic entropy growth) at a following stage. Thus, till the task of the humanitarian culture was regulating and transferring social violence (to escape as much as possible its chaotic forms), ideological worldviews served for social sustainability. Since the new historical stage has set the task of removing physical violence as a condition for global survival, most of the outdated sustaining proce- dures are counter-productive.

Therefore, turning back to the pattern of techno-humanitarian balance, the key question of the Earth or any other planetary civilization’s destiny behind the Singu- larity is whether or not the strategic life meanings can be designed above ideological worldviews and macro-group discriminations for the non-confrontational solidarity. In other drafting, the same question might sound as follows: How far can the development in morals and concomitant aggression-restrictors go? To what extent of conscience can our mind and even our brain elevate without losing its motivations and the will to activity? Theoretically, modern cross-disciplinary worldviews accumulated in Mega-History, unlike the classical naturalism, might warrant new universal meanings and motivations free from ideologies; yet, how real are the chances to massively assimilate it in the next decades?

Accelerating technological development and spreading education are unprecedentedly raising the global role of the individual activities and mentalities. In view of the approaching Singularity, the crossroads of the current historical phase look extremely dramatic: perhaps, our earthly wives are now giving birth to either the potential gods with access to some forms of immortality and cosmic supremacy or the generation of suicides who will finally crumble the Noosphere…

ReferencesCao, 2001 — Cao Shuji A history of the Chinese population: The Qing dynasty: Shang-

hai: Fudan Univ. Press, (in Chinese).Chaisson, 2006 — Chaisson E.J Epic of evolution. Seven ages of the cosmos. N.Y.:

Colombia Univ. Press.Christian, 1991 — Christian D The Case for ‘Big History’ // Journal of


98


World History 2 (2): 223–238.Davies, 2004 — Davies P.The cosmic Blueprint. New discoveries in

nature’s creative ability to order the Universe. Philadelphia & London: Templeton Press.

Deutsch, 1997 — Deutsch D. The Fabric of Reality. London, N.Y.: Allen Lane, The Pen- guin Press.

Elias, 2000 — Elias N. The civilizing process: Sociogenetic and psychogenetic investi-

gations. Rev. ed. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell, 1939/2000.Global study of homicide. Trends, contexts, data. UNODC.



99

Joy, 2000 — Joy B. Why the future doesn’t need us? // Wired, April: 238-262.Kaku, 2010 — Kaku M.Physics of the Future: How Science Will Shape

Human Destiny and Our Daily Lives by the Year 2100. N-Y etc.: Doubleday.

Keeley, 1996 — Keeley L.H. War before civilization. The myth of the peaceful savage.

N.Y.: Oxford Univ. Press.Krug et al, 2002 — Krug E.G., Dahlberg L.L., Mercy J.A., Zwi A.B. and

Lozano R. Eds. World report on violence and health. Geneva: World Health Organization. Kurzweil, 2005 — Kurzweil R.The singularity is

near: When humans transcend biol-ogy. N.Y.: PG.

McNeill, 1992 — McNeill W.H. Control and catastrophe in human affairs // The Global Condition: Conquerors, Catastrophes and Community. Princeton, N.J.: Princ- eton Univ. Press: 133-149.

Nazaretyan, 1991 — Nazaretyan A.P. Intelligence in the Universe: Sources, Forma-

tion, and Prospects. Moscow: Nedra (In Russian).Nazaretyan, 2005a — Nazaretyan A.P.Fear of the dead as a factor in social self-or-

ganization // Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, vol.35, #2: 155-169.

Nazaretyan, 2005b — Nazaretyan A.P. Western and Russian traditions in Big Histo- ry: A philosophical insight // Journal for General Philosophy of Science, vol.36: 63-80.

Nazaretyan, 2009 — Nazaretyan A.P. Technology, psychology and catastrophes //

Social Evolution & History. Studies in the Evolution of Human Societies, vol.8,#2: 102-132.

Nazaretyan, 2010a — Nazaretyan A.P. Evolution of non-violence: Studies in big his-

tory, self-organization and historical psychology. Saarbrucken: LAP.

Nazaretyan, 2010b — Nazaretyan A.P. Virtualization of social violence: A sign of our époque? // Societal and Political Psychology International Review, vol.1, #2: 23-36.

Nazaretyan, 2014a — Nazaretyan A.P. Book review // Minds & Machines,: 27: 245- 248.

Nazaretyan, 2014b — Nazaretyan A.P. Global crises and the meaning of life // World Affairs — The Journal of International Issues, vol.18, #3: 10-34.

Nazaretyan, 2015 — Nazaretyan A.P. Nonlinear Futures: Mega-History, complexity theory, anthropology & psychology for global forecasting. 3-rd ed. Moscow: Argamak-Media (In Russian).

Panov, 2005a — Panov A.D. Scaling law of the biological evolution and


10


the hypothesis of the self-consistent Galaxy origin of life // Advances in Space Research, vol.36: 220–225.

Panov, 2005b — Panov A.D. The singular point of history // Social Sciences Today, #1: 122-137 (in Russian).

Petrenko, 2010 — Petrenko V.F. The multidimensional mind: A psycho-semantic paradigm. Moscow: New Chronograph.

Pinker, 2011 — Pinker S. The better angels of our nature. The decline of violence in

history and its causes. N.Y.: Viking Penguin.Rees, 2003 — Rees M.J. Our final century: Will the human race survive

the twenty-first century? NY: Basic Books.Rozanov, 2009 — Rozanov A.Yu. Life conditions on early Earth after 4.0

bil. years ago // Problems of the emergence of life. Moscow: RAS: 185-201 (in Russian).



10

Sloterdijk, 1983 — Sloterdijk P. Kritik der zynischen Vernunft. 1 und 2. Bnd. Frankfurt

am Main: Edition Suhrkamp.Smolin, 2006 — Smolin Lee The trouble with physics. Houghton Mifflin

and Penguin (UK).Snooks, 1996 — Snooks G.D. The dynamic society. Exploring the

sources of global change. London and N-Y: Rutledge.Toynbee, 1987 — Toynbee A.J. A Study of History: Abridgement of

Volumes I-VI. N.Y, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Wang, 1993 — Wang Yumin Debating the so-called ‘death toll exceeding

one hundred million’ during the Taiping Revolution period // Academic Monthly, #6: 41-50 (in Chinese).

Weinberg, 1993 — Weinberg S. The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe. N.Y.: Basic Books.


99

COSMOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY:IN RELATION TO THE WORLD

Pierre-Paul Okah-Atenga — PhD, Associate Professor,University of Paris-Sorbonne

(Paris, France)


This study does not only aim at identifying the core which stimulates to the universe, known or still unknown dynamics and statics, but also at discovering the core that explains and establishes the different faces of relationship between peoples. In fact, it is justice which explains and founds the world order which exists. But metaphysical justice is triple as it expresses contradiction, tack, human kind. This text is related to contradiction.

Key Words: Cosmology, Core, Justice, World order, Philosophy, Rule.

IntroductionDefinitely, sciences and technologies do provide us with clear

explanations on questions of the nature, of the structure and functioning of the universe, because they use steps that are easy to perceive and that strengthen our hopes in a certain ease or in an undeniable security. But intuitively and rationally, human feels he can learn more and access to a universal, transcendental, ageless knowledge which units scattered solutions revealing other scientific domains. It is question of a new glance on the universe. Knowledge that it can deliver is based on critical contemplative, in- terrogative, denying reflection through which one discovers the core wrapped up in bits of knowledge that other sciences reveal to us.

Promptly, the question under examination here is that of the discovery of the explanatory core which founds nature, the structure, the functioning of the world under a fundamental rule, from which all other laws derive which are revealed through science, history, geography, economics, law, physics, astronomy and all other specific fields. Based on this, our main question is: what is the basic rule that explains and founds dynamics and statics of the universe? But alternatively, does a world order exist? What is it? How do we know it?

In fact, the objective here is double, specifically not only identifying the core that stimulates to the universe, progressive and regressive movements that we know and dynamics and statics we still ignore; but moreover discover the core that explains and founds different faces of human relationships, relationships between peoples. Ma- jor prerequisites inspire this double objective, namely not only the complexity of the universe which enlists the known and the unknown, the visible and the invisible, the accessible and inaccessible, the

100



macroscopic and the microscopic, the determinism and the indeterminism, the possibility and the impossibility; but also worries caused by our environment today as a result of conflicts arising, diseases destroying peoples (AIDS, Ebola fever), natural disasters (cataclysms, destruction of the environment) and question of the place of human in the universe, limitations coupled to his actions, consciousness of ethic and metaphysical dimensions of this place and actions.

© Okah-Atenga Pierre-Paul, 2015

Okah-Atenga Pierre-Paul Cosmology and philosophy: in relation to the world


10

Other prerequisites inspire furthermore the double objective, namely the problematic of the transcendence that leads to the belief of a spread and paced universe in the space. This leads to the burning issue of supernatural, of the hereafter, of life, of energies that occur there, increase or disappear. When scientific languages which can claim a kind of relevance do appear somehow insufficient, this will open a door to other explanatory and basic reflections, among which philosophy and its metaphysics, without forgetting the philosophical cosmology. To view what ought to be done and mostly how to range in to tell where the world is moving to, and if it is, or not, already complete, abovementioned major prerequisites should effectively be combined, on one hand to a philosophical process made of contemplation, observation, collection of information, interrogation, questioning, logical reasoning, analysis, synthesis on the world viewed in its universality and, on the other hand to the cosmology which, is, a rational discourse on the way human lives his contact with the universe.

This leads us to the following assumptions: not only the contact of the human to the world is not the same everywhere, since it can take various shapes; but also, the functioning of the universe shows certain patterns, despite various phenomena that we witness. From this, the following answers to abovementioned questions are very important: it is justice that explains the universal order of the existing world, since justice is not only the substance of philosophy, but also the essential law (fundamental) that fosters dynamics and statics of the universe. Based on this answer to our main question, we then notice that the notion of justice in question here has three dimensions, expressive both of contradiction, of tack and human kind. After having brought some light to main concepts, we are going to pour more precision on expressive justice of contradiction theme, particularly in the cosmology and philosophy of ancient Egypt

Cosmology and functioning of the worldCosmology and philosophy seem to be at their start only a constant

questioning about the universe (nature, structure, functioning). As it happens to meridians closer to the pole, cosmology and philosophy necessarily converge towards the proximity of the being and totality, without confusion or cessation, till tackling the real under different angles and plans.

Whereas philosophy transforms into conscience such huge experience of human in the world, cosmology is a science of the world as such, a knowledge and rational discourse about how human lives his relation to the world mastered and possessed by himself.

As a matter of fact, cosmology is the first speculation about the universe, whose first ideas appear in the pharaonic Egypt and deep antiquity of Europe, where human wants to dominate his fear of the unknown and his place in the system of the universe. The universe is known here as an orderly world and mastered by human, a knowledge


100


or a rational discourse about the world now owned by human. In 1762, cosmology is defined by the “Dictionnaire de l’Académie française” as science of general laws through which the physical world is governed, even though cosmology is not the same everywhere, since it takes different shapes depending on the time and people where it is developed.

For example, Aristotle (384-322 B.C) represents the world centered on the earth,with a sublunary world and superlunary world. Claude Ptolémée de

Thébaïde (100-


101


170 after Christ) is a geographer whose cosmological system is geocentrism (earth is fixed at the centre of the universe) His great “Syntaxe mathématique or Almalgeste” is a vast compilation of astronomic knowledge of elderly. It will be influential till the end of middle ages and Renaissance.

Based on the Greek legacy, the Islamic civilization will closely consider cosmology and astronomy, as its objective is to determine prayer hours and Mecca direction towards which the faithful shall orient for the prayer. Furthermore, Arabs will produce charts and geographic maps used in determining necessary elements of the prayer. This undertaking shall require talents from all domains (algebra, astronomy, geography, philosophy…). Many great minds will take part in this venture, notably Al-Khwarizmi, Al-Kindi (+873), Al-Farabi (+950), Avicenne or Ibn Sina (980-1036), gazali or Al-gazel (1058-1111), Averroès or Ibn Roschd (1126-1198). During this period, a great expansion is witnessed in thought from Islam (Âge d’or de la civilization islamique).It is known under a simple expression of classical period.

Another thought shall contribute significantly to the evolution of cosmology, notably the Polish astronomer’s thought Nicolas Copernic (1473-1543), who clearly states the movement hypothesis of Earth and other planets around the Sun. In fact, the heliocentrism of Copernic claims that the Sun is immobile at the centre of the universe (De revolutionibus orbium coelestium libri VI. But even though the Coper- nic treaty explains main astronomic phenomena known during that period, more simply than the Ptolémée system so far admitted, it denies to Earth the dominant role in the universe. As a matter of fact, this treaty will give way to many criticisms, notably in the church, as Copernic demonstrates that the Earth is not mobile at the centre of the universe as believed. On the contrary, the Earth turns on itself and around the Sun. This strongly contested demonstration will only be known as valid on the 18th century, after the discovery of glasses. Breaking from the geocentric conception of the world, the Copernic work indicates a change in the history of thought and scientific progress.

From 1609, Galileo (1564-1642) will use astronomic glasses. He will perfect it to study the movements of planets, stars and sunspots. Therefore, Galileo discovers the moon relief, main satellites of Jupiter, phases of Venus and the presence of stars in the Milky Way. In fact, rallied to the heliocentric system of Copernic, whose work is singled out (1616), Galiléo is brought before the Court of the Inquisition after publication of “Dialogue on the two great systems of the world”. He is convicted and forced to retract (1633), as in 1616 the Inquisition published a decree defining the heliocentrism as false doctrine and against Holy Scriptures. In 1632, it will single out all scriptures on heliocentrism, despite support received by Galileo from some Jesuits. Pope Urban VIII, a friend to Galileo will immediately commute Galileo’s

104



sentence, house arresting him. Galileo shall only be rehabilitated in 1992 by the same Church.

Nevertheless, Galileo remains one of the founders of modern mechanism (Dis- course on two new sciences), as it plays a role in the introduction of mathematics for the understanding of physical laws. Notably, Galileo states the law of fall of objects in the vacuum. Moreover, Galileo brings the first formulation of the principle of relativity. But the fate that awaits Galileo will lead René Descartes (1596-1650) to mention that Galileo lacked method and to choose a philosophical career. That is why Descartes will give up publishing the “Traité du monde et de la lumière” (1634) and conceive a philosophy project of universal sciences, which clearly set the range



101

apart from scholastic teaching. Thereafter, Descartes will raise the universal doubtand the cogito to the rank of first principle of intelligibility.

Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that in the prehistory (Egypt) and deep An- tiquity (Egypt, Europe), during Middle age, Renaissance period and during the Age of Enlightenments, religious cosmology is not different from scientific cosmology, since it is question before all of studying the sky and time calculation, so that cosmology has for practical applications the production of calendars, sundials and clocks, the determination of religious feast days. From 17th and 18th centuries, with Kepler (1571-1630, Tycho-Braché (1546-1601), Galileo (1564-1942), Newton (1642-1727),astronomy concerned by an observable unearthly space will lead to discoveries in fundamental sciences (universal gravitation). These discoveries are in fact applications in other domains than time calculations and calendars. For example, mechanic will open the way to industrial revolution. During the 18th century, astronomy and cosmology will become autonomous sciences, free from religious authorities. En- riched by physical sciences and chemistry (quantic mechanic), astronomy will give birth to astrophysics at the end of the 19th century. In return, cosmology will split into a religious cosmology, a scientific cosmology and a philosophic cosmology.

II. Philosophic glance on cosmologyFacing the growth of sciences and technology, temptation is high to

empty cosmology from philosophical background to take it to archeological considerations (the age of the universe), historical (evolution) and materialist (constitutive dimensions and elements) which give us confidence, obviously in a certain ease or a certain spiritual security. But intuitively and rationally, human feels he can learn more and access universal, transcendental, timeless knowledge, unifying scattered responses that other scientific domains reveal. In general, philosophy is like a scientific-systematic and critical presentation which leads human to a self-awareness to the af- firmation of the absolute, through a reflection on the insertion of human in material realities surrounding him. In fact, philosophy raises the problem of human and his destiny in this world, aims at helping human acquire the most lucid self-awareness and of his place in the universe, and also the conscience to reduce his opinions to clear and distinct ideas. Moreover, philosophy operates a reflection on full experience of human and on scattered theories revealed to us by other scientific domains. That is why there is only a rational, logic, systematic and critical philosophy.

Nevertheless, philosophy has two directions, known as two types of our experience of conscience, that is the metaphysical direction and the ontological direction. In fact, the metaphysical direction helps us to be aware of the occurrence, of the existence and of the meaning of


106


things in this world, over time and in the history. This comprises general metaphysics (being, core) and special metaphysics (God, Soul, and Liberty). The task of general metaphysics consists of explaining the universe and trying to understand the unity of the world through the search and discovery of the first or ultimate cause of things surrounding us (core, substance). Thus, it is question of “living first” and “philosophize then” to live well.

About ontology, it helps be aware of the substance (being, core) of things facing us in the universe, of their nature (origin, source), of their structure (formation), of their functioning (evolution), of their value (raison d’être), across space and history. The task of general ontology is to seek, as general metaphysics first or ultimate


103


causes of things (general metaphysics), that escape the fugacity of the sensitive, to penetrate the substantiality of the being which is by the examination of the formal being in its intrinsic reality, by the study of its deep logical nature, by the discovery of its essential attributes, by the knowledge and by the explanation in their high intelligibility of things surviving in the world across time and history.

From there, philosophical research will contain both an analysis of properties of the being in general (metaphysics-ontology), a reflection on characteristics of the human (What is human: anthropology), a critical study of the scientific activity (Kant: What must I learn: epistemology- theory of knowledge), a justification of human rights and obligations (Kant: what must I do: ethics-politics) an interpretation of the relationship with God, of the religious attitude (Kant: what can I hope for). It is because, moreover, the world is part of human being that he determines this being and lets its dimensions known. Therefore, philosophy will seek to know what the world is, the way human lives his surrounding world, the way he builds his history, tools he uses to live humanely. In fact, philosophy seeks the existential significance of structures and bodily, material and cosmological dimensions of life of beings in general and human beings in particular in the universe.

Furthermore, because other scientific domains have many explanations scientists recognize not being able to answer alone, philosophers will enlarge logic to other modes of reasoning than deduction (cause-effect relationship), that induction (the definition of precise natures, of the following gender, of the specific difference), to indicate the final meaning to give human actions (teleology-ethics), the meaning of the notion of expressive substance of the vocation to consider there is a first and ultimate cause of the origin of life, of the world and human himself (metaphysics)

Beside the metaphysical perspective, philosophers can make use of the phenomenological perspective. As a matter of fact, if the world is part of the human, it implies human is part of the world. This implies a necessary movement that goes from human to the world and from the world to human. That is why we agree with Martin Heidegger (fundamental ontology), when he thinks and believes that human is a being-in-the-world. Therefore, it goes without saying that philosophy should study this movement to explain to human both how human is present and/or absent in the world and how the world obeys him and/or resists him. From there, human appears as a being of the world, as human has a conscience, a will, a liberty and desires.

Yet according to Edmund Husserl, every conscience is the conscience of something. Consequently human is not a solitary subject within itself. He is naturally or artificially sour towards others or towards the world. Thus, human is only himself if he looks at others or at his fellowman and at the world of objects, things and materials, across time and in the history. Influenced by the phenomenological

104



perspective, Martin Heidegger will bring in two notions to signal the place of human in the world, that is the being-there and the being-in-the-world. These two notions simply show us that human and the world are complementary. Hence, the world exists only for the human, (a thinking being) and human can only exist within the world (material, time, space, history, culture). For the African (black) in particular, the world is neither an appearance, nor an illusion, but something not only with a great ontological intensity, but which also disarmed him (slavery, slave trade, colonization) still again something that must, nevertheless help him (re) build by and with exchanges with others, within and out of the African continent.



105

III. The world order in questionThe world order first and foremost refers to an attempt to elaborate

and material- ize an intellectual and dialectic effort between cosmology and philosophy, that leads to the quest and discovery of nature (source, origin), of the structure (formation) and the functioning (evolution) of the world and man according to a law or a principle of invariable intelligibility. From there, man can foresee phenomena that occur in the world in time, history and culture. Therefore, man can predict the operation of the universe which is often cyclic. In fact, the world has a reality and it is even a reality, that is a compound and modifiable being that man organizes according to a certain order, whose laws and principles are discovered by philosophical cosmology. In addition, man is a being endowed at the same time with reason, will, freedom but also desires. That being is always in situation in a universe that is strange to him, but to which he must all the same open his heart.

Thanks to the philosophy of nature and its history, man is going to discover the nature of the universe, explain and describe its structure, master and possess its functioning and evolution. All that leads to philosophical cosmology which is itself a philosophical orientation of cosmology essentially teleological and an attempt to respond connected with the primary or ultimate cause that explains and justifies at the same time the origin or the source, the formation or structure, the evolution or functioning of the world. Therefore, philosophical cosmology is a very old intellectual practice and attitude towards reality, even if the word cosmology was introduced in philosophy only in XVIII century by Christian (Baron de) Wolf who in 1728, made it a branch of philosophical knowledge.

As a word, intellectual practice and attitude towards reality, philosophical cosmology therefore deals with all the problems that concern nature (origin, source), structure (formation), the functioning and evolution of the universe seen as a reality in itself (Wolf, Kant). Associated with science, philosophical cosmology is like part of Physics that examines and teaches the study of all the bodies of the world, to the extent that Cosmology is like the way all the bodies in question make up the world. In particular, Philosophical cosmology associated with science is like a systematic and critical theory that concerns the universe seen as a set of beings in space and a series of independent events in space, time, history and culture, but that should in the long run be put in order according to the laws or invariable principles that Philosophical Cosmology takes out the mission of discovering.

That shows that the contributions of Scientific Cosmology to Philosophical Cos- mology are necessary, because they determine our vision of the world and our way of living, since they give us the opportunity to articulate the philosophical reflections and scientific knowledge. All that lead to an experimental, systematic and critical science that deals with the origins of man and the universe seen as


106


the totality of phenomena astronomically observable, without neglecting its formation, evolution and functioning (cosmogony, cosmogenesis). If we believe that the world is a set of beings and a series of independent events in space, time and history, not only the universe is a compound and modifiable being, but also the universe is a being made which functions according to laws and invariable principles that Philosophical Cos- mology simply takes the mission of discovering. That is why to the main question of knowing what is at the base of the world order (nature, structure, functioning) and even to the principle of philosophical process, the answer is the following: not only



107

it is not exaggerated to put the question on justice to the principle of philosophical process, but also it is justice that strongly expresses,

explains and justifies the laws and invariable principles of the world order, seen, henceforth, as a big unified whole. Consequently, the world

order here implies the legitimating of the origin (nature, source) of formation (structure), of functioning and evolution of the universe

through a founding principle (primary or ultimate cause) which, teleologically, sub- sume under the term of justice. Now, it is important

to emphasize that the basis (the foundation) designates at the same time the home -truths or the ultimate truths and the logical truths prior to the truths that are a case of legitimizing abstractly or theoretically.

Thus, the invariable principle of intelligibility refers to the Arche of the An- cient Greeks, inherent or original principle whose foundation is the

basic principle of determinism, according to which all in the universe depends on preceding events. All that leads to the principle of necessity

which is rigorously expressive of what cannotbe otherwise than what it is.

Because mechanistic determinism stipulates that everything is determined and fatal, justice is firstly the permission that we need to proclaim in a loud voice a holy word (religion), to the extent that at the beginning, justice and law become confused. Then, justice is related to the fact of making an order or making a decision, as well as to the fact of obeying to the necessity through which what exists, exists but that cannot be otherwise. Thus, proclaiming, making an order or making a decision express justice, the same way as obeying something expresses law. Justice and law are therefore at the same time expressive of the existence of a world order, explanatory of the primary or ultimate cause of nature, structure, evolution and functioning of the universe, the same way they are the founders of the unity of the world, despite the diversity and changes in environment.

As a result, the Philosophical Cosmology appears as the study of the being as he determines himself and excludes some aspects of the being.

That is what leads to the philosophy of nature and on the preeminence of natural law, because the latter is a prime principle of intelligibility that stipulates that things are determined according to their purpose.

From there, justice sounds like Leibniz ´s sufficient reason, which enables to understand that there is an order in the world, but that it is

important to seek to know (Philosophical Cosmology) in order to become the “master and pos- sessor of the world”. Consequently, the

world order is the consciousness and the will to make the world function according to justice and law, seen as first elements (original,

primordial), in the heart of a change that gives birth to all the compounds. From there, our triple hypothesis is the following: if at the

metaphysical level, justice is in the principle of the philosophical process and at the basis of the world order (nature, structure,

functioning, evolution), therefore justice is expressive at the same time of themes of conflicts, moderation and human race. Only the


108


first part of that hypothesis (conflict) interests us here and in particular, in relation to the cosmology and philosophical thought of

Ancient Egypt. In order to justify our hypothesis, we are going to give some elements of analysis and reflexive explanations of the situation

of Man in the world, so as to show that the cosmos ( the ordered world) is to man a factual experience, and for the African, mostly the Black

African, it is the passage of slavery, of the slave trade and colonization, whose explanation is to be examined through a history of the

philosophy of nature, from the long Egyptianprehistory and the depth of Greco-latin antiquity to our contemporary era.



109

IV. Justice as expressive of the themeof conflict in ancient egypt

It is a reflection on the manner or the nature (Physic) through the physical category of conflict, to the extent that changes in the world are thought from a qualitative couple of opposites (Aristotle). In fact, two qualitative opposites cannot have a meaning separately because one of them is what it is under its aspects of quality only in relation to the other. They can also exchange roles; this reversal is not going in any way to alter the opposition of the two opposites.

The observation of the universe shows us that the world is made of elements that are found in pairs. The two elements that make a pair are therefore two qualitative opposites. The articulation of the elements of the world seeks therefore to always satisfy this need for conflict. When opposites exist, the universe is in equilibrium. When on the other hand on the opposite terms is absent, that will imply the intervention of a third party (God, nature, man), and who is going to create the circumstances that allows what is absent to recur so as to take back its place. Consequently, what is at the centre of explanations of the world order as we perceive it here and also such as it is only the result of a regulation based on the equilibrium of opposites, are at the same time the protection of opposites, the production of opposites, and the recovery of conflict.

Here, therefore, justice is the main pillar of the world order seen as the desire to ensure the equilibrium of opposites that explain the manner the universe is struc- tured and which is also at the origin of universe. Facing nothingness, it is necessary to create an opposite that is the world in its entirety. Face to life, it is necessary that death should arise. Therefore, fair nature, fair structure, the fair evolution and functioning of universe are driven by the desire to satisfy the need of conflict. This is illustrated in the Egypt of Pharaohs, notably in the thought of Ancient Egypt. In fact, in the thought of The Egypt of Pharaohs, justice as expressive of the theme of conflict is manifested through the birth and harmonious order of the world, which are often the result of conflicts between opposing forces, that is order and disorder, good and evil, life and death, day and night, light and darkness. These couples of opposites are indissociable because they make people think the world and its changes inside conflicts; they don’t have individual meanings, even if finally it is important to find the principle that reconciles them that is, here, the Maat, a principle of single intelligibility and also a supreme intelligence.

In fact, Egyptians perceive the universe as a divine creation and as an evolution in instable equilibrium, following the game of couples of opposites that takes place. Thus, part of the myth of Osiris shows us how Osiris, ( a deity and righteous and good king) is assassinated by his brother and Brother-in-law Seth ( a deity and jealous king, bad and unrighteous). But later on, and by magic, Osiris has a son called Horus,


110


with his wife Isis. The latter is going to avenge his father when he grows mature. He is going to seize power again and the kingdom of his father. But also, he is going to spare the life of his uncle Seth and give him the Southern part of the kingdom of his father Osiris. More deeply, this myth is not only the expression of an idea of justice that is going to help to solve the problem of meaning and essence of things, men of political power, but this myth also advocates the requirement of return to a fair social order; then again, this myth is the expression of the victory of Osiris over Seth through his son Horus. It is the victory of the forces of good and order (Osiris,



111

Horus) over the forces of disorder (Seth, Nephtys), to the extent that the couples of opposites seem to be present in all things and in the whole process. Therefore, Seth is an indispensable protagonist who engages his responsibility in the assassination of Osiris. As a result, Osiris needs Seth to express himself.

In the Ancient Egypt thought, justice as expressive of the theme of opposites manifests through the believes of Egyptians which are based on a set of myths that display a scene of countless deities (a basic polytheism) because there exist as many deities as provinces (prefectorates). But these myths also highlight the understanding of the divine as a unique principle, that leads to a real monotheism, because the name and aspect of a deity can change from one province to another, but they can worship the same God in several provinces, because the character of several deities remain the same.

In general, Egyptian cosmogony is a set of mythical tales on the formation and functioning of the universe, also an activity of learning or

research, as well as reflection on the origin and organization of the world (structure, evolution), even if that cosmogony varies in relation with the provinces of Egypt. Nevertheless, there are Gods who have

more important roles (protecting gods) than others (local gods). For example, according to the cosmogony of Heliopolis, only chaos exits at the beginning of the universe under the form of an ocean called Noun.

Thénars Athoum ( Athoum, Aton) confused with Re/Ra is going to emerge from that ocean. Henceforth, the appearance of the other

deities is going to be made by mixed couples (masculine/ feminine), because the demiurge born in the stream is going to give birth to

two twins: god Shou (the air, dryness) and the goddess Tefnout (humidity, humid). Shou and Tefnout support their daughter Nout (the

sky), the twin sister of Geb. Nout is a woman whose body is bent, stretched and whose starry stomach represents the celestial sphere.

She is the mother of the couples Osiris and Isis (the symbol of plant renewal) then of couples Seth and Nephts (the force of evil and

disorder). It’s the couple Osiris/ Isis that is going to give birth to Horus, (the force of good and order).

The Egyptian theology is therefore the reflection of a set of beliefs that constitute the religions practiced during about three millenniums before our era. That set of beliefs endures with a remarkable stability and has a determining influence in the development of the culture and civilization of Egypt and its environments. In fact, gods and the hereafter are for Egyptians a first rank preoccupation and are in the centre of all the aspects of existence. Therefore, the temple is the most important monument of Egyptian cities, because the temple of each province has its Eighth and Ninth (a group of nine deities) and its triads each of them made with three human beings (the father, the mother and the son), even if there exist other protecting gods and local gods. For example, the biggest Eighth and Ninth is the one that is worshipped at Heliopolis, the centre of the sun-cult. In fact, the god sun


112


( Re, Atton, Atoum, Amon-Re) constitute the Eighth and Ninth with his children and grandsons: Shou, Tefnout, Geb/Nout, Osiris/Isis, Seth/Nephtys. It is important to notice that the couples of deities are mixed (masculine/feminine.)

Consequently, the face of the other divine beings is different because it lives in the hereafter and the human beings race is different, because it lives in the universe, but aspires to go to the kingdom of deities. To say it all, the only important god who is worshipped in a constant manner was Re (the god sun), because he is everywhere in Egypt and whatever the era, at the same time the completed being and renaissance.



113

That is why he is the king of cosmic deities that is the only true god who should be worshipped at the highest level. Anyway, the contribution of Egyptian cosmic myths is contained in the expressive principles of a qualitative relation (opposites) and present in their morphological organization (order/disorder, good/evil, justice/ injustice, equilibrium/disequilibrium...) even if the epilogues always lead to a happy end. A a result, the equilibrium of the Egyptian society of Pharaohs lies on the good will of gods and the equilibrium of forces among them. Therefore, there are deities of good (Horus), whose reestablish order when it is destroyed by the deities of evil (Seth).

Accordingly, justice expressive of the theme of opposites is symbolized in the Egyptian thought not only by the contrast between the couples Osiris/Osiris and Seth/Nephtys, but also by the victory of Horus (the symbol of forces of good, order, justice, peace) over the forces of evil, disorder, injustice and violence. Beyond the simple reestablishment of the equilibrium, the faces of Horus and Seth highlight the fact that good exist only in relation to the existence of bad, the beauty of the good appears only in response to the ugliness of the evil. From there, justice is expressive of justice of the theme of opposite only because there is an injustice. Above all, the victory of Horus over Seth unites the organizational contrasts and valorizes the projec- tion of Re/Ra, that is the existence in general and the creation in particular of Egypt in particular. Despite the natural and social determinations, all that is going to lead to the building of a social and political regulation treaty. In fact, Seth as the enemy of Osiris inspires social order, because it is one of the elements of dramaturgy of power and discourse that creates a stage. In fighting against Horus, Seth participates in the process of creation of Egypt. Seth is therefore one of the founding father of Egypt and one of the souls of Nekken such as Osiris who is at the time his brother, his brother- in-law and mythical enemy.

Consequently, Seth is at the same time one of the essential elements of the Egypt and a protagonist indispensable to Horus in the system of political regulation, like the contrasted couples of good/evil, beautiful/ugly, necessary/superfluous. There- fore, Seth is going to govern barren Egypt where he is going to ensure henceforth the custody of the universal order into the heart of Egyptian civilization, whose Northern part is governed by Horus. In all, the idea of justice is deployed in a universe where men are invited to participate, even if at the same time, in the course of the history of humanity, what can be injustice at a given moment can act as justice at another moment.

ReferencesADAME BA KONA, ADAME BA KONARE, L’os de la parole, cosmologie du

pouvoir, Présence Africaine, 2001.ALFRED, C., Khenaton pharao of Egypt: a new study, Thames and

Husdon, London, 1968.


114


AMA MAZAMA, L’impératif afrocentrique, Ed. Menaibuc, Paris, 2003.ANKH, «Revue d’Egyptologie et de civilisations africaines », Paris, Khepra, n° 1-6,

1992, 1993.ASSMANN, J., MAÂT. L’Egypte pharaonique et l’idée de justice sociale, Julliard,

Paris, 1979.



115

BARRAU, A.& PARROCHIA, D., Formeetoriginedel’univers, Regardsphilosophiques sur la cosmologie, Dumond, 2010.

BASTIT, M., Etudes de cosmologie philosophique, L’Harmattan, 2013.BILOLO, M., Le cosmos, théologies philosophiques de l’Egypte antique,

Menaibuc, 2003.CHEICK ANTA DIOP, Nation nègre et culture. De l’antiquité nègre

égyptienne aux problèmes culturels de l’Afrique noire aujourd’hui, Présence Africaine, 2000.

CORTEGGNANI, J.P., L’Egypte ancienne et ses dieux, Fayard, Paris, 2007. DAUMAS, FR., La civilisation de l’Egypte pharaonique, Artaud, Paris, 1971. DAUMAS, FR., Les dieux de l’Egypte, coll. Que sais-je ? Paris, 1977.DESPLANQUES, S., L’Egypte ancienne, PUF, Paris, 2005.DIAMANO- APPIA, M., & DIAMANO- APPIA, N., L’Egypte antique, Gallimard, 2002. DUNAUD, F., Isis, mère des dieux, Ed. Actes du Sud, Paris, 2009.DUNAUD, F., LICHTENBERG, R., Les Egyptiens, Ed Le Chêne, Paris, 2004.GOYON, J.-C., Rê, Maât et pharaon ou le destin de l’Egypte antique, Eds A.C.V., 1999.LALOUETTE, CL., La littérature égyptienne, coll. Que sais-je N° 1934,

PUF, Paris, 1981.MARUEJOL, F., Dieux et rites de l’Egypte antique, La martinière Eds De, 2009. MENU, B., L’Egypte pharaonique. Nouvelles recherches sur l’histoire juridique,

économique et sociale de l’ancienne Egypte, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2004. MORET, A., Le Nil et la civilisation égyptienne, Ed Albin Michel, Paris, 1925.OKAH-ATENGA, P.P., Cosmologie et philosophie- De la justice et du

Fonctionnement du Monde. Ed. PUY, Yaoundé, 2014.OKAH-ATENGA, P.P. Traite négrière, Esclavage, Colonisation et

Emergence de types d’humanité en Afrique. Le devoir de mémoire, Ed. Clé, Yaoundé, 2015.

POSENER, G., Dictionnaire de la civilisation égyptienne, en collaboration avec

SERGE SAUNERON & JEAN YOYOTTE, Ed. Fernand Hazan, Paris, 1959.

SAUNERON, S., L’Egyptologie, coll. Que sais-je N° 1312 ? PUF, Paris, 19654. SAUNERON, S., & YOYOTTE, J., La naissance du monde selon l’ancienne Egypte,

Seuil, Paris, 1954.SCHWARZ, F., L’initiation au livre des morts égyptiens, Albin Michel, Paris, 1988.

110


TOWARDS A GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Arkady Ursul — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor,Lomonosov Moscow State University

(Moscow, Russia)

Tatiana Ursul — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, National Research Technological

University «MISiS» (Moscow, Russia)


Sustainable development is seen as a global resolution strategy socionatural contradiction between the growing needs of humanity and limited natural resources. This scenario seems to be an exit from the global ecological crisis and treated as a global control system balanced on social and natural development.

Key Words: demographic sustainability, evolutionary approach, environmental safety, global processes, global sustainability, interdisciplinary research, national security, security, social and natural contradiction, sustainable development.

Introductory remarksIn this century, there may, and even must, occur a cardinal turn

in human history, whose importance can hardly be compared with all previous revolutionary changes of the past. We mean the transition to sustainable development as a new form and highway of civilizational process. This transition will occur, albeit with great difficulty, as a quite conscious choice of all mankind — or, in any case, of those peoples and states which form the United Nations.

The meaning of impending turn of history is to save humanity from possible annihilation, from threatening and impending disasters caused not by some external reasons, but by the previous and current development of civilization. It is this development where there is a hidden “mechanism”, leading to a rapid or slow self- destruction of mankind, the details of which will be discussed in this monograph.

The concept of the survival of humanity as a strategy for sustainable development (SD) is known to have been formulated by the International Commission on Environment and Development in the book “Our Common Future”, published in English and several other languages in 1987 (the Russian translation was published in 1989) [Our Common Future, 1989]. The official adoption of the concept and strategy for sustainable development took place at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. It is the UNCED where state leaders and heads of governments of 179 countries — members of the UN realized that all the achievements of civilization are under the threat of extinction if the environmental


111


issues and some other global problems are not solved. After all, all mankind may be plunged into the abyss of anthropoecological disaster, since ecological conditions, resources and other riches of nature, and its ability to repair itself came to the verge

© Ursul Arkady, Ursul Tatiana, 2015


112


of exhaustion.The transition to sustainable development, as recommended by the

United Nations, began in 2005, and this “beginning” will persist at least through 2014. This decade of the beginning of transition to sustainable development implies the completion by the UN member countries of the period of understanding the need for such transition and the beginning of the practical actions by the countries of the international community aimed at building our common sustainable future. The UN political ideas and recommendations must turn into real strategies and social norms and relations of each state as regards managing the transition to a new model of development of the entire civilization. Let us note the important specifics of the idea of sustainable development — it was offered on a supranational, global political level, rather than in a single country or by an individual scientist.

Therefore, an issue arises that was attempted to be solved at the UNCED: how to save humanity from its supposed annihilation, and what has to be done to this end? It turned out that for our civilization to survive, one needs to radically change the model (form) of development of humanity, its interaction with nature and even the very way of life of the population of our planet. It is necessary to carry out such transformations which, perhaps, would be the most fundamental ones in the history of civilization, and which would ensure the survival of humanity and its transition to a new form (model) of development and existence. But is it possible at all? After all, the concept of sustainable development is not yet a practically proven scientific theory, but rather a certain world outlook, political idea and recommendation. Scientists will have to clarify and substantiate or reject it, as it is done now by some of them without proper justification, often on the basis of purely subjective considerations.

In our opinion, the documents first adopted at UNCED and later at other international forums on sustainable development under the auspices of the United Nations are “informational materials” that have an ideological and conceptual basis, a “soft” regulatory and strategic orientation, socio-political recommendations and a source of future norms governing the transition to sustainable development. Until recently, when considering the issues of sustainable development, major attention was paid to their conceptual and strategic content. And in this paper, we will not evade these aspects of the problem of sustainable development, but we will focus our attention on political and strategic issues of the discussed theme. These issues have only begun to be examined, and they now represent the greatest interest; moreover, here as well the emphasis will be laid on the scientific side of the examined issues.

It is clear why philosophical and conceptual-strategic issues turned out to be more attractive at the initial stage of comprehension of the issue of sustainable development. After all, it was necessary to first

Ursul Arkady, Ursul Tatiana. Towards a global sustainable future


113

understand what sustainable development constitutes as a form of further civilizational existence and progress, because it turned out to be essentially new. This form of civilizational development was neither predicted, nor developed by any sufficiently popular school (theory) of social science. The reason for this is that the humanities scientists saw the future in the “format” of the model of non-sustainable development, wherein the existence of mankind was implicitly assumed to be eternal. And it was one of the major misconceptions of the past, and to a large extent, also the modern social sciences and the humanities, which has been mostly abstracting from nature.

112



It turns out that it was necessary to pay close attention to environmental issues, to understand the impossibility of mankind’s

existence in conditions of a dangerous and unstable model (shape) of modern civilization process. It was a kind of eco- futurist “collapse” of

all social science or, at least, the part that was “responsible” for the explanation of the event essence and somehow tried to look into the

near future. Here we should recognize the nonlinear nature of the development of the latter part of the socio-humanitarian knowledge. Much of what social studies has “tried and tested” appeared of little

use for adequate vision of the future in the way of the survival of mankind. And the idea itself of a sustainable future appeared only

because we had to pay attention to the environmental issues of surrounding environment of society, i.e. escape from the social world

in the socio-natural dimension that was not the case for the main part of the socio-humanitarian knowledge. In addition, this transition to the

wider system of life and, consequently, a broader view of the future development of mankind has led to a radically new idea of the

evolution of civilization. We can say that in our minds there have been dramatic transformations, a kind of nonlinear transition to an

alternative traditional, to the “different future”than that previously represented to the majority of social scientists.

In the very idea of development, which in the social and socio-natural areas has become a concept of sustainable development, “nonlinear thinking” has been appeared. In the issue of sustainable development, the future is on focus. In the model of non-sustainable development, approach to the study of the future was largely “linear”: the future was derived from the past and the present, which suggests traditionally understanding of historical approach. Meanwhile, in the awareness of the issue of sustainable development there will be a shift of emphasis from the study of the past and the present to the future. This process makes sense to call futurization (from Lat. Futurum — the future), which is designed to restore the temporal integrity of scientific knowledge.

Real transition to sustainable development will begin only when the proper form of evolution will gradually be included (and increasingly replace it) into a real political and other socio-cultural normative systems, including morality and even religion, in spite of its great commitment to the traditional model of development. The concept of sustainable development is actually a synonym of more “normal” development, where such a level of security of planetary social and natural system is reached, which ensures the survival of mankind and its indefinitely long existence. In the model of non-sustainable development, mechanism of the “normal” functioning of society has mainly local (spot) and short-term nature, and the model itself is generally a dangerous and unstable environment for the further existence of man and mankind.

If this environment (natural and human) of the existence of man and


115


society would have been more secure, then it would being reduced, or there even would not be need in the regulatory and protective equipment, and the system would have been more open, thereby contributing to further progressive development of civilization. It is obvious that these means, in principle, shall not be discarded, as there will always be risks and negative impacts on society and the people from which we have to defend. However, part of the internal threats, which depends on the human factor, can be changed, and more supportive, safe socio-cultural environment of living and development could be created, that suggests the transition to sustainable development.


112


Until now, there were no approaches to measuring of the extent and probability of survival of mankind. Now, due to the formation of concepts and strategies for sustainable development, we can assume that the extent civilization will move from the modern model to sustainable development model will be the same as the extent of increasing of the probability of survival. Assuming that such a transition would fully satisfy the survival of mankind, the probability (rate) of survival can be expressed in terms of reduction of anthropogenic pressure on the biosphere, on that drew the attention A.P. Fedotov [Fedotov, 2003] (there are other approaches to the measurement of the degree of transition to the sustainable development [Ursul, Demidov, 2006: pp. 67-86]).

Awareness of the immanent relationship of development and security, and in the long term of the “security-development” system has led to the formulation of opportunity of security provision through the development, and to be more precise, through sustainable development. In addition, this idea was proposed in 1995 [Ursul, 1995]. Formation of a more secure human environment and civilization as a whole in the process of transition to sustainable development means that a substantial part of the security functions can be provided is no longer protection, but this very new more normal i.e. sustainable type of development, which will reduce the amount, scope and intensity of negative and harmful influences. Protective security mechanism in this case is no longer the primary and is transformed into additional security and its legal and regulatory systems means through sustainable development. The first such regulator- legal awareness occurred when a decree No. 537 “On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation to 2020” was signed [Website of the Security Council], which approved this Strategy and repealed previous editions (1997 and 2000) of the National Security Concept. The adoption of this Strategy, which for brevity we will refer as Strategy-2020, is essential for the consolidation of the efforts of state and society in the field of national security and further socio-economic development of Russia in the long term.

In the Strategy-2020 is decided to put in its basis the fundamental methodological status of the relationship and interdependence of the sustainable development of the country (and the society) and national security (especially in Articles 2 and 3 of The Strategy-2020). Therefore, if the “Concept of transition of the Russian Federation to Sustainable Development”, approved by Presidential Decree in 1996, had mainly environmental “focus”, now in connection with the adoption of Strategy-2020, perhaps we can state the new vision of sustainable development issues through “prism” of security issues, and above all, national security. It was the first time for the reason that to date has been developed conceptual and theoretical foundations of the vision of sustainable development from the perspective of security issues as well as security through sustainable development. Let us make a point that



117

Strategy-2020 is not only a National Security Strategy, but also a new one, “safe” version of the Russian concept of transition to sustainable development in the vision of this development from the perspective of security of both our country and the entire world community. We believe that this is an important ideological and conceptual- methodological turn in the awareness of security issues and in the field of sustainable development issues, their combining into a single scientific-search and practical-activity directions.

We call attention to the fact that regulatory support for formation of more secure wide system as an environment of human and mankind existence requires changes

114



of the social and socio-natural essence of human activity itself. In the modern model, this activity has the economocentric nature and a man is guided by the principles of self-interest and benefits that are far from the issues of mankind survival. This process in the society, in any case, at the global level, leads to the spontaneous interaction of these often competing interests that are opposing the survival of all mankind (which was not noticed by F. von Hayek, as will be discussed further).

This discrepancy of vectors of individual survival and the survival of the human race, which is now constantly striving to anthropoecological disaster, creates a dangerous environment of existence and development of so-called model of non-sustainable development. One of the tasks of the transition to sustainable development is just the creation of a unified strategy for survival, in which the personal and national interests to the necessary extent coincide with the interests of the survival of all mankind. After all, if individual and corporate interests continue to be opposite to the vector of survival of all mankind, it will just irreversibly degraded, and eventually die in a rapidly impending planetary-system crash.

If the model of non-sustainable development focused attention on a separate “economized” person, then the model of sustainable development focuses on the whole of mankind, the survival of the latter as a whole, and not just, for example, the “golden billion”. It became apparent that not only the rights and freedoms, but also an individual’s life could not be maintained in the future if the entire sphere of human habitation degrades and breaks down, not only its social, but also the natural environment. That is why the new model of civilization development is more humane in its strategic and political orientation.

The idea of connection of strategies for the future security of Russia and its transition to sustainable development comes from the fact that the security of “non-sustainable development”, the model of which is still being implemented in Russia (and throughout the world as a whole), is impossible in principle. Transition to sustainable development involves safety ensuring in all respects, and the Global Security is also being implemented in the way of sustainable development. Such a close relationship of universal (and global) security of the country (and the world community), and sustainable development provides strategic novelty and specificity of further human existence.

As a methodological basis of such vision, all the means to explore the future should be used, including forecasting, futurology and systemic approaches, determining the specific issue of the survival of mankind as a further provision of security for civilization through sustainable development.

In recent years, a number of scientists described the future of civilization as a society of not only new opportunities and horizons,


115


but also as society of risk, dangers, crises and global disasters. This feeling of endangered mankind and global threats intensified after the acts of international terrorism in the United States of September 11, 2001 and subsequent terrorist attacks in various parts of the globe, that per global media caused great psychological resonance, a sense of fear and terror in the hundreds of millions of people.

Globalization is not only formation of the unity and growth of the integrity of civilization, the emergence of some new goods in the international community, but also the formation of a historically new threats and dangers of global character. As a reaction to westernization strategy of globalization development, standardization and


116


universalization, nationalism and separatism are revived; international terrorism is obtaining the planetary scale, becoming one of the most serious threats to progressive movement of the international community. This is not only a radical anti-globalization, but also the “shadow” or a kind of “alternative” globalization, when the Euro-Atlantic direction of globalization is opposed the fundamentalist ideology and strategy of “holy war”, reflecting the hopelessness of the situation in the modern world of billions of starving beggars, sick, illiterate, doomed to remain without a future, which the “golden billion” seeks to privatize just for yourself.

Security issues at the beginning of the XXI century take on a special significance for each country, for each person, for the whole world community. For example, in the “Charter of European Security”, adopted November 19, 1999 in Istanbul, at the OSCE summit, it was declared, that the Heads of states and governments express their firm commitment to the formation of a free, democratic and more united the OSCE region, where the states parties coexist in peace with one another in conditions of freedom, prosperity and security. Security not only in Europe, but also throughout the world has become even the main criterion of human existence in its broadest sense.

Becomingthenewbenchmarkandaprioritycriterionfortheeffectivenessofallareas of human activity, safety is understood not only more widely and comprehensively, but also starts a new sink in, becoming value clearly understood by all mankind. Many universal values of the XX century are appeared to be less important than the values associated with security, and therefore among the values of the XXI century, and of all the III millennium, security will be, in the opinion of the authors, the most important value. After all, security is associated with the possibility of human life and mankind, its save, and not only for the present generation, but also future, as well as for the biosphere as a whole.

It was in the last decade of the second millennium when the civilization faced an issue of global survival. It is primarily concerned with the protection of the challenges, threats and hazards to the survival and development of the mankind. The greatest danger to civilization are those that accompany the development of global issues, and the latter are known to be the result of social and economic progress in its traditional and spontaneous, and as is now clear, deform-dehumanized form. Because different planetary dangers may lead the mankind to a particular disaster even in the coming decades, it is clear that security provision in all its aspects is a priority of any social activity.

It is the issue of security, in particular the environmental safety, that necessitated at the beginning of the third millennium the change of direction (strategy, shape, pattern) of development, as lasting from the time of the Neolithic revolution traditional spontaneous development has no longer ensured the survival of mankind. This new situation in world development, that from the synergetic point of view appeared to



117

face the bifurcation, reflected in modern science, which is not only due to internal logic, but mainly under the influence of external factors has to start changing of the direction of its development. This change is necessary not only to explain the course of the history of society and its interaction with nature, but also mainly in order to predict the future and create the most effective means of survival of mankind, to identify ways and principles to overcome the deep anthropoecological crisis, in which civilization was by the end of the XX-XXI centuries.


118


The transition to a new form of development of civilization (which is still only exists in the form of political declarations and credentials of the UN) was caused by the reasons mainly related to the environment and security provision in the broadest sense. If the international community fails to realize the transition to sustainable development, even in this century the socio-ecological catastrophe of a planetary scale or another could break, related to the above-mentioned threats. XXI century can be the century of global transition to sustainable development, and thus the survival of civilization, and the preservation of the biosphere as a natural foundation of human life.

To mankind to survive, we need to transform radically the process of development, changing human values and orientations of the translational motion, since they were formed in the non-sustainable development model — UDM (at UNCED in Rio de Janeiro was named that form of development, in which our civilization still continues to develop). None, even the most highly developed country (and especially the developing world) would not be able to go on the path of sustainable development without changing the mechanisms of development fundamentally, not choosing new targets of its national development and security, which have been identified in the “Agenda for the XXI Century “(1992),”Plan of Implementation of the WSSD” in Johannesburg in 2002, the outcome document of the Rio + 20 “The future we want”, and other official documents of the United Nations. And this is required from all other countries of the world community the transition to a new strategy for SD, that is no longer modernization-overtaking, but transformational-anticipatory, and only thanks to which it will be possible to ensure the survival and security of all mankind, and not just some part of it, tending to privatize the future to the detriment of the rest of the world’s population.

Global threats and negative trends of socio-ecological, socio-economic and socio-political nature exacerbate global issues and negatives of globalization, create new adverse global trends and increase the risk of further movement to planetary anthropoecological catastrophe. That is why it is important to be united in a common resolve to make determined efforts to respond positively to the need to prepare to deal with global challenges, especially environmental issues.

Inconsistency of the expected socio-economic development of the rotation at the beginning of the new millennium is apparent. One, a traditional model of development in which we are moving by inertia (no longer in the direction of universal progress), threatens planetary omnicide. The second model of sustainable development still exists only at the conceptual and theoretical level and is basically a political declaration and strategic programs at the global, regional, national and local levels. This virtual, but not yet implemented reality creates a lot of difficulties and challenges for the current generation, that is clearly by the overwhelming majority does not want to share the benefits with the



119

future generations of the world’s population. Strategic objectives of changing the course conflict with policy, tactics and specific behaviour of the existing authorities and peoples of the world, who think about the future in the face of a narrow circle of their representatives (mostly scientists). A sustainable future will not appear without a struggle with an unstable present and past. In this is the controversy and drama of the XXI century, which, depending on the resolution of this conflict, would be a century of transition to a sustainable future of mankind, or the end of its history in the truest sense of the word.


120


For UNCED, WSSD, Rio + 20 and all their documents the fact in common, that they are still largely on the political and strategic levels just declare the model (in principle — the variety of models) of sustainable development, the contours of which even in concept form are not defined enough clearly. We intuitively and at the level of common sense only partly understand that such development in many ways, as mankind is still moving on the way of “progress”, is no longer possible, otherwise it will be no future. All considerations of this sustainable future is much more and mostly cosmetic “woven” in the now-functioning model of development than in the abstract desired, but still virtual-theoretical “reality” of a sustainable future. Therefore, all our scenarios of the future are “transition” — a mixture of non- sustainable development model and our conceptual aspirations for the future, which nevertheless still quite vague and is little argued (especially by science). And only with the implementation of UN documents: “Agenda for the XXI Century”, “ Plan of WSSD Decisions Implementation”, “The future we want”, it will become clear if we start to move away from the global catastrophe impending to our descendants and to approach the next “brighter future”(now globally sustainable), or all our hopes will be the same utopian, as previously declared variants of the desired future.

The specifics of any state and their coalitions transition to sustainable development is, in particular, in equating the priorities of the global and national development on the objectives and criteria that ensuring the survival of the entire world community, while maintaining the natural environment. In this sense, the emergence of the priorities and objectives of sustainable development shifts the national interests to global, but does not lead to a levelling of specificity, its own interests, goals, values, ideals, etc. This situation is typical for absolutely all the countries of the world community.

In this regard, the transition to sustainable development poses to Russia some new opportunities to integrate into the global transition process, but at the same time, initiates, especially from developed countries, dangers and threats of information- political, security and economic impacts. Under the guise of sustainable development from its external and internal opponents actions can and will be proposed, that clearly contradict to it, not to mention about the open opponents of this development strategy, clearly prefer the personal, group and corporate interests to the global interests of all mankind. Their opinion is also to a certain extent necessary to take into account, as there is no only one true and recognized by all concept, model and strategy for sustainable development.

Sustainable development is not just one of the new challenges, but the global super issue, on the solution of which depends the future of all mankind, its fate in the third millennium. This is a completely new form (model) of development of the entire international community that finds its way to its survival and solving of global issues of



121

mankind. Sustainable development is an issue and a strategy for future development of civilization, through which “lenses” we can and shall see all challenges, including globalization, and security provision. This means the use of a new conceptual and methodological approach of the future, an advanced vision of civilization processes, designing the upcoming model of socio-natural processes.

The book authors offer advanced vision of the civilization development of the upcoming model of socio-natural processes. Security issue we are trying to comprehend in the context of a new vision for the future development of mankind, where security


122


will be provided by fundamentally new form (strategy) of development. Here, in fact we will talk about conceptual rethinking of what was otherwise considered by science in the model of non-sustainable development. The concept of sustainable development was first associated with the environment, but then it became clear that it was in fact a new form of development of mankind. However, the issue of environmental safety is an important issue on which the authors will still focus, referring to the global sustainability. Further development and understanding of the concept of security from the perspective of a global movement towards sustainability, its transformation into a major strategy for the existence and development of the civilization of the third millennium will change the outlook of people and help them to find a common future.

Socio-natural contradictions and the transition to sustainable development

In recent years, concept of sustainable development (SD) is more and more often and widely discussed in the society. We agree with the opinion of N.S. Kasimov that “perhaps no other scientific idea of any natural or social sciences did not have before such a wide public resonance” [Kasimov, 2004]. However, we are not inclined to clearly assume that the idea of SD has only a scientific nature; in fact, one might even say that this idea cannot yet be fully reasoned by science, at least that science that appeals only to the facts and practices.

After all, there is still no such a type of development on a global scale, and we just assume that it may appear in the future, if there will be adequate social and socio- natural transformations. Therefore the proof of the consistency of the idea of SD could be obtained only by future science, which we call, in contrast to the modern (to some extent in its avant-garde part, post-non-classical), noosphere science [Ursul, Ursul, 2004a; Ursul, Ursul, 2004b]. Although we already have in principle the study of the SD strategy and attempts of its argument [Scientific Basis, 2003; Strategy, 2002], and the first scientific foundations were laid by the report of the Brundtland Commission (WCED), “Our Common Future” [Our Common Future, 1989].

The reason of mentioned popularity of the idea of SD is not so much in its scientific merit and originality, but in the fact that this idea has gained recognition in the United Nations, now representing more than 190 countries worldwide. Adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 (UNCED), confirmed at the World Summit on sustainable development in Johannesburg in 2002 (WSSD) and the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, again in Rio de Janeiro in 2012 (Rio + 20), SD strategy granted the status of political recommendations for all countries and peoples of the world. Science, of course, participated in the formulation of the main provisions of this strategy, as reflected in the



123

instruments of referred UN forums, while the WSSD recommended all countries to begin the transition to SD from 2005. However, we must bear in mind, that modern science basically explores the non-sustainable development model (UDM) and actually (literally and figuratively) displays “our common past”.

The basic idea of SD in overall civilizational perspective, in our view, is to save civilization and the biosphere. Therefore, in a sense, it seems not only conservative, but also an innovative idea. However, it differs significantly from the “traditional” conservatism (if it is appropriate to say so) and is to some extent the neoconservative and innovative outlook.


124


According to N.S. Kasimov and Y.L. Mazurov, “the provisions of the concept of SD, including the form in which they are reflected in the report of the Brundtland Commission, are not fundamentally new in human history. They were inherent to the traditional patriarchal society of past eras; they have being reproduced in the modern world order of aboriginal communities, such as indigenous minorities of the Russian North. Moreover, in fragmentary form, the imperatives of traditional SD are retained even in some developed countries that experiencing an industrial revolution, the effects of urbanization and other civilizational upheavals” [Kasimov, Mazur, 2004].

Among cited by them examples are as follows. In Germany, the principles of sustainable development began to be introduced in the management of the economy long before the report of the WCED. German term “Nachhaltigheit” (resistance) from XIX century entered into the practice of forestry in this country. Under sustainable forest that management understood, in which the removal of forest resources was necessarily accompanied by reforestation, fully compensating cutting volumes.

However, not only in the field of nature, but also in the sphere of ecology, especially American and British environmentalists used the term “sustainability” almost at the same meaning as modern in the concept of SD.

Yet purely etymological excursus on the concept of SD cannot give a complete picture of its essence. It is important, given the global nature of SD, to trace the formation of its understanding by the international community. Even in the report, “World Conservation Strategy” (1980), presented by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, stressed that in order for development to be sustainable, it is necessary to consider not only its economic aspects, but also social and environmental factors. Especially widely in the 80’s the development and environmental issues discussed in the writings of scholars of American Research Institute “Worldwatch”, in particular, its director, Lester R. Brown [Brown, 1972; Brown, 1981] and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) since the mid-70s widely used the term “development without destruction”, and later used the concept of “eco-development” as an environmentally acceptable development, i.e. impacting the environment at the least negative level.

The Declaration of the first UN Conference on the Environment (Stockholm, 1972) also associated economic and social development with environmental issues. In such an understanding, the important contribution was made by the scientific reports of the Rome club, especially the report “The Limits to Growth” (1972), which formulated the idea of civilization transition from exponential economic growth to a state of “global dynamic equilibrium”, from quantitative growth to the organic development and new world economic order.

In addition, although we started talking about the idea of forming of



125

SD tendencies not from Russia, one can hardly agree that the concept of sustainable development first emerged in the West (sometimes refer to the book of Lester Brown) [Brown, 1981: pp. 24]. The origins of the idea of SD are of fundamentally international character. You can specify the works of Russian (Soviet) scientists who in one form or another expressed ideas close to the ideas of sustainable development. Most often the name of the VI Vernadsky is mentioned, who used even the phrase “sustainable global community,” but the main thing, developed the idea of the noosphere, or sphere of mind, which is directly related to the concept of SD [Ursul, 1993].


126


Equally important, in our view, was the role of the founder of theoretical astronautics K.E. Tsiolkovsky, who, thinking about survival

(saving) of the human race, not only offered the idea of extra-terrestrial habitation spaces, but also devised a means of implementing this idea,

a space rocket. Although now a global world is becoming more integrated, but still limited earthly world of socio-natural interactions

that influence and even determine all the other processes on our planet. The most obvious limitation is not only territorial; impose a limit on

further extensive development, but also exhaustible natural resources, global environmental threat, etc. This and limitation of the temporal

nature, often impose a limit on the development of various processes in the world, including the existence of mankind. Eschatological themes

abound in the pseudo-scientific, even the scientific literature, and the media. And global warming or alleged another Little Ice Age are not

the only threat to the planet in the future. It is expected that the world is threatened by disasters, such as volcanic activity, as seismic

activity increased and not only to the volcanoes may represent a danger, which many on the planet, but also supervolcanoes (there are more than two dozen supervolcanoes in the world). And of particular

concern is Yellowstone supervolcano, located in the north of the United States, as well as asteroid-comet hazard that is gaining relevance. At these planetary restrictions and threats in the late XIX — early XX

centuries drew attention K.E. Tsiolkovsky, who offered to fix them for humankind through the invention and use of the rocket as a vehicle

for a wide space exploration. With the help of space exploration scientist proposed subsequent implementation of continuous progress

of civilization, and thus ensuring the possible immortality of the human race. And, apart from the idea of preservation of the biosphere, it was

one of the first versions of the concept of sustainable development, but in outer form, the implementation of

which is not excluded in the distant future.However, this more distant cosmic future may come, if we can solve

our global issues and to secure the globalization process, sending it to the SD Highway [Ursul, 2004]. Now the priority is the solving of the issues of the biosphere, its preservation. Noosphere ideas of VI Vernadsky and social (space) immortality of K.E. Tsiolkovsky did not include focusing of human efforts at the preservation of biosphere. One spoke of the transformation of the biosphere into the noosphere, another considered development on the planet dangerous and ineffective, suggesting the idea of conservation and the survival of mankind in the spaces of the universe. However, now we clearly understand that the natural basis of SD is only conservation of the biosphere, the return to nature’s “essence” as the foundation of survival and continued development of mankind. Authors, opposing the idea of SD, have a different point of view [Nazaretyan, 2004].

However, if the above ideas of VI Vernadsky and K.E. Tsiolkovsky was expressed mainly in the first half of XIX century, the second half of



127

this century was marked by the emergence of ideas related to the rational (“the right” by A.D. Armand) nature management, driven primarily by Soviet scientists (V.A. Anuchin, A.D. Armand,J.K. Efremov, S.G. Strumilin, T.S. Khachaturov, etc.). For example, A.D. Armand believed that the moral duty of every generation is to leave the next generation the natural resources in the best condition and in greater numbers than it has received from the previous [Armand, 1964].

Of particular importance is the direction in the field of nature management, which in the 80’s of XX century was developed in Moldova, and in the 90’s, after the collapse


128


of the USSR, in Russia: the formation of scientific basis of the adaptive strategy of intensification of agricultural production. The expected intensification of agricultural production should use to a greater extent the adaptive properties of man and natural factors (biogenic and abiogenic), replacing by them unplayable (especially chemical- technological) resources. In fact, there was, basing on agriculture, formulated a scientific basis for what in the future will be called “stable (or noosphere) nature management”, and was formulated methodological concept of an expanded understanding of the intensification as maximal involvement of qualitative factors and sources of activity while minimizing the quantitative parameters [Zhuchenko, Ursul, 1983].

One could continue to list other areas related to the environment and nature management, but only to these sources more systematic concept of SD cannot be reduced. If we look at the main components of the planned process of SD, we find that expressed in Marxist ideas of social justice can rightfully be attributed to one of the directions of the future concept of SD. These ideas (of course, without mentioning their authors) were included in the concept of SD, developing by the UN and especially by the former Secretary General Kofi Annan, and are considered perhaps the most important in the idea of SD, along with the issues of environmental safety.

In addition to the social aspect, it is important to note those works in the field of economics, which develop not extensive, namely intensive mode of production and of any economic activity, which is environment-friendly and economically fairer than the traditional market-economocentric model.

Here we should include socio-human developments, which is oriented to the study of trends that may in the future enter into the model of SD. In light of these studies, it is clear that, for example, in Russia there is a process of translational motion from the values of the totalitarian past through the market-democratic present to a sustainable future. Still all of these values are mixed into one “eclectic” formation, and it is important now to identify those universal global priorities that will support the process of transition to SD. It would seem that the preservation of mankind is a kind of conservative idea, but it requires a change in mankind itself, and the cardinal, in order to enable it to survive and exist indefinitely on the planet. This is the most fundamental transformation for the entire post-neolithic history of mankind, which are aimed at the preservation of mankind as well as the biosphere as a natural foundation of all life and intelligence in the world.

The presence of different directions to form anew shape of civilization development indicates that there are various contradictions in its present form (model). But from all the contradictions we do not accidentally allocate the contradiction between society and nature, which manifests, and more and more acute, as the contradiction



129

between the growing needs of the world community and the inability of the biosphere to provide these needs [The concept, 1996]. Anyway, such a contradiction has always arisen, but it is only the second time it manifested at the global level. First time hunter-gatherer economy of fragmented by tribes of mankind gave way to producing economy, and for the second time, in the second half of XX — beginning of XXI century, when there is also need to change the very type of development of already relatively unified world community, and again globally.

During the transition to the Neolithic revolution, it was basically a lack of natural

(food) resources that could not be mastered with the help of the Paleolithic methods


130


and extensive technology. Therefore, agricultural revolution was the formation of a new way of natural resources management in the food production (mostly of biological nature), that not previously existed in the natural form and able to meet the needs of the people that created the conditions for the population explosion.

The transition to SD, which in principle cannot be stretched for several thousand years as a transition to a productive economy, shall happen in a few decades (at most one or two centuries). This is due to the fact that to a lack of natural resources (primarily non-renewable) social and environmental crisis was added, the destruction of the biosphere as the natural foundations of life and civilization and any other life forms on the planet. Moreover, the degradation of the natural environment is more “weak link” in this crisis than the lack of natural resources, which in principle can be replaced by the creation of new high-tech and environment-friendly economic activities. This is the difference of the current global conflict in the “society — nature” from the Upper Paleolithic, which led to a change in the method of economic activity and wider to the interaction of the main components in said system.

Global issues (and their counterparts in the past), concentrating the negative consequences of the previous development of mankind, are the precursor and companion of dramatic turns in the history. Global contradictions arise and form when fundamental crises are brewing in the existence and evolution of homo sapiens, which leads to a change in method of socio-natural interactions and, thus, of being of the social stage of evolution. Historical examples in the past can reveal some analogues of the current global situation, where some, especially socio-natural, global development processes lead to the emergence of global conflicts and all sorts of complex human issues, and their solution generates new global processes [Ursul, 2013].

Humanity is not the first as well, but at least the second time in its history faced also with different, but still planetary-spatial and socio-natural contradictions and limitations of its ever-expanding business operations: the first time (in the Upper Paleolithic), and then in our time. However, we must see that it is the restrictions of a fundamentally different type of economic activity: in the first case — for hunting and gathering, and the second time — for the productive economy that can no longer be viewed as extensive, and to some extent the intensive activity in relation to the previous one. Geocentric restrictions for extensively growing productive economy suggest that global issues can be solved in the way of globalization as a new round of “planetary intensification”, which calls for a transition to an intensely-innovative and at the same time co-evolutionary method of economic process and socio-natural interactions on a global scale.

Thus, the historical examples we find in the past, have some analogy to the contemporary global situation where certain, primarily socio-natural, global development processes lead to the emergence



131

of global conflicts and all sorts of complex human issues, and their solution generates new global processes. Fundamental processes of formation of new ways of socio-natural interactions lead, albeit ambiguously, to the emergence of global conflicts, and their positive solution again gives rise to the development of new global phenomena, turning out at the same time the processes of global development. It is important to identify this evolutionary aspect of the global dynamics and, from process vision, to go to its evolutionary views [Ilyin, Ursul, 2009; Ilyin, Ursul, 2014].


132


It was under the influence of the era of production, when human activity began to think as an activity of people aimed at the change and transformation of the world [Ogurtsov, Yudin, 2000: p. 635]. Now it is necessary to make appropriate adjustments to the philosophical category of activities that should be understood not only in terms of transformation, but also from the perspective of adaptation, and the formation of adaptive capacity now and in the future is no less important than adapting actions [Zhuchenko, 2003]. We agree with the N.S. Kasimov and his co- authors that “consumption of natural goods shall not exceed the natural limitations due to the parameters of the environment of our planet” [Kasimov, Mazur, Tikunov, 2004: p. 29]. Now we increasingly use the concepts, that in one form or another express these natural constraints (to which it is necessary to adapt), in particular the concept of “carrying capacity of ecosystems”, “economic capacity of ecosystems”, “limit of the resistance of ecosystems” and others. According to KS Losev, each of these concepts shows the maximum allowable perturbation of the local or the global ecosystem (the biosphere) of human activities, beyond which it ceases to function as a regulator and stabilizer of environment, goes to unstable state and may eventually completely irreversibly degraded [Losev, 2001; Losev, 2003: p. 692].

Carrying capacity of ecosystems associated with environmental and natural resource types of security, since the first characterizes the degree of ensuring the protection of the biota, and the second — the degree of extraction of natural resources from the biosphere.

Stability of the biosphere and its ecosystems is the ability to maintain its operation and the opportunity to realize further evolutionary

processes, to recover from disturbances and negative impacts. This is achieved thanks to the great biological diversity (number of species on

the planet is more than 30 million). It is this diversity has formed the compensatory-restorative and regulatory mechanisms that guarantee in

a certain range the homeostasis of the system “biota — the planet”. Moreover, the stability of the planetary ecosystem provides by

redundancy of biogeochemical cycles links and interchangeability of its components. The higher the biodiversity, the more stable the

ecosystem, while one or two species community (biocenoses) are unstable. Priority in the concept of “carrying capacity of the ecosystem”

takes environmental, but not natural resource component, and it determines the natural limitations, although it is necessary to take

into account both components at the same time. Solution of referred socio-natural contradiction means pursuing economic and other human activities within the carrying capacity of ecosystems, and mankind as a

whole — within the boundaries of the same capacity of the biosphere. Actually, this is the transition to SD in a single “ecosystem scale”, when adapting and adaptive activities will harmoniously combine,

which should lead to co-development (co-evolution) of nature and society.



133

Transition to SD is global in nature and in the long term of future of civilization requires the necessity of global governance of the process of this transition. This means that the beginning globalization should get its new impetus and strategic orientation from a yet virtual model of SD, becoming no longer natural, but socio projected and controlled (first directed) process of evolutionary movement of a joint mankind. “Inscribing” the globalization in the strategy of SD requires that all components of this last strategy (and above all, political, economic, social and environmental components) shall “work” already in the direction of a new civilizational paradigm,


134


increasingly breaking away from the old model of development, i.e. becoming manageable process instead of the natural process.

It also means that all the main actors of the modern, and especially the future process of globalization, shall also work on the transition to SD. This particularly applies to transnational actors — international organizations, the business community, especially the TNCs and TNB, many of which have already adopted the declared commitment to SD, such as the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (more fully discussed in the last chapter of this work). However, most large-scale businesses assistance to globalization through SD began to develop thanks to the emergence and implementation of the UN Global Compact.

UN Global Compact is a voluntary international initiative to promote the principles of socially responsible business, a political platform and a practical framework for companies that are committed to the transition to sustainable development. Global Compact sets the task of developing

the principles of corporate social responsibility, ensuring its participation in the solution to the challenges of globalization processes. Now it is important to strengthen and expand the

participation of civil society, especially the business community, non-governmental and other organizations, local communities and local

authorities in the preparation and adoption of decisions on the transition to SD, to intensify the process of information exchange in the field of ecology and other fields of said transition. This is to some extent

is already achieved through the UN Global Compact, which has being implemented for more than ten years. Important role in this process is

given to the state, which should take control of the processes of transition to SD and put this transition as its main strategic goal,

utilizing the political mechanisms and creating for this legislative and regulatory

framework as part of the emerging global governance.Mankind has faced in recent decades not only with the natural

constraints, but with the global natural, especially biosphere, limitations. Therefore, the transition to SD due to integrity and strong correlation of components of the biosphere (as the foundation of life and control of the environment) and the formation of the unity of civilization through globalization should be a management process, in particular aspects limiting the natural continuation of market-economocentric model of non- sustainable development (UDM). And although transition to SD of course, cannot be reduced only to the limitations, however, as has been shown, they are now becoming a priority, and depending on the degree of awareness of these biosphere and other limits and boundaries, it will be possible in the future to judge the effectiveness of transition to SD at the global, regional, national and local levels.

The strategic goal of transition to sustainable development is to form an entirely new civilization model of development, which while



135

ensuring the survival and continued further forward movement of civilization, would not destroy the environment, would be in harmony (co-evolutionary) relationship with the biosphere. If as a result of universal coordinated action we preserve the biosphere, by the same the survival of civilization and its ongoing development will be possible, not only over the next centuries, but also indefinitely.

Inevitable transition of any country in the world to sustainable development stems from the need to address common global challenges of the world community. In this sense, the transition to sustainable development is the real way to solve the long growing global issues, each of which is fraught with real danger of anthropoecological planetary catastrophe.


136


New civilization model emerged as an attempt to find a common conceptual framework of the joint survival population of the planet, go out of the global (and especially environmental) crisis, prevent global catastrophe — omnicide (death of all living things). Elimination of a state of “Rio process” (also known as the transition to sustainable development), or lack of active participation in this process objectively postpones it even further to the periphery of global development, going to its steady process and the “state”, and will transform this country into the reservation of archaic model of non-sustainable development, raw materials or other “appendage” of the “golden billion”.

That is why we cannot agree with the opinion that, for example, Russia cannot rely on the concept of sustainable development [Zubakov, 1996: p. 14]. That is why is justified the formation of the main areas, as well as integrated concepts and state strategy of Russia’s transition to sustainable development. The answer to the question — whether Russia should move in the same direction as that of the world community, realizing “the Rio” — is already evident, despite the difficulties of implementing of the SD strategy.

According to official documents adopted, Russia should participate according to its capabilities and international commitments on global

issues related to the interaction of nature and society, contributing to the protection and restoration of the Earth’s ecosystem. After all, the

biosphere as a regulator of the environment is a unified system, and the transition to sustainable development can only be realized by the entire united mankind. Rather, it is the preservation of the planet’s biosphere,

its biodiversity and sustainability, preventing of anthropogenic climate change, the protection of the ozone layer from depletion, forest

protection and restoration, desertification, ensuring of safe disposal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, solving the issues of the

world’s oceans and interstate regional environmental issues, the development and improvement of the system of protected areas and a

significant expansion of their space on the territory of Russian Federation, etc. [Russia on the path, 1996: pp. 23-26].

Solution of global environmental issues, determining the specifics of the transition to sustainable development, its difference from all other ways of non-sustainable development in Russia should be associated with the deployment of political, socio- economic, geo-environmental, financial, tax, legal and other mechanisms amid the transition to a market economy. One of peculiarities of Russia’s transition to sustainable development is a coincidence in historical time scales of the transition to a market economy and democratic transition, which is typical even for the old (current) model of development. This means that economic activities should be focused not only on achievement of high economic efficiency, but also social justice and environmental safety (and security in other ways), which in its trinity should be a major system criterion of the development.

Russia plays and will play a crucial role in maintenance of the global



137

environmental balance.There is a quarter of world`s forests in Russian Federation,

untouched by the economic development that largely provides a global stabilization of the biosphere (along with tropical forest). Moreover, Russia ensures the safety of 20% of world reserves of liquid fresh water. There are other arguments in favour of the special role of our country in the socio-natural transition to SD, what will be discussed more in the last section of the fourth chapter.


138


Model of “sustainable future” is still quite not clearly defined, and as long as the international community adheres to the thesis of the diversity of models of sustainable development (but with common goals and principles), one of which can be realized in each country. However, in contrast to the current working model of development, which is also characterized by “a variety of countries,” it is necessary to create a sustainable future for the world community, each region and the state first of all on a conceptual and theoretical, virtual level. And only then it is necessary to implement a virtual future, creating an optimal trajectory from the model of non- sustainable development. And such trajectory for each country will have its own characteristics.

It is too early to talk about the theory of sustainable development, but scientific concepts already exist and they are described in a number of publications, the most important of which are listed in the bibliography at the end of the book and paging links. Concepts (or their spectrum) precede the creation of a theory that can only be interdisciplinary, comprehensive, covering all the major groups of modern science, as can be seen in the course of the subsequent presentation.

Vision and strategy for sustainable developmentAt the end of the last millennium, as mentioned, UNCED was held,

which took a historic decision to change the course of the entire world community. This unprecedented decision of heads of governments and leaders of countries in the UN and gathered at the UNCED, about the change of the course of civilizational dynamics was declared primarily due to rapidly deteriorating global environmental situation and forecast of possible global catastrophe in the XXI century, which can lead to death of all living things on the planet.

Environmental challenges that will be main in the XXI century, include: climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions, pollution and lack of fresh water, deforestation and desertification, loss of biodiversity, population growth (and its movement), waste management, air pollution, degradation of soils and ecosystems, chemical pollution, ozone depletion, urbanization, depletion of natural resources, violation of biogeochemical cycles, the spread of diseases (including new) etc. [GEO- 3, 2002] Almost each of these environmental issues can, if a natural development of civilization will continue, lead to the destruction of humanity and the biosphere. Such environmental issues as the greenhouse effects, acid rains, ozone depletion and pollution with super toxicants are of highest concern.

Two weeks before the start of the meeting of Rio + 20 in Brazil, UNEP, established under the UN Environmental Program, issued its fifth report on the state of the environment in the world “Global Environment Outlook” — GEO-5 [GEO-5, 2012]. This environmental organization regularly publishes such reports: four reports on the Global Environment



139

Outlook (GEO) have already been issued in 1997, 1999, 2002 and 2007. The report in 2012 noted that, despite hundreds of internationally agreed goals and objectives, the ecological situation on the planet continues to deteriorate (all previous reports also noted this trend) and is close to critical and even crisis-catastrophic.

This requires the abandonment of the old model (form) of civilizational development, what inexorably leads to global man-made disaster and the formation of first in theory and then in practice new in the perspective — strategies of human development, which should be efficiently managed on a planetary scale.


140


UNCED and other forums on SD demonstrated awareness of harmfulness of the traditional way of development, which was described

as a model of non-sustainable development, fraught with crises, catastrophes, homicide (death of all living things). The transition to the new model (strategy) development was a natural reaction of the world

community, striving for its survival, self-preservation and further development. Humanity is faced with increasingly sharpening

contradiction between their growing needs and the inability of the biosphere to provide them without their destruction. As a result socio-

economic development accelerated way to global eco- disaster, endangering not only the satisfaction of vital needs and interests of

future generations, but also the possibility of their existence. Therefore, as shown in the previous section, there was an idea to

solve this contradiction in the transition to such a civilizational development that does not destroy its natural basis, ensuring the

survival of mankind and the possibility of further ongoing, i.e. managed sustainable

development.Ideas of sustainable development meet objective requirements of

time and can have a decisive impact on the future of every country of the world community, to play an important role in determination of the state’s priorities, strategy of socio- economic development and the prospects for further reform of the country. A new strategy for the development of civilization has already determined the position of the international community — to join efforts for the sake of mankind’s survival and continuous development while preserving the biosphere.

The term “sustainable development” became widespread after the publication of a report prepared for the United Nations in 1987, especially created in 1983 by the World Commission on Environment and Development, chaired by Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland [Our Common Future, 1989]. In the Russian edition of this book English term “sustainable development” was translated as “sustainable development”, although in English-Russian dictionaries there are many other meanings — supported, long, continuous, supported, self-sustaining, protected development.

Even in the report “World Conservation Strategy” (March 1980), it was emphasized that in order to provide sustainable development, not only economic aspects, but also social and environmental factors should be taken into account. This international document, developed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), with the support of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and supported by the World Wildlife Fund, emphasized that “the management of use of the biosphere by the mankind, ecosystems and species within it should be in such way that they could benefit to the present generation and at the same time maintained its potential to meet the needs and aspirations of future generations “(Article XXIX). But mostly in the 80s issues of



141

“environment and development”, as already mentioned, have been discussed in works of scientists of the research institute in the United States “Worldwatch” and especially its director Lester R. Brown. Since the mid-1970s UNEP widely used a concept of “development without destruction” (development without destruction), and later used the concept of “eco-development” as an environmentally acceptable development, i.e. seeking to cause the least adverse impact on the environment.

We can also assume that in the declaration of the first UN Conference on the Environment (Stockholm, 1972) the link of economic and social development with


142


environmental issues was also determined. Reports of scientists of Club of Rome (more than 30 reports), which showed the need to change the course of mankind development, had a very strong influence on the formation of the new strategy of the international community.

UNCED widely used definition that was given in the book “Our Common Future” (p. 50): “Sustainable development is a development that meets needs of the present, but does not endanger the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Such definition extends the principle of social justice, not only for the present but also for future generations, which now live on the planet and have to leave acceptable environmental conditions and available natural resources. But it became clear that the principle of social justice should find not only its temporal continuation, but also should be spread to some extent on the nature (primarily — biota), which also “pretends” to meet the needs of its evolution.

Therefore, the above-mentioned definition has been criticized for its nebulosity and clear anthropocentricity, because the definition of SD should fully take into account issues of conservation of the natural environment. That is why it is important to eliminate from available definitions even overtones to the degradation of both mankind and the biosphere. It was done to some extent in the “Concept of the transition of the Russian Federation to Sustainable Development”, where the sustainable development means “stable social and economic development, not destroying its natural basis” [The concept, 1996]. Further, it is specified: “Improvement of the quality of life must be achieved within limits of the economic capacity of the biosphere, the excess of which leads to the destruction of the natural biotic mechanism of regulation of the environment and its global changes”.

The above-mentioned “Concept of the transition of the Russian Federation to Sustainable Development”, was presented by the Russian Government and approved by the Presidential Decree No. 440 of 1 April 1996. The concept was adopted on the recommendation of the UNCED, in documents of which it was proposed to the government of each country to adopt its national strategy for sustainable development. The concept has become an important step in this direction and in the future it was supposed to finalize works on the project of National Strategy for Sustainable development of the Russian Federation, scientific foundations of which were developed later [Scientific Basis, 2002; Strategy, 2002; Ursul, 1998].

Only after UNCED it became clear that all the achievements of civilization without solution of environmental issues are endangered to be destroyed. They may disappear because all mankind will be plunged into the whirlpool of planetary ecological disaster, because the wealth of nature, self-healing capabilities of the biosphere will be completely exhausted. Also it is obviously necessary to change fundamentally the model of mankind development and even the way of life of every



143

person, to perform the most crucial civilizational transformations in the history, which would ensure the survival of mankind and its future continued existence.

However, the whole world is on the threshold of fundamental third (after agricultural and industrial) civilization revolution. The strategy of sustainable development cannot be created on the basis of traditional universal ideas and values, patterns of thinking. It requires the development of new scientific, political and philosophical approaches that are appropriate not only to modern realities, but also offered prospects of development in the III millennium.


144


The concept of “sustainable development” as a global socio-natural process, in our opinion, may be determined by only two of its main features (characteristics): anthropocentric and biospherocentric. Anthropocentric characteristics in the broad sense refer to the survival of mankind (the country) and the ability (opportunity) to further ongoing (sustainable) long continuous development, so that our descendants would not have less opportunities in comparison with the current generation to meet their needs for natural resources and environmental conditions of the Earth and space (the principle of equality of opportunities of generations to meet their needs and, consequently, the right to life).

Biospherocentric and environmental feature of the definition is associated with the preservation of the biosphere as a natural basis of all life on the Earth, its stability and the natural evolution in order to avoid development of mankind in ecophobic form. In the above-mentioned book, “Our Common Future” (p. 68) it is noted that “sustainable development strategy is aimed at achievement of the harmony between people and between society and nature,” which can be described as the principle of co-evolution of nature and society, man and society.

That is why quite abstract term of “sustainable development” can be defined as a form of socio-natural development, which ensures the survival and continued progress of society and does not destroy the environment, especially the biosphere (further we go back to other definitions of SD, including general)

Gradual transition to sustainable development of the world community should be carried out, taking into account principles, set out in the Declaration and other documents of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, 1992), as well as materials of the special session of the General Assembly of the United Nations (New York, 1997). However, each country, taking its national strategy for sustainable development, transforms them in accordance with specific conditions.

On the basis on the general approach, we mention following basic principles of

sustainable development:– everyone has the right to a healthy and productive life in harmony with

nature, to live in a healthy environment for him;– socio-economic development should be aimed at improvement of

the quality of life within acceptable limits of economic (carrying) capacity of ecosystems;

– the development should be carried out without harming the environment and should ensure the ability to meet basic needs of both present and future generations;

– the preservation of the environment should be an integral part of sustainable development, economic development, social justice



145

and environmental safety, which together define basic criteria of development, must be aggregated.

– the survival of mankind and sustainable socio-economic development should be based on laws of biotic regulation while preserving biodiversity in the biosphere;

– rational use of natural resources should be based on sustainable use of renewable and economical use of non-renewable resources, recycling and safe disposal of wastes;

– environment-friendly economic management should be based on strengthening of interrelation of economics and ecology, the formation of a unified (conjugated) ecologized economic system of development;


146


– implementation of appropriate demographic policy should be directed at stabilization of the population size and optimization of its activities in accordance with fundamental laws of nature;

– necessity of wide use of the principle of advanced adoption of efficient measures to prevent the deterioration of the environment, the prevention of environmental and man-made disasters;

– an important condition for the transition of society towards sustainable development is the eradication of poverty and the prevention of large differences in the level of people’s lives;

– use of variety of forms of ownership and the mechanism of market relations

should be focused on the harmonization of social relations, ensuring public safety;

– in the future as ideas of sustainable development are being implemented, the importance of the rationalization of the size and structure of the personal consumption of the population should be increased;

– the preservation of small nations and ethnic groups, their cultures, traditions and environment should be a priority of the state policy at all stages of the transition to sustainable development;

– the development of international cooperation and global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the integrity of Earth’s ecosystems must be accompanied by the adoption by states of the relevant international agreements and other legal acts;

– free access to environmental information, the creation of an appropriate database, using for this purpose global and national communications and other means of information are necessary;

– during the development of the legal framework, environmental consequences of proposed actions should be taken into account, act on the basis of the increase of the responsibility for environmental offenses, provide compensation to victims of environmental pollution;

– greening of consciousness and outlook of the person, the reorientation of education and training on principles of sustainable development should contribute to prioritization of intellectual and spiritual values in relation to material and real;

– sovereign rights of each state to develop its own natural resources shall be implemented without prejudice to ecosystems beyond national borders; in the international law recognition of the principle of differentiated responsibilities of states for violation of global ecosystems is important;

– business should be carried out with abandonment of projects that could cause irreparable damage to the environment or environmental consequences of which are not enough studied.As you can see, the basic idea of sustainable human development is

not to exceed limiting capabilities of the biosphere. There is an obvious global and socio-natural essence of modern concepts of the model of



147

sustainable development (including a minimum of environmental, economic and social imperatives) in mentioned principles. Focusing on planetary and socio-natural approach to development will require serious philosophical transformations. Survival and continuity of social development on a global basis should be achieved without the quantitative growth of many traditional parameters and, above all, the extensive growth of production.


148


The idea of SD continues ideological transformation of globalization as systemic planetary world view, on the one hand, significantly expanding the space-time of social and socio-natural interactions to the planetary biosphere volume. But, on the other hand, this extension encounters planetary (biospheric) restrictions, which impose an objective limit on further expansion of social and socio-natural processes and involves their “compression” and the acquisition of integrity within boundaries of the biosphere (except for the possibility of further expansion of space, what is involved with great difficulties). And quite often in the literature spatial, temporal, and other restrictions imposed by the natural factors are rarely or not even mentioned.

Meanwhile, the emerging global, and even more so — a sustainable world regains its integrity not only under the impact of human activity, but also natural global restrictions and features. The global world is holistic, but limited by earthly world of socio-naturalinteractionsthatinfluenceandevendetermineallotherprocessesonour planet. The most obvious limitation — not only territorial restrictions, imposing the limit on further extensive development, but also exhaustibility of natural resources, global environmental threat etc. They are limitations of the temporal nature related to spatial limits, putting time final to development of various processes in the world, including the existence of mankind.

Implementing the global goals and principles of sustainable development, so-called “priorities of SD” may be released in a given period in each country,

characteristics showing the importance, the primacy of actions, defining the procedure, such as the sequence of their execution time. We consider this kind of priorities in the work, focusing on strategic and policy priorities. Thus, in Russia in the next decade from the standpoint of national security following priorities of sustainable development were identified:

– improvement of the quality of life of Russian citizens by guaranteeing personal safety, as well as high standards of life support;

– economic growth, which is primarily achieved through the development of

the national innovation system and the investment in human capital;– science, technology, education, health and culture, which are

developed bystrengthening the role of the state and to improve public-private partnership;

– ecology of living systems and environmental management, the maintenance of which is achieved through a balanced consumption, development of advanced technologies and appropriate reproduction of the natural resource potential of the country;

– strategic stability and equitable strategic partnership, which are



149

fixed on the basis of Russia’s active participation in the development of a multipolar model of the world [The National Security Strategy, 2009].As you can see, these priorities of SD significantly enhance vision

of SD in its triune complex, when only ecological, economic and social characteristics are unified. However, deep and simple global essence of the transition to sustainable development is in the reduction of anthropogenic pressure on the biosphere, at which the civilization “fit” into it organically and could progressively develop without degradation indefinitely. In short, in this perspective, sustainable development is the simultaneous preservation of the biosphere and mankind, their co-evolution. Further sustainable development will be seen as an impending form of co-


150


evolutionary interaction between nature and society (as well as the individual andsociety), providing their mutual co-existence and co-development.

It is appropriate to note that in recently adopted Russian official document “Principles of State Policy in the field of environmental development of the Russian Federation for the period till 2030” in the introduction it is stated that “there are following principles in accordance with the above principles of SD”:

a) observance of the human right to a healthy environment;b) the provision of favourable conditions of human life;c) a science-based combination of environmental, economic and

social interests of the individual, society and state in order to ensure sustainable development and a favourable environment and ecological safety;

d) the protection, reproduction and rational use of natural resources as necessary conditions to ensure a favourable environment and ecological safety;

e)the priority of preserving the natural ecological systems, natural landscapes and natural systems;

f) the responsibility of federal bodies of state power, bodies of state power of subjects of the Russian Federation and local authorities to ensure an enabling environment and ecological safety on their respective territories;

g)The presumption of environmental hazard of planned economic and other activities;

h) a mandatory assessment of planned impact on the environment when making decisions on the implementation of economic and other activities;

i) the prohibition of the economic and other activities, consequences of which are unpredictable for the environment, as well as projects that may lead to the degradation of natural ecological systems, change and (or) destruction of the gene pool of plants, animals and other organisms, depletion of natural resources and other negative changes in the environment;

j) to ensure that economic and other activities comply with standards and requirements in the field of environmental protection and environmental safety;

k) the right of every person to obtain reliable information about the state of the environment;

l) the participation of citizens in decision-making concerning their rights to a healthy environment;

m) responsibility for the violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the protection of the environment;

n) full compensation for harm caused to the environment;o) participation of citizens, public and other non-profit organizations

in solution of issues in the field of environmental protection and environmental safety, taking into account their opinions on making



151

decisions on planning and implementation of economic and other activities which may have a negative impact on the environment;

p) the development of international cooperation in solution of global environmental issues and the application of international standards in the field of environmental protection and environmental safety [URL 1].Transition to sustainable development implies the preservation and

gradual restoration of natural ecosystems to a level that ensures the stability of the environment in which there is a real possibility of the existence of future generations of people, meeting their vital needs and interests indefinitely.


152


Formation of a new development strategy means primarily a gradual connection into a single self-organizing system of economic,

environmental and social spheres. For example, from the eco-geographical point of view, geo-ecological, economic and geographic,

social, geographic, political and geographical aspects of this type of development should be combined into a “stable system”. Sustainable development, as a minimum, must be characterized by (at least) the

economic efficiency, biospherocompatibility and social justice at general decrease of anthropogenic pressure on the biosphere.

Combination of economic, social and environmental characteristics into a single strategic system of sustainable development means a new integrity that forms a fundamentally new model (form) of civilizational

development. Formation of economic activity, not destroying the biosphere, but preserving it,

i.e. permissible for ecology, not going beyond carrying capacity of ecosystems — one of central tasks of formation of a future sustainable global peace. From this point of view biosphere should be considered not only as a storage room and a supplier of resources, but as the foundation and conditions of life, the preservation of which should be a mandatory condition for functioning of the socio-economic system and its individual elements.

There is still no sufficiently scientifically sound solution to create a fully biospherocompatible economy. The increased power of the economic activity of the XX century, focused on the rapid economic growth, has become a destructive force for the man and the biosphere. But biospherocompatible economy still looks like another utopia and there are no clear ways and mechanisms of its formation, which would suit the modern civilization. The resolution of this ecological and economic contradictions is seen in the creation of a new economic model, the “equilibrium” or “sustainable” economy based on principles of full and complete intensification and greening [Ursul, 1998; Barlybaev, 2002; Bobylev, Girusov, 2004; Towards the “green” economy, 2011; Report on the implementation, 2012].

Formation of economic activity, not destroying the biosphere, but preserving it,

i.e. permissible for ecology, not going beyond carrying capacity of ecosystems — one of central tasks of formation of a future sustainable global peace. From this point of view biosphere should be considered not only as a storage room and a supplier of resources, but as the foundation and conditions of life, the preservation of which should be a mandatory condition for functioning of the socio-economic system and its individual elements.

Economic systems in the process of its existence should use more and more innovative processes, increase its complexity and organization, otherwise, eventually, they come to the regressive branch of evolution, anyway ending their existence. Therefore, for continuous, or better to say, prolonged existence of any evolving economic system



153

it is necessary to generate new and increase the degree of its organization. Systems that are prone to excessive accumulation of the past, i.e. inertial-conservative, even at certain ensuring of its safety (security), sooner or later degrade and lose their identity (quality), finishing its history. Only those evolving systems receive “skip” into the future, for which the evolutionary process is presented as a continuous innovation process, which has mainly a progressive orientation.

However, nowadays there is a further shift from predominantly extensive development of production and other activities to predominantly intensive and innovative. This means that the share of extensive factors will be significantly


154


reduced, and the intense innovation will be increased, more and more qualitative factors will be introduced and already introduced will be improved, forming a more rationally organized system for improvement of the efficiency of social activities.

As greater saving of costs and resources will be achieved and increased and the overall efficiency of activities, “specific load” of qualitative and innovative factors will increase and intensification by itself will achieve the most comprehensive and complete form. However, what we call the intensification of development and innovation, will be associated with a number of extensive (in some sense) factors, such as the use of scientific information, i.e. ideal factor that will continue to grow, while material factors and components will be involved in activities in their minimized and optimized form. To some extent, this minimization coincides with ecologization, however, in the early stages intensification leads to significant degradation of the environment, the growth of “natural” entropy.

Thus it means that the pursuit of innovative development, and eventually full and complete intensification, i.e. full use of qualitative factors in the increasing volume and connection of them into a single system of accelerated growth of efficiency does not exclude extensive processes of evolution. The increasing focus on the use of science achievements in the production is a high technology form of intensification that does not involve “economy of thoughts” and hiding of new scientific knowledge. Another example: the transition of agriculture on the path of the adaptive multi- system of intensification leads to the most efficient use of solar radiation, and generally these resources of cosmic energy are inexhaustible that allows to create sustainable agriculture.

The deep essence of the transition to sustainable development in all spheres of activity is in the survival of mankind and the simultaneous preservation of the biosphere, or, as mentioned above, is even shorter — in the preservation of the biosphere and civilization, their mutual evolution (co-evolution). However, for survival of the latter as a unique species, it is necessary to transform radically all areas of their activity in the direction of significant reduction of the pressure on the biosphere by times (i.e. more than 10 times).

This is a very difficult task and its implementation largely contradicts everything that is peculiar to unsustainable (or economocentric) development, which can be dated to the beginning of mankind’s transition to a producing economy, environmental failure of which was most clearly demonstrated in the XX century.

XXI century can be a turning point in the history of civilization, because during it the main contradiction should be resolved — will mankind exist or not. Transition to sustainable development must remove this contradiction in favour of the survival continuous development of civilization, but in significantly altered — biospherocompatible form, not destroying the natural environment of



155

their habitat, which is the natural cradle of all life, including reasonable.

Environmental and other socio-natural, and through them also social global issues, other global phenomena, closely associated with cosmic processes, have arisen due to the spatial sphericity and thus the closure of our planet as a celestial body, the global boundedness of the globe and its biosphere, in which anthropogenic activity is deployed. Globalization and a number of other socio-natural global processes have already been “programmed” by natural features of the globe. Globalization and the aggravation of global issues were caused by natural characteristics and features of


156


the biosphere and even cosmic properties of the planet as a celestial body. This is the space-natural specificity of all global processes, including globalization and global issues, including environmental ones.

This feature of globalization as a special understanding of the world is not always understood, and very often attention is focused on trends of expansion and binding fragments of society, although appearing at the same time restrictions and limits are inherently associated with this space-temporal extension. Spatial aspect of globalization began to be realized in the first place. At the time, the Club of Rome has been put forward a kind of “Spatial” maxim-motto: “think globally, act locally”, which is considered by some scientists as a fundamental principle in modern globalistics. Meanwhile, the “principle of globalistics” already in its brief formulation contains an obvious contradiction and, in fact, “spatial gap” between thought and action.

Much earlier V. I. Vernadsky rightly stated that a person as a “citizen of the world” “should think and act in a new aspect, not only in terms of individual, family or genus, states or their unions, but also in the planetary aspect. He, like all living things, can think and act in the planetary aspect only in the area of life — in the biosphere, in particular the Earth’s environment, with which it is inseparably linked naturally and leave from which he cannot. Its existence is its function. He carries it with him everywhere” [Vernadsky, 1991: p. 28]. As you can see, this scientist, being aware of the role of mankind as a global factor of development, does not divide the thinking and action on local and planetary spatial components.

However, apart from the spatial, temporal, and aspect of a global mindset is very important. It is unlikely that the concept of globalization can be limited only by the spatial dimension, which in fact took place “by default”. Such “spatial” view of the world of globalization breaks the real relationship of space and time (which Vernadsky always stood against) in thought and action. It is important to identify characteristics of the global outlook and, moreover, in a temporal perspective, it can be seen that the time range, horizon of view of global processes (into the past as well as into the future) will expand significantly, taking into account also the non-linear relationship and systemic interrelation of periods (modes) of the time. Expansion of the horizon of vision is concerned with past and future and obviously present, but at the same time it is particularly worth to focus on the process of futurization that generates the appearance of leading mechanisms in all spheres of activity.

Globalization (and futurization) of time is not shown obviously in the spatial dimensions, but following them, because of the essential relationship of space and time, the latter is filled with new features that are not essential for the “pre-global” outlook. A global approach allows seeing the future of mankind not as simple and the continued expansion of Oecumene and brings fundamentally new nonlinear corrections to prospects of evolutionary processes involving man.



157

All anti-crisis and “cyclical” problematics should be included into the subject area of created theory of SD. Indeed, globalization of human activity involves due to abovementioned strengthening crisis-cyclic phenomena in all areas of activity of people because of the emergence of restrictions and limits. If we take a cyclic phenomenon, which began to be studied primarily in the economy, question was not raised on the possibility of their elimination or reduction (at least of downward phases). The question was mainly on the recognition of their objectivity and understanding of their development. Meanwhile, in the face of strengthening of


158


action of global restrictions negative consequences of crisis-cyclic phenomena in all spheres of human activity will grow. Therefore, it is important to relate study of these processes to the issue of transition to SD. After all, if it does not happen, then the transition to SD will not happen, and again it will be necessary to admit that hopes of not only environmentalists, but also other supporters of this transition will not be realized again. Therefore, it is clear that the future theory of SD should be much wider than it is now represented by most of scientists involved in this problematics, which is still hardly identified with environmental issues.

Awareness of the inadequacy of the current model of non-sustainable development to the future of civilization, its survival and preservation led to the formulation of the most common now concept of sustainable development (SD), where sustainable development is conceived as a development that meets the needs of the present, but does not endanger the ability of future generations to meet their own needs [Our Common Future, 1989: p. 50].

As you can see, the concept of sustainable development was formulated almost in the same terms that are used in safety sciences. The present definition includes the concept of threat and the desire to ensure the protection of vital needs (and interests as perceived needs) of future generations of earthlings. However, the issue of security of life of present and future generations, given in this definition was transformed into ecological vision of SD, all attention was focused on environmental issues and mainly on environmental safety. Ecological interpretation of sustainable development was dominant for nearly two decades in the understanding of the new civilizational model of development.

And it is clear why there is such a point of view: indeed primarily the idea of SD appeared in connection with the need to solve environmental issues what is easy to retrace by “ecological” UN fora, from Stockholm (1972) to the Rio de Janeiro (1992) and Johannesburg (2002) and again in the + 20 in Rio in 2012.

With the adoption of the SD strategy “pointless” — a natural human existence was actually completed. At the summit “Rio + 20”, it was decided to develop goals of SD, which will be replaced by “Millennium Development Goals” [Dubinkina, 2013]. After 2015 new indicators of SD that complement GDP will be developed. There was also opened a “green light” for the green economy, which will be actively used in order to achieve sustainable development.

It is important to note that in the course of training and the “Rio +20”, universities in many countries signed the Declaration on the

promotion of methods and directions of education necessary for the transition to SD, on the promotion of scientific research in educational institutions on issues of this type of development [URL 2]. There were

leaders of all seven universities in Russia and one faculty (of global processes) of MSU named after M.V. Lomonosov among signatories of



159

the Declaration. And, of course, such approaches deserve conveyance in other educational institutions of our country.

At the “Rio + 20” business behaved much more actively than at previous UN fora on sustainable development, meanwhile the largest promotion of transition to SD of businesses began to develop due to the appearance of the aforementioned United Nations Global Compact, which began to strengthen significantly economic and social actors on the way to global sustainability.

However, the negative impression of the “Rio + 20” outweighs its advantages, and

above the point at issue is that there were no new “breakthrough” ideas at the summit


160


and only a few major decisions were taken, which would indicate a real willingness and active movement of the world community on the way to sustainability. In fact, leaders of countries of the UN do not want to make decisive steps towards a sustainable future and to break with the consumer society. In contrast to UNCED and WSSD, only one final document, agreed with great difficulty, was adopted [Outcome of the UN Conference]. It was impossible to resolve the issue of financial support for developing countries, declaring such need to cope with costs at the transition to SD, there was no decision on protection of biodiversity in international waters, subsidies for fossil fuels, that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, were not eliminated.

At the summit, the role of science in the transition to SD was not emphasized and specifically discussed, although it is clear that generally without it, it is impossible to perform transition to SD especially on a global scale. But as mentioned, in the end of 2013 Scientific Advisory Council of the UN Secretary General was created. Twenty- six eminent scientists from natural, social, humanitarian and technical sciences have been approved by the Scientific Advisory Board, what was announced by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. The new Council will advise on science, technology and innovation for sustainable development.

It is obvious that present generations (especially of the “golden billion”)are in no hurry to provide equal opportunities to meet needs of the future (as, indeed, now living mainly in developing countries) generations, dooming them, due to their short- sighted decisions on much worse living conditions, and possibly on the degradation of the entire human civilization. Many experts, especially environmentalists, believe that today’s politicians lack the political will to explain to fellow citizens the need of abandonment of the growing consumption (and the consumer society) for the sake of future generations. It is assumed that, as usual, mankind can recover from the habit of living beyond means only due to a serious crisis, when inevitably they will accept restrictions, unless, of course, it would not be late.

However, this does not take into account the fact that the crisis went global, and threats to human existence gained worldwide character and scale (for example, the environmental problem visibly demonstrates it) that it is no longer possible to get out of the crisis without the use of advanced mechanisms and factors (one of main is transition to SD). After all, if environmental or other planetary catastrophe will happen, it is clear that no one will be able to eliminate its consequences. The larger the disaster, the more difficult struggle with its negative consequences for mankind and, therefore, means to eliminate global crises and disasters, to solve global challenges generally should be anticipatory rather than “lagging” — as it is now practiced by the elimination of consequences of local emergencies and disasters.

From the elimination of consequences of disasters to their prevention is a fundamentally new strategy to combat any negative processes,



161

and for the global processes this is the main and perhaps the only temporal strategy. It is possible that a number of cyclical processes in the economy and other spheres of human activity can be “smoothed” by using preventive measures to prevent negative sides of the cycle if it has anthropogenic, not natural basis.

And although it was clear as a result of the global community of the SD strategy, that it is necessary to work together to solve socio-economic, environmental and other issues, however, there is no environmental focus in the SD strategy — it is the most common interpretation of a new civilizational vision and strategy. Up to the


162


present day many authors still write scientific papers and tutorials in the same aspect. For example, the “classical university textbook” by N.N. Marfenin — “Sustainable Development of Mankind” — states: “Sustainable development of mankind is a fundamental setting for the development of the world community in a direction determined by the conservation of ecological sustainability of the biosphere and favourable stable environment for the entire population of our planet” [Marfenin, 2007: p. 596].

Environmental imperatives are really leading in the creation and understanding of the concept of SD (especially if this interpretation comes from environmentalists). However, during theoretical and methodological researches it became clear that the SD is not just the addition of environmental factors and measurement to the traditional socio-economic development. In fact this refers to fundamentally new transformations in all areas of human development, i.e. this “innovation-activity revolution” on a global scale. Moreover, being included in the systemic transition to SD, environmental activities of mankind takes fundamentally new features that are gained due to the integrity and the interconnection of the entire system of global activity on transition to SD.

System-synergistic vision of movement for global sustainability

We can assume that the most significant advance in the field of SD still has conceptual and theoretical nature and affects mainly the formation of a new outlook, adequate to requirements of the XXI century. And although the UN actually declared 2005 the beginning of “Decade of transition to SD”, however, in most countries of the world community there is no necessary for this transition political will and efficient measures of authorities in response to one of the main challenges of the Third Millennium.

This is largely due to a lack of understanding of the strategic importance of transition to SD, fundamental differences between the current and future forms of civilization process. The idea of transition to SD (as noted and will be continued to be emphasized repeatedly) was the result of understanding of ecological issues, or more accurately, and at the same time widely- environmental issues. And although there were found many contradictions in the development of mankind, however, only in the interaction of society and nature such contradiction appeared, which we consider as the basic contradiction of the interaction of modern civilization with nature.

The fate of the civilization and surrounding terrestrial and cosmic nature depends on the resolution of this contradiction in the socio-natural system of “mankind- biosphere”. Main socio-natural contradiction appears (being more and more acute) in the fact that the biosphere cannot provide growing needs of the world community in such a way to avoid anthropoecological disaster. It is obvious that this



163

contradiction is fundamentally existential and it is important to resolve it in the future, as long as our civilization has not yet died.

The basic idea of SD is the survival and preservation of the human race, the possibility of its further long existence, because in the model of non-sustainable development (UD), as mentioned in the next decade or centuries there is a threat of anthropological disaster. The way to protect mankind from the impending global disaster, as noted, may not be similar to those actions, which are carried out in case


164


of local disasters caused by natural and man-made reasons. From the elimination of consequences of disasters it is necessary to move to prevention and pre-emptive actions, what actually the concept of SD proposes to the international community. One of main components of innovative SD-transformations must be proactive decisions and preventive actions, which would allow postponing the disaster till more distant time, or eliminating threats and dangers. When these threats and dangers had a local or regional nature, it was possible to eliminate negative consequences even with huge economic losses, but in the case of a global scale is necessary to prevent them, what requires the formation of a completely new culture — a culture of prevention.

Now it is clear that it is important to move a global disaster at a later time in order to create in proper time means of its prevention and in the future prevent it by anticipatory actions. Thus, the SD is presented as a further relatively much safer development of mankind, when there would not be threatening anthropogenic or other man-made disasters that could destroy it as now the only known representative of the social stage of evolution.

For the first time the idea of such a safe type of development, as mentioned, was stated and substantiated by K.E. Tsiolkovsky, but in a cosmic form. He drew attention to the fact that our planet is threatened by various kinds of disasters, but mostly of natural character — increased volcanic activity, falling of heavenly bodies to the ground etc. Moreover, he believed that gravity prevents progress and therefore outside of the planet, in the “free space”, mankind will be able not only to avoid threats of natural character, but, having settled in the space, to find their social immortality.

Despite the start of the development of cosmonautics, a similar version of sustainable development was utopian: in fact, in order to

explore widely extraterrestrial space, it is important to solve our earth and, above all, global issues, i.e. to solve mentioned socio-natural

contradiction, but in its planetary dimension. The logic of the space version of the survival of mankind was based on the axiom of further

conquest of nature and the extensive development of economic activities. “Collision” with earthly restrictions led to another —

planetary — variant of mankind’s survival in the short historical perspective. And that did not led to the abandonment, but significantly

restricted the extensive development of nature and the transition to an intensive way, in which qualitative and innovative factors

(sources) of development substantially dominate over extensively-quantitative.

Resolution of the main socio-natural and at the same time existential contradictions and coming out to the main road of sustainable development should ensure safe development of civilization for some historical period. During several centuries of the third millennium scientific, technical and technological progress will prepare material-technical, socio-biological bases for broad development of extra-



165

terrestrial spaces, which was K.E. Tsiolkovsky’s dream, and thus the earth trajectory of sustainable development will rush to the spaces of the universe.

Principal contradiction between society and nature will be resolved this way if we manage to go over to sustainable development on our planet at the beginning of this millennium. If it happens in earthly and cosmic directions socio-natural development will come to the main road of evolution in the universe, which received the name of universal evolution. Moreover, in cosmic perspective universal evolution will exist in its social-natural form [Ursul, 2005; Ilyin, Ursul, Ursul, 2012].


166


General patterns and trends of global-universal evolution are evidence of this, in particular the continuation of an information vector of this evolution, when prior levels of development of matter in either form are included in higher ones, which are in co-evolutionary relation with their environment. From the standpoint of universal evolutionism sustainable development is a special socio-natural version of co-evolution of nature and society on the main road of progressive development in the universe.

Transition to sustainable development primarily serves as a transition from spontaneous to manageable world order. Moreover, the process of control is primarily associated with the introduction of restrictions on spontaneous anthropogenic process which would keep the process within the carrying capacity of ecosystems. Primarily we speak about reduction of total human impact on nature, first on the biosphere, and then on cosmic objects and spaces. Technogenic development of civilization has shown that, perhaps, we should adopt the principle of “wu wei” proposed in ancient China as a strategy for development of the most ecologically safe world, this principle proclaimed the ideal of minimum impact on the environment, still making human activity possible.

Reduction of anthropogenic impact on the biosphere and its ecosystems is the starting point of transformations that need to be taken by the mankind to go over to sustainable development. These transformations will affect not only the sphere of interaction between nature and society, but that society itself. Once N. Wiener noted that “we have so radically altered our environment that now in order to exist in this environment, we have to change ourselves” [Wiener, 1968: p. 58].

Reduction of anthropogenic impact on the biosphere and contributory intra-social changes should have the survival of civilization through preservation of biosphere as its objective. In fact, the issue of preservation of the mankind and the biosphere acts as an issue of their common security, and it is important to emphasize this fact, as in such cases it is quite often said about their joint development, i.e. socio-natural co-evolution. And it would go without saying that in case of co-evolution the main components of global socio-natural system should be retained, but the priority is given to joint development (co-evolution).

Meanwhile, co-evolution of society and nature as their co-development will be possible only if society, developing progressively, takes natural resources and exists in suitable, rather stable environmental conditions. This will be evident if we consider the simplest scheme of synergetic interaction between two systems, such as society and nature. If we represent society and nature as two material systems that interact with each other, then, as follows from the principles of synergy, an increase of entropy in nature would lead to its decline in society, and therefore in this respect — to progressive



167

development of the latter (although, of course, progress of society cannot be reduced only to the growth of information, negentropy). Apparently, possible generalization of the concept of entropy, which is treated in a broader sense and means any manifestation of degradation, destruction, chaos, disorder (such a broad understanding is being developed in scientific literature) could be the basis for identifying one of the patterns of interaction between society and nature, which is of scientific nature.

The essence of this law lies in the fact that in interacting systems (in particular,

society and nature) the process of disproportionation of entropy takes place: any


168


decrease of entropy in one system is associated with its increase in the environment. From this perspective, environmental issue appears as a special case of entropy increase in the environment due to the growth of negentropic products and systems in the society. The interconnection between these locally conjugate processes was named “disproportionation of entropy” [Galimov, 2001]. That is why a synergetic approach turns into a socio-natural approach and an elementary unit of evolution (self-organization), and in the course of globalization it exists not only in the society, but also in a broader system “society — nature”.

From synergetic point of view, social production as the basis for the modern type of social progress is carried out by the admission of negative entropy (information generation) from the external environment, and mainly the Sun and some natural mineral resources, processes and conditions of the Earth may be such highly negentropic sources for us. And the second law of thermodynamics — the law of increasing entropy — is the fundamental law, which is crucial for the issue of energy sources and resources, necessary for the continuation and development of industrial and other social activities.

According to synergetic ideas, it is necessary not only to borrow negentropy from high-quality sources of energy, such as the sun for us, but also to dissipate waste matter and energy of lower quality in the environment for progressive development of the society (as planetary and space civilization process). And the more developed space civilization in power consumption is, the stronger the flow of used low-quality energy escaping into the environment, which even was the reason for highlighting it as one of extra-terrestrial intelligence search criteria [Rebane, 1982].

Currently, in the face of global environmental crisis deterioration, the task is to reduce environmental degradation significantly due to more efficient use of resources and effective interventions to protect the environment. A significant step in this direction can be made, if the civilization not only saves natural resources, uses “fossil” energy more efficiently, but also replaces this energy with renewable power and virtually inexhaustible solar energy. In this case degradation processes in the biosphere will be dramatically reduced, randomization of the environment and “fossil economy” may turn into “sustainable economy” [Scheer, 2002].

And this is the result of not only synergy development, but also the general theory of interaction between nature and society, when the latter exists and progresses at the expense of nature. If we understand progress as complexity in the processes of self-organization and as improved order of systems, it is clear that the processes taking place in society and nature are completely different. If society is developing progressively, there is regressive process in nature, since its resources are withdrawn and the process of simplification and disruption of natural ecosystems takes place. Therefore, the co-evolution of society



169

and nature as their joint co-development suggests that the progress of society is achieved by increasing degradation (regression) of nature.

There cannot be joint development of nature and society, and it follows from synergetic (thermodynamic) considerations. Therefore, V.I. Danilov-Danilyan is right to some extent when he opposes the use of terms “co-evolution of society and nature”, “co-evolution of man and biosphere” [Danilov-Danilyan, 1999]. However, if we define the concept of co-evolution as N.N. Moiseev (co-evolution is a co-development, that is, the joint development of a component and a system


170


in which the development of the component does not violate the development of the system) [Moiseev, 2001: p. 186], it appears that in some way co-evolution of society and nature can occur in case of sustainable socio-natural development, when anthropogenic effects in the biosphere fall to a level that does not exceed its regulatory and compensation potential.

And in this case the society takes resources from nature, although it occurs within the boundaries of carrying capacity of ecosystems. Within the scope of carrying capacity of ecosystems there is no essential breach of normal development of nature, which can continue its evolution, while outside the limits of it there is destruction of ecosystems. But in both cases, progressive development of society is realized at the expense of nature, which renders its resources and undergoes some degree of degradation. Minimum ecosystem degradation occurs in case of SD. Therefore, in a sense, in our view, we can talk about the co-evolution of nature and society in the form of SD, although it is clear that the element (a man), in a varying degree, breaks natural development of the system (the biosphere). SD is preserving, relatively safe type of development for ecosystems and this is achieved by the fact that the development itself is constructed in such a way as to ensure this safety, organically integrating it into the development process itself.

Something similar happens in the biosphere, when 99% of biota power is consumed for the main function of stabilization and regulation of the environment. We can assume that in society the lion’s share of effort will be spent on security, particularly in the model of non-sustainable development. And as between development (D) and safety (S) a constant ratio exists (D + S = const) according to the law of conservation of energy, the efforts, spent on security, are deducted from the total amount of energy, resources, efforts, etc. that could be used for progressive development.

That is why the idea to unite development (progressive) and security appeared, so that they contradict each other as little as possible, i.e. to provide security through SD [Ursul, 2001b]. And since in this case anticipatory safety of all the components of socio-natural system are possible, the cost of such security can be reduced significantly in comparison with currently practiced approach to eliminate the consequences of accidents and disasters.

While recognising the essence of SD, we paid attention to the fact that it is a special type of development in the conditions of planetary biosphere restrictions. Meanwhile, there are broader material and energy constraints in the further development of civilization. And if mankind chooses the path of “sustainable existence”, it will be forced to take information orientation of its progressive motion. It will mean that the main resource of manageable SD will be information and material-energy resources will become “secondary”. It is on this way that the sociosphere may turn into the noosphere due to SD and the



171

highest level of information and ecological society will be achieved.In the study of SD model transformations information factor invades

NSD model and the sociosphere turns into the noosphere (first into the information stage of the sphere of reason — ionosphere) only because of a higher degree of informatization and mediatization, because of the formation of the so-called “noosphere intelligence. “Priority and dominance of information as a resource for development over material-energy resources will be achieved by gradual extension of the sociosphere information content and by the appearance of global-social at first, and then


172


planetary collective civilization intelligence, capable of anticipatory management of socio-eco-development. Modelling of the flow of these information process involves an assessment of actual information content of the sociosphere and setting the minimum information content of a future global civilization as megasociety with SD. Overcoming of this minimum information content during the process of “stable self- organization” of the sociosphere will mean the end to the NSD model history and the entry into a new era of civilization development — the era of the noosphere.

We should note that all the recommendations of the UN concerning the transition to SD are mainly political in nature, although they were elaborated on the basis of the report of experts of the International Commission on Environment and Development “Our Common Future” [Our Common Future, 1989]. The report contained one of the first detailed arguments for the need to change the course of civilization development and, in fact (as well as all the UNCED and WSSD documents in aggregate) presents the conceptual model of SD. International political decision was made on the basis of expert judgements and scientific research and forecasts. However, it is clear that the available scientific evidence of the transition to a new model of socio-natural development is not enough, there is need for more basic research and even methodological transformations of modern image (model) of science. Indeed, many scientists do not pay due regard to the fact that this evidence requires a fundamental change in the science itself, and this is primarily caused by the emphasis on the study of the future. Future science will become a science capable of recognizing and exploring “sustainable future”, but after experiencing some kind of “futuroshock”.

The concept of sustainable development is also presented as theoretical and philosophical platform for various types of integrative and centrifugal tendencies in social life, for example, in the activities of political parties, religious organizations (especially those related to world religions), etc. For example, the existing differences in political parties tend to absolutize one (or a part) of directions of combined social activity to the prejudice of another, while from the standpoint of the concept of SD we should talk about their systemic integration. This is particularly evident for the parties and movements that take either social or liberal or environmental values as a priority. The inclusion of sustainable development goals will objectively lead to the need for more centrist orientation and for integration (co-evolution) of social movements and organizations to ensure the right of humanity to survive. And if a number of centrifugal tendencies of integration appeared on the stage of globalization (e.g., ecumenical processes), globalization through SD will greatly strengthen the unity of civilization in all fields of human activity and its interaction with nature [Vashchekin, Muntean, Ursul, 2002; Ursul, 2004; Los, Ursul, Demidov, 2008; Baburin, Muntean, Ursul, 2011; Global processes, 2011].



173

Strategy of global demographic sustainabilityThe most complex issues of the transition to SD, in our opinion,

appear at the demographic level, which proved to be the least examined by science, especially in a global perspective, in relation to environmental issues.

Having raised the question of global demographic process in the future of SD, we face the manifestation of a number of contradictions in the understanding of this issue. On the one hand, on a global scale mankind should not be numerically altered


174


in such a manner as to disappear from the face of the Earth, as it happened with the vast majority of species. It means that the human race, being unique not only as a species, but also as a new social stage of evolution of the matter, must reproduce its numbers at the required level, below which it will not be able to survive. Thus, we should not cross certain, yet not set, lower limit of the population reproduction of the planet for the realization of sustainable development.

On the other hand, from the standpoint of sustainable development, there is an upper limit (also yet not precisely set) of population size of the planet. We should not assume that the more people live in the world, the more fully the goals of sustainable development are achieved. After all, the biosphere, as well as the entire planet, has spatial, resource and other constraints and evolutionary corridor of its natural resistance, i.e. carrying capacity of the biosphere. This stability may be violated as natural safety, and in certain cases a global catastrophe can emerge. Thereby infinite increase in the number of population (which was a dream of, for example, Russian anthropocosmist N.F. Fedorov) can already destroy our common home with other living beings, that is, global omnicide is quite likely to occur.

As we can see, these very general arguments in the spirit of realization of the goals of the global transition to sustainable development suggest that the world’s population should be in a specific evolutionary corridor with upper and lower limits, in which all further demographic trajectory of the planet should fit.

Therefore we need to consider, how the real demographic process goes on in the world and how it correlates with the ideas about this process from the standpoint of the global transition to sustainable development. It is on the development of adequate ideas about this correlation that both demographic strategy in the world as a whole, and demographic policy of each UN member states, committed to the transition to sustainable future, depend.

Of two basic and interrelated objectives of the global transition to socio-natural sustainable development — to save the mankind and the biosphere — the highest priority is given to the preservation and survival of the human race. First of all, for this purpose, the idea of international community transition to SD was suggested. This idea is supposed to “trick” the nature, which throughout biological evolution consistently destroyed all emergent sorts of living beings, giving them a medium term of existence on the planet lasting only a few million years. Of the species existing billions of years ago, we can hardly find one in the modern biosphere, except for some micro-organisms (bacteria and archaea). Anyway, animals, especially as large as a human being, are not listed among long-living creatures of our planet.

But in terms of temporal existence man does not want to obey the natural laws of evolution of the biosphere, and due to his intelligence

and other social characteristics that distinguish him from animals, seeks to prolong his existence indefinitely. Theoretically, such an idea



175

does not contradict natural evolutionary processes, especially on the main and permanent-progressive trajectory of evolution in the

universe (superhighways of globally universal evolution) [Ilyin, Ursul, Ursul, 2012]. Therefore, we can assume that if the idea of the survival of mankind through the transition to sustainable development can be

implemented in principle, then along with other types of sustainability (economic, social, environmental, and others) demographic stability

must be accomplished, and, in our opinion, it should be apriority.


176


Demographic stability from a global perspective is the most important form of stability, which should be realized in the evolutionary transition to sustainable future. Global demographic stability is what underlies the idea of transition to a new civilizational strategy. All the rest mentioned and other forms of global sustainability explicitly or implicitly aim at the realization of the main type of “human sustainability” — the stability of socio-demographic processes as the main indicator of civilization survival [Baburin, Ursul, 2010].

Promotion of this “indicator” of sustainability of future development, although it seems obvious from the standpoint of common sense, can

fail to get approval of some “deep” ecologists, who consider the survival of humanity as equal as the survival of any other kind of living beings.

And here it is appropriate to note that the survival of such unique species as the human race cannot be limited only by natural biological

laws. If all other living beings in their population-species existence (not mentioning individual) are mortal, man in his social-biological species

aspect through his rationality and social claims already pretends to the species immortality, which was a dream of K.E. Tsiolkovsky at the beginning of the last century. That is why the idea of demographic

stability should not be seen as another “anthropochauvinistic” idea. The human race claims to socio-biological immortality (as continuous

existence and development) not just as a kind of living beings, but as a social information and intellectual material formation (the stage of

evolution of the matter), intended to continue the universal evolution on its superhighway. But in principle it is impossible without finding the

appropriate demographic security and stability of the social (stillrepresented by the mankind) stage of evolution.

Having adopted the hypothesis-aim to acquire demographic stability as the main one for implementing the global transition to sustainable development, further we will consider its relation to other types of stability (especially environmental) and the implementation in a global aspect. There will be also found a number of contradictions, which in the course of the abovementioned transition need to be resolved.

Obviously, the transition to sustainable development both at the global and national levels makes certain adjustments to the implementation of optimal population policy and strategy, pursuing a dual purpose — providing demographic security and sustainability on a state and, respectively, planetary level. However, for each country there is a specificity of the implementation of demographic stability, depending on the current demographic situation and necessary (and possible) actions on the part of state leaders, directed at the approximation to a “sustainable path”.

The documents of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED, 1992 [URL2]) note that the growth of world population and scale of production combined with irrational consumption structures bear heavily on the life-supporting capacity of



177

the biosphere. Although the UNCED materials do not contain specific recommendations for changing the world’s population, however, many researchers believe that there is very close relation between the possibility of a global transition to sustainable development and a radical change in the demographic policy of the states. And it is a new approach to population issues, because the dynamics of the population of the planet as a whole until recently has not been examined, excluding several individual countries (though these issues were considered by UN experts).


178


About a million years ago, the number of human ancestors was about a hundred thousand. The world’s population in its Neolithic history only increased, and human consciousness got accustomed to this trend1. During the agricultural period of the Neolithic revolution (10-12 thousand years ago) the world’s population increased by about 100 times compared to a few million hunters and gatherers in the late Paleolithic. The beginning of the use of fossil fuel energy for food production, for the movement of people and for industry needs increased this figure by 10 times during the period of 200 years.

The addition of each billion people to the one billion inhabiting the planet in 1800, took less and less time. The second billion was added at the end of the 30s of the XX century, the third — by 1960, the fourth — even after 15 years, the fifth — after 12 years, the sixth billion — in 2000, i.e. also in 12 years. Nowadays there are more than 7.2 billion people on the planet.

In the industrialized countries the population hardly increases (natural increase — from 0 to 1%). However, in developing countries, where about 5 billion people live, the number of people increases at a rate of 2 to 8% per year, depending on the country and region.

However, the quantitative growth of the world’s population will not be unlimited. According to UN projections [World Population Prospects, 2010], by 2050 the world population will reach 9 billion, and then even 9,5–10 billion people in 2100 — and possibly stabilize at this level, and then will start to decrease gradually. However, if the increase in life expectancy will exceed 100 years in the next hundred years, then it can lead to an increase in the population, even up to 11 billion people, which will create a huge burden to the environment and food and pension security. Taking into account the transition to a sustainable development path it would require large investments in the sphere of family planning, which will lead to a reduction in fertility.

The studies on global demographic processes conducted by S.P. Kapitza [Kapitsa, 1999], also show that the Earth’s population stabilizes at the level of 10-11 billion, and will not even double in comparison with what we already have. Now the population of developed countries stabilized at the level of one billion (which is often called the “golden billion”). In these countries there are tendencies that will affect other countries, other nations in the near future. Thus, the global population explosion will come to an end, which has no connection to the exhaustion of resources or to ecology and which represents a certain internal dynamic characteristic of mankind development.

These studies also indicate that the limit of the world population growth is not determined by ecology and natural resources, but by some other — internal demographic imperatives and not yet explored laws. It is possible, as S.P. Kapitsa

1 However, there was reduction of world's population because of the global natural disaster which occurred about 75000 years ago, when the eruption of the Toba supervolcano in Indonesia led to a sharp (not less than one order of



179

magnitude) decrease in the number of human ancestors. The consequence of this eruption was the destruction of food chains and increased competition for remaining available resources during the long volcanic winter. It is possible that in the future next few decades or centuries of its eruption could happen again, triggered by increased volcanic activity. The second time a strong population decline occurred most likely due to human destruction of megafauna as the main source of protein foods in the late Paleolithic (although assumed to natural factors and reduce the large animals). It is possible that this kind of depopulation occurred to these crisis-catastrophic events.


180


believes, that these patterns are determined by information factors, which we admit as quite correct assumption in general, but it is still not very clear and has no detailed explanation. Therefore, it being so, we are not talking about resource and ecological factors as crucial in global-demographic process, they may correct it to some extent — accelerate or slow down. However, we believe that here global constraints of extensive growth can act if not directly, then indirectly, including the ones functioning through information characteristics of civilization development.

Emerging global world obtains its integrity under the influence of not only human activity, but also natural — global constraints and features. The global world becomes more integrated, but limited earthly world of socio-natural interactions that influence and even determine all the other processes on our planet. The most obvious limitations are not only territorial ones that impose a limit on further extensive development but also exhaustible natural resources, global environmental threat, etc. The limitations of temporal nature related to spatial limits should also be mentioned; they often set final stage of development for various processes in the world, including the existence of mankind.

Global issues, globalization, and other global processes that are closely linked to the cosmic processes arouse due to the spatial sphericity and thus the closure of our planet as a celestial body, due to global boundedness of the globe and its biosphere in which human activities are performed. Globalization and a number of other socio- natural global processes have already been “programmed” by natural features of the globe just as, perhaps, global demographic processes. Globalization was caused by natural characteristics and features of the biosphere and even cosmic properties of the planet as a celestial body. It is in this that space-natural specificity of global processes, including global demographic issues, consists.

The abovementioned means that during the XXI-XXII centuries demographic transition can naturally occur, which consists in the fact that the expanded reproduction of the world’s population will be replaced by the limited reproduction and subsequent quantitative stabilization (low fertility and low mortality). If future development confirms the possibility of spontaneous implementation of the global demographic transition, there is no need to include the mechanisms of hard demographic regulation offered by some environmentalists which aim at a sharp decline in the total number of population on the planet for the sake of further existence of the remaining and future generations. Unless, of course, it is clear that the addition of the next three-four billion people to the current more than seven billion will not lead to such an increase of anthropogenic pressure on the biosphere, which will disrupt its stability irreversibly and will cause natural disasters.

Meanwhile, demographers have such concerns, and therefore the



181

appearance of a new goal is assumed in order to create a mechanism for maintaining the balance between steady number of human population and limited resources of the earth. Such a mechanism will be represented by sustainable development of the civilization, which is able to resolve the social-natural contradiction between the growing needs of the world community and the inability of the biosphere to provide these needs [Concept, 1996]. Once T. Malthus noticed this socio-natural contradiction, but only modern ecological situation brought an end to the debate about this scientist’s rightness, and highlighted its global and threatening nature for mankind [Lisin, Jusfin, 1998: pp. 11-13].

148



In essence, it is not about restoring the balance by curbing the population explosion, mostly in developing countries, and not about the reduction of overall anthropogenic pressures on the planet by other means. Of two historically known strategies of population reduction- increase in mortality (famine, war, pestilence, genocide, etc.) and birth control through family planning — we can speak only about the second direction, the so-called “humane depopulation”, i.e. about voluntary and conscious reduction in fertility among couples. India promoted this initiative in post-war years, but failed. It is not surprising because all the world’s religions, and almost all the states have always encouraged a different trend. However, nowadays a number of scientists relate the spontaneous growth of population to the path leading to a global ecological catastrophe. That is why now they say about upcoming demographic revolution not only in terms of natural demographic transition, but also in terms of humane depopulation (due to family planning, now perhaps even strategic planning), which could guarantee demographic security of the international community and forthcoming exit to the path of SD.

In the works of the Club of Rome processes and scenarios for the world population growth control were already modelled. If the population growth control strategy had been introduced in 1975, the “zero growth” could have been achieved by 2050. If the control had been initiated in 1985, by 2050 the world’s population would have reached 8 billion, and if it all had started in 1995 there would have already been 10 billion [Meadows, 2007]. As you can see, demographic modelling shows that government regulation and possible transition to global governance can significantly influence population growth.

Even during the transition to environmentally sound technologies in the conditions of continuing population growth, the total anthropogenic load on the biosphere may increase more than twice by the middle of the XXI century, which can be fraught with irreversible loss of stability of the biosphere. It becomes clear that rational mechanisms, including conscious maternity (family planning), represent one of the ways to avoid ecological collapse, and it is important to begin its humane implementing in the near future, because the nature itself can make it inhumane. We are talking about the possible influence of environmental factor on all demographic projections, which were yet given with no account taken of rapidly increasing damage to the biota with complete destruction of natural terrestrial ecosystems because of the violation of the biosphere stability by human activities.

Meanwhile, there is a difference in the form of depopulation in the past and possible “ecological” depopulation in this millennium. When we speak about possible manageable humane depopulation, we do not mean the reduction in the number of people in developing countries, we mean retaining of that “golden billion” of developed countries. This point of view seems inadequate in relation to the


183


transition to SD, because we need to see the ultimate and integrated goal which consists in reduction of anthropogenic pressure (which was not “pursued” by, for example, the abovementioned upper paleolithic depopulation, when there was a significant reduction in the population of the planet).

In this sense, the representatives of developing countries are right, saying that the population growth in these countries is not a major threat to the stability of the biosphere, as four-fifths of the “South” consume less than 20% of all resources and four times less pollute the environment in comparison with developed countries.


148


From this point of view, one-percent population growth in the United States represents greater threat to the biosphere, compared to more than two-percent growth in any of the developing countries, as one (“average”) resident of the United States consumes 15-20 times more resources than an” average “citizen of India, and especially Ethiopia or Afghanistan. In this sense, more than 1.3 billion people in India has the same anthropogenic impact on the biosphere, as several tens of millions of Americans — and in fact now there are about 320 million people in America, and each year the population of the USA increases by more than 3 million people. If the current rate of one-percent population growth in the United States remains, in 2030 there will be 350 million people, and by the middle of the XXI century — about 400 million people. If no special measures are taken to reduce anthropogenic pressure, the United States will put the same amount of pressure on the biosphere as 8 billion people in developing countries by the end of the demographic transition, which eloquently speaks about the “American style” of resources exploitation and about the nature of waste. That is why the United States should, as the Council for Sustainable Development under the President of the United States (abolished byG. Bush) previously believed, be the first to set an example of solving the issue of population growth and efficiency of resources use.

It should be noted that previously negative effects of an overall increase in population on the planet were almost ignored. Meanwhile, the number of population and especially its density play an important role in civilization processes, although this process has not been closely studied. And, nevertheless, biosphere and ecological view of this issue shows the need for a detailed study of demographic processes as growing number of population and its density significantly affects both intra-social processes and the relations between society and nature. Increase in the density of population and the excess of eco-acceptable limit coincided with the beginning of bloody wars in the history of mankind. In future in order to maintain the stability of ecologically overstocked society different kinds of limitations are implemented [Arsky, Danilov-Danilyan, 1997].

Taking into account the coming demographic transition and the need to create favourable conditions for the future descendants, each country needs to reconsider its demographic policy.

Until now many of the measures taken, various demographic programs and projects proved to be ineffective, because, in our opinion, they proceeded from inadequate causes and assessments of population impact on the environment. Increase of anthropogenic pressure on the biosphere may be considered as the main reason (if it is a global dimension) of a possible planetary anthropoecological catastrophe may be considered, which is undoubtedly connected with the quantitative growth of population and the growth of its material (not spiritual) needs, satisfaction of which becomes possible only at the expense of both inert matter of the planet and biota, of its consumption



185

and, as a consequence, the destruction, the loss of stability of the biosphere.

According to the researchers who devoted themselves to the study of this issue, the international community, as a whole, needs to solve the problem of significant reduction (almost in order of magnitude) of consumption of primary biological production [Gorshkov, 1995]. Basically it can be solved by reducing the pressure on the biosphere of economic development of rich in biodiversity areas, by cessation

150



of deforestation and reduction of wetlands, by enlarging the area of protected territories, which creates the necessary reserve capacity of the natural (wild) nature that regulates and stabilizes the environment. It is clear that reduction of anthropogenic pressure may occur not only as a result of the proposed by a number of scientists humane depopulation.

The idea about the necessity of reduction of anthropogenic pressure on the planet, including its implementation at the expense of demographic factor, contradicts traditional views. The possibility of sustainable growth of livelihoods in the past was ensured by population growth. Until recently, almost no population growth was restrained by environmental conditions on a global scale, despite the fact that the permissible number of people from the standpoint of ecology is significantly (several times) less than the present-day amount of people. It is obvious that under spatial and other environmental conditions any territory has a certain carrying capacity both for every living thing and for inhabiting it (populating) humanity. Further overpopulation leads to undermining of the biosphere stability on the planet and other “planetospheres” (geospheres) and has a boomerang effect on the mankind and biota. We should note that demographic compensation requires two-percent increase in GDP for every percent of natural population growth.

Until now, the growth of population on planet Earth has been mainly promoted by economic factors due to proportional growth of the working age population in its total amount. It was natural for a period of extensive economic and population growth (population explosion) of the whole mankind. Anthropogenic pressure caused by population growth and development of production was exceeded at some particular stage. If we proceed from the permissible number of world population suggested by some scientists (V.G. Gorshkov, N.F. Reimers and others) which is equal to one billion, then it corresponds to the year 1800 in the world when the industrial revolution only started its triumphal procession across the planet. It is quite possible that already for two centuries the mankind has contributed to the widespread, yet reversible, but already global destruction of the biosphere, undermining its stability and thus the conditions of its existence and the biota. It is in this that the mankind differs from many biological systems that stabilize their habitat, where it is disrupted only by large animals, the number of which does not exceed one percent of all living matter.

In fact, we are speaking about the rejection of natural demographic development and about the transition to a globally-managed, more consistent with the objectives of sustainable development, intensive (in terms of quality, not quantity) demographic process.

In this case we are talking about completely different “sustainable” demographic strategy that differs from the traditional (natural)one and that requires the inclusion of reasonably controlled mechanisms of


151


humane depopulation. And although such a preventive self-regulation is a very controversial and complex phenomenon, but in principle it is globally implemented manageable process. Certain points in this respect are contained in the adopted by UNCED “Agenda of the XXI Century” [Agenda], which emphasizes that the problem of population growth control is very delicate and requires the understanding by all the sectors of society (especially by women) of the relation between demographic trends and factors, on the one hand, and sustainable development on the other. The document is of general political advisory nature and focuses on the need for extensive deployment in the UN member-states of activities


152


directed at settling population issues, their connections with the possibility of transition to the path of SD and a fundamental change in global demographic trends.

It clear why the UNCED recommendations are very diplomatic in nature, although almost all subsequent major UN documents, dealing with the issue of relation between demographic problem and sustainable development, contained this kind of recommendations.

Ways to enhance and develop the concept of sustainabledevelopment

Over the past 20 years after UNCED more than half of the world community adopted strategies or programs for sustainable development. However, on the basis of the results of the dynamics of social and environmental issues of our planet, we can conclude that the principles of sustainable development in the form, in which they are now understood, could not be fully implemented in any country of the world. We can say that not only ignoring this transition, but even powerful resistance to the movement towards a new development model takes place. The mankind as a whole was not yet ready for a new revolutionary turn in its history.

Here the question arises: could be the reasons hidden in the very understanding of SD? There are, in our opinion, only the outlines of a future theory of SD, it needs to be created, and further we will get acquainted with some suggestions in this direction of research, which extend the interpretation of SD as a global process.

Environmental emphasis in the understanding of SD only highlighted the problem of the need to get over to a new model of civilization development, but at the same time showed the limitation of this vision of SD. Ecocentrism of SD interpretation began to falter in its implementation, and such successful promotion of SD ideas to the extent environmentalists expected turned out to be impossible. And the problem lies not only in the lack of political will among the state officials of our planet (and the lack of understanding the idea of SD by most people, not to mention the need for such a transition for the sake of not yet existing future generations), but also in the very interpretation of this type of development. SD as a new but already controlled form of civilization revolution in principle should be directed against all the crisis phenomena and catastrophes (not just environmental), including the crisis in the global economy. The appearance of the crisis phenomena, for example, in the world economy, which had a negative impact not only on the economy itself, but also on the process of preparation and conducting of “Rio + 20” indicates that the adopted conception and strategy of SD turned out to be insufficiently systemic and holistic, thereby insufficiently adequate.

Although the theoretical prospect of the model of “inscribing” human activity in the biosphere is obvious, its practical implementation is impossible because it contradicts a number of trends. It is also



153

impossible (especially after Muslim-Catholic opposition to this idea) to turn over the rest of the developing world and the United States, i.e. more than four billion of the world population, to the Chinese model of family planning (one family — one child). In addition, developed countries are unlikely to voluntarily give up their high incomes and to lower their material living standards for the sake of future generations: they do not give up on this even for the sake of the majority of the poorest modern generations. Some shifts are possible in this direction, but the hope for their effectiveness and, what is more, rapid implementation, would be a utopia.


154


Such a radical change in the traditional course of mankind development in the coming decades is, in principle, impossible, as well as the change in the nature of man in the direction of significant improvement of human qualities and lifestyle. But some positive changes are still possible. Moreover, the degree of approximation of the actual trajectory of the transition process to the ideal model of sustainable development will determine the measure of civilization survival, including the quantitative parameters of the process, similar to those presented in D.L. Meadows’ and co-authors’ works [Meadows, Meadows, Randers, 1994].

In our view, the real process of quite long period of transition to sustainable development will represent a “mixed” strategy — partly similar to the model of manageable development, having focus on “sustainable society” and partly to the continuation of spontaneous inertial motion along the path of non-sustainable development. And it is connected with the fact that the transition to sustainable development must be globally controlled (or directed) development, and the international community is not yet such, in spite of the adoption of documents on the transition to sustainable development during UNCED and other UN forums on SD. Therefore, in those countries and regions that will lag in the national development behind the necessary level of global transition process, in the first place catastrophic processes may occur, primarily related to global warming, ozone depletion, desertification, loss of biodiversity, etc. Global ecological disaster will break out in a varying degree, but to a lesser extent than the radical change of course may happen, than the effective transition process of moving towards sustainable development may unfold. Predictions of the extent to which implementation of the SD strategy is possible can be based only on the insertion of quantitative parameters into it and the definition at a global and national level of indicators and parameters for assessing progress in this direction.

It should also be borne in mind that the amount of money (the energy conservation law in its special form) that is spent on these or that events, is constant at the given time, so its expenditure on the environment should be seriously grounded and realized not only by a small group of intellectuals, but also by some critical number of the country’s population, and in principle by the whole planet. Preservation of social (and socio-natural) justice for future generations should go together with some attention to the current generations, where the justice is broken (which is paid special attention in socialist doctrines).

And it is possible that not having disseminated and realized the principles of sustainable development for current generations across the planet, the mankind in general will not be able to switch to this new type of development. Here we face one of the most significant conflicts of transition to SD, when instead of a priority to ensure a decent life for current generations the mankind switches the focus of its activities



155

on future generations, about which still little is known. But the transition to SD, first of all, depends on the current generations and therefore it is important to start realizing the principles and objectives of SD first of all for the now existing generations with their prolongation on all subsequent generations of the world’s population.

Environmental focus of this concept became inevitable and right step, focused on long-term, strategic perspective. Sustainable development in this sense implies the survival of civilization and even improvement of life quality of the world’s


156


population without increasing use of natural resources and without degradation of the environment to such an extent that it may lead to exceeding the carrying capacity of the Earth as an environmental system. Despite the fact that the transition to SD may require different actions in each of the states, current efforts to build sustainable future require an integrated approach to activities primarily in three key areas: economy, social sphere and ecology.

Formulation of a new development strategy means a gradual inclusion into a single self-organizing system of economic, environmental and social spheres. In this sense, sustainable development must be characterized by (at least) economic efficiency, social justice and biospherocompatibility with general decrease of anthropogenic pressure on the biosphere.

But it turned out that this is not sufficient, and sustainable global perspective cannot be achieved if we do not take into account the short-term challenges and threats to the SD generated by modern market economy. And not only economy, ecology and social sphere, but also politics and a number of other important aspects of real human activity. It reflects the contradiction between the proclaimed new form of civilization development and the current form of non-sustainable development. The new model of civilization development was found, on the one hand, more promising, at least in social and environmental perspective, since it seems that due to this civilization can survive.

But, on the other hand, still created at theoretical level, this model is very “lean”, less systemic and does not include some more components

in terms of development and security that characterize the modern model of development, more and more often referred to as a “the

model of non-sustainable development”. It is these components that “pull back” the movement in the right, but not rather systemic, very

stripped-down, one-sided direction. Sustainable future confronts the threats posed by not yet included fields (they continue to develop in

the framework of the NSD) that significantly retard the progress towards the SD of ecological orientation. We should not assume (and

thus make narrower) that the key to the SD transition lies in the solution of environmental issues, which are global now. We should talk

about all the global issues and negative planetary processes that need to be resolved in the transition to SD. Thus, one-sided ecological vision

of the transition to SD gives way to globally-integrated interpretation of the movement towards sustainability. It’s a kind of a global-temporal

law of “conservation of energy”: the more irrational current generations use natural resources, the less amount of it is left for future generations. And not only resources, but also environmental

conditions which canbe viewed as a resource in a wide synergetic sense.

In our opinion, “environmental dimension” of the movement towards SD is only the beginning of a new way of understanding the meaning of a global sustainable future. Environmental issue in its global vision is



157

a part of the overall process, which requires the solution of all global issues, which already got some attention as soon as the conception and strategy were adopted [Ursul, 1993; Ilyin, Ursul, Ursul, 2015]. We should not assume (and thus make narrower) that the key to the SD transition lies in the solution of environmental issues, which are global now. We should talk about all the global issues and negative planetary processes that need to be resolved in the transition to SD and that retard or even disrupt the transition. We should not assume that the required theory of SD is already created and the only problem

Раздел І. Inert matter/ Косная матеРия

158


consists in its implementation. In our opinion, the imperfection of the theory of SD (which is hardly can be called a theory) is one of the reasons why mankind cannot go fast enough in the direction of its survival and sustainable existence.

It is important to link concept of SD (this is more appropriate reference to a scientific form of this phenomenon) with the globalistics and global studies, because this is mainly about the global process. Biosphere through its natural limitation has impact upon all the processes occurring in it, including human activities.

This feature of globalization as a special world view is not always comprehended and quite often the focus is only on society trends expanding and binding fragments especially when it comes to globalization, although the restrictions and limits appearing herewith are inherently associated with this spatio-temporal extension. “Market expansion”, the growth of markets first of all, and other parameters of economic growth complete its expansion in the convergent and, in principle, limited world of the planet. But if the expansion of markets for some reason is limited, then at some point further deepening of labour division is not possible, and therefore, the economy is facing a serious crisis, which was called by M.L. Khazin a “crisis of the decreasing efficiency of capital”. The scientist makes a conclusion, “as the process of expansion of markets is limited by the size of the Earth, then the scientific and technological progress in its current model is fundamentally limited in time, it must inevitably, sooner or later, come to its end” [URL1, URL3]. However, even Adam Smith believed that a growing economy can be effective only for a limited time, about two centuries only, after which population growth and decrease of natural resources will lead to the limit and then to the stabilization of the economy and its transition to stabilization [Smith, 1962].

The global nature of future development with its limits and boundaries compels to view our common future not so linear as this development, has been before when everything was growing and expanding in terms of quantity — population, production, demand, etc., etc. It is the “ideology of growth” the market economy rested upon, but if it gets slow and what is more stops due to objectively existing global circumstances, mankind is going to face the crisis, from which one can withdraw only by creating a brand new stable and intense biosphere — friendly economy. Future generations will have to live in a non-linear globally-limited world, and they will have to connect not only the economy and the environment, the economists timidly and reluctantly voice, to economists, but also to create a different — not just and not only “green” economy, but alternative non-linear intensive economic activities [Ursul, 1986a; Ursul, 1986b; Intensification of science, 1987], and it is not very clear what place in it will be taken by market “element”. And how our descendants, will manage to satisfy their needs when many of the resources are not only limited, but even disappear, in any case — a series of non-renewable material and natural



159

resources, which are ruthlessly exploited today. Involuntarily, one has to shift to information and intellectual resources, creating thus the habitat homo sapience that V.I. Vernadsky believed to be noosphere.

However, as it was mentioned, apart from spacious aspect, the temporal aspect of a global thinking is quite significant. It is unlikely that the concept of globalization can be limited only to the spatial aspect, which in fact took place “by default” [Ursul, 2012]. Such “spatial” world view of globalization breaks the real relationship of space and time (which has always been opposed by V.I. Vernadsky) in thinking and activities.


160


It is important to identify the properties of the global outlook and, moreover, in a temporal perspective, it can be manifested when the time range, perspectives of global processes will significantly expand (both to the past and future), as well as take into account the non-linear progress and system correction of periods (modes) of time. Expansion of the view prospect pertains both past and future, not to mention the present time, but at the same time it is particularly important to focus on futurization process generating the emergence of leading mechanisms in all spheres of activity. The global approach allows you to see the future of humanity not as simple and still continuing expansion of Oecumene and introduces fundamentally new nonlinear corrections to the prospects of evolutionary processes human involvement.

It has become clear that all global processes and above all globalization as a process of integration and gaining integrity of mankind, not only the creation of the planetary community of civilization, but also a single global social and natural system “man — society — nature” on the principles of co-evolution should be associated with the transition to the path of SD [Vashchekin, Muntean, Ursul, 2002; Ursul, 2004; Global processes, 2011; Baburin, Muntean, Ursul, 2011; Ursul, Los, 2012]. It has already been pointed out in the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development in 2002. This means that the globalization processes making the content of globalization as a single global process, in the long term should be developed in line with the transition to SD and in the same “globalization” trends there should be ensured security, forming in its integrity what is called global security as the security of the international community, implemented under conditions of co-evolution “man — society” and “man — society — nature “ systems.

In the subject and globally scalable areas of the created SD theory, as noted above, there should be entered all the anti-crisis and “cyclical” problems. Indeed, globalization of human activity involves in view of the foregoing with the strengthening crisis-cyclic phenomena in all areas of human activity of people because of emergence of restrictions and limits. If one takes a cyclic phenomenon, which became the subject of the study primarily in the economy, the issue of the possibility of eliminating or reducing (at least downward phases) has not been investigated. It was mainly about the recognition of their objectivity and understanding of their development. Meanwhile, in the face of strengthening of global action limits there will also increase the negative effects of crisis-cyclic phenomena in all spheres of human activity. Therefore, it is important to link these processes to the problem of transition to SD. After all, if it never happens, then the transition to SD will not take place as well, and again one will have to admit that all the expectations held not only by environmentalists but other supporters and enthusiasts of this transition will never come true. Therefore, it is clear that the future SD



161

theory of should be much broader as compared to the understanding held by the majority of the scientists engaged in these problems.

A step in the expansion of SD concept was made in September 2000 at the Millennium Summit, which adopted the “United Nations Millennium Declaration”, which greatly expanded, especially in the social aspect, vision of the future development of the world community. Nest year there were developed eight global goals (MDGs) and 21 tasks for the period up to 2015 mainly on the basis of eight chapters of the Declaration where the countries have undertaken certain obligations. Moreover, assessment of progress towards the MDGs is performed for more than 60


162


indicators, covering the 190 member-states of the UN. United Nations Development Programme in 2005, adapted the concept of the MDGs for Russia and the reports have been prepared by UNDP on the progress in achieving the MDGs in Russia [Report, 2012].

But there was observed not only social expansion of future global development. There emerged the works with broader interpretation of the concept of sustainable development, where it was associated with the concept of security, not only in environmental aspect. It has been shown that the stability of society, state, economy, etc., as well as their safety can be “guaranteed” only at implementation of the model and the strategy of sustainable development [Ursul, 1993; Ursul, 1994; Ursul, Ursul, 1995; Ursul, 1995; Ursul, 1995; Ursul, 2001a]. Broader understanding of SD as the most secure development, and not only — ecologically safe gets more and more common, and this idea will be discussed further in more detail.

It is possible to ascertain the increased interest in the relationship of theory and the concept of security, which is evidenced by the emergence of a number of works in this scope [Ursul, Romanovich, 2001; Dzliev, Romanovich, Ursul, 2001; Romanovich, 2002; Romanovich, 2003; Romanovich, Ursul, 2006; Ursul, Ursul, Engel, 2008; Ursul, 2008; Baburin, Dzliev, Ursul, 2012; Ursul, Ursul, Ivanov, 2014]. Recently, the investigation of the problem of security, in our opinion, clearly reveals two very important trends that can be called extrapolation and globalization, which further will be discussed in greater details. Extrapolation characterizes the spreading of the concept of security in those areas and components of human activity, which only a few decades ago, were not included in the subject area of safety studies. Globalization of security problem suggests that this expansion is going on in the global dimension, when a research idea shifts from local-state and national-regional problems to global scale and security problems. Both trends are significantly expanding the concept of security and actually have formed it as an interdisciplinary, general science, and perhaps even a philosophical category.

At such expansion of security concept there also take place the conceptual and even paradigmatic revolution in the understanding of the problem under discussion. The significant element in the process of security nature re-thinking (in Russia at least) turned out to the adoption of such a fundamental document of the state, as “National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2020”, the conceptual basis of which was ensuring national safety through sustainable development priorities.

ReferencesAgenda — Agenda of XXI century //

URL:www.un.org/russian/conferen/wssd/



163

agenda21.Armand, 1964 — Armand D.A. We and our grandchildren. — Moscow, 1964.Arsky, Danilov-Danilyan, 1997 — Arsky Y.M., Danilov-Danilyan V.I. and

others. Environmental problems: what is happening and who is wrong and what to do? — Moscow, 1997.

Baburin, Ursul, 2010 — Baburin S.N., Ursul A.D. Sustainable development policies

and public-legal process. — Moscow, 2010.


164


Baburin, Muntean, Ursul, 2011 — Baburin S.N., Muntean M., Ursul A.D. Globalization in the perspective of sustainable development. — Moscow,

2011. Baburin, Dzliev, Ursul, 2012 — Baburin S.N., Dzliev M.I., Ursul A.D. The National Security Strategy of Russia: theoretical and

methodological aspects. —Moscow, 2012.

Barlybaev, 2002 — Barlybaev H.A. The general theory of globalization and

sustainable development. — Moscow, 2002.Bobylev, Girusov, 2004 — Bobylev S.N., Girusov Ed. and others. Economics of

Sustainable Development. — Moscow, 2004.Brown, 1972 — Brown L.R. World without Borders. — NY, 1972.Brown, 1981 — Brown L.R. Building a Sustainable Society. — NY, 1981.Concept, 1996 — Concept of transition of the Russian Federation to

Sustainable Development // Russian newspaper. — April 9. — 1996.

Danilov-Danilyan, 1999 — Danilov-Danilyan V.I. Can there be a co-evolution of

nature and society? — Moscow, 1999.Dubinkina, 2013 — Dubinkina K.A. The Millennium Declaration: Is there progress

in 10 years? // NB: The problems of society and politics. — 2013. — No. 10.

Dzliev, Romanovich, Ursul, 2001 — Dzliev M.I., Romanovich A.L., Ursul A.D. Securityproblems: theoretical and methodological problems. — Moscow, 2001.Fedotov, 2003 — Fedotov A.P. Global Studies. The beginning of the science of the

modern world. A course of lectures. 2nd ed. — Moscow, 2003.Galimov, 2001 — Galimov E.M. Phenomenon of life: between

equilibrium and nonlinearity. Origin and principles of evolution. — Moscow, 2001.

GEO-3, 2002 — Global Environment Outlook — GEO-3. — Nairobi: UNEP, 2002.GEO-5, 2012 — GEO-5. Global Environment Outlook. Summary for Policymakers. —

Nairobi: UNEP, 2012.Global processes, 2011 — Global processes and sustainable development

/ Ed. A.D. Ursul. — Moscow, 2011.Gorshkov, 1995 — Gorshkov V.G. Physical and biological bases of life stability. —

Moscow, 1995.Ilyin, Ursul, 2009 — Ilyin I.V., Ursul A.D. Evolutionary globalism (the concept of

the evolution of global processes). — Moscow: MSU, 2009.



165

Ilyin, Ursul, Ursul, 2012 — Ilyin I.V., Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Global evolutionism:

ideas, problems and hypotheses. — Moscow, 2012.Ilyin, Ursul, 2014 — Ilyin I.V., Ursul A.D. Global studies and globalistics.

The evolutionary dimension. — Saarbrücken. Germany: LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2014.

Ilyin, Ursul, Ursul, 2015 — Ilyin I.V., Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Global sustainbility.Prospects for a safer future. — Saarbrücken: Dictus publishing, 2015.Intensification of science, 1987 — Intensification of science and industry: problems

of methodology / Ed. A.D. Ursul. — Chisinau, 1987.Kapitsa, 1999 — Kapitsa S.P. How many people lived, lives and will live

on the earth: Outline of the Theory of human population growth. Moscow, 1999.

Kasimov, 2004 — Kasimov N.S. From environmental education to education for sustainable development // Education for Sustainable Development: Proceedings of the seminar “Environmental education and education for sustainable development”. — M.-Smolensk, 2004.


166


Kasimov, Mazur, 2004 — Kasimov N.S., Mazur J.L. Formation and development of education in the field of sustainable development abroad // Education for Sustainable Development. — M.-Smolensk, 2004.

Kasimov, Mazur, Tikunov, 2004 — Kasimov N.S., Mazur Y., Tikunov V.S. The concept of sustainable development: the perception in Russia // Herald of the RAS. — 2004. — V. 74. — No. 1.

Lisin, Jusfin, 1998 — Lisin V.S., Jusfin Y.S. Resource and environmental challenges

of the XXI century, and metallurgy. — Moscow, 1998.Los, Ursul, Demidov, 2008 — Los V.A., Ursul A.D., Demidov F.D. Globalization and

the transition to sustainable development. — Moscow, 2008.Losev, 2001 — Losev K.S. Environmental concerns and sustainable development of

Russia in the XXI century. — Moscow, 2001.Losev, 2003 — Losev K.S. Carrying capacity of ecosystems // Global Studies.

Encyclopedia. — Moscow, 2003.Marfenin, 2007 — Marfenin N.N. Sustainable human development: a textbook. —

Moscow, 2007.Meadows, 2007 — Meadows D. Limits to Growth. 30 years later. — Moscow, 2007.Meadows, Meadows, Randers, 1994 — Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J.

Beyond growth. — Moscow, 1994.Moiseev, 2001 — Moiseev N.N. Universe. Information. Society. — Moscow, 2001.Nazaretyan, 2004 — Nazaretyan A.P. Anthropogenic crises: the hypothesis of

techno-humanitarian balance // Herald of the RAS. — 2004. — V. 74. — No. 4.Ogurtsov, Yudin, 2000 — Ogurtsov A.P., Yudin E.G. Activities // New Encyclopedia

of Philosophy. — Moscow, 2000. — V. I.Our Common Future, 1989 — Our Common Future: Report of the World

Commission on Environment and Development / Per. Translated from English. — Moscow, 1989.

Outcome of the UN Conference — Outcome of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro received an official name: “The future we want” // URL: http://www.un.org/ru/sustainablefuture.

Rebane, 1982 — Rebane K.K. Energy, entropy, environment. — Tallinn, 1982.Report on the implementation, 2012 — Report on the implementation of

the principles of sustainable development in the Russian



167

Federation. Russia’s view on the new paradigm of sustainable development. Preparing for the “Rio+ 20”. — Moscow, 2012.

Russia on the path, 1996 — Russia on the path to sustainable development. —

Moscow, 1996.Romanovich, 2002 — Romanovich A.L. Prospects for the development and security:

the philosophical and methodological problems. — Moscow, 2002.

Romanovich, 2003 — Romanovich A.L. Development and security. — Moscow,

2003.Romanovich, Ursul, 2006 — Romanovich A.L., Ursul A.D. Sustainable future

(globalization, security, noospherogenesis). — Moscow, 2006.Scheer, 2002 — Scheer G. Sunrise in the global economy: The strategy of ecological

modernization. — Moscow, 2002.Scientific Basis, 2002 — Scientific Basis for Sustainable Development of

the Russian Federation. — Moscow, 2002.


168


Scientific Basis, 2003 — Scientific Basis of Sustainable Development Strategy of the Russian Federation. — Moscow, 2003.

Smith, 1962 — Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. — Moscow: Sotsekgiz, 1962.

Strategy, 2002 — Strategy and sustainable development issues of Russia in XXI century. — Moscow, 2002.

The concept, 1996 — The concept of the transition of the Russian Federation to Sustainable Development // Russian newspaper. — April 9. — 1996.

The National Security Strategy, 2009 — The National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2020 // Russian newspaper. — May 19. — 2009.

Towards the “green” economy, 2011 — Towards the “green” economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication: Progress Report for the representatives of power structures. — UNEP, 2011.

URL 1 — URL: http://base.garant.ru/70169264.URL 2 — URL: www.uncsd2012.org/HEI. URL1 — URL: aftershock.su.URL2 — URL: http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html. URL3 — URL: worldcrisis.ru/crisis/473153.Ursul, 1986a — Ursul A.D. Intensification of production in the global

problems system // Communist Moldova. — 1986. — No. 2.Ursul, 1986b — Ursul A.D. Intensive way interaction between nature and society

// interaction between society and nature (philosophical and methodologicalaspects of environmental problems). — Moscow, 1986.

Ursul, 1993 — Ursul A.D. Way into the noosphere. The concept of survival and sustainable development of civilization. — Moscow, 1993.

Ursul, 1994 — Ursul A.D. The concept of the natural eco-security // Security.

–1994. — No. 1-2.Ursul, 1995 — Ursul A.D. Sustainable development and security issues

// Security. — 1995. — No. 9.Ursul, 1998 — Ursul A.D. Russia’s transition to a sustainable development of Russia.

Noospheric strategy. — Moscow, 1998.Ursul, 2001a — Ursul A.D. Securing sustainable development through // Security

Eurasia. — 2001. –No. 1.Ursul, 2001b — Ursul A.D. Security through sustainable development // Security

Eurasia. — 2001. –No. 1.



169

Ursul, 2004 — Ursul A.D. Globalization through sustainable development // Security

Eurasia. — 2004. — No. 1.Ursul, Ursul, 2004a — Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Formation noosphere sciences and

sustainable development // Security Eurasia. — 2004. — No. 4.Ursul, Ursul, 2004b — Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. “Sustainable” future and a new image

of science // State Service. — 2004. — No. 6.Ursul, 2005 — Ursul T.A. Social and natural development of universal evolution. —

Moscow, 2005.Ursul, Demidov, 2006 — Ursul A.D., Demidov F.D. Sustainable development of

society and nature. — Moscow, 2006.Ursul, 2008 — Ursul A.D. Environmental security and sustainable development //

State resource management. Special Issue. — 2008. — No. 11. — March.


170


Ursul, 2012 — Ursul A.D. Becoming a global mindset: spatio-temporal perspective

// Space and time. — 2012. — No. 3.Ursul, Los, 2012 — Ursul A.D., Los V.A. Sustainable development as a global process:

Studybook. — Moscow, 2012.Ursul, 2013 — Ursul A.D. Global phenomena and methods of socio-natural

interactions // Politics and Society. — 2013. — No. 12.Ursul, 2013a — Ursul A.D. Cosmoglobalistiсs: the relationship of global

and cosmic processes / Philosophy and Cosmology 2012 (Vol. 11) - Kyiv: ISPC, 2013. — P. 7-51

Ursul, Ursul, 2014 — Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Cosmoglobalistics: Interrelation of Global and Cosmic Processes / Philosophy and Cosmology 2014 (Vol. 13) — Kyiv: ISPC, 2014. — P. 90-118

Ursul, Romanovich, 2001 — Ursul A.D., Romanovich A.L. Security and sustainable

development (the philosophical and conceptual problems). — Moscow, 2001. Ursul, Ursul, 1995 — Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Sustainable

development and security: a synergetic approach // Self-organization and management organization. —

Moscow, 1995.Ursul, Ursul, Engel, 2008 — Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A., Engel A.A. Sustainable

development, security, noospherogenesis. — Moscow, 2008.Ursul, Ursul, Ivanov, 2014 — Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A., Ivanov A.V. Security problem

in the long term sustainable development. — Moscow, 2014.Vashchekin, Muntean, Ursul, 2002 — Vashchekin N.P., Muntean M., Ursul A.D.

Globalization and Sustainable Development. — Moscow, 2002.Vernadsky, 1991 — Vernadsky V.I. Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon. —

Moscow, 1991.Website of the Security Council — Website of the Security Council of the Russian

Federation: http://www.scrf.gov.ru.Wiener, 1968 — Wiener N. Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal

and the Machine. — Moscow, 1968.World Population Prospects, 2010 — World Population Prospects: The

2010 Revision. URL: http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm.Zhuchenko, 2003 — Zhuchenko A.A. Adaptive strategy in agriculture // Global Studies.

Encyclopedia. — Moscow, 2003.Zhuchenko, Ursul, 1983 — Zhuchenko A.A., Ursul A.D. The strategy of adaptive



171

intensification of agricultural production. — Chisinau, 1983.Zubakov, 1996 — Zubakov V.A. XXI century. Scenarios for the future: an analysis of

the effects of the global environmental crisis // Green World. — 1996. — No. 9.

1989.


161

РАЗДЕЛ IІ

LIVING MATTER ЖИВАЯ МАТЕРИЯ

Living matter (Bazaluk's definition) is the second (after inert) state of matter of our Universe, known to a modern science. The evolution of living matter is carried out in three complementary and specifying directions: 1) continuous and nonlinear complication of biopolymers and gene mechanisms(molecularevolution), 2) continuousandnonlinearcomplicationoftypesofinteractions (development of functions), and both continuous and nonlinear complication of environments of existence (evolution of ecosystem). Abilities to selfreproduction (self-replication), self-organising and self-control have opened as a result of natural planetary and cosmic processes in structures of living matter. Structures of living matter are distinguished by ability of the active (continuous) and nonlinear (versatile) adaptation to environment conditions, both in the near and distant future, at the molecular- genetic, cellular, organismal and population-species level. Living matter on the Earth is represented by the form of the biological organisms which differ from the degree of complexity of the internal organization. The evolution of living matter (biological evolution) forwards continuous and nonlinear complication of cosmic biospheres which of the local planetary organizations pass to level of cosmic force and influence on the cosmic processes.

Живая материя (определение О. Базалука) — это второе (после косной) состояние ма- терии нашей Вселенной, известное современной науке. Эволюция живой материи осущест- вляется по трём взаимодополняющим и взаимообуславливающим направлениям: 1) непре- рывное и нелинейное усложнение биополимеров и генных механизмов (молекулярная эволю- ция), 2) непрерывное и нелинейное усложнение типов взаимодействий (развитие функций),3) непрерывное и нелинейное усложнение сред существования (эволюция экосистем). В ре- зультате закономерных планетарных и космических процессов в структурах живой ма- терии открылись способности к самовоспроизведению (саморепликации), самоорганизации и саморегуляции. Структуры живой материи отличает способность активного (непре- рывного) и нелинейного (разностороннего) приспособления к условиям внешней среды, при- чём как в близкой, так и далёкой перспективе, на молекулярно-генетическом, клеточном, организменном и популяционно-видовом уровне. Живая материя на Земле представлена в форме биологических организмов, отличающихся сложностью внутренней организации. Эволюция живой материи (биологическая эволюция) способствует непрерывному и нели- нейному усложнению космических биосфер, которые из локальных планетарных организа- ций переходят на уровень космической силы и оказывают определённое влияние на косми- ческие процессы.

162


РАЗДЕЛ IIIINTELLIGENT MATTER РАЗУМНАЯ МАТЕРИЯ

Intelligent matter (Bazaluk's definition) is the third (after inert and living) state of a matter of our Universe, known to a modern science. The evolution of intelligent matter is carried out in three complementary and specifying directions: continuous and nonlinear complication of neural network of subconsciousness and consciousness (neuroevolution), 2) continuous and nonlinear complication of means and methods of communication, 3) continuous and nonlinear complication of sociocultural environments (sociocultural evolution). Abilities to capture, process, store and transmit to future generations environmental conditions as well as manage internal creative potentials in artificial products activities have revealed as a result of regular planetary and cosmic processes in the structures of intelligent matter. The structures of intelligent matter are distinguished by ability to designing (creation, transformation and destruction) environment conditions. Intelligent matter on the Earth is represented by the form of the human society (civilization), whose representatives differ by the level of mental development (neural networks of subconsciousness and consciousness) and, consequenty, the ability to unconscious and conscious activity. The evolution of intelligent matter (noogenesis) gives rise to continuous and nonlinear complication of cosmic noospheres which pass from the local planetary organization to the level of cosmic force and have influence on the cosmic processes.

Разумная материя (определение О. Базалука) — это третье (после косной и живой) состояние материи нашей Вселенной, известное современной науке. Эволюция разумной материи осуществляется по трём взаимодополняющим и взаимообуславливающим направлениям: 1) непрерывное и нелинейное усложнение нейронных ансамблей подсо- знания и сознания (нейроэволюция), 2) непрерывное и нелинейное усложнение средств и способов общения, 3) непрерывное и нелинейное усложнение социально-культурных сред (социально-культурная эволюция). В результате закономерных планетарных и космиче- ских процессов в структурах разумной материи открылись способности запечатлевать, перерабатывать, хранить и передавать следующим поколениям условия внешней среды, а также реализовывать внутренние творческие потенциалы в искусственных продук- тах деятельности. Структуры разумной материи отличает способность к конструи- рованию (созданию, преобразованию и разрушению) условий внешней среды. Разумная ма- терия на Земле представлена в форме человеческого общества (цивилизации), предста- вители которого различаются уровнем развития психики (нейронных ансамблей подсо- знания и сознания) и, соответственно, способностью к бессознательной и сознательной деятельности. Эволюция разумной материи (ноогенез) способствует непрерывному и нелинейному усложнению космических ноосфер, которые из локальных планетарных ор- ганизаций переходят на уровень космической силы и оказывают определённое влияние на космические процессы.

Арпентьева М. Р. Ксенопсихотерапия: космические путешествия и трансформации в научно-фантастических произведениях


163

КСЕНОПСИХОТЕРАПИЯ:КОСМИЧЕСКИЕ ПУТЕШЕСТВИЯ И

ТРАНСФОРМАЦИИ В НАУЧНО-ФАНТАСТИЧЕСКИХ ПРОИЗВЕДЕНИЯХ

М. Р. АРпентьевА — к. психол. н., доц.,Калужский государственный университет имени К. Э.

Циолковского (г. Калуга, Россия)


Статья посвящена анализу особенностей трансформация понимания себя и мира че- ловеком, путешествующим в космосе. Данные изменения описываются в контексте их развивающей, психотерапевтической, функции. Отмечаются феномены, компоненты и пути развития понимания себя и мира, космической идентичности человека в целом. Рас- крываются основные отличия развития человека, его понимания себя и мира, в разных типах отношений. Показаны взаимодействие и взаимное воздействие включенных в диа- лог субъектов, постигающих себя и мир доступными им способами, трудности и возмож- ности взаимопонимания на пути построения трансперсональных отношений. Формиро- вание и развитие трансперсональных отношений рассматривается как специфическая особенность отношений человека, со сформированной или формирующейся космической идентичностью.

Ключевые понятия: ксенопсихотерапия, космическая идентичность, путешествую- щая психика, трансперсональное взаимодействие, интерперсональное взаимодействие.

XENOPSYCHOTHERAPY:SPACE TRAVEL AND TRANSFORMATION IN SCI-FI

WORKS

MaryaM arPentieva — Ph.D. of Psychology, Associate Professor,Tsiolkovsky Kaluga State University

(Kaluga, Russia)

The article analyzes the peculiarities of transformation of understanding yourself and the world a man traveling in space. These changes are described in the context of their educational, psychotherapeutic, functions. Observed phenomena, components, and development ways of understanding themselves and the world, the cosmic identity of man in General. Describes the main differences of human development, his understanding of himself and the world, in different types of relationships. Shows the interaction and mutual influence are included in the dialogue of the actors, comprehend themselves and the world available to them, the difficulties and possibilities of understanding on the transpersonal way of building relationships. The formation and development of transpersonal relationship is

Раздел III. Разумная материя / Intelligent Matter

164


viewed as a specific feature of human relations, with formed or emerging cosmic identity.

Key Words: xenopsychotherapy, cosmic identity, traveling mentality, transpersonal interaction, interpersonal interaction.

Помимо притягательности вымысла и попыток проектирования и/или ре- троспектирования жизни человека и человечества как космических существ,

© Арпентьева М. Р., 2015



165

научно-фантастические произведения о космических путешествиях включаю попытку осмысления человеческой жизни и развития человека не изнутри его самого, привычных ему пониманий себя и мира, а извне — со стороны возмож- ных — иных пониманий, представленных иными реальностями и существами.«Инопонимание» как «артефакт» или факт космического путешествия как пу- тешествия в «запредельное», в жизни человека и человеческого сообщества всегда связано с моментами их интенсивного развития [Базалук, 2012; База- лук, 2014]. С точки зрения психологической, инопонимание — важнейший компонент и результат психотерапевтического взаимодействия, взаимодей- ствия «Своего» и «Чужого». Поэтому контакт человека с иными формами и временами жизни может быть рассмотрен как форма психотерапевтического взаимодействия, реализации психотерапевтических (ксенопсихотерапевтиче- ских) отношений. Примером этих отношений, несомненно является «косми- ческий туризм»: практика, благодаря которой люди, пресыщенные жизнью на Земле, то есть, по сути, достигшие по своими ощущениям состояния наиболь- шего и полного понимания себя и мира с точки зрения своей «земной иден- тичности», получают возможность «встряхнуть» себя и окружающий их мир, сменив «земную идентичность» на идентичность «космическую». Насколько это удается в каждом конкретном случае и какие артефакты и тенденции здесь можно выделить — вопрос отдельный, ему и посвящено наше исследование. Однако, сам факт изменений — очевиден: сама сложность выхода в космос уже выступает как вариант «инициации» личности, терпящей неудобства и пере- живающей дискомфорт ради нового, иного понимания себя и мира. Поскольку уровень и другие характеристики «иного» существенно отличаются от окружа- ющей человека повседневности, обращены к ответам на вопросы: «Кто мы та- кие? Что мы делаем на Земле?», Для чего мы рождены?», то складывающиеся в поиске ответов на данные — экзистенциальные — вопросы отношения — долж- ны быть не просто обыденными психотерапевтически-ориентированными, но и содержать развернутую и осмысленную информацию о профессиональной психотерапии, в особенности таком ее глубинном аспекте, как изменение цен- ностей человека и способа его жизни, трансперсональности или интерперсо- нальности человека. Это представление встречается, например, в произведе- ниях С.Лема, А. И Б.Стругацких, И.Ефремова и др., которые, помимо богатой творческой фантазии, опирались на источник вдохновения иного плана: ре- альные переживания человека, людей, переживших опыты трансперсональ- ного и интерперсонального бытия. И если интерперсональное бытие, интер- персональная идентичность, встречается в ряде случаев, особенно в психотера- пии и консультировании, и в пределах земных типов отношений,


166


отношений человека в рамках его «земной идентичности», то трансперсональное бытие, описанное в трансперсональной философии и психологии, а также в исследо- ваниях космоса и космонавтов, — преимущественно опыт «космической иден- тичности»: человек как «гидра вселенной» осознает не просто взаимосвязь, но единство с окружающим его универсумом. Трансперсональный опыт много- слоен, однако, важнейшим в нем является парадокс приближения: чем дальше человек выходит в космос и ощущает себя существом космоса, тем в большей мере он переживает свою внутреннюю суть — свою уникальность, а уникаль- ность — как всеобщность [Солер, 1992]. Поэтому целью нашего исследования


165


было сопоставление двух моделей — профессионально-психотерапевтических отношений «на земле» и модели отношений, условно названных нами ксеноп- сихотерапевтическими — профессионально-психотерапевтических отноше- ний в ситуации контакта с «иным» («чужим») [Шипунов, 1992, Ryman, 2009, Legatt, 2011].

В качестве метода исследования выбран контент-анализ научно-фантастичес- ких произведений, который осуществлялся нами в нескольких направлениях:

1. Анализ представлений о психотерапевтических возможностях обыден- ных (повседневных) межличностных отношений;

2. Анализ представлений о ксенопсихотерапевтических отношениях и ксе- нопсихотерапии (как области психологического знания о процессах и резуль- татах взаимодействия представителей разных — земных и внеземных цивили- заций и контактах с ними).

Анализ психотерапевтических возможностей обыденных (повседневных) межличностных отношений включал ряд аспектов:

А) анализ представлений о распределении и содержании ролей «психотера- певта» и «клиента» в обыденных взаимоотношениях;

Б) анализ ситуаций, выступающих как психотерапевтические — условия, при которых ситуация взаимодействия становится психотерапевтической.

Анализ представлений о психотерапевтических отношениях и психотера- пии в научно-фантастических произведениях также включал:

А) анализ представлений о содержании ксенопсихотерапии, ролей «ксе- нопсихотерапевта», «ксеноклиента»;

Б) анализ всенопсихотерапевтических ситуаций — условий, при которых ситуация взаимодействия приобретает статус всенопсихотерапевтической — развивающей, выводящей за пределы привычного понимания себя и мира, в том числе, приводящих к осмыслению своей космической идентичности.

Обыденные психотерапевтические отношенияВ рамках первого направления исследований проведен контент-

анализ 30 отобранных текстов научно-фантастических произведений, принадлежащих 30 разным авторам (Ефремов И., Стругацкие А., Б., Булычев К., Кизи К., Лем С., Линдсей Дж., др.) с явным «психолого-психотерапевтическим содержанием», наличием «психотерапевтической ситуации»:

– наличием героя (героев), которому (которым) требуется психологиче- ская помощь;

– поддержка и героя (героев), который (которые) ему эту поддержку ока- зывают;

– описание ситуации психотерапевтического контакта, различных его стадий.

168



Выделено несколько типов действующих лиц, претендующие на звание «пси- хотерапевтов» и /или «посредников», «клиентов», «супервизоров», а также не- сколько типов проблемных ситуаций, служащих как источниками психологиче- ской травмы, так и психотерапевтическими (развивающими) ситуациями:

1. Ситуации «добровольного» «столкновения с реальностью», в том числе, с инопланетной реальностью, встречи с «реальностью другого», в которых субъ-



165

ект (герой, героиня) обнаруживают необходимость пересмотра своих пред- ставлений о себе и мире и/или необходимость помощи другим в их пересмотре (70%). Или сама реальность других людей или реальность ситуации «вторга- ется» — в результате «космической» катастрофы, «срыва» научного экспери- мента, нападения на космическую экспедицию или экспедицию в прошлое/ будущее — в понимание субъекта, ставя его перед осознанием непонимания и необходимости выбора — нового понимания реальности или непонимания. В данном случае мы имеем дело с героями, заинтересованными друг в друге (от- ношениях друг с другом). Не только с точки зрения личностной, но и с обще- человеческой — межцивилизационной, не только в обыденном, но и в науч- ном аспектах. Они интересуют друг друга как люди, обладающие выраженным стремлением к развитию личной силы (зрелости) и/или профессиональной компетентности через развитие своих внешних и внутренних ресурсов. Это, как правило, побуждает их выйти на прямой конфликт с ситуацией и другим человеком, создавшим эту ситуацию.

2. Длительно складывавшаяся ситуация, которая выступает центром кон- фликта — внутриличностного или межличностного — и которая требует пре- образования — с помощью психологических средств, поскольку иные попытки решить ее не имели или не имеют или не могут иметь никакого результата (50%). «Клиент» либо не стремился скорее адаптироваться и «удержаться», развить свои ресурсы, привыкнув к неадаптивным способам поведения, и/или считал травмирующий опыт обычным — не ожидая помощи или принятия со стороны других людей. Скорее он активно избегает такой «помощи» как угро- жающей потере его контроля над собой и ситуацией (другими людьми). В этом случае «клиент» становится «невольным пациентом», на которого воздей- ствие осуществляется вне его воли или желания (43.3% случаев). Иногда «кли- ент» хочет «выбраться» — но не может — не хватает собственных ресурсов: он ждет своего «психолога» («ксенопсихолога»), но и опасается его — не зная, что ждет его за пределами известного (56.7%) — в том числе, не вполне понимая, что значит а) «быть человеком», б) быть существом, «гидрой» всей Вселенной, в) быть иным — «ящерицей Кластера» и т.п.

3. Необычная или привычная ситуация, которая выступает как источник психологической травматизации субъекта и, вместе с тем, как источник ново- го опыта — ситуация «ре-переживания» и переосмысления человеком себя и мира (20%). Успех помощи связан как с усилиями участников ситуации —«клиента» и «психотерапевта», заинтересованными в личностном росте кли- ента и/или развитии взаимоотношений друг с другом, развитии контактов между цивилизациями, так и их личностными особенностями (необычность и сила личности — ее развитие как преодоление собственных ограничений).


170


Таким образом, как и в случае «бульварных» и «психологических романов», речь идет о трех типах ситуаций: 1) потенциально травматичных, если субъект не изменит свое понимание и поведение, 2) актуально травматичных, из кото- рых субъект не может или не хочет искать выхода, 3) ситуаций, имеющих двой- ственное психологическое значение — провоцирующих в силу своего сходства актуализацию «непроработанного» (травматического) опыта и содержащих в себе возможности его осмысления.

В качестве «психотерапевтов» выступают:


167


1. Главные герои, в отношениях которых разыгрывается основной кон- фликт, возникает непонимание, обычно обнажаются «отложенные» конфлик- ты, самонепонимание и/или непонимание других людей (70%). Они часто имеют собственный опыт решения аналогичных проблем, который при необ- ходимости раскрывают перед клиентом и/или «супервизором»;

2. Окружающие — сотрудники, близкие главных героев, а также предста- вители иных цивилизаций, намеренно или ненамеренно провоцирующие воз- никновение в жизни героев необычных ситуаций и ситуаций, в которых ак- туализируется необходимость осмысления «жизненной рутины» героев (20%). Иногда — это умудренные жизнью — «вторично мудрые» («профессора»,«гуру») или — чаще — напротив — невинные («младенцы, малыши» и «пер- вично» мудрые субъекты, способные видеть «клиента» и его мир таким, каков он есть, а также самим быть клиентами — обучаясь у своих партнеров;

3.Более «отдаленные» от героев субъекты — из «своего» и «чужого» мира, столкновение с которыми побуждает герое задуматься о точности своего пони- мания себя и мира (20%). Они могут предлагать альтернативный имеющемуся у клиента способ осмысления мира и способ жизнедеятельности в целом.

В качестве «клиентов» выступают:1. Главные герои, не понимающие ту или иную часть своего —

или чужого — жизненного опыта и/или межличностных отношений (80%). Непонимание связано как с нежеланием понимать — частичностью понимания и использо- вание защит — от понимания, так и неспособностью понять себя и мир, свя- занный с отсутствием опыта принятия (толерантности), «экспертной однобо- костью», и/или ранним формированием дисфункциональных представлений о себе и мире в условиях подавления осознания, результатом «травм» и «ней- рохирургических вмешательств», «потерей памяти и стиранием личности» во время экспериментов, катастроф и перемещения во времени и пространстве.

2. Окружающие героев близкие люди (70%), которых герои воспитывают, защищают или помогают решить конкретные жизненные проблемы, выйти из того или иного кризиса, проблемной ситуации — хронической или «острой» природы (26.7%%). Проблемы этих клиентов сходны с проблемами предыду- щих, однако, необычайно важны особенности культурно-исторического кон- текста развития «клиента» — с характерными для той или иной цивилиза- ции — на том или ином этапе ее становления — культурно-исторически де- терминированными нормативами поведения, понимания и ценностей (в том числе, с нормами «ксенофобии» и «толерантности»).

3. Группы клиентов, которые, в отличие от двух предыдущих групп не в состо- янии справится со своими проблемами — из-за генерализованности проблем, личностной слабости, отсутствии

168



необходимых условий и помощи со стороны других — которая либо не может быть оказана, либо будет бесполезной в силу различных внутренних и внешних обстоятельств (40%). Более частое упомина- ние таких ситуаций свидетельствует о том, что в научно-фантастических про- изведениях большое внимание уделяется проблемам возможности понимания (взаимопонимания) разных людей — и, следовательно, возможностям изме- нения — субъектов и их отношений. Здесь мы встречаем все типы клиентов: и тех, кому может быть полезна собственно психологическая помощь, направ- ленная на преодоление длительно действующих и ранних травм и связанных



169

с ними проблем-последствий, и тех. Кому нужна психологическая поддержка для решения актуальной проблемы — задачи жизнедеятельности, и тех, кто сам — своим существованием и деятельностью — является «помощником» для других, а также тех, помощь как таковая кому не нужна — она не может быть принята — человек настолько «погружен» в свои проблемы и настолько к ним«привязан» собственным выбором — лжет себе и окружающим, например, что не сможет выйти из своего состояния, даже при помощи других людей.

Описание профессиональных ксенопсихотерапевтических отношений встречается достаточно часто и, как и в других случаях, как критическая па- родия на «профессионализм» консультанта — ксенопсихолога, но также ча- сто — и как «гимн» профессионализму и возможностям психотерапевтов-«ксенопсихологов» и «этнопсихологов». Критическое отношение «обыденного сознания» к профессиональной терапии и наоборот — профессионалов к не- профессионалам — может иметь ряд серьезных оснований. В одних примерах мы встречаемся с разновидностью «воздействующего» психотерапевта, задачей которого, все же является удержание «на лезвии бритвы» между любовью и вла- стью, пониманием и вмешательством, отчуждением и зависимостью. Поэтому он обычно сам «ищет» себе клиентов, начиная помогать, исходя из собственного представления о необходимости помощи, однако, рефлексируя основания свое- го вмешательства и его результаты — для себя, клиента, окружающих.

В проанализированных научно-фантастических текстах понимание психо- логом «воздействующей» ориентации своего клиента направлено на «привыч- ный» поиск источников и характера его проблем, «психо-патологии», обнаруже- ние и вычленение для него и для окружающих «ошибочности» его понимания мира. Такие ошибки связаны с влиянием психологических проблем клиента, характером искажений. Для специалиста типичны «конструктивная» агрессия и поиск способов «ограничить» себя и мир от вмешательства «клиента».

Понимание клиентом психолога включает осознание особенностей его по- ведения и самого понимания — как «отгадчика», его проницательности — в рамках его социокультурной, в т.ч. профессиональной принадлежности. Ха- рактерны ответные агрессивные реакции и поиск способов «ограничить» себя и мир от вмешательства непрошенного «консультанта», сменяющееся осозна- нием невозможности «поколебать» его понимание и изменить характер взаи- модействия с «консультантом».

Как правило, понимание психологом ситуации включает поиск внутренне- го и внешнего одобрения — подтверждения своему поведению и пониманию — у «ко-терапевта», их сопоставление,


170


принятие решения о вмешательстве в си- туацию и ее изменению. Выбор способа вмешательства связан с осмыслением характера понимания клиентами себя и окружающего мира.

Далее понимание психологом клиентов предполагает исследование их по- нятий, изучение неточностей и несоответствий понятий, сопоставление поня- тийных представлений и «реальности», выявление и сопоставление критери- ев реального-субъективного, указание клиентам на ошибки и ограничения их понимания, демонстрацию собственного понимания — его безошибочности и возможностей — и своих критериев. Ответное самопонимание клиента включа- ет осознание своих понятий, изучение неточностей и несоответствий понятий, сопоставление при помощи консультанта понятийных представлений и «ре-



171

альности», выявление и сопоставление критериев реального-субъективного, осознание клиентами ошибок и ограничений собственного понимания, в противовес пониманию консультанта — «безошибочному», дающему новые возможности осмысления происходящего и имеющему четкие критерии. По- нимание клиентами ситуации включает далее осознание ее многозначности и различия существующих позиций, наличия общих и частных «критериев» истинного и реального, важности их соотнесения, взаимосвязи определения — понимания — ситуации участниками и направления ее развития, трудностей, возникающих при переопределении ситуации у разных субъектов.

Рефлексивный компонент понимания включает понимание клиентами консультанта и предполагает процесс индоктринации — усвоения транслируе- мого консультантом психотерапевтического мифа. Типичны развитие интере- са к консультанту и его позиции, видению и поведению, стремление к осозна- нию критериев и понятий консультанта, далее — развитие позиции и понятий консультанта — анализ хода понимания и результатов понимания, изменения в осмыслении обсуждаемой реальности, консультанта и самих себя.

По окончании «сессии» важный момент — сверка пониманий «ко- терапевтов», установление/подтверждение взаимопонимания: обмен ценно- стями — представлениями, который демонстрирует значимость взаимопони- мания и его развития, важность не-соревновательного (неагрессивного, при- нимающего) контакта. Взаимопонимание рассматривается как возможность понимания окружающего мира и самих себя, преодоления/снятия ограниче- ний. Происходит со-осмысление проблем и затруднений, связанных с пред- взятостью специалиста, возможным наличием «соревнования» с клиентом или ко-терапевтом в рамках «профессионального» контакта. Изучаются воз- можности их преодоления, происходит осознание собственных возможностей и ограничений, а также общих эффектов взаимодействия профессионалов как людей и специалистов.

Понимание клиента психологом — это понимание ошибочности, ограничен- ности, их причин — «проблем» и «психопатологий», в т.ч. «ценностных». Оно включает анализ возможности показать ошибочность и ограничения клиента ему самому, возможностей клиента к реалистической оценке происходящего. Иногда — возможностей не-психологического воздействия на «клиента» — при«отказе» или недоступности использования психологических средств. Самопо- нимание консультанта — осмысление правильности и ограничений собственной позиции и понимания, необходимого поведения и выбора модели общения с«клиентом», непонимание как повод к развитию понимания

Понимание психологом клиента как «коллеги» — включает


172


осознание и коррекцию его манипуляций — в отношениях с другими, анализ способов манипуляции, источников и результатов (целей) манипуляций, особенностей понимания «коллегой» себя и других людей, возможностей и ограничений разных способов их разрушения и осознания «клиентом-коллегой» происхо- дящего. Проблемы понимания клиентом себя и окружающего мира клиентом связываются с содержательными особенностями такого понимания: проис- ходящее понимается как угрожающее и требующее контроля. Осуществляется осмысление характера своего воздействия на мир и возможностей, которые оно дает, ограничений в воздействии на «консультанта». Самопонимание консуль-



173

танта завершает эту стадию, включая осознание неэтичности использования психологических знаний во вред людям, но — возможности их использования в отношении «вредящих» коллег, важности собранности и усилий к понима- нию и изменению клиента, характера оказываемого на клиента воздействия, его последствий — для клиента и его окружения.

Понимание консультантом как «супервизором» своего клиента или ко- терапевта как «коллег» включает анализ соотношения и соблюдения меры«конструктивной» агрессии и результатов помощи, возникающих нарушений, их проявления в деятельности субъекта, ее результатах, динамики развития«патологии» в деятельности «коллег», степени осознания ими собственных проблем и затруднений (наличия и содержания их защит от самопонимания, осознания ими своей деструктивности). Оно предполагает изучение возмож- ных способов коррекции нарушений — своих и самим «клиентом» — коллегой, опирающееся на представление о важности контроля и самоконтроля стрем- ления к власти.

Самопонимание клиента включает обнаружение неосознанных защит и де- структивных стремлений, возможности и необходимости их осознания, кон- троля и преодоления. Важно также осмысление противоречивости собствен- ных стремлений клиента — к помощи и к разрушению других людей. Самопо- нимание консультанта и ко-терапевта включают понимание и подтверждение сходства-различия своих — в том числе профессиональных — знаний и пози- ций, осознание важности внедрения этих знаний и ценностный установок в повседневные социальные отношения. В целом, это предполагает осознание важности понимания других людей, заботы и самозаботы, важности осозна- ния деструктивности в себе, ее контроля, нравственного воспитания.

Второй тип произведений демонстрирует работу «понимающего» психоло- га (иногда — как ко-терапевта — дублирующего основного специалиста). Он меньше, чем другие ориентирован на воздействие и вмешательство (как это типично для специалиста в первом примере), поэтому — менее агрессивно- амбициозен как специалист и, в отличие от своего коллеги со «специальным образованием», а также в отличие от «эмпатического, но нечестного (закрыто- го, не принимающего, не доверяющего «клиенту», его внутренней силе) кол- леги, добивается успеха — в установлении и развитии психотерапевтических отношений как отношений взаимопонимания и взаимного развития (Прило- жение №1).

В этой ситуации понимание «неудачливого» ксенопсихолога более «удач- ливым» ко-терапевтом включает осмысление его моделей его поведения, цен- ностей, отношения к себе и к людям,



174

особенностей понимания себя и мира, особенностей понимания консультанта другими людьми — в том числе, как причин неудач в профессиональной деятельности. Далее инициируются про- цессы самопонимания ко-терапевта — понимание своих ценностей, моделей общения и понимания, их несоответствия пониманию, общению и ценностям других людей, возможности непонимания части происходящего и возмож- ности отличий — между людьми — в этих сферах. Во многом это предпола- гает осмысление «клиента» иной культуры, времени, цивилизации как ко- терапевта — посредника, включает признание его консультативных и посред- нических функций — в отношении субъектов разных цивилизаций — человече-



175

ских и нечеловеческих. Кроме того, происходит анализ его сходства различий с собой, другими людьми, осмысление возможностей и ограничений контакта с человеком (существом), чей опыт столь отличен от обычного и, вместе с тем, содержит сходные черты.

Ответное понимание «клиентом — ко-терапевтом» психолога предполагает осмысление хода его понимания, степени его понимания самого себя и партне- ра, возможных действий и готовности — неготовности к контакту — развитию понимания, на фоне своего желания или нежелания понимать и общаться. Происходит осмысление ситуации как ситуации полного или частичного взаи- монепонимания и нежелания консультанта дать клиенту возможность понять его, осознание различия стремлений, собственных негативных переживаний от присутствия психолога и других людей — вторгшихся без спроса в мир «кли- ента».

Понимание клиента консультантом включает, далее, ориентацию на по- нимание клиента в собственных понятиях и на основе собственных стремле- ний. Осознание того, что исследовательское — не диалогическое понимание клиента приводит к конфликтности ситуации. Это требует анализа различий в стремлениях клиента и консультанта к пониманию, смыслов взаимодействия, нежелания допускать в свое понимание ни клиента, ни ко-терапевта. Понима- ние ко-терапевтом «клиента» и его консультанта, связанное с осознание ситуа- ции непонимания, недопустимостью «лобовой» ксенопсихотерапии, иниции- рует стремление решить ее. Решение предполагает опору на выбор клиента, осознание недопонимания собеседниками друг друга. Это непдопонимание связано с отсутствием учета ими состояния и смыслов взаимодействия друг с другом — их различий, нежеланием консультанта слушать ко-терапевта, учи- тывать его понимание, стремлением прервать связь ко-терапевта с «клиен- том», помешать их взаимопониманию, стремлением «клиента» понять и быть понятым «ко-терапевтом», готовность того учитывать стремление понять про- исходящее клиентом.

В результате осмысления поведения «клиента» — как посредника между миром людей и нелюдей становится возможным понимание других существ — нелюдей. Оно связано с понимание того, что они делают с «клиентом»- посредником: как обращаются, во что превращают, как относятся — к челове- ку, как и с какой целью. Речь идет о реконструкции ценностей и способов во- площения существами разных типов их ценностей, наличие у существ хотя бы минимального желания контакта, минимального стремления быть понятыми и понять людей. Происходит соотнесение этих стремлений, своего стремле- ния понять и быть понятыми. Активизируется исследование и обоснование рассогласования на основе анализа способа жизнедеятельности «посредника- клиента», анализ возможности согласования в диалоге рассогласованных до него способов воплощения общих


176


ценностей.В ситуации развитого взаимопонимания понимание ситуации ко-

терапевтом в его общении с клиентом — предполагает ее осознание как ситуации встречи и взаимообогащения — духовного и т.д., взаиморазвития. Как ситуации ста- новления клиента «человеком» и освоения «ко-терапевтом» иного способа бы- тия, — нового для себя и для клиента, расширение зоны его профессиональной компетентности, а также как ситуации со своими ритуалами — с их (взаимо-)по-



177

ниманием и загадками — непониманиями (различными пониманиями) взаимо- действия. Понимание «клиентом» и ко-терапевтом друг друга предполагает их со-осмысление друг друга и себя как «необычных» и «обычных» людей, своей роли в жизни другого и функций другого в своей жизни. Вновь, на новом витке, активизируется процесс сопоставления своих и другого существа возможностей и ограничений, осознание факта своего и другого развития, изменения, наибо- лее важных тенденций этого развития, в том числе — тенденций сближения друг с другом, а также противоречий и тенденций сближения-отталкивания в отно- шениях с другими. Центральными моментами диалога становятся проблемы ча- стичного сходства — различия способов воплощения ценностей и сходства цен- ностей разных существ, творческого потенциала (возможностей) такого разли- чия и ограничений, связанных с этим различием — их временного или неизмен- ного характера. Рефлексивный контекст самопонимания ко-терапевта включает осознание своего понимания «клиента» как со-консультанта, со-беседника, как человека и как нечеловека, значимости его присутствия в своей жизни. Резюми- рующий аспект — осмысление особенностей взаимоотношений с другим суще- ством, своего отношения и понимания происходящего с ним и в диалоге с ним, типичных моделей общения с другим, возможности «жертв» и необходимости толерантности и принятия ради общения и развития понимания — своего и дру- гого человека — ради взаимоотношений (взаимоотношений взаимопонимания).

Приведенные примеры иллюстрируют несколько важных моментов:1. Возможности обыденной психотерапевтической помощи в

решении про- блемы взаимоотношений и личностного развития героев — на уровне изме- нения их поведения, способов понимания происходящего и ценностей — со- поставимы с возможностями профессиональной психологической помощи, в которой один человек действительно заинтересован в том, чтобы понять и по- мочь другому, сохранить и/или развить с ним отношения;

2. Эффективность помощи, как и в других типах произведений, во многом противопоставляется успешности — «длительный и трудный поиск себя» —«подготовка к более радикальным и устойчивым изменениям», быстрые из- менения рассматриваются как временные или «имитируемые» клиентом, реже — как подтверждающие компетентность психолога;

3. Особое значение имеет изначальное представление героев о различиях друг друга, а также о различиях их ценностей, пониманий и моделей общения, меньшее — ситуация взаимодействия, изначально множественная по своему смыслу встреча «чужих» людей, пытающихся найти общий язык —



178

взаимопо- нимание. Здесь речь идет о выходе непосредственно на обобщенную — жиз- ненную ситуацию каждого из участников как воплощение разделяемых ими ценностей, сопоставление этих способов воплощения, стоящих за ними цен- ностей. Ситуация актуального контакта — всего лишь в разной мере полная, но точная «презентация» этой общежизненной для партнеров ситуации;

4. Перед обыденными «психологом» и «клиентом» стоит задача понима- ния не только «клиента», но и самих себя — как клиентов и как психотерапев- тов — важности собственного понимания и важности быть понятным и поня- тым другим, осмысление своих ресурсов и ограничений, их проявлений в про- цесса взаимопонимания т.д..В этом смысле обыденный психотерапевтический«ксенопсихологический» контакт более подвижен: «клиенты», «консультан-



179

ты», «ко-терапевты» и «супервизоры» меняются местами, помогая или мешая друг друга на пути построения взаимопонимания.

В описании ситуаций профессиональных ксенопсихотерапевтических отно- шений участвуют:

1. «Плохие профессионалы» — обычно — главные герои или герои второго плана, вольно или невольно усиливающие страдания и/или общее неблаго- получие «клиента», усиливающие непонимание. Это люди, которые «мстят» клиенту за его «непослушание» или иные «грехи», вплоть до «грехов» иных — значимых для консультанта — людей, непосредственное «отмщение» которым невозможно. Профессиональная и личностная незрелость побуждает к попыт- кам навязать «клиенту» свои ценности, модели поведения и способы понима- ния и/или отличную от психологической «помощь» клиенту;

2.«Хорошие» психотерапевты, волонтеры — «мудрые люди» или «профес- сора — люди чести», характеризуются высокой личностной и профессиональ- ной зрелостью, часто, как и в других типах произведений, противостоя «пло- хим» психотерапевтам, спасая клиентов, противопоставляя им свои ценности, модели поведения и способы понимания, вмешиваясь или не вмешиваясь в ценности, поведение и понимание самих клиентов (толерантность к непони- манию происходящего с клиентом);

3. Клиенты, пострадавшие в результате какого-то локального или гло- бального научного эксперимента, катастрофы и т.д., которые встречаются со специалистом в кризисных ситуациях своей жизни, иногда — попадают в специализированную психиатрическую клинику и т.д. Они могут быть и быв- шими преступниками и/или жертвами преступления, провоцирующими «ксе- нопсихотерапевта», «испытывающими его на прочность», нарушающими его целостность и психическое здоровье и/или обращающиеся к нему как к по- следней надежде на исцеление.

Психотерапевтическая ситуация — ситуация реабилитации клиента после психической травмы или жизненного кризиса в условиях стационара, в усло- виях свободного посещения специалиста или в повседневном общении «кли- ента» с о своим близким — «волонтером» или профессиональным психотера- певтом (или лицом, его заменяющим — ксенопсихологом, этнопсихологом, шаманом, гуру, т.д.). (Сравнение возможностей обычного консультирования и психотерапии и космической, «ксенопсихотерапии» демнстрирует как сход- ство, так и различие моделей и эффектов взаимодействия (Таблица №1).

Ксенопсихотерапевтическая ситуация включает:1. Историко-культурный (пространственно-временной) контекст

и его конкретное воплощение в жизни субъекта — человека или не-человека: его целостной жизненной ситуации как результата способов воплощения им его жизненных — человеческих и не-


180


человеческих ценностей;2. Инцидент, потрясение — необычное и в разной мере

травматичное для человека событие — «столкновение с иной реальностью» — как встреча чело- века с «иной ситуацией собственной жизни» или с «иным человеком»;

3. «Топтание вокруг да около» — «самоподтверждающиеся пророчества» о невозможности и ненужности изменений, невозможности или возможности преодоления непонимания, отчуждение — опустошение и/или избегание по- вторных столкновений с «иным», активизация «защитных механизмов», а не



181

личностное развитие;4. Поиск изменений, встреча и «путешествие» — к поиску нового

понима- ния человеком самого себя и окружающего мира — т.е. сама по себе ситуация психотерапии, поиск, «разоблачение» или «случайное обнаружение» спря- танного от самого себя и от других — собой и другими людьми, умение «от- пускать», то, что раньше удерживалось, разнообразить ранее единообразное;

5. «Посттерапевтическая ситуация» — привнесение изменений в жизнь

«клиента» и жизнь других людей, становление клиента самопсихотерапевтом, психотерапевта — клиентом и учеником,

принятие обыденности как полифо- ничной и изменяющейся, уместные и подвижные защиты собственных и чу- жих границ —

забота о себе и о другом, реже — отчаяние и отказ от понимания. В целом, возможности и ограничения обыденных и профессиональных

ксенопсихотерапевтических взаимоотношений в фантастических произве- дениях приближаются к реальным профессиональным

нормам. В некоторых случая, когда в окружении субъекта не находится человека, могущего помочь и заинтересованного в такой

помощи, более успешной и эффективной может оказаться профессиональная помощь, в которой клиент получает развернутую

прямую и обратную связь о понимании им себя и окружающего мира. В случае профессиональной ксенопсихотерапевтической

помощи обычно идет речь о взаимной помощи и о необходимости понимания субъектами друг друга, через

осмысление себя и своих отношений.Таблица №1. Психотерапевтические и

ксенопсихотерапевтические отношения: особенности и стадии взаимопонимания

Ксенопсихотерапевтические отношения

Психотерапевтические отношения

равенство субъектов и\или смена ро- лей «консультант» — «клиент»

совместное понимание — и понима- ние друг друга — ведущие фокусы взаимо- отношений

техники обмена пониманиями и об- мен непониманиями вместе с готовностью к принятию непонимания и толерантному пониманию

в контакт обязательно привносится духовное измерение и психофизиологиче- ское измерение —

возникает проблема совместимости- несовместимости,

стремление к паритетности и отноше- ния власти-подчинения

совместное понимание и понимание консультанта — ведущие фокусы взаимо- отношений

техники, подобные техникам «гуру» — работа с изменениями состояний сознания

психологический уровень, реже — ин- теграция с духовным и психофизиологиче- ским,

духовное в контексте помощи обычно не рассматривается, что снижает ее эффек- тивность и сводит помощь к поиску про- блем и патологий, а не к пониманию ин- дивидуального способа воплощения



182

примирение с другим и с собой: по- строение «канала» взаимопонимания с другим, «обособление» ниш существо- вания каждого, постепенное изменение границ в связи с расширением «канала» взаимопонимания

человека. в том числе — в его физических и психологических проявлениях и «нару- шениях»,

нахождение человеком собственного пути или адаптация к миру — решение о том, что считать чужим, а что — своим, из- менение границ

Стадии взаимопонимания:предъявление — обмен схемами и их отторжение, непонимание, фикса- ция отличий понимания и жизнедея- тельности в целом и необходимости осмысления их источников и резуль- татов,обмен пониманиями и сопоставление ценностей, вычленение возможно- стей освоения способов и схем пони- мания человека иной цивилизации,создание общих способов понима- ния и установление циклов развития взаимопонимания как циклов обмена понятным и непонятным, понятым и непонятым

Стадии взаимопонимания:понимание клиентом психотерапевти- ческой ситуации и предъявление соб- ственных схем и способов понимания консультанту,понимание психологом клиента и предъявление собственных схем и спо- собов понимания,присвоение или конфликт отвержения клиентом схем и способов консультан- та («индоктринация»), реже — созда- ние общих схем и способов осмысления происходящегоАрпентьева М. Р. Ксенопсихотерапия: космические путешествия и

трансформации в научно-фантастических произведениях


183

Важно отметить, что в данном случае речь идет о том, что отношения с «дру- гим», проявляющего желание помочь или способного в силу своего отлично- го от клиента (космического путешественника) жизненного опыта это сделать, оказываются трансформирующими уже потому, что «фрустрируются» повсед- невные, рутинные для человека, привычные и ставшие шаблонными модели отношений. «Иной», «другой» дает человеку клиенту развернутую прямую и обратную связь о себе и других людях, обнаруживает и предоставляет их для со- поставления (консоционные связи) собственные смыслы жизнедеятельности. В фантастических произведениях, описывающих «ксенопсихотерапевтические» контакты, возможности и ограничения обыденных и профессиональных взаи- моотношений приближаются к профессиональным, однако, речь чаще идет о взаимопомощи и о необходимости понимания субъектами друг друга, через осмысление себя и своих отношений. Аналогично, в философских, лингвисти- ческих и психологических ксенологических исследованиях человеческих от- ношений как отношений взаимопонимания, акцентирующих «иллюзию до- ступности пониманию» подчеркивается взаимность трансформации и инвер- сии консультативных (психотерапевтических) отношений [Ванденфельс, 1999; Делез, 1996; Михайлов, 1997; Подорога, 1995; Хантингтон, 1997; Шапинская, 2012; Шукуров, 1999], влияние результатов взаимопонимания на жизнедея- тельность индивидов и сообществ (их «смысловые вселенные»). Заметим так- же, что в близких научно-фантастическим текстам текстам, описывающих духовно-ориентированное взаимодействие («эзотерических текстах», текстах«оккультного содержания») прослеживаются черты, аналогичные супервизор- ской поддержке: обращенность к рефлексии, осмыслению различных фокусов миропонимания (себя, другого,


184


мира), их взаимодействия, стратегий (интер- претирующих и интегрирующих) понимания, стадий, эффектов и «артефактов» взаимопонимания, личностных и межличностных контекстов и последствий взаимодействия (изменений общения и поведения человека, его ценностей, по- нимания себя и мира, его личности и отношений, деятельности и всего бытия). Ксенопсихотерапевтическое взаимодействие обращено на рефлексию, взаимо- и самопреобразование участников полилога: человек и «иной» общаются как



185

существа единого универсума, познавая друг в друге то, что может и не может быть осмыслено, сдаваясь перед лицом невозможного понимания, называя не- понятное непонятым и продолжая стремиться — осмыслить- вопреки всему: что же есть человек, что есть — его жизнь, что есть — мир. Продленность человека в мир и мира в человека, порождение — человеком мира и миром человека, со- провождающие их воплощение, перевоплощение и превращение — обычные и необычные аспекты постижения себя и мира, с которыми сталкивается человек в диалоге с Вселенной, с пространством и временем, бытием. Бытие, его осно- вы, — вот с чем беседует человек, подчас безуспешно пытаясь постичь самого себя и жизнь. Однако, эта «безуспешность» оказывается гораздо более продук- тивной привычного успеха: встряска захватывает не столько все существо че- ловека, его жизнь меняется и никогда не будет прежней, уже потому, что вер- нувшись на землю, ему некому рассказать и нет слов рассказать о том, что про- изошло. «Все изменилось» — начиная с самого человека и заканчивая миром, ставшим частью самого человека, покинувшего свою колыбель — землю — ради развития. Начав с попытки интерперсонального взаимодействия, отношений, человек возвращается — субъектов трансперсональных отношений, он возвра- щается как единство: человека и мира.

Приложение №1.

Фрагмент научно-фантастического текстаОн вызывает меня всякий раз, когда ему хочется побеседовать.

– Здравствуй, Ст., — говорит он. — Побеседуем? Давай?Для связи выделено четыре часа в сутки, но он никогда не

выдерживает рас- писания. Он его не признает. Он вызывает меня, когда я сплю, когда я сижу в ванне, когда я пишу отчеты, когда я готовлюсь к очередному разговору с ним, когда я помогаю ребятам, которые по винтику перебирают охранный спутник Странников... Я не сержусь. На него нельзя сердиться.

– Здравствуй, Малыш, — отзываюсь я. — Конечно, давай побеседуем.

Он жмурится, как бы от удовольствия, и задает свой стандартный вопрос:– Ты сейчас настоящий, Ст.? Или это твое изображение?Я уверяю его, что это я, собственной персоной, Ст. П., лично и

без никаких изображений. Уже много раз я объяснял ему, что не умею строить изображе- ния, и он, по-моему, давным-давно это понял, но вопрос остается. Может быть, он так шутит, может быть, без этого вопроса он не представляет себе нормаль- ный обмен приветствиями, а может быть, ему просто нравится слово «изобра- жение». Есть у него любимые слова — «изображение», «феноменально», «по бим-бом-брамселям»...



186

– Почему глаз видит? — начинает он.Я объясняю ему, почему видит глаз. Он внимательно слушает,

то и дело прикасаясь к своим глазам длинными чуткими пальцами. Он великолепно умеет слушать, и хотя теперь он бросил эту свою манеру — метаться как уго- релый, когда его что-нибудь особенно поражает, — я все время чувствую в нем какой-то азарт, скрытую буйную страсть, неописуемый, недоступный мне, к со- жалению, всепоглощающий восторг узнавания.

– Феноменально! — хвалит он, когда я заканчиваю. — Щелкунчик! Я это обдумаю, а потом спрошу еще раз...



187

Между прочим, эти его одинокие размышления над прослушанным (бе- шеный танец лицевых мускулов, замысловатые узоры из камней, прутьев, ли- стьев) наводят его иногда на очень странные вопросы. Вот и сейчас:

– Как узнали, что люди думают головой? — спрашивает он.Я слегка ошарашен и начинаю барахтаться. Он слушает меня по-

прежнему внимательно, и постепенно я выплываю, нащупываю твердую почву под но- гами, и все идет вроде бы гладко, и оба мы вроде бы довольны, но когда я за- канчиваю, он объявляет:

– Нет. Это очень частное. Это не всегда и не везде. Если я думаю только го- ловой, то почему я совсем не могу размышлять без рук?..

Я чувствую, что мы вступаем на скользкую почву. Центр категорически предписал мне любой ценой уклоняться от разговоров, которые могли бы на- вести Малыша на идею аборигенов. И предписал, надо сказать, правильно. Со- всем избежать таких разговоров не удается, и в последнее время я заметил, что Малыш как-то очень болезненно переживает даже собственные ссылки на свой образ жизни. Может быть, начинает догадываться? Кто его знает... Я уже несколько дней жду его прямого вопроса. Хочу этого вопроса и боюсь его...

– Почему вы можете, а я не могу?– Этого мы еще толком не знаем, — признаюсь я и осторожно

добавляю: — Есть предположение, что ты все-таки не совсем человек...

– Тогда что же такое человек? — немедленно осведомляется он. — Что такое человек совсем?

Я очень неважно представляю себе, как можно ответить на такой вопрос, и обещаю рассказать ему об этом в следующую встречу. Он сделал из меня насто- ящего энциклопедиста. Иногда я круглые сутки глотаю и перевариваю инфор- мацию. Главный Информаторий работает на меня, крупнейшие специалисты по самым различным отраслям знания работают на меня, я обладаю правом в любую минуту связаться с любым из них и просить разъяснений — относитель- но моделирования П-абстракций, обмена веществ у абиссальных форм жизни, методики построения шахматных этюдов...

– У тебя усталый вид, — сочувственно замечает Малыш. — Ты устал?

– Ничего, — говорю я. — Терпеть можно.– Странно, что ты устаешь, — сообщает он задумчиво. — Я

почему-то никог- да не устаю. А что такое, собственно, усталость?Я набираю в грудь побольше воздуху и принимаюсь объяснять ему,

что такое усталость. Не переставая слушать, он раскладывает перед собою камешки, кото- рые обработал для него старый добрый Том, придав им форму кубиков, шаров, параллелепипедов, конусов и более сложных фигур. К моменту, когда я заканчи- ваю, перед Малышом вырастает сложнейшее сооружение, решительно ни на что не


188


похожее, но тем не менее в своем роде гармоническое и странно осмысленное.

– Ты рассказал хорошо, — говорит Малыш. — Скажи мне, наша беседа за- писывается?

– Да, конечно.– Изображение хорошее, четкое? Изображение!– Как всегда.– Тогда пусть эту фигуру посмотрит дед. Посмотри, дед: узлы

остывания здесь, здесь и здесь...



189

Дед Малыша, П.А.С., работает в области реализации абстракций в смысле Парсиваля. Он довольно рядовой ученый, но большой эрудит, и Малыш под- держивает с ним постоянную творческую связь. Павел Александрович говорил мне, что Малыш мыслит зачастую наивно, но всегда оригинально, и некоторые из его построений представляют определенный интерес для теории Парсиваля.

– Обязательно, — говорю я. — Непременно передам. Сегодня же.

– А может быть, это пустяки, — вдруг заявляет Малыш и одним движением сметает всю свою конструкцию. — Что сейчас делает Л.? — спрашивает он.

Л. — это старший инженер базы, большой шутник и анекдотчик. Ког- да Л. беседует с Малышом, околопланетный эфир заполняется хохотом и азартными визгами, а я испытываю что-то вроде ревности. Малыш очень любит Л. и обязательно каждый раз спрашивает о нем. Иногда он спраши- вает и о В., и тогда чувствуется, что сладостная тайна бакенбард до сих пор осталась для него неразгаданной и острой. Раз или два он спросил о К., и мне пришлось объяснить ему, что такое проект «Ковчег-2», а также зачем этому проекту нужен ксенопсихолог. А вот о М. он не спросил ни разу. Когда я сам попытался заговорить о ней, когда попытался объяснить, что М., если и обманывала, то для его же, Малыша, пользы, что из нас четверых именно М. первая поняла, как тяжело Малышу и как он нуждается в помощи, — ког- да я попытался все это ему растолковать, он просто встал и ушел. И точно так же встал и ушел, когда я однажды, к слову, принялся объяснять ему, что такое ложь...

– Л. спит, — говорю я. — У нас тут сейчас ночь, вернее, ночное время борто- вых суток.

– Значит, ты тоже спал? Я тебя опять разбудил?– Это не страшно, — говорю я искренне. — Мне интереснее с

тобою, чем спать.– Нет. Ты иди и спи, — решительно распоряжается Малыш. —

Странные мы все-таки существа. Обязательно нам нужно спать.Это «мы» подобно бальзаму проливается на мое сердце. Впрочем,

Малыш последнее время часто говорит «мы», и я уже понемножку начал привыкать.

– Иди спать, — повторяет Малыш. — Но только скажи мне сначала: пока ты спишь, никто не придет на этот берег?

– Никто, — говорю я, как обычно. — Можешь не беспокоиться.– Это хорошо, — говорит он с удовлетворением. — Так ты спи, а я

пойду по- размышляю.– Конечно, иди, — говорю я.– До свидания, — говорит Малыш.– До свидания, — говорю я и отключаюсь.Но я знаю, что будет дальше, и я не иду спать. Мне совершенно



190

ясно, что сегодня я опять не высплюсь.Он сидит в своей обычной позе, к которой я привык и которая

уже не ка- жется мне мучительной. Некоторое время он всматривается в потухший экран во лбу старины Тома … Малыш рассеянно озирается, пальцы его перебирают отшлифованные камешки. Он … некоторое время сидит неподвижно, понурив голову. Потом, решившись, он протягивает руку прямо ко мне и нажимает кла- вишу вызова под самым носом у Тома.



191

– Здравствуй, Ст., — говорит он. — Ты уже поспал?– Да, — отвечаю я. Мне смешно, хотя спать хочется ужасно.– А хорошо было бы сейчас поиграть, Ст.. Верно?– Да, — говорю я. — Это было бы неплохо.– Сверчок на печи, — говорит он и некоторое время молчит. Я жду.– Ладно, — бодро говорит Малыш. — Тогда давай опять

побеседуем. Давай?- Конечно, — говорю я. — Давай.

В этом фрагменте можно увидеть несколько моментов. Понимание ситуа- ции ко-терапевтом:

как ситуации встречи и взаимообогащения — духовного и т.д., взаимо-развития,

как ситуации становления клиента «человеком» и освоения «ко- терапевтом» иного способа бытия, — нового для себя и для клиента, рас- ширение зоны его профессиональной компетентности,

как ситуации со своими ритуалами — пониманием и взаимопонимани-ем, и загадками –непониманиями (различными пониманиями) взаимо- действия, установление циклов развития взаимопонимания как циклов обмена понятным и непонятным, понятым и непонятым

Понимание «клиента» ко-терапевтом и клиентом ко-терапевта: как людей и как необычных людей, своей роли в жизни

другого, роли другого в своей жизни, своих и другого возможностей и ограничений,

своего и другого развития, тенденций этого развития, в том числе —тенденций сближения, а также противоречий и тенденций сближения- отталкивания в отношениях с другими,

частичного различия способов воплощения ценностей и сходства ценно-стей, творческого потенциала (возможностей) такого различия и огра- ничений, связанных с этим различием — их временного или неизменно- го характера

Самопонимание ко-терапевта: своего понимания «клиента» как «ко-терапевта», человека и

нечеловека, значимости его присутствия в жизни «ко-терапевта»,

особенностей их взаимоотношений, своего отношения и понимания происходящего, мо- делей общения с другим,

возможность «жертв» ради общения и развития понимания — своего идругого человека — ради взаимоотношений (взаимоотношений


192


взаимо- понимания)

ReferencesАрпентьева, 2015 — Арпентьева М. Р. «Аллологический подход и

космические путешествия в развитии человеческого сознания» / Philosophy and Cosmology 2015 (Том 14) — Киев: ISPC, 2015. — С. 139-152

Базалук, 2012 — Базалук О.А. Космические путешествия — путешествующая психика: курс лекций. К.: КНТ, 2012. — 424с.



193

Базалук, 2014 — Базалук О. А. Модель эволюции разумной материи / Philosophy and Cosmology 2014 (Том 12) — Киев: МФКО, 2014. — С .165-196

Ванденфельс, 1999 — Ванденфельс Б. Ответ чужому: основные черты респонзивной феноменологии // Мотив чужого: сб / Науч. ред. А. А. Михайлов; отв. ред. Т. В. Щитцова. — Мн.: Пропилеи, 1999. — С. 123–139.

Делез,1997 — Делез Ж. Мишель Турнье и мир без Другого. / Комментарии.

№ 10. — М.,СПб.: Наука, 1996. — С. 85Михайлов, 1997 — О разработках проблемы Чужого в современной

философской мысли // От Я к Другому. Сб. переводов / Под ред. А.А. Михайлова. — Мн.: Навука, 1997. — 276 с.

Подорога, 1995 — Подорога В. Феноменология тела. Введение в философскую антропологию. — М.: Admarginem, 1995. — С. 144-145, 30-31.

Солер, 1992 — Солер К. Клинические уроки перехода // Логос. — 1992. —

№3. — С.178–189.Хантингтон, 1997 — Хантингтон С. Столкновение цивилизаций и

изменение мирового порядка // Pro et Contra. Распад и рождение государств. — Т. 2. — 1997. — №2. — С.117.

Шукуров, 1999 — Чужое: опыт преодоления./ Под ред. Р.М. Шукурова. — М.: Алетейа, 1999. — 384с.

Шапинская , 2012 — Шапинская Е.Н. Образ Другого в текстах культуры. — М.: Красанд, 2012. — 214 с.

Шипунов, 1992 — Шипунов Ф.Я. Истина великой России. М.: Молодая гвардия, 1992. — 352 с.

Ryman, 2009 — When It Changed: Science Into Fiction / Eds. by G. Ryman,

P. Duncker, J.Robson. — UKL.: Comma Press, 2009. — 276p.Legatt, 2011 — Legatt J.h. Fantasy, Science Fiction, and Speculative

Fiction // The Encyclopedia of Twentieth-Century Fiction. / J.Cl.t Ball. — N.-Y.: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. — V III. Twentieth-Century World Fiction. — P. 1066- 1077.

ReferencesArpentieva Maryam. Allological approach and space travel in the

development of human consciousness / Philosophy and Cosmology 2015 (Vol.14): academic journal — Kiev: ISPC, 2014 — P.139-152

Bazaluk O.A. Kosmicheskie puteshestviya — puteshestvuyushchaya psihika: kurs lektsij [Space travel — traveling mentality: a course of lectures]. — K.: KNT, 2012. — 424p.

Bazaluk O.A. The Evolution Model of Intelligent Matter / Philosophy and Cosmology 2014 (Vol.12): academic journal / editor-in-chief O.



194

Bazaluk — Kiev: ISPC, 2014 — P. 165-196Vandenfels B. Otvet chuzhomu: osnovnye cherty responzivnoj

fenomenologii [Answer the stranger: main features responsibly phenomenology] // Motiv chuzhogo: sb / Nauch. red. A. A. Mihajlov; T. V. Shchitsova. — Mn.: Propilei, 1999. — P. 123–139.



195

Delez J. Mishel’ Turn’e i mir bez Drugogo [Michel Tournier and the world without the Other] // Kommentarii. № 10. — M.,SPb.: Nauka, 1996. — P. 85

O razrabotkah problemy Chuzhogo v sovremennoj filosofskoj mysli [ On the development of Another problem in contemporary philosophical thought] // Ot Ya k Drugomu. Sb. perevodov: /Pod red. A.A. Mihajlova. — Mn.: Navuka, 1997. — — 276 s.. — P.34.

Podoroga V. Fenomenologiya tela. Vvedenie v filosofskuyu antropologiyu [ Phenomenology of the body. Introduction to philosophical anthropology]. — M.: Admarginem, 1995. — P. 144-145, 30-31.

Soler K. Klinicheskie uroki perekhoda [ Clinical lessons of transition] // Logos. — 1992. — №3. — P.178–189.

Hantington S. Stolknovenie tsivilizatsij i izmenenie mirovogo poryadka [The Clash of civilizations and the changing world order] // Pro et Contra. Raspad i rozhdenie gosudarstv. — T. 2. — 1997. — №2. — P.117.

Chuzhoe: opyt preodoleniya [Alien: the experience of overcoming it]/ Pod red. R.M. Shukurova. — M.: Aleteja, 1999. — 384p.

Shapinskaya E.N. Obraz Drugogo v tekstah kul’tury [The image of the Other in the texts of culture]. — M. : Krasand, 2012. — 214 p.

Shipunov F.Y. Istina velikoj Rossii [The Truth of the great Russia]. M.: — Molodaya gvardiya, 1992. — 352 p.

When It Changed: Science Into Fiction / Eds. by G. Ryman P. Duncker, J.Robson. — UKL.: Comma Press, 2009. — 276p.

Legatt J.h. Fantasy, Science Fiction, and Speculative Fiction // The Encyclopedia of Twentieth-Century Fiction. / J.Cl.t Ball. — N.-Y.: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. — V III. Twentieth-Century World Fiction. — P. 1066-1077.

182


GENERALLY CIVILIZED CONTEXT OF GOVERNING THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE WORLDOksana Gaievska — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor,

Kyiv National Economic University(Kyiv, Ukraine)


Analyzing the contemporary global mechanisms of governing relationships between peoples represented both in procedural and institutional aspects the author notes their fundamental and globally civilized meanings in the historical progress of mankind to a higher level of social system organization. Therefore, the actual European process and principles of creating the efficient ordering system, according to which certain international institutional structures function, should be considered in the context of today’s total sovereignty and at the same time ensuring the safety of international relations. This trend suggests that the presence of some basic concepts of self-governance aimed at creating mechanisms for intergovernmental governance in the global community should remove the possibility of destabilization of international cooperation. Thus, generally civilized pillars of social governance, including international relations, lie in the understanding that people have to base their relationships on principles of the highest administrative feasibility, which should embrace economic, political and spiritual energy of any nation. This interpretation of general issues of international relations seems quite logical and well grounded in the light of recent developments in Ukraine.

Therefore, the expression “reason rules the world” should be viewed as an objective opportunity of any institution through the energy of its own organization and by management to achieve a holistic level of the system which is too important for humanity, which in its historical development has always longed for a high level of organization, and consequently reached in its civilization development a level where management has become the most productive type of production. In this view management as a science can be perceived as the most lucrative and prudent source of allocating capital.

Biological organizational evolution appears to have been locked: in its highest form — for a human being it has found its reflection and the most organic way of life. And the higher the development of civilization, in particular management, the

more organically the mankind enters this circle, the more harmonious relationships people have with nature. A knowledge of harmonization mechanisms

through people’s self-subjecting to nature in all its forms of existence is a superior necessity for humanity, and hence a source of eternity and management as a

science. Key Words: socialgovernance, generalcivilizationofmanagement, socialsystemorganization,

governance civilization of the world.

Human beings and humanity in general in their biological development are lucky: the nature has gifted them the highest ability to self-management by providing them with an appropriate management tool — the brain that has the desired biological and social information


183


to perform administrative actions. The biological history of human beings has its age, but in the known time a man has always had this ability, although, of course, with varying degrees of managerial excellence. In this context, management has its multimillion century history, the study of which should be the subject of management science. Historical sources of acquiring management knowledge enable to establish certain common, generally civilized support of management, the stages of

© Oksana Gaievska, 2015


184


its evolution — from experiential science that revealed itself in the form of studying organizational traditions, in particular, ethnic, theoretically

meaningful to the knowledge already gained in relatively recent times of management status as a science.

Management as a calculation of organizational movement capacity serves as an organization of institutions, and therefore it should define ways of organizing, summarizing and organizing them; offer some schemes of possible organizational forms. Without governance the organization is meaningless, it simply cannot exist. So we can say that the organization creates governance. In the simplest reflection a human activity is aimed at two main processes: integration and separation of certain elements. The former and latter mainly relating to a technological sense are the organizational basis for the creation of a product with the prerequisites that require separationandjoiningtheinvasionofthesubject, whichthusbecomesanorganizational source, chiefly the manager. In more complex version these two approaches in the real activity have a different content in relation to the result, which requires an accurate calculation of their impact on product activity, and this is management. The compilation, regarded as the highest sense of management in cybernetics, in the most general terms is a preliminary comparison of elements that are subject to be united or separated. Here we encounter so called Bogdanov’s “tectology”: “If societies, classes, groups confront destructively, disorganizing each other, it means that each collective endeavors to create the world for itself in its own way. This is the result of separateness, isolation of organizing forces, the result of the fact that their unity, notably their common and coordinated organization, has not been achieved yet. This is the struggle of organizational forms. “

The appearance of the rulers and the ruled in this way is thus mainly as an objective phenomenon, viewed as a subject and object of management, in which the former is only the need of the latter; only social, economic and political history of mankind distorts this healthy, natural state of the human self-management. A man as part of nature serves in this context as its organizational formation, and also on its internal structure, which also has a set of interrelated elements, as the organization of this “interaction” is a function of the human brain. The social organization creates management through the human brain as well as the biological organization through hereditary information controls the movement of living organisms.

This comparison is more fully introduced in the theory of algorithms aimed not only at revealing the intellectual reproduction of organizational structures and objects of the activity itself, but also the possibility of mental calculation that will enable the organization to show the natural end product of human activity. Therefore, the theory of algorithms is a natural reproduction of mental organization, which the manager must understand in order to create his own product, which is

Gaievska Oksana. Generally civilized context of governing the social organization of the world


185

not contrary to the laws of nature; otherwise it will be turned in its destructive principle. But it will be the separation of elements, which in time stretches it so that it will transform the process of separation into a tragic thing for a man, on which, in fact, the entire history of mankind is built.

Finally, the union or separation of elements applying management creates a system in which the former and the latter decide the fate of its existence, depending on how these processes take place and the system functions.

In this sense, management is crucial to the system, because it is able to find in the variety of elements often opposing each other such properties that can significantly

184



nourish the system, notably contain it. This process of continuous selection belongs to management activities as its contents element marked in cybernetics as a term«regulation». In a sense, the genius of the organization is to find the largest number of related items in the object, combine them taking into account this relationship and during the system existence divide and re-unite them in accordance with the target harmony, the energy that they create during joint activities. Calculating energy is another meaningful implication of the organization as a determinant of management. It doesn’t particularly relate to the absolute similarity (such elements practically do not exist), it mainly embraces the possibility of joining the organic system what defined as the manager’s organizational genius.

Therefore, management acts as a link system that «engaged» its elements and thus the application of human brain in the social organization ultimately depends on the excellence degree of this part as a unifying principle. In global terms, this is the formula for the salvation of mankind.

The constant search of opportunities of improving one's own activities leads to specific, proven by experience management methods and eventually to the creation and accumulation of knowledge, which at a certain frequency system can be converted from sustainable into typical quantity and quality of facilities. The clear understanding of management principles creates the science that only in the nineteenth century received this status, though it had long before its historical recognition. The constant possibility of direct life-laboratory testing its efficiency was the most convincing argument in favor of this scientific context. Hence the creative search could not be a purely laboratory one as real life experience along with the needs of material, spiritual and political production turns out to be a source of expertise. The scientific and philosophical understanding of the material world organization, its objective foundations completed this search as a proven guarantee of a specific effect of mankind social self-management. It consequently relates to only a certain level of civilization management, organizational mechanisms and management efficiency of social systems as a whole and in certain types of human activity. Today, such a focus of mankind management interest has not considerably changed and only the temperature of contradictions, especially those ones that create a tragic situation can aggravate either side of the objective interest of mankind or part, including national one, but overall it remains unchanged. Ideological doctrines, in this context, added nothing new to the universal understanding, particularly democratic one, of the meaning and role of management in life, and just the existence of mankind itself. And it is next to impossible to add anything fundamentally new, because it is a well- established, proven by history and experience managerial civilization’s need, that even in its ideological form it is so reasonable and well-justified that can disappear


187


only with the disappearance of mankind. But even in this scenario, nature is able and prone to informative self-management through the transfer of information from generation to generation and a certain organization of biological self-nature. Mankind and its intellectual energy in this context is no different from other parts of nature and therefore various prophecies about their disappearance have no scientific proof mainly in terms of informative one. As information is eternal, as well as everlasting management as its organizational expression.

However, for the organizational coordination and streaming of elements this system as a fastening material may be insufficient. Thus arises the necessity of


184


obtaining the total energy of the system temperature, which may be a sufficient reason for such a union. This is a well-known main link,

introduced in management as a condition of a chain reaction, as the total concentration in particular, and sometimes in the unit, which

makes it a gumming up factor. Mainly in this organizational meaning governance acts as a catalyst for the movement, as a concentrated

energy throttle of the coordinating system which constantly nourishes all its elements, because governance in this context is a

pillar, the «inspirer and organizer,» in social terms portrayed as leader or doctrine. The main precondition of the effectiveness and

appropriateness of the existence of this organizational phenomenon is a profound penetration into the system elements and the most adequate

reflection of their energy in their own body. In this sense the genius of organization, management genius should not be considered as a

supernatural presence, often mysterious implications of leadership or governance, but mainly a deep penetration into the management

object, the most accurate calculation of its capabilities and needs of its institutional capacity. In terms of calculations this potential should be

introduced by the first and the last link, between which it is located. And it doesn’t mean the minimum and maximum, which quantitatively

determine the quality potential of the object, but determine a possible effectiveness in constant growth behavior, in the infinity, into which

sometimes unrealistic temporal and spatial factors must be put. That is what should be presented as the highest managerial accounting,

notably as the manager’s higher expertise, regardless of whether it comes to element of the system, or the whole system itself, the

separating or unifying effect. The task of management is to change a whole, on the basis of which its new, more powerful quality should

emerge. Consequently, the organization has to confront the disorganization, the state when the whole system falls below even the simple sum of its components. Therefore, management should prevent the organizational foundation form turning into another foundation of

the component. That is why the power significantly decreases that might be viewed as a fallacy of managerial behavior. The general

collision of organization and disorganization lies in attempts to preserve the balance of components, constantly create space to add their energy towards strengthening not only parts, but the whole organic as their

interaction. The manager as an integral component of the organizational system should prevent the release of any element beyond

it, because it means breaking the link, power aggression of another system or environment on their own system. Moreover, this aggression is usually carried out in those elements of the system that do not have

sufficient energy to resistance, which consequently leads to the penetration of negative energy environment into it. If this energy were

positive, it would be part of the energy system, in which it is turning around, on the basis of which

the world community is chiefly founded as a unity of energy diversity.



189

The integrative nature of the world is mainly reflected as a tendency that removes the minus sign in the variety of energies, although at a higher level it is part of the human being as the bearer of natural harmony. In this respect the objective of management lies in the opportunity to neutralize the collision of energies, or at best, to use them to strengthen the system, as appropriately redistributing at least in terms of collision. It is the power of the management system, which is designed to provide healthy contradictory directions to disorganization.

It mainly relates to the elements of the organization (system) when it does not have sufficient force to maintain the balance of elements which leads to the breakdown

186



of relations between them, even at the system level. It is assumed to consider this situation a negative phenomenon, which indicates a weakening effect on your system element. The main source of this state is conditions for the interaction of elements that appeared as a result of administrative failure, because the system itself that has not reached the level of integrity, does not create such an element as management.

According to the laws of their parts and the whole their interaction has yet to reach this level, and only through management. In this sense management is not just a consequence of the organization complete system, but also, under certain conditions, it is the energy of creating the organization as a whole. Therefore, the expression “brain rules the world” should be seen as an objective possibility of any system phenomenon through the energy of its own organization and by management to go on a holistic level of the system that is too important for humanity, which in its historical development will move to a higher level of organization.

Vividly the contemporary international community is in its state of transition and the epistemologically accepted in science and policy human skills as a system of states because of management science are ones that accurately indicate the energy inequality of the system’s elements, which affect the main activities of the International Institute of Management — United Nations.

Even the emergence of a special or unique unit in the organizational respect is in a management sense not just the usual gap in communications, but it is some kind of measurement of the systemic crisis at the whole, at least it does not reflect the sufficient clarity, because their existence is filled with the system energy and that is why the are looking for other connections, other opportunities to enter into it. This process is chiefly focused on creating new unit formations, which are then converted into element links requiring a new habitat.

This is a classic disruption of the link between the element and system which means a possible creation of new system’s properties and therefore it must take into account the necessity (if objectively) of finding new relationships, relationships of another order, which has to be in the organization of the system or go beyond it. The latter usually is not used in management, because it does not strengthen the organizational system, although it may have a different energy impact on it.

The first approach implies that the task of management lies in the fact that it as an intermediate contributes to strengthening basic trends — the development of partnership principles of cooperation that is possible only on the basis of strengthening ties between the people and their environment, as well as between the elements of the environment. Moreover, this process must take place continuously, which makes continuous improvements to institutional relations and thus management role as a catalyst for these relationships.

From the point of view of philosophy these ties share profound origin


187


that acts as an objective regulator of any management relationships and mechanisms. This is a well-known regular formula of conservation and extinction of the existence of the dialectical law of contradiction, the development of which determines the movement as a form of existence of substance.

Concerning management we should clearly perceive objects that are exposed to the influence through the institutional channel, and the nature and limits of this effect should be presented as an organizational capability. The influence mechanism encompasses the administration subject that can influence it creatively


188


or destructively, though it might be quite persuasive that that even a possibility of destruction or preservation is embedded in the potential that, in our opinion, is viewed as an axiomatic vision: the destruction of the object implies the action embodied in institutional mechanisms and it can generate the appropriate management system. The opposite approach, it seems to us, has a subjective sense as it raises a unit to the level of the total, and in management a unit is prior to the whole.

Another thing is that each controlled object has its inherent structural properties which have initially a decisive influence on the preservation or destruction of the object provided that they are supposed to be an integral part of the subject, especially its institutional arrangements. So the energy of constant preserving the mechanisms of the object management is viewed as a task, because it should keep itself in that way. It should be emphasized that self-regulation does not mean self-management, as it can also influence the object through management, at least when it concerns social objects. Management in this case acts as a reflection of the organizational capacity of the object and at the same time it is a factor in its development at the subjective level.

In terms of organizational management the quantitative and structural equation of the object bears a special burden, the power of which ultimately lies in the extent to which it structurally brings sufficient quantitative characteristics. Moreover, the balance should be a dialectical balance that exists even in action implying opposite trends. The opposite in the organizational sense means the emergence of new energy as a result of the development of a substantial part or even one element, so the crucial point lies, in organizational sense, in the way of combining elements, their organizational communications.

After all, having created the material and spiritual guarantees of its own existence, the mankind civilization has reached in its development the state when management has become the most productive type of production, and management as a science has been consequently the most favorable source of allocating the capital. The biological organizational evolution appears to be locked: in its highest form it has found the most organic way of life for a human being. The higher the development of civilization, the more organically the mankind enters this circle, the more harmonious relationship it shares with nature. Knowledge of harmonization mechanisms through nature self-ordering in all its forms of existence is eternal needs of humanity, the source of eternity and management as a science.

So management as a science has always been as an eternal self-organization of humanity and only different forms of its existence as a conscious objective or subjective phenomenon, creating its history, saturating its specific evolutionary uniqueness.

So in order to convert management into a socially productive science we should identify human, including national, organizational principles which directly reflect the national picture of managerial mentality of



189

a nation, but not through social pressure and even direct investment in research activities. This process is both national and universal, as the social element of the system and civilization it cannot carry its energy, in turn, constantly providing its system as a whole and developing domestic energy sources.

The general methodological theses of the classical heritage of social management as a science are the fact that the modern world civilization, which has a certain


190


organizational self-sufficiency, is currently reaching the level of self-management through information energy of this civilization that continually experiences catastrophic explosions which are precisely such ones as they are only if a human being is unable to manage these processes. The proposed by V.G. Afanasyev characteristics of the system properties of social organization, which he also connects with the world all living things, emphasize the consistence of the society, its government opportunities through self-awareness. The latter, self-awareness, form V.G. Afanasyev’s point of view is logically consistent with the N.A. Berdyaev’s paradigm.

As the main methodologies of the theory of organization A. Bogdanov and M. Weber created scientifically accurate conceptual idea of the organization as a form of existence of material substance and spirit, but the information richness of their scientific works is hard to fit into definitional characteristics.

In a particular way typical methodological characteristics of the science of social management to some extend are inherent to the

number of other works of authors which are devoted to the analysis generally civilized principles of social management. In this context,

management as a science has to offer knowledge of these principles, which guide the subject and object of management in organizational

objective channel in order to come into such coordination between management and truth, which sufficiently displays its informative

power. The truth of management is to detect the presence of necessary institutional guarantors which is the most

striking proof of its instrumental potential.And finally, one of the most powerful tasks of management in

terms of self- assertion in the practical management activities is to portray its content aspect as a permanent source of national management thinking, its empirical and theoretical level of Ukrainian managers’ creative thinking skills and their understanding of their own activities. However, such creative thinking is possible only on the basis of objective vision of self-reflection, acquiring in this regard that “local” information sufficient enough to produce sound management decisions. Nowadays in the world the most powerful flow of such information is the national information, which recreated the state of modern civilization, level of development and diversity. The consistent human development is reflected in the national information. This development embodies a basic structural unit of modern humanity, which seeks a balanced state of all its elements of regularity that eventually removes contradictions accumulated during the history of civilization, and thus turns them into an absolute source of system development as a whole and its individual elements.

The functional approach to understanding the content of management and organization as its generally civilized basis is epistemologically proven and significantly represented in the modern science of social management. From the point of view of generally



191

civilized understanding of social governance it is necessary to focus on the fact that the organization is the essence of management, namely management is some kind of property of the social system, which it received in connection with the smart principle of absolute substance — human.

Such understanding of generally civilized principles of social management makes a number of tenets and truths that do not exclude, in our opinion, a crucial feature of social governance — the necessity and ability to accurately calculate the organizational capacity of the social system and emerging on this basis, the


192


possibility of administrative error free performance, at least at the level of the social system. Concerning the social and administrative aspect it is also necessary to point out that the dialectic of subject and object management, considered by many scientists, are present in the relationship of certain parts of the social whole, but management includes this alignment as an organizational feature of the system that sometimes even shifts in organizational space, replacing each other under certain system administration, reproducing the motion of the system. Absoluteness in this dialectical understanding is absent, although the traditional vision of such a relationship is sufficiently encountered in the modern management practices.

Consequently, management as a phenomenon is such a vivid level and potential of the object that adequacy in this term is the prerequisite of the calculated efficiency of management.

Cooperation as one of the generally civilized foundations of social management is a certain organizational form that exists not only in an active state, but also in the form of beyond activity, actually as an objective organization that has, saying, a spring mission in the existence of mankind as a society. So even a negative activity—an expression of cooperative principles — is also defined as an expression of objective principles existing in the form of cooperative work. It doesn’t necessarily relate to the division of labor, which leads to cooperation, but mainly the biological energy of mankind.

First of all, it should be noted that the classification of generally civilized understanding of social governance somehow incompletely reflects its true potential. We can to some degree of scientific completeness argue that the subject of social management as a science focuses on mankind as the system and a human being as its defining quality reflected in the civilization context, as the highest achievement of mankind it is the creation of civilization. And identifying its generally civilized phenomena, regardless of the level of development of certain parts of humanity is one of the leading problems of social management of both science and practice.

This approach relates to various generally civilized social phenomena, but this difference only proves the main idea, regardless of the content and form of civilization, it has a number of common manifestations (qualities) that emerged in the process of development and this process continues. Social governance is a general expression of (quality) development of civilization, the ability to self-organization of the human community, primarily through management, objective and subjective its potential, in modern conditions is mainly due to the political system of society and the state as its main institution.

But above mentioned leading positions are leading ones and in order to view the generally civilized context of social management as a concept in its full meaning, it needs to determine its basic characteristics, bringing its organizational connection with the basic concepts (categories) of social management, the most important



193

phenomena that it studies. The sequence of these events, their significance to the society in relation to social management as a civilization phenomenon in this context do not matter.

Concerning social management as a subject of academic intervention from the perspective of bringing its generally civilized context its structure is of fundamental importance, which is quite weighty represented, especially in such social phenomena as production (material and spiritual), industrial relations, society’s political life,


194


political relations, people in the context of a self-managed society, international relations as a management target, their genesis as an expression of general civilization foundations of social management. The global management increasingly focuses on the idea that social management has not only the current impact on certain social forms, but also the profound, genetic history of mankind. The latter, of course, indicates the generally civilized context of this phenomenon, its historical and modern principles of existence, the impact on the various, sometimes controversial, particularly in Ukraine, social phenomena. Consequently social management is of crucial significance for the countries of the so-called transition state, which, as we know, Ukraine belongs to, which confirmed a new social system. Finding basic, objective for social management, generally civilized factors which have the most effective impact on the social system should be the methodology of calculation of its potential and identifying opportunities for self-management.

Civilization foundations of social management are mainly represented, especially in those mentioned above, social phenomena as an organization, its essential content in relation to the management, production (material and spiritual), industrial relations, and industrial cooperation, political society, political relations, people in the context of a self-managed society, international relations as a management object and expression generally civilized principles of social management. As a methodological indication of social management it proves the presence of such a basic, defining quality in any society as the ability to conscious self- management and so the task is only to find basic support, basic principles, where the fateful self- organization is, in fact, crucial to the movement of society in a civilized way.

In the structure of social management as a science, production management (both material and spiritual) is a civilization

phenomenon that is historically and most effectively reflected due to the cooperative society (in broad terms) in an active personal form —

business management, and the person under such conditions is becoming a more capacious carrier of social relations, in particular,

the nature of social management. Thus, cooperation is presented as a phenomenon which has its own organizational capacity as sometimes seemingly independent workers (which has deep historical roots) and the other side of the issue — is a cooperative interdependence, which

openly today reached the level of management globalization. The historical and evolutionary way of mankind self –management has passed through various forms, especially public administration, a

higher level of which is democracy as an organic combination of object and subject of management, the effectiveness of which is calculated

within the framework of human needs like playback, including institutional capacity of a particular social structure. Prudently this calculated efficiency as the process is to reach the level of absolute

dominance in management science in the nonpolitical space, which



195

will exert a more and less negative impact on the relationship between object and subject of management. The harmonization of social relationships, the removal of contradictions that cause their

continued political tension and thus the transfer of management organizational energy as the highest expression of social organization in

general will have the greatest potential. This quality will mean a need for professionalization of management, in

particular at all levels of modern state organization.This state may be reflected in the offered characteristics of democratic

governanceas a concept of management model of professional democracy. In a very concise


196


form, this concept can be formulated as the need and the ability to directly use the target of management, especially in social management, scientific knowledge, in fact, science management for the organization of society, which means the possibility of preparing managers at all levels and who will be selected and engaged in this activity on a competitive, democratic basis. Therefore, harmonization of interests of all members of society through scientific understanding and real opportunities for their implementation should be in the main objectives for managers of all levels. The politicization of managers in such circumstances should disappear as an administrative phenomenon.

It should be noted that management relations at all times have never relied on the science of management which has ever determined self-management and self- organization of the society as scientifically proven information, ensuring maximum efficiency of administrative activity in general, and organic matter — as the most effective organizational fulfillment of society, a human being as a determining factor and also the presentation of mankind as a system of social relationships, which currently have a level of institutional development which transforms management in crucial source of civilization.

The system state of humanity implies main features of this consistency: this feature is reflected namely in the self-organization of the state, which reflects a deeper systemic phenomenon — self-organization of sovereign nations, streaming cooperation which is the main function of management of international institutions and organizations. The state sovereignty significantly shares the possibility of organizing humanity’s consistency, which today is represented in the management of international relations.

Thus, the system state of international cooperation is a managerial phenomenon, because any system is a set of elements that is self-managed in a cause-and-effect regime, organizational and functional interdependence, which is inherently systemic administration. The latter implies not only in public understanding, but in the objective concerning the autonomous ability of the various elements of the system to communicate with one binding factor: the presence of a single energy movement that must be grasped by subjective efforts of those who represent both needs and the possibility of all elements. That “caught” model can be represented by, for example, aims, which should have a calculated potential of the elements and the whole system that needs constant management influence.

Indeed, governance as a generally civilized phenomenon has several aspects which share the nature of objective economic, political and cultural processes. The most crucial one among them is the creation of an adequate legal framework to guarantee equality among peoples that is secured through public equity, which is based on the respect for sovereignty rights, the nation as a whole which must be mandatory. In terms of management such relationships between peoples, nations and states are equal values that can guarantee equal rights.



197

Moreover, the overrating of one of these elements over the other two leads to disruption of the system of relationships between nations, because any of these elements offline can only act as a catalyst for the development of relations between nations, but not a self-sufficient unit in the system. In this sense the management vision of international relationships, their development is conceived as a synonym for relationships between states and nations. Therefore, establishing relationships between different social environments


198


in international management decisions should take into account the real state of the nation state, which is especially important for those who do not have their statehood as the respect for equality has no state boundaries and it reaches the highest principles of humanism.

Such notions as “system”, “integrated system” imply a profound, authentic bellwether of relationships’ self-development: the system cannot function properly, grow rapidly without its own adequate capacity, the allocation of elements that organizes them in such a ratio of international and national content, which would significantly contribute to the development of relationships of different nations.

An equally important factor is the development of this new systemic consistency of mankind as an objective and potential ability of harmonization which is based on the contradictions of organizational and managerial factors between the system and the national interests of humanity. Increasingly the effective balance of interests of the international community and national interests of individual nations can be achieved using managerial efforts of international institutions, which reached the global level of civilization development. Moreover, national and state interest becomes a major source of stabilization and development of the world community as a system.

Thus, governing the actual state of social and systemic relationships between nations changes its context: countries of different levels of development have an opportunity of organizing subjective efforts, because on the basis of relations developing in the new type of contradictions, their normal functioning and development require exactly correct, scientifically prudent management of international relations. Scientists view the current state of these relationships as chaotic, in their perception it reflects the objective contradictions existing among nations; this tendency requires a certain “handling” of this situation in the world. Moreover, the essential characteristics of this process, mainly management, are the fact that the objective contradictions that constantly arise should be the object of administrative streaming and harmonization. The understanding of management context allows us to offer a vision of humanity and organizational capacity of its parts as a permanent factor of management improvements. Indeed, the presence of the international community as a system of states is the evidence of a systematic self- management of mankind based on certain fundamental pillars, particularly law. It should be noted that despite the fact that in the management science and practice, the term “state” has a somewhat dominant interpretation, from the point of view of social management the rule of the law is a basic, fundamental, generally civilized creation in relation to the state. This means that methodologically any state should be viewed as a manifestation of particular legal state of self-regulation as part of the global system, and governing it is a legal regulation of relationships. Indeed, international law as a social phenomenon of management system, through its elements such as



199

internal law, human rights, etc., have different forms of their reflection, the higher of which is the state, but in managing international relationships not the state, but namely the right should be the basis for social organizations, including international relationships.

From the perspective of management a lack in governing certain international relationships is a crucial disadvantage of mankind self-management, including international institutions as responsible senior management structures of the


200


modern world order as a preventive direction in their work is, in fact, essential, decisive.

Organizing international relationships on the principles established by these institutions is their initial purpose, because the autonomy and independence in particular states’ activities that violate these principles is evidence of insufficient management energy of international institutions. In this connection a considerable potential for improving management of international cooperation is inherent to the process during which countries are being transferred to such a type of management which can be classified as social management, built on a fairly effective combination of national and international interests in accordance with the objective needs of international life, the interests of all peoples of the world if, of course, the organizational principles of cooperation are founded on the basis of its actual, usually controversial, conditions.

Moreover, understanding the mutual benefits of cooperation in the modern history of international relations has a fundamentally different context because it relates to the interests of millions of people; it has become a sign of international relationships, so governing them, namely governing people or countries’ cooperation can be very effective if it is based on the following principle: national must strengthen the international community and vice versa.

It is clear that the implementation of this principle has a concrete historical content, because cooperation relationships not only exist, but they are constructed through mutually beneficial activities, mutually beneficial exchange of products and cooperative efforts to address both domestic and international challenges facing the world community. Therefore, this cooperation has crucial forms of providing the participants with opportunities of solving internal management problems through potential cooperation of nations. It means that the acceleration or deceleration of this development primarily depends on the creation of institutional spaces for collaboration, direct interaction of interests of various countries and cooperation of international institutions, the development of institutional mechanisms and so on. The structural backbone of international relationships encompasses such principles as respect for national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, mutual benefit, non-interference in the internal affairs of each other. However, each of these items does not answer the question of the nature of organizational relationships of cooperation as joint activities with the strengthening and development of the international community both in international and in the domestic sense.

Therefore, we must rely on the following methodological principles of international cooperation that allow determining the potential, on the basis of which we can create a system of organizational coordinates, it means representing management cooperation among countries in generally accepted, theoretical terms of a phenomenon that



201

characterizes cooperation in general and it is an indicator of its organizational development.

It is especially true because in cooperation management it is necessary to isolate the two sides of the phenomenon: the objective and subjective associated with conscious activity of the State Cooperation Organization, its management, although this division is not only quite complicated, but also to some extent scientifically incorrect because it concerns the theoretical understanding of the essence of international cooperation.


202


Concerning the objective management cooperation reflects the inherent to the relationships consistency, formed as a result of international division of labor, specialization and cooperation in the sphere of material and spiritual production. And this consistency is present in the relationships between countries regardless of the number of countries entering into these relationships, and even at the level of their development.

The evidence of such kind of managing international cooperation is an organizational expression of the relationships between them in the form of governing integration processes that determine the level of cooperation. In this sense, governance itself as a necessary condition for the development of these processes to some extent is objective, and the level of its organization must meet this basis, that fully exploit the potential of interstate cooperation in its functioning. Moreover, a new organizational and political level of relationships between nations appears in establishing direct contacts between the subjects of cooperation, which greatly complicated the management of cooperation between them. Therefore diversified cooperation is significant for a scientific analysis of the main areas of cooperation in order to better introduce not only the object of control, but also likely to find out possibilities for methodological foundations of the process of international integration management.

Self-organization of the international community, new qualities of the modern world development respectively cause the objective necessity for management responses, so that the countries that currently receive independence in their choice of economic, political and cultural development could have the opportunity to maximize their national potential and also could be systematically and correctly placed in the global integration process, it is necessary to create new management mechanisms.

In other words, the generally civilized foundations of social governance, their scientific understanding are methodological knowledge that is closely connected with the object of management and transforms the science into the active construction the operation of which acts as a true factor of any managerial object development according to its organizational capacity, its basic structural elements. And in this sense this unity, the level of its development, is the highest level of the unity of the modern world community and its basic elements — the nation. Therefore constant verifying the validity of the conceptual apparatus of science in the management system and element dimensions is a condition of the science self-management. And the national aspect is also autonomous in relation to management as a science, as a system of knowledge about the general principles of management, creating a structure of management as a science in general.

The latter is especially important because it is not just about the general science, but also about its national element, mainly a Ukrainian one, which enjoys not only the general organizational potential as



203

human experience, but also creates our own national knowledge. The latter, in turn, uses the general science of management and simultaneously creates its own one, the national science. This fact also requires accent characteristics because the Ukrainian management practices established national management as a structural element of the world’s one.

It is clear that the structure of national knowledge does not imply a disorderliness

of management as a world science. This structure is a human diversity and adequacy


204


of knowledge, which is cemented by its systematic state, its original condition and social and intellectual diversity of its implementation.

It means that management as a science is not just a separate science, some organizational formation, but also an information phenomenon that reflects a structural condition of management in general. The total management science and its reflection are a separate unit, including calculated intellectual potential and only in this form it can efficiently serve society as a social phenomenon. It does not mainly refer to a certain reality in general and particular, but also mutual, complementary knowledge, though it is commonly believed that management as general knowledge in the Ukrainian science is “very demanding” and as a science its arsenal encompasses just something that can serve as something general in management. But it’s not true, because Ukrainian governance as a separate phenomenon is not only complementary to the overall management in the Ukrainian reality, but also the only source of science like any other national human element of social structuring, although at the overall level it has a great element of its own system capacity.

Thus, management as a general science is general concerning a national one, which obviously is not a sign of hierarchical correlation: national management as a science is not comparable to the general one in terms of its total capacity, the effect of exposure to any object and intellectual power. The integration of generally civilized foundations of human society in the real movement of material and spiritual civilization is direct evidence of this perception.

As you know, it is very important to understand the current concern of determination (most accurate) of the role and place of science in the system of knowledge for the scientific and creative process in the society, since not only does the creative process customarily depends on it, but also the problem of the efficient influence of this or that science on targets it examines. That is why the structuring of scientific knowledge has almost a universal methodological sense.

The mentioned above idea mainly concerns not only management as a science in general, but also social governance. The latter is especially important, and should be investigated, because social governance is the science that occupies a fundamental place in the management knowledge. It determines sufficient efficacy of branch disciplines of management, since it deals with the main source, which determines the ability to manage certain objects: public relations, material and spiritual production sectors of the society, the division of labor, etc., and finally, it focuses social self-management on its main factors — a human being as a bearer of interests of the specified structure of objects.

And, in this context the stipulated consistence has objective principles, which is especially important because sometimes it removes the existing “creative” practice of manipulating scientific knowledge with regard to the definition of the role and place of a science in the modern information space, including governing the society.



205

This objectivity lies in the fact that management is a phenomenon almost endless because it implies the adherence of any social, biological or technical systems to governing, possessing sometimes too complicated vertical and horizontal organizational capabilities to self-management, which embraces he organizational capacity of any self-governing object.

Erecting on this basis the system of management sciences is completely natural and objective. Therefore, it is the objective and academic necessity to identify management


206


knowledge in this system that would determine the methodological background of other management sciences.

Social management as a science is supposed to fulfill this function due to its profound determinant — generally civilized approaches (foundations) of social management. That is why social management as the science refers to knowledge that represents the most complex system of government of the world — human society, a key element of which is the human being. This knowledge has a generally civilized and social context that helps housing management to exercise its mission — to establish a highly developed modern social organization of the world.

ReferencesAfanasyev, 1995 — Afanasyev V.G. Nauchnoe upravlenie obschestvom

[Scientific society management] — Moscow, 1995. — 245 p.Bevzenko, 2002 — Bevzenko L.D. Socialnaya samoorganizaciya:

sinergeticheskaya paradigma: vozmognosty socialnuh interpretaciy [Social self-management: the synergy paradigm: opportunities of social interpretation] — Kiev, 2002. — 436 p.

Bogdanov, 1989 — Bogdanov A.A. Tektologiya: vseobschaya organizacionnaya nauka [Tectology: management science ] — Moscow, 1989. — 412 p.

Veber, 1990 — Veber M . Izbrannue proizvedeniya [ Selected works] — Moscow, 1990. — 566 p.

Voronkova V. G. The concept of relationship among man, consciousness, mind in the context of the virtual information space / Philosophy and Cosmology 2013 (Vol.12): academic journal — Kiev: ISPC, 2014 — P. 170-182

Gaievska, 2000 — Gaievska O.B. Upravlinnya yak socialyuy fenomen [Governance as social phenomenon] — Kyiv, 2000. — 182 p.

Gaievska, 2012 — Gaievska O.B. Upravlinska cuvilizaciya: zagalnocuvilizaciynuy rozvutok upravlinnya micshnarodnumu vidnosunamu cherez nacionalnu dercshavnu samoorganizacieyu [Management civilization: generally civilized development of international relationships management through national state self-management] / Herald of politics 2012 (Volume 66) — Kyiv, 2012 — P. 324-334.

Gaievska, 2014 — Gaievska O. B. Zagalnocuvilizaciynuy zmist socialno-sustemnoyi organizaciyi [Generally civilized context of social organization] / University faculty 2014 (Volume 3) — Kyiv, 2014 — P. 92-101.

Gaievska, 2014 — Gaievska O.B. Nauka socialnogo upravlinnya v sustemi profesiynoyi pidgotovku [social governance as a science in the system of professional preparation] / Theory and practice of governing social systems. Periodical quarterly journal 2014 (Volume 3) — Harkiv НТУ «ХПІ», 2014 — P. 105-113.

Luman, 2004 — Luman N. Obshsestvo kak socialnaya sistema



207

[Society as social system ] — Moscow, 2003. — 232 p.Pochepcov, 2005 — Pochepcov G.G. Strategiya: instrumentariyi po

upravltniyu budusshim [ Strategy: management tools of future] — Kyiv, 2005. — 377 p.

Pushulin, 2003 — Pushulin M.P. Socialnoe upravlenie: sinergeticheskaya paradigma [Social governance: synergy paradigm ] — Moscow, 2003.


208


Farenik, 2003 — Farenik S.A. Upravlinnya socialnumu protsesami: pobudova ta realizaciyasocialnuhmodeley[ Governingsocialprocessesandimplementation of the social model] — Kyiv, 2003. —368p.

Shepelev, 2004 — Shepelev M.A. Globalizaciya upravlinnya yak megatendenciya suchsnogo svitovogo rozvutky [Governance globalization as the world development tendency] — Kyiv, 2004. —512p.

198


ГРАЖДАНСКОЕ ОБЩЕСТВО КАК ПАРАДИГМА, КОНЦЕПТ И КОНСТРУКТ СОЦИАЛЬНО-

ФИЛОСОФСКОГО ДИСКУРСАВ. Г. Воронкова — д. филос. н., проф.,

Запорожская государственная инженерная академия (г.Запорожье, Украина)


В статье осуществляется попытка дать анализ гражданского общества с точки зрения социально-философского дискурса как парадигмы,

теории, концепта и конструк- та данного явления. Методология. Дается обоснование концепции гражданського обще- ства с точки зрения

раскрытия механизмов саморазворачивания гражданського обще- ства в контексте синергетической методологии. Научная новизна. Анализируется

по- нятие гражданского общества с точки зрения социально-философского дискурса как па- радигмы, теории, концепта, конструкта, который

способствует проникновению вглубь анализируемых явлений и содействует раскрытию их имманентной сущности. Практи- ческое значение работы состоит в разработке мало исследованной и актуальной темы, которая

пытается представить новое понимание человека в пределах данного дискурса. Ключевые слова: гражданское общество, парадигма, концепт,

конструкт, субъект- субъектное отношение, субъект-объектное отношение, синергетическая методология,

самоорганизационные механизмы

THE CIVIL SOCIETY AS A PARADIGM, CONCEPT AND SOCIAL CONSTRUCT

FHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSEValentina Voronkova — Doctor of Philosophy,Professor,

Zaporozhye State Engineering Academy(Zaporozhye, Ukraine)

The article is an attempt to give an analysis of civil society in terms of socio-philosophical discourse as paradigms, theories, concepts and constructs of the phenomenon. The substantiation of the concept of civil society in terms of disclosure mechanisms samorazvorachivaniya grazhdanskogo society in the context of synergetic methodology. The notion of civil society in terms of socio-philosophical discourse as paradigms, theories, concept, construct that facilitates the penetration depth of the analyzed phenomena and promote the realization of their inherent essence. The practical significance of the work is to develop a little researched and timely topic that attempts to present a new understanding of man within this discourse

Key Words: civil society, a paradigm, concept, construct, subject-subject relation,


199


the subject- object relationship, synergetic methodology, self-organization mechanisms

Гражданское общество в современном украинском обществе еще не сфор- мировано, находится в хаотическом состоянии несознательного движения и ша- раханья то в одну, то в другую сторону, в котором личностная позиция самореали- зации человека не находит своего выражения в сознательной и целеустремлен-

© Воронкова В. Г., 2015


200


ной деятельности по преобразованию общества в целом. Межличностная разъ- единенность, увеличение индивидуалистического (эгоцентрического) сознания, нарушение механизма идентификации со своим народом и культурой приводит к тому, что современное украинское общество не является интегративным нача- лом, которое объединяет личностей. Современная украинская политика актуа- лизирует задачу — объединить нацию, создать конкурентоспособную экономи- ку, европейское пространство интеграции, гражданское общество. Но главное в этом процессе — не потерять человека, потому что ради человека формируется современное общество и современная экономика, весь способ общегосударствен- ного и частного бытия нации [Сидоренко, 2013:с.4]. В Украине нет ничего более неопределенного, нежели дискурс гражданского общества, причем общества, ко- торое развивалось бы изнутри цивилизованным путем, а не навязано было извне в условиях, давлеет глобальное гражданское общество, электронное правитель- ство, глобальный менеджмент, глобальные международные организации.

Гражданское общество в контексте социально-философского дискурса нами анализируется как парадигма, теория, концепт и конструкт.

Парадигма — это понятие философии, система теоретических, методоло- гических и аксиологических идей, взглядов, положений, которые воспринима- ются в качестве образца решения научных задач и разделяются некоторыми членами научного сообщества; 2) модель-эталон научно-концептуального мо- дуса, которые следует рассматривать в качестве образца-субмодели в контек- сте определенных научно-идеологических апробаций. Термин «парадигма» впервые ввел в философию позитивист Г.Бергман, но адекватный приоритет в его использовании и распространении принадлежит Т.Куну в связи с диф- ференциацией научных идей, принципов, проблем. В своей работе «Структу- ра научных революций» (1962) Т.Кун говорит о возможности выявления двух основных аспектов: эпистемологического и социального [Кун, 2002].

В эпистемологическом плане парадигма представляет собой совокупность фундаментальных знаний, ценностей, убеждений и технических приемов, которые считаются образцом научной общественности, в социальном пла- не — выделяются в рамках некоторого научного сообщества, ученые которого разделяют научные взгляды, которые имеют широкую эктраполяцию у диф- ференцированных гуманитарно-естественных науках, под которыми следует понимать модусы ментальности, рефлексии, оценки предметов-объектов дей- ствительности в аддитивности с философскими, эстетическими, этическими, онтологическими, теологическими, социальными, политическими, экономи- ческими идеями, принципами, категориями. Существование парадигмы свя- зано с периодом формирования науки, в рамках которой ученые

Воронкова В. Г. Гражданское общество как парадигма, концепт и конструкт социально-философского дискурса

201


выполняют определенную проектно-программную функцию своей теории или парадиг- мы. Изменение парадигмы осуществляется в контексте научных революций, что связано со своеобразным переключением научного сообщества на новую систему мироустройства и ценностей. Критика чрезмерного психологизма в понимании парадигмы способствовало тому, что Т.Кун конкретизировал свою позицию, используя понятие «дисциплинарной матицы», которая синоними- чески рассматривается как концепт парадигмы [Кун, 2002].

В понятие «дисциплинарной матрицы» парадигмы входят символические обобщения, которые составляют формальный аппарат и язык, характерные

200



для конкретной научной дисциплины; метафизические компоненты, кото- рые определяют наиболее фундаментальные теоретические и методологиче- ские принципы; ценности, которые детерминируют господствующие идеалы и нормы формирования и обоснования научного знания. Понятие парадиг- мы в позднейших работах Т.Куна связано в большей мере с характеристикой интегральных социально-психологических аспектов научного сообщества. В современную парадигму философии современного развития входит: 1) фрак- туалистская парадигма (структурный функционализм, теории социального и политического конфликта); 2) дефиционистская парадигма (символический интеракционизм, феноменология, этнометодология); 3) парадигма социаль- ного бихевиоризма (концепции социального обмена). Для теорий Т.Куна ха- рактерным является то, что классическая и модерная парадигмы не совмести- мы между собой, так как между ними существует несоответствие, а новая пара- дигма подчиняется новым принципам, категориям, тенденциям [Кун, 2002].

Термин «парадигма» аналогичный термину «концепция» и представляет собой совокупность понятий, которые остались в душе, которая восприняла язык и формируется языком, которые осуществляются в пространстве чело- веческой души Последняя включает объяснения происхождения понятий в разрезе умственной деятельности, включая элементы трансцендентального опыта, которые в целом направлены на целостное отображение сложной и противоречивой действительности.

Термин «концепция» — это система взглядов, категориальных структур, идей, идеалов, норм, обоснованиенекоторыхидей, которыевыражаютнекоторый способ восприятия мира; понимание некоторых явлений, предметов, процессов, которые репрезентируют конструктивную идею или конструктивный принцип, который выражает парадигмальный срез теоретического знания, определяет его топику и риторику, выявляет релевантные сферы их применения и способы вли- яния, В концепциях фиксируются граничные определения и реализуются макси- мально широкие взгляды на предмет и объект исследования, которые сохраняют открытость и дальнейшее развитие логико-гносеологическое, социокультурное и праксиологическое значение в познавательном процессе; определенный срез полисемантического знания, которое создает понятийно-концептуальное ядро, в котором фиксируются не только свойства объекта, но и отношение к нему субъ- екта. Если предмет научного знания (исследование) в исследуемой парадигме — это то, что находится в рамках объекта (частичного), в котором выделяется та его часть, которая служит предметом исследования, то предмет исследования определяет тему научного поиска, в которой объект и предмет соотносятся как общее и частичное. Благодаря процедурам концептуализации они становятся элементами науки, объединенными социологической концепцией: терминами,


201

Воронкова В. Г. Гражданское общество как парадигма, концепт и конструкт социально-философского дискурсаустойчивыми законами и закономерностями, теориями и моделями. Концепция, как научная форма ещё со времён И.Канта рассматривается, во-первых, как со- вокупность суждений, отражающих в той или иной степени объективную соци- альную реальность. А, во-вторых, процедурно, концепция это ещё и правило, на основании которого выносятся суждения, оценки, действия, как руководство для организации, структурирования материалов, полученных в результате наблюде- ния и опыта. Достижения и открытия, полученные ученым в результате исследо- ваний, становятся частью большой науки, в форме концепции.


200


Термин «теория» — это форма научного познания и целостного пред- ставления о закономерностях и современных чертах предмета познания, ко- торые характеризуются специфическим объектом, а также объективностью, обоснованностью, системностью, способствуя восстановлению закономер- ностей объекта в его целостности, выполняя функции — методологическую, аксиологическую, прогностическую, прагматическую, синтезирующую. Объ- ектом исследования в науке принято называть тот фрагмент окружающей дей- ствительности, предметного, материального мира или области идей, духовной жизни, который интересен для исследования не сам по себе, а как носитель нераскрытых характеристик и непознанных противоречий. Другими слова- ми, объект исследования (носитель) необходим для того, чтобы в конкретном явлении или в четко определенном пространстве объекта иметь возможность выделить для специального исследования совокупность конкретных особен- ностей, которые непосредственно интересуют ученого, носителем которых и есть восстановленный объект. Объект познания — это совокупность качествен- но определенных явлений и процессов реальности, которые отличаются по своей внутренней природе, основным чертам, законам функционирования от других объектов реальности.

Термин «концепт» — понятие, смысловая загрузка которого состоит в аб- страгировании от конкретно-языковой формы их выражения. В научном зна- нии определенным образом упорядоченный и иерархизированный минимум концепта создает концептуальную схему, а установление необходимых связей между собой создает сущность концептуализаци. Впервые термин «концепт» был употреблен С. Аскольдовым, который определил его как субститут неопре- деленного большинства предметов одного и того же порядка. Концепт функцио- нирует всередине сформированной концептуальной схемы в режиме «понима- ния — объяснения» и есть результатом взаимодействия различных факторов — национальных традиций, фольклора, религии. Концепт — оперативная единица памяти человека, метального лексикона, концептуальной системы и языка моз- га. Каждый концепт занимает свое четко определенное и обоснованное место на том или ином уровне концептуальной схемы. Концепт одного уровня может и должен конкретизироваться на других уровнях, изменяя тем самым элементы схемы, с которой начинают соотноситься его элементы.

Концепт в рамках одной концептуальной схемы не обязательно должен не- посредственно соотноситься между собой, но обязательно в рамках целостно- сти, в которую он входит. Концепты соотносятся в соответствии с данной пред- метной схемой, скорее, они есть организованные в своей целостности способы видения (конструирования, конституирования) реальности. В этом смысле


201


они владеют определенной онтологической «наполняемостью», которые от- личают их от конструктов, которые представляют собой чисто познавательные инструменты и способствуют переходам от одного уровня теоретической ра- боты к другому (с изменением языков описания) и в этом качестве могут не иметь никакого онтологического «наполнения». Благодаря схемам концеп- туализации и операционализации концепт подлежит в науке «разворачива- нию» в систему конструктов, обеспечивая в идеале их «выведение» на эмпи- рический уровень познания. Собственно обоснование концепта формируется в более широких по отношению к ним метауравневых системах знания, презен-

202



тация которых может состояться в рамках той или иной конкретной теории. В постекласической методологии науки концепт стал рассмативаться не только со стороны своего функционального наполнения всередине научного знания (или научной теории), но как системосозидающие элементы концепций, кото- рые выполняет функция организации дисциплинарного (научного, теологиче- ского, философского) знания вообще. В качестве своеобразного «генератора» продуцирования концепта стала выступать философия. Философские концеп- ты — это фрагментарные единства, видение которых было радикализирова- но в постструктуралистской философии, в частности, в номадологии Делеза и Гваттари, в которой конструкт стал трактоваться как дополнительный инстру- мент познания и приобрел статус «зарождения философии».

Таким образом, социально-философский дискурс гражданского общества определяется через посредничество и творчество конструктов, постоль- ку само гражданское общество определяется через «творчество конструктов» [Сидоренко, 2013б]. «Творчество конструктов» означает отличие дискурса от науки, которая имеет дело с «проспектами» и «функтивами», а также от ис- кусства, которое порождает «перцепты» и «аффекты». Философский дискурс как «творчество конструктов» не может редуцироваться ни к созерцанию конструкта, ни к рефлексии, которая свойственна только философии, ни к коммуникации, которая рождает консенсус. Конструкт есть чисто сингуляр- ное и автореферентное понятие (а не сущность или вещь), которое не имеет пространственно-временных координат, а только свои «интенсивные коорди- наты» как составляющие предметности бытия. Конструкт, будучи творческим процессом, одновременно редуцирует свой объект, размещается в дофило- софском «плане имманенции», который представляет собой некоторый образ мыслей (мысль о мысли), «горизонт событий», «резервуар» для конструкта, некоторую пустыню, по которой путешествуют «племена-конструкты».

Дофилософский план имманенции по своей сути ризоморфный и вмещает в себе все, что представляет собой всецелостность. Движение конструкта в пла- не имманенции создает «переменную кривую» и ее «складки». В то же время в плане имманенции конструкт «производит хаос» и рождает элементы, кото- рые представляют сущность диаграмматических черт этого хаоса, абсолютные направления, которые представляют собой интенсивные черты хаоса и его из- мерений. В этом смысле задача философской рефлексии, которую она реша- ет через посредничество конструктов, — придать хаосу такую консистенцию, которая способствовала бы развитию, преодолевая иллюзии трансцендентно- сти, универсалий, вечности, дискурсивности. План имманенции окружают ил- люзии: 1) «иллюзия


203

Воронкова В. Г. Гражданское общество как парадигма, концепт и конструкт социально-философского дискурсатрансцендентности», которая в имманентности находит место для трансцендентности (конструкты в данном случае стают фигурами);2) «иллюзия универсалий», когда имманентность становится имманентной к объекту созерцания, субъекту рефлексии или другому субъекту коммуни- кации; 3) «иллюзия вечности», когда конструкты должны быть созданы для культивирования идей связи с вечным абсолютом; 4) «иллюзия дискурсив- ности», когда смешиваются конструкты с предложениями и, как следствие, философия и наука, смешивают воедино своим аргументы.

Конструкты соотносятся: 1) с автором (аристотелевская субстанция, декар- товское cogito, кантовское a priori); 2) владеют эндоконсистенцией — целост-


204


ностью и экзоконсистенцией — соотнесенностью с другими конструктами; 3) соотнесенностью с проблемой или пересечением множества проблем, на кото- рые он должен отвечать; 4) процессуальностью. Когда конструкты рассматри- ваются в контексте процесса развития.

Таким образом, термины «парадигма», «концепция», «теория», «кон- структ» «концепт» являются методологическими составляющими научного познания, которое способствует проникновению вглубь анализируемых яв- лений, раскрытию их имманентной сущности благодаря методам, подходам, принципам с использованием рефлексии как процесса осмысления теорети- ческих и индивидуально личностных процессов, что представляет собой при- влечение познания на свою пользу.

Термин «концепт» (лат. conceptus — понятие) свидетельствует об упорядоченном и иерархизированном минимуме идей, которые создают кон- цептуальную схему, а нахождение необходимых идей и связей между ними создает сущность концептуализации. Концепт существует всредине сформи- рованной концептуальной схемы в виде формата «понимание-объяснение», занимает четко определенное и обоснованное место на том или ином уровне концептуальной схемы, что способствует рождению конструктов. Конструкты выступают в качестве своеобразного «генератора» продуцирования концеп- тов, представляя многогранное разнообразие составляющих, необходимых для того, чтобы способствовать упорядочению социальной системы, а кон- структы — точка совпадения составляющих конструктов. Таким образом, на социоантропологическом уровне эти дефиниции подчеркивают функциональ- ное значение гражданского общества, выраженное ценностно-нормативными, знаково-коммуникативными и нормативно-результативными функциями.

Проблемная ситуация в исследовании данного феномена состоит в том, что формирование субъект-субъектных отношений происходит благо- даря взаимодействию человека, государства и гражданского общества, что в целом способствует повышению его составляющих. В нашем представлении гражданское общество как система высшей меры саморегуляции, которая сама себя поддерживает благодаря общественным подсистемам и способствует воз- обновлению, коррекции и усовершенствованию всех его подсистем, сохраняя социальное равновесие общественной среды и находиться в ситуации постоян- ных изменений, направленных в сторону цивилизационного вектора развития [Воронкова, 2012].

Гипотеза исследования состоит в том, что система гражданского обще- ства представляет собой сложное образование, в котором еще не сформиро- вано субъект-субъектное взаимодействие, но совместное взаимодействие двух типов


205


отношений должно еще сформироваться на прочной основе, которой есть средний класс, чтобы обеспечить эффективную саморегуляцию и дина- мику развития объекта. Отличие от предыдущих исследований заключается в экстраполяции социантропологической парадигмы в механизм гражданского общества, которая нацелена на воссоздание человека как родового существа, на человекоцентризм, в основе которого актуализация сущности человеческой жизни [Базалук, 2002].

Основу консолидации украинского социума следует искать снизу, а не сверху, то есть в эффективной деятельности общественных организаций,


206


объединенных в гражданское общество как коллективный субъект, который может быть сформирован на основе преодоления межличностной разъеди- ненности, изменения субъективно-объективного отношения на субъективно- субъективное. Гражданское общество как общество равных возможостей и равноправных людей, освобожденное от административной регламентации и опеки, оптимально соединяет человека, нацию и государство на основе пари- тетной защиты человека и нации, в котором человек свободно проявляет свою личность, творческую инициативу и защищает нацию. Законодательное опре- деление юридического равенства на основе наделения их равными правами и свободами — главная черта и основа гражданского общества. В отличие от го- сударства, гражданское общество представляет собой систему многообразных связей и отношений граждан, их объединений, союзов, которые базируются на равенстве и личностной инициативе граждан.

В основе теоретико-методологических подходов анализа человека как объ- екта и субъекта гражданского общества следует выделить следующие методы и подходы: 1) системно-структурный метод (основоположники Л. Фон Берта- ланфи, Н. Винер, А. Богданов) выделяет общие понятия этого метода: элемент, связь, структура, субстрат (среда, в которой существуют элементы), целостная совокупность элементов, связей и субстрата, подсистема, суперсистема как со- вокупность систем, которая используются для анализа гражданского общества.2) Системный метод как способ научного познания и практической деятель- ности, который требует рассмотрения частей гражданского общества в нераз- рывном единстве с целым — государством, которое консолидирует обществен- ность, есть ее двигателем.3) Структурно-функциональный метод, при котором исследуются элементы гражданского общества, благодаря чему происходит выделение в объекте стабильных элементов, их структурных взаимосвязей как системы, функционально взаимосвязанных переменных (Т.Парсонс, Ис- тон, Р.Мертон). 4). Синергетический метод, который используется для анализа гражданского общества как нелинейной системы, которая развивается в не- линейном обществе и имеет целую совокупность полифуркационных (бифур- кационных) возможностей для своего развития; 5) Антропологический метод, который развивает антропологические основы развития гражданского обще- ства, в основе которого самореализация человека как целостного существа [Нестеренко, 2004].

Данное исследование имеет отличие от предыдыщих исследований в том, что оно состоит в теоретической рефлексии синергетическ-антропологической парадигмы, которая направлена на формирование механизмов: 1) механизмов саморегуляции гражданского общества; 2) механизмов саморазвития граж-



207

данского общества; 3) механизмов самовоспроизводства гражданского обще- ства. В результате внедрения этих механизмов в «организм» гражданского общества происходит саморазворачивание функций гражданского общества в отрыве от функций государственных, они включаются в динамику переходов от одного уровня качества гражданського общества к другому, саморазворачи- вание функций определяется как пространство, в котором происходит процесс разворачивания компонентов, которые способствуют формированию новой социальной реальности. Отличие от ранее исследуемых исследований состоит в том, что нами используется мультипарадигмальная рефлексия (диалектиче-


208


ская, синергетическая, системная, структурно-функциональная в их единстве и взаимообусловленности) гражданского общества, которая происходит на основе синтеза положений теории систем, социальной синергетики, киберне- тических теорий с их понятийно-категориальным аппаратом — обратных сяв- зей, гомеостазиса, авторегуляции, аутопоэзиса, механизмы которых способны преодолеть антиэнтропийные процессы и достичь стабильности в граждан- ском обществе, которое только начинает консолидироваться [Карась, 1995].

Синергетически-антропологическая методология дополняется системным подходом и методами кибернетики, которые способствуют обогащению мето- дологического анализа новыми онтологиями и законами процессов самоор- ганизации общества. Использование принципов социальной самоорганиза- ции для анализа гражданского общества приводит к объяснению социальных трансформцаий в обществе в контексте выявления механизмов самооргани- зации системы в состоянии нестабильности, «режимов с обострениями», объ- яснения состояний экономического, финансового, инфляционного, экологи- ческого кризиса, влияющих на интенсивную трансформацию социальных ин- ститутов.

Синергетически-антропологическая методология характеризует граж- данское общество как открытую, нелинейную систему, которая постоянно изменяется и имеет точки бифуркации, фракталы, эмерджментность, ко- торые обмениваются энергоинформационным и человеческим ресурсом. Синергетически-антропологическая методология требует объяснения меха- низмов самовоспроизводства гражданского общества в контексте протекания всех процессов — экономических, политических, социальных, духовных, куль- турных, мировоззренческих. Самооргнанизационные механизмы гражданско- го общества включают механизмы организационные, социального развития, саморегуляциии, самовоспроизводства, которые формируют механизмы смо- организации гражданского общества, преодолевая энтропийные механизмы социальной самоорганизации, которые можно определить в пределах параме- тров энтропии/негентропии социальных систем. Адаптационные механизмы гражданского общества реализуют функции текучести, преемственности, от- бора при сохранении характерных черт общества в рамках одного и того же со- циального организма. Бифуркационные рассогласованные механизмы граж- данского общества реализуют указанные функции на основе последователь- ной смены качественно новых состояний системы, которая время от времени теряет характерные черты своего предыдущего развития, сохраняя при этом черты преемственности [Бойчук, 2007].

Прерывность и рассогласованность (вариативность) позволяет системе на основе многовариантного поиска отбирать новые, более



209

эффективные стили. Эти же механизмы, обезспечивая необратимость протекания процессов, реа- лизуют важные качества — закрепление социальных изменений, которые про- исходят, способствуют формированию синергетически-рефлексивной модели гражданского общества [Воронкова, 2012].

Согласно данного исследования, бифуркационнные механизмы являются более эффективными по сравнению с адаптационными, так как они позволяют увеличить темпы развития гражданского общества, соединить всю совокупность механизмов и запустить их в движение, которое должно сформировать единый


210


эффективный механизм, который отвечает времени и простанству. Поэтому в данном научном исследовании мы попытаемся выделить следующую совокуп- ность механизмов, которая может быть задействована в этом процессе: 1) ме- ханизм организации; 2) механизм самоорганизации; 3) механизм самоуправле- ния; 4) механизм управления; 5) механизм инновационный. Как свидетельству- ет анализ, если адаптационные механизмы базируются на отрицательной обрат- ной связи и есть близкими к механизмам негэнтропийным, то бифуркационные механизмы — к механизмам энтропийного типа. Приоритет синергетически- антропологического подхода выражаеться в появлении нелинейного мышле- ния, самыми важными атрибутами которого являются: 1) многовариантность и альтернативность эволюции; 2) возможность выбора ее альтернативных путей;3) возможность ускорения темпов развития, инициирвание ускоренного нели- нейного роста;4) влияние каждой личности на макросоциальные процессы; 5) недопустимость навязывания социальным системам путей развития; 6) проте- кание социальных поцессов в условиях нестабильности; 7) необратимость раз- вития; 8) эволюционность и целостность мира [Бевзенко, 2002].

В результате синергетически-антропологического анализа гражданско- го общества как парадигмы, теории, конструкта, концепта, сделаем вывод, что оно решает четыре важных задачи: 1) обеспечение свободы (содействие развитию) человека-индивида, как главного условия самореализации жиз- ненного потенциала и креативной социальной деятельности; 2) обеспечение свободы движения информации и других обменных ресурсов по каналам (те- чениям) междукомпонентной социальной связи; 3) содействие качественно- му отбору потребителями обменных ресурсов; 4) согласование темпа и ритма локальных социальных действий. В центре предметной сферы гражданского общества — экстремальные процессы социальной жизни и их влияние на об- щество в условиях нелиенейного развития. Поэтому именно методология ана- лиза гражданского общества базируется синергетически-антропологчисекой методологии, которая придерживается основных принципов:1) обязатель- ность оценки уровня самоорганизации и взаимодействия; 2) нелинейности;3)альтернативности поисков развития; 4) использование информации как ре- сурса развития информационного общества. В результате методологического анализа гражданского общества, мы выделяем положение о том, что механиз- мы гражданского общества должны базироваться на: 1) социоантропологче- ских основаниях, в центре которых «человек как мера всех вещей и их созда- тель»); 2) синергетических основаниях, в основе которых нелинейное мышле- ние как основа функционирования управления как сложного социального и противоречивого явления, способного к самоорганизации в условиях непред- виденности социальной



211

системы; 3) наличия альтернатвиных путей развития социальной системы; 4) формирования гражданского общества как открытой и динамической систеым, способной к саморазвитию и самоорганизации; 5) необходимости оценки конструктивности природы случайности и неустойчи- вости; 6) отказ от линейного, шаблонного мышления и ориетации на готов- ность субъекта к созданию и восприятию нововведений и инноваций. Все это дает возможность по-новому использовать механизмы формирования граж- данского общества в условиях модернизации и трансформации современного общества [Сидоренко, 2013].


212


Поэтому гражданское общество развивается в соответствии с требования- ми: 1) государство выдвигает требование сверху (государственная концепция развития гражданского общества сверху, в основе которой субъект-объектное взаимодействие); 2) развитие гражданского общества идет снизу, в осно- ве которого межличностное взаимодействие и развивается оно в контекстке субъект-субъектной парадигмы развития.

Только преодоление понимания другого человека как объекта может ко- ренным образом изменить отношение к гражданському обществу, что позво- лит создать фундамент гражданского общества, в основе которого человек как его полноценный субъект демократического общества [Бойчук, 2012].

Позволим дать определение гражданского общества с точки зрения синергетически-антропологической методологии, под которым следует по- нимать собой совокупность антропологических, социальных, культурних, духовно-моральных, религиозных взаимодействий людей, сплоченных един- ством целей и принципов, которые контролируют деятельность «снизу» и решают задачи самодеятельности, креативности, творчества, формирования оснований гражданского общества, в основе которых человек и его потреб- ности. Именно при формировании антропо-социальных условий и проявля- ются субъективные качества индивидов, необходимые для совместной дея- тельности людей в гражданском обществе, которые решают задачи самовос- производства общества собственными усилиями в условиях свободы [Андрос, 2005]. Для эффективного функционирования цивилизованного гражданского общества необходимы модернизация экономики, развитие инвестиционно- инновационной политики, строительство социальной инфраструтуры обще- ства, системы образования и науки, охраны здоровья как субстанциональных ценностей бытия, социальной защиты населения, которое не должно быть брошено в стихию рыночной экономики. Поэтому для становлення циви- лизационной модели гражданского ощества предстоит еще мого поработаь, чтобы Украина стала конкурентоспособным государством на международной арене и не только экономически, а чтобы благосостояние повышалось вместе с культурой народа, его социальными и антропологическими стандартами, интеллектуально-духовным развитием, увеличением показателей человече- ского капитала. Субъектность нации и государства, а также субсидиарность то- вариществ и отдельных личностей гражаднского общества повышается толь- ко тогда, когда нация становится равноправным субъектом действия, которая руководствуется собственным выбором пути развития, интеграции и форми- рования условий для достижения конкурентоспособности нации, которая не игнорирует субъектов гражданського общества.

В контескте развития субъектности нации, субъект развитого


213


граждан- ского общества — это источник целенаправленной активности, носитель предметно-практической деятельности, оценки и познания; это человек на высшем уровне активности, который открывает бытие и самореализует свое самосознание; это носитель всех атрибутов человека — природных, социаль- ных, общественных, индивидуальных. Основной характеристикой субъекта развитого гражданского общества является переживание самого себя как су- веренного источника активности, способного в некоторых границах осущест- влять свою деятельность и реализовываться в деятельности и бытии каждого


214


конкретного индивида, определять свое отношение к другому человеку, пред- ставляя свое «Я» как единственное, всеобщее, коллективное. Объект, напро- тив, — это то, что противостоит субъекту; это то, на что направлена предметно- практическая и оценочно-познавательная деятельность субъекта.

В нашем понимании субъект-субъектная позиция в гражданском обще- стве является первой ступенькой выделения субъекта с окружающего мира, в основе которого формирование собственного сознания и самосознания от- ельного человека, своего «Я». Субъектное познание другого субъекта как объ- екта предшествует субъектному познанию самого себя как объекта и только после этого на высшем уровне междуличностного познания другого субъекта как субъекта. На более высоком уровне самосознания эта противоположность необходима на первом уровне самоопределения в мире, должна преодлеваться на пользу субъект-субъектных отношений, в формате которых другой человек выступает в роли не столько объекта влияния, сколько «значимого другого». Взаимодействие людей может быть эффективным в том случае, если его участ- ники являются взаимно значимыми. Понятие «субъект-субъектного отноше- ния» означает наличие прямой связи между отдельными индивидам и чело- веческими общностями (народами, этносами). Собственно «Я» и обозначает процесс выделения субъекта из объекта, когда человек начинает осознавать себя отдельным существом в мире, обществе, своем бытии.

Коллективный субъект не возникает как механическое соединение многих

«Я», а возникает в процессе единой направленности субъектов на некоторые цели, которые они совместно реализуют именно на этом этапе, когда проис- ходит осознание отдельными субъектами своего единства, когда формируется«поли-субъект» или «мы-концепция». И чем дальше мы будем возвеличивать- ся по стугенькам обобщения субъектов в едином целепокладании, тем больше мы будем объединены и будем утверждаться, выражая единое «Я», в контексте которого каждый из элементов этого единого целого с необходимостью может влиять на другого. Эти отношения есть преимущественно материальными, по- тому что человек есть участником не только субъект-субъектных, но и субъект- объектных отношений, которые проявляются разными своими сторонами. Субъект-субъектное отношение предвидит в первую очередь взаимосвязь и эмоционально-духовное взаимодействие людей, напротив, объект-объектное отношение использует телесно-физические свойства людей. Когда человек реализует не столько свои интеллектуальные, столько телесные свойства, то и выступает скорее объектом отношений, для субъектных отношений необходи- ма обоюдная напрваленность одного субъекта на другого, окрашенная эмоци-



215

онально и как такая, что предвидит взаимодействие, взаимопроникновение, а не просто влияние субъекта на объект.

На духовном уровне это выражается во взаимном обогащении, взаимном развитии, например идеями (И.Вапчков и И.Гриншпун), которые, в свою оче- редь, выделяют среди коллективного субъекта полисубъект как его подструкту- ру, в контексте которой разворачивается процесс единого развития внутренних содержаний субъектов, которые находятся на уровне субъект-объектных отно- шений. Полисубъект понимается как целостное динамическо-психологическое образование, которое отражает феномен единства развития внутренних содер- жаний реальних субъектов, которые находятся в субъект-субъектных отноше-


216


ниях, объединенных совместной творческой деятельностью, которая прояв- ляется в способности к активности, действенности, интеграции, способности к превращению окружающего мира и самого себя, способности выступать как целостный субъект в отношениях к процессу саморазвития и других поли- субъектов. Продуктом самосознания полисубъекта является «мы-концепция», которая формируется в процессе их деятельности и развития. Взаимоотноше- ния в данной концепции формируются следующим образом: «Я» переходит в систему «Мы», а потом возвращается к «Я», и, таким образом, включается в поглощение колективом субъекта и устанавливается широкое взаимодействие субъектов всередине полисубъекта.

В связи с этим следует выделить три уровня связей, благодаря которым возможно определить, есть ли данная группа людей полисубъектом: 1) ин- тегративная связь –подструктуры объединены единой направленностью; 2) неинтегративная связь — неантагонистические противоречия; 3) дезинтегра- тивная связь — антагонистические противоречия и нулевая стадия развития полисубъекта. В системе этих упровней не следует отказываться от своего «Я» на пользу коллективному, а следует правильно понимать свое «Я» и свое место в системе межличностных отношений (С.Рубинштейн). «Я» есть всеобщность, которая свойственна всем, то есть каждому «Я», которое своим объектом име- ет индивидуальное, частное «Я». Во взаимоотношениях субъектов нет никакого принципиального преимущества частного «Я». Если субъект-субъектная фор- ма взаимотношений обеспечивает сохранение человека в качества субъекта, то объект-объектная связь предвидит устойчивое функционирование верей или предметной среды. Но если будет утверждаться субъект-объектное взаимоотно- шение между людьми, то субъект будет уничтожаться как личность для друго- го субъекта и отсутствие межсубъектной связи приведет к объективации самого субъекта, мир людей превратиться в ряд объектов, где теряется мораль, духо- вость, истина, любовь и чувства сопричастности к великому [Базалук, 2006].

Что касается самовыражения субъекта в гражданском обществе, то оно связано с общественной жизнью, социумом. И только при условии, когда каж- дый человек будет видеть в другом личность, другого равноправного субъек- та, доверять ему, возможна совместная деятельность, которая может достичь своей цели. Оптимальные условия для персонализации индивида существуют в группах высшего уровня развития, в которых персонализация каждого вы- ступает в качестве персонализации всех (именно в таких группах мы можем наблюдать, как проявляються субъект-субъектные отношения), в контексте ко- торых каждый член группы является социально значимым для другого, когда каждый стремится стать персонализированным в


217


общей системе отношений. Ответ заключается в том, чтобы человек видел свое бытие в другом челове- ке, «инобытийствовал» в другом, и благодаря своей пролонгированности в другом развивалась личность. В результате этого взаимодействия развитие осуществляется во «внутреннем пространстве личности» (Э.Ильенков), хотя это пространство связей с другими людьми (интер-индивидное, а не интра- индивидное) «пространство жизни». Деятельность в гражданском обществе есть основным путем и единственным эффективным способом стать личностью, чтобы способствовать выработке общественных — духовно-интеллектуальных, информационно-языковых, религиозных и других критериев средоспособно-


218


сти нации относительно возрождения аутентичных качеств граждан, объеди- ненных в гражданское общество.

Для гражданского общества чрезвычайно важно, чтобы был выработан интеграционный интегратор, который отображает способность граждан (социума) быть творческой средой не только в экономическом, технологи- ческом, экологическом планах, но и в духовно-интеллектуальном, языково- информационном, этнически-культурном, демографически-ментальном, поли- тически-патриотическом, космологическом аспектах [Базалук, 2003]. Пробле- мы сегодняшнего общества заключаются в том, что отсутствует сама по себе эффективная цель деятельности, которая подчиняла бы все приватные деятель- ности отдельных субъектов, проблема неосознанности отдельными людьми своей причастности к категории колективного с субъекта. Разрозненность це- лепокладания свойственна не только обществам в целом, но и отдельным ин- дивидам, в силу чего затрудяется межличностное взаимодействие. Это в свою очередь приводит к расслоению всей системы гражданского общества и обще- ства в глобальном понимании этого слова. В человеке должна сформироваться не только ответственность за себя, но и ответственность за себя в общем деле и других людей в смысле самоактуализации, чтобы не раствориться в общей си- стеме взаимосвязей людей в обществе. Поэтому субъект-субъектные отношения гражданского общества являются более высокой формой взаимодействия, чем субъект-объектные. Но самого високого уровня субъект-субъектное отношение достигает именно в любви к другому человеку, а это уже считается аксиологи- ческой стороной проблемы; это уровень морального отношения к другому че- ловеку. Человек для объединения с другим человеком, как это называется, — персонализацией, субъект-субъектным отношением — должен осуществить по отношению к «другому значимому» человеку акт трансценденции, то есть акт трансценденции, выхода за пределы свого собственного «Я», за пределы свого субъективного мира, на встречу другой субъективности в условиях нелинейно- сти, которая формирует личность нелинейного общества» [Нестеренко, 2004].

Проанализировав условия, при котором человек может быть объектом и субъектом гражданського общества, сделаем вывод:

1)необходимо преодоление субъект-объектных отношений и утверждение субъект-субъектных отношений, в контексте которых человек находит свое ис- тинное выражение, понимание и принятие «значимого другого» «Я»;

2)отношение другого «Я» к моему собственному «Я» должно выступать как условие моего существования, так как каждое «Я», постольку оно есть, есть и коллективным субъектом, в контексте которого должен отсутствовать приори- тет одного «Я» над другим;

3)для успешного функционирования личности ее предметная деятельность и общение должны иметь, кроме объективной



219

целесообразности, личностный, субъективный смысл, который понимается как некоторый аспект реализации собственного «Я»;

4)установление доверия один к другому и формирование интегрированной общественнной цели или идеи, которая объединила бы и сплотила субъектов всепх видов деятельности;

5)утверждение человека во всей полноте ее бытия, а не превращении чело- века в маску;


220


6) проявление силы своих действий в гражданском обществе, для чего че- ловеческое «Я» не должно раствориться в системе взаимозависимостей людей в обществе;

7) формирование полисубъектного взаимодействия между людьми, «мы- концепции» как фактора стабилизации своей ответственности за себя и дру- гого человека;

8) осуществление процесса персонализации субъекта, который должен по- лучить идеальную представленность в жизнедеятельности других людей и вы- ступать в гражданском обществе как личность.

Таким образом, объединение людей должно включать в свою структуру субъект-субъектный тип отношений и только на этом фундаменте оно спо- собно функционировать как развитое объединение граждан — гражданское общество. Реализация данных отношений завист от каждого из субъектов общественной, целенаправленной деятельности, от личностного типа выяв- ления сущностных сил, а также от деятельности государственных органов и других социальных институтов. Однако активность должна исходить от нас самих, осуществляться в нас самих и тем самым превращать нас в актив- ных субъектов гражданского общества, а для этого должен реализовываться принцип соразвития, который лежит в основе гражданского общества как единого организма [Бех, 2000].

В контексте применения синергетической методологии к анализу граж- данского общества современное общество встречается с отрицательными явлениями энтропийного характера, что свидетельствует о мере отклонения социальной системы от эталонного (нормального, ожидаемого) состояния, которое выявляется в снижении уровня темпов развития как экономическо- го, так и социального развития системы.

Теоретические и практические значение гражданского общества как социального феномена и социального института заключаются в том, что анализируются основания саморазворачивания функций гражданско- го общества, которые требуют анализа антиэнтропийных процессов и их пре- одоления, сводятся к использованию трех ключевых идей синергетической парадигмы: 1) изучение нелинейности развития; 2) изучение многовариант- ности и альтернативности развития (экономические системы проходят боль- шоеколичество и разнообразие бифуркационных точек рассосредоточения);3) способность социально-экономической системы к качественному скачку. Возмущения в системе (флуктуации) могут вызвать качественный переход системы от одного уровня в другому, поэтому следует акцентировать внима- ние на внедрении орагнизационных и управленческих изменений, которые в конце ХХ века стали одной из главных проблем философии современного мира [Бех, 1999].


221


Содействие развитию гражданского общества как главного концеп- та — конструкта современного развития общества есть одним из глав- ных условий становления Украины как демократического, правового госу- дарства. Для этого необходимо налаживание эффективного взаимодействия органов исполнительной власти с институтами гражданского общества, кото- рое должно базироваться на партнерстве и взаимозаинтересованности в до- стижении целей, связанных с процессом демократизации во всех сферах об-


222


щественной жизни. Гражданское общество — это сфера — общения, комму- никации, взаимодействия, спонтанной самоорганизации и самоуправления свободных индивидов на основе добровольно сформированных ассоциаций, которые защищены необходимыми законами от прямого вмешательства и регламентации со стороны государства и в котороим превалируют граж- данские ценности, которые мобилизуют творческие силы, направленные на становление и консолидацию украинского народа как политико-этнической общности и целостной единицы мирового сообщества [Бех, 2004].

Таким образом, подтверждена гипотеза исследования, что система гражданского общества представляет собой сложное образование, в ко- тором еще не сформировано субъект-субъектное взаимодействие, но со- вместное взаимодействие двух типов отношений должно еще сформиро- ваться на прочной основе, которой есть средний класс, чтобы обеспечить эффективную саморегуляцию и динамику развития объекта. Отличие от предыдущих исследований заключается в экстраполяции социантропологи- ческой парадигмы в механизм гражданского общества, которая нацелена на воссоздание человека как родового существа, на человекоцентризм, в основе которого актуализация гуманистических ценностей и ориентация на свободу личности.

ReferencesАндрос, 2005 — Андрос Є.І. Проблема свободи у контексті

раціоналізації людського буття / В. Г. Табачковський, М. О. Булатов, Т. В. Лютий та ін. // Людина в цивілізації ХХІ століття: проблема свободи. — К.: Наук. думка, 2005. — С. 127-174.

Базалук, 2002 — Базалук О.А. Сущность человеческой жизни: [Монография]

/ Олег Александрович Базалук.- К.: Наукова думка, 2002.- 270 с.

Базалук, 2003 — Базалук О.А. Происхождение человечества: новая космологическая концепция : [Монография] / О.А.Базалук. — Днепропетровск: Пороги, 2003.-142с.

Базалук, 2006 — Базалук О.А. Философия жизни: от волюнтаризма к экзистенциализму (компаративистский анализ): [Монография] / О. А. Базалук. — Винница: О. Власюк, 2006. — 292 с.

Базалук, 2014 — Базалук О. А. Модель эволюции разумной материи / Philosophy and Cosmology 2014 (Том 12) — Киев: МФКО, 2014. — С .165-196

Бевзенко, 2002 — Бевзенко Л.Д. Социальная самоорганизация. Синергетическая парадигма: возможности социальных



223

интерпретаций/ Л.Д.Бевзенко. — К.: Институт социологии НАН Украины, 2002. — 437 с.

Бех, 1999 — Бех В.П. Философия социального мира: гносеологический анализ: [Монография] / В.П.Бех. — Запорожье.: «Тандем-У», 1999. — 284 с.

Бех, 2000 — Бех В.П. Генезис соціального організму країни: Монографія. — 2-е вид., доп. / В.П. Бех. — Запоріжжя: Просвіта, 2000. — 288 с.


224


Бех, 2004 — Бех В.П. Человек и Вселенная: когнитивный анализ: [Монография]. — 2-е изд. доп./ В.П.Бех. — Запорожье: Просвіта, 2004. — 148 с.

Бойчук, 2007 — Бойчук М.А. Влада і громадянське суспільство: механізми взаємодії: [Монографія] / М.А.Бойчук. — К.: ТОВ «Атлант ЮЕмСІ».- 2007.- 207 с.

Бойчук, 2012 — Бойчук М.А. Демократія як народовладдя: становлення та розвиток в Україні в період утвердження незалежності: [Монографія ]/ М.А.Бойчук.- К.: Генеза, 2012.- 240 с.

Воронкова, 2012 — Воронкова В.Г. Формування синергетично-рефлексивної моделі самоуправлінського суспільства: цивілізаційний контекст/ В.Г.Воронкова // Гуманітарний вісник Запорізької державної інженерної академії: [зб.наук.пр.] — Запоріжжя: Вид-во ЗДІА, 2012.- Випуск № 49. — С.17-28.

Воронкова, 2013 — Воронкова В.Г Концепциивзаимосвязичеловека, сознания, разума в контексте виртуально-информационного пространства / Philosophy and Cosmology 2013 (Том 12) — Киев: МФКО, 2014 — С. 170-182.

Карась, 1995 — Карась А.Ф. Громадянське суспільство і національна культура / А.Ф.Карась / / Гуманізм за утвердження громадянського суспільства в Україні. — Вісник Львівського університету. — 1995. — Вип.32. — С.11-18.

Кун, 2002 — Кун Томас. Структура научных революций / Томас Кун; [пер. с англ. Налетова И.З.]. — М.: АСТ, 2002.- 608 с.

Нестеренко, 2004 — Нестеренко Г.О. Особистість у нелінійному суспільстві: [монографія] / Г.О.Нестеренко. — Запоріжжя: Просвіта,

2004. — 140 с. Сидоренко, 2013 — Сидоренко С.В. Генеза від громадянського суспільства до глобального громадянського

суспільства / С.В.Сидоренко / Гілея: науковий вісник: [зб.наук.пр.] — К.: Вид-во УАН ТОВ «НВП» «ВІР»,

2013.- Вип 69.Сидоренко, 2013б — Сидоренко С.В. Розвиток громадянського

суспільства в історії соціально-філоcофської думки: умови виникнення, сутність, структура. / С.В.Сидоренко // Гуманітарний вісник Запорізької державної інженерної академії: [зб. наук. пр.]. — Запоріжжя: Вид-во ЗДІА,– 2013.- Вип 54. — C. 175-188.

Українська, 2011 — Українська національна ідея як духовно-інтелектуальний код соборності народу: етнічний, інтеграційний та цивілізаційний вектори (матеріали круглого столу) / за ред.В.С.Кравціва; НАН Країни. Ін-т регіональних досліджень. Львів, 2011.- 62 с.

Bazaluk Oleg Neurophilosophy in the Formation of Planetary-Cosmic Personality


225


/ Future Human Image 1 (4) — Kyiv: ISPC, 2014. — P. 5-13

ReferencesAndros E.I. The problem of freedom in the context of the rationalization

of human life / V.G Tabachkovskyy, M.A.Bulatov , T.February / The man in the twenty- first century civilization : the problem of freedom. — K. : Science. opinion , 2005. — P. 127-174 .


226


Bazaluk O.A. Origin of mankind: New Concept kosmolohycheskaya [Monohrafyya] / O.A.Bazaluk. — Dnepropetrovsk : Thresholds , 2003.- 142 p.

Bazaluk O.A. The Essence of Human Life [Monohrafyya] / Oleg Aleksandrovich Bazaluk . — K.: Naukova Dumka, 2002. — 270 p.

Bazaluk O.A. Philosophy of life : that voluntarism k эkzystentsyalyzmu (komparatyvystskyy analysis ): [ Monohrafyya ] / O.A Bazaluk . — Vinnitsa O. Vlasyuk , 2006. — 292 p.

Bazaluk O.A. The Evolution Model of Intelligent Matter / Philosophy and Cosmology 2014 (Vol.12): academic journal / editor-in-chief O. Bazaluk — Kiev: ISPC, 2014 — P. 165-196

Bazaluk Oleg Neurophilosophy in the Formation of Planetary-Cosmic Personality

/ Future Human Image 1 (4) — Kyiv: ISPC, 2014. — P. 5-13Bevzenko L.D. Sotsyalnaya self-organization. Synerhetycheskaya

paradigm: Up Social abilities ynterpretatsyy / L.D.Bevzenko . — Kyiv: Institute of Sociology of NAS of Ukraine , 2002. — 437 p.

Bech V. The genesis of the social organism country Monograph. — 2nd ed., Ext. /

V. Bech. — Zaporozhye: Education , 2000. — 288 p.Bech V. Philosophy Socio world : hnoseolohycheskyy analysis

[Monohrafyya] / V.P.Beh . — Zaporozhye: “In Tandem “, 1999. — 284 p.

Bech V. Man and the Universe: kohnytyvnыy analysis [Monohrafyya]. — 2nd ed. ext. / V.P.Beh . — Zaporozhye : Education , 2004. — 148 p.

Boychuk M.A. The government and civil society: interaction mechanisms

[monograph] / M.A.Boychuk . — K.: “Atlant YuEmSI .” — 2007. — 207 p.

Boychuk M.A. Democracy as a democracy: Development in Ukraine during the establishment of independence [ The book ] / M.A.Boychuk . — K.: Genesis, 2012. — 240 p.

Voronkova V. Formation of synergistically — reflective model local government society civilizational context / V.H.Voronkova / / Humanitarian Bulletin of Zaporozhye State Engineering Academy [zb.nauk.pr. ] — Zaporozhye : Type of DIG , 2012. — Issue number 49. — P.17 -28.

Voronkova V. G. The concept of relationship among man, consciousness, mind in the context of the virtual information space / Philosophy and Cosmology 2013 (Vol.12): academic journal / editor-in-chief O. Bazaluk — Kiev: ISPC, 2014 — P. 170-182

Karas A.F. Civil society and national culture / A.F.Karas / / Humanism for the promotion of civil society in Ukraine . — Bulletin of Lviv University. — 1995. — Vyp.32 . — P.11 -18.

Thomas Kuhn . Structure nauchnыh revolutions / Thomas Kuhn , [ Lane.



227

with the English. Naletova IZ ]. — Moscow: AST, 2002. — 608 p.Nesterenko G.O. Personalityinnonlinear Society[ monograph]/

H.O.Nesterenko.— Zaporozhye: Education , 2004. — 140 p.Sidorenko S.V. The genesis of civil society in global civil society /

S.V.Sydorenko / Gilea: Research Bulletin: [ zb.nauk.pr. ] — K : Type of UAS of “ SPE “ “Believe,” 2013. — Issue 69.

Sidorenko S.V. Civil society development in the history of social and filocofskoyi thought: conditions of occurrence, nature and structure. / S.V.Sydorenko / Humanitarian Bulletin of Zaporozhye State Engineering Academy [Coll.


228


sciences. etc.]. — Zaporozhye : Type of DIG — 2013. — Issue 54. — C. 175- 188.

Ukrainian national idea as a spiritual and intellectual collegiality code people, ethnic, and civilizational integration vectors ( Materials of the round table) / by red.V.S.Kravtsiva , NAS countries . Institute of Regional Studies . Lviv , 2011. — 62 p.

216


РАЗДЕЛ IV.COSMOLOGY IN PERSONS КОСМОЛОГИЯ В ЛИЦАХ

«ФИЛОСОФИЯ ОБЩЕГО ДЕЛА» Н. Ф. ФЕДОРОВА И ПРОБЛЕМА СПАСЕНИЯ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСТВА

А. А. Кононов — к. технич. н., вед. научный сотрудник,Институт системного анализа

РАН (г. Москва, Россия)


В статье делается попытка раскрыть новую грань в понимании мирового значения

«Философии общего дела» Н.Ф. Федорова, как краеугольного камня в основании нового на- учного направления — Фундаментальной цивилизационной безопасности, концентриру- ющегося на изучении проблем спасения и безопасности человеческой цивилизации и каж- дого человека, как ее части.

Ключевые слова: Философия общего дела, Н. Ф. Федоров, Фундаментальная цивилиза- ционная безопасность, проблема спасения человечества, Общая теория неуничтожимо- сти человечества

NIKOLAY FEDOROV’S “THE PHILOSOPHY OF COMMON TASK” AND THE PROBLEM OF SALVATION

OF HUMAN RACEAlexander Kononov — PhD, leading scientific fellow, Institute for System Analysis of Russian Academy

of Science (Moscow, Russia)

In this article we try to draw a new aspect of importance of Nikolay Fedorov’s “The Philosophy of Common Task”. This philosophy became the milestone in the base of the new field of modern science — the civilization’s fundamental security. The researches in this field continue the Fedorov’s work on the problems of salvation and security of humanity, and every human been.

Key Words: philosophy of common task, Fedorov, salvation of human race, civilization’s fundamental security, common theory of indestructibility of humanity.

«Философия общего дела» Н.Ф.Федорова стала по сути дела краеугольным камнем в основании новой области науки — Фундаментальной цивилизаци- онной безопасности. Главная


217


проблематика этой науки может быть сформу- лирована так — спасение человечества перед лицом бесчисленных угроз его уничтожения.

© Кононов А. А., 2015

Раздел IV. Космология в лицах / Cosmology In persons

218


Н.Ф. Федоров, по сути, стал первым, кто поднял вопрос о создании науки занимающейся такого рода проблемами: «Ученые, разбившие науку на мно- жество отдельных наук, воображают, что гнетущие и обрушивающиеся на нас бедствия находятся в ведомстве специальных знаний, а не составляют обще- го вопроса для всех, вопроса о неродственном отношении слепой силы к нам, разумным существам, которая ничего от нас, по-видимому, и не требует, кроме того, чего в ней нет, чего ей недостает, т. е. разума правящего, регуляции. Ко- нечно, регуляция невозможна при нашей розни, но рознь потому и существу- ет, что нет общего дела; в регуляции же, в управлении силами слепой природы и заключается то великое дело, которое может и должно стать общим» [Федо- ров, 1995a: с. 40].

Рассмотрим, как основные идеи Н.Ф.Федорова нашли свое развитие в Тео- рии цивилизационной безопасности, известной так

же, как Общая теория не- уничтожимости человечества (ОТН), являющейся на сегодняшний день, наи- более систематическим и

продвинутым направлением развития исследований в области Фундаментальной цивилизационной безопасности [Кононов, 2012].

ОТН включает в себя в общей сложности 21 теорию, каждая из которых раз-

вивает какие-то мысли и идеи Н.Ф.Федорова.На рисунке 1 показаны структурные взаимосвязи перечисленных

теорий. Теории, находящиеся на более низких структурных уровнях, призваны обе- спечить более глубокое и тщательное изучение наиболее важных аспектов тех теорий, которые их включают в себя.

В Теории катастрофически нестабильных сред вводится понятие такого рода сред, обобщаются и систематизируются факты, доказывающие именно такой характер сред, в которых существует человечество и каждый че- ловек, показывается, почему так актуальны задачи спасения.

Под катастрофически нестабильными средами понимаются среды, в которых люди обитают, и в которых могут происходить, возможно, непред- сказуемые, неподконтрольные зависящим от них людям, изменения, которые, в свою очередь, могут иметь для этих людей катастрофические последствия, по Н.Ф.Федорову «ибо в мире действительно слепая сила (по сознанию верующих«мир во зле лежит»)» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 194].

В качестве примера катастрофически нестабильных сред могут быть приведе- ны: мозг и тело человека, как носители человеческого сознания и человеческой личности; природная, социальная и национальная среды существования людей; планета Земля; Солнечная система; Галактика Млечный путь; Вселенная.

«Но кроме своего медленно, постепенно наступающего конца мы не можем быть уверенными, что Землю, эту песчинку Вселенной, не постигнет какая- либо внезапная катастрофа… (А между тем

Кононов А. А. «Философия общего дела» Н. Ф. Федорова и проблема спасения человечества


219

Земля, быть может, единственная носительница спасения мира, а прочие миллионы миров только неудачные попытки природы…)» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 197].

Следовательно, необходимо спасение Вселенной от разлившегося в ней зла, и главной силой спасения Федоров называет человечество: «Существо, признающее в борьбе зло, призвано, очевидно, сделать мир новым небом и новою землею, управляемыми разумом и любовью. Человечество призвано быть орудием Божиим в этом святом деле» [Федоров, 1995b: с. 362].

Теория конкурентоспособности человечества

Теория цивилизационных сверхзадач

Теория конкурентоспособности наций

Теория супернаций

Общая теория безопасности, как конкурентоспособности

Теория безопасности развития

Теория спасительности и спасимости

Теория спасительных смыслов

Теория спасительности созидательности

Теория спасительных ролей

Резурекционная теория бессмертия

Теория множественности путей спесения


220


Общая теория неуничтожимости

человечества (ОТН)

Теория катастрофически нестабильных сред

Теория этического фильтра

Общая теория виктимности

Теория уязвимостей человеческой природы

Теория пределов возможностей

Теория идеологической безопасности

Теория критериальных рисков

Теория деструктивных смыслов

Рис. 1. Основные структурные составляющие Общей теории неуничтожимости человечества

Именно поэтому в ОТН определено множество задач, которые, предлагает- ся называть задачами конкурентоспособности (термин «конкуренция» берет свое начало от латинского слова concurrere — «сталкиваться», «принимать вы- зов»), понимаемой как способность принимать вызов, конкурировать с любы- ми силами и не стать жертвой катастрофических изменений и обстоятельств, когда какие-то силы могут стать реальной угрозой. Именно эти задачи рас- сматриваются в рамках Теории конкурентоспособности человечества (ТКСЧ). Федоров был уверен, что с помощью науки люди смогут победить при- роду, научатся управлять планетами, атомами и молекулами [Федоров, 1995a: с. 421].

Федоров был первым, кто определил для человечества



221

сверхзадачи (борь- бу с рознью и «небратством», воскрешение предков, расселение в Космосе), решение которых позволит спастись человечеству и каждому человеку. На-


222


правление, связанное с исследованием сверхзадач, которые должны решаться человечеством во имя его спасения, развивается в ОТН в Теории цивилиза- ционных сверхзадач.

Анализ показывает, что во многом конкурентоспособность человечества определяется конкурентоспособностью наций. Изучению этой проблемы по- священа Теория конкурентоспособности наций, которая во многом строится на развитии идей Н.Ф. Федорова о необходимости преодоления «не- братства», эгоизма отдельных личностей и раскола общества на сословия.

Но среди всех наций можно выделить те, которые должны брать на себя особую ответственность за конкурентоспособность человечества. Это боль- шие, полиэтнические, богатые ресурсами нации, имеющие возможность раз- вивать фундаментальную науку даже по самым ресурсоемким направлениям, и решать высокотехнологические сверхзадачи человечества. Для обозначения таких наций предложен термин «супернации». В качестве очевидных при- меров супернаций могут быть названы народы России, США, Китая, Индии и Евросоюза.

Чрезвычайно важным, с точки зрения обеспечения прогресса конкурен- тоспособности человечества, представляется необходимость переосмысления сути понятия «безопасность» практически во всех сферах применения этого понятия. Термин «безопасность» должен обозначать не состояние защищен- ности (что, как правило, не соответствует действительности, а лишь формиру- ет ложные иллюзии), но способность обеспечить защищенность. Это должно помочь избавиться от той атмосферы «святой лжи», которая царит во многих областях деятельности с безопасностью связанных, и обуславливающей, в частности, такие явления, как гонка вооружений и войны. Эта задача решает- ся в рамках Общей теории безопасности, как конкурентоспособности. По сути, речь идет о решении задачи по Н.Ф. Федорову «обращения знания в дело» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 37].

Прогресс человечества несет с собой и новые вызовы и угрозы. Разработкой подходов и методов решения этих проблем занимается Теория безопасно- сти развития. Н.Ф. Федоров указывал, что людям предстоит “не только посе- тить, но и населить все миры Вселенной… Сего ради и создан человек» [Федо- ров, 1995a: с. 401], а это, бесспорно, путь, связанный со многими опасностями, которые должны заблаговременно изучаться и парироваться.

Изучению истоков того, что подрывает конкурентоспособность человече- ства и тем самым способствует тому, что стать жертвой тех или иных обстоя- тельств может и человечество, и отдельные нации и отдельные люди, посвя- щена Общая теория виктимности (ОТВ). И основы этого направления так же были заложены Н.Ф. Федоровым. Так, он писал: «История как факт есть взаимное истребление, истребление друг друга и самих себя,



223

ограбление или расхищение чрез эксплуатацию и утилизацию всей внешней природы (т. е. земли), есть собственное вырождение и умирание, история как факт есть всег- да взаимное истребление, будет ли оно открытым, как во времена варварства, или же скрытым, как при цивилизации, причем жестокость делается только утонченною, а вместе и более злою. Такое положение ставит вопрос: должен ли человек быть истребителем себе подобных и хищником слепой природы, или же он должен быть регулятором (руководителем) последней и восстанови-


224


телем жизни себе подобных, жертв своей необузданной, слепой юности, всего своего прошлого, т. е. жертв истории как факта?» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 138].

В рамках ОТВ Теория уязвимостей человеческой природы рассма- тривает наиболее сложные проблемы человеческой природы, осмысление которых должно способствовать нейтрализации их деструктивного влияния на конкурентоспособность человечества. Н.Ф. Федоров так же видел эти уяз- вимости и предупреждал о них: «Род человеческий, оставаясь несовершенно- летним, оставаясь в розни, не объединяясь в труде познавания слепой силы, а подчиняясь ей, естественным путем придет к вырождению и вымиранию» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 402]. Но «мы сумеем встать на такой «сверхъестественный» путь преодоления собственной несовершенной природы … нашей природно- греховной заклиненности» [Семёнова, 1995: стр.23].

Теория пределов возможностей призвана помочь осознать ограничен- ность как времени, так и сил, которых может оказаться недостаточно для ре- шения критических проблем, особенно если время и ресурсы растрачивать на конфликты и самоистребление (криминал, войны). Кроме того, теория призва- на снизить риски манипулирования общественным сознанием путем спекуля- ций на неизбежных недостатках человеческой природы и социальных систем, что очень часто играло в истории человечества самую роковую и разрушитель- ную роль. Н.Ф. Федоров осмысливал проблему пределов возможностей людей, например, в части решения задачи спасения Вселенной путем заселения всех ее миров для борьбы со злом. Для него было очевидно, что живущих людей не хватит для решения этой задачи и потребуется воскрешение всех когда-либо живших людей.

Теория идеологической безопасности должна обеспечить защиту со- знания людей от внедрения в него разрушительных идей и идеологий, таких, например, как идеи Эдуарда Гартмана, чьи взгляды неоднократно критико- вались Н.Ф. Федоровым (например: [Федоров, 1995a: с. 86], [Федоров, 1995a: с. 127]), который «представил возникновение бытия и жизни как следствие произвола слепой и неразумной воли, которая в своем стремлении к бытию увлекла за собой светлую и разумную идею, обрекши ее на страдание в несо- вершенном и смертном универсуме. Появление в мире сознательных существ становится, по мысли Гартмана, началом освобождения идеи от ужаса бытия. Пройдя три стадии иллюзий (возможность счастья в условиях природного по- рядка, вера в загробное блаженство, научные теории прогресса), человечество в своей наиболее сознательной части примет решение покончить с собой и тем уничтожить вселенную; в результате этого акта коллективного самоубийства идея получит наконец возможность избавиться от страданий и возвратиться в небытие»



225

[Гачева, 1995: стр.475].Теория критериальных рисков призвана дать возможность

понять и разработать теоретические, методологические и практические подходы и ме- тоды, которые бы обеспечивали контроль качества (полноты, адекватности, актуальности, непротиворечивости, неизбыточности) критериальных систем, определяющих нормативную базу безопасного существования и развития со- циальных систем и контроль рисков связанных с несовершенством, как систем критериев, так и социальных систем, в которых те или иные критерии не вы- полняются.


226


У Н.Ф. Федорова можно найти немало суждений, касающихся проблемы критериальных рисков, вот, для примера, одно из них: «Германский философ (И.Кант), давая критерий для определения истинно доброго дела в видах от- личия от мнимо доброго, пользуется этим критерием совершенно произволь- но, так что долг, безусловный по форме, по содержанию оказался правилом, определяющим мелочные отношения до разрешения вопроса о том, позволи- тельно ли принимать приглашение на неумеренность, без всякого стремления к выходу из этих отношений, хотя они далеко не могут быть признаны истинно нравственными» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 110].

Теория деструктивных смыслов посвящена изучению таких роковых феноменов человеческой цивилизации, как алчность, манипулируемость, дог- матизм, доктринерство, косность, зависть, страх нового, и выработки путей их преодоления. Об интересах Н.Ф. Федорова в этой области можно судить хотя бы по следующему отрывку из работы «Обыденные церкви на Руси»: Среди«представителей вновь возникшей науки «Коллективной Психологии», запад- ных ученых (Сигели, Барбаста, Тарда, Ферри, Нордау) распространено мнение о том, что толпа действует на отдельных единиц понижающим образом, сово- купная деятельность собрания людей уподобляется психическим эпидемиям, собрание людей есть толпа, где всегда преобладают низшие инстинкты и стра- сти» [Федоров, 1997: с. 57].

Теория спасительности и спасимости посвящена изучению проблем стимулирования и развития всего того, что может способствовать прогрессу способности человечества спастись (спасимости). Вот как это звучит в вопро- се, сформулированном Н.Ф. Федоровым: «Что лучше: изливаться ли в прокля- тиях войску, от чего войны нимало не уменьшатся, или же обратить войско к истинному его назначению, к делу для всех спасительному, в котором род человеческий найдет свое благословение?» [Федоров, 1995b: с. 357].

Теория множественности путей спасения призвана, как системати- зировать все те факторы и направления деятельности, которые способствуют спасимости человечества, так и раскрыть возможности их наиболее полной ре- ализации и стимулирования их развития. В этой связи хочется процитировать выдающегося исследователя работ Н.Ф. Федорова С.Г. Семенову:

«Россия претендует сейчас включиться в мировой регион единого типа хозяйствования и политического уклада. Потери ее пока на этом пути огром- ны: распад единства страны, отказ от формулированной еще Федоровым гео- политической задачи умиротворения ислама, новые типы розни, межнацио- нальной, межрегиональной, развал экономики, обнищание населения, утрата общенациональных ценностей и задач. Среди необъятной по объему работы устроения новой экономики, спасения национальных



227

богатств, материальных и культурных, среди борений партий и интересов, установок и ориентаций нельзя забыть ту главную ценность, те сверхцели глобального, планетарного, онтологического порядка, многие из которых были поставлены Федоровым, а они-то и должны придать необходимую самобытность и устойчивость в бы- тии нашему национальному целому, стать нашим словом миру. «Философия общего дела» в ряду активно-христианской мысли убеждает в том, что по- настоящему «выжить» в надежной дальней перспективе для человека, для на- родов, для человечества — значит неуклонно восходить, и не только к новому


228


уровню комфорта или утилизации природы (тут кстати, и весьма скоро, на- ступит глухой предел на нынешних мировых путях), но и в самом своем нрав- ственном и субстанциальном качестве, осознав свое религиозно-эволюционное предназначение» [Семёнова, 1995: стр.33].

Главное утверждение Теории спасительных смыслов — умножение спасительных смыслов умножает шансы на спасение. И потому именно «умно- жение спасительных смыслов» является главной задачей этой теории. Вот что, например, писал Н.Ф. Федоров о спасительном смысле братства: «смысл брат- ства заключается в объединении всех в общем деле обращения слепой силы природы в орудие разума всего человеческого рода» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 45].

Основные задачи Теории спасительности созидательности — рас- крыть и усилить мессианские смыслы конструктивной стороны жизни людей и социальных образований, какой бы сферы деятельности это не касалось. У Н.Ф. Федорова находим: «Только открытие поприща для спасения жизни мо- жет освободить человечество от пороков» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 49].

Задача Теории спасительных ролей определить категории ролей, кото- рые, в повышении шансов на спасение цивилизации,

своей нации, других лю- дей, играет каждый человек, проживая свою жизнь, и помочь людям иденти- фицировать себя в этих категориях, тем самым способствуя индивидуальному росту

мессианского самосознания каждой личности, а также и осознанию мес- сианского значения каждой личности другими людьми. Самый

глубокий иссле- дователь работ Н.Ф. Федорова С.Г. Семенова пишет: «Федоров рассуждал так: если мы нравственные и ответственные

существа (а от имени такого человече- ства и выступал мыслитель), то должны говорить и действовать за себя, а не за Бога, должны

осознавать свою долю участия, свой долг» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 22]. Резурекционная (от латинского «resurrectio» — воскрешение)

теория бессмертия призвана раскрыть смыслы транспоколенческого гуманизма, цивилизационной

ответственности, постановки и решения задач неуничтожи- мости человечества, связанные с предполагаемыми, при прогрессе

цивили- зации, возможностями создания технологий продления жизни, бессмертия и неуничтожимости личности, в идеале

применимых даже для людей, живших за долго до появления такого рода технологий. По сути, вся эта теория, лишь

конкретизация (с учетом современных научных представлений) и развитие

главной федоровской идеи — воскрешения предков.Теория этического фильтра строится на предположении об

объектив- ности Закона этического фильтра, утверждающего, что лишь этически разви- тым цивилизациям удается достичь состояния относительной неуничтожимо- сти, как самой



229

цивилизации, так и, возможно, каждого ее представителя. Все прочие цивилизации либо самоуничтожаются, либо уничтожаются, в виду их неспособности успеть преодолеть свою зависимость от катастрофичности сред в отведенное время между глобальными катастрофами, неизбежными в таких средах. В этой связи рассматриваются проблемы прохождения такого фильтра человечеством. Основания этой теории мы опять же находим у Н.Ф. Федорова:«детство человечества и, что всего важнее, детство всего мира, или его начало, его основа, стала вопросом о том, благое или злое начало лежит в основе всего мира? А между тем о благости этого начала, свидетельствует изумительней- шее явление: по-видимому, все зло, которое только можно было сделать от-


230


носительно и природы (истощение, опустошение), относительно и друг друга (изобретение истребительнейших орудий), все было сделано человечеством,… и несмотря на это, оказывается, что это самое опустошение и истощение вы- нуждает людей к объединению и к обращению орудий, придуманных для вза- имного истребления, в средство всеобщего спасения, возвращения жизни; т. е. орудие величайшего зла обращается в орудие высочайшего блага. Вопрос о злом или благом начале по всей справедливости может быть назван вопросом«быть или не быть», разрешаемым совокупным действием всего рода челове- ческого…» [Федоров, 1995a: с. 127].

Хочется надеяться, что представленная аргументация позволяет открыть новую грань в понимании мирового значения «Философии общего дела» Н.Ф. Федорова, как краеугольного камня в основании важнейшего научного направления — Фундаментальной цивилизационной безопасности, концен- трирующегося на изучении проблем спасения и безопасности человеческой цивилизации и каждого человека, как ее части.

ЛитератураГачева, 1995 — А. Г. Гачева, С. Г. Семенова. Комментарии //

Федоров Н.Ф. Собрание сочинений: в 4-х тт. Том I. — М.: Издательская группа«Прогресс», 1995, стр. 465 — 515.

Кононов, 2010 — А. А. Кононов Креабилитациитранспоколенческогогуманизма в свете возможных перспектив создания технологий неуничтожимости личности / Philosophy and Cosmology 2010 (Vol. 9): academic journal / editor-in-chief O. Bazaluk — Poltava: ISPC, 2010 — P.63-67.

Кононов, 2012 — А. А. Кононов. К проблеме осмысления существования человечества в катастрофически нестабильных средах // Гуманитарные и естественные науки: проблемы синтеза. Материалы Всеросс. науч. конф., 3 апреля 2012 г., Москва [текст + электронный ресурс] / Центр пробл. анализа и гос.-упр. проект. — М.: Научный эксперт, 2012, стр. 880 — 890.

Кононова, 2006 — И. А. Кононова. О проблемах контроля над Мирозданием, космической экспансии и неуничтожимости Человечества / Philosophy and Cosmology 2006 (Vol. 6): academic journal / editor-in-chief O. Bazaluk — Poltava: ISPC, 2006 — P.149-161.

Семёнова, 1995 — С. Г. Семенова. Философия воскрешения Н.Ф. Федорова // Федоров Н.Ф. Собрание сочинений: в 4-х тт. Том I. — М.: Издательская группа «Прогресс», 1995, стр. 5-33.

Федоров, 1995a — Федоров Н.Ф. Собрание сочинений: в 4-х тт.



231

Том I. — М.: Издательская группа «Прогресс», 1995. — 518 c.Федоров, 1995b — Федоров Н.Ф. Собрание сочинений: в 4-х тт.

Том II. — М.: Издательская группа «Прогресс», 1995. — 544 с.Федоров, 1997 — Федоров Н.Ф. Собрание сочинений: в 4-х тт. Том III. — М.:

«Традиция», 1997. — 753 с.


232


ReferencesA.G. Gacheva, S.G. Semenova. Kommentarii // Fedorov N.F. Sobranie

sochinenii: v4-kh tt. Tom I. — M.: Izdatel’skaia gruppa «Progress», 1995, str. 465 — 515.

A.A.Kononov To rehabilitation of transgenerational humanism in the light of possible prospects of creation of human person indestructibility technologies / Philosophy and Cosmology 2010 (Vol. 9): academic journal / editor-in-chiefO. Bazaluk — Poltava: ISPC, 2010 — P.63-67.

A.A.Kononov. K probleme osmysleniia sushchestvovaniia chelovechestva v katastroficheski nestabil’nykh sredakh // Gumanitarnye i estestvennye nauki: problemy sinteza. Materialy Vseross. nauch. konf., 3 aprelia 2012 g., Moskva [tekst + elektronnyi resurs] / Tsentr probl. analiza i gos.-upr. proekt. — M.: Nauchnyi ekspert, 2012, str. 880 — 890.

Semenova. Filosofiia voskresheniia N.F. Fedorova // Fedorov N.F. Sobranie sochinenii: v 4-kh tt. Tom I. — M.: Izdatel’skaia gruppa «Progress», 1995, str. 5 — 33.

Fedorov N.F. Sobranie sochinenii: v 4-kh tt. Tom I. — M.: Izdatel’skaia gruppa

«Progress», 1995. — 518 s.Fedorov N.F. Sobranie sochinenii: v 4-kh tt. Tom II. — M.:

Izdatel’skaia gruppa«Progress», 1995. — 544 s.

Fedorov N.F. Sobranie sochinenii: v 4-kh tt. Tom III. — M.: «Tradiciia», 1997. —

753 s.


233

Autors / Об авторах

AUTHORS

Avchenko Oleg is a Doctor of Geology-Mineralogical Sciences, Professor, Far East Geological

Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok (Russia)[email protected]

Arpentieva Maryam is a Ph.D. of Psychology, Associate Professor, Tsiolkovsky Kaluga State

University, Kaluga (Russia) [email protected]

Bazaluk Oleg is a Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Chairman of the International Society of

Philosophy and Cosmology, Kyiv (Ukraine)[email protected]

Chen Jie is a PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Peking University, Beijing (China)

[email protected]

Gaievska Oksana is a Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Kyiv National Economic University,

Kyiv (Ukraine) [email protected]

Haitun Sergey is a Candidate of Physics and Mathematics, Leading Researcher, Institute for the History of Science and Technology named after S. I. Vavilov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow (Russia)[email protected], [email protected]

Kirsh Marvin E. is a PhD, Professor, California State University Department of Anthropology,

Los Angeles (USA)[email protected]

Kononov Alexander is a PhD, leading scientific fellow, Institute for System Analysis of Russian Academy of Science, Moscow (Russia)[email protected]

Nazaretyan Akop is a Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Eurasian Center for Big History & System Forecasting, Moscow, (Russia)[email protected]

Okah-Atenga Pierre-Paul is a PhD, Associate Professor, University of Paris-Sorbonne, Paris



234

(France)[email protected]

Ursul Arkady is a Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow (Russia)[email protected]

226


Ursul Tatiana is a Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, National Research Technological Univer-

sity “MISiS”, Moscow (Russia)[email protected]

Voronkova Valentina is a Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Zaporozhye State Engineering

Academy, Zaporozhye (Ukraine) [email protected]


227

До відома авторів Редакція приймає до публікації статті російською, англійською та

українською мо- вою. Матеріали приймаються в електронному вигляді в текстовому

редакторі Word наe-mail: [email protected].

Обсяг статей — 0,5–1 др. а. (20–40 тис. знаків з пробілами); за погодженням з редакцією обсяг статті може бути збільшений.

Форматування тексту (шрифт, кегль, інтервал, поля) здійснюється редакцією.

Рисунки і формули бажано вставляти в текст за допомогою відповідних інструментів редактору Word.

Список літератури, що додається до статті, не нумерується; видання розташову- ються за абеткою з повним бібліографічним описом.

Посилання в тексті наводяться в квадратних дужках і включають: прізвище авто- ра (авторів) з відповідної позиції в списку літератури; після коми — рік видання; після двок-рапки — номер сторінки із символом відповідною мовою. Напр.: [Жи- жек, 2002: с. 26], [Dawkins, 1989: p. 126]. В посиланнях на видання, наведені в спи- ску літератури без вказівки автора, наводяться перші слова назви або її абревіатура (яку потрібно вказати в списку літератури) — напр.: [Философский энциклопеди- ческий..., 1983: с. 220] або [ФЭС, 1983: с. 220], при цьому у відповідній позиції спи- ску літератури вказується: (цитується як [ФЭС]). Якщо в списку літератури на один рік приходиться декілька видань одного автора, то після року видання необхідно курсивом проставляти відповідну (починаючи з a) букву латинської абетки (як у списку літератури, так і в посиланні) — напр.: [Жижек, 2008a: с. 26], [Жижек, 2008b: с. 75].

Примітки до тексту розміщуються внизу сторінки з числовим форматом номеру і з оп-цією нумерації «на кожній сторінці».

В україномовних статтях вітається буква «ґ». В авторській довідці необхідно вказати: прізвище, ім’я, по батькові;

(при наявності) науковий ступінь, вчене звання, почесні та інші звання; місце основної роботи і по- саду; поштову адресу; телефон; e-mail.

До статті можна прикласти фото автора, яке слід надсилати окремим файлом, ба- жано у форматі jpg (фото буде розміщене на початку статті).

До статті додаються анотації (реферати) російською і англійською мовою об- сягом не менше 250 слів (реферати англійською мовою до російськомовних та україномовних статей, бажано робити більшими за обсягом, ніж анотації мо- вою статті). Іншомовна анотація (реферат) обов’язково повинна мати переклад назви статті, прізвище та ініціали автора. Анотація має відображати основний смисловий зміст статті і містити наступну структуру, що позначається характер- ними дієсловами і словосполученнями: 1) стан питання, предмет дослідження — Background (розглядаються…, викладаються…, стверджується…, пропонується…, обґрунтовується…); 2) матеріали і/або методи дослідження — Materials and/or methods (використовуються методи…, обґрунтовуються положення, концепції, ідеї…, подається огляд…); 3) результати — Results (розглянуті…, викладені…, виявлені…, запропоновані…), висновок — Conclusion

228


(здійснений аналіз…, зробле- ний висновок…, викладена теорія, концепція…).

До анотацій додаються ключові (5–10 слів). Редакція і наукова рада МФКО здійснюють відбір матеріалів для

публікації за критеріями наукової новизни, оригінальності, відповідності тематичній спрямованості журналу, стилістичній адекватності жанру наукової статті.

Рецензування здійснюється “наосліп” (без відомостей про автора): на першому етапі — членом редколегії, на другому — запрошеним рецензентом.

228


Авторське правоАвтори, надаючи статтю для публікації, гарантують, що робота не є

порушенням будь-яких існуючих авторських прав. Для зручності розповсюдження та забезпечення належної політики використання, копірайт передається Видавцю, якщо не узгоджено інше.

Політика cплатиРозміщення статей авторів в журналі, а також доступ до архіву випусків

журналу, є безкоштовними.

Політика відкритого доступуЖурнал забезпечує безпосередній відкритий доступ до своїх випусків

відповідно до принципу, що роблячи дослідження загальнодоступними, ми сприяємо більш високому рівню глобального обміну знаннями. Авторські права на статтю залишаються за автора- ми, в той час як журналу надається право першої публікації. Автори мають право згодом використовувати матеріали статей, повторно їх публікувати, архівувати або поширювати їх. Журнал не несе відповідальності за подальше використання статті. Даний журнал має ліцензію відкритого доступу Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY).


229

Information for authors The articles that are published in the Philosophy and Cosmology follow a

double blind peer-review procedure. Submitted papers must be clearly written in English, Russian, or

Ukrainian. The preferred mode of submission is as MS Word (.doc) by email

attachment to: [email protected]

The target length for an article is 6,000-8,000 words (20,000-40,000 characters with spaces). If your article is longer than this, please contact the editorial office.

The style (e.g. fonts, font size, spaces, margins, etc.) is adjusted by editors.

It is suggested that figures, tables and formulae should be displayed with features of your software package (e.g. MS Word tools).

The list of references (Bibliography) should appear at the end of the main text, and belisted in alphabetical order by author’s name.

References to publications within the text should be as follows: [Zsizsek, 2002: p. 26], [Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 1983: p. 220], [Zsizsek, 2008a: p. 26], [Zsizsek, 2008b: p. 75], in appropriate language. There must be a strict one-to-one correspondence between the names and years in the text and those in the list of references.

Footnotes should be kept to a minimum and indicated by consecutive superscript numbers.

Information about the author should include: author name, honorary or other degree(s) (if any); affiliation. Provide also the full postal address, including the country name, e- mail address and, if available, phone numbers (with country and area code). Contact details must be kept up to date by the corresponding author.

Author may also provide his/her/their photo(s). Head and shoulders shots of authorswhich appear at the beginning of the paper. The ‘.jpg’ format is preferred.

A concise and factual abstract in Russian and English is required. The abstract should state briefly the purpose of the research, the principal results and major conclusions. An abstract is often presented separately from the article, so it must be able to stand alone. For this reason, References should be avoided, but if essential, then cite the author(s) and year(s). Also, non-standard or uncommon abbreviations should be avoided, but if essential they must be defined at their first mention in the abstract itself. The abstract should not be less than 250 words.

The abstract should also contain a short list of carefully chosen Key Words or content indicators (5-10 words).

Acceptance of manuscripts is based on originality and importance to the field as assessed by the Editors. Manuscripts are reviewed by the Editorial Board with ad hoc assistance of external reviewers (blind peer review). Publication decisions are made by the Edito- rial Board. Based on editorial judgment, some submissions are rejected initially without external review.

Payment policy

230


The journal provides publishing of articles for free as well as access to issues of journal.

Open access policyOur journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle

that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Copyrights for articles are retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. Authors have rights to reuse, republish, archive, and distribute their own articles after publication. The journal is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work.

This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY) .

230


К сведению авторов Редакция принимает к публикации статьи на русском, английском,

украинском языках. Материалы принимаются в электронном виде в текстовом

редакторе Word на адрес [email protected]. Объём статей — 0,5–1 п. л. (20–40 тыс. знаков с пробелами); по

согласованию с редакцией объём статьи может быть увеличен. Форматирование текста (шрифт, кегль, интервал, поля)

осуществляется редакци- ей. Рисунки и формулы желательно вставлять в текст с помощью

соответствующих инст-рументов редактора Word. Список литературы, прилагаемый к статье, не нумеруется; издания

располагаются в алфавитном порядке с полным библиографическим описанием.

Ссылки в тексте приводятся в квадратных скобках и включают в себя: фамилию ав- тора (авторов) с соответствующей позиции в списке литературы; после запятой — год издания; после двоеточия — номер страницы с символом на соответствующем языке. Напр.: [Жижек, 2002: с. 26], [Dawkins, 1989: p. 126]. В ссылках на издания, приведённые в списке литературы без указания автора, приводятся первые слова заглавия или его аббревиатура (которую нужно указать в списке литературы) — напр.: [Философский энциклопедический..., 1983: с. 220] или [ФЭС, 1983: с. 220], при этом в соответствующей позиции списка литературы указывается: (цитирует- ся как [ФЭС]). Если в списке литературы на один год приходится несколько изда- ний одного автора, то после года издания следует, в порядке убывания, курсивом проставлять соответствующую букву латинского алфавита (как в списке литерату- ры, так и в ссылке) — напр.: [Жижек, 2008a: с. 26], [Жижек, 2008b: с. 75].

Примечания (сноски) к тексту размещаются внизу страницы с числовым форма- том номера и с опцией нумерации «на каждой странице».

В русскоязычных статьях приветствуется буква «ё». В авторской справке следует указать: фамилию, имя, отчество; (при

наличии) на- учную степень, учёное звание, почётные и иные звания; место основной работы и должность; почтовый адрес; телефон; e-mail.

К статье можно приложить фотографию автора, которую следует выслать отдель- ным файлом, желательно в формате jpg (фотография будет размещена в начале статьи).

К статье прилагаются аннотации (рефераты) на русском и английском языках объёмом не меньше 250 слов (рефераты на английском языке к русскоязычным и украиноязычным статьям, желательно делать больше по объёму, чем аннотации на языке статьи). Иноязычная аннотация (реферат) обязательно должна содер- жать перевод названия статьи, фамилии и инициалов автора. Аннотация должна отражать основное смысловое содержание статьи и содержать следующую струк- туру, определяемую характерными глагольными формами и словосочетаниями:1) состояние вопроса, предмет исследования — Background (рассматриваются..., излагаются..., утверждается..., предлагается..., обосно-вывается...); 2) материалы и/или методы исследования — Materials and/or methods (ис-пользуются методы..., обосновываются


231

положения, концепции, идеи..., даётся обзор...); 3) результаты — Results (рассмотрены..., изложены..., выявлены..., предложены...), заключение — Conclusion (дан анализ..., сделан вывод..., изложена теория, концепция...).

К аннотациям прилагаются ключевые слова на русском и английском языках (5– 10 слов).

ВНИМАНИЕ: В качестве НЕОТЪЕМЛЕМОЙ части русскоязычной (украиноязыч- ной) статьи необходимо указать следующую информацию на английском языке: авторы, заглавие, данные об аффилировании авторов (наименование(я) организа-

232


ций, ведомств, адрес(а) авторов), аннотация, ключевые слова, пристатейные спи- ски литературы в романском алфавите.

Редакция и научный совет МФКО осуществляют отбор материалов для публика- ции по критериям научной новизны, оригинальности, соответствия тематической направленности журнала, стилистической адекватности жанру научной статьи.

Рецензирование осуществляется «вслепую» (без сведений об авторе): на первом этапе — членом редколлегии, на втором — приглашенным рецензентом.

Авторское правоАвторы, предоставляя статью для публикации, гарантируют, что работа

не является нарушением каких-либо существующих авторских прав. Для удобства распространения и обеспечения надлежащей политики использования, копирайт передается Издателю, если не согласовано иное решение.

Политика оплатыРазмещение статей авторов в журнале, а также доступ к архиву выпусков

журнала, являются бесплатными.

Политика открытого доступаЖурнал обеспечивает непосредственный открытый доступ к своим

выпускам в соот- ветствии с принципом, что делая исследования общедоступными, мы содействуем более высокому уровню глобального обмена знаниями. Авторские права на статью остаются за авторами, в то время как журналу предоставляется право первой публикации. Авторы имеют право впоследствии использовать материалы статей, повторно их публиковать, архивировать или распространять их. Журнал не несет ответственности за последую- щее использование статьи. Данный журнал имеет лицензию открытого доступа Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY).

232


International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology (ispc)

ISPC — an organization formed at the suggestion of members of the First International Seminar “The Universe — structure, stages of formation and development” (Pereyaslav-Khmel- nitsky, Ukraine, 5–7 October 2004). The mission of the project ISPC — to merge into a single information space academic scientific and philosophical researches on space matters.

ActivitiesCurrently ISPC specializes in the design and creation of a common information space in the

space exploration.

The priority for ISPC is three areas:1. The scientific and philosophical research of the structure of the Universe

and the stages of its evolution and the study of man’s place in the scale of the Earth and the cosmos;

2.Scientific and philosophical analyst of modern educational systems in order to create the image of man of the future — an abstract ideal way of future generations of serving a guide for the existing systems of education;

3. Theoretical and practical research of the organization and implementation of space travel. In addition to enabling high-quality communication and access

to current information about space exploration, ISPC publishes research journals “Philosophy and Cosmology” and “Future Human Image”, a series of

monographs “Space Travel”, conducts online conferences,international seminars, exhibitions, etc.

Proposal for cooperationISPC looking to cooperate with academic researchers, teachers of

educational institutions at all levels of accreditation, students, enthusiasts and all interested to create a common information space in space exploration.

http://www.bazaluk.org/

E-mail:[email protected]


233

PHILOSOPHY AND COSMOLOGY.The Journal of International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology

Philosophy and Cosmology is an open access, peer-reviewed and refereed journal that focuses on theoretical and conceptual problems and issues in philosophical and cosmological research. Philosophy and Cosmology is

published by International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology. The objective of Philosophy and Cosmology is to promote exchange and collaboration among philosophers, social, technical and natural science researchers

throughout the world. In pursuit of this objective the journal not only publishes high quality research papers but also ensures that the published papers achieve broad international credibility. Philosophy and Cosmology

publishes original papers, review papers, conceptual frameworks, analytical and simulation models, case studies, empirical research, and book reviews. The Journal Philosophy and Cosmology (ISSN 2307-3705) was established by

Oleg Bazaluk as a press organ of International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology at 2004. This Society was established in the setting of Pereyaslav- Khmelnitskiy State Pedagogical University. Initially the Journal was printed as a special edition of Ukrainian philosophical journal «Sententiae» (Editor-in-Chief — Oleg Khoma) and covered

scientific and philosophical researches of the space problematic. Since 2008, Journal Philosophy and Cosmology is an independent printed issue. Since 2009, together with coming of G. Aliaiev, Journal Philosophy and Cosmology

has an International status printing advancedresearches at the spheres of:

cosmic education, social philosophy, philosophy of Space, philosophic anthropology, philosophy of cognition, philosophy of science and technology, philosophy of religion, futurology, cosmology, philosophy of cosmology.The Journal printed the papers of leading specialists from Russia: E. Vitol, G. Gladyshev, A. Kononov, S. Krichevs-

kiy, I. Lantsev, T. Lolaev, M. Prokopenko, M. Prokhorov, K. Khrutskiy, V. Yakovlev; from Ukraine: G. Aliaiev, O. Bazaluk,I. Vladlenova, G. Zheleznyak, V. Okorokov, N. Malysheva; from Kazakhstan: S. Kolchigin; from Georgia: L. Djakhaia; from USA: A. Khazen.

At present scientific-philosophical Journal Philosophy and Cosmology is an annual printing issue which focuses on publishing of researches at the sphere of philosophy of Space also with creation of integrated informational area for Space observation and outer space exploration.

REVIEWING A MANUSCRIPT FOR PUBLICATIONReceived papers pass through two stages of peer review: the internal one (performed by the members of edito-

rial board) and external one (performed by the professional researchers from different scientific and educational organizations). The Journal involves of peer review advanced scientists form Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Kharkov Polytechnic Institute (Ukraine), Tbilisi State University named after Ivane Djavakhishvili (Georgia), some Institutes of Russian Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and others.

The Journal has two top-priority directions of activity: Scientific and philosophical research of the Universe structure and one’s stages of evolution; searching for

a place of Human at the scale of Earth and Space; Theoretical and practical research of organization and performing of space travelling.The Editorial Board of Journal is opened for collaboration with academic scientists, lecturers (any levels of ac-

creditation of educational organizations), students and other interested party for creation of integrated informational area for Space exploration.

ACADEMIC ETHICS POLICYThe Editorial Board of Philosophy and Cosmology follows the rules on academic writing and academic ethics,

according to the work by Miguel Roig (2003, 2006) “Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing”, and suggests to potential contributors of the journal, reviewers and readers to follow this guidance in order to avoid misconceptions in academic writing.

ACCESS POLICYOur journal is practicing a policy of immediate open access to published content, supporting the principles of

the free flow of scientific information and global knowledge sharing for the common social progress.

234


http://ispcjournal.org/en/index.html E-mail: [email protected]


235

FUTURE HUMAN IMAGE.An International Journal for Philosophy, Psychology and Education

Scientific journal Future Human Image is a project of the International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology. The main aim which is pursued by editors-in-chief of the journal and its editorial board consists in consideration and generalization of the most effective methods of impact on mentality of younger generations with possibility of their further use when forming a future human image.

It is necessary to understand two major components for efficient operation of any educational system:1. Vision of the aim of the educational impact that is some ideal image, to achieve it using the full potential

of the educational system.2. Knowledge and usage of methods that allow achieving the aims.That is, any educational system needs to foreknow whom and how to educate in younger generation.Modern society, having stepped over a threshold of the third millennium, departed further from the first

main criteria proclaimed during the Age of Enlightenment and put in a basis of the European and American education system. Many of them are used so far by the state education systems of the USA, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, Ukraine, etc. The fourth century each new generation of Europeans and Americans is brought up on “a crucial role of science and mentality incognition of “a natural order”, on “need of distribution of knowledge and culture” and on a number other common truths of the Age of Enlightenment.

But the world around us is evolving, mankind, society, noosphere are developing.In order to catch new tendencies in the development of the society, to provide continuity between generation

and high-quality development of new generations, it has to be improved the education system.So, in organizer’s judgment, the journal Future Human Image as synthesis of the advanced researches in

neurophilosophy, philosophy of education, psychology and pedagogy, will be constantly actual and demanded. The scientific journal Future Human Image is a platform for large-scale interdisciplinary research of features of modern influence of the social environment on structurally and functionally developing mentality of new generations.

Editorial board of the scientific journal Future Human Image hope for productive cooperation with all interested persons and the organizations in the field of research of modern methods of impact on mentality of younger generations. To discussion of the questions “Whom and How to Bring Up in Younger Generations” experts in the field of neurophilosophy, education philosophies, public figures, psychologists, experts in neurosciences, teachers, parents are invited. In order that society progressed it is necessary to offer and discuss not only classical methods and training programs, but also new educational technologies. Our children have to get the education best in the world and only we can help with it to them.

AIMS AND SCOPEFuture Human Image attempts to assess a framework to the contemporary research theories in the fields of

philosophy, psychology, pedagogy, neuroscience, futurology, sociology linked to the issues of forming future human image.

Future Human Image is transdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and intercultural journal.Future Human Image serves as a forum for the exchange of information and views between academics and

practitioners, NGOs and the community, data producers and users.We welcome articles written by professional scholars and practitioners in: Philosophy of Education Neurophilosophy Social Philosophy Philosophical anthropology History of Philosophy Philosophy of Mind Futurology General Psychology, Child Psychology, Differential Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, Educational Psychology Psycholinguistics Social Psychology Pedagogy Education theory and practice Curriculum Psychopedagogy Gender studies in education, etc. http://www.fhijournal.org/E-mail: [email protected]

Philosophy & Cosmology 2015 (Vol. 15) The Academic Journal

Філософія і космологія 2015 (Том 15) Науковий журнал

Философия и космология 2015 (Том 15) Научный журнал

Коректура, комп’ютерне верстання — Панченко Н.В.Переклад — Нежива О. Н.

Макет обкладинки — Кулинич Є. А.

ispcjournal.orgispcjournal.org/journals/2016/phc_2016.docxweb viewispcjournal.org

Documents