MY PHILOSOPHY


Sorry! Russian text will be translated to English soon.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Consec. numbers Subsection Summary Links Last update
1 «MARXIST-LENINIST PHILOSOPHY» An honest review, in which on the basis of scientific analysis in May 1989 I predicted abolition of the sixth paragraph of the USSR Constitution and the dissolution of the USSR Link 01 12/23/2011
2 FATHER AND SON Psychological "picture" of one of the episodes which occurred to me in early childhood Link 02 05/25/2010
3 ABOUT THE CREDIBILITY IN SCIENCE Here I present my point of view on the need for the serious researcher be based on the other scientific works
Link 03 03/21/2011
4 PHILOSOPHY OF TRUTH Here I quote statements of various people about the scientific search for truth Link 04 03/24/2011
5 MY «TRAVEL NOTES» There are some of my thoughts, having a serious philosophical subbase Link 05 10/15/2011




«MARXIST-LENINIST PHILOSOPHY»

      In 1989 I studied in postgraduate extramural of LENZNIIEP (Leningrad Zonal Scientific-Research Institute of Experimental Design). I was going to defend there a dissertation on the building structure, based on my personal invention
Inventor's Certificate SU № 1270256 A1
      One of the steps in my postgraduate was the candidate minimum exam of Marxist-Leninist philosophy. This exam (by agreement between the institutions), I had to take on the philosophy department of financial and economic institution. In that distant time was not yet developed the wide internet, so we were writing our reviews more seriously than it is now.
      In short, my review I wrote right and truly, ie unaided and with complete seriousness. I sent the review to the chair of philosophy. At the appointed time I has come for an examination in philosophy.
      When I came to take the exam, two respectable teachers of the philosophy department met me as someone who "stands in front of you, although he is truly dead." Of course, they were very wondering, because in the middle of May 1989 in my review I predicted the demise of the Soviet Union and the repeal the paragraph of the USSR Constitution of the leading and guiding role of the CPSU. For them it was a shock! The whole their party essence were fully counter to my forecasts.
      But then came the head of the chair and invited me into his office. We talked for about an hour. As a result, I went from the institution with a mark of "excellent" for my review and a mark of "excellent" for exam on the Marxist-Leninist philosophy.
      The review in 1989 was printed by me on the typewriter in quadruplicate. I didn't have a good copy - my OCR software proved to be powerless. I was not lazy and reprinted my review on the computer. No changes in the text I did not do (just corrected some grammatical errors and the page numbers in the table of contents).
      I hope that this text will be of interest not only to me but to many other readers. I present it to your court...

LENINGRAD ZONAL SCIENTIFIC-RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF EZPERIMENTAL DESIGN
DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY FINANCE AND ECONOMICS INSTITUTE named after N.A. VOZNESENSKY

Name of the review: "DIALECTICS OF RENAISSANCE AND MODERNITY"

Author: S.G. Makarov
postgraduate extramural
LENZNIIEP, specialty:
«building structures»
Leningrad
1989


P L A N
      Page
Part   I INTRODUCTION 4
Part   II PHILOSOPHY OF THE RENAISSANCE 5
  II.1   Humanism 6
  II.2   Renaissance Neoplatonism 8
  II.3   Renaissance natural philosophy 9
Part   III MODERNITY THROUGH THE REVIVAL PRISM 14
  III.1   Science - Politics - History 14
  III.2   Historical analogies 14
  III.3   Parallels and prognoses 15
REFERENCES     16
Х   Х   Х
(Note: page numbers, which are standing on the right, are hyperlinks for direct transitions)


DIALECTICS OF RENAISSANCE AND MODERNITY

Part I. INTRODUCTION

      Let's consider the number taken in any order ordinary moments (phenomena, events), which appeared (or "showed up") in recent years in our country.
1) Strikes on various occasions, demonstrations are taking a big wide range (Chisinau, Riga, Tallinn, Tbilisi, Moscow, Leningrad, etc.).
2) 'Unthinkable' phenomenon - a strike of police officers (April 1989, Leningrad).
3) Soviet tanks, poison gas, sapper shovels - against ... Soviet people (April 1989, Tbilisi).
4) The first non-party minister (Raymond Pauls, Latvia).
5) The first Soviet "honest millionaires" (A. Rosenbaum, B. Grebenshchikov, etc.).
6) Widespread increase in prostitution and drug addiction.
7) The rapid increase in the number of "superfluous people of society" - "bums" and "homeless."
8) Relative to the Brezhnev period officially introduced into circulation the term "period of stagnation."
9) Enhanced activity of nations and nationalities of the USSR in matters of self-determination - up to the requirements of secession from the USSR.
10) Were revealed many chronic "furuncles" in the party and state apparatus (Rashidov, Churbanov, Medunov, etc.).
11) For the first time in history, USSR top party and state leaders of the republic at the same time, "resigned" (April 1989, Tbilisi).
12) Stopped Yerevan nuclear power plant, mothballed nuclear plant construction in other regions (Crimea, Minsk).
13) A big number of party and state leaders have not received popular support in elections March 26, 1989
14) Achieved a cessation of hostilities the Soviet forces in Afghanistan without ascertaining the fact of victory or defeat.
15) «... Changes! We are waiting for changes!» (of a popular song of Victor Tsoi, a group of "Cinema").
16) «...the air smells of civil war...» (of the popular song "Nautilus Pompilius" group).
17) The wide scope got the campaign of moving the of Stalin's personality from the "great leader" in "the great criminal."
18) A significant increase in the number of suicides.
19) A significant increase in crime, especially organized crime with a weapon.
20) People give the broad support to candidates, whose programs include such items as:
- introduction of multiparty system;
- complete abolition of all privileges due to party affiliation and other elite affiliations;
- cancellation of the passport system;
- equality before the law for all citizens, regardless of the positions and titles;
- establishing real accountability and accountability to the people all of the highest economic, party and state workers.
......................................................................................................
      This list could go on and on, but there is hardly any need for this. Even a cursory review of such phenomena of our social and cultural life brings quite expressive association. But now let's leave those associations and follow with you for some facts...
      Polish humanist Andrew Frych Modzhevsky (1503 - 1572) in his treatise "On the correction of the State" (1551) put forward a project is very progressive social and political reforms.
They consisted of the following points:
- establishing equality of all classes before the law;
- government's responsibility before the law and all citizens;
- participation of all social classes in the election of the monarch;
- elimination of the privileges of the feudal nobility (see [15], page 158).
Consider some of the items from another program:
- reduction of working hours to six hours due to good organization of work;
- to enable for every member of society to live in harmony with his nature (of "Utopia" by Thomas Moore – see [14], page 137).
Let's follow forward...
«...the Renaissance - it's a time when the spirit... rose to a presentation the claims to himself that he was and knew themselves as the real self-consciousness in the supersensible world, and in the immediate nature. (Hegel - see [3], page 165).
      We can only conclude that the "spiral development" has made its next spiral turn: in the philosophical sense, we are now in the same "with nothing" situation, and that the Later Middle Ages. And this situation, as history shows, is a prelude to the next lifting virtually all spheres of life.
      Therefore, we (along with Viktor Tsoi), are "waiting for change" and hope that our "Renaissance", which translated into modern language, apparently, is expressed by the words "adjustment policies" would soon yield results.
      In this - the history of philosophy sense - Renaissance gave us today for a special urgency. It is gratifying that our "age of scholasticism" has come to its logical conclusion and now we seem will be able to establish in our society proper social "causal relationship", the result of which will rise and people's living standards and economic balance, and the real authority of the Party and state apparatus, as well as the flowering of science, art, foreign economic relations etc., etc., etc.
      If all this finally happen, our country may come into the world to the forefront not only in quality and quantity of arms, but also on those indicators that are very important for EACH of us EVERY day.
      But to dream did not remain just a dream, we must act. To act, you need to know how to act. In this respect, the experience of history in general and the experience of the Renaissance, especially for us is priceless.
      Please excuse me, but I can not help but bring about this remarkable words of "great thinker" Kozma Prutkov, which will be properly completing the introductory part of the review (in which I justify the choice of theme) and serve as a good transition from the first part of the review to the second one:
"Our present is a consequence of the past, and therefore continually pay attention to your past, than to protect themselves from serious errors in the future" ([17], Part II, thought number 64).
Go to the top of the review


Part II. PHILOSOPHY OF THE RENAISSANCE

      According to Engels, the Renaissance represented a "great progressive revolution", which was marked by outstanding achievements in all fields of culture. This was the era, "which needed giants, and which gave birth to the Titans" and this applies not only to some particular direction, but absolutely all fields of science and art.
Dante Alighieri, Johann Eckhart, George Gemist, Francesco Petrarca, Leon Battista Alberti, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo Buonarroti, Dzhannotstso Manetti, Albrecht Durer, Giordano Bruno, Michel de Montaigne, Thomas de Vio (Kaetanus), Niccolo Machiavelli, Andrzej Modzhevsky, Thomas Munzer , Thomas More, Tommaso Campanella, Galileo Galilei, Nicholas of Cusa, Bernardino Telesio, Lorenzo Valla, Theophrastus Bombast Aureol Philip von Hohenheim (Paracelsus), Nicholas Copernicus, Francesco Patrizi, Pico della Mirandola, Marsilio Ficino, Pietro Pomponazzi, Erasmus, Francis Bacon, Jacob Boehme, Nicolas Malebranche,
      – this is just a short list of leading giants of the Renaissance.
      However, just reading this list, we already can imagine the tremendous depth and richness of thought at that time
      Appearing to change centuries-old domination of scholasticism, the Renaissance philosophy became a significant milestone in the development of European philosophy. Soviet science in the Renaissance sees the greatest progressive revolution of all who lived through that time mankind. In historical terms, this revolution also marked the beginning of the era of capitalism.
      Isolation of the philosophy of the Renaissance as a distinct stage in the history of philosophical thought is due to the specific nature of the problems posed by it, which determined the difference between this philosophy from the philosophy of the Middle Ages and modern times.
      The philosophy of the Renaissance created a new picture of the world, tending to deny the divinity. God philosophy of the Renaissance "was deprived of liberty", - he blends with nature and the law of natural necessity, and the nature becomes deified beginning of things. This philosophy has a distinctive view of man as the most important object of philosophical attention: man is the main link in the chain of being.
      In the evolution of philosophical thought of the Renaissance clearly traced three periods (three directions):
- humanistic (anthropocentric), in which a person occupies a special place and its relation to the rest of the world;
- neoplatonic, which is characterized by wide statement of ontological problems (on the theory and the entity of existence);
- natural-philosophical, consisting mainly of a mental interpretation of nature, considered in its entirety.
Go to the top of the review


II.1. Humanism

      Humanism historically has been the first period of the philosophy of the Renaissance, although it covers a very long period (mid-14th century. - beginning 17th century.). At the root of humanism stood by Dante Alighieri (1265 - 1321) and Francesco Petrarch (1304 - 1374).
      If we consider the most profound revolution in the philosophy of knowledge, the ideology of humanism is a philosophical thought throughout the period, it represents a new way of philosophizing and the nature and sources of philosophy and way of thinking, and also the image of the philosopher, his place in society.
      Humanists were not professional philosophers. Professional philosophy of that time still existed in the framework of traditional knowledge. Foci of the new - the humanist - the culture circles become scientists interlocutors in cities municipalities. Humanists - are scientists without degrees and titles. Among the humanists were the political leaders of urban communities, poets, writers, linguists, educators, diplomats said. They illegally usurped the title of "philosophers", they themselves defined the nature and direction of the new philosophy.
      They dreamed of a new, more just order of society, but their dreams of the imminent onset of the "golden age" faced with the tragic surrounding them reality.
      Culture of the Renaissance was born, first in the Italian city-republics, which was introduced after the fall of Italy in 1453, the Byzantine Empire. Each city-republics had their own form of government, founded on democratic principles. In some cities - people's rights, in others - the best people, chosen by people. This fragmentation indicative of a weak state that was attractive to invaders.
      It was in this dire time for the country appeared the teaching of Niccolo Machiavelli. It is the most harmonious and coherent teaching, which has incorporated the features of the predecessors of philosophy - Dante Alighieri, Francesco Petrarch, and Machiavelli's contemporary - Thomas More, so at Machiavelli personality and his teaching, emphasis should be placed.
      Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 - 1527) belonged to an impoverished family, which once played an important role in the political life of the Florentine republic. He practically grew up in an environment of humanist intellectuals, and that affected his political views.
      Machiavelli entered the political arena came at the age of 30 years when he was elected first secretary of the Second Chancellery, and then - as Secretary of the Council of Ten - the republic government. Machiavelli's political activity, as a member of the government, covers 14 years. In 1512 after the fall of the republican government Machiavelli was removed from the affairs and imprisoned and then exiled to his rustic estate.
      In 1526 he was called to the defense of Florence. Machiavelli is attempting to unite the fragmented Italian states, however, the new republic, which was restored after the expulsion of the Medici, refuses to his former secretary. The official decision of Big Council about Machiavelli crushed him - ten days after the decision he died (June 21, 1527).
      In the political part of doctrine of Machiavelli, to replace the medieval Christian theology history comes an idea of the general variability, dialectical unity and constancy of the laws that govern the affairs of people and the state as a whole.
«Reflecting on the historical course of events, I come to the conclusion that the world is always the same - says Machiavelli - and that it always has the same lot of good and evil; but the good and evil are moving from country to country, as we see from the history of the ancient states that were changed due to a change of manners, but the world itself has remained the same» (see [15], page 145).
      States rise, reaching peaks of greatness, power and civic virtue, and then decay and die. In the writings of Machiavelli, this cycle is considered as a result of the influence of fortune (ie, fate), which was identified with the god. Machiavelli does not deny God, however, limits its function: god - it's dark and powerful source of human fear and obedience, and religion - it's people's case.
      Thus, God is part of the structure of the collective perception of the world.
      Machiavelli's religion is a form of ideology, and the weakening of this ideology, respectively, require new forms. This is the way to the golden age of reason.
      Machiavelli had separated politics from religious morality. The policy is "now committing history," and the story is, accordingly, "the political experience of the past." History by Machiavelli - is not an impersonal moving of things or times; in this course the fate, the necessity mean the objective force, the set of conditions in which a person is compelled to act. And because the success of the human act depends not only on the fate of-need, but also on the extent to which a person, politician will be able to understand, adapt to it and, simultaneously, to resist it.
      For the philosophy of humanism in our presentation acquired logical completeness and perfection, I have to give a rather long quotation from a speech by a prominent politician and humanist Florence Dzhannotstso Manetti:
«The desire of the king was the law for people. But as the kings corrupted their souls with the robberies, murders and other great wickedness, many cities, including most of the Greek, preferred to establish the reign of the best people (optimates) as the Athenians and their followers - the reign of people. Rome combined itself both one and the other, because along with the Senate, who succeeded optimates were also popular tribune. In Venice, the governance from the nation was moving to the best people. In Florence, the governance were partly in the hands of the people, partly in the hands of the best people. However, our ancestors did not like to engage in criminal and civil matters, as they were afraid to accustom himself to drink the blood of their fellow citizens. They prefered to have experienced, virtuous, famous, people along with trained members of city government...» (see [19], page 140).
And finally, the last quotation from the same author, which is even more expressive than the previous one:
«...one day, when gathered together many educated people, they were asked what is above all . Some have said - the king, others - a woman, and still others - the wine, and they argued it by their examples and arguments. One of them said that above all is the truth that is mighty of king, women and wine. ... When ...rightness due to many passions that grow in the human soul, became distorted, starts pestilence, comes infertility of mother-earth and to human will be denied in everything he needs.» (see [19], page 139).
Comments, I think, are unnecessary.

Go to the top of the review


II.2. Renaissance Neoplatonism

      The content Neoplatonism of the Renaissance is the statement and an attempt to address the root ontological problems of philosophy in terms of the mutual relation of God and the world.
      The founder of this direction was the largest European thinker of the 15th century Nicholas of Cusa (1401 - 1464). He was born in Germany in the family of a prosperous farmer-fishermen, was educated at Heidelberg and Paruansky universities where he became a doctor of canon law.
      His diverse ecclesiastical and political activities aimed at attempt to restore the credibility and unity of Catholic peace and consent of the faiths. Thanks to the patronage of the popes (especially Pius II) Nicholas of Cusa, who became a cardinal, played a very prominent role in church and political life of Europe of his time. At the same time he paid great attention to his scientific pursuits.
      Philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa is closely connected with the tradition of medieval Neoplatonism. Characteristic, however, the break of Nicholas of Cusa with the orthodox tradition of medieval theology.
      The central problem of philosophy of Cusa is the problem of the relations, the relationship between God and the world. "Rational" justification of theological truths in the spirit of Thomas Aquinas, self-confident "knowledge" about God and the world Cusa opposes the concept of "scientific ignorance" that gave the name of his greatest philosophical work.
      "Scientific ignorance" does not constitute a waiver of knowing the world and God. Rather, it is impossible to express the fullness of consciousness in terms of knowledge of formal logic, due to complex and contradictory process of knowledge.
      The philosopher should proceed in formulating and solving the problems of peace and god precisely because of his own "ignorance" of the incommensurability of the object of knowledge and applied to it force, ie, concepts and definitions.
      Considered god of Cusa, as a great beginning of being, gets his name or an absolute maximum or "the absolute". God is one and the single beginning.
"The absolute maximum is unique, because it - everything, in it - all, because he - the upper limit" (see [4], page 8).
Cusa in his later writings uses to God the term "non-other" and "being-opportunity", which, however, do not carry no fundamental novelty.
      Explained by Cusa, God is revealed not in his other world, but in its indissoluble unity with the world, in the sense of "all around is in all", ie God embraces all beings as infinite as its cause and nature, has the whole world in itself. The transition from God to peace and from peace to the God of Cusa calls "deployment" of God that is contained in it in the "twisted" form.
      Philosophies of Nicholas of Cusa is not immediately found its supporters and followers. His philosophy is at first not extend beyond the narrow circle pupils. Professional philosophical thought of the 15th century had passed the "philosophy of the coincidence of opposites" of Cusa. Even the Italian platonists have not been able to assess the depth of the dialectical content of the philosophy of "scientific ignorance."
      Only in the 16th century natural philosopher, pantheist Giordano Bruno has poured into the common stream of modern philosophy the dialectics of Nicholas of Cusa. Subsequently, the understanding of God as a "twisted" and the world as the "expanded" peaks reflected in the philosophy of the Netherlands materialist philosopher Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677).
      Dialectical doctrine of Nicholas of Cusa on the coincidence of opposites also found its continuation and development in the philosophy of German classical idealism of the late 18th - early 19th centuries.
      Keeping in mind the subject of my review, let me note that the problem of "explanation of the relationship between God and the world" is unlikely to have particular relevance to us now, so I allow myself to finish the complete analysis of Renaissance Neoplatonism and go to the next section.

Go to the top of the review


II.3. Renaissance natural philosophy

      Under the "Natural philosophy" the thinkers of the 16th century understood not only the object of their study - philosophy of nature - but also a natural "natural-philosophical" approach to the knowledge of the laws of the device of the world. Natural philosophy was the highest result of a philosophical evolution of the Renaissance, it exhausts the specific content of thought of this era and is giving the place to modern philosophy, which, though inheriting the achieving of philosophy of Renaissance, but first it was born not out of it.
      As well as the philosophy of the Renaissance in general, the philosophy of nature, covering the period from the second half of the 16th century to the early 17th century, originated and was developed as an exercise of "amateurs," although the name of each of them remained in the history of philosophy for centuries.
      By the mid-16th century, the humanist tradition and neo-Platonism heavily outdated. Humanistic neoplatonism gradually turned into an instrument of employee literature, and it became the "ornament of the princely yards" of fragmented Italy, it was transformed into a popular elegant not interesting and almost empty treatises on love. In this regard, as next logical step in the development of philosophical thought of the Renaissance appeared the natural philosophy.
      Attempt to create a universal synthesis of natural philosophy, covering the central problems of philosophy undertook Tommaso Campanella (1568 – 1639). Chronologically being a contemporary of Descartes and Bacon, he, however, in the spiritual plane entirely belongs to the philosophical culture of the Renaissance.
      We can consider him as Renaissance thinker because he has a versatile talent and breadth of interests, the extraordinary strength of character, the irresistible desire to be active. His entire life is a long confrontation with the hostile forces of political and ecclesiastical reaction, this life is compelling evidence of inherent human freedom flowing from the humanistic principle of human dignity.
      In contrast to the claims of divinity to possess the truth, Campanella was developing the teaching of "two books", which reflects a peculiar modification of the medieval concept of "two truths" – Theology and philosophy.
      Virtually all life Campanella held in prison, what was the logical consequence of his unbridled temper. While being in prison Campanella wrote dozens of philosophical writings, left an indelible mark on the history of philosophy. These were the various treatises on philosophy, "metaphysics", "Galileo's Apology", as well as the famous utopia – "Sun City".
      «The Sun city» is the philosopher's unrealizable dream of an ideal society, in which there is no private property where general work guarantees the abundance combined with a strict regulation of a life. The ideal of a society organization – the Sun City – Campanella founded on reason and nature laws. The image of the City of the Sun has played a considerable role in the subsequent development of progressive public thought.
      In the treatise «Against the pagan philosophies» Campanella declares that exist two divine books in which the person obtains true - the Nature and The Scriptus. The person learns the live book of the nature by means of his mind and sensations, nature knowledge – the question of the philosophy and science. The second book – the Scriptus – is "not better" than the nature book, it only «more suitable» to ordinary human consciousness. These two books are created by god for the different purposes: first (Nature) opens before human a boundless possibilities of knowledge of the world, and the second (Scriptus) edifies him in belief. Between these two books, – considers Campanella, – isn't present and there can not be a contradiction.
      The theory of "two books" in interpretation of Campanella means basic refusal from coordination of scientific theories and hypotheses with interpretation of the bible texts.
      Thus, scientific research is released from necessity of results coordination with the theological doctrine. In this case full independence of a science and philosophy from religion was reached with formal declaration of their consent. But if the scientific knowledge of the world isn't subordinated to literal interpretation of the Bible, so any system of the world based on supervision, should be considered as not contradicting belief.
      Possibility of knowledge of a true picture of the world of Campanella saw in refusal of book knowledge, in direct studying of the nature on the basis of sensual experience. The matter, according to Campanella, is not abstract possibility of life, it really exists.
      «The matter not is nothing, but it is real, - he wrote in «Questions to real philosophy», - hence, it is in the world, but not only in mind. Beings are formed of that matter which is in the world, but not of from that that is present at our consciousness. Forms die, but the matter remains the same. Hence, it is uniform and immortal, but forms are numerous, volatile, they are subject to occurrence and destruction. Hence, the matter in greater measure, than forms, possesses the valid life» (see [15], page 307).
      However, this real things real and corporal mass in itself is yet not sufficient for their occurrence. Campanella doesn't recognize activity of a matter. A matter, by him, is not a simple body, but a passive body.
      In treatment of space and time Campanella also follows physiophilosophical tradition. Space he names «the first incorporeal motionless substance, which is capable to perception of any body» (see [15], page. 308).
      Space in this approach precedes a matter in quality of «a basis of existence of the world». Objective existence of time Kampanella as well as other representatives of naturalistic philosophy finds in things, in the course of world movement. Thus time consists from replacing each other existence and a non-existence.
      From representation about the abilities of things to sensation Kampanella comes to the doctrine about primalitates – three main attributes of existence – POWER, WISDOM and LOVE. At that time it sounded as an original projection of a Christian doctrine about the Trinity. Campanella wrote:
«Any real existence consists of possibility of sensation of life and love to life, like god, whose image they bear» (see [15], page 311).
      So naturalistic in the basis explanation of life in the nature with the help of doctrines about general ability to sensation, has led Campanella to attributing to the nature as a whole a reasonable basis, to idealism. Doctrine of primalitates and embodied in them the reasonable basis lead to the concept of god-creator.
«So it is necessary to recognize that there is a first wisdom and the first reason... It is necessary to come to the first art, to the first mind and to the first wisdom, a source of being».
      In the picture of the world developed in early physiophilosophical papers of Campanella, there was no place for new cosmology. Campanella recognized mobility only of heavenly bodies – the sun and planets. He considered the Earth cold and motionless, located in the world center.
      But the founder of «philosophy of sensations» should reckon with the data of the newest the then discoveries even if they came to the contradiction with initial positions of its theory.
«If stars are such, as Kopernik writes about them, it is necessary to accept a different manner of philosophizing» (see [15], page 315).
      Campanella recognized possibility of worlds plurality existence, which he too called systems. In this question it was the unique continuer of Dzhordano Bruno cosmological ideas.
      The picture of the world developed by Campanella which was based on the doctrine of primalitates, didn't suppose an idolization of a matter and demanded preservations of god who is not identified with the world of the nature. In it was the radical difference of his philosophy from Dzhordano Bruno's naturalism.

      Dzhordano Bruno is the brightest representative of philosophical thought of Renaissance known under the name «naturalistic pantheism». In Dzhordano Bruno's (1548 - 1600) philosophy were deep embodied such tendencies and features of the Renaissance philosophy as humanistic pathos, spontaneous dialectics, acute sense of beauty and greatness of the nature.
      Dzhordano Bruno was born in a family of the poor nobleman serving in army of the Neapolitan vice-king. He received his first education at local Latin school, then in Naples he attended lectures of professors of university. Without having means to complete his university education, Bruno in 1565 has entered the Dominican award and has received a monastic name of Dzhordano.
      Scepticism of the young monk in relation to displaying of a Catholic cult has caused vigilance of the church authorities and has caused special investigation. Without having possibility to justify himself, Bruno ran to Rome, dumped his monastic vestments and about two years wandered in cities of Northern Italy.
      Wanderings have resulted Bruno to Paris, where he even taught philosophy in University, then has published his first books – the treatise «About shades of ideas» and a comedy "Candlestick". Vicissitudes of life have resulted Bruno to London where his lectures and protection of ideas of Kopernik caused the hostile relation to it from supporters of scholastic tradition.
      Within nine years Bruno has traveled across all states of Europe, has published the big series of his scientific works. Being the founder of harmonous physiophilosophical doctrine, which is running counter to church doctrines, in 1592 he has been seized, then transferred to Roman church authorities.
      During the long period inquisitors by means of tortures tried to achieve from Dzhordano Bruno a repentance and renunciation of substantive provisions of his philosophy, but he was unshakable. On February, 17th, 1600 after a sentence of church court Bruno has been burned in a fire in Rome.

      The central category of philosophy Bruno is "Uniform". Having taken out "Uniform" from Neoplatonism, Bruno treats it in the spirit of the naturalistic pantheism, which is developing into philosophical materialism.
«...The soul or the form is one, matter or the body is one, the simple thing is one, anything that exists is one, all the greatest and the best is one... Она (Вселенная) не рождается, ибо нет другого бытия, которого она могла бы желать и ожидать, так как она обладает своим бытием. Она не уничтожается, ибо нет другой вещи, в которую бы она могла превратиться, так как она является всякой вещью. Она не может уменьшиться или увеличиться, так как она бесконечна... Вселенная не сотворена; она существует вечно и не может исчезнуть. В ней происходит непрерывное изменение и движение, но сама она неподвижна, ибо Вселенная в целом не может перемещаться, она заполняет собою самой всю себя... единая Вселенная не может иметь ничего противоположного или отличного в качестве причины своего изменения, и богу христианской и всякой иной религии не остается во Вселенной Бруно ни места, ни дела» (see [5], page 273-274).
      Такой степени «вольнодумия» до Джордано Бруно не позволял себе никто. В этом все его «преступление» перед церковью, в этом его величие как ученого, в этом причина его бессмертия.
      Антихристианские тенденции философии Бруно были использованы и продолжены европейским атеистическим свободомыслием 18-го – 19-го веков, а этика героического энтузиазма, столь неразрывная с самой личностью и гражданским подвигом мыслителя, оказала значительное влияние на последующие свободные от религии учения о нравственности.
      Если бы эпоху Возрождения потребовалось охаректеризовать лишь одним словом, этим словом, видимо, явилось бы слово «гуманизм».
      Если вспомнить исторического «родителя» этого слова – Цицерона – то в переводе с латыни понятие «гуманизм» расшифровывается приблизительно так:
«Ревностное изучение всего, что составляет целостность человеческого духа» (see [20], page 6).
      В связи с этим характеристика Возрождения была бы существенно не полной, если бы мы не остановились на личности одного из выдающихся философов в истории человечества – Мишеля Монтеня.
      Центральное место в натуралистической философии Мишеля Монтеня (1533 – 1592) принадлежит человеческой личности. В этом плане философия Монтеня вобрала в себя лучшие гуманистические традиции предшественников. Через призму гуманизма Монтень подходит к решению практически всех современных проблем бытия – проблеме Природы, проблеме бога, проблеме Истины и т.д.
      Мишель Монтень – гасконский дворянин, отец его занимал различные выборные должности в Бордосском парламенте. Монтень получил идеальное гуманистическое образование: с младенчества он постигал эту науку под руководством воспитателя-немца, который говорил с ним только по-латыни. Глубочайшее изучение древних латинских, а затем и греческих авторов составило основу культуры Монтеня.
      Формальная сторона требует упоминания об обучении также и в колледже в г. Бордо, однако, не подлежит сомнению тот факт, что именно самообразование явилось причиной того, что личность Монтеня оставила в истории свой неизгладимый след. Самообразованием он занимался всю свою жизнь.
      В профессиональном смысле Монтень не был ни философом, ни богословом, ни даже гуманистом: литературные занятия никак не определяли его положения в обществе. Дворянин, политический деятель, советник Бордосского парламента, мэр города – это его официальные функциональные роли в обществе. При этом Монтень не скрывал, что он не придает особо важного значения своей политической деятельности.
      В напряженный период религиозных гражданских войн 16 века во Франции сохранение моральной независимости было откровенно опасным, поэтому Монтень вынужден был примкнуть к наиболее прогрессивной группе французского дворянства и буржуазии – к «политикам», которые религиозному фанатизму и своекорыстию противопоставляли политику веротерпимости, стремление к гражданскому миру и веру в королевский абсолютизм – единственную силу, способную обеспечить сохранение национального и государственного единства Франции.
      Книгу своей жизни – «Опыты» - Монтень написал в начале 70-х годов 16 века после отхода от политической деятельности и уединения в своем родовом замке. Эту книгу он писал на протяжении долгих лет. В полном виде, включающем три части, она вышла в свет лишь после смерти автора.
      По жанру книга «Опыты» противостоит официальной учености того времени. Блестящий латинист Монтень написал свои «Опыты» на французском языке – «языке парижского рынка», включающем в себя и красочные гасконские изречения. Одно это уже являлось своего рода «вызовом» официальной учености.
      Внутренняя логика изложения в «Опытах» также не традиционна: в книге нет стройного плана, нет строгой формальной последовательности. Логика книги заключена в свободных размышлениях о жизни, о человеке, а также о самом себе.
      Хотя в «Опытах» идет речь о природе и боге, о мире и человеке, об этике и политике, предметом философии Монтеня неизменно остается человеческая личность, а именно – личность автора. При этом безо всякой рисовки Монтень отмечает:
«Я выставляю на обозрение жизнь обыденную и лишенную всякого блеска» (see [15], page 205).
Объясняя кажущуюся «узость темы» своего сочинения, Монтень отмечает:
«Прослеживать извилистые тропы нашего духа, проникать в темные глубины его, подмечать в нем те или иные из бесконечных его малейших движений – дело весьма нелегкое, гораздо более трудное, чем может показаться с первого взгляда...» (see [15], page 206).
      Монтень писал «Опыты» как именно философское произведение. Автору, человеку новой гуманистической культуры, схоластическая философия представлялась пустой, бессодержательной и бессмысленной. Причину жалкого состояния официальной философии Монтень видит во власти традиции, привычки, авторитета.
      Монтень выступает за критический подход к оценке любых «авторитетных суждений» вообще, в том числе и к оценке взглядов античных философов, перед которыми он преклонялся. Наиболее ярко скептицизм Монтеня представляется нам в следующем рассуждении:
«… то, что общепризнано, воспринимается как некий условный язык, непонятный непосвященным: такую истину принимают со всей цепью ее доводов и доказательств, как нечто прочное и нерушимое, не подлежащее доказательству и обсуждению, и в результате подобного некритичного подхода мир наполняется нелепостью и ложью: общепринятые мнения никогда не проверяют, никогда не добираются до основания, где коренится ошибка или слабое место. Между тем именно «уверенность в несомненности» есть вернейший показатель неразумия и крайней недостоверности» (see [15], page 212).
Остается лишь поражаться глубине подхода автора к анализу самой сути теории познания. Слова написанные более четырех веков назад сохраняют полную актуальность и весь свой философский «блеск» в первозданном виде.
«В начале всякой философии лежит удивление, ее развитием является исследование, ее концом – незнание».
Это не просто софизм или «фраза ради фразы». Монтень поясняет, что незнание, явившееся результатом глубокого исследования, это совершенно не то незнание, которым исследователь обладает вначале:
«Надо сказать, что существует незнание, полное силы и благородства, в мужестве и чести ничем не уступающее знанию, незнание, для постижения которого надо ничуть не меньше знания, чем для права называться знающим» (see [15], page 213).
      Заслуживает внимания анализ Монтенем проблемы относительности знания на каждом конкретном историческом этапе. Наиболее ярко это выражается при анализе переворота в суждениях о строении мира, вызванного открытием Коперника. Как и всегда скептицизм Монтеня предостерегает от свойственного человеческой природе желания объявить достигнутое знание абсолютным знанием. По этому поводу следует привести замечательную фразу Монтеня, которая содержит в себе призыв к разумному скептицизму мыслящего существа, которого, порой, очень недостает и современным исследователям:
«И кто знает, не появится ли через тысячу лет какая-нибудь третья точка зрения, которая опровергнет обе предыдущие? (see [15], page 215).
      Центральной фигурой «Опытов» является человек, но при этом Монтень, как и подобает объективному исследователю, решительно отвергает всякую попытку представить человека в качестве центра мироздания, главного звена космической иерархии.
      Следует отметить, что отвергание Монтенем антропоцентризма, «развенчивание» человека как центра мирозданья не содержит, однако, никакого принижения человеческого достоинства. Человек в антропологии Монтеня изымается из предустановленной богом сверхъестественной иерархии ценностей и возвращается матери-природе как одно из ее порождений, как ее неразрывная часть.
      Отказ от антропоцентризма имеет своим естественным продолжением пересмотр всей картины мира и новому пониманию бога. Если человек как биологический продукт «возвращается» матери-природе, то он перестает быть предметом особых забот бога, при этом «безработный» бог, избавленный от роли промыслителя, заботящегося о делах людей, сливается с безличным и чуждым человеческим страстям и заботам природным началом.
      Неумолимая логика Монтеня при этом приходит к вполне естественному выводу: место бога принадлежит природе. На этом «крамольном» выводе у Монтеня кончается вся религия.
      Если исчезает религия, то что же делать с другой «религией» - религией понимаемой как установившаяся форма общественного сознания, выражаемая посредством отправления тех или иных религиозных актов? Монтень отвечает, что он считает все существующие формы религии лишь общественным установлением, народным обычаем. При этом ни одной из религий нельзя отдать предпочтения. Единственным действительным признаком истинной веры должна быть христианская (читай: нравственная) добродетель, эта добродетель заложена практически во всех религиях, она является в этом смысле общечеловеческой добродетелью, заслуживающей почитания и соблюдения.
      Из этой «общечеловеческой добродетели» естественным образом вытекает этика человеческих отношений, как конкретное выражение и применение общечеловеческих «законов человеческой нравственности». Эти законы имеют в своей основе гуманистическую природу человека и не имеют ничего общего с фанатической религиозностью и оторванной от жизни схоластикой. Подлинная добродетель «имеет своим путеводителем природу, а спутником счастье и наслаждение» (see [15], page 227).

      Гуманистическая натуралистическая философия Мишеля Монтеня оказала значительное влияние на последующее развитие европейской философской мысли.
      Провозгласив опыт основой человеческого знания, он оказал воздействие на разработку Ф. Бэконом эмпирического метода в философии. «Опыты» Монтеня дали толчок работам таких умов человечества, как П. Гассенди, Р. Декарт, Б. Паскаль, Н. Мальбранш и многих-многих других.

Go to the top of the review


Part III. MODERNITY THROUGH THE REVIVAL PRISM

      Очень неординарные события в современной общественной и политической жизни у большей части населения вызывают откровенную тревогу и неуверенность в завтрашнем дне.
      Что это? Случайное стечение обстоятельств или «неумолимый рок»?
      Можно ли как-то повлиять на ход процессов в науке и обществе или остается лишь плыть по течению, сознавая полную тщетность любых попыток что-либо понять, предпринять или предвидеть?
      Все нижеследующее является попыткой ответа на эти непростые вопросы. Пусть я в чем-то окажусь не прав – в этом проявится неумолимая диалектика научного поиска. Однако, высокоорганизованная личность, по-моему, должна характеризоваться именно стремлением извлекать уроки из прошлого, чтобы не повторять их в будущем, иначе вся наука превратится лишь в простое наукоподобное упражнение ума подобное схоластике.

Go to the top of the review


III.1. Science - Politics - History

      Мы знаем, что история и политика связаны неразрывными узами. Фактически история – «политика в действии»: тот или иной политический ход (даже, если впоследствии выясняется его ошибочность) становится неумолимым достоянием истории и в глубоком смысле исправлению не подлежит.
      Но, с другой стороны, любое научное достижение тоже моментально «вписывает свою строку в книгу истории». Так, например, создание атомной бомбы стало, поистине, историческим событием, оказавшим громадное влияние на весь ход мировой истории.
      Практическое доказательство возможности космических полетов тоже явилось фактом большого исторического значения – человечество устремилось в космос. Это, в свою очередь, открывает новые горизонты в науке – появилась возможность получения неизвестных ранее материалов с «неземными» свойствами, стали ставиться качественно новые эксперименты в области взаимоотношений Космоса с живыми организмами.
      То есть взаимосвязь между наукой и историей тоже ни у кого, я думаю, сомнений не вызывает.
      Теперь рассмотрим «взаимоотношения» между наукой и политикой.
      Достаточно вспомнить, опять-таки, создание атомной бомбы, чтобы эта взаимосвязь сразу же прояснилась: крупное научное открытие – это политический козырь, который «диктует политику». Кто «держит верх» в науке, тот неизбежно становится решающей силой при решении политических вопросов.
      Однако, все это – вещи довольно очевидные и только ради них не стоило вообще заводить этого разговора.
      Я хочу поставить акцент на обратной связи: политика своим «обратным концом» всегда ударяет по науке. Поэтому серьезных ошибок в политике история не прощает: они всегда влекут за собой отставание в науке, отставание в экономическом развитии, а впоследствии и политическую слабость государства в целом.

Go to the top of the review


III.2. Historical analogies

      В IV веке до нашей эры Римская империя достигла невиданного могущества. Этот же период характеризуется громадным расцветом науки и искусства.
      Сократ, Платон, Протагор, Аристотель, Анаксагор – гиганты науки времен Римской империи. Тысячелетия пролегли между нами и ними, однако, каждый более или менее серьезный ученый вновь и вновь обращается к их выдающемуся наследию.
      С чего начался развал Римской империи? С известного всем похода Александра Македонского в Индию. Случайность ли это? Я отвечаю: нет, это не случайность. Римская империя держалась на диктате силы, а при таких началах, как показывает история, «поход на чужую страну» всегда является мощным катализатором общественных процессов внутри страны и влечет за собой еще большее ослабление единства этой страны (империи), что приводит к ее распаду.
      Мы говорим о расцвете науки и искусства, о гуманизации всей жизни в эпоху Возрождения. Но что представляет собой «эпоха Возрождения»? Это, прежде всего, Византийская империя. Именно империя, подмявшая под себя многие страны и народы, в 1453 году потерпела крах. А крах империи, как неумолимо свидетельствует история, - это гуманизация жизни, это расцвет науки и искусства, это прогресс.
      Именно «обломки империи» оказываются, в конечном счете, той благодатной почвой, на которой произрастают выдающиеся умы человечества подобные Николаю Кузанскому, Николаю Копернику, Джордано Бруно, Галилео Галилею, Мишелю Монтеню.
      Характерно также и то, что выдающиеся умы, имена которых красной строкой вписываются в историю, при жизни считаются дилетантами в той области знаний, в которой их имена остаются на века. Естественно, это правило не выполняется на все 100%, однако, это явление, несомненно, содержит в себе глубокий философский смысл.
      Что представляет собой революционный переворот в науке или искусстве? Это, прежде всего, революция в сознании, а чтобы эта революция «состоялась», сознание не должно быть сковано рамками определенного круга явлений и событий, определенных методов и стандартных направлений мышления, как это зачастую бывает у профессионалов.
      Только «свободный ум» (или свободная от повседневных обязанностей часть ума) способен, оказывается, произвести революцию в науке или искусстве.
      Это и является ответом на вопрос, почему вся философия эпохи Возрождения, оставившая неизгладимый след в истории человечества, была преимущественно «любительской».

Go to the top of the review


III.3. Parallels and prognoses

      Следует честно признаться, что во вводной части реферата я немного «покривил душой» нарушив «единство места» – одно из основных положений метода социалистического реализма. Чтобы «спираль развития» сделала свой очередной виток, концы этой спирали должны быть сопоставимы по максимально возможно большему числу параметров. Только тогда можно в подлинно научном смысле говорить о «витке спирали».
      В нашем же случае следует констатировать лишь «историческую аналогию». Однако, и историческая аналогия в данном случае весьма поучительна.
      Вспомним Монтеня. В «Опытах» он утверждает (не дословно), что чем хуже идут в стране экономические и политические процессы, чем хуже уровень жизни народа, тем пышнее процветает «словоблудие», при этом ораторское искусство проявляется именно в увеличении длины речей в сочетании с их пустотой. Видимо, над этим фактом стоит призадуматься.
      Опять же Монтень. Из громадной толпы бегущих «делать революцию» едва ли более, чем 5-6 человек оказываются способны вразумительно ответить: против чего и за что конкретно они борются. Не это ли мы наблюдаем в современной жизни, хотя бы на примере того же «демократического союза»?
      Десятилетиями в нашем сознании закрепляли убеждение, что человек, уехавший из нашей страны за границу (на постоянное место жительства), - наш кровный враг. Теперь же, при желании, можно не только выехать за границу, но даже и вернуться обратно (Любимов), что вообще «не укладывается ни в какие рамки». Это ли не гуманизация?
      Возьмем современную прессу, предвыборные речи кандидатов в Советы (?).
      Они, по-моему, неумолимо свидетельствуют не просто о фактах, но о ЯВЛЕНИИ гуманизации всей нашей современной жизни. А это уже факт ИСТОРИИ.
      Что представляет собой факт участия нашей страны в войне в Афганистане? Акт дружбы? Безвыходный шаг? По опросу «Собеседника» (см. «Собеседник» № 20 за май 1989 г., page 13), проведенному среди участников войны в Афганистане, большинство сходится на том, что это была политическая ошибка. А сами участники войны – не бог весть какие философы, но уж в объективности им не откажешь.
      Беспартийный министр, провал профессиональных политиков на выборах, «фурункулы» в партийном аппарате – это ли не явное свидетельство глубокого кризиса политики, точнее – идеологии; все эти факты красноречиво говорят об ослаблении ведущей роли партии в стране. Следующий за этим логичный шаг – отмена шестого пункта в Конституции СССР.
      Выставки абстракционистов, импрессионистов, примитивистов, которым раньше было вообще не пробиться в «большие залы», теперь уже – обычное явление. И в этом заключается неумолимая логика жизни, логика философии.
      Прогагор утверждал, что человек только в себе может найти истину, человек – мера всех вещей (see [21], page 121).
      «Что делает философия? – она делает человека вполне человеком» (see [21], page 125). Поэтому сделанный выше анализ современной нам жизни, произведенный через призму прошлого, представляет собой пример истинно философского подхода к проблеме в духе лучших традиций науки.
      Кое-что из моего реферата, видимо, непривычно для восприятия, что-то кажется слишком резким. Но именно на этом и стоит весь научный поиск: где слишком гладко – там не наука. Этой научной прямолинейности нам еще нужно учиться и учиться.

      В докладе на XIX Всесоюзной конференции КПСС 28 июня 1988 года тов. Горбачев, в частности, сказал:
«Перестройка, обновление социализма немыслимы без всемерной активизации интеллектуального, духовного потенциала общества, заключенного в науке, образовании, всей культуре. Но одной констатации мало. Надо действовать, причем энергично и масштабно...» (see [1], page 23).
Именно в этом духе, духе перестройки и обновления и написан данный реферат.
      В заключение хочу отметить следующее. Если уж я претендую на научность, а научность, на мой взгляд, начинается с научного предвидения, то я вынужден набраться смелости и сделать в заключение ряд прогнозов:
1. Существующая политическая и экономическая ситуация в стране говорит о том, что мы имеем дело с «империей в фазе распада». В этом смысле распад СССР практически неизбежен.
2. Мы находимся на пороге невиданного расцвета науки и искусства, в чем каждый из современников сможет довольно скоро воочию убедиться.
3. Съезд Советов 25 мая 1989 года, скорее всего, окончится безрезультатно.
В этом выражается неумолимая логика науки, даже если ее выводы не нравятся нам самим.
05/16/1989 Sergey Makarov

Go to the top of the review


REFERENCES

1. М. С. Горбачев. О ходе реализации решений XXVII съезда КПСС и задачах по углублению перестройки (Доклад на XIX партконференции). М., 1988
2. Проблемы мира и социализма. № 2, 1989
3. Гегель Г. Соч. в 14-ти томах. М.-Л., 1935, т. II: Лекции по философии, кн. 3
4. Н. Кузанский. Избранные философские сочинения. М., 1937
5. Джордано Бруно. Диалоги, М., 1949
6. Буркхарлт Я. Культура Италии в эпоху Возрождения, т. I-II, 2-е изд. С-Пб., 1904-1905
7. Лафарг П. Томас Кампанелла, М.-Л., 1926
8. Лазарев В. Н. Леонардо да Винчи, М., 1952
9. Кампанелло Томмазо. Город Солнца, М., 1954
10. Макиавелли Никколо. Князь, М., 1910
11. Виллари И. Никколо Макиавелли и его время, М., 1914
12. А. Г. Спиркин. Основы философии, М., 1988
13. М. М. Розенталь. Философский словарь, М., 1968
14. Краткий очерк истории философии под ред. М. Т. Иовчука, М., 1969
15. А. Х. Горфункель. Философия эпохи Возрождения, М., 1980
16. «Собеседник» № 20, май 1989
17. Сочинения Козьмы Пруткова, Кострома, 1959
18. В. Ф. Асмус. История античной философии, М., 1965
19. Сочинения итальянских гуманистов эпохи Возрождения, М., 1985
20. Л. М. Баткин. Итальянские гуманисты: стиль жизни, стиль мышления, М., 1978
21. Журнал «Вопросы философии» № 8, 1988
Х Х Х

11/20/2011 Segrim

Go to the top of the review




Go to the top of page


FATHER AND SON

(first published)
      Along the road were going father and son. They were slowly philosophizing about the meaning of life. Suddenly my father as if "stuck": "Everyone born human will die. If the man was born, then a man MUST die, a person is obliged to die. And man is dieing...»
      In various embodiments father kept repeating it over and over again - the son said nothing in reply, but thought to himself: «By what right does this man of forty age injures my child's mind and as it were specifically trying to get me out of the state of mental equilibrium. With my future children, I never allow myself such a faux pas...»
      It was in 1959. Soon before this "dialogue" son just turned eight years old. It was me.
14/01/2007 Segrim
Go to the top of section




Go to the top of page


ABOUT THE CREDIBILITY IN SCIENCE

      In the yard - the night and I can not sleep. Now that it happened, I have to again stand up and express my thoughts on paper, otherwise I shall not find peace and I will toss and turn all night as "a sinner in a frying pan". In what is my fault, I think. And, namely I answer myself. My fault is that I brought to this world six new things:
1. "THE LAW COMPATIBILITY OF CABLE-STAYED NETWORKS", which allows you to "put on stream" process of invention of a new cable-net constructions. It allows design engineers develop more good constructions, which precisely fit under the "flight of unbridled fantasy" of an architect. Previously this could only dream of.

2. More than 25 years ago I invented a large series of strained cable-stayed structures, which are suitable and promising for the construction not only on Earth but also in space and on other planets. This time I informed about it the experts of Patent Institute. I mentioned about it to the professionals, builders in my report in Sverdlovsk in the end of 1989. At least one of them gave me a helping hand? At least one of them supported me, told me that though somebody needs my designs in this world? No!

3. I opened the "Logical Nature's metric" ("THE WORLD HARMONY LAW"), ie in fact, I have formulated and told people with the help of simple human language a simple and general logical law, which is used by the Nature as in creation and in destruction of all what surrounds us, as well as us ourselves. Buckminster Fuller (American architect), as he wrote, "invented" the term "tensegrity" or "tensed integrity."
After a deep analysis of his definition of tensegrity structures, I realized that his "tensed integrity" is namely the first half of my "The World Harmony Law", written by him with "clumsy" language... After my discovering of this simple truth, I immediately described all my reasonings on this subject in my article Tensegrity - it's potency, in which I paid tribute to the great Buckminster Fuller, who, thanks to his talent, during his lifetime became an honorary member of 25 academies of the world.

4. The next my "audacity" was that, thanks to the world harmony law, I deciphered the working scheme of the program of immune system defence of the human and decoded the working scheme of human immunodeficiency virus. I opened up the world that the diseases may have not only viral biological subbase. Cause of the disease may be a program failure which without any material carrying agent reprograms the human body functioning, resulting in this organism quickly moves to the "last point".

5. After that I applied my knowledges directly to the AIDS and offered a practical way of its treatment, which then other people, for example, the firm "Shahatana", successfully applied in practice.

6. Due to the opening by me "non-material causes of disease", I proposed to include into theory of medicine the new section: "chain reaction-type diseases". Then, after HIV/AIDS, I examined a number of diseases, concluded that they belong to diseases such as "Chain Reaction" and told people that the treatment of these diseases should be the same as for AIDS: the general full-body hyperthermia to 42 - 44 degrees Celsius.
      EACH of the above items could be a worthy excuse for a whole human life. For each of these achievments a grateful humanity would give another person a worthy place in society. But only not me.
      Am I a normal man? Of course, not! Normal man is that, who just is "Keeping Mum, pressing on the pedal" and never in his life does not produce anything particularly useful, nothing outstanding (this tema has already been described by me in the article "An Essay on Einstein").
      What I do, this is only one side of the coin. My motto: «Do what you must and whether that will be!». I am working not for fame, but simply because I "can not do otherwise." My work - it's for me just natural way of expressing myself. I, like Russia, which once was "pregnant with revolution" often simply can not sleep for as long as I will not write on the paper my thoughts, which both ocean wave suddenly bore down on my brain.
      However, I started this article for another reason. I'll try to explain the reason. Recently I posted in two English encyclopedias in chapter "Tensegrity" some information about the series (six pieces) of my fundamentally new tensegrity structures, which do not resemble anything of what was before me.
      Before me, in this section were collected only five designs for the last 100 years. Moreover, all they are so primitive, that I generally call them "pencils on the ropes". Do you think that all the experts "were delighted and applauded me"? Nothing like that. They just erased all my information till I "confirm it with the reliable sources". It turns out thatit was I, who should "reaffirm its information links to reliable sources." I felt funny, and very sad at the same time. And what do you, the experts, are sitting here? You apparently just can't beleive your eyes?
      Let us recall the "old man Newton". After the discovery in 1666 of his law of universal gravitation, he a few months later bitterly wrote:

«...I am convinced that, or I should not disclose anything new, or I have to spend all my forces to protect my opening».
      Oh, how I understand him! The old man referred only to himself and to God. Any normal person, especially if it's an expert of one of the English encyclopedias, was obligated, as I understand, immediately "to lay the freethinker in the coffin". Because he violated the most sacred rule: he made no reference to his predecessors in opening a new law. Tell me, how could he make these references for one who was not existed?
      I, for example, do not hide my predecessors:
Anaxagoras (in a broad philosophical approach to the analysis of the world)
Heaviside (in the tenacity in science and the methodics of scientific work)
Newton (in the image of the flow of thoughts and in depth immersion into the researching question)
Einstein (in the character traits and whole his behavior in this world)
      But all they are my spiritual mentors. And I no one of them can't add to myself as an co-author or give to them my links from my specific objects of researches.
      Till I have received the solo inventor's certificate, the experts from VNIIGPE (All-Union Scientific Research Institute of State Patent Examination) is also heavily battered my nerves: I, as an self-owner, very long had to prove that my structures something cost in this world. Contrary to the frivolous and totally untrue of British experts thinking, in fact, certificate in Russia's is not issued to the author till he proves the experts:

• the world novelty of the invention
• the usefulness of the invention, which is specifically for VNIIGPE recognized by the leaders in the considered region, filed in writing and signed by them

      However, there were people who gave to VNIIGPE a writing positive evaluation of my designs. In fact, they became the "godfathers" for the whole series of my structures. Here are their names:

V.R. Kulbach, Ph.D., Professor Polytechnic Institute in Tallinn. Then he was the "star of first magnitude" in the Soviet Union in the field of suspension coatings
V.I. Travush, Ph.D., professor, deputy director for scientific work TSNIIEP of public buildings and engineering structures, Moscow

      If it were not for these people, I probably would have never received my author's certificate. To protect my structures after the filing by me at once the six applications for inventions, all the process lasted for me exactly three and a half years.
      By the way, Einstein, it must be said, at one time very lucky: he didn't must prove his truth and his significance during all his lifetime. But such a lucky falls not for everyone.
      Very lucky to Maxwell too: in his main scientific work on electromagnetism, he referred to the work of Oliver Heaviside (and he was the single predecessor referred to in this monograph). But the self pioneer, the founder of a trend in science to whom, say me, please, should be referenced to? You are silent? That's it! But namely a pioneer as the first paves the first ski track through the virgin soil (it is very, very difficult). For all the mankind he makes the ski way on which others already can safely move forward, even if they do not know the name of this pioneer, or just they do not want to mention about him.
      For the experts of all the commissions, which actually manage the destinies of people, the methods of their work, I think, are oriented on "normal person", who "do not open anything and nothing invent". If a person wants to better something, then let "only a very little" (not too hard!), only if it could be easy to see: was a simple pencil, but became "a pencil with eraser at the other end" - a trifle, but nice!
      A maverick who does not refers to other inventors (ie, a scientist of such magnitude as Isaac Newton), according to the rules of experts would need to "immediately destroy" that others couldn't repeat such a way. Namely how it was done with the Heaviside: "Heaviside operational calculus", which he invented, was recognized in the world after about 50 years after his death. When he lived among the people, he was "just a holy fool" and died in poverty. How could society to recognize its merits, if he did not have higher education diploma and he had no team of co-authors?
      Wake up, people! More careful you must to treat to your "scientific Gene Pool". Otherwise all the science will be just stopped.
      The requirement of experts "to refer to authorities", is such a contagious thing, that even in everyday life, people sometimes just do not want to analyze and are unwilling to accept the information without reference to authority. People do not like to trust to their own heads. Their own brains are completely turned off, even in matters of common usual logic. And some kind of scientific logic to many of them, apparently, simply is not available (in their heads such ability, I think, was atrophied, as superfluous).
      Like a vacuum cleaner draws in the dust, so also modern man continually "sucks" the information. However, he did not even pay attention: whether he needed this information or it is just a "garbage". And it's for a whole day (maybe with a break for sleep). When and why a man must to think and analyze if for receiving his salary and other benefits it is absolutely not necessary? So he does not think, he do not analyze.
      However, if you are working as an EXPERT, you should at least try "to move at least with one brain convolution" and remember, for example, misadventures of the "old man Newton".
      On the one hand, every day I am angry to experts of English encyclopedias, because they "have arrested all of my information and do not leave it out (this is very bad: the anger shortens your life!). I must remind them: this information already "sat under house arrest for 25 years". On the other hand, I perfectly understand them: the personalities scale of Newton and the Heaviside so rarely appear on our planet, that their existence while they are alive, you can simply "ignore". And after their death and even more so. In any case, humanity is already accustomed to this approach («...but clairvoyants, as well as witnesses, in all ages people burned at the stakes»).
      Proceedings of the Johannes Kepler were recognized by mankind only 300 years after his death.

      Hot News: Today March 21, 2011 in the morning I once again checked sections of "Tensegrity" to English sites "Wikipedia" and "Wikimedia Commons". Turned out to be: on the website "Wikimedia Commons" all 6 of my designs again included in the samples of this art form. After my posting on the site of these structures they were already 3 times removed and 3 times turned back (I myself did not do it). And such information is good to write a record in the Guinness Book of Records. That's how hard to prove his truth for the inventor-alone!

      It would be nice yet during my lifetime to get from a grateful humanity at least some recognition...

03/21/2011 Segrim

Go to the top of section




Go to the top of page


PHILOSOPHY OF TRUTH




Truth you utter, has neither past nor future. She exists and it's all she needs. (Richard Bach)
Suorce: http://www.orator.ru/bach.html


Truth is not given to man in finished form, as proprietary, objective reality, it is acquired by way and life. Truth involves a movement and the striving to infinity. Truth can not be understood dogmatically, catechetical. Truth is dynamic, not static. Truth is the fullness, which was never given us in completed view. (Berdyaev)


Man, seeker of truth, is internally strong, and so he is not afraid of uncertainty.


Perhaps you've seen how one asked believers to answer to various tricky questions, such as "Who created God?" or "Can God create a stone which He can not lift?" Critics sincerely consider that if the believers have nothing to say, this is evidence on the harmfulness of their faith. But this approach is perfectly not applicable to science. The fact that science can not explain certain phenomena, does not discredit the value of scientific method.


The quest for the truth - it is an impulse coming from within. It is self-sufficient and it not needs as explanations and excuses.


Source: http://content.mail.ru/arch/2292/596877.html



Go to the top of section




Go to the top of page


MY «TRAVEL NOTES»

Empty bottle we normally throw away because it is no longer any interest for us. It happens that the man is interesting for us only if he have something in his depths. And when that "something" disappears, the person dies, if not physically, just in memory of those who knew him.





Each subject and each process has his time and place in our life:

     in childhood, we study the anatomy,
     in our youth age - physiology,
     in maturity - economics and politics,
     in elderly age - history and archeology.





There can be no serious future in the country in which the most underpaid professions are teacher, educator, librarian and a physician.




Wide is my native land..!
Really wide.
And it may be too wide..?
(about the Soviet Union in 1989)


It is better to lose a wallet than optimism.


Nonstarter - the person is not interesting!




Whether you love birds, just as I love them?
(see the picture on the right)




My ex-wife, with whom I lived longer than with other women, stubbornly refused to learn the computer, although she very needed the computer skills for the job. I tried several times to help her in this endeavor (but I have already successfully taught the computer skills to about 600 people), but she was nervous, and cursing.
One time she with the "cursing" said: "I feel that these computers will kill the humanity". To this I replied calmly: "Even if they will do it, believe: they will commit it independently of whether can YOU work for a computer or not".


Someone from the great men said: "When you write about others, you are always writing about yourself (probably why I, like the secretive introvert, do not like doing it)". However, after the "mature reflections" I was forced to agree with him: yes Anaxagoras, Newton, Einstein, Heaviside - they all are I myself, or more precisely: they are my ideological supporters, my teachers, although I had no meeting with anyone of them.


When I taught physics in middle school, in February had "happened my birthday." One girl of 7 th grade handed to me her own greeting card, in which, inter alia, it was written: "I wish you to become a GREAT PHYSICIST !" I thanked her, smiled back and thought to myself: "Holy naivete! She apparently does not know, what in all the world EVEN A SINGLE school physics teacher NEVER became a great physicist".


Back in 1989 while I was in such a state that "my intellect hold in mind whole the Universe," I said: "Will be terrible heat. Many people will not can go through it. But those who will survive, will get rid of all diseases".
It very surprised many people. I was surprised only by the fact what I was unable to specify exactly when this will happen.


It is believed that memories - is the elderly persons apanage. Perhaps it is so. But tell me, can a man be a man and have no memories? A man without memories - it's something as empty vessel: the form and the exterior view are present, but content is absolutely not present.
Of course, the young man is constantly driving forward, he does not want to look back and all his thoughts seek the future, believing that "all still ahead" and it always seems to him: now, that's beyond the first... or second... or, at worst, beyond the third turning will be opened to you that, for what is really worth living, will open something MOST IMPORTANT in your life. But life is constantly flowing and flowing as a flat river (or, conversely, as a mountain river!) and something interesting do not opens to us, but we constantly peer into the misty distance, which again and again approximates us to the next turn...


Recognition of your own mistake - this is not a weakness. This is evidence of absolute objectivity and fortitude for which there is no authority above truth.


You don't must seek "naked truth" in the sphere of relations, because instead you can find the corpse.


If a person is not enrolled by doubts, then in his own development he come to a limit.


Microscope can be useful to drive nails. But still better use it for other aims.


Over time, all things usually become worse: and the things and people and circumstances...


Newton wrote: "I always keep in mind the subject of my research and wait patiently until the first glimmer slowly and gradually turns into a full and brilliant light".
It turned out that my "creative cuisine" works exactly the same manner. In this case, when "the result is already matured" (and, often, it happens at night), I just can not sleep: someone wakes me up and makes to go in direction of my working desk. I can oppose it - nothing will be better. To sleep after this "push" I can not.
On this occasion, I recall how dicer loads his dice (ie, the "problem") into glass, then he vigorously shakes the glass, then he overturns it by throwing the dice on the table. The bones in a certain manner lie on the table and show the problem solution. The same idea is incorporated in many other games and in different ways of divination.
What is the difference between randomness and certainty, - I thought. And answered myself: IN NATURE, they do not differ in nothing. IN HUMAN MIND this cases distinct FUNDAMENTALLY (let's remember quantum mechanics) and it consists in the fact that, if WE KNOW the historical reason of our results, it is certainty. If WE DO NOT KNOW the historical reason of our result, then FOR OUR MIND this result is accidental. This means that all quantum mechanics - it's simply a recognition of our weaknesses in relation to nature.
I remembered that even Einstein almost 100 years ago thought a similar way. He never believed that quantum mechanics reflects objective reality. He believed that all quantum mechanics is just a TEMPORARY MEASURE, which preceded the objective knowledge.
Similar arguments can be attributed to the "probability theory and mathematical statistics." All this - the recognition of human weakness. In my opinion, this whole "science" is merely "a convenient for our practice option recognizing the weakness of our understanding of the present state of affairs in Nature". (see also "Reflections about the base of natural logarithms" in the "Golden Spiral" chapter)


The famous Laplace, French mathematician and astronomer who became interested in mechanics, so that wanted to build a complete mechanistic picture of whole the world that surrounds us. In this way he, among others, began to analyze the question: "Is there a god?" Naturally, in his view of the world God has no place. Laplace clearly came to the conclusion that there is no God. Try to guess what happened next?
After such a "discovery" of Laplace, he immediately exclaimed: "IF GOD IS NOT, then GOD IT'S ME!"
Yes... Weak man...


Question: By means of what genius is fundamentally different from the average person? Answer: By means of the speed of information processing - a genius can have this rate of ten or more times higher than it have "normal" person...
If you agree with me, I'll go further. The speed of information processing is related to the conductivity of neurons of the nervous system. Let's remember: over copper wires, for example, the electrons are running faster than over iron wires... So, the geniuses SOMEHOW have the speed transmission of signals along the neurons much higher than that of other people! For talented biologist I give for free a topic for his doctoral dissertation (to find a decent topic for your dissertation is a very difficult task!): "Analysis of the chemical reason of transmission signal speed in neurons and finding ways of making it higher for expedite the processing of information".
Believe me: this is a very "fertile" theme. By learning to accelerate the processing of information in the brain the average person, you can create geniuses simply "on request". You will be able purposefully create an army of 'ideal soldiers', hundreds of ideal students...
If after the processing of proposed theme you will be a bit lucky, then after concrete positive results in this thread, you can even get a Nobel Prize.
Good luck!


I recently read an interesting article about Grigory Perelman. It was called "An Interview with Grigory Perelman mathematician: Why do I need a million dollars? I can control the universe. " In this article, as it follows even from its name, Perelman said that he is able to manage the universe. Of course, an ordinary person can't experience and appreciate such a statement, though many fear that this is indeed true.
I propose to give Perelman a simple task: let he will turn to us the reverse side of the moon. If he told us the truth about the managing the universe, - it is for him a simple job. And if he refuses, under any pretext to do it, we all do from this our findings...

The same article says that he "wrote his thesis under the guidance of Academician Alexandrov. The theme was simple: «Saddle-type surfaces in Euclidean geometry»"...
I'm also involved into "saddle surfaces" from about 1983. Of course, I do not Perelman, so I think that this topic is very complex, almost boundless. However, while moving this way I discovered the "law compatibility of cable-stayed networks" and even the "world harmony law". If anyone is interested, I can clarify: the idea of world harmony law I got in the process of describing the triple curvature of a single cable involved in shaping the surface of the saddle...



Go to the top of section




Go to the top of page


Link to the site start page