News AEST

Philosophy of the moral path of mankind

 

Report at a remote meeting of the international dissertation council IP-IP300 for the defense of dissertations for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Ecological and Social Technologies (https://fig.ast.social). 

The report is available on the Institute's website (https://fig.ast.social).

 

Applicant for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy:

Esenaliev Taalay Duishenovich, Ph.D. in Philosophy, Professor, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Ecological and Social Technologies, Director of the Institute for International Security and Informal Justice (https://sis.ast.social).

 

Official opponents:

 

ITO Hironori, Ph.D, Specially Appointed Professor, University of Tsukuba, Bureau of Global Initiatives, Japan.

Zhumabekova Turdukan Abdykaryevna, Doctor of Law, Professor, Deputy of the Parliament of the Kyrgyz Republic of the IV convocation, Honored Worker of Science and Education (according to the RANS), Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.

Announcement by the Institute of Philosophy about the postponement of the date for the defense of the qualification work due to the reason that one of the opponents is not available to participate in the process of the applicant’s qualification promotion.

Defense of qualification work of Esenaliev Taalay Duishenovich, on the topic "Philosophy of the moral path of mankind", submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the specialty "Philosophy" was postponed from March 24, 2023 to March 28, 2023 due to the reason that  one of the opponents is not available to participate in the process of the applicant’s qualification promotion. 

New composition of official opponents:

ITO Hironori, Ph.D, Specially Appointed Professor, University of Tsukuba, Bureau of Global Initiatives, Japan.

Zhumabekova Turdukan Abdykaryevna, Doctor of Law, Professor, Member of the Jogorku Kenesh of the Kyrgyz Republic of the IV convocation, Honored Worker of Science and Education (according to the RANS), Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Kyrgyz Republic.

Nizamiyev Abdurashit Gumarovich, Doctor of Geography, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Natural Science, Tourism and Agrarian Technologies, Osh State University, Kyrgyz Republic.

Trinh Luong Quang, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Director of the Vietnam-Russian Center at Binh Duong University, Binh Duong Province, Vietnam.

Leading organization: Institute of Public Administration of the Academy of Environmental and Social Technologies

Research Report

 

Humanitarian secular and religious teachings of the world have been subjected to the destructive influence of the ideology of money. Selfish motives have become the main motivation for behavior. A person for the sake of money began to threaten, harm another person. The murder of a person and violence against him were the result of the influence of a destructive religion and the ideology of money. They began to believe in Money as in a universal force - God. Thus a new religion of money was born.

Money began to be used as a technology to control people's behavior. This is how mass energy control technology appeared. However, this technology has a significant deficiency that impedes social development - it is immorality and injustice. Exploitation and oppression of man, lethal wars have become a destructive factor of civilization.

The ideology of money defeated all religious and secular teachings, brought the world to the brink of a nuclear catastrophe. Dehumanization, as the process of convincing people that they can kill other people, has become a technology for launching lethal wars.

The religion-ideology of money has led humanity to a moral crisis, which manifested itself in the dominance of material interests over spiritual ones. There was a threat to the very existence of human civilization.

The most dangerous consequences of the ideology of money were the following phenomena:

moral and psychological decay of people, selfish motives of officials of public authorities, which was expressed in distrust of the authorities;

mass parasitic behavior, hedonism as a way of life, sociopathy, social cowardice and mental modesty;

human values have given way to money as the main value, ideology, technology and religion; they began to believe in money as in God; monetarism has perverted the consciousness of many persons in public power, which has led to the criminalization of government bodies, the rupture of international relations, and the isolation of countries;

the growth of aggression and intolerance, manifestations of asocial behavior, the penetration of criminal persons into power and the abuse of power for selfish purposes, mass wrecking and systematic fraud have become a sad negative norm of the day;

deformation of historical memory, a negative assessment of significant periods of national history, the spread of misconceptions about the history of states and peoples;

atomization of society - the rupture of social ties (friendly, family, neighborly), the growth of individualism, disregard for the rights of others.

Lethal wars accompany humanity throughout history. Religion, science, culture, education, law, ethics could not stop the killing of man by man. The main motive of any war is material interest. Distribution to their own benefit of resources (territories, energy sources, minerals, other wealth and money). Moreover, money has become an ideology. They believe in money as in God. For money they kill, rob, deceive, betray. This dangerous ideology has become a destructive force, constantly pushing people into wars, crime, killing each other. To stop lethal wars, new ethics and technologies are needed.

In this regard, on July 25, 2019, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/73/329 “Building a culture of peace in the spirit of love and morality”. The International Day of Morality has been proclaimed on April 5th.

To solve the task set by the UN in Resolution A / RES / 73/329 to form a culture of peace in the spirit of love and morality, the main provisions of ecological discursive ethics developed by scientists Chigirev Viktor Anatolievich and Yunatskevich Petr Ivanovich (Institute of Morality, 2016).

Ecological discursive ethics is a global project for all humanity, provided with eco-social technologies that will form on planet Earth a culture of peace in the spirit of love and morality. Our work is devoted to the study of the possibilities of this ethics in ensuring the moral path of mankind. The ecological and discursive content of the new ethics is based on the global ecological principle (GEP - a person should not harm himself, other people and the environment) and the discursive-evaluative method (DEM - a group expert and mass ethical assessment of socially significant decisions from the position of a global ecological principle).

The purpose of the study: to substantiate the philosophical content of the moral path of mankind.

Object of study: the moral path of mankind.

Subject of study: the formation of moral thinking and behavior of people through the transition from monetary ethics to environmental discursive ethics.

The following statements were accepted as the research hypothesis:

the goal of monetary ethics - to divide people into poor and rich, turned out to be contradictory, deceptive, harmful to all mankind; there was inequality, exploitation and oppression of man by man, lethal wars;

monetary ethics is based on the primacy of the material over the spiritual in human thinking and behavior;

ecological discursive ethics is based on the following principles, rule, method and technology:

global environmental principle (GEP): a person should not harm himself, other people and the environment;

global ethical moral principle (GEMP): a person should behave in such a way as not to harm himself, other people and the environment;

moral rule III-C: do not harm yourself (С1), neighbors (С2), environment (С3) neither by thought, nor by word, nor by deed; create for yourself, your neighbors, the environment by thought, word, deed;

the technology of changing the ethical worldview paradigm is based on the discursive-evaluative method (DEM), which consists in organizing a wide participation of citizens in the discussion and evaluation of socially significant decisions from the standpoint of the GEP, GEMP, III-C;

eco-social technologies (EST), which are understood as a set of methods for applying the discursive-evaluative method in the formation of a new worldview paradigm of a moral person.

To achieve this goal and test the provisions of the hypothesis, the following tasks were defined:

1. The study of religious teachings and philosophical concepts.

2. Definition of the crisis of monetary ethics and worldview based on the primacy of money over human values.

3. Axiological analysis and substantiation of human values.

4. Substantiation of the basic concepts of ecological discursive ethics.

5. Determination of the main functions of eco-social technologies that ensure the moral path of human civilization.

The methodological basis of the study is the discursive-evaluative method.

The theoretical basis of the study was the works of the following thinkers and scientists:

Anaximander, Anaximenes, Aristotle, Diogenes Laertsky, Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Empedocles, Democritus, Plato, Protagoras, Socrates;

Sri Aurobindo, Paramahamsa Yogananda, Swami Vivekananda, Sri Swami Sivananda, Shivaya Subramanyaswami;

D.T. Suzuki, Hu Shi;

Lao Tzu, Confucius;

K. Lamprecht, B. Russell, A. J. Toynbee, E. Frome, O. Spengler, K. Jaspers, A. Bergson, M. Heidegger, A. Camus, K-O. Apel, J. Deleuze, F. Guattari, K. Lorenz;

V.A. Chigirev, P.I. Yunatskevich, S.V. Goryunkov, A.M. Safiollin, V.P. Selegen, M.P. Kryukov.

Research method: theoretical analysis and synthesis of religious and secular philosophical literature.

Provisions for defense:

monetary ethics is based on the primacy of the material over the spiritual in human thinking and behavior;

The scientific and practical foundations of ecological discursive ethics are:

global environmental principle (GEP): a person should not harm himself, other people and the environment;

global ethical moral principle (GEMP): a person should behave in such a way as not to harm himself, other people and the environment;

moral rule III-C: do not harm yourself (С1), neighbors (С2), environment (С3) neither by thought, nor by word, nor by deed; create for yourself, your neighbors, the environment by thought, word, deed;

the technology of changing the ethical worldview paradigm is based on the discursive-evaluative method (DEM), which consists in organizing a wide participation of citizens in the discussion and evaluation of socially significant decisions from the standpoint of the GEO, GENP, III-C.

eco-social technologies (EST), which are understood as a set of methods for applying the discursive-evaluative method in the formation of a new worldview paradigm;

ecopedagogy is a practical pedagogical science of education and upbringing, supplemented by a discursive-evaluative method.

Research base: Institute for International Security and Informal Justice (https://sis.ast.social).

The scientific novelty of the study lies in the substantiation of the change in monetary ethics and the definition of the basic concepts of ecological discursive ethics, reflecting the moral path of humanity.

1. For the first time, it was concluded that religious and secular philosophical concepts, humanitarian teachings could not resist monetary ethics, which puts money at the forefront, exploiting, oppressing, robbing, raping, killing a person.

2. In the course of their development, the peoples and advanced countries of the world began to shape the thinking and behavior of a pragmatic, utilitarian, parasitic person, capable of robbing and killing another person after the process of dehumanization.

3. The basic concepts of the philosophy of the moral path of mankind have been developed.

4. Human values and the legal mechanism for their protection are determined.

5. Ecological social technologies are substantiated that ensure the education of a moral person who does not harm and creates.

6. A new logic of the strategic discourse of public authorities with society is proposed not on the basis of the Hegelian system, according to which the collision of thesis and antithesis presupposes synthesis, but on the basis of the discursive-evaluative method, according to which the collision of thesis and antithesis generates discourse. If the meanings of the discourse do not converge, then the basis of the thesis and antithesis must be replaced, as well as the authors of the thesis and antithesis themselves in case of further discrepancy of the discourse.

7. It has been established that the new (environmental discursive) ethics presupposes a continuous discourse and evaluation of the object, subject, social subjects. Subject-subject and subject-object relations are discussed and evaluated, which ensures the stability of the doctrine over time. Teaching does not develop if there is no discourse and evaluations in it. If the commandments of the doctrine are unshakable and firm, such a doctrine breaks away from reality and turns into a dogma.

The theoretical significance lies in the definition of the crisis of the materialistic worldview, the analysis of religious and philosophical teachings, the justification of the primacy of the spiritual over the material, the development of basic concepts and ethical categories of the moral path of mankind, the axiological substantiation of human values.

When studying philosophical and religious doctrines and teachings, an axiological interpretation was applied, i.e. explanation and understanding of the teachings from the values that make up the foundations of the worldview paradigm and human behavior. The value approach has operational significance and allows to establish a connection between the global problems of civilization such as inequality, lethal wars, the murder of a person by a person with a material monetary worldview, the main of which is material values, primarily, such as money.

Dynamism to the process of changing the material monetary paradigm of thinking is given by the openness of the axiological system of monetary ethics, based on money as the main human value, which is the cause of social catastrophes and lethal wars. Replacing socially dangerous material values with such a universal value as morality, which is understood as the harmless behavior of a person and his creative work for other people, will ensure the development of human civilization.

The collective and individual abilities to form values allow society to use the developed methods and content of moral education, which are called environmental pedagogy (ecopedagogy), for self-preservation and development. This pedagogy is based on a global ecological principle and a discursive-evaluative method. Their interaction integrates social and personal-individual levels. As a result, the moral personality of a person is formed who observes rule III-C in behavior (do not harm yourself (C1), neighbors (C2), environment (C3) by thought, word or deed; create for yourself, neighbors, environment with thought, word, deed). The main direction of interaction between society and the individual is the assimilation by the individual of the value norm (rule III-C) in the process of training and education, the further consolidation of this rule in the legal and political systems of society.

Morality, as a basic value of a person, is formed in the process of its life activity, and is identified in communication as a group and social value approved by society and demanded by the state for persons holding public positions.

The ways and forms of overcoming negative phenomena in society and the state are determined. The possibility of the movement of the world civilization towards sustainability and stability, in addition to the achievements of technology and technology, is justified by the ability of a person to learn and moral education, to survive in the aggravated conditions of reality by participating in discursive and evaluative practices related to the discussion and evaluation of socially significant decisions. The prerequisite for this ability is due to the bifurcation of a person, the rhizomorphic nature of his development, and the identity of discursive-evaluative practice as an adequate rhizomorphic means of practical resolution of issues of a person’s personal existence, stabilized by the planes of negative civil consent.

In philosophy, a new approach to the formation of a person's value is proposed through his participation in the assessment of the values of other people. Assessed values are reflected in the qualities of the individual, the group expert and mass ethical assessment of which allows to strengthen and protect morality as a basic value, as well as to slow down the immorality inherent in the natural bifurcation of any person.

For the implementation of evaluation, there are immanent prerequisites in the very mode of human existence. They are contained in the need and the mechanism of identification. Evaluating positively morality in other people, a person identifies himself as a moral person. With a negative assessment of morality in other people, the identification of an immoral personality is manifested, as a rule, sociopathic, criminalized and harmful to other people.

Evaluation is carried out through correlation not so much with norms and ideals, but with a value constant, a kind of "tuning fork", akin to intuition, feeling, taste, sounding inside a person. In this case, it is more appropriate to speak not about feeling in the psychological sense, but about experiencing in the hermeneutic-phenomenological meaning of the term, as an additional definition. Value attitude is participation, proportionality of man to the world, acceptance of the world by man. That is, the basis of the value attitude is not so much the need as the ability of a person to identify the surrounding circumstances as his own, that is, corresponding to this, specific, “empirical” person.

The work resolves the central problem of philosophy - this is the answer to the question of a person's attitude to himself, other people and the environment. In the most general sense, this attitude is given by the moral rule III-C (do not harm yourself (C1), neighbors (C2), habitat (C3) by thought, word or deed; create for yourself, neighbors, the environment by thought, word, deed).

This rule denotes a direction in philosophy that studies the foundations of a person's moral attitude towards himself, other people and the environment. A value attitude is a positive, neutral or negative significance of any objects, with a distraction from their existential and qualitative characteristics.

The practical significance of the study lies in the substantiation of the change in the worldview paradigm, which was reflected in the UN Resolution No. A/RES/73/329 on the formation of a culture of peace in the spirit of love and morality. New ethical concepts are used in the content of education and upbringing, aimed at the formation, in accordance with this UN Resolution, of a new moral person in all states of the world, capable of creating and not harming. So humanity can get rid of lethal wars.

The practical question of philosophy about the relationship between knowledge, behavior and value is resolved. Moral knowledge (rule III-C), formed in the family and educational organizations from early childhood and maintained throughout a person's life, is a connecting thread between the human spirit, other people, the environment and creative practical activity.

In the most general sense, to know the moral rule III-C means to have a clear, well-founded idea not only about what is, but also about what should be in people's relations - not to harm and create.

Man is an active being. He is incapable of living outside the practical work of transforming the world. Therefore, we attribute the value of morality to the basic knowledge of every person on planet Earth as a certain attitude of thinking and behavior that excludes harm to the person himself, other people and the environment, and stimulates the creative activity of a person for himself, other people and the environment. To know the truth of human existence means to know and fulfill rule III-C, which unites all philosophical and religious ethical doctrines, allows you to use material objects and money not as values, but as tools to ensure life and the next reproduction of the moral generation of people. Rule III-C is both true and good, beautiful and perfect.

Truth is the correspondence of thought to its object, the main value (morality) is the correspondence of the object of thought about it.

Most philosophical, ethical and religious teachings state that a person must be moral, honest, kind. But this is not the truth, namely the statement about the obligation. People are not always moral, honest, kind. But this does not prevent us from asserting that a person is required to have morality, honesty, kindness in relation to himself, other people and the environment. And the more immoral, evil, dishonest people there are in society, the more insistently the demand for morality, honesty, and kindness sounds. The ideas of society that one should not harm a person, other people and the environment is ethical knowledge, although it concerns not what is, but what should be. Thus, knowledge in the narrow sense is distinguished, and knowledge in the broad sense, embracing not only truth, but also morality, honesty, goodness as beautiful in a person.

A person not only cognizes the world, but also acts on the basis of the acquired knowledge. This means that knowledge in a broad sense includes not only ideas about what is happening, but also plans for the future, assessments, norms, promises, warnings, ideals, models, etc. A person has a fairly clear, reasonable idea about morality and its opposite - immorality. Morality is evaluated in people as good through non-harm, immorality as evil through harm.

Good and evil are not varieties of truth. The statements about good and bad, worthy and unworthy are not true or false. Truth does not change with time, but the concept of goodness has different meanings in different eras and in different societies. Also, the concept of morality as not causing harm to a person and creating for a person in the process of discursive-evaluative practices can be further defined. It is also not true, and can be refined, corrected by discourse and evaluation throughout the history of mankind.

Recommendations for use: the research materials are used in activities to implement UN Resolution No. A / RES / 73/329 on the formation of a culture of peace in the spirit of love and morality in all countries of the world.

The reliability of the research results is ensured by the use of axiological analysis and the discursive-evaluative method, reliance on the generalization of religious and philosophical literature, the study of the worldview paradigm, and the generalization of the empirical and theoretical research experience of the institutes of the Academy of Ecosocial Technologies.

The validity of the scientific results and conclusions of the study is ensured by relying on theoretical and empirical data obtained by the Institute of International Security and Informal Justice, the Institute of Public Administration.

Testing and implementation of research results. The main conclusions and results of the study were reported and approved at meetings and seminars of the Institute for International Security and Informal Justice, the Institute of Morality, the Institute for the Problems of Training and Professional Use of Specialists, the Institute of Moral Culture, and the Scientific Consortium of High Humanitarian and Social Technologies.

The main idea of the study (the change of the ethical ideological monetary paradigm to ecological discursive ethics) was presented in the documents of the Scientific Consortium of High Humanitarian and Social Technologies to the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, the Security Council of the Russian Federation and was reflected in the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 809 dated 09.11. 2022 as a state task is to ensure the primacy of the spiritual over the material, the education of a highly moral person in the Russian Federation, the rejection of the destructive ideology of the primacy of the material over the spiritual.

 

Conclusions from the results of the study

 

1. In the course of the study, it was established that the great and lofty ideas of Greek culture, the Roman world, before Constantine and the Renaissance, were absorbed by the moment of being, the dominance of the ideology-religion of money (monetary ethics). Comfort, satisfaction of hedonic needs has become the meaning of human existence.

Religion has submitted to the requirement of monetary ethics that the goals and objectives of religion meet utilitarian needs. All religions of the world from Asia to Europe have succumbed to monetary ethics, they have become tools for extracting money from their adherents. Religion has failed, becoming a pale shadow, whose place has become in the far corner of life. The forces of secularized life, positivist reason and materialistic science triumphed.

Monetary ethics has permeated all ethical religious and philosophical doctrines, justifying the next bloody wars and an economy focused on domination and plunder. Sociopathic circles emerged.

2. Persons who fell ill with sociopathy (loss of feelings of empathy for other people, morality and conscience) began to penetrate into power and other spheres of life. They used Monetary Ethics to appoint the "good" and determine the "evil" to rule and plunder again. The history of mankind has gone in sociopathic circles.

Everyone who defeated the "evil" enemy himself eventually became "evil" in the eyes of others and he was subjected to bloody extrajudicial reprisals. History has been rewritten all the time by sociopaths to paint themselves as "good" and their victims as "evil."

Thus, "Monetary Ethics", having become the basis of a distorted worldview of a person, ensured the high lethality of wars. It was the cause of constant bloodshed in the redistribution of resources and the criminalization of states.

Monetary ethics was aimed at satisfying the perverse needs of the minority. "Matter" began to be valued above man. “Sacred private property” is declared that which cannot be declared the property of a person in principle - namely, that which was not created by this person: space, earth, bowels, people.

Real relations are also extended to people (treatment of a person as a commodity: it can be sold, used, disposed of). The primacy of the material over the spiritual, the cult of the value of money and the depreciation of a person have become a convenient tool for people of non-traditional moral orientation, pests, sociopaths, social parasites, international scammers, criminals and swindlers.

Thus, the development of society and the state that used the old ethics led to the capture of all planetary resources by a small group of sociopaths and the total crisis of earthly civilization, endless lethal wars.

3. At the end of the 20th century, military scientists V.A. Chigirev and P.I. Yunatskevich, who were engaged in solving the problems of reducing the lethality of wars, substantiated, and at the beginning of the 21st century carried out a change in the ethical ideological paradigm based on the following principles and rules:

global environmental principle (GEP): a person should not harm himself, other people and the environment;

global ethical moral principle (GEMP): a person should behave in such a way as not to harm himself, other people and the environment;

moral rule III-C:

don't hurt yourself (C1),

neighbors (C2),

habitat (C3),

not in thought, not in word, not in deed;

create for yourself, neighbors, environment

thought (M),

in a word, (C),

deed (D).

The technology for changing the ethical worldview paradigm is based on the practical application of the discursive-evaluative method (DEM), which consists in organizing a wide participation of citizens in the discussion and evaluation of socially significant decisions from the standpoint of the GEP, GENP, III-C.

4. A change in the ethical paradigm of thinking (“environmental discursive ethics”) will lead to the formation of a moral atmosphere on planet Earth that will provide true freedom to citizens, establish justice for everyone, and create legitimate welfare (wealth) for everyone. Lethal wars will be a thing of the past. The state will be decriminalized. The confrontation of people will be carried out with the help of soft power. Non-lethal wars will be won by the side that achieves moral superiority over its opponent.

5. Ecological discursive ethics (EDE) is based on a global ecological principle - this is a way of human behavior that ensures the survival of mankind, based on a person not causing harm to himself, others and the environment. This ethics, as a procedure for assessing the ethical (morality, morality) of the behavior of specific social subjects, is based on the discursive practices of the specific life of these social subjects.

The foundation of ecological discursive ethics is mass ethical (moral) assessments of the acts of social subjects.

The ethical assessment of the act of a social subject is based on an innate sense of harm, immanently inherent in every person, which does not need to be reinforced by metaphysical reflection.

The ability of a person to feel harm has biological and ethological grounds.

6. Negative civil consent - a consolidated (aggregated) condemning opinion of many social actors about the social actions (inaction) of other social actors, today can be visualized in the form of visual images, literally painted in different colors.

The planes of negative civil agreement can be visualized in color.

Green means that others rate the subject as acting without harm, who can continue to act further.

Blue color means difficulty in assessing the subject, difficulty in recognizing the harm from him, the success of the social disguise of the person being assessed, whose threats are not distinguished by others.

The appearance of red reminds the actor that others see harm or threat in his actions.

This is an occasion to reflect, to analyze the current situation, to bring new arguments for and against appropriate actions.

An important design feature of discursive ethical regulators is the principle of self-punishment used in them.

Here the well-known religious principle of retribution for sin is realized, and not in the other world, but during the life of a particular person. It is implemented by others through mass ethical evaluation.

7. Mass ethical assessment - determination of the level of morality of a social subject by others, by a mass of appraisers. The object of mass ethical assessment is formed responsible for the commission of a social action. In the case of a harmful social action, a feeling of guilt arises, without which there can be no question of a full-fledged correction, restoration of social health.

The healing feeling of guilt and the feeling of shame associated with it leads to self-correction of the subject's behavior. He can publicly repent, apologize online to others for his harmful actions. At the same time, he has a clear understanding that no one else but him is to blame. He is faced with an internal question: "Why did I do this?", "I won't do it again." And this is the way to his moral perfection.

Unique measures of the individual morality of social subjects have been created and tested - harm scales as various ways of digitizing and visualizing the assessment of the level of morality of a social subject (https://www.globalnrav.ast.social; https://euroopen.ast.social). 

Being essentially quasimetric scales, they make it possible to obtain “smooth” evaluation functions and, accordingly, to apply the entire arsenal of well-developed methods of optimal control, game theory, etc. in social measurements.

The use of harm assessment scales in practical discursive ethics makes it possible to effectively influence (manage) social (rhizomorphic) processes.

In order to exist and work peacefully together, it is not necessary to love each other, it is enough just not to harm each other. Ecological discursive ethics is applicable to all spheres of human life, aimed at regulating people's relations, excluding mutual harm, threats.

In order for the practice of moral behavior to become the basis for the humanitarian progress of a person (refusal to kill a person by a person), it is important to maintain rituals of discourse and mass ethical (moral, moral) assessment in society.

8. The transition to the moral path of development of human civilization is possible with a change in the worldview paradigm - the transition from materialistic-monetary to spiritual-human, which is ensured by the practical application of eco-social technologies. The resolution of contradictions between citizens and organizations, including states, is possible in discursive and evaluative practices, the ethical regulator of which is the moral rule III-C. Spirituality arises as a result of creation for others. And then others will not harm, and will create for the spiritual person.

Creative activity should be based on network structures (discursive-evaluative networks), in which a person will reflect the results of his socially useful work. A network hierarchy of users will be established around it, relying on which the creator will ensure the satisfaction of his needs for nutrition, procreation and public recognition of his successes and merits in creation for others. The place of each person in the future is determined not only by harmless behavior, but to a greater extent by creation for others.

 

Questions, comments, suggestions, discussion and evaluation of the report, abstract and qualifying work, please send to:

Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Eco-Social Technologies

https://fig.ast.social 

Адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. Для просмотра адреса в вашем браузере должен быть включен Javascript.