The development of the social sciences needs to rely on precise methods. The nomological model of explanation adopted in the natural sciences is ill-suited for the social sciences. An algorithmic model of society can be a promising solution to existing problems. In its most general form, an algorithm is a generally understood prescription for what actions to perform and in what order to achieve the desired result. Any algorithm can be represented as a set of rules of the form «If (...) A, do D to get P». People are the bearers of this kind of rules that apply in different areas of their activities. The rules are subject to change based on personal and collective experience. There is a special mathematical discipline that studies the laws of evolution of such rules. This discipline is called genetic programming. Contrary to the threatening name, the algorithmic model does not imply the deprivation of a person’s right to free choice, but it needs this right as a necessary condition for the evolution of social algorithms. These algorithms allow us to give a non-causal, but law-like explanation of many well-known social phenomena, as well as to effectively model the future, which is critically important today. A retrospective look at the evolution of social algorithms shows that the current global crisis of human society is associated with the approach to the point of singularity in their evolution. This is due to the fact that there is no need for direct human participation in the implementation of social algorithms, which is reflected in a fundamental change in the sphere of employment and less need for further development of the sciences. (shrink)

В доступной форме ученики и последователи В. И. Свидерского рассказывают об этом выдающемся "генераторе" новых философских идей, о значении этих идей в преодолении кризисных явлений в современной философии.

В издании рассматриваются вопросы происхождения и смыслового наполнения дефиниций "совесть" и "интеллигенция" анализируются взгляды представителей разных историко-философских школ по заявленной проблеме.

In his critique of empiriocriticism, V. I. Lenin also considered it necessary to characterize its relationship to religion in order to show more fully the social significance of this school, which was fashionable in its time. In contrast to those who took at face value the pretensions of Machism to present the scientific thought of the nineteenth century and who hastened to put it in place of "obsolete" materialist dialectics, V. I. Lenin unmasked the "completely reactionary character" of this essentially (...) subjective-idealistic current, which played into the hands of fideism despite the fact that E. Mach considered himself an atheist. (shrink)

В монографии рассматриваются мифы о Мировом Разуме, который нашими древними предками почитался как языческая богиня Матерь Мира София Премудрая. Для широкого круга читателей.

В книге большое внимание занимает рассмотрение сущностных черт самого сложностного мышления и тех возможностей, которые оно открывает при анализе процессов глобализации, проблем биоэтики, экономики, инженерной науки. Для специалистов.