Start page

Valentyn Stetsyuk (Lviv, Ukraine)

Personal web site



A clear understanding of the need for transformations in the existing world makes us talk about global governance with a combination of formal and informal institutions that should mediate world affairs. Such an attempt was made 80 years ago at the creation of the United Nations. However, the UN has faced difficulties, which we have talked about a lot here, and to overcome them, it is necessary to search for new ideas among the traditions that were ignored, for example, when creating the United States of America. (JENNINGS JUSTIN. 2023: 3).

The improvement of the spiritual and physical qualities of a person becomes especially relevant in the context of a constant deterioration in the state of natural conditions. The chief researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences examined three scenarios for the development of mankind in the coming decades in the vision of Fukuyama, the Club of Rome, and the transhumanists. All of them predict the inevitable death of humanity. In many respects agreeing with the authors of the scenarios in a critical assessment of the situation in the world, he believes that only European civilization has come to the end of its existence, and Russia and other countries can avoid such a fate. There are grounds for such a conclusion. Liberal humanism contradicts the laws of nature. Evidence of this is the growth of the “genetic load” in Western countries. This phenomenon, which was given the name by John Haldane (1892-1964), practically means the preservation of low-viable individuals entirely in the spirit of liberal humanism. The threat of dangerous cargo was first recognized in Europe, so there is no doubt that Europe will find a way to eliminate it. Perhaps the thoughts of a Russian philosopher will be used, who believes that instead of liberalism, collectivist, communitarian ideology should reign in the public consciousness (NIKIFOROV ALEKSANDR. 2021: 93). Other scenarios are being developed, one of which sees the salvation of mankind in space exploration.

In recent years, more and more reports have appeared about plans and the possibility of human colonization of the Moon and nearby planets. When interested people seek the allocation of huge sums of money or they invest in the preparation and implementation of flights into deep space, it seems unreasonable and hopeless for several reasons. Scientists who have dedicated their activities to solving the practical issues of space exploration better than others understand the premature of such a grandiose human enterprise, but their voices remain unheard (VOKIN G.G. 2015). Meanwhile, their arguments are not abstract but follow the applied content of the set theory, stability theory, and reliability theory. First, the goals of outer space exploration should be identified. Simple curiosity and personal ambition aside, goals can be socio-economic, existential-pragmatic, scientific, and political. If we talk about socio-economics, then it should be recognized that at present on space flights we "must spend the already limited resources of the Earth, not receiving from Space in return at least an equivalent of energy or matter" (ibid, 20). In other words, hoping for the commercialization of space is nothing but a thoughtless waste of money. Moreover, the conditions for human existence, his "niche" exist only on Earth, and at present, there is no need and prerequisites for the acquisition of qualities that allow one to go beyond the boundaries of this area of existence.

If we keep in mind the scientific goals of space navigation, then we can talk not only about the origin and history of the development of such a space object as the Earth but also about the appearance of people on it and about their spiritual and physical development, that is, about what the sciences studying the formation and development of human civilization in its various manifestations. These humanities are lagging behind the accelerated development of technology, and this imbalance indicates that a large skewness has formed in our worldview, which can lead to a situation where space will become uninteresting for us, and the issue of survival will force us to do what we previously neglected. Avoiding such misfortune is possible by allocating funds for the development of the humanities commensurate with those spent on space exploration, attracting talented young people, and searching for new research methods. Their effective use would bring us closer to answering the fundamental questions of the world order and human existence in it. An analysis of mankind's space activities shows that achievements in this area are accompanied by a significant increase in the number of problematic issues, including of a humanitarian nature. Their solution is impossible without taking into account the indissoluble unity of the natural and humanitarian aspects of space exploration.

The political goals of space exploration under the conditions of the existence of a systemic crisis as a state of the modern world can only be an ill-considered adventure calculated for an external effect without a convincing ontological justification, which is generally typical of international politics in general. It must be borne in mind that currently, human society is experiencing a civilizational revolution, passing through a kind of rite of passage:

Two universal processes are developing in the world: globalization and individuation, accompanied by the transformation of subjects, objects, situations, the development of technical and technological tools, mutations of political and other institutions (NEKLESSA ALEKSANDR. 2019).

The accentuation of the universal process of individuation is a consequence and manifestation of the crisis of liberal humanism while underestimating the structure of human society and overestimating the role of an individual in the civilization process.

Conceiving, in general, the ethnogenetic processes in Europe, it can be argued that, compared with other continents, they had a more complex character. For millennia, waves of immigrants of different ethnic origins rolled through Europe, leaving their contribution to the process of integrating elements of different cultures into the common European civilization as a supercultural phenomenon. The experience of distinct cultures, representatives of which are not so many individuals as national communities, includes two large categories – the experience gained (category ven) and the experience inherited (category zhi). At the same time, the experience gained, spreading in a certain region, forms the basis of regional civilization, and the most significant achievements, which simplify existential problems, are assimilated throughout the world and form an earthly civilization. The formation of Earth's civilization is complicated by the process of globalization, which greatly narrows creative initiative, hinders the manifestations of original thinking, and limits the search for new ways in science, culture, and technology. Influence on world civilization is mainly provided by individuals as representatives of distinct cultures, while national communities maintain and develop the connection of elements of their own culture. In contrast to the experience gained, the experience inherited can be the basis for new creative searches and at the same time provide those searches with the originality of methods and ways. However, it cannot be ruled out that in the inherited experience of individual peoples, there can be unpromising achievements, therefore, it is in their interest to get rid of such experience, assimilating the achievements of other cultures. Even the experience of societies that are usually considered backward and primitive can be used to reform traditional political systems:

These societies show how successful collection action can occur by dividing sovereignty, consensus building, power from below, and other mechanisms (JENNINGS JUSTIN. 2023: i)

The cited author sees hope for the survival of mankind in understanding how the ancient collectives worked, but it must be added that the experience of successful collectives must be used. To do this, their history must be studied objectively without conjectures and assumptions based on scanty information about the events of the past millennia that took place on the periphery of human civilization. Even a deep study of the history of Europe can provide us with relevant information.

Positive achievements of accumulated experience are inherited, if not genetically, then by mechanisms of evolutionary psychology. The recognition of this fact is not only theoretical but also of practical importance for modern international relations, the peaceful nature of which is hampered by ideological faults, especially between the Christian and Muslim worlds. Some peoples of the world have developed an inferiority complex and they are looking for their greatness in the mythical past, and such attempts naturally cause skepticism, which only increases alienation between nations and activates unhealthy ambitions.

The search for greatness in the past is caused by a heightened sense of national dignity. This generally positive quality is understood too simply and superficially. In his conclusions, a person must certainly pay attention to the reasons that push his thoughts in one direction or another. The greatest benefit to each person is brought by people who are guided in their lives by the voice of conscience as the voice of God. By doing so, they are more conducive to its progress than fiction and the spread of fantasies about its past greatness. All world history convinces us that during the existence of mankind, cultural leadership passed from one people to another and each of them has its chance in the future.

The development of modern geopolitics in the direction of global hegemony causes the growing concern of many philosophers of the world, expressed, in particular, in the solid collective work of recent times (DEMENCHONOK EDWARD, DALLMAR FRED, 2017). Reviewers rated this book with these words:

… this is a book manifesto, a book application, a book – a call for the joint development of an intercultural and inter-civilizational concept of alternative world order. This program work must be continued. The problems are formulated, the tasks are set, and then it is necessary to find out who will be the political subject of solving these problems who will prevent to overcome the global disorder, and how to practically begin to fulfill the covenant of Leo Tolstoy from “War and Peace”, which means that if people are vicious and connected and constitute power, then honest people only need to do the same. It's so easy” (GLINCHIKOVA A.G., VERETEVSKAYA A.V., 2019: 142).

The book provides an analysis of the problems generated by the global crisis and suggests various ways out of it. It is noteworthy in the preface to this book, it is noted that in the twenty-first century "individual freedom is threatened in many ways, along with escalating social and global problems" (DEMENCHONOK EDWARD, 2019; xi). However, there is no question of counterbalancing individual freedom by certain individual duties in this book. Likewise, the authors do not view cases of "indifferent, pseudo-scientific, conveyorized violence" as an unconscious balancing of the excesses of liberal humanism. The solution to the problem of growing violence is seen in the emergence of new "global heroes of non-violence" like Mahatma Gandhi, and Nelson Mandela, which will lead the movement of broad masses to "re-humanization" (DALLMAYR FRED, 2019: 7-8; NANDY ASHIS, 2019: 67-68), that is to aggravate the problem. In general, a certain concept, which would unite almost two dozen articles of the book, does not get through, except for the call for courage to hope made in the sub-title of the book.

The Lord God created the earthly civilization laid down in its basic principles of structuring and polymorphism, and man cannot ignore them. The principle of structuring is comprehensive and liberal humanism must obey it too. While legitimate social classes, which provided the structuring (socialization) of society, existed, humanistic ideas remained at the level formed by the Indo-Europeans in prehistoric times and were limited. This was enough for the dynamic development of European countries. The necessary polyphony in the forms of public consciousness in Europe was ensured by its multinationality. When democratic forms began to spread not only to the political system, but also to the spiritual life, and public consciousness fell under the pressure of globalization, Europe entered a period of protracted systemic crisis, one of the manifestations of which was the de-socialization of society. In connection with all this, the question arises whether democracy meets best the task of organizing a society with the greatest benefit for a person. Proponents of democracy like to repeat: "Yes, democracy as a form of government is imperfect, but humanity has not yet come up with anything else." Is it so?

Throughout the history of mankind all forms of government can be divided into three groups – the board of one person, groups of individuals, and the board of the majority. Closer to our time, forms of government generally develop from authoritarian to democratic. However, carefully considering the power structure of the states of the past and the present, we can conclude that there has always been a combination of democratic and authoritarian forms of government, and where this conjunction was more harmonious, the states achieved the greatest success. The ancient Greek philosopher Stoic Panetius (180 BC – 110 BC) even considered the combination of monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic elements to be ideal (RUSSELL BERTRAND. 1995: 237). Let us recall the history of ancient Rome. The interaction of the democratic and autocratic components of power in Rome had good results, and Roman achievements were later used by medieval Europe in state and military construction, the development of a theory of law, etc.

At present, in Europe, a further simplification of the structure of society grows in the direction of increasing its monotony increases. At the lowest level of the structure are the broad masses. Overestimating the possibilities of democracy and trying to democratize all spheres of human activity, intellectuals try to attract the masses to an active social life, but they fail to:

Endless moralizing calls for informing: to guarantee a high degree of awareness of the masses, to provide them with full socialization, to raise their cultural level, etc. – are dictated solely by the logic of the production of sanity. However, these appeals have no sense – rational communication and the masses are incompatible. Sense is given to the masses but they crave spectacle (BAUDRILLARD JEAN. 2000: 15).

At the same time, political scientists and philosophers, traditionally considering democratization to progress, are now to a large extent caught aback by the fact that democracy does not work in many post-communist countries. All this makes many doubt the universality of democratic forms of government, especially clearly such sentiments are manifested in Russia:

In Russian ruling circles, the thesis is now fashionable that democracy in the West is just a game, behind which lies the power of money, the military-industrial complex, special services, etc. Indeed, in no country in the world, there is democracy in the sense in which it was understood in ancient Athens, namely: "democracy". Elites rule everywhere and usually legitimize their power through elections. At the same time, in democracies, elections, due to what happens during their real, but not imitative, competition, make democracy both a game and reality. One of the main reasons for the current crisis of democracy in the West is precisely that there are more games and fewer realities (CHERNEGA B.N. 2019: 32).

At the same time, the crisis passed China, which is currently developing very dynamically. Applying the principle of structured humanism, the Chinese leadership administratively carries out what is achieved in the West by the methods of democracy – the regular change of ruling teams, the fight against corruption, and social inequality. With such a balanced policy, with the given availability of cheap labor and a large-scale domestic market, China has secured superfast economic growth and has come close to being the nominal leader of the world economy, which the United States remains. Using "soft power", also formed on the principles of Confucianism, China is turning into a global superpower, which becomes an example for the peoples of Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Oceania. The success of China in the fight against coronavirus disease 2019 is also undoubted.

If we take this situation into account, then we must agree with Chung-Ying Cheng that Confucianism is "a resource for the development of a renewed world system" (CHUNG-YING CHENG. 2019: 36). However, his understanding of the goal of civilization as the achievement of human well-being seems too mundane and near-minded. Well-being itself can help achieve the goal as a prerequisite or an enhanced opportunity. A man can comprehend the mystery of the goal of creating the world by God only by perfecting himself and choosing the most successful examples of behavior for this, one of which, indeed, can be affirmed by the principles of Confucianism in the understanding of Chung-Ying Cheng:

Confucianism is a philosophy based on empirical observation and a reflective understanding of humanity or what a person is. It all started with a modest observation of how things and people change and move. This observation experience awakens a person to reflect on his own identity so that he can change his behavior and affirm the autonomy of humans will be based on human feelings and human understanding. Therefore, Confucianism is the discovery of humanity from himself to others and from others to himself. In this discovery of his own “I”, a person establishes his identity and begins to feel others concerning their identities, which should be discovered by their own “I”. He reveals the human goal of finding good and the human potential for this (ibid: 39).

As we see from the definition, when organizing the life and activity of human society, the role of God is absent in Confucianism, while it should be based on ethical standards developed by individuals in the process of self-knowledge. Perhaps such people hear the voice of God and understand it in their own way, but in principle, God speaks to each person with a voice of conscience and he should be guided by it. This is the difference between Confucianism and many modern religions, which form their ethical standards.

Nevertheless, there must be a grain of rationality in Confucianism. Its search and adaptation to the peculiarities of other nations will contribute to their success. It is not easy for a person to part with traditional views and habits; he is characterized by the inertia of thoughts and behavior. For radical changes to take place in human society, recognized and influential authorities must rethink the world around the person and him in it, moving away from the mechanistic ideas about them that developed in the previous historical era.

Under current conditions in world politics, people of a new category should play a more influential role, but other than as imagined E. Fromm. In his opinion, these people should abandon all forms of possession, gain self-confidence based on the inner need for affection, love, and unity with the world, feel the joy gained from serving people, free themselves from illusions, and further in the same spirit [FROMM ERICH. 2010: 182-183]. In general, in his view, people of the new category should learn to fully to be, that is, to enjoy life. But it’s not for this that the Lord God created man, although one can only guess at the purpose of his creation. Since man has changed significantly during his existence, it can be assumed that the process of creation continues. This is evidenced at least by the emergence and development of human conscience as the improvement of his spiritual sphere.

All this comes from God, but a human, to join the process of creation, must understand the meaning of conscience to use its manifestations for his benefit. A huge number of thinkers around the world dealt with the issue of the origin, essence, and manifestation of conscience, but did not receive clear answers, because they were too diverse and even opposite. Due to the different understanding of this psychological phenomenon, some researchers even concluded that the word conscience should be completely excluded from scientific circulation (VESELOVA E.K. 2009: 127). This is the result of the fact that they, not understanding the Divine nature of conscience, tried to deduce it by an inductive method, delving into the smallest details, that is, studying its particular aspects (conscience and shame, conscience and speech, conscience and knowledge, etc.). A more systematic approach has long been demonstrated by Russian philosophers. Considering the traditional Russian consciousness to be especially marked by a "conscientious" perception of reality, they considered the doctrine of conscience from the point of view of worldview unity, and thanks to their efforts, the Russian mentality receives a new contextual reading with a focus on the problem of conscience (DRUZHININ V.I, SAMASRTSEVA E.I. 2009).

In the report of the Club of Rome, the topic of the systemic crisis is considered mainly in the aspect of the interaction between nature and man [WEIZSÄCKER, von ERNST ULRICH; WIJKMAN ANDERS. 2018, 2]. In this report, the emphasis is placed precisely on the preservation of the quality of the elements of nature, however, when two objects interact, both must adapt to each other. Human adaptation to changing environmental conditions is usually not discussed, although such a tendency is already manifesting itself in the new posthumanist movement. Proponents of such a worldview, in their striving for improvement, must fit into the entire process of the creation of the Universe, and a person at a certain stage of his development must fulfill some Divine task on Earth within the framework of this process. This task is more serious than just being in joy and love. Joy and love, being positive qualities of life, should only ensure the successful constructive activity of people according to their potential capabilities. The history of mankind has always been a mutual creation act of God and Man, but in the future, this interaction should become more consistent:

Episodic and ephemeral human participation in earthly history is redeemed when he gets the opportunity to play his role on Earth as a willing helper of God, whose authority over everything gives Divine weight and significance to insignificant and pitiful human effort without it (TOYNBEE ARNOLD J. 1995: 108).

But to become the “willing assistant”, it is necessary to understand the ideas of God, according to which He created this world, to realize exactly what He did and what Man did, and analyze whether any actions of Man contradict the act of God. According to Saint Augustine (354-430), each person finds evidence of the existence of God in his soul, but nowadays it is not enough to prove the existence of God to yourself, it is necessary to understand the "logic" of His creation. The prehistory of humanity, when the man himself played an insignificant role, allows it to be done, but it still needs to be known in general ways. And this should be the priority of the people of the new category, whose activities will be aimed at overcoming the crisis of liberal humanism. Instead of a passive desire to be in a fundamentally new society, they should have an active desire to have it. Such people cannot be very numerous, especially since they have to give up some dubious joys of life, but having joy and at the same time the duty to serve God and people following the traditional ethical values, which provide for respect for elders, teachers, and parents, what is impossible without realizing by men their place in the hierarchical structure "family – community – region – country – nation".

Liberal humanism found its natural reflection in liberal democracy, that is, in the political system now dominant in the West, which provides not only free general elections but also the rule of law, separation of powers, freedom of speech, assembly, religion, and ownership of property. However, in some countries of Central Asia, free elections brought dictatorship to power, in the Balkans they exacerbated inter-ethnic conflicts, while under authoritarian rule there remained tolerance. In Arab countries, there is a danger of choosing even more reactionary than previous regimes. (ZAKARIA FAREED, 2004, 6). Thus, it turned out that liberal democracy can lead to the opposite of the intended outcome.

Liberalism is based on the direction in the philosophy of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, which emphasizes the importance of personal freedom (ibid, 8). However, the Greeks and Romans could understand freedom differently than the philosophers of our time. Here is one of the modern definitions:

The fundamental sense of freedom is freedom from chains, imprisonment, and enslavement by others. The rest is an extension of this sense, or else metaphor. To strive to be free is to seek to remove obstacles, to struggle for personal freedom, to seek to curb interference, exploitation, and enslavement by men whose ends are theirs, not one's own. At least in the political sense, freedom is co-terminous with the absence of bullying or domination (BERLIN ISAIAH, 1994, 52)

Philosophers try to describe the phenomenon of the concept of freedom, but its essence escapes from their reasoning as soon as it comes to positive and negative liberty. This is because a person is never free. Even if he is free from the chains, imprisonment, enslavement, and other external restraints of his actions, he remains a prisoner of an internal deterrent in his conscience. Constitutional liberalism, in the words of Zakaria, places the rule by law at the center of political life, while the rule of law must be exercised. However, a person has not only the rights received at his birth but also the duties dictated by his conscience, also obtained at birth from God. And if his rights are secured by laws, then duties must also be regulated by any of the forms of public life.

Throughout the history of mankind, religion has been such a form, and Christianity has been especially consistent in asserting the idea of the importance of a person's duty to God. However, in recent centuries, the existing conflict between duties to God and the state has taken the form of a conflict between the state and the Church. As a result, the Church loses its influence on social processes, because Christianity does not improve its understanding of human nature. On the other hand, people, without losing their Christian religiosity and faith in the omnipotence of God, lost faith in the omnipotence of the Church. Guided by their own experience of experiencing faith and not hoping for salvation in the other world, they began to seek spiritual support already in this. Additionally, the advent of a new era in the history of Christianity heralds an influx of new believers, not in the West, but in the so-called "global South" – in Africa, Asia and Latin America (STEPANOVA E.A. 2012: 87)

China's economic success under authoritarian rule gives rise to doubts about the promise of liberal forms of government. Moreover, there are signs of degradation of the European democratic system:

- it has been noticeable for a long time that the overwhelming majority of the newly created parties in Europe are "protest" groups and only a few of them are capable of effective management (KOMAREK STANISLAV. 2021, 233).

In the decades after the end of the Cold War, it (the Western political elite – V.S.) managed to noticeably degrade, because there were no challenges that, in general, temper the elite. Now it consists of people who have learned for many years to avoid responsibility and real political decisions, engaging in imitation of political activity (OLESHCHUK PETRO. 2024).

According to Oleschuk, Western politicians avoid political decisions, replacing them with simulacra, because it is easier to do nothing, replacing actions with statements.

The simultaneous crisis of Christianity and democracy suggests the need for their simultaneous reform on the principle of "Regimentum mixtum" (mixed government) with a combination of authoritarian and democratic forms. This dividing sovereignty has a deep philosophical justification:

Throughout the long development, from the 7th century BC. and to this day, philosophers were divided into those who sought to strengthen social bonds and those who wanted to weaken them. This difference has been associated with others (RUSSELL BERTRAND. 2001: 13).

Russell called one of these strands of philosophy the disciplinarians and the other the liberalists. There has long been a conflict between these areas:

This conflict existed in Greece even before the rise of what we recognize as philosophy, and it is quite clearly expressed in the representatives of the earliest Greek thought. Modified, it persists up to the present time and, undoubtedly, will persist for many centuries to come (ibid.

Mixed government can extinguish this conflict. The liberal-democratic component of government should be limited to the secular sphere with different levels of democracy in state and local bodies. The authoritarian rule must ensure social discipline by organizing and controlling spiritual life, and it can be implemented in different ways, for example, in the process of the ecumenism of religions or confessions. Pluralism of opinions in the spiritual sphere can only be in cooperation with secular authorities and organizations, and matters of faith should be limited to a circle of competent persons. Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” Regimetum mixtum has not yet been tried.

Following the principle of structuredness, which must exist in the world, the entire set of members of any human community cannot be the bearer of power. There should be certain categories of people from which the authorities in the center and the localities would be formed. The principle of structuring must be implemented scientifically, otherwise, it is realized spontaneously and indeed exists. While verbally preaching liberal democracy, large owners of the means of production form a group of those in power at the highest level of social stratification and, according to this principle, lower levels are formed. This structure of society is not legalized anywhere and its existence is not officially mentioned. This cannot be so, and this spontaneous process of distribution of actual, rather than declared, rights and obligations of members of society must be taken under control.

Plato believed that the state should be governed by philosophers. However, even after two thousand and a half years, the idea of ​​managing states on a scientific basis is far from being realized. No wonder A.D. Sakharov complained that "the scientific method of managing politics, economy, art, education, and military affairs has not yet become a reality" (SAKHAROV A.D.1968-2). In principle, people in power should profess some lofty goals. However, at the time of Plato, philosophy was in such a state that it would be dangerous to entrust the leadership of the state to philosophers, and Sakharov was not a philosopher. At the time of Plato, philosophy was in agreement with the achievements of the then physics and mathematics, for both physicists and mathematicians were philosophers at the same time. In our time, a true philosopher has the opportunity to operate with a much larger volume of knowledge of the humanities and natural sciences, but they cannot be integrated into an integral system so far. Thus, we come to where we started – it is necessary to overcome the existing techno-humanitarian imbalance in the world.



FS – International Yearbook "The Future of Science"Release of the second. 1968. Moscow. "Znanie". In Russian.

FS21 – Brockman John (Ed). 2008. The Future of Science in the 21 cen. Moscow. (In Russian, translation from English "The Next Fifty Years: Science in the First Half of the Twenty-First Century").

NFY – The Next Fifty Years. Edited by John Brockman. 2002. New York.

PMF – Miscellany: "Pläne für eine menschliche Zukunft". Herausgeben von Rüdiger Lutz. Auswahl aus den Öko-Log. Bücher 1,2 und 3, erscheinen bei Beltz 1981, 1983 und 1984. In German.

WBGD – Dallmayr Fred, Demenchonok Edward. 2017. A World Beyond Global Disorder: The Courage to Hope. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

BACON FRANCIS. 2002. The New Organon. Cambridge University Press.

BAUDRILLARD JEAN. 1983. In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities, or the end of the social. New York. Semiotext.

BERDYAEV N. 1951. "The Kingdom of Spirit and the Kingdom of Caesar". Paris. In Russian.

BERLIN ISAIAH. 1994. Chotyry ese pro svibodu – In Ukrainian – Four Essays on Liberty. Kyiv. Osnovy.

BESTUZHEV-LADA I.V. 1968. The Future of Mankind as an Object of Scienific Research. FS.

BLAUT J. M. 1993. The Colonizer's Model of the World. Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History. THE GUILFORD PRESS New York / London.

BUCKLE H.T. 1863. History of Civilization in England. Saint Petersburg.

CARPA FRITJOF. 1988. Krise und Wandel in Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft. PMF.

CHUNG YING CHENG. 2019. Moral'noye osmysleniye global'nogo krizisa: izucheniye garmonii i etiki kak resheniye – In Russian – Understanding the global crisis: a study of harmony and ethics as a solution// Vek globalizatsii № 3 (31). Moscow.

COLLINWOOD R.G. 1996. The Idea of History. Kyiv. In Ukrainian.

de las Casas Bartolomé. 1542. A short Account of the Destruction of the Indies.

CSIKSZENTMIHALYI MAIHALY. 2008. The Future of Happiness. FS21.

DALLMAYR FRED, 2017. Introduction. The Courage to Hope. WBGD.


DRUZHININ V.I., SAMARTSEVA Ye.I. 2009. U istokov i – In Russian – At the Origins of and Tula. Publishing house TulGU.

ELLIS HAVELOCK. 1904. A Study of British Genius. Hurst and Blackett, Limited. London.

FLECHTHEIM OSSIP K. 1988. Plädoyer für eine neue Futurulogie. PMF. In German.

FORMOZOV A.A. 2005. Chelovek i nauka: iz zapisey arkheologa – In Russian – Man and Science: From the Records of an Archaeologist. Moscow. "Znak".

FROMM ERICH. 1986. Haben oder Sein. Die seelischen Grundlagen einer neuen Gesellschaft. München. In German.

FROMM E. 2002. Gumanisticheskiy psikhoanaliz – ( In Russian) – Humanistic psychoanalysis. Saint Petersburg.

FROMM ERICH. 2010. Maty chy buty? – (In Ukrainian – To Have or To Be/

FUKUYAMA FRANCIS. 2004. Konets istorii i posledniy chelovek – ( In Russian) – The End of History and the Last Man. Moscow. Publisher ACT.

GARE ARRAN. 1996. Nihilism Inc.: Environmental Destruction and the Metaphysics of Sustainability. Sydney: Eco-Logical Press.

GAUDIUM ET SPES. 1965. пастирська конституція Другого Ватиканського собору Католицької церкви.

GLINCHIKOVA A.G., VERETEVSKAYA A.V. 2019.Po tu storonu global'nogo besporyadka: Vek globalizatsii № 1 (29) – ( In Russian)- Beyond Global Disorder: The Age of Globalization No. 1 (29). Moscow-Volgograd.

GOODWIN BRIAN. 2008.In the Shadow of Culture. FS21.

HARARI Yu.N. 2016. Lyudyna rozumna – In Ukrainian – Homo Sapiens. Kharkiv. Family leisure club.

HARARI Yu.N. 2018. Homo Deus. Kratkaya istoriya budushchego – In Russian – Homo Deus. A Brief History of the Future. Moscow. Sinbad.

HEFFERNAN MICHAEL J. 2011. The Meaning of Europe: Geography and Geopolitics. Kyiv.

HEINRICH HEINE. 1966. Zur Geschichte der Religion und Philosophie in Deutschland. Leipzig.

HEINSON GUNNAR. 2006. Söhne und Weltmacht. Berlin.

HOFFMANN JUlIA. 2014. Das Wirken Gottes innerhalb eines evolutiven Weltbildes. Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Philosophie. Institut für Katholische Theologie der Pädagogischen Hochschule. Karlsruhe. In German

HOLISTER C.W., 1991. Roots of the Western Tradition.

INOZEMTSEV B.L. В.Л. 2004. Svoboda i demokratia: chto vyshe? – In Russian – Freedom and Democracy: what is higher?//ZAKARIA FAREEDЗ. 2004. The Future of Freedom. Moscow. Ladomir.

JENNINGS JUSTIN. 2023. Rethinking Global Governance. London and New York. Routlege.

KANT IMMANUEL. 2004. Krytyka praktychnoho rozumu – In Ukrainian – Critique of Practical Reason. Kyiv. Univers.

KNÖBL WOLFGANG. 2011. Contingency and modernity in the thought of J.P. Arnason//European Journal of Social Theory, 14. SAGE.

KOMÁREK STANISLAV. 2020. Yevropa na rozdorizhzhi – ( In Ukrainia) – Europe at a Crossroads. Lviv. "Apriori".


Кудрявцев П.С. 1982. Kurs istorii fiziki – In Russian – Course in the history of physics. Moscow. "Enlightenment".

Le Goff Jacques

LE GOFF JACQUES. Translated by Julia Barrow. 1988. Medieval Civilization. 400-1500. Blackwell.

LITTLEWOOD J.E. 1953. A Mathemaitician's Miscellany. London. Methuen & Co. Ltd.

LIFSHITS MIKH. 1994. Dzhambattista Viko – In Russian – Giambattista Vico.//Foundations of a New Science of the General Nature of Nations. Moscow-Kiev. REFLbook-ISA.

LUTZ RÜDIGER. 1988. Total 2000. PMF.

MALTSEV OLEG. 2020. Posledniy prorok Yevropy – (in Russian) –Maestro. The last prophet of Europe. Odessa. Publishing house "Patriot".

NANDY ASHIS, 2017. Beyond Brutalization. WBGD.

NAZARETIAN A.P. 2004. Civilizational Crises in the Context of Universal History. Moscow.

NEKLESSA ALEKSANDR. 2019. Bor'ba za budushcheye – ( In Russian)- Fight for the Future. Methodological and prognostic aspects of civilizational competition: INTELROS – Intellectual Russia. Special issue. Moscow.

NIKIFOROV ALEKSANDR. 2021. Kakoye budushcheye zhdet chelovechestvo? – (in Russian) – What future awaits humanity?//Philosophical journal. №3, 2021

OLESHCHUK PETRO. 2024. Perspektyvy zakhidnoyi dopomohy Ukrayini. Shcho bude dali. – (in Ukrainian) – Prospects of Western aid to Ukraine. What will happen next. Internet edition "New Voice".

POPPER KARL R. 1988. Abschied vom materialistischen Weltbild. PMF.

PAVLENKO Yu.V. 2004. Istoria mirovoy tsivilizatsii – (in Russian) – History of World Civilization. Kiev. "Fenix".

PROZOROVA YULIA. 2021. Retseptsiya zapadnogo liberal'nogo proyekta i opyt postsovetskoy modernosti v Rossii// Neprikosnovennyy zapas – (in Russian) – Reception of the Western Liberal Project and the Experience of Post-Soviet Modernity in Russia// Safety reserve/ No. 137.

REES MARTIN. 2008. Cosmological Challenges: Are We Alone, and Where? FS21. Moscow.

ROLLER ANN. 1978. The Discovery of the Basic Laws of Life. Moscow. (In Russian, translation from English).

RUSSELL BERTRAND. 1995. Istoria zakhidnoi filosofii – ( In Ukrainian) – History of Western Philosophy. Kyiv. "Osnovy".

RUSSELL BERTRAND. 2001. Istoriya zapadnoy filosofii i yeyo svyazi s politicheskimi i sotsial'nymi usloviyami ot antichnosti do nashikh dney – ( In Russian)- A history of Western Philosophy and its Relationship to Political and Social Conditions from antiquity to the Present Day. Novosibirsk.

RUSSELL BERTRAND. 2013. Pochemu ya ne khristianin – ( In Russian)- Why I am not Christian. Moscow.

RYBACHUK SERGEY. 2018. Gibkost' konfutsianskoy mysli v usloviyakh krizisa – ( In Russian)- The flexibility of Confucian thought in a crisis: Logos. Volume 28. Number 6. Moscow.

RYKOV S.Yu. Liki kitayskoy ratsional'nosti: Istoriko-filosofskiy yezhegodnik. T. 33. Moskva – ( In Russian)- Faces of Chinese rationality: History of Philosophy Yearbook. V. 33. Moscow.

SAKHAROV A.D. 1968-1. Symmetry of the Universe. FS.

SAKHAROV A.D. 1968-2. Razmyshleniya o progresse, mirnom sosushchestvovanii i intellektual'noy svobode – (In Russian)-Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom. Samizdat.

SHAPOVALOV V.A., VASILENKO V.V. 2010. Krizis nashego vremeni v nauchnom nasledii P.A. Sorokina – (In Russian) – The crisis of our time in the scientific heritage of P.A. Sorokina//Vestn. Moscow Univ. Ser 18. Sociology and political science. No. 2.Вестн. Моск ун-та. Сер 18. Социология и политология. №2.

SMOLIN LEE. 1997. The Life of the Cosmos. New York. Oxford.

SMOLIN LEE. 2002. The Future of the Nature of the Universe. NFY.

SOROKIN P. 1992. Krizis nashego vremeni// – In Russian – The Crisis of Our Time // Man. Civilization. Society. Moscow..

STEPANOVA E.A. 2012. Vera novogo veka – In Russian – Faith of the New Age // Religious Studies. No. 2.

STETSYUK V.M. 1987. Identification of Places of Settlement of the Ancient Slavs by Graphoanalytical Method. News of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. A Series of Literature and Language. Tom LХIV. №1.

STETSYUK VALENTYN. 2019. Reasoning on the Origin of the Human language// Macrolinguistics. Vol.7. № 1. (Serial № 10).

STEWART IAN. 2008. The Mathematics of 2050. FS21. Moscow.

TEIHARD de CHARDIN PIERRE. 1987. Fenomen cheloveka – In Russian – The phenomenon of Man. Moscow.

TOYNBEE ARNOLD J. 1995. Doslidzhennia istorii – In Ukrainiav – A Study of History. Tom 1. Kyiv. "Osnovy". The translation from English.

VESELOVA E.K. 2009. Sovest' kak psikhologicheskiy fenomen – In Russian – Conscience as a Psychological Phenomenon // Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. Ser. 12, no. 4

VOIN A.M. 2016. Filosofiya i global'nyy krizis – In Russian – Philosophy and the Global Crisis. Moscow-Berlin. Direct Media.

VOIN A.M. 2017. Yedinyy metod obosnovaniya nauchnykh teoriy – In Russian – An Unified Method for Substantiating Scientific Theories. Moscow-Berlin. Direct Media.

VOKIN G.G. 2015. Kosmos i chelovek. Priglasheniye k razmyshleniyam – In Russian – Space and Man. An invitation to reflection. Yubileynyy. ZAO "PSTM".

VOIN A.. 2017. Zakony istorii i situatsiya v mire i v Rossii – In Russian – The Laws of History and the Situation in the World and in Russia

WEBER MAX. 1950. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York. London


WIENER NORBERT. 1956. I am a Mathematician. Garden City, New York. Doubleday & Co. Inc.

YARKHO V.N. 2010. Byla li u drevnikh grekov sovest'? (K izobrazheniyu cheloveka v atticheskoy tragedii) – In Russian – Did the ancient Greeks have a conscience? (To the image of a person in Attic tragedy) // Historical psychology and sociology of history. V. 3, № 1. Moscow.

ZAKARIA FAREED. 2004. Budushchee svobody – In Russian – The Future of Freedom. Moscow. Ladomir.