Self-ruling of Human Society
Human society, in its most basic sense, is a conglomerate of naturally formed ethnic units struggling for survival. Each such unit self-organizes according to its own laws, developed during this struggle. Success in this struggle depends on the effectiveness of the adopted laws. Humans have inherited the hierarchical principle of self-organization from the animal kingdom, and this principle must be present in every ethnic unit in addition to human laws, because observations indicate that the phenomenon of hierarchy is universal:
Life as a bios is a hierarchical structure – from molecules, cells, simple organisms, and up to mammals and Homo Sapiens. Astronomical bodies in space are organized into hierarchical structures – metagalaxies, galaxies, stars, and planetary systems. Every manifested form is a phenomenon of hierarchy, and manifestation as such is possible insofar as hierarchy is possible [BUTUZOV GLEB. 2021, 16].
L.N. Vasilyeva echoes this idea when she writes that social existence is a continuation of natural existence, and that each person lives by its laws. Based on this, she draws the following logical conclusion:
Scientific inquiry, therefore, consists of understanding these laws. In this sense, we come closer to perceiving the fact that existence is hierarchical, has a history, and is in a process of constant formation, where complexity gives way to simplicity. To what extent, in the process of scientific knowledge, we come closer to understanding this complexity is a crucial question of epistemology (VASILYEVA L.N.)
Both quotes speak of hierarchy, which ensures the stability of any complex structure. Unfortunately, human society today, if extended to Europe, exhibits instability, as evidenced by the devastating wars that began after the French Revolution. The path to such human development was paved by the Enlightenment, which conceived of social existence as independent of the laws of nature. In particular, Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that universal equality was the natural state of humans, not presuming the possibility of an evolution from animal society to a human one. He wisely reinterpreted Thomas Hobbes's theory of the social contract, which stipulated the necessity of moral obligations of those in power to their subjects, and of parents to their children. In return, children should love and respect their parents, and subjects should love and respect the authorities more than ordinary members of society. Rousseau, in turn, advanced the idea of popular sovereignty. This idea shaped the sentiments of a certain segment of educated Europeans and fueled the French Revolution. It was this understanding of equality in the absolute sense that developed the liberal humanism that now reigns in the Western world. Ensuring global stability became the imperative of the times, leading to the belief that it was possible after Ilya Prigogine studied the causes of instability using physics as an example. He founded a philosophy of instability, beginning with the following considerations:
First, let's ask ourselves: why is instability being discussed in natural science today, when determinism previously dominated? The idea of instability not only theoretically supplanted determinism in a certain sense but also allowed human activity to be included in the field of natural science, thus enabling a more complete integration of humans into nature. Accordingly, instability, unpredictability, and, ultimately, time as an essential variable, have now come to play a significant role in overcoming the disconnect that has always existed between social research and the natural sciences [PRIGOGINE .I. 1991]
As a follower of Prigogine, Mrs Vasilyeva believes that modern scientific paradigms are symbolic representations of the world. The fractal category, introduced by Benoit Mandelbrot, is such a paradigm, as it reflects the structural features of many natural systems. This term characterizes a structure composed of parts similar to the figure itself; thus, in a certain sense, a hierarchical structure. In such a structure, each part functions independently of the others, but in harmony with the whole, in accordance with the idea adopted for its construction. Moreover, for the stability of a complex system, each element of its structure is equally important and valuable. The idea of the great importance of small elements goes back centuries. Poet George Herbert included it in a 1640 collection of aphorisms as "For want of a nail the shoe is lost, for want of a shoe the horse is lost, for want of a horse the rider is lost."
The fractal principle is a manifestation of necessary, but no more than sufficient, freedom in any design. In particular, the human body, river systems, and much else, including, to a certain extent, the cosmos, are constructed according to the fractal principle. The fractal principle is all-encompassing in the physical world, and the spiritual world should be created according to the same principle, meaning it can be applied to any creative work. We will proceed from this, considering the Universe an act of creativity, and observe the facts of similarity within it, like the idea of a fractal, in various phenomena of the physical and spiritual worlds.
Any complex structure exhibits both hierarchy and autonomy among its constituent elements, imparting a networked nature. In general, human society must have a three-dimensional form—vertically hierarchical and horizontally networked, united by a single idea that underpins both the overall structure and its individual elements. Based on this, we begin our search for the necessary principles for constructing human society by studying the organization of the animal kingdom, from which it historically evolved. Relationships between people evolved as a result of the behavior of herds of animals, where hierarchy reigns. Moreover, collective struggle exists among animals, similar to the modern struggle between political parties [HARARI Yu.N. 2016,: 40]. The development of interhuman relations was influenced by factors absent from the animal kingdom. Under the influence of these factors, humans are fundamentally different from animals. Fukuyama sees this difference in humans' desire to be creatures with a certain dignity. He views dignity as "the first glimmer of freedom" [FRANCIS UKUYAMA. 2004: 16], that is, it is a response to relationships between people. Consequently, when comparing the organization of human society and the animal world, one should abstract from the phenomenon of dignity, but the phenomenon of freedom is present in the animal world, although it is structured hierarchically in accordance with the fractal principle. Nature is conditioned by the hierarchy of relationships between animals. Hierarchy is a fundamental principle of nature, which must be modernized by human qualities absent in animals. Hierarchy in the form of a fractal must be present in human society and reflect its vertical structuring.
The principle of hierarchy in interpersonal relationships is evident in the teachings of the Chinese thinker Kong Fuji (551-470 BC), better known as Confucius. His moral teaching is based on the principle of ren—a special kind of humanity, structured by the law of justice and understood according to the responsibilities of elders and juniors in family and society in a hierarchical order: between prince and retinue, husband and wife, father and son, elder and younger brother, and between friends. Aristotle also thought similarly, writing about proportional justice, which is only sometimes equal:
A father can repudiate his son if he is wicked, but a son cannot repudiate his father, because he owes him more than he can repay, especially existence. In unequal relations, it is right, since everybody should be loved in proportion to his worth, that the inferior should love the superior more than the superior loves the inferior: wives, children, and subjects, should have more love for husbands, parents, and monarchs than the latter have for them. In a good marriage, "the man rules following his worth, and in those matters in which a man should rule, but the matters that befit a woman he hands over to her" [RUSSELL BERTRAND. 1995: 157).
Rousseau demonstrates the arrogance of the man of the new world by separating humanity from nature, while the first philosophers, unburdened by the knowledge available in our time, drew their conclusions based on empirical observation of the surrounding world. We will return to this topic when we make other empirical generalizations, which, in Vernadsky's words, "are no different from an established scientific fact" (VERNADSKY V.I. 2004: § 15).
Using the concept of fractals in synergetic natural systems, Czech scientist Radan Květ developed a theory of four interconnected natural networks
- a network of geological faults;
- a network of prehistoric pathways;
- an information network.
The essence of this theory is as follows. People unwittingly created footpaths along rivers, primarily on the first terraces, and the network of footpaths simultaneously became the initial information network. This network facilitated the dissemination of technological experience, ideological ideas, creative preferences, and so on (KVĔT R. 1998: 43, KVĔT RADAN. 2000: 294). It goes without saying that along with the spread of experience and ideas, new words corresponding to newly created concepts also spread. However, it should be kept in mind that the river network is quite discrete, and water flows can both facilitate and hinder human communication. Small rivers and the paths along them form a local area of close human interaction, limited by wider rivers, which present difficult-to-remove obstacles to the dissemination of new information. Thus, in certain areas, a community of people self-organizes, linked by real economic ties, a common language (dialect), and common cultural and ideological ideas.
People's awareness of this commonality becomes a determining factor in the formation of primary ethnic communities, which is impossible without a common language, as another Czech scholar wrote back in 1940:
Tribal affiliation is the fundamental and objective characteristic of a people, because it embodies a complete geographic and genetic interconnectedness. Only in this interconnectedness can social organization emerge, leading to a common language and culture. Clearly, a people's identity cannot be preserved without a unique spiritual atmosphere, provided by the communicative nature of their own language (KORČAK JAROMIR.1940. 1940: 6)
A tribe arises from the unification of tribal communities with a tendency toward endogamy (BROMLEY Yu.V. (Ed.). 1986, 431). This tendency contributes to the consolidation and dissemination of certain anthropological characteristics within individual tribes. A single area may contain one or more tribes constituting a single ethnic community. The geographic features of areas (primarily natural boundaries) determine the unification of individual ethnic units into a single community with distinct linguistic, cultural, and social characteristics.
As has happened repeatedly throughout history, ethnic communities grow in number over time and leave their traditional habitats, migrating in search of new, more suitable places to live. However, some residents usually remain in their original locations and subsequently merge with the newly arrived population. The newcomers adopt elements of culture and language from the original settlers, and thus a new ethnic group is formed in the same natural conditions. With repeated population changes in areas, this process can occur repeatedly, so such areas can be called ethno-forming.
One of the largest concentrations of ethno-forming areas is located in the Dnieper River basin. Geological processes have resulted in the formation of a rather complex hydrological system here, in which its tributaries and those of the Pripyat and Desna Rivers flow in virtually opposite directions. Thus, clearly delimited areas were formed, where the languages of the peoples who successively settled this territory—Indo-Europeans, Germans, Iranians, Balts, and Slavs—were repeatedly dissected (see map below).
 |
Map of Ethno-producing areas in Eastern Europe illustrating alternation of substratum influences.
At different times, parent languages were separated into dialects which later developed into individual languages in the same areas. Present-day names of people were given to their ancestors. The numbers on the areas correspond to such periods: 1. the uprising of the Indo-European languages. 2. The uprising of Germanic and Iranian languages. 3. Formation of Slavic languages. 4. East Slavic tribes at the time of Kiev Rus'.
As noted, newcomers fall under the cultural influence of the previous population, adopting vocabulary, toponymy, technologies, some customs, and ritual elements necessary for the new conditions. In other words, in such a superposition, the culture and language of the indigenous population constitute a substrate that influences the subsequent cultural and linguistic development of the new population in a given territory. The degree of this influence depends on the relative cultural levels of the old-timers and the newcomers. It is the linguistic substrate of the ethno-forming areas that reflects the order of settlement of the territory.
Other clusters of ethno-forming areas are located between the Don and Volga rivers, as well as in the Amur basin (see Turkic, Finno-Ugric, and Samoyedic Peoples, Far East: Family Relationships of the Altaic Languages). The river networks that form ethno-forming areas arose as a result of tectonic faults in the Earth's crust. The configuration of the hydrological network is determined by fault zones with a depression from the highest points to sea level. Fault zones are not randomly distributed on the Earth's surface; in their configuration, one can discern a specific idea, the bearer of which must exist. We assume that the bearer of this idea is God, who himself realized this idea.
In technology and information science, every well-functioning system consists of prefabricated, independent modules. This is a universal law of design that must be applied in the construction of human society. To ensure successful development, humanity must be structured according to the principle of polymorphism, which we can observe at all levels of biology. In human history, this principle is ensured by ethno-forming areas where individual ethnic groups are formed, the multiplicity of which corresponds to the horizontal structuring of humanity.
The original ethnic communities were based on blood ties, that is, they consisted of people of common origin who were aware of this. A characteristic of these communities was the absence of social stratification, which contributed to the formation of a unified culture in which social and ethnic specificities coincided. (CHEBOKSAROV N.N., CHEBOKSAROVA I.A., 1985, 70).
However, primary ethnic groups emerging in ethno-forming areas do not avoid communication with similar neighboring ones, although the exchange of information is no longer as intense as within the area. With the emergence of ethnic self-awareness, conditioned by a sense of differences in the languages and cultures of primary ethnic groups, the process of their isolation occurs consciously, when people on the opposite bank of a large river are perceived as different or alien. At the same time, the river itself becomes not only a natural but also a psychological boundary between ethnic groups. As V.V. Evsyukov notes, in ancient human concepts, a body of water "is conceived of as a magical boundary between worlds, a boundary between the transient and the eternal, life, death, and immortality" (YEVSIUKOV V.V., 1988: 47). Of course, in the ancient worldview, one's own clan is considered the embodiment of only the positive, while the other clan is considered the embodiment of everything negative. In addition, another clan with its customs and culture is often identified with the other world.
The assumption of the existence of natural boundaries between individual ethnic groups is natural and has long been accepted by scholars. For example, Telegin wrote that "natural boundaries (rivers, mountains, boundaries of landscape zones) often and for long periods served as boundaries of settlement for certain ethnic groups" (Telegin D. Ya., 1968, 21). The importance of the existence of interethnic boundaries was determined by the need to regulate the use of the terrain. Citing J. Balandie, L. E. Kubbel asserts that such a need existed "even at the earliest stages of the history of human society" (Kubbel L. E., 1982, 126). One can easily agree with this assertion if one mentions the well-known existence in biology of such boundaries of settlements of individual individuals and groups of higher mammals (bears, wolves, etc.) and certain species of birds. During the period of human transition to productive economic activity, the role of these boundaries, according to Kubbel, became increasingly important. This became especially noticeable when human communities with different economic systems, most often those with productive and non-productive economies, coexisted and interacted. The importance of territorial organization increased even more when different communities exploited the same ecological niche. "Moreover, it was precisely in these cases that the limiting role of natural boundaries became especially clear."(Ibid, 1982, 127).
Rivers often serve as boundaries between archaeological cultures, although not always clearly defined. Sometimes we encounter instances where material remains of the same culture can be found on both banks of a river. Clearly, in such cases, we are confronted with the phenomenon of an ethnic membrane. When dialect formation has progressed so far that its speakers begin to identify themselves as a distinct ethnic unit with its own language and spiritual world, natural barriers no longer act as boundaries between ethnic groups in and of themselves, but as convenient, perceived boundaries between settlement areas. According to S.A. Arutyunov, such ethnic boundaries cannot be impenetrable. However, like a membrane, such a boundary can be permeable for some connections and impermeable for others; it can be permeable in one direction and impermeable in the other (the phenomenon of osmosis). He cites the example of the Khanty-Nenets ties. Marriage ties, the movement of individuals and entire groups, and the mutual assimilation of entire clans are bilateral, while the ethnic border remains fairly stable. (ARUTIUNOV S.A. 1982: 77).
Through endogamy, a local population is formed from the population of the ethnic-forming area. Exogamy is not excluded and is sometimes even encouraged. However, in the vast majority of cases, a girl from another tribe must be a virgin, as evidenced by a physiological characteristic called a hymen. The biological role of this genital organ is unknown, but its specific nature suggests that it is unique and could not have arisen naturally. A girl from another tribe's chastity indicates that she has not had sexual intercourse and therefore cannot be pregnant. It can be assumed that this custom is aimed at preserving the tribe's distinctive characteristics, which are ensured by the Y chromosome, which the girl lacks. However, a male embryo could have this chromosome if the girl was already pregnant. This leads to two conclusions. First, the tribe consciously preserves its identity, which is ensured by a specific set of Y chromosomes, and second, it knows how to do so. Such knowledge can only be innate without a clear understanding of its meaning and is secondary evidence that the Creator envisioned the human race as structured according to anthropological characteristics and endowed people with certain innate knowledge. The hymen is genetically determined and cannot disappear during the historical development of the female body, but the established attitude toward chastity in subsequent human history was regulated by the laws of existing morality in order to preserve the characteristics of a particular social or ethnic group. Obviously, membership in a clan was determined by the patrilineal principle. Exceptions to this rule, when kinship is determined by the principle of matrilineality, complicate the formation of an ethnic group.
Genetics also provides other evidence of the structuring of human society. As is well known, genes come in two types: recessive and dominant. Recessive genes exert their effect only when they are paired on a chromosome, while dominant genes suppress the recessive effect and act regardless of which gene is paired.
If we consider the successes of different peoples in the development of human civilization, it becomes clear that their contributions vary. Those peoples with the most significant contributions have achieved success in specific areas of science and culture, while only a few have done so in multiple areas. Lee Kuan Yew, the main architect of Singapore's "economic miracle," asserted that human intelligence is 80% genetics and 20% upbringing. To date, no specific genes conferring intelligence have been identified. But if we listen to the words of Lee Kuan Woo, who successfully implemented eugenics in Singapore, we can assume that intelligence can be determined by a set of interconnected genes. Although one of these genes must be the most important, let's call it, for simplicity's sake, the talent gene. Since children of genius parents don't always shine with intelligence—there's even a saying, "nature takes a rest on children"—the talent gene must be recessive. For it to manifest in children, both the father and mother must possess it.
The talent gene doesn't always manifest itself prominently for various reasons. But there are recessive genes that manifest themselves very well. These are the genes responsible for light hair and eye color. Blondes and blue-eyed children are born to couples in which both parents have these traits. If one parent lacks this gene, the children will have traits of the dominant gene, which causes dark-haired or brown-haired people. Thus, the number of blondes in any human society depends on how often blondes marry each other. Without such a preference, the number of blondes in society gradually decreases and correlates with the likelihood with which blondes in a society marry each other. The number of talented people in the world also decreases as the population grows. I no longer remember whose joke it was that intelligence is a constant, and as the population grows, it is distributed among everyone, and therefore exceptionally intelligent people become fewer. As always, there is a grain of truth in every joke.
People endowed with talent try to use it for their own success, to somehow express themselves in society, and, by demonstrating a creative approach to the realities of life, they seek and find new ways to solve complex, pressing problems:
For creativity is truly aristocratic; it is the work of the best; it does not tolerate the power of the worst, the domination of the mob… Creativity does not tolerate equality; it demands inequality, elevation; it does not allow looking back at one's neighbors, lest one overtake them (BERDYAEV NIKOLAI. 1923: 11).
The importance of racial struggle and conquest in the formation of the state cannot be denied. Through these "naturalistic" paths, state power was organized in the initial stages of societal development. Through harsh struggle and war, a race of rulers emerged; the best were selected, and an aristocracy of power was strengthened (IBID: 59).
By finding something beneficial to society, creative people gain trust and, within a hierarchical framework, rise to the top. The necessity of hierarchical relationships within a group is determined by both innate knowledge and practical reason, which is why inequality has always existed in society. Human awareness of inequality has led to a competitive struggle for existence, manifested at both the personal and collective levels and characterized by an assessment of the effectiveness of accepted behavior. At the same time, conflicts between individuals within a group are inevitable, leading to the group recognizing certain individuals as authorities. Such authorities assume responsibility for managing the group. Berdyaev came to the recognition of inequality based on the facts of the successful existence of human society and was categorically against equalization:
The violent demand for equality, emanating from the depths of chaotic darkness, is an attempt to destroy the cosmic hierarchical order formed by the creative birth of light in darkness, an attempt to destroy the human personality itself, as a hierarchical level, as born in inequality (IBID: 44).
Different social strata have different interests. For a society to thrive, they must be balanced within a hierarchy. Ancient Rome, with its patricians and plebeians, shows how this could be achieved. The plebeians recognized the need for hierarchy and did not aspire to the patricians' leadership role, but demanded fairness in the relationships between the classes. As a result of this struggle, the positions of people's tribunes were created, who became defenders of the rights and interests of the plebeians. The patricians agreed to these reforms to maintain political stability as a condition for the further development of the Roman state. From this, one can conclude that the state elite valued stability as its highest value. This was the world's first social agreement in the interests of societal stability, a theory developed by Thomas Hobbes in the 17th century (HOBBES. T. 2001). However, history shows that the principle of state stability as the highest value was not always understood by its elite. This resulted in various revolutions.
Consequently, the formation of an elite, both intellectual and cultural, must be purposeful rather than stochastic, since the existence of dominant and recessive genes leads to a limited number of people capable of any kind of creative activity. In a society that doesn't pursue a deliberate policy of pairing men and women who clearly demonstrate their talents, the number of scientific and cultural figures declines. Of course, such a policy can only be implemented at the state level, with oversight and regulation of educational institutions.
However, special abilities can be used by individuals both for the benefit of society and for personal success. L. Vasilyeva characterizes such gifted individuals, who place their own interests above those of society, as a ersatz elite. Beyond any elite remains the majority, among whom are those "pivotal" individuals who ensure the stability of society. This is the essence of the equality that should be seen in the phrase "liberty, equality, fraternity." One could say that the current situation in society resembles the distribution of infinitesimal quantities of higher and lower order in mathematics: despite the arithmetic operations between them, they remain infinitesimal.
Of course, the existence of elitism undermines the principle of unanimity as a form of democracy, given its dogmatic understanding. In politics, its harm manifests itself under specific circumstances. An example is the European Union's inability to resist Russian aggression. Dogmatic thinking also manifests itself in the politics of liberal humanism. The existence of a "genetic burden" consisting of individuals with low viability indicates an overvaluation of this burden. Liberal ideology proclaims the supreme values of individual rights and freedoms. However, an individual can be indifferent to the collective interests of people united by a wide diversity of characteristics and ideas, and even more so to the problems of humanity as a whole, as a disordered aggregation of diverse individuals. Such an ideology poses a threat to human civilization, and, anticipating this possibility, the Creator purposefully shaped the Earth's surface through geological processes so that they would form human society as a collection of ethnic units organized hierarchically (see Ethno-Forming Areas). This manifests the idea of horizontal and vertical structuring, which, in practice, is incorporated into the design of any complex system.
Evolutionary history provides us with numerous examples of the extinction of individual species and even groups of animals. Some species are dying out right before our eyes, unable to adapt to new living conditions. In South America, hundreds of insect species are dying out due to deforestation, without having been studied or even classified by biologists. But species extinction in some cases may indicate more than just habitat deterioration. The extinction of the saber-toothed tiger or the Irish elk was due to a false evolutionary path, manifested in the excessive increase in the size of their fangs or horns. Other animals, although in principle perfectly capable of survival, are found only in isolated niches. A fascinating example is marsupials, which were widespread across the globe but were later displaced by placental mammals and survived only in isolated Australia, gradually becoming extinct elsewhere on Earth. There is no doubt that the idea of carrying young in a pouch has proven false. Here we see a phenomenon called by Teilhard de Chardin the technique of tentative groping, which reveals a certain determination. This tentative groping also presupposes a certain variety, a richness for choosing the most perfect embodiment of an idea (TEIHARD de CHARDIN PIERRE. 1987: 95). Thus, we see a lack of determination in biology at the level of certain details of the physical structure of animals and, obviously, plants, despite the idea of increasing complexity in living organisms.
Now let us turn to the organization of the system of governance of human society in accordance with its three-dimensional structure, where the significance of values is structured vertically, and their degree of adaptability is structured horizontally. All forms of government throughout human history can be divided into three groups: the rule of one person, the rule of a group of people, and the rule of the majority. Closer to our time, forms of government generally evolve from authoritarian to democratic. However, a careful examination of the power structure of states past and present reveals that a combination of democratic and authoritarian forms of government has always existed, and where this combination was more harmonious, states achieved the greatest success. The ancient Greek Stoic philosopher Panaetius (180 BC – 110 BC) even considered the ideal combination of monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic elements (RUSSELL BERTRAND. 1995L 237). Let us again recall the history of Ancient Rome. The interaction of democratic and autocratic components of power in Rome produced good results, and Roman achievements were later used by medieval Europe in state and military development, the development of legal theory, etc.
Each state (the entire world, according to the fractal principle) should be constructed according to the principle of structuring humanity horizontally and vertically. That is, the governance of human communities as states should be adequately reflected. Such a form could be a system that can be generally called Regimentum Mixtum, which combines authoritarian and democratic forms. This division of sovereignty has a profound philosophical justification:
Throughout the long development from the 7th century BC to the present day, philosophers have been divided into those who sought to strengthen social ties and those who sought to weaken them. This distinction was associated with other (RUSSELL BERTRAND. 2001, 13).
Russell called one of these directly from philosophy adherents of discipline, and the other – adherents of liberalism. There has long been a conflict between these two direct lines:
This conflict existed in Greece even before the rise of what we recognize as philosophy, and it is quite clearly expressed in early Greek thought. Having changed, it has persisted to the present day and will undoubtedly persist for many centuries to come (IBID).
Mixed governance can resolve this conflict. The liberal democratic component of governance should be limited to the secular sphere, with varying levels of democracy in state and local bodies created on a network principle. Authoritarian governance must ensure social discipline by organizing and controlling spiritual life, and this can be implemented in various ways, for example, through the ecumenism of religions or denominations. Plurality of thought in the spiritual sphere should be limited to a circle of competent individuals from among society's intellectual elite, whose task should be to convey the ideology of secular authority. A social contract must exist between the authoritarian and democratic branches of government as a guarantee of successful governance, which is possible only with a certain level of morality. Even Franklin Roosevelt emphasized that morally untrained intellectuals pose a threat to society (PORSUGYAN L.R. . 2010, 101).
According to the principle of structuring that must exist in the world, power cannot be wielded by the entire multitude of members of any human community. Certain categories of people must exist, from which governing bodies, both central and local, are formed. The principle of structuring must be implemented scientifically; otherwise, it is implemented spontaneously and exists in practice. According to the preaching of liberal democracy, large owners of the means of production form a group of those in power at the highest level of social stratification, and lower levels are formed accordingly. This social structure is not legalized anywhere, and its existence is not officially mentioned. This cannot be, and this spontaneous process of distributing the actual, rather than declared, rights and responsibilities of society's members must be brought under control.
Plato believed that states should be governed by philosophers. However, even two thousand and a half years later, the idea of governing states on a scientific basis is far from being realized. It is not without reason that A.D. Sakharov lamented that "the scientific method of guiding politics, economics, art, education, and military affairs has not yet become a reality" (SAKHAROV A.D. 1968). In principle, those in power should profess some lofty goals. However, under Plato, philosophy was in such a state that entrusting state governance to philosophers would have been dangerous, and Sakharov was not a philosopher. Ancient philosophy was in agreement with the achievements of contemporary physics and mathematics, for both physicists and mathematicians were also philosophers. Today, a true philosopher has the opportunity to draw on a much greater body of knowledge from the humanities and natural sciences, but it is difficult to integrate it into a coherent system.
However, knowledge alone isn't enough to govern a state. Its leader must possess leadership qualities that enable them to become an authority in society. Certainly, self-confident people become authorities. Self-confidence should be a sign of a true leader:
Confidence is fuel. It helps you present ideas, negotiate, defend your position, and create something new. Research shows that people with greater confidence are more likely to be heard and influence others (KADYA NATALYA. 2026).
To this importance of a leader's self-confidence, it should be added that it also hypnotizes subordinates. This is a characteristic of mass consciousness whereby people's behavior is influenced more by the form of address than by its content, which is perceived when the truth is conveyed to the masses in accordance with their level of knowledge. This situation leads to the fact that in competitive struggles between groups, the one with the higher level of knowledge wins. However, the more a person knows, the less self-confident they are. This is the main problem of leadership. It is solved by placing an elite between the leader and the masses, one that understands the leader and simultaneously raises the level of development of the masses. The state develops as well as the elite fulfills its tasks. But the leader must also understand that their overconfidence can be detrimental. The need for changes in the methods and style of state leadership is not always obvious, since social processes develop very slowly; therefore, state leaders often become conservative when they overestimate the value of previous experience, are unwilling to take risks, and see no alternatives. In a more dynamic system like business, some experiences make good leaders doubt themselves, and that is to their advantage:
Doubt doesn't make you weak. It makes you stronger—if it's based on inner resilience and self-worth. This is what distinguishes those who play the role of leader from those who aren't (IBID).
A true leader doesn't view subordinates as a resource, but rather allows the team to think independently while the company is growing well. Doubts arise when stagnation sets in, and they must confront reality and assess the risks in order to make appropriate decisions. At such times, it's not their team that decides everything, but their way of thinking:
How he understands power, how he treats mistakes, how he reads changes, how he reacts to uncertainty, how he perceives people in teams – as partners in creating a system or an instrument for implementation (IBID).
.This is a good example of how, in difficult times in business, a quick solution to an emerging problem is adopted not democratically, but authoritarianally. The same must happen in society when its collective leadership has not developed the resourcefulness necessary to find adequate solutions to unforeseen situations. In business, the measure of success is money, the amount of which corresponds to the time spent on the production, transportation, and sale of a product. Similarly, the length of a society's existence determines its historical success. Over the course of its existence, the principles of its self-government are refined. This refinement must be consistent with the general line of human development, the guidelines of which are determined and gain weight in the struggle for existence. One such guide is human conscience. Immanuel Kant, who largely determined the direction of European philosophy, described conscience as follows:
A man may use as much art as he likes in order to paint to himself an unlawful act, that he remembers, as an unintentional error, a mere oversight, such as one can never altogether avoid, and therefore as something in which he was carried away by the stream of physical necessity, and thus to make himself out innocent, yet he finds that the advocate who speaks in his favour can by no means silence the accuser within, if only he is conscious that at the time when he did this wrong he was in his senses, that is, in possession of his freedom; and, nevertheless, he accounts for his error from some bad habits, which by gradual neglect of attention he has allowed to grow upon him to such a degree that he can regard his error as its natural consequence, although this cannot protect him from the blame and reproach which he casts upon himself (KANT IMMANYEL. 2004: 110)
In the cited work "Critique of Practical Reason," devoted to questions of morality, Kant uses the word "conscience" only once, although it could have been key. He simply lacked the knowledge to understand the meaning of conscience using only his inherent transcendental method. Later philosophers, having become familiar with evolutionary theories, might have believed that conscience is precisely what fundamentally distinguishes humans from animals.
It's impossible to imagine that human conscience could develop solely under the influence of life circumstances and the external environment, amidst a constant struggle for survival. Conscience, as a human capacity for self-assessment, obviously developed from a sense of shame, which restrains us from certain behaviors that may be considered unworthy in the eyes of others. However, shame and conscience are far from equivalent feelings; the difference between them is defined as follows:
Shame is a temporary feeling, while conscience is permanent. Moreover, a person who lives by conscience experiences a stronger sense of shame, since shame without conscience loses its meaning and significance (PORSUGYAN L.R. 2010: 100).
Animals lack both conscience and shame, and primitive man also lacked shame, and its emergence is documented in the New Testament. However, the word "conscience" does not appear in the Old Testament, which may indicate the development of this human phenomenon in later times. Accordingly, all modern religions have demonstrated progress in their appreciation of the importance of conscience. Its most profound understanding is found in the Pastoral Constitution of the Second Vatican Council, "Joy and Hope," which was promulgated from 1962 to 1965, where we find the following words:
In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience, when necessary, speaks to his heart: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law written by God; to obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it, he will be judged (9). Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths (10). Wonderfully, conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by the love of God and neighbor (11) (GAUDIUM ET SPES, 1965, 16).
The importance of conscience as a divine moral law has been noted, but generalities rarely reach the public consciousness, as even ordinary clergy do not fully understand it, despite the fact that the importance of conscience is beginning to gain understanding even in business. The developing concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR), understood as "business with conscience," reflects business's awareness of its moral obligation to society. Like any law, the moral law of conscience must also be proven, and this proof falls to the intellectual elite of society, who can demonstrate it through their behavior. Although the sense of conscience cannot be taught because it is a deeply personal state of the individual (PORSUGYAN L.R. 2010: 101), the voice of conscience is present to varying degrees in the heart of every person. It is possible to convince people that heeding it is in their own interests. The French sociologist Gabriel Tarde argued that all social life is largely based on the instinct to imitate one another.
The evidence was overwhelming that in all the affairs of men, whether of good or of evil report, imitation is an ever-present factor; and to a philosophical mind the implication was obvious, that there must be psychological or sociological laws of imitation, worthy of most thorough study (TARDE GABRIEL. 1903, iv).
Imitation of one another determines a certain level of prevailing morality in society, which is determined by its aristocracy. Historically, the upper classes of society formed organically in monarchical states. They are better prepared for the transition to a mixed form of government. This applies primarily to Great Britain.