Outlook and ideological bases of comprehension of the social organism

Search after solution to the problem underlying the current research can be started from any notion. However, the logic requires to begin the analysis with a central notion of research.

Priority in attempt to conceptualize a concept of social organism belongs to sociology not philosophy. Sociology had to get over many difficulties on its way of searching after a key category to unveil the problem of an order in social life. On its way it has changed scores of times the key category by virtue of which it had been striving to ar­range social reality. We are merely pointing out the directions of search for the key category has been emerged to clear determined problem. First of all, they are:

- functional theories: early functionalism (E. Durkheim), func­tional imperativism (T. Parsons), functional structuralism (R. Merton);

- conflict theory: dialectical conflict theory (K. Marx, R. Dahren- dorf), conflict functionalism (H. Zimmel, L. Coser);

- theory of interaction: interactionism, “role theory”, symbolic in- teractionism;

- theory of exchange: utilitarianism, behaviorism (G. Homans), structuralism of interexchange;

- ethnomethodology which,indeed, denies the very procedure of grounding of a key notion. For ethnomethodologist the fact that is being immediately observed is nothing but people’s endeavour to create a general sense of social reality. The substance of this reality is recognized as something less interesting than means of creation of a form of something that exists “beyond”.

However, it is relevantly independent study of social reality in a form of social theory that has made the largest contribution to the development of concept of social organism, and that is why absorbs greatly our interest; it has emerged within the Western science, and is known as organicism. Organicism comprises the bioorganismic con­cepts of society such as super-organism led by the concepts of evolu­tional biology and analogy with construction and functions of a liv­ing organism [See: 169, 248].

However, despite of such variety of existing approaches of com­prehension of superorganic construction of a social world, to con­struct methodological complex of research instruments more infor­mation about essence and attributes of social reality is required.

To get more complete picture of attributes of the concept of so­cial organism and taking into consideration the fact of existing de­pendency between generic - type notion “social organism” and ge­nus-type notion “organism”, let’s approach it as if from a different side. To achieve this aim the sense of a notion “organism” should be decoded; this notion with the help of corresponding semantic filters can be interpreted, compared with the generic - type formations, and presented, after all, as a particular text.

Becides the concept of organism determines the limits in its own development by providing entirely corresponding to its nature reali­ty. The same attribute of a notion was underlined by M. Serov - au­thor of the original theory of functional organization, “Lexical lan­guage units turned to be a specific system substance which ‘set”, de­termine the class of probable structures that can be realized at this very substance” [154, 199].

Indeed, any notion can be decoded, and after that what is reason­able becomes valid. Sense becomes accessible, and we discover the es­sence and content of any notion considering it as totality. In other words, this very idea by itself contains the “pattern of organism”. Ac­cording to Hegel (Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences), concep­tualization of the Notion does not require any external stimulus for its actualization since it embraces the contradiction of simplicity and difference, and therefore its own restless nature impels it to actualize itself, to unfold into actuality the difference which, in the notion it­self, is present only in an ideal manner, that is to say, in the contradic­tory form of differencelessness, and by this removal of its simplicity as of a defect, a onesidedness, to make itself actually that whole, of which to begin with it contained only the possibility [57, 12].

Thus, quantum “organism” as a concept is such specific amount of information which represents social reality in all fullness of its internal and external aspects. In addition, the concept “organism” possesses a particular meaning or sense. Together with other parti- cles-senses it constitutes the Semantic continuum within the Universe structure.

There are, as it is known, several explanations of origin of the sense. Subjective - that is to say, information transcends from the other world - one of them; the possibility of its including into con­tinuum of the semantic space by alien civilization is not excluded. There is another way - materialistic one. It is considered to be the outcome of purpose-driven cognitive process taking place in human brains.

Within the framework of the current research we are of the opin­ion that the concept of organism originated in the course of practical interaction; people in a process of comprehension of particular ob­jects of the world named them relating to particular senses.

There is rather poor evidence in support of organicism as philo­sophic category in scientific philosophic publications. This notion operates as conventional one. Every researcher endows it with his “own” meaning. It exists as some totality that can cover everything.

All those definitions were able to discover in the annals of the world philosophical thought, follow from it. Thus, G. Hegel (Ency­clopedia of the Philosophical Sciences) determined organism as infi­nite, self sustaining, and process sustaining [56, 357]. K. Marx, F. Engels, V. Lenin’s works contributed essentially into clarification of the issue under consideration. Their role in giving this term a scien­tific statute is beyond any doubts. However, neither complete denial of their contribution into a treasury of philosophic thought, nor blind defense of out of the date ideas should be allowed. K. Marx, for in­stance, considers a society as organism going through the sequence of periods (origin, development, death) or “natural phases” of devel­opment analogical to biological phenomenon, springing from itself, suffering through the pangs of childbirth, capable of transformation, constantly mutating [See: 109; 112; 130]. It was such view on the social organism that had a tremendous impact on finding a solution for a problem of rationalization of social practice. As Lenin admitted, based on organismic concept of society specific and practical conclu­sions could be deduced [See: 112].

As publications suggest the notion “social organism” is employed to describe a special living environment of production and reproduc­tion of a human being. V.Lenin intentionally dwells upon this sub­ject when he writes that K. Marx’ opposition of human being to plants and animals is based on the fact that the first one lives in different social organisms, which undergo historical change, and are defined by the system of social manufacture, and so by a system of distribu­tion [109, 476].

Dictionaries and encyclopedias inform us about organism in a rather shallow way. The Big Soviet Encyclopedia, for example, de­fines that organism (from later Latin “organize” - arrange, give well- organized form) - any living being [6, 482-483].

Philosophical Encyclopedia, in its turn, points out that term “organism” can be used in two senses - broad and narrow. In a nar­row sense of the word organism is a biological individual, coher­ent living system, well-organized in space and time, capable of in­dependent self-sustaining due to adjust interaction with environ­ment; in a broad sense - a system which likens the living organism [See: 110, 161].

Native philosophic dictionaries do not contain term “organism” at all; S. Ozhehov’s dictionary represents notion “organism” in terms of three senses. Two of them refer to biological organism, and that is why do not attract much of our attention, the third one interprets it as “harmoniously organized integrity” [147, 403].

And only since recently, obviously under the influence of social crisis, new endeavor to define the very notion organism and some­how to make it content precise has emerged. Thus, M. Moiseyev, known as an investigator not only of biosphere but of society as well, in his work Algorithm of Development defines organism in a follow­ing way, ”In terms of theory of management any system which not only has its own goals but is also definitely capable of sustaining them can be understood as organism” [140, 72].

The statute of informational quantum - the sense of “organism” in a structure of the Universe allows us to agree with the following statement of exoteric philosophy, “The concept of organism is some­thing quite general; in every particular moment it is added with a peculiar feature; however, among all variable conditions the princi­ple idea remains unchangeable.

From all above stated it can be deduced that social organism as a central category is a generic-type notion of organism existing side by side with biological organism. Their unity should be searched for only at substantial level. The letter means that the realm of vital activity of organism is a special part of “space-time” continuum different from the one in which pristine physical world and spiritual world unfold.

The next step on the way of attainment of general aim set before is selection of outlook platform for investigation of social organism.

Social life, though it has been a formation unfolding at the macro level, has “triune” causation; the source of its self- evolving (trigger mechanism) has been hidden within the processes of macro level; its purpose for the Universe and its employment as immanent factor of self - motion of the Universe should be searched for at the mega level, though, it itself has emerged at the macro level and keeps function­ing at it.

Peculiarity of comprehension of problem of social world is that, in general, never before in cognitive theories social institutions have been considered as outcomes of mega evolutional process. Investiga­tors ignore this issue considering it as some temporary formations, providing normal functioning of man within the framework of plan­etary processes taking place within the framework of historical time. This fact is also rightly highlighted by Safronov who has suggested perspective approach for comprehension of unity of a person with the nature and Cosmos [See: 160].

It should be obvious here that the problem of formation and func­tioning of social world cannot be solved without considering the most general, that is to say, outlook foundations. It is philosophy that is supposed to provide the reflexion of foundational substance, that is to say, to account for the nature of the Universe.

Native philosophy, taking into consideration its advances, suc­ceeded more than others in a realm of comprehension of the essence of new outlook. In our opinion the solution will be found, if we suc­ceed in integration of the Western tradition, which prioritizes ex­periment and quantitative formulations, with such tradition as the Chinese one, with its concept of the world as spontaneously changing and self-organizing.

It means to comprehend the modern world we need to deepen dras­tically the process of comprehension and also update, note that first of all, categorical apparatus of philosophy itself. Not ignoring ge­neric-type philosophic categories “substance” and “spirit”, not dimin­ishing their role and significance, philosophy should, we should, af­ter all, move to adoption of genus-type category “the universum”. In another words, from our standpoint, perspective of philosophy in­cluding social philosophy as well is to move from opposition of sub­stance to spirit towards explanation of their organic unity, search for a new reason of the world. Based on such synthesis literally the following should occur: new outlook reevaluation of the past should emerge, unorthodox means of solution of the present problems should be elaborated, deeper view of the future should be developed.

It signifies, regardless how paradoxically it sounds, that the main issue of philosophy not only remains to be the key contradiction, but even is getting more actualized. However, now it has turned to us its different side. Problem of clarification of primacy of origin of oppo­sitions is transformed in necessity of conceptualization of them as integrity.

It is qualitatively different situation. It has been brewing for a long time. Such qualitative spring accounts for dramatic and accord­ing to cosmic measures even spontaneous increase of consciousness. According to V. Vernadsky, “such moment in history of thought has advented, when it is put in the forefront as an important and pro­found foundation of a new scientific outlook of future which is being formed” [38, 113]. However, world and native philosophy hasn’t made appropriate inferences from this fact. Therefore, in practice, we seem encounter with it unexpectedly.

In this respect debate between K. Marx, F. Engels, and G. Hegel, on issue whose philosophies they have rooted their arguments at, is extremely significant. G. Hegel postulated existence of spiritual fac­tors such as reality that operated autonomously from physical body; he, in particular, based himself upon the experiments that presently have received the name parapsychological.

F. Engels categorically denies the possibility of existing of para­psychological phenomenon [See:129]. Together with K. Marx he de­clares that nothing in the world exists, but substance of this or that state. Substance is primary, spirit, and consciousness are secondary. Ideal is material that has gone through human brains. This consti­tutes a credo of Marxist materialism.

In the XXth century success of unorthodox natural science caused urgent necessity to revise the ideas about correlation of sub­stance and conciseness had been established in materialistic world view. Such scientists as K. Tsiolkovsky, V. Vernadsky considered it reasonable. K. Tsiolkovsky saw the world as material one, but believed that there were higher intelligent forces in power whose authority had been the outcome of prolonged evolution; the very Universe at present condition was the result of interaction of those forces [198, 300-322]. V. Venadsky’s merit, as it is known, is the development of science about biosphere and concept of noosphere. These investigations signified a very valuable step in overcoming shortage of mechanistic materialism.

In the second half of the XXth century the scientific method al­lowing to begin investigation of complex self-organizing systems with unlinear inverted connections (thermodynamics of irreversible pro­cesses, synergetics, theory of catastrophes, systemical analysis) was developed. Biosphere, noosphere, human being belong to the above mentioned systems. Science stepped in a new post unorthodox stage of its development. Such principle regularities of processes in self­evolving systems as stochastic, indefiniteness, bifurcation were found in a focus of attention. Construction of imitating models of evolu­tion of complex systems demanded recognition of principles of theo­retical variability, probability, NP- algorithms, multy-criterion op­timization and etc. However, modern social philosophy takes it not quite simply and cautiously.

Synergetics takes standpoint of thermodynamics to study phe­nomenon of self-organization. The effects of mutual action of a set of interconnected elements of systems, remote from balanced condi­tion, actively exchanging substance, energy, and information with environment are its objects. Its success in a realm of investigation and modeling of physical and chemical processes has initiated pene­tration of concepts and means of synergetics in biology, economics, sociology, political science, and social philosophy. Synergetic mod­els of process of perception and artificial intellect give us hope to dis­cover, after all, logic that generate miraculous phenomenon of spon­taneous order in human communities.

Thus, to adopt social world, by using qualitatively enriched cate­gorical apparatus of social philosophy substantial beginning should be discovered, which accounts for not only dialectics of material and spiritual things, but more precise, reveals their motion through all three above-mentioned levels (mega-, macro-, micro-), and shows its mechanism of its self-evolving as organic wholeness.

Category of substance is that very logical beginning which oth­er categories (which in their unity constituting coherent knowl­edge about the universum and its social form of motion) have been derived from. It is possible only because this beginning contains within itself contradiction which becomes the source of its devel­opment. Peculiarity of dialectical method of investigation of so­cial life as logical outcome of evolution of the Universe consists in theoretical reproduction of this contradiction, analysis of struc­ture of its motions.

That is why it is important to understand that if the substance is the very foundation causing everything, it is the one that also gener­ates itself. Then, that is to say, it by itself is a subject, the essence that generates itself; the substance is an identity of contraries - foun­dation of something else and self grounding, interaction of which con­stitutes the very process of its self- motion.

Thus, paradox of substance consists in the fact that only under the condition of being a reason for itself it is capable of generating something else.

Otherwise, relation of substance as a foundation of “something else” to itself as a subject should gain a form of self discovery. This is the way of evolving into reality the substantial relation poles of which seem to be segmented in time.

Consequently, to move from substance to social organism the universum should be studied as totality, that self-evolves, generates a set of concrete forms of motions one of which is a social one.

The survey of rational account of the world is the dramatic one. From time to time it seemed that rather ambitious program got close to its completion: scientists began to behold the very fundamental level from which its properties could have been derived from. We will give only two examples. One of them is formulation of renowned Bor’s model of atom, due to which all variety of atoms were brought to simple planetary systems with electrons and protons. Einstein’s hope to integrate all physical laws within the framework of the common theory of field signified the next period of intensive expectations.

Today we experience next in turn period of intensive expectations of discovery of deeper than atom and field foundations for construct­ing the picture of the world. Their search continued even after the discovery of the theory of fields. For the last century it has been es­pecially intensive. However, only in the second part of the XXth cen­tury physics asserted the role of quantum vacuum as a prime source of the Universe origin. In this context the “touch” to the mystery of origin of the Universe is considered to be an essential point in the process of development of natural sciences of a modern period.

Being a quantum-mechanic object vacuum possess complicated inner structure, that is characterized by a set of quantum numbers combination of which cause the number of the most unexpected at­tributes at different levels of its self-unfolding. It is used as a base for construction of the scientific picture of evolution of the Universe. Presently creation of a new picture of the world, as it can be traced through modern scientific publications, is being formed in two sepa­rate and diametrically opposite directions. Two kinds of vacuums (physical and semantic) account for this. Some researchers are tak­ing quantum vacuum to create the physical Universe; others do the same to create the semantic Universe.

Original scientific picture of the world, as it is known, is formed on the base of substance of physical vacuum. It is called to give more elaborated account for the world around us and for us within the framework of this world. Physical value is considered the one which should undergo the rigid scientific description (with the help not only natural sciences but social sciences as well) [213, 45].

Within its framework it is realized that it is all its elementary particles organizing the Universe that are the excitation of vacuum; its peculiarities define not only the logics of atoms and molecules but also the global attributes of evolution of the Universe.

Dialectical analysis of electromagnetic interaction as the princi­ple one allows in a more concrete way to express correlation of mac­roscopic form of motion of material objects, having clarified the in­ner foundation of their unity. Moreover, by means of electromagnet­ic interaction with other types of interaction: gravitational, weak and strong - the unity of qualitatively defined forms of macroscopic mo­tion (social one is among them) with micro- and mega worlds and through them with the Universe can be established.

Regardless of striking potential of such standpoint to account for the origin of the world, it is not completely faultless as many of propo­nents of this theory imagine. The main problem is that image of the world constructed by classical natural science turned to be, in its essence, completely spiritless. Contradiction between tiny world of a human being and almost unlimited Cosmos became striking. And since the beginning of noosphere time it no longer has been satisfying anyone.

The stages of the development of science, subsequent upon the unorthodox and post unorthodox stages, have not changed essential­ly the situation yet. Accumulated within different fields of natural science problems are still waiting on their solution; they incite the researchers towards intensive search for an idea different from the Physical Universe.

At the end of the XXth century in scientific-philosophical liter­ature in contrast to the Physical Universe, the concept of the Seman­tic or Informational Universe proliferated. Its roots are hidden in the profundity of the history of philosophical thought. For a long time in philosophy mainly idealistic ideas have been dominating ideas: ideas about some creative spiritual power, designing according its own will and is perceived as all reviving principle of nature and life, as “the world engine” (Plato, Aristotle), “the world soul” (Plato, sto­ics, neoplatonics, Gerder, Hete, Fekhner, Scheling, and others), “the world spirit” (“nus”, Anaxagoras, “absolute idea” of Hegel and oth­ers), “the world will” (Spengler, Nietzsche and others), “the world energy” (Oswald), “entelehia” (Aristotle, Drysh, neovitalizm and oth­ers). In the main, all religious teaching connected with the act of cre­ation in one or another way support this idea. It is quite appropriate in this context to refer to Dao Lao Tsy: ideas about general logics and its embodiment that have a character of world rationality and that outwardly is expressed in a form of orderliness of being and sequenc­es of its changes.

Adding to scientific circulation the concept of informational space signifies, in particular, recognition of informational potential as autonomous reality. Similar thoughts were repeatedly expressed be­fore. It would be fallacious to think that similar ideas are character­istics only of proponents of idealistic and mystic worldviews. Such renowned philosopher as B. Russel, physics theorists E. Shredinher, V. Heisenberg, D. Bom recognized their content value [ See: 158].

The work of a founder of French “atheistic” existentialism A. Camus A Man who revolts is significant in this context. A. Camus made the conclusion in it that the sense governs the world, and the way to comprehend it goes through the discovery of the essence of revolt. The idea of the Semantic Universe has been present in Russian scientific - philosophic literature for a long time. Suffice it to recol­lect the idea of pneumatosphere or spiritosphere of P. Florentskyi [See: 81]. The same idea is also energetically supported by L. Lyeskov [See: 158]. To ground the Semantic Universe it is important to under­line the content value or statistic value of information. Using the works of Frehe and Chercha in a field of mathematical logics as a foun­dation [96, 553], derivative notion of the sense as information or sum of knowledge that sign, word, symbol contain should be comprehended. Spiritual reality manifests itself in the binary hypostasis: continuity (language semantics) and discontinuity (sign system). Lacking of the sense signifies the existential vacuum. The sense turns sign system into the content of the text that emerges when the senses are compared. The principle function of a sense consists in the endowing the processes of developing with the direction. V. Frankl wrote, “Sense of the sense is that it directs the course of being” [198, 285]. Its impact is so strong that a man physically feels it. And at the level of nanve consciousness he gains the statute of God’s beginning or God.

In addition, it is important we should bear in mind, if sense is a result of placing of one meaning in a particular relation with other

meaning or placing of one sign in a particular relation with another sign, we have deal with a specific form of relations. The sense is a particular relation of meanings. It is prime and principle essential attribute. The sense is truly spiritual relations.

The Semantic Universe exists, to point of view of proponents of this theory, in the form of the “meon” (ether). It should be point out here, that no one objects the existence of ether along with the sub­stance. In addition, existence of the meon as the referent of energo- informational exchange or as the Semantic space does not contradict any known physical law.

V. Vernadsky, who by no means can be suspected in ideological con­juncture, wrote: “Further scientific analysis will provide us with a new picture of the process which has been taking place; the picture which doesn’t coincide with the adopted mode of comprehension of heliocen­tric system. Modern dominating in science conviction split the substance into a pile of the smallest particles or properly located centers of forces, eternally maintained in diverse motions. The ether is not different. It penetrates the substance, constantly actuates wavelike fluctuating. All these motions of the substance and ether are in the closest and uninter­rupted connection with infinite for us world space [137, 195].

The scientific - philosophic literature introduced the category “ether” long ago. The description of vacuum in such terms as “ayper- on” and “amer” was given long ago by the renowned Hellenists Anaxi­mander, Democritus and their followers. The discovery of the wave nature of light demanded the introduction to science the hypothesis about existence of the light ether of the electro-magnitic fluctuations carrier. From the idealistic standpoint it should be understand as the Absolute Spirit connected with the intelligible substance.

In modern science to name the energo-informational field, which constitutes the physical essence of noosphere, different terms are used. Thus, American scientist of Australian origin Wilhelm Raykh, and Italian investigator of paranormal phenomenon L. Markezi call it organic field. Raykh is considered to be the author of the term. Other investigators call this physical fluctuating field telurgic one, (from Lat. “tellurus” - “earth”), since in ancient times people used it as the one which was radiated by the Earth to search underground water springs and ore fields. Belarus scientist A. Veynyk calls it hronal one, a sea group of the scientists (Ye. Akimov and others) calls it “torsion”, others (A. Okhatrin and others) - microleptonne”. In literature you can find it defined as “spinor”, “axionic”, “ansdronic” and other terms. Presently based on these hypotheses a special sci­ence “eniology” is being formed.

There is a commonly recognized fact that society is the whole sys­tem in the process of functioning and development of which from rea­son to consequence not only substance, energy, and information are transferred, but also, using K.Marx’ terminology, the “crystals of social substance”, “clusters deprived of differences, human labor”, embodied in products of labor, and due to this, particular not sub­stantial, but nevertheless, material social relations are reproducted [See: 130, 46, 203, 25]. Here we are fixing only the fact of existence of the ether, without commenting other nuances of the used thesis.

Recognition of the semantic field (intelligent ether) performing as a carrier of the electro-magnitic fluctuations, organically connect­ed to the motion of the Universe, signifies insertion of corrections in the modern world view paradigm. From the materialistic standpoint it can be considered as the intelligible form of the substance.

V. Nalimov and Zh. Drohalina in the work Reality of Unreal writes: “It is important to pay attention to the fact that the Semantic field, like the physical one, plays the role of the environment across which interaction takes place. Man interacts with himself or with other people with the help of the discrets of words or symbols. This process takes place by means of generation the words (symbols) and their understanding. Both processes are done by means of interac­tion with the semantic field. Using the physics’ terminology, proba­bly we should say: radiation and absorption of the quantum of the Semantic field take place” [See: 144, 93].

These authors consider unmanifested semantic Universe or the semantic vacuum as the one that received the name Nothingness with­in the framework of philosophy, and that so excited the East (“nerva- na”) as well as the West (think of Gnostic, Eckhart, Beme, Scheling, Sartre, Heidegger, Yung, Tyllykh and others).

In accordance to named criterion to discern these worlds such type of the fundamental interaction should be discovered which presents in itself the base of their attributes and regulations. Our view, inter­transition of the material one into the spiritual one constitutes such fundamental interaction and is the immanent essence of the Universe. In a planetary condition such process is nothing but life. But it should me mentioned that the material and the ideal, as ingredients of the same substance, not only transit each other, but move along from the microlevel through the macro to the mega level and verso.

The fact that in the pre-materialistic study the material and spir­itual foundations were considered as contraries excluding each other signifies nothing else but that the researchers used to look at the con­trary to each other differences as the “indifferent to each other dif­ferent”. And if for all previous period of time philosophic thought had not fought over the problem what was prime - being or conscious­ness, material or spiritual - but tend to synthesize them in the or­ganic wholeness, we would have proceeded much farther and would have known about the social life far and away more.

In practice the ante-synthesis caused, as it is known, the forma­tion of the ideological contradiction between the materialists and ide­alists, which due to the incompatibility of the methodological and ideological positions, instead of looking for a substantial foundation of social world, moved along the direction opposite to the truth. In­vestigators seemed didn’t notice that they were trying to solve one and the same problem only from different sides. Indeed, the propo­nents of the subjective as well as objective approaches of the world explanation appeared to be the ordinary metaphysicist.

Thus, the epistemological reason is likely to be one of the rea­sons of the crisis in the social development. We obviously exagger­ated the division of the world into the material and spiritual one and paid to it too much attention. We wasted time and a great deal of intellectual efforts looking for the prime and secondary instead of going beyond the boundaries of those contraries by means of their synthesis in something third and the whole one. Until this whole third one in the process of its self-motion began to destroy the so­cial organisms - the products of self-evolving of human reason, that apparently have been existing at the phase of unconscious. Avail­able literature proves that human reason existed always, though not always in a conscious form.

The idea of natural -scientific picture of the world, built up on integration of physical and the semantic variety of vacuum, paves the way to a fundamentally new step in comprehension of the world by means of developing super uniting theory that integrates in or­ganic wholeness physical and the semantic worlds, substance and con­sciousness, substance and information. Such theory is capable of broadening considerably the degree of our freedom in conceptualiza­tion and transformation of ruins of national social organisms in ef­fective constructions of new type, also to increase out intellectual capacity in construction of a planetary social organism.

In the light of epistemology accepting of such theory signifies that we in a course of examining of material and spiritual move from category of discerning and opposition to category of contradiction. In this case we even today are already ready to discover in a founda­tion of the Universe “the root of any movement and vitality”. Never­theless, true self - motion is based, according to G. Hegel (Science of Logic), on contradiction which makes its appearance in opposition, is only the developed nothing that is contained in identity and that ap­pears in the expression that the law of identity says nothing. This negation further determines itself into difference and opposition, which now is the posited contradiction [49, 31].

Thus, in selecting of world view platform to achieve the main aim of current research, we came to necessity of integration of ma­terial and spiritual within substantial foundation of our world as equal constituents of the Universe. However, there is nothing new in this. It has been already known. Such approach was developed by other generations of philosophers in the history of philosophical thought.

The problems of modern social development, as never before, de­mand search of the cosmic ideology of development of humanity, so we should fearlessly move forward to face cosmic (quantum) philoso­phy. Since surrounding world of the second nature is not built by anyone, we face the problem to describe its smallest “bricks” (that is to say, microscopic structure of the world) in a way that will account for the process of its self origin (self construction). In the connection with ascertainment of substantial foundation of the world problem of comprehension of the social organism shifts from outlook rank to ideological one.

The elaboration of ideology of investigation as well as the selec­tion of the outlook standpoint is a personal business of the investiga­tor. Provided that the definition of ideology as a system of “views and ideas, in which relations of men to each other and reality, social problems and conflicts are realized and evaluated, which also con­tain complete (programs) social activities, focused on consolidation or change (development) of given social relations” [188, 206], than the integrity of ideas (semantic filters) underlying our endeavors to begin re-comprehesion of social phenomenon should be considered as ideology of this investigation.

The condition of native philosophical thought has been compli­cated by the fact that ideological horizon is lacking the advancing ideology. It is a paradox, however, philosophical trend, formed at the end of XIXth century as ideological trend, and which in practice has won its opponents only due to development of effective for that mo­ment methodology, itself has turned to its victim. Ideology appears also to require a regular updating in accordance with progress of spir­itual production.

So, we endeavoring by means of philosophical tools to transcend in the XXIst century should break through new technology. For this it is necessary we should move from the ideology of destruction to the ideology of creation. It should be started from the most impor­tant thing, from the search of the ideology based on a new world view approach to the comprehension of the world we live in. Proceeding from the technocratic to the information type of development it is reasonable to count on noospheric and even, probably, on a cosmic by character ideology. The degree of scientific quality of any of culti­vated ideology is determined by its connection with civilization which defines the principle life tendencies of planetary humanity. And noth­ing terrible will happen in case we are not able to solve the problem completely. It is a radical change in the mode of thinking of philoso­phers and scientists who define the character and structure of spiri­tual production of epoch that is important. Others will go further, will be more fearless and will achieve more.

But, first of all, the essence of ideology as a tool of comprehen­sion as well as a tool of transformation of social life should be estab­lished. As M. Mamardashvili rightly admitted: “Marx’s way of anal­ysis suggests that ideological production is always some rationaliza­tion of complete spiritual products of social relations (that is to say, products beyond and independent from activities of rational scien­tific thought) provided by outward means of “knowledge”, employ­ment of rational procedures as means of comprehension and appro­priation of these products by individuals who in this way are being integrated in social system. But if these means are “rational” in bour­geois society (that is to say, always inverted to capacity to make judg­ments by anatomized individuals), than in other historic epochs these means can be means of animistic, mythological, religious and other systems” [115, 33-34].

Such definition of ideology of investigation proceeds from the fact that we consider the main function of ideological relations in­volved in a sphere of spiritual production as being analogical to one of the economical relations in sphere of material production.

This idea has been already recorded in existing literature. Par­ticularly, O. Bohdanov underlining organizing principle of ideology and defining its place in the life of society wrote the following: “These are organizing forms for all practice of society, or what is the same, they are its organizational instruments”. They indeed are defined in its development by conditions and relations of production (spiritual is among them V.B.), however, not only as their superstructures but as forms organizing some content, which are defined by this content, and adjusting to it” [26, 135].

In the collective work Spiritual Production the following proof of organizing role of ideology for investigation is found, ” It is not simply the consciousness (it is produced by all individuals spontane­ously included in material process) that is formed, but its special so­cial - “secondary”, “ideologizied” - form, by means of it individuals “ are being integrated in social system” [71, 142].

It is clear, that in our case ideas that constitute the content of so­cial and natural science are being integrated in a system to enrich arse­nal of social philosophy. In derivative variant the point can be some the semantic material or senses creating the semantic continuum.

There is no urgent need to dwell in details on the role of ideology for organization of mental activity of researcher, because all those regulations K. Marx wrote about in German Ideology, expand to it with a slight difference that not all practical and transforming activ­ities of the man but specific philosophical thinking constitutes that its subject.

A principle function of ideology of investigation is that it de facto is a relevant the Semantic filter through which all richness of ideas have been accumulated by the end of the XXth century by the world social thought on issues of social life of people should be filtered. V. Nalimov emphasizes this aspect of process of comprehension; he notes: “Development of culture as well as science is again and again endless filtering of new ideas through paradigmatic conception generated by senses of the past. And if filters are incapable of evolving along with the form, which soften their rigidness, than their revolution rejection takes place. In history of Western Christianity it is religious and ideological wars and revolutions, in science - revolutional change of paradigm so perfectly described by Kun” [See: 144, 42].

So, because in the process of deepening of comprehension it is not the entry content of the social world but the filter, it is being analyzed through, that changes, to gain its organizmic image it is necessary that qualitatively different ideological directives should be employed. In addition, the organismic vision of the social world is nothing more than one of possible visions; no one is forbidden to look at the second nature differently, as at chaos, or, let’s say, as at crystal.

The more radical difference between the filters, the more contrast received product. In this connection sometimes in particular cases the texts formed by the investigators of one and the same processes seem to be incomparable with each other. For example, it is true con­cerning the scientific and theological comprehension of the world. The idea that plays the role of the semantic filter and constitutes the epistemological set of instruments of research gains a new quality and consequently should be termed for sure as ideologema.

It becomes clear that spread enough directive focused at deideol- ogization of social, political, and other investigations is quite absurd. Principally, it is not possible to examine even the smallest problem without the employment of the particular semantic filters, since we will be lacking the criterion of selection and ordering of the informa­tion under investigation.

In connection to above given it is reasonable to study ideology as a moment bringing to order not only naive but also scientific conscious­ness. We do not discover anything new here because we are talking about the methodological function of ideology. Therefore, ideology as a set of instruments of investigation, to our mind, is effective way of rationalization of philosophic ideas within which the real social con­nections between people and phenomenon have been perfectly fixed.

It can be said, that in the process of investigation we should trans­form the real social phenomenon being, since it brings about the pres­sure over people and is felt by people, into the form of knowledge. K. Marx and F. Engels in German Ideology wrote: “Relations in jurisprudence, policy, etc. - in consciousness - turn into notions” [See: 121, 100].

In another words, in the process of the current investigation a particular system of social relations existing in a realistic way should be reproduced. K. Marx and F. Engels directly pointed out the fact that the idea as a product of activity of philosopher was only the imag­inary “equivalent” of realistic relation. “Relation for philosophers equals to idea. The only attitude they recognize is “man”-to-himself attitude and that is why for them all realistic relations turn into ideas” [6, 99]. In addition, more precise definition of relation as the one “that philosophers call idea” is given [6, 99].

So, we should select special methodological means, more univer­sal than usual methodological instruments, to be able by employing it purposely and rationally transform the ensemble of social relations fixed by naive and scientific consciousness in a form of the idea of the social organism. As we can see the necessity of elaboration of spe­cial ideology of investigation is not our caprice but a rigid demand of technology of spiritual production.

The ideology of investigation, as any other system, consists of particular set of elements. And it seems to us it should include at least four ideologems. We mean four semantic filters to research dif­ferent aspects of chosen problem: worldview, logic, epistemological and ontological.

In fact, we have already though partially accomplished formation of ideology of investigation, since above given outlook directive to­wards one in two content of foundation of the universum is nothing but the outlook ideologema.

Next, the necessity to point out the semantic filter in the field of the logical analysis of the problem arises. The thing is that by means of the logic ideologema the pack “materialistic-spiritual” in the most extraordinary modifications of the Universal forms should be dis­covered. The same should be discovered also within the structure of the social body. It seems to us that at macrolevel, where the second nature is developed, in subjective form, the spiritual component has penetrated and has frozen in a field of the material world in a form of technology; however, the materialistic component has been trying to penetrate the spiritual sphere in a way of the artificial intellect.

The search of epistemological filter proceeds from the outlook standpoint taken earlier, which leads us to the search for a new ideol- ogema in ordering the material under consideration. We connect this search with the dialectical method of analysis of the social form of the Universe motion.

However, we are not pleased with the subjective dialectics which was masterly developed and left to us by G. Hegel; simply because it is effective for the studying of the regulations of manifestation of nothing but the spiritual component of the worldgenerating sub­stance. The same reason explains why we do not find satisfaction in the objective dialectics, which we have inherited from K. Marx, F. Engels, V. Lenin and which was brought to primitive linearity by their “faithful” followers, because it reveals the regularities of manifestation of nothing, but the materialistic component of the Universe foundation. After all, V. Lenin happened to be right writing, “dialectics is by itself the theory of comprehension of (Hegel and) marxixm...” [111, 321].

The ontological filter consists in the following: the original sub­stance of the social life of people is defined as the quantum vacuum possessing the quantum-wave nature that provides quite specific forms of spreading in the Cosmos and existence in condition of the Earth.

In short, we cannot proceed to the investigation of chosen topic unless we use some different from existing, even dialectical, ideolog­ical approaches. The conceptualization of the problem from the stand­point of any of existing ideological approaches, regardless of the the­sis about the dichotonomeous foundation of the world, means join­ing to the dominating ideology with the aim surely to fail the solu­tion of the most complex problem of modern social philosophy.

Presently being in the condition of ideological vacuum we are enforced to take a risk and to formulate a specific ideological direc­tive to study the logics of social reality that has revolved. We com­pletely understand that it should dwell upon strong aspects of Hegel and Marx' teaching overcoming at the same time their main short­coming - monism. That is why we introduce the working type of hy­pothesis: to achieve the main aim of the research, the most appropri­ate way of organization of informational material should be other than the uncritical one, proceeding within the framework of Hege­lian and Marxist teaching, that is to say, subjective and objective dia­lectics; but tracing of mutation of the worldgenerating substance from the standpoint of such dialectics, which takes into consideration the inter-supplementation of the above named approaches within the contradictory in itself organic wholeness.

Such epistemological ideologema, to our mind, allows us to re­veal logical interrelations and intertransition of the material and spiritual one not just at the level of the macro world but through self­evolving of the origin substance at the micro and mega levels.

In such connection the ideological aspect of researcher’s activity grows in a purpose driven employment of above listed semantic fil­ters (ideologems) as the means of comprehension and mastering of the products of the past philosophic and scientific work, which with the aid of the rational procedures, are being integrated in the quali­tatively new system of social philosophy, and after this in a theory of noosociogenesis. It is obvious that synthesis of ideas, gained by dif­ferent schools and trends, into the organic wholeness is perspective and will be typical for the development of philosophy and science of the XXIst century.

Thus, taking into consideration all above given ideology of inves­tigation can be defined as the purposefully constructed system of the semantic filters, ideologemas that organize our research activities in a process of conceptualization the spiritual inheritage of the past in the light ote concept of social organism. By the “spiritual produc­tion” in this context we mean the broad sense of this term, “all activ­ity of people focused on production, exchange, distribution, and con­suming of spiritual values” [28, 209].

To continue the investigation of the social organism the method­ological means of transformation of the entering material should be selected and presented in a way of cognitive and instrumental com­plex. This is, actually, what is next on our agenda here.

1.2.