ARTICLE .97 Russian Philosophical : One Step Backward and Two Steps Forward – Approaching the Universal Evolutionary Future

Konstantin S. Khroutski Novgorod State University

The natural sciences is right stating its , but is not right in relation the things which are passed over in silence.

Karl-Friedrich Von Weizsacker

Epistematic Versus Epistemic Song4, who, during the ABC5 in Tsukuba and while debating my presentation of the original Cosmist philo- During the Fifth Asian Bioethics Conference1 in sophical system – of subjective functionalist evolutionary Tsukuba, Professor Hyakudai Sakamoto2, a leading universalism5, posed a question about the plain defini- Eastern expert in bioethics, while presenting his out- tions of my core notions – "cosmic" and "cosmist". The look for the future development of global bioethics, crux was that I used these notions precisely in the epis- proclaimed the fundamental necessity of "a new - tematic, but not in the accepted epistemic reasoning. ism without human-centrism", as a overriding way in The fact is that I have elaborated an original Cosmist harmonizing (or, "bargaining") "every kind of antagonis- – an original system of fundamental princi- tic values on the Globe". In his exploration Prof. ples, which strives to obtain the capability to generate Sakamoto necessarily transcends the area of epistemic (thus providing modern science with) the universal the- reasoning (the area of Western episteme3 itself, inas- ory and methodology of comprehending the living much as he definitely rejects its cornerstone principles: world, primarily – the object of individual's health (the anthropocentrism and rational foundation of on personalist wellness). the whole) and enters the emergent level of the epis- Generally, we treat "" and "cosmic" from the tematic creative work (by comparing the different epis- accepted standpoint of the science of physics – the sci- temes or creating a new episteme). ence of matter and energy: "cosmos" is the universe in It was the very same reason, why I had a difficulty contrast to the earth alone, and "cosmic" – relates to the to provide a clear short answer for Professor Sang-yong cosmos. In scientific relation, we usually mean (under

Journal of Futures Studies, November 2005, 10(2): 97 - 104 Journal of Futures Studies

"cosmic") the data from the exploration of this versal world-outlook system, which is equal extraterrestrial vastness (from astrology, cosmo- and true for every living subject on Earth, nautics, etc.) All this is absolutely normal. including humankind first of all. However, there is another standpoint on "cos- The same was with Western episteme – mos" and "cosmic", which has the history for the basis of current Western and world civiliza- ages, may be since the beginning of human tion – in the middle of the Second millennium civilisation itself. Clearly expressed in the (A.D.) of world history. Particularly, I stress that Eastern and Ancient , the macro- Western episteme originally was emergent, – cosm/microcosm principle has emerged and non-deductive from the cultural and the enriched human culture, by introducing the atti- laws of Monarchic (I also call it Eastern) civiliza- tude and mentality of seeing reality as a whole tion. Nevertheless, although not derivable from and noticing patterns that are universal the contemporary culture of Monarchic soci- throughout all the levels of reality. This philo- eties, Western episteme has come into the sophical conception runs through ages and world by of Western mentality – Western epochs, having reached the and thinkers' philosophic breakthrough: by Rene awoke Russian cosmological development, Descartes, Francis Bacon, John Locke, Voltaire, including Russian Cosmism. , , John Dewey, and In Russian cosmological tradition, the by many other. Evidently, precisely this Western Eastern and Greek "man is a small cosmos" has episteme (as substance – the system of mental acquired a great (in philosophical relation) concepts) served as a basis for the creation of "active-evolutionary personalist" significance – theoretical proposals and practical solutions – of a Cosmist agent, responsible both for her in building a new macro-evolutionary era: for or his personal wellness (of microcosm – constructing and erecting new (democratic – as Humankind 6), and for wellness of the entire opposed to monarchic, ruled by a sovereign) Cosmos (macrocosm). Significantly, the Russian social systems, aimed at the industrialization cosmological tradition (in its cosmos-, person- and democratization of a society, with eventual and future-centric integrity) was interrupted globalization of socioeconomic interrelations. since the Bolshevist revolution in the 1917 year Thus, the macro-evolutionary impact of the – suppressed by the proletarian dictatorship Western episteme (on the world development) and the communist (Marxist) . To my is clearly evident in the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, let it view, however, the world evolutionary7 process be in the 20th century as well (the century of ter- evidently completes its successive ascending rible world wars and global confrontation), but evolutionary circle and crosses, in our days, the not in the 21st century (in the macro-- point of the beginning of a new epoch of spiral ary aspect) – in no way! (This topic is discussed ascent – of a new evolutionary era based on below). At present, to my firm , new originally novel – universal – civilisatory8 epis- (emergent) epistematic fundamentals are called teme. Inasmuch as Russian cosmological poten- for objectively – those, which might be effica- tials, to my firm conviction, are of immense sig- cious in realization the healthy fitting true onto- nificance for the achievement of acceptable genesis of a humankind and any other living emergent future for everyone on Earth, I see subject on Earth, from a molecule – up to socie- the to "make a step backward" – for ty, mankind and, ultimately, the whole evolu- learning the Russian cosmological fundamen- tionary process of the life on Earth. tals, and "two steps forward": the first – to mas- ter the absolutely necessary Western civilisatory fundamentals (I mean the substantial funda- What is the Point? mentals, regardless of the form: Marxist, liberal, After such a complicated introduction, a socialist, etc.9), but, all this, – for "the second reasonable question can arise: What is the point, step forward": To reach the evolutionary novel meaning why is this argument important, what 98 (emergent10) macro-level, based on original uni- is its relevance? Therefore, in this next part I Russian Philosophical Cosmology

clarify the significance of this argument, espe- further occurred the historical emergences of cially its relevance to discussion of the future. families, social bodies, communities, societies Substantially, the Russian outstanding philoso- and civilisations; the next integrity naturally pher (a philosophical cosmologist) Nicolei O. should be a whole mankind. Lossky asserted: "Philosophy is a science and And what is more, macroevolutionism has therefore, like every other science, it seeks to the essence of self-(macro)evolutionism. This is establish truths that have been strictly proved the basic point of the so-called Cosmist and are therefore binding for every thinking Dualism12, (1) that states the factual of and not only for a particular people or the one cosmic universal evolutionary process nation."11 In the present, however, we really of the life on Earth – Process (which is a exist in the condition of global paradoxes in our posteriori, descriptive notion), (2) urges to its about the world, first of all – con- scientific exploration (by means, originally, of cerning the scientific comprehension of a priory revealing and explaining Process's humankind. In the first place, the so-called universal laws), but, at the same time, (3) 'Anthropological Evolutionary Paradox' – in declares that cognition of the causes and mech- relation to humankind: a person is a uterine ele- anisms of Process's origin and the Evolution are ment of the one common whole cosmic evolu- beyond the scope of current scientific possibili- tionary process of the life on Earth (Process, ties.13 Substantially, however, Process is an briefly); however we deny the search for univer- autonomous subject: independently of our sal evolutionary knowledge and rely on the plu- interpretation of its origin and causative mecha- ral (different and often incompatible) sources of nisms of development (God, Nature, Cosmos, knowledge in defining man's nature: biological, Darwinian evolution, etc.), the final outcome of sociological, psychological, etc. Earth's common evolutionary process – its cur- At the same time, we have objectively and rent state – reveals the one wholeness (proved really (in front of our philosophical reflection) by natural sciences) and the universal functional the series of indisputably evident, scientifically interrelation of the entire number of Earth's liv- verified truths. The first: our living world is one ing subjects (biological, ecological, social, per- universal whole – fundamental universalism. sonalist). This is known at least since the discovery Process is a self-(macro)evolable14 sub- (in 1953) of the structure of DNA by Watson stance. Humankinds are self-(macro)evolable and Crick, which proves the unity of all life on substances as well. All the significant psycholog- Earth, and the genetic transmission of psycho- ical theories prove this truth: in psychoanalysis logical character by DNA molecules. The second – "instincts of libido"; in neo-behaviourism – truth (in importance): the one whole universal "drives"; in humanistic psychology – the striving process of the life on Earth (including for wholeness or selfhood (Jung), or self-actuali- and social organisations) has the cosmic origin. sation (Rogers, Maslow) – all these various, but Really, in all cases, the energy needed for life on in all instances the main instigative internal Earth is coming from cosmos (mainly, the Sun forces energize the behavior of a humankind energy); likewise, all the matter of Earth has the throughout her or his life. I refer to W.E. cosmic origination – fundamental cosmism. The Vinacke (1984): "the instigative forces especially next and very important evidence: the cosmic characterize human ... The terms most universal process of the life on Earth (Process commonly used for this function are 'instinct', or Evolution, in my abbreviation) has the 'need', 'drive', and 'motive'. Whatever original fundamental macro-(emergent)evolutionary drives there may be, evidently is accepted the essence: the origin of life, the origin of nucleus- basic principle: all the instigative forces primari- bearing protozoa; the origin of sexually repro- ly have the internal character." ducing forms; the rise of sentient animals, with From all this, I thus argue: If the life on nervous systems and protobrains; the emer- Earth has the universal substance and the self- gence of cogitative animals, namely humans; (macro)evolutionary essence, i.e. – is founded 99 Journal of Futures Studies

on the principles of universalism and self- teme) are very ineffective in realising and build- (macro)evolutionism, then the non-universal ing the emergent natural stratum (macro-evolu- and/or non-(anti)macroevolutionary approach tionary stage) – of the true wholesome accept- (with respect to living subjects) is ultimately able future for every living subject on Earth, for inadmissible and impossible in philosophical a humankind first of all. and scientific relation – is anti-scientific (irra- The final determination: A new systemic tional, unnatural) in principle. At the same time, philosophy is needed to lay a foundation for a nevertheless, the accepted basic principle of theory capable of reflecting the factual state of and science is pre- reality, which might organize a humankind and cisely presentism, i.e. – anti-(macro)evolution- her or his life world within the inseparable and ism. (The principle of presentism is described, in self-(macro)evolable whole. The main point is the Cosmist context, as the standpoint of treat- that the standard Western dualism (Cartesian, ing the world on Earth as substantially complet- first of all), positioning in polar opposition (to ed phenomenon – as life in the present, i.e. – each other) mind and body, intellectual and denying emergent temporal horizons and material, man and world, – has become too nar- prospects, but, on the contrary, – maintaining row for the successful development of science the core principle of continuity: of extension (philosophy) and global culture in general. The into the future of that which is "now", and which new philosophic and methodological search is already cognized and described). Significantly, should be, to my mind, personcentric, health- the current presentism is totally shared (with centric, and of evolutionary (wholistic) subject- very rare exceptions) among up-to-date philoso- subject and natural-natural essence – versus the phers, scientists, and cultural workers, what is existing Western anthropocentrism, presentism, one more bright expression of the dominating adaptationism, pathocentrism, and of the sub- anti-(macro)evolutionism and, hence, – of the ject-object and natural-artificial patterns of the lack of a true natural, scientific (in the place of interrelations of humankind with the world. existing non-natural – artificial) approach to the comprehension of the evolable life on Earth. Furthermore, still these issues are not on Russian Cosmological Potentials the agenda of the world civilization. That is the and Cosmist Episteme – a Vista reason, too, why the term presentism is for the Future Evolutionary Vigour unadopted (rejected) in the current scientific milieu, for it is not the object for exploration However, this is not my task, at this time, but something self-evident. As a result, to expose the structure of the proposed (post) and science continue Cosmist episteme and the derived theoretical to uphold unnatural – artificial positions, which and methodological basic principles (this is a ultimately are false in scientific relation. Until vast material, which needs a space of an article, now, drawing a conclusion, the global objective at least). But I see my chances, touching the scientific issues – of the world life (planetary) background/foreground metaphor, in continuing fundamental universalism, cosmism, and self- the Russian cosmological story, which might be (macro)evolutionism are being solved... by a "scaffolding" to wrap the Cosmist "stuff" "denying the existence of these problems". around. Really, precisely 100 years ago, in the In the upshot, the point is: Our current year 1905, prominent Russian scientist and philosophic and scientific world-viewing is very philosopher Dmitriy I. Mendeleev15 asserted: effective in adapting (responding to influences "Bringing together and integrating the sum of of the environment), cognizing, conquering and the present time and the past history impres- dominating over the (independently) evolable sions, it is possible, of course schematically, to world (Nature, Cosmos) on Earth; while the cur- express an idea that the peoples of Asia repre- rently dominating scientific and philosophic sent a kind of thesis, and Europeans – of 100 proposals (deduced from the Western epis- antithesis, and that the synthesis is needed Russian Philosophical Cosmology

which is still in deficiency... I assume that we, mos': (the First, Eastern) of the world Past and , most of all have the inherent qualities present (Thesis) – relying on the macro-epis- of any kind for the achievement of this synthe- teme of holistic centralized (upon fundamental sis, though up to the present only the initial , or theocentrism, or metaphysical preparation to that is visible". truths) world-viewing and the order of interrela- The core distinction of Russian epistematic tions with the world; (the Second, Western) of cosmism is clearly seen in the assertion of a the Present – (the modern Western dominating renowned Russian Cosmist – Nicolai G. AntiThesis): of the episteme for anthropocentric Kholodny: "Humankind, despite the essential and de-centralised (humanistic, democratic) features of the vital environment created by reconstructing and dominating the world; and him/herself, continues to remain an integral part (the Third, proposed Cosmist) episteme of uni- of cosmos, completely subordinated to its laws. versal (wholistic) personalist (subjective func- A person is not above the nature, but inside the tionalist evolutionary) world-viewing – the epis- nature". This judgment reflects a cornerstone of teme for gradual rearranging and the ultimate Cosmist episteme: Humankind is within (but not achievement of the emergent (macro-evolution- without) the cosmic evolutionary process of the ary) true universal Future of everybody's individ- life on Earth, hence, she or he is really micro- ual wellness (SynThesis). cosm (similarly to the views of Eastern or Ancient philosophers) but, distinctly, in Cosmist realm, – a person is the personality who is not Intermediate Conclusion only integrated, but, likewise, is the decisive ele- Not less than 95%, in my view, of modern ment of macrocosm – Process (Evolution). scientific and philosophical world-viewing is : A. We have, at least, the three based on the Western mentality – Western distinctive functional macro-orders of man's episteme (the product of being (functioning): (1) Homo Sapiens animalis itself). However, at present, Western philosophy (HSA) – the direct function of has exhausted its macro-evolutionary potential (Nature); (2) Homo Sapiens sapiens (HSS) – the – the ability to generate universal truths as direct function of Society; (3) Homo Sapiens alétheia – "the basic openness of a horizon". cosmicus (HSC) – the direct function of Process This is not merely mine, but the conclusion of (Cosmos). B. Macro-evolutionary development the best Western thinkers themselves (ontogenesis on the whole) of a subject and (Heidegger, Derrida, Rorty, Pellegrino, Vattimo (her/his) emergent future wellness is possible and other) who uphold the thesis about "The primarily from within a subject (person), who, in end of philosophy in the age of democracy". turn, him/her/itself is basically positioned within Therefore, if the modern traditional philos- Process (Evolution) – is an integrated functional- ophy already and irrevocably associates with ist (active) element of the one common Process, the forms of rational Western philosophy, the i.e. – humankind's (HSC, ultimately) ontogenetic rationality is to introduce into the global prac- wellness is substantially subjective and, hence, – tice the new trends of whole-organizing and universal in the Cosmist functionalist signifi- (macro)evolutionary (thus – natural) exploration cance: through personalist perception and of the actual world, effecting the bases for true active realization of the inherent overriding universal social (and wholesome personalist) functional belongingness to Process. life. Philosophical cosmology (or universal syste- Eventually, aiming at the following devel- mology, or cosmist personalism, or any other opment of the Russian cosmological potentials rational form of universal science) might realize and definitely basing myself at the up-to-date such a trend. Herein, the crucial thing is that stage of progress, I have elaborated my original cosmist episteme is the universal episteme – Cosmist conception and am ready, in outcome, episteme, which serves to everyone, – to the to substantiate the three contemporary macro- whole evolable living world on Earth. evolutionary dimensions of 'humankind in cos- Substantially, my contemporary Cosmist 101 Journal of Futures Studies

conception – of subjective functionalist evolu- the concept. Nevertheless, the conception of tionary universalism – descends from the "episteme" has continued its autonomous life Russian (but not Soviet!), really unique philo- in the world-wide science – in the sense of sophical tradition, capable of integration the interpreting a history as a series of "disconti- studies simultaneously in cosmism (universal- nuities", when each epoch has a certain glob- ism), personalism, and futurism, ultimately aim- al principle (episteme) of the organization of all manifestations of human life – the latent ing at the active-evolutionary functionalist posi- universal model (structure) of the construc- tion of humankind (a person) in cosmos. At tion of human culture and a civilization. The least, in my strong opinion, there are no other meanings of the notion "episteme" and the comparable civilisatory potentials in the whole notion "paradigm" (Thomas Kuhn) are con- world. Therefore, I venture to argue that the sidered to be similar, but the significance of acceptable (for every living subject, a person pri- "episteme" is more general and broad marily) evolutionary Future on Earth is impossi- (whereas Kuhn's paradigm is an all-encom- ble without the mastering and maintaining of passing collections of beliefs and assump- Russian cosmological intellectual means. tions which create scientific worldviews and Precisely on the Russian cosmological – practices, Foucault's episteme is not merely epistematic – basis, I have arrived at, in my theo- confined to science but to a wider range of discourse, thus all of science itself would fall rizing, the fundamentals of the future universal- under the episteme of the epoch). More ist Bio-science – of Universal Functional often, at present, the use of the notion "epis- , CosmoBiotypology, and the teme" implies the meaning of "western epis- Basic Cosmist Functionality of a man. However, teme". (The notion "episteme" is more this is the other story, and I hope – which might known in the of be prepared as an article for the Journal of French-speaking world). Futures Studies. 4. Professor Sang-yong Song (South Korea) is a President of the Asian Bioethics Association, from mid-November 2004. Correspondence 5. The main theses of my Cosmist theory are disclosed in the Eubios Journal of Asian and Dr. Konstantin S. Khroutski, PhD International Bioethics (accessible on-line, Dotsent at the Novgorod State University after 2002-2005) and other publications of Eubios Yaroslav-the-Wise Ethics Institute, founded and directed by A/B 123, PO-25, Novgorod Velikiy, Prof. Darryl Macer; Calicut Medical Journal 173025 Russia. (2004); and in the other publications, includ- E-mail: [email protected] ing the conceptions of Philosophical [email protected] Cosmology and the Universalist Bio-Science which were introduced in the World Futures, Notes 2001, 57(3), and 2004, 60(8). 6. I use the term 'humankind' in the definition of 1. ABC5, the conference of Asian Bioethics ''human'': man, Homo sapiens, human being, Association, held in Tsukuba, Japan, February individual, person, etc. Likewise, the term 2004. 'man' is traditionally referred to the human 2. Professor Hyakudai Sakamoto is a founder of race in general, or "mankind". the Japanese Association of Bioethics in 7. I deliberately use the term "evolutionary" Tokyo in 1989 and, at present, an honorary instead of the usual "historical". Board member of Asian Bioethics 8. The term "civilisatory", from my Cosmist Association. standpoint, likewise has a peculiar meaning 3. The term "episteme" has been introduced by – not merely "culturally advanced" (like Michel Foucault in his work The Order of "civilised"), but precisely indicating the rela- Things – to mean the regime of truth that tionship with civilization as an autonomous upholds all the discourses of a particular evolutionary subject. Thus, 'civilisatory' 102 epoch. However, soon after he abandoned (adjective) means the relation to a civiliza- Russian Philosophical Cosmology

tion, i.e., signifying as a human society with comes from within, and the ultimate, for its highly developed social organizations, as humankind, fulfilling a purpose of master- well the culturally inherent development of a ing the uniqueness of oneself and thus nation (or region) – as the organism, which is attaining oneness with the universe. viewed from the macro-evolutionary point of Henceforth, in the light of synthesizing view, taking into account as much past and Cosmist episteme, we might see the present, as the future civilized time of its (macro)evolutionary integration of the 'ontogenetic' development. Indian (of Thesis) epistematic freedom (to 9. For instance, from my Cosmist (evolutionary) achieve human universal uniqueness) – point of view, contemporary People's with the Western epistematic (of Antithesis) Republic of China is a typical representative human liberation of basic needs, that opens of Western civilization: Although conforming up the possibilities for realization, in the to the inherent (Eastern) world-viewing fun- future, the true leading (macro)evolutionary damentals, China generally aims at the real- role of humankind (a person), by virtue of ization of basically Western values – the accomplishing the Cosmist rational – Basic industrialization and technological progress, Functionalist (her or his intentional and as well as steadily deepening the democrati- active) contribution to the wellness of zation of society and ever-increasing people's Process, thus effecting the main mechanism well-being, etc. On the whole, evidently the of flourishing development of the one entire world, at present, is pursuing the whole universal Evolution. Western goals of evolutionary development. 14. The term "evolable" is used in the meaning 10. In my reasoning, the notion "emergence" of "able to evolve – evolving". (and the term "emergent") substantially has 15. Author of the periodic system of elements. the accepted meaning: the macroshift of a system that cannot be predicted or explained from antecedent conditions. [The term "macroshift" is introduced into the evolutionary thinking by Ervin Laszlo (in the 2001), who is widely regarded as the founder of systems philosophy and general evolution theory]. 11. I am citing here the famous book by N.O. Lossky – "History of Russian Philosophy" (the section – "Characteristic Features of Russian Philosophy"), published in New York in the 1951, by the International Universities Press, Inc. 12. Which I introduced in the World Futures, 2001; and further developed in the Anthropology and Philosophy, 2004. 13. This directly means that Process's origin can be known (emergently) in the (not nearest) future, what is distinct from Tantric/Vedic (Indian) episteme, which states that rather mind is an object. On the whole, however, substantial cohesion might be noted between Cosmist and Indian , really as between Synthesis and Thesis. I have in view especially such Indian epistem- atic fundamentals as the belief in a supreme being of many forms and natures, the view that opposing theories are aspects of one eternal truth, the standpoint that education 103 Journal of Futures Studies

104